30.3 C
Tuesday, April 16, 2024

Osimhen Gets His Century of Goals, Juve Survive Penalty Controversy

Victor Osimhen scored his 100th club goal...

Minister Awards Scholarship to Newborn Twins in Abia

Master Munachimso and Somtoochukuwi, a newborn set...

Abure Begs S’Court to Reverse Suspension

PoliticsAbure Begs S'Court to Reverse Suspension

Insists appeal not pre-election matter

Emameh Gabriel in Abuja – Embattled National Chairman of Labour Party, Julius Abure, has approached the apex court to set aside the concurrent judgments of the Court of Appeal and High Court both in Benin which ordered his removal as national chairman of the Labour Party

This was even as he faulted the Lower Court for categorising issues of leadership of political parties as particular as pre-election matter as against the provisions of Section 254 (14) of the 4th Alteration, of the 1999 Constitution” No. 21 Act of 2017

The appeal court sitting in Benin in a judgment delivered by Justice Theresa Ngolika Orji on July 10 maintained that the ruling of the lower court on the suspension of Abure by members of his ward was valid.

It would be recalled that a ward in the Edo State chapter of the Labour Party (LP) had on March this year suspended Abure over alleged anti-party activities.

The embattled national chairman have since then approached various courts for his reinstatement, the last of which was the Court of Appeal in Benin, which maintained the status quo.

But dissatisfied Abure in an appeal dated July 14 by his lawyer, which was exclusively obtained by THISDAY, Abure faulted the appellant court on six grounds.

While he described the ruling as miscarriage of justice, he said the lower court justices erred in law when they proceeded to hear the appeal as a pre-election matter without a letter of authority from the president of Court of Appeal as provided for in the Court of Appeal Practice Direction on Pre-Election and Political Parties Leadership Matters 2021.

He said “the lower court would have the ample time to hear the motion dated 7th July which has been hurriedly excluded.

In another ground, Abure maintained that “the Lower Court Justices erred in law when they granted the motion of the 1st respondent dated 15th June 2023 seeking accelerated hearing by departure from the rules of the Lower Court without considering the facts in the counter affidavit filed opposing the application.

He said, Order 8 Rule 6 (1) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2021 provides that “where a Notice of Appeal has been filed, the Respondent may apply for a departure from the Rules to compile and transmit the records of appeal to allow for an accelerated hearing and determination of the appeal”.

“The Lower Court failed to consider the convenience of the parties in its

Further more, Abure faulted the
lower court justices erred for declining to hear the motion dated 7 July 2023 challenging the jurisdiction of the court but proceeded to adjourn the motion and consolidated same with the brief of argument ordered to be filed in five days thereby leading to breach of right to fair hearing of the appellant.

Again, he said the lower court justices erred in law when they granted an order deeming the records of appeal self-compiled by the 1st Respondent as properly compiled and transmitted leading to miscarriage of justice.

He said for instance, the “judgement of the Lower Court was delivered on 26h day of May 2023
The Notice of Appeal was filed by the Respondent on 9h June 2023.

He expressed disappoinment that
by Order and Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2021, the lower court mandated the Appellant (now the 1″ Respondent) to compile and transmit record of appeal within 60 days after the filling of the Notice of Appeal but the record was transmitted by the 1 Respondent on 17th day of June 2023 when the time for the Registrar to transmit the record of appeal has not expired.

Check out our other content

Check out other tags:

Most Popular Articles