A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Jubril Okutepa has challenged any lawyer to quote any section of the Court of Appeal judgement that ordered the reinstatement of the sacked Osun council chairmen.
Speaking on Arise TV News Night on Tuesday evening, the SAN said the judgement that sacked the council chairmen was upheld by another Court of Appeal judgment which dismissed an appeal filed by the APM and the APC..
In a strong declaration, the legal practitioner affirmed that no one can wake up and say he does not respect APP judgement because a null and void judgment until it is set aside remains a judgment of the Court.
Okutepa clarified further that the Osogbo High Court order that directed the holding of Osun local council polls was to enforce the Supreme Court ruling which had directed that caretaker committee should no longer happen at the local government levels, declaring that the court order obeyed by Osun electoral commission gave effect to the Supreme Court ruling and is therefore legal and constitutional.
Below is an extract from the NewsNight interview:
Arise TV: This Osun situation is looking like a basket case that refuses to go away and when you look at it, the Rule of Law is the first casualty, whichever side you belong to. There is the issue of whether it was proper for the Governor Adeleke to go ahead with the election considering the fact that the tenure of the “Reinstated” Local Government Chairmen is yet to lapse.
Jubrin Okutepa SAN: When you used the word “reinstated” local government Chairmen of the thirty Local Government in Osun State, I am wondering where you derive your authority from that proposition?
Interviewer: Were they not reinstated by the Appeal Court ?
Jubrin Okutepa SAN: No court ordered reinstatement of the council chairmen. I have taken my time to read the judgment of the Court of Appeal and there is nowhere the reinstatement of the chairmen was ordered by the court.
For us to understand this matter, there is a need to understand the historical context. Sometime in 2022, two political parties, PDP and APP went to Court to challenge the arrangement for Local Government election. They were two separate suits, PDP case was filed before the promulgation of Local Government Election Law of 2022. In both of this cases , the Federal High Court decided and held that the process, procedure leading to the election conducted by the then government of Governor Gboyega Oyetola was flawed, declared the election null and void and of no consequences and removed the persons who were purported to have been elected through that flawed election.
Indeed, the case was pending in Court when the said election was conducted and under the disciplinary power of the Court, the Court saw that, that conduct was an affront to the Rule of Law, the process pending before the Court and so in both two cases, the Court nullified and ordered that those who were purportedly elected vacate the office.
Now there were appeals; one Appeal by APC, another Appeal by APM against the two sets of judgment. Now in the first case involving APC V PDP, the court of Appeal looked at the entirety of the case, there were four issues for determination formulated in that case, the Court of Appeal resolved issue 1 and issue 2 and said; (1) the amendment granted by the Federal High Court when the case was pending was wrong; (2) the second order made by the Court Appeal in that process was the case itself was premature and that there was no cause of action and consequently resolved that issue 3 and 4 became academic.
So the Court of Appeal came to the conclusion that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to have entertained the matter in the first place and then struck out that case that was filled by PDP and made NO ORDER.
In the 53-page judgment that I have read, there is no where an order was made by the Court of Appeal and it is important for us as lawyer and general public not to read into judgment what is not there contained .
There was NO PRAYER before the Court of Appeal by any person for reinstatement and even if there were, prayer 3 and 4 was described by the Court of Appeal as academic and they ought not to go into it.
Fast forward, there is also another appeal, you know there were two separate judgments in which the purported election conducted by Governor Gboyega Oyetola were nullified. This time around, the second case, was the case that APM, one other person and APC were the appellants. Now when they filed the appeal, they went to sleep, they didn’t compile a record of appeal, they didn’t plead an argument.
Then, those who were respondent in the appeal now brought a motion before the Court of Appeal , because equity aids the vigilant, not the Indolent. There are procedures under the Court, that once you file an appeal, you compile the record of appeal within a certain number of days, file your brief of argument within a certain number of days. That your failure to do so, the consequences of that failure is a DISMISSAL of the appeal. And so the Court of Appeal in the second appeal dismissed the APC appeal filed by those who were aggrieved by the decision of the Federal High Court that nullified and set aside the election.
This means in law that the judgement of the Federal High Court which was appealed against but which appeal was not pursued and which appeal had now been dismissed remains a judgment of the Court. So there is NO ORDER in any of the judgments that those who were dismissed or removed or election declared null and void by the Federal High Court in the second case that was filed later in time have been ordered to be restored.
So when anybody therefore comes to say that there is a DISOBEDIENCE to Court Order, I wonder which Court Order?
My view, with profound respect, is that politicians will do well by learning to abide by the consequences of their actions.
ARISE TV: Politicians on all sides?
Jubrin Okutepa SAN: Yes, on all sides. You know what I always say in any society where the Rule of Law is bastardized , then you are likely to face the state of nature when the mighty become right.
So my view therefore is that rather than going public to insinuate what is not contained in the judgment and giving political coloration and interpretation to it to suit political purposes, they should go back to the processes, go back to the proceedings and then advise themselves.
But let me tell you it does not lie in the mouth of anybody, including myself, to say that the Judgment of the Federal High Court which had been, by implication of the dismissal of the appeal court, affirmed by a Court of Appeal, remains a judgment. And no one can wake up and he does not respect it because a null and void judgment until it is set aside remains a judgment of the Court.
ARISE TV: Thanks for your explanation, but why is it that Senior Advocates cannot agree on a matter and what is the hope of Nigerians trying to understand what is lawful and what is not, is it not the doing of judiciary, your colleagues?
Jubrin Okutepa SAN: No! Let me say this, we must make a distinction between when we appear here to say something and look at the background, and whether or not what we are saying can be defended from what is before the Court.
There is a political interpretation and there is unbiased legal interpretation.
What I have given to you is a legal opinion and I challenge any lawyer to come here and point to me where in the Court of Appeal’s judgments.
The inference I gave for the subsequent dismissal of the case means that nothing has touched the second judgment of the Federal High Court. As to whether or not the Federal High Court has jurisdiction to treat the matter, is not an argument that I can proffer here because the law that I know is that whoever knows that a order of court order against him or her is null and void one has the duty and responsibility to return to that court and ask that, that order be set aside.
My suggestion therefore, is that before you even invite us here, it is not out of place for you to pick a copy of the judgment to read.
ARISE TV: There are several judgements, there is an Appeal Court judgment, there is a Federal High Court Judgment and there is State High Court Judgment that has ordered the election to go on and there is another appeal proceeding that has now been reenlisted to be revived
Jubrin Kutepa SAN: Why do they file separate suits?
ARISE TV: We should ask the politicians
Jubrin Kutepa SAN: That is why I said politicians should learn how to play by the rules of the game.
ARISE TV: Is it like the Judiciary is aiding them?
Jubrin Kutepa SAN: No, I don’t agree with you, the judiciary had determined the case, the Federal High Court determined the two suits, nullified the election of the Yes/No chairmen.
ARISE TV: Will it be fair to say that the state government of Osun just cherry picked the judgment that suits her by following the High Court Judgment that ordered them to proceed with the election?
Jubrin Kutepa SAN: With profound respect, I am not from Osun but it will be uncharitable to say that the Osun State Government choose and pick which order to follow.There was an order from the State High Court commanding the Osun State Independent Electoral Commission (OSSIEC) to go on and conduct the election.
For me that judgment is in line with the decisions of the Supreme Court that at any particular time the Local Government must be democratically run and not with caretaker. I do not see how the judgment that commands obedience to constitutional provision can be described as cherry picking or illegal.