Your one-stop for the truth

Abubakar Sani Danladi Still Barred By Court, Can’t Contest 2023 Elections, By Nelson C. Len

As against the report being circulated that a Federal High Court sitting in Jalingo, Taraba State, has cleared Abubakar Sani Danladi to contest future elections, nothing like that actually happened.

Ads

The Federal High Court sitting in Jalingo on Friday allegedly gave a judgement nullifying a Supreme Court judgement that barred Sani from contesting any election in the state for the next 10 years.
Justice Simon Amobeda in his judgement on whether the Federal High Court has a jurisdiction to set aside it’s earlier judgement on certificate issues, defined the concept of what jurisdiction as “the court’s ability to decide or re-decide it’s decisions.”
He further affirmed that the court has jurisdiction to set aside it’s earlier judgement or make another decision if there is a hole in the earlier judgement.
From the above judgement by Justice Simon Amobeda, you will agree with me that this is just an academic exercise in futility. Why, because if jurisdiction is defined by the judge as stated above, then it is only the Supreme Court that has that jurisdiction to re-decide its earlier decision, stopping Sani Danladi from contesting any election until after 10 years.
It should be recalled that prior to 2019 general elections, a High Court in Jalingo had disqualified Abubakar Sani Danladi from contesting the election after it was found that he presented a forged document to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The case went on to the Court of Appeal before the election and to the Supreme Court after the election, where the apex court affirmed the judgement of the lower court confirming that the certificate presented by Sani Danladi to the INEC was fake and forged.
It was in the same judgement that the Supreme Court barred Sani Danladi from contesting any election until after 10 years and that should be by 2027 and not 2023 as widely spread by some quaters.
To buttress more on this, it could recalled that the 2019 Taraba State governorship tribunal sitting in Abuja had substituted the candidate of APC after an application was received by the panel from counsels to the party with reasons that the Supreme Court has affirmed the disqualification of their candidate who was Sani Danladi and was replaced by Professor Sani Yahaya. This happened after  the election had been decided and a winner emerged in person of  the PDP candidate, Arc Darius Dickson Ishaku.
This action was a clear indication that the APC itself had confirmed that its candidate, Sani Danladi, was guilty as charged with the offence of forgery, hence its application for substitution of candidate.
The court is a well defined institute and can not flout its own orders. Yes, the Federal High Court has the jurisdiction of hearing a case which was yet to be decided by the apex court (Supreme). But it has no powers anymore to up-turn an order that has been effected and sealed by the highest court in the country.
The case against Sani Danladi was a case of forgery, which a punishment was served to that effect and such must be carried out to the letter and until then, no court can revisit same case to up-turn it unless the Supreme Court revisits to re-decide the matter.
Therefore, for some people to come out to say Sani Danladi has been cleared to run for political office in Taraba state by 2023 is not true and it is just a means of making a caricature of the Judiciary. There was no place where it was mentioned either in the judgment by the Supreme Court or even the lower court  that Sani Danladi is to present an affidavit after the judgment to avert the effects of the judgement passed against him by the Supreme Court.
To this note, it should be made clear to APC and the good people of Taraba State that Sani Abubakar can not contest in the 2023 general elections as a candidate of any political party as he has been barred from such activities until after 10 years. The state high court only cleared Sani on the provision of an affidavit to be used in the future in replacement of the forged certificate he presented earlier and this can only take effect after 10 years must have elapsed from the date of the Supreme Court judgement.
The high court setting aside a judgement of the Supreme Court doesn’t only sound un-calm to the ear but also an effort to market the Judiciary in such a manner that is not only contradictory but also hopeless to the society.
Nelson C. Len lives in Jalingo, Taraba State
Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.