toto slot

toto togel 4d

situs togel

10 situs togel terpercaya

situs togel

10 situs togel terpercaya

link togel

situs toto

situs togel terpercaya

bandar togel online

10 situs togel terpercaya

bo togel terpercaya

bo togel terpercaya

10 situs togel terpercaya

situs toto

situs togel

https://rejoasri-desa.id

https://www.eksplorasilea.com/

https://ukinvestorshow.com

https://advisorfinancialservices.com

https://milky-holmes-unit.com

RTP SLOT MAXWIN

PDP Factions Trade Insults As Supreme Court Hearing Holds Today

5 Min Read

The National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party, Senator Ali Modu Sheriff,  has said the Supreme Court should not hear an appeal filed by the sacked National Caretaker Committee of the party led by Senator Ahmed Makarfi.

According to The PUNCH,  the hearing of the appeal is slated to take place before the Supreme Court on today, the Sheriff-led leadership of the party has asked the apex court to strike out the appeal, marked SC/133/2017.

The Makarfi-faction had filed the appeal on February 27, 2017, against verdict made on the 17th February 2017, by the Port Harcourt Division of the Court of Appeal which sacked their caretaker committee and installed Sheriff as the National Chairman.

But Sheriff, as the National Chairman of the party, and Prof. Wale Oladipo as the Secretary, requested for the striking out of the appeal in their written argument accompanying an application which they filed on the 21st of March, 2017.

The Sheriff-led PDP leadership argued that the decision of the Makarfi committee to file an appeal in the name of the PDP without the party’s authorisation was not only illegal, but a violation of the party’s constitution, citing the provisions of Chapter 5, Articles 35(1), 36(1) and 42(1) of the PDP constitution to back their position.

They stated, “The decision of the Port Harcourt division of the Court of Appeal cited above (that nullified the ‘National Convention’ of the 21/5/2016, as well as the appointment of the ‘National Caretaker Committee’) and the order made therein for status quo as of May 18, 2016, judgment of Justice Mohammad in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1443/20l6, to be reverted to by parties, are still valid and subsisting, and as such, are not only binding on the parties and their privies, but also in the courts including the Supreme Court.

“In the circumstances, we humbly urge that these orders be given effect by recognising that only the National Executive Committee of the PDP, as represented by its National Chairman (Sheriff), National Secretary (Oladipo) and National Legal Adviser can act for the PDP to prosecute this appeal and to instruct counsel to act on behalf of the PDP.”

The Sheriff-led PDP leadership noted that it had not, by its argument, said the Makarfi Committee could not appeal the May 17 judgment of the Appeal Court, having been parties in the case from the trial court, it (the Makarfi Committee) or its members could only appeal as interested parties after first obtaining the court’s leave to so appeal.

In a counter-argument, the Makarfi committee’s group of lawyers, led by Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), urged the court to discountenance the Sheriff leadership’s arguments and proceed to hear its appeal.

In its reply of argument, dated May 15, 2017, the Makarfi committee queried the legitimacy of the application filed by the Sheriff-leadership and argued that it was not only strange but intended to frustrate the hearing of the main appeal.

It argued that it was wrong for Sheriff and others, who had briefed Akin Olujinmi (SAN) to represent them in the substantive appeal and had filed a respondents’ brief, in which they also made similar arguments in relation to the competence of the appeal, to go ahead to brief Fagbemi to ask the court not to hear the appeal but to strike it out.

Relying on Order 8 Rule 6 (1), (2) and (4) of the Supreme Court’s Rules, the Makarfi faction faulted the March 15, 2017, letter of the Sheriff-led NEC, applying to withdraw the appeal and the subsequent application for it to be struck out.

It argued that since the appeal was not filed by Sheriff and others, they lacked the right to apply to withdraw it.

Share this Article