The legal tussle over the disputed Kano State governorship poll has taken a new dimension as a legal luminary and lead lawyer to Kano State Governor Abba Yusuf, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), has disclosed that the Court of Appeal does not have the jurisdiction to correct the errors made in the recently delivered judgment on the poll.
The Court of Appeal in Abuja had on Friday affirmed the verdict of the Kano State Governorship Election Petitions Tribunal which sacked Abba Yusuf, candidate of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP).
But controversy is now training the certified true copy CTC) of the judgment as the CTC contained contradictory resolutions, with the Justices of the Court of Appeal (JCAs) ruling in favour of and against Governor Yusuf in the document.
Clarifying the situation, the Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Umar Bangari, said the discrepancy was a clerical error that did not affect the court’s decision.
Bangari also cited Order 23, Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal handbook, saying that the section “empowers the court to correct any clerical error once detected by the court or any of the parties in the matter”.
But challenging the Registrar in a letter addressed to the appellate court on Thursday, Olanipekun said the 60-day timeline allowed to hear and dispose of an appeal expired on November 18.
The Senior Advocate said, “Assuming without conceding that the judgment has some errors, whether typographical or otherwise, we humbly and dutifully draw your attention to the fact that the Court of Appeal became functus officio in the matter on Saturday, November 18, 2023,
“Any application for correction of errors can only be entertained by the Supreme Court.
“Section 285(7) of the Constitution earlier referred to becomes very handy and imperative to the effect that the Court of Appeal cannot take any further step in the appeal or subject after the expiration of sixty (60) days.”
On Bangari’s statement that parties should file a formal application for correction, Olanipekun said: “We are not aware that any of the parties has filed any application to correct any error.
“Even at that, judicial precedents are countless as to the procedure to follow, and which court has jurisdiction to take such an application, after the expiration of the 60 days mandatorily benchmarked by the constitution.”
“Today is the seventh day, effective from Friday, November 17, 2023, since the delivery of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.”
“We repeat that, out of the 14 days mandatorily prescribed for our client to file his notice and grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court, he is left with just seven (7) days; and it is only fair that he should be allowed to exercise his constitutional right of appeal without any inhibition, within the fraction of days left for him.
“We reiterate that this response has been borne out of a compelling duty and responsibility to the administration of justice, and, as counsel, it is our responsibility to draw attention to these salient statutory imperatives.”
