PDP: Sheriff, Makarfi know fate soon

.To communicate date of ruling to parties

The Supreme Court on Monday heard the appeal that is legally seeking to resolve the protracted crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) but reserved its judgment to a date to be communicated to the parties.

Five-member panel of the apex court headed by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, adjourned for judgment after the panel sat for about five hours hearing arguments from Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), the lead counsel to the appellant, Senator Ahmed Makarfi, and the opponent party led by Chief Akin Olujimi (SAN) and Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) who represented Senator Ali Modu Sheriff and PDP respectively.

The appeal filed by Senator Ahmed Makarfi and Senator Ben Obi is challenging the Ali Modu Sherrif-led leadership of the PDP and it arose from the judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal Port-Harcourt Division on February 17, 2017 that pronounced Sheriff as the authentic National Chairman of the party.

Earlier, during the proceedings, members of the panel had unanimously dismissed Sheriff’s application that had asked the court to dismiss the appeal for being incompetent having been filed out of time without permission from the court.

In the lead ruling, Justice Walter Onnoghen said the panel confirmed that Makarfi’s appeal was filed on March 16, against the judgment delivered February 27 and it was within the three stipulated by law. Stating that the appeal was competent, the panel dismissed the objection for lacking in merit.

After Sheriff lost his bid to stop the substantive appeal from being heard, his lead counsel, Chief Akin Olujimi (SAN) told the apex court that the appeal marked: SC/133/2017 brought before it by the sacked National Caretaker Committee of the party led by Ahmed Makarfi have been declared illegal by the February 17, 2017 verdict of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt, so Makarfi and his camp
lacked the powers to take decisions for the party, including initiating court processes in its name.

Olujimi stated this in his written argument in support of an application he filed on March 21, 2017 that asked the court to strike out the main appeal filed by the Makarfi Caretaker Committee.

The PDP leadership is contending that the Makarfi Committee did not obtain the necessary authorisation of the PDP to appeal in its name and on its behalf, because the PDP under the current leadership, was comfortable with the Appeal Court decision and did not intent to challenge it.

Sheriff further contented, in an address written by Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) that since the Court of Appeal, in its February 17 judgment, declared that Sheriff-led NEC as the authentic leadership organ of the PDP, the Makarfi-led Committee could no longer pursue an appeal in the name of the party.

The Sheriff-led PDP leadership argued that the decision of the Makarfi committee to file an appeal in the name of the PDP without its (the party’s) authorisation was not only illegal, it violated the party’s constitution.

Relying on the provisions of Chapter 5, Articles 35(1), 36(1) and 42(1) of the PDP constitution, it argued that the party, with a corporate personality, could only act through the principal national officer, whose powers and functions are stated in the constitution.

However, in a counter argument, the Makarfi Committee, led by Wole Olanipekun (SAN), had urged the apex court to discountenance the Sheriff NEC’s arguments and proceed to hear its appeal, in which it among others, urged the Supreme Court to set aside the Appeal Court judgment of February 17.

In its reply argument dated May 15, 2017, the Makarfi Committee queried the legitimacy of the application filed by the Sheriff-led NEC 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’ briefs, in which they also made similar arguments in relation to the competence of the appeal, cannot again, 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 Committee faulted the March 15, 2017 letter of the Sheriff-led NEC applying to withdraw the appeal and the subsequent application for its strike out. It argued that since the appeal was not filed by Sheriff and others, they lacked the right to apply to withdraw it.

After listening to arguments of counsel to parties in the suit, Justice Onnoghen reserved judgment in the matter till a date to be communicated to the parties.