PDP crisis: Supreme Court to announce judgment date

Sen. Ahmed Makarfi and Ali Modu Sheriff

The Supreme Court , on Monday , reserved its judgment on the appeal concerning the protracted Peoples Democratic Party leadership tussle between the National Chairman of the party, Ali Modu Sheriff , and the sacked National Caretaker Committee of the party led by Ahmed Makarfi .
An apex court ’ s five - man bench , led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria , Justice Walter Onnoghen, on Monday , adjourned for judgment on a date to be announced later .
Justice Onnoghen announced the adjournment after the warring leadership factions of the party adopted their court processes and made brief oral arguments on Monday .
The appeal , heard by the apex court was filed by the sacked caretaker committee of the party led by Makarfi .
A number of the party’ s bigwigs, loyal to both factions , also attended the Monday ’ s proceedings .
Both Sheriff and Makarfi attended the proceedings .
Among those on Makarfi ’ s side , who were in court , were a former Vice- Chairman of the party ( South - West) , Chief Bode George; the present occupant of the position in the faction , Chief Eddy Olafeso ; a former Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives , Emeka Ihedioha ; the Publicity Secretary of the caretaker committee , Dayo Adeyeye ; and Chief Tom Ikimi .
Notable personalities from the Sheriff ’ s faction , who were present in court , were the Deputy National Chairman of the PDP , Dr . Cairo Ojougboh , and the National Secretary , PDP, Prof. Wale Oladipo .
The Makarfi faction filed the appeal on February 27, 2017 against the February 17, 2017 judgment of the Port Harcourt Division of the Court of Appeal which sacked the caretaker committee and affirmed Sheriff as the national chairman of the PDP.
But Sheriff and the National Secretary , Oladipo , both of whom were recognised by the Court of Appeal ’ s judgment , want the Supreme Court to dismiss the appeal .
The Sheriff faction also filed a separate application in the name of the PDP, claiming that having regard to the Court of Appeal’ s judgment , which recognised them as the valid leaders of the party, the Makarfi committee lacked the authority to file the appeal in the name of the party.
After preliminary issues were addressed during the Monday ’ s proceedings , counsel representing the PDP on behalf of the Sheriff faction , Mr . Lateef Fagbemi ( SAN) , was asked to move his application , seeking the dismissal of the appeal .
In his argument , Fagbemi maintained that the judgment of the Court of Appeal, having not been set aside , Sheriff and members of the executive committee remained the alter ego of the party.
Fagbemi urged the apex court to strike out the appeal filed by the Makarfi committee in the name of the party without authorisation, same having been withdrawn by the Sheriff -led executive committee , which the lawyer argued , had the authority to do so .
He said , “ In urging your Lordships to grant the application , I will say that the point here is not about the locus of counsel but about the competence of the appeal ; whether it was filed with authority or not and whether or not the party, in whose name the appeal was filed, has a right to withdraw the appeal .
“ If the party, through its directing minds, led by Ali Modu Sheriff , and backed by the constitution of the party and the judgment of the Court of Appeal , has withdrawn the appeal , there is evidence that they exercised their rights and their powers rightly .
“ Whoever is interested in the appeal , can only come as an interested party and not to file an appeal in the name of the party. ”
But the Makarfi committee ’ s lawyer , Chief Wole Olanipekun ( SAN) , who made submissions after Fagbemi, urged the apex court to grant his client’ s appeal , set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and also dismiss the application seeking the striking out of the appeal .
He said , “ I urge your lordships not only to dismiss this application but to do so with heavy cost .
“ Apart from Rule 29 of the Rules of Professional Conduct , Rule 27( 1) and ( 4) of the rules also demonstrate that the application is incompetent and the Supreme Court does not even have the vires to countenance it . ”
He stated that Chief Niyi Akintola ( SAN) , who represented Sheriff and Oladipo against the PDP at the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal, and who still represented the same clients at the Supreme Court , could not decide who should represent the PDP at the apex court .
Olanipekun said , “ Are they saying they were respondents to a non- competent respondent ( the PDP) at the lower court ?”
In response, Sheriff and Oladipo’ s lawyer , Chief Akin Olujinmi ( SAN) , supported Fagbemi’ s application , adding that he had, in his preliminary objection, raised a similar issue of lack of authority on the part of the Makarfi committee to file the appeal .
Olujinmi added , “ The issue is very narrow and your lordships will have to consider whether the appeal is filed in the name of the PDP without authority is competent .
“ Apart from lack of authority to file the appeal , there are no grounds to sustain the appeal .
“ I urge your lordships to dismiss the appeal for lacking in merit and for being incompetent. ”
Earlier on Monday , the apex court dismissed the objection by Sheriff ’ s lawyer to the motion by the Makarfi committee , seeking leave to appeal on grounds of mixed law and file .
The apex court granted the application after dismissing the objection and deemed the appeal as properly filed .
Justice Onnoghen reserved judgment after the Monday ’ s hearing.
Also on the five - man panel were Justices Tanko Muhammad, Bode Rhodes -Vivour, Kayode Ariwoola and Dattijo Muhammad.