Hope Democratic Party (HDP) V. Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan (2011)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ISA AYO SALAMI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Lead Ruling)

On Friday 27th May 2011, this Honourable Court granted leave and with the concurrence of the other parties to the petition acceded to the prayers in the Motion dated and filed by Hope Democratic Party (hereinafter referred to as the Applicant) that:-

“a. The petitioner is no longer desirous of maintaining this petition.

b. The petitioner’s candidate at the election having congratulated the president-elect in person of Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathon, the 1st Respondent herein withdraw (sic) its grievances at the April, 16th 2011 Presidential election in solidarity with its presidential candidate at the election.”

In its Ruling this court held (at page 4 of certified true copy of the Ruling dated 27/5/2011) that:-

“We have read the seven paragraph affidavit in support of the application as well as the one page written address annexed to the application. We heard learned Senior Counsel for the two sets of respondents. We find it expedient to grant the applicant leave to withdraw the petition dated and filed on 6th May 2011 pursuant to paragraph 29(1) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act as amended.

For being withdrawn with the concurrence of all the …..”

By a Motion on Notice dated, 4/6/2011 and filed on 8/6/2011 the Applicant – Hope Democratic Party now prays for the following orders:-

“1. An order setting aside the order/ruling of the Tribunal made on 27th May, 2011 striking out the Petitioner Presidential Election petition as hearing proceeding been undertaken (sic) without jurisdiction as there were shown no return or a fixed date and the petition not set down for hearing at a pre-hearing session or at all.

2. An order restoring this presidential election Petition No. CA/EPT/PRES/02/11 and allowing the accelerated hearing of the petition before this Tribunal on its
3. An (sic) for such further other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances,”

In support of this Motion, the Applicant filed an affidavit of 10 paragraphs sworn to by Ogubuike Udonna Esq. a legal practitioner in the chambers of A.A. Owuru & Co. of Counsel to the Applicant. The Applicant also filed a Written Address in support of the application.

The 1st and 2nd Respondents filed a counter-affidavit on 14/6/2011 deposed to by Friday Izinyon, legal practitioner in the chambers of Alex A. Izinyon (SAN) & Co. one of the leading Counsel to the 1st and 2nd Respondents to the application.

In addition, and on the same 14th June 2011, the 1st and 2nd Respondents filed a Written Address (incorporating Preliminary Objection) in support of the Counter-Affidavit in opposition to the Motion to set aside the order of Court striking out the petition.

On 16/6/2011 in reaction to the processes filed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents, the Applicant filed a Petitioner’s Reply to 1st and 2nd Respondents’ Counter Affidavit. The said Reply to Counter-Affidavit which contains 9 paragraphs was also sworn to by Ogubuike Udonna a legal practitioner in the chambers of A.A. Owuru & Co.

The Applicant also filed a Written Address in Reply to the 1st and 2nd Respondents’ Counter Affidavit.