PDP crisis: Exparte order has expired, court rules
… to deliver judgment on July 4

Justice Mahmud Liman of the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital today upheld the argument of the lead counsel to the embattled National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Senator Ali Modu Sheriff and National Secretary, Prof. Adewale Oladipo that the exparte order given in favour of the Senator Ahmed Makarfi-led National Caretaker Committee has elapsed.
He took the position following the submission of the lead counsel to the plaintiff, Oladejo Olamikonra (SAN) that application to discharge the exparte order was incompetent.
The judge held that while it is true that the application to discharge the exparte order had been overtaken by events, it was competent.
In one of three applications filed before the court in opposition to the suit, Sheriff and Oladipo had urged the court to discharge the exparte order because, according to them, it was obtained by deceit and suppression of material facts.
The application was filed on the 26th of May, 2016.
According to the rules of the court, an exparte order automatically elapses either upon its discharge by the court or 14 days after the application to discharge it is filed. In this case, the application to discharge the exparte order having been filed on the 26th of May, 2016, the order automatically lapsed on the 9th of June, 2016.
That was why when the plaintiff’s counsel, Olamikonra (SAN) argued today that the application to discharge the order was incompetent, the upheld the arguments of the defence counsel that it was competent.

Meanwhile this happened just as the court adjourned till July 4, for judgment on the matter brought before him by the members of the National Caretaker Committee on behalf of the PDP on issues relating to the National Convention of the party held in Port Harcourt on the 21st of May, 2016.

The Party held parallel National conventions in Port Harcourt and Abuja. While the Acting National Chairman, Ali Modu-Sheriff convened that of Port Harcourt, the Party’s Elders organised the Abuja meeting. They were to elect their new executives in the convention.
The conventions however ended in deadlock. Instead of electing new leaders, the convention produced National Caretaker Committee headed by Senator Markafi, to the chagrin of Senator Sheriff who vowed never to relinquish his office. He maintained that he remains the Acting chairman of the Party.
The newly appointed Caretaker Committee approached the Court on May 23 to seek an exparte order to stop Sheriff from parading himself as the National chairman of PDP. It is also asking the court to validate the Port Harcourt convention which produced the committee.
Sheriff had shortly after the abandoning the Port Harcourt convention headed for the court in Abuja to challenge the legality of the Port Harcourt convention which produced Markafi, hinging on a purported order by the Abuja conveners to stop that of Port Harcourt.
Justice Liman granted the exparte order, and adjourned the matter till June 7, for hearing.
 On June 7, when the matter came up, the plaintiff counsel sought an adjournment to enable him reply the processes parties filed by the defence counsel. The matter was then adjourned to today for hearing.
At the resumed hearing today, parties canvassed their positions and the court adjourned till July 4, 2016, for judgment.
Four motions were filed and argued by both parties. While the plaintiffs, Senators Markafi and Ben Obi filed the originating summons on behalf of the PDP, Senator Modu-Sheriff and three others, who are the respondents in the suit, filed three applications.
They included a motion to discharge the exparte order; notice of preliminary objection and a motion to dismiss the suit, all dated and filed May 26, 2016. Three of the motions were heard together.
On the motion seeking to discharge the exparte order, the court agreed that the timeline of 14 days for an exparte order has ended and should therefore not be over flogged.
However, arguing on the originating summons, which bordered on the validity of the Port Harcourt convention and the agreements reached there, counsel for the Plaintiffs, Olaminkoran (SAN) urged the court to declare the convention legal, as against the contention of the defence counsel, Oluyede.
In his argument, Olaminkoran claimed that the convention was legally convened and by the right persons empowered by the Party constitution to do so and therefore should be upheld.  
“One of the reasons we have come to court is that only the court of law can declare a particular action as legal or illegal. But, the position of the PDP is that the convention was lawful, legal, backed by the PDP convention and was convened by the body that is constitutionally empowered to call such convention, the National Executive Committee of the party which included at that time Sheriff and who was the Acting National Chairman and the National Party Secretary, who are the main respondent in this suit,” he said.   
Moving his motion earlier, lead counsel to Modu-Sheriff and Oladipo, Olueyede urged the court to strike the name of PDP as plaintiffs in the action, thereby dismissing the entire suit.
He argued that the use of the name of PDP, a corporate entity in the suit by Senators Makarfi and Ben. Obi, who are the plaintiffs in the suit, is illegal.
“The reason for the submission is because, the use of the PDP corporate entity as a plaintiff to commence this action by Senators Makarfi and Ben Obi is predicated on the illegal usurpation of the functions of the appropriate organs of the party, the National Working Committee (NWC) of the party, which they claim to lead. The Caretaker Committee is an illegal contraction set up by their own admission on May 21, 2016 in defiance of express prohibitory orders of this honourable court, made respectively in suit numbers, FHC/CS/L/ 613/ 2016 and FHC/ CS/L/637/2016 on May 12 and 16, 2016, and by the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), High Court judgment in suit number FCT/HC/1443/2016.
“We also seek that the court make an order dismissing this action for reason of ex-facia illegality represented in the title of the action and their admission of those who are behind the use of the name of PDP as plaintiff in this action that their authority to represent the political party and to invoke its cooperate personality is contested and requires validation by this court’s orders, which they seek.
“Also that this suit be dismissed by reason of ex-facia illegality as the right sought to enforce this action and the assumed personal rights of Senator Markafi and Ben Obi and other members of the Illegal CTC which they lead and not at all the corporate right of the PDP.
 “And finally, for such ancillary and consequential orders as this court may deem fit to make in the circumstances,” Oluyede said.
He relied on the grounds of the applications, the affidavits and exhibits annexed in the processes and urged the court to grant his application and remove the name of PDP from the suit.
Earlier, the plaintiff had insisted that the three processes be dismissed for incompetence, but the court overruled the position and upheld them.
Justice Liman also upheld the application of the defence for an amendment, saying that striking out the processes on technical grounds would delay quick determination of the suit.
The court further held that, “In a case where no application is filed to set aside the irregularity or was not filed timeously, the court might view the party to have waived his right to complain.
“Where however an application to set aside have been properly filed, the court has a range of options in the exercise of his discretion either to set aside the process, wholly or partially or the order amendment, subject to the cause of amendment.
 “In the instant case, the Plaintiff has not shown what prejudice it will suffer if the motion to amend the defect is granted; more so that this being a political case in which a major political party is battling with its life, which calls for conscientious efforts to address the legal conflict expeditiously.
“I think to strike out the processes filed will roll back the entire proceedings to the beginning, and this will signal the triumph of technicality and tragic expense of substantial justice.
“In the like of the above analysis, I dismiss the motion to strike out the three processes filed and grant the application for amendment.”

These twists and turns are becoming irksome.

bejeiodus:
These twists and turns are becoming irksome.

I tell you, they better put their house in order else they'll be fighting for votes with KOWA party come 2019