Court summons YDP officials over misrepresentation of judgment

Court summons YDP officials over misrepresentation of judgment

A Federal High Court in Abuja has summoned officials of the new Young
Democratic Party to appear before it on March 23 over alleged misrepresentation
of its judgment ordering the registration of the party.
The presiding judge, Justice Ahmed Mohammed, said the court was embarrassed
by the claim of the party officials at a press conference that the court in its
judgment of March 4, 2015, ordered the Independent National Electoral
Commission to shift the 2015 elections in order to allow the party to participate in
the polls.
The PDM had on the strength of the alleged court’s pronouncement scheduled its
primaries for March 26 and 27, commencing barely 48 hours to the beginning of
the rescheduled general elections of March 28 and April 11, 2015.
The court on Thursday ordered YDP’s lead counsel, Kelvin Nwofo (SAN), to
investigate the issue and produce all the persons who addressed the press
conference in court.
The judge made the order when the application for stay of execution of the March
4, 2015 judgment filed by INEC came up on Thursday.
The electoral commission is seeking a stay of execution of the judgment on the
grounds that it had filed a notice of appeal dated March 9, 2015 against the
March 4 verdict before the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal.
The PUNCH had obtained a copy of the enrolled order made in the judgment by
the court and reported on Thursday that the document showed that apart from
ordering INEC to issue certificate of registration to the party, the court did not
order that the party be allowed to participate in the polls.
Justice Mohammed, who said he received calls from different parts of the
country and abroad, held in a short ruling that the YDP’s claim during the said
press conference had put the court in “a very negative light”.
He said if Nwofo failed to comply with his directive to produce the persons
involved in the press conference on March 23, the court would not hesitate to
“cite any person who misrepresented its record and judgment for contempt”.
The judge said, “As far as the court is concerned no such orders were made. In
fact, even the plaintiff, the Young Democratic Party, did not seek such reliefs from
the court.
“It is therefore very unfortunate that that the court is portrayed in a very negative
perspective.
“One would have expected that the person concerned to approach the court and
obtain the certified true copy of the judgment to see the orders made by the
court.
“In the light of the embarrassing situation, I hereby directed the learned senior
counsel to the plaintiff to investigate this ugly development and bring the persons
or possible persons who held the press conference to court on the next adjourned
date to show the court where the said order was made, failing which the court
will not hesitate to cite any person who misrepresented its record and judgment
for contempt.”
According to the enrolled order of the judgment, the court only, among three
other orders, directed the INEC to issue certificate of registration to the party.
The judge held in the judgment that YDP was deemed registered as a political
party by the virtue of the failure of INEC to communicate its decision not to
register the then political association as a political party within 30 days of
receiving its (the plaintiff’s) application as stipulated in section 78 (4) of the
Electoral Act.
A copy of the court’s judgment also obtained on Wednesday showed that the
plaintiff – the YDP – did not ask for inclusion in the polls in its amended
originating summons dated December 2, 2014.