Enugu: ‘You Can’t Disqualify My Client Because Of NYSC’- Enugu Gov’s Lawyer Tells Tribunal

The lead counsel to the Peoples Democratic Party at the ongoing Enugu governorship election petition tribunal, Chief Wale Olanikpekun, Friday, prayed the court to quash the petition seeking the disqualification of the state governor, Mr Peter Mbah, over an alleged forgery of his NYSC certificate.

Mbah is the second respondent in the petition filed by Labour Party’s guber candidate in the 2023 elections in the state, Barr Chijioke Edeoga.

Chief Olanikpekun, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who led a team comprising Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, stated that the Section 177 of the constitution provides the qualifications to run, and that the discharge certificate of the National Youth Service Corps was not stated, hence the incompetency of the petitioner.

According to him, “NYSC participation or non-participation may not be the ground to disqualify the second respondent.” He quoted the case between Agi against the Peoples Democratic Party to justify his prayers.

He further averred that the state election petition tribunal has no jurisdiction to disqualify the second respondent because the matter partaining to the alleged forgery of the NYSC was ‘a pre-election matter’. He therefore asked: ‘is NYSC certificate part of the qualifications?’.

MJ Numa, counsel to the petitioner, argued that the section 177 of the constitution, which Chief Olanikpekun relied on, ‘does not stop the second respondent from being disqualified based on Section 182 of the constituion, hence the petition should be adopted’. According to him, “Issues are premised on merit. It borders on the substance of the petition holistically.”

The counsel to the state governor, Mr Tochukwu Maduka, prayed the court to quash the petition on forgery on the basis that the second respondent is challenging the National Youth Service Corps on the certificate it allegedly issued to him.

He argued that because the matter was already at the Appeal Court, that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the case, hence prayed the court to strike it out. His submission was supported by the counsel to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Mr SI Okolie.

Numa argued however that there is no appeal on the subject matter. He also argued that the FCT High Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the matter. He said the tribunal and the FCT High Court are coordinate in nature.

Recall that an FCT High Court had earlier restained NYSC from issuing clarifications on Mbah’s NYSC discharge certificate.

When asked by the trial judge if the matter has been appealed, the counsel said NYSC appealed, hence ‘there is an appeal’. According to him, “The tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the matter already decided by the FCT High Court, and on appeal.”

It became a drama when Mbah’s lawyer submitted that ‘the FCT High Court discovered that the certificate was not forged’, bit could not prove it.

The trial judge fixed the continuation of the pre-hearing on 22/6/23. However, she held that the ruling on the forgery would be when the judgement would be delivered.