Sacked former governor of Imo State, Emeka Ihedioha, has asked the Supreme Court to review its judgment on January 14, 2020, which declared Senator Hope Uzodinma as governor of the state.
Naija News reports that the Supreme Court headed by Justice Tanko Muhammad has sacked the incumbent, Governor Ihedioha from office.
The seven-man panel of the apex court in a unanimous decision held that Ihedioha did not win the majority of votes cast at the March 9 governorship election.
In the Judgment delivered by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, the court accordingly ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission to withdraw the Certificate of Return issued to Ihedioha and issue a fresh Certificate of Return to the candidate of the APC on grounds that he won the majority of lawful votes cast at the election.
The court held that the lower courts erred in law when it rejected evidence tendered before them to the extent that votes from 388 polling units were not credited to the APC and Uzodinma.
Speaking at a press conference, an associate of Ihedioha, Dr Manzo Abubakar, said Ihedioha’s decision to return to the Supreme court was part of the effort to deepen the nation’s democracy.
He said: “The judgment will go down in infamy and may make Nigeria a laughing stock in the comity of nations, if not reviewed.
“Section 176(2b) of the constitution is clear that to be declared as governor, a candidate must have not only the majority of total votes cast but also 1/4 of the votes in 2/3 of the local governments of the state.
“It is axiomatic that nowhere in the petition or evidence did the petitioner, (Uzodinma) claim that he met the constitutional requirement of spread to be declared the winner.
“We sympathise with their Lordships, as mortals who are not infallible.
“To err is human. It would be practically impossible for any human to have read briefs and record of proceedings exceeding 5000 pages in the matter within 2 hours after hearing when it also had the pressure of time to deliver judgment in the remaining pending governorship appeals. No doubt, this accounted for the mistakes made by the Supreme court.”