Why Uzodinma’s Victory In Supreme Court Can’t Be Used As Precedent For Andy Uba’s Case

9bd0b8f3685611229ca2b51cbeb1ec32

The 2021 Anambra governorship election may have come and gone but the tussle for the successor of Governor Willie Obiano is yet to be over.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared the governorship candidate of APGA, Prof. Chukwuma Soludo as the winner of the keenly contested election after polling a total of 112, 229 votes. While some candidates have congratulated Soludo and moved on, the governorship candidate of APC, Senator Andy Uba rejected the outcome of the poll and vowed to reclaim what he termed as ‘ stolen mandate’ in court.

Andy Uba who came a distance third in the election and scored a total of 43, 285 votes alleged that the election was rigged in favour of APGA and now set to fight to reclaim the mandate given to him by the people of Anambra state up to Supreme Court.

Since Andy Uba declared his intention to challenge the outcome of the Anambra governorship poll in court, some people have tried to use the victory of Hope Uzodinma in Supreme Court in January 2020 as precedent for Andy Uba’ s case.

Looking at the judgment of the Supreme Court in January 2020 which nullified the election of Emeka Ihedioha of PDP and declared Hope Uzodinma of APC as the authentic winner of the Imo 2019 governorship election, one will observe that the case is different from Andy Uba’ s case.

According to Premium Times, in the case of Uzodinma, the apex court held that the results of the governorship election from 388 polling units were wrongly excluded by INEC. Supreme Court further held that if the results of 388 polling units were added, Uzodinma will emerge as the winner of the governorship poll and thereby declared him as the authentic winner of the election.

In Anambra governorship election, INEC conducted the election across the State and ensure no result from polling unit was excluded.

In Ihiala local government area where INEC could not conduct the election on the election day, supplementary election was organized for the people of the local government to exercise their franchise and results from the polling units were not excluded.

The supplementary election in Anambra governorship election and acceptance of polling units results from Ihiala LGA make Uzodinma’ s case to be different from Andy Uba’ s case.

Remember that in the case of Uzodinma, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of APC because it held that the results of 388 polling units were wrongly excluded by INEC but this is not the case in the Anambra election. This is why Uzodinma’ s victory in Supreme Court cannot be used as precedent in the case of Andy Uba.

Source: Mcebiscoo.com

Leave A Comment Below๐Ÿ‘‡โ€โ€๐Ÿ‘‡โ€โ€