Since the final review judgement of the Supreme Court on the APC candidate in the gubernatorial election in Bayelsa State, there had been serious calm in the volume of attacks on the apex court.
Though many experts are trying to take inspiration from the second judgment on Bayelsa State to equate or conjure what may happen in the expected review of the Imo State case represented by the PDP and its governorship candidate, Chief Emeka Ihedioha, top legal luminaries have argued that both cases do not have the same presentation and colour in law.
They argued that whereas the Bayelsa case was anchored on falsification of certificates by the deputy guber candidate, Imo State case is driven by careful discovery of serious conflict in number of votes from the 388 pooling units tendered by Governor Hope Uzodinma to be returned elected by the Supreme Court.
Some of the senior lawyers said based on the stand and instances given by Justice Amina Augie of the Supreme Court in dismissing Lyon and his deputy’s application, there are strong indications that the pronouncement of the Supreme Court on Imo State case will not only shock many, but return the confidence of the institution.
Justice Amina Augie’s key pronouncement that may be very relevant in deciding Imo’s case was when the justice averred that “The Applicants failed to either show that there was any clerical error, accidental slip or omission, or that any aspect of the judgement that needed to be varied.”
According to many lawyers, the above quote means a lot when all the fallacious computation and votes’ allocation imbalances observed in the results of the 388 pooling units that gave Uzodinma higher votes are put on the scale of justice.
