Constitutional lawyer Daniel Bwala highlighted the weighty task facing the Supreme Court as it deliberates on whether the Court of Appeal holds the authority to overturn established legal principles in its review of Governor Caleb Mutfwang’s appeal against the Appellate Court’s decision that ousted him from office.
During an interview on Arise Television on November 27, 2023, Bwala emphasized the challenge to the Supreme Court’s authority as the ultimate judicial body concerning settled law on pre-election matters, specifically in the context of the Plateau election.
He observed a discrepancy: while the Court of Appeal deferred pre-election matters to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction in election petitions from Benue, Ebonyi, and various other areas, it intervened directly in the Plateau case, raising questions about its stance.
He said: “This case of Plateau State when it gets to the Supreme Court it would be the case of Supreme Court versus Court of Appeal. It has more to do with the sanctity and integrity of that Supreme Court itself because the Supreme Court will have to determine whether that judgment they delivered in the Presidential Election Tribunal is to be carried out by subordinate courts in Nigeria.
“They made it clear that a decision by a final court is called a settled law. Once a case is not determined by the final court it is not a settled law. But once it is determined by a final court it is cast in stone. So, the Supreme Court will have to determine whether the Court of Appeal is above it or it is above the Court of Appeal.”
Noting how the confidence had been eroded in the judiciary by the decisions of some courts, he said: “The confidence of the people is gradually waning considering the trust they have in the judiciary. How can a court in Ebonyi, a court in Benue, and in all other places obey the judgment of the Supreme Court but in Plateau State, the Court of Appeal disobeyed the judgment of the Supreme Court regarding matters of pre-election?
“Before the Supreme Court, all characters of pre-election were brought, the ones that bordered on the double nomination, certificate forgery, and even on how somebody emerged in a primary, and the Supreme Court maintained the same position and they spoke with vehemence. So, it will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court will speak with the same vehemence.
“In the days of Justice Tobi, they never failed to chastise the court below them when the court below them disobeyed the judgment they passed.”
