Supreme Court Reserves Judgment in Abba Yusuf’s Appeal

A flyer showing people.

The Supreme Court has reserved judgement in an appeal by Kano state Governor, Abba Yusuf.

In a pivotal development at the apex court, the fate of Governor Abba still hangs in the balance.

The appeal is challenging the Court of Appeal’s decision that ousted him from office.

The crux of the matter revolves around the governor’s alleged failure to submit his New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) membership and provide a statement on oath regarding his party affiliation.

Read Also : Supreme Court to Hear Zamfara State Governorship Appeal today

Background

The legal tussle traces back to the Kano gubernatorial election held on March 18, where the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) initially declared Yusuf victorious with 1,019,602 votes against the APC’s Nasir Gawuna.

However, the election tribunal invalidated a substantial number of votes, citing non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022.

Amidst the legal proceedings, the Supreme Court acknowledges a mistake in the initial copy of the Court of Appeal’s judgment and accepts a corrected version.

The court emphasizes a commitment to efficiency, stating, “We don’t have time to waste on 9 appeals.” A new date for the judgment is pending.

Nasir Gawuna, the APC’s candidate, contends that Yusuf wasn’t an NNPP member during the election, submitting falsified documents to mislead INEC. Gawuna also challenges the validity of Yusuf’s victory, asserting noncompliance with the Electoral Act and urging the Supreme Court to uphold the Appeal Court’s declaration of him as the winner.

The legal saga has witnessed twists and turns, including the Appeal Court affirming Gawuna’s victory on November 17. However, the subsequent discovery of inconsistencies in the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment on November 21 adds a layer of complexity to the ongoing legal battle.

The Supreme Court had accepted that the Court of Appeal Made mistake in the FIRST copy of the Judgement.

Consequently, it accepted the SECOND copy of the judgement which was corrected by the appeal court.