The supreme court says its draft judgment in a suit regarding the 2020 Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) ward, local government and state congresses was erroneously released to the public.
Some party members had gone before the Imo state high court in Owerri to contest the 2020 congresses that resulted in the Charles Ugwu-led executive.
Through its attorney, Ndukwe Nnawuchi, the Imo PDP argued that the high court lacked the authority to intervene in the internal affairs of political parties because the suit involved a pre-election matter, and congresses of political parties that are internal party affairs are not subject to the jurisdiction of courts.
The high court agreed with the PDP and dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction.
However, the high court’s judgment was overturned by the court of appeal.
Consequently, the PDP filed an appeal before the apex court.
In a statement released on April 11, Emenike Nmeregini, publicity secretary of the party in Imo, claimed that the supreme court, in its judgment, upheld the party’s 2020 ward, LGA and state congresses.
But in a statement issued by the supreme court on Tuesday, Hajo Bello, chief registrar of the court, said there are two versions of the supreme court’s judgment in circulation.
According to the statement, a draft version of the judgment was erroneously certified by the registry in April.
“It has come to the notice of the chief registrar of the supreme court that there are two versions of the lead judgment in appeal No. SC.CV/471/2021 PDP v Chief Joseph Ogwulegbo & 64 Ors delivered on 11/4/2022 in circulation,” the statement read.
“Some unscrupulous persons have published a draft copy of the lead judgment which was erroneously certified by the registry on 28/4/2022 containing 30 pages.
“That version is not the officially published judgment of the court. It is hereby disowned. No other justice of the court contributed to it.
“The lead judgment of the court properly signed, issued and published by the registry of the court after 4/5/2022 containing 20 pages is the correct judgment of the court collated with all the opinions of all the justices on the panel.
“It is worthy of note that it is misleading to represent a draft judgment of this court which is subject to correction before the full opinion of the court is published by the chief registrar as a judgment of the court.
“A draft is not the judgment of the court until it is properly signed and delivered to the registrar for publication and certification.”
Efforts to reach the registry for more information on the development were not successful as the registrar did not respond to calls.
