Inyang Okoro, a Supreme Court judge, has accused the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) of using the social media to terrorise and bully justices of the Supreme Court.
Justice Okoro, one of the judges who heard the suit of the opposition party challenging the alleged double nomination of Vice President-elect Kashim Shettima, noted this in his opinion during the May 26 verdict of the apex court.
Without specifying how the judges are being attacked, he said the conduct of the opposition party was awful and unethical.
“Using the social media to terrorize and bully the justices of the supreme court by the appellant is appalling and unprofessional,” Justice Okoro held.
He lampooned the PDP saying they were attempting to mislead the apex court by claiming that the lower court found that there was indeed a double nomination.
“The appellant stated to this court that the court below found that there was indeed double nomination and that the 4th respondent knowingly allowed himself to be nominated in two constituencies,” Okoro said.
“I have searched the entirety of the record and indeed the judgement of the court below and there is no such finding. To think that learned senior counsel will mislead the court is sad.
“For public policy sake, I must state that indeed the 4th (Shettima) respondent withdrew from the nomination for Borno central district on the 6th of July 2022 exhibited as exhibit APC 1 on page 58 of the record of appeal.
“The political party sent to the INEC same 6th of July, 2022 the notice of withdrawal. The political party further sent on the 10th of July 2022, a notification of dates for the conduct of fresh primaries for the senatorial district and the latter letter exhibit APC2 on page 59 of the record carried the reference of Exhibit APC1.
“That is as at the 6th of July, 2022 there was no longer nomination of the 4th respondent for Borno central senatorial distict and there could not have been double nomination on the 14th of July 2022.
“The appeal is without merit and is dismissed. I abide by the award of cost in the lead judgement.”
