"THIS (Omehia's) application is clearly misguided and ill-advised. But it affords us the opportunity to warn counsel to desist from bringing frivolous application before us. If a court has the jurisdiction to hear a case, it follows that it has the jurisdiction to be wrong or right in its judgment. This application is clearly an abuse of court process and it is accordingly dismissed".

With these words from Justice Iyorgher Ignatius Katsina-Alu, the seven-man panel of the Supreme Court dismissed, with finality, an application filed by Chief Celestine Omehia, praying it (Supreme Court) to set aside its judgment of January 18, 2008, whereof it declared Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi as the governor of Rivers State.

But before the apex court reached that decision, a melodrama ensued between Omehia's counsel, James Ezike and the obviously displeased panel of Justices as to the merit of the application, as neither side was ready to shift grounds on the matter.

While Ezike prayed the court to give him fair hearing before reaching a decision, the panellists were not in such charitable mood to hear his (Ezike's) application, praying them to reverse themselves almost two years after the judgment had been delivered.

"This court is the final court in this country, we have a duty to make sure that justice is done. When we give our judgment, nobody can re-open it. Your mission here today is futile. Nothing will come out of it," Justice George Adeshola Oguntade.

In his own reaction, Justice Katsina-Alu held: "This your application is a serious professional misconduct. We gave our decision two years ago. Whether you like it or not it is our decision. Your coming here now is contemptuous. If we sit here from now till December, you will get nothing. Rather, we may award punitive cost against you."

For Justice Walter Sam Onnoghen, the only forum open to Omehia was with God.

"Even if we are wrong our decision is final. You may appeal to God. You brought this application in contempt of court. You can go and appeal to God," Onnonghen declared, throwing several people in court in fits of laughter.

But Ezike was unbowed as he bravely argued on why he should be given fair hearing on the application.

"My lords, I have come to seek justice and that is why I am here. Justice demands that you hear me out," he submitted.

The more it looked like the panellists had turned deaf ears to his entreaties, the more he continued to argue his case.

Although he conceded that the court had the jurisdiction to hear Amaechi's appeal, which led to the judgment, he submitted that the court departed from its jurisdiction by venturing into lawmaking when it held that only political parties could sponsor and canvass for votes in an election.

Justice Onnonghen interjected by saying: "Okay, since you agreed we had jurisdiction to hear the matter, we have decided wrongly or rightly. We are the final court in the country. So you may appeal to God."

In his response to Onnonghen, Ezike said, "The final decision is yours, but the lesson of history is different."

At this stage, Justice Katsina-Alu threatened to call in the police to arrest the lawyer. He said: "If you are not careful, I will call in the police to take you out."

Again, a relentless Ezike replied, "I will take the medicine as a man. All I have asked for is to be heard, then you decide."

With the ruling foreclosing the application's fate, Justice Oguntade took liberty to admonish lawyers to stop bringing frivolous applications to the Supreme Court.

He told Ezike to always avert his mind to the prevailing circumstances that led the court to give the judgment it gave in the Rivers State Governorship election tussle.

He said, "We gave everybody the opportunity to contest the election, but some people in the Presidency said no. When we ordered that Ifeanyichukwu Ararume was the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in Imo State, the party rather than comply with the order, expelled him from the party to frustrate the judgment of this court."

In its judgment delivered on October 25, 2007, the Supreme Court declared Amaechi as the PDP candidate in the polls and that he was the duly elected governor of the state, thus displacing Omehia as governor.

But Omehia, in his latest application filed by Ezike, argued that the reason given by the court on January 18, 2008, for its decision was a nullity because it lacked the jurisdiction and was incompetent to do so.

He contended that the said judgment of the court amounted to a special repeal of Sections 177, 178 (iii) and 179 of the 1999 Constitution, adding that a judgment which deemed a candidate who had not contested an election as having won and lost same was unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect.

According to the former governor, the reasoning of the court in its judgment of the case where it stated that "it is only a party that canvasses for votes...and only a party that wins an election," was an act of judicial lawmaking, which is a fundamental encroachment on the powers assigned to the legislature under the principle of Separation of Powers.

According to him, the provisions of Sections 177, 178 (iii) and 179 of the 1999 Constitution and Sections 33(i), 34(i) and (iii), 35, 36, 37(i) 38, 39 51, 54 (iv), 64 (i) and (ii) 65, 70, 71, 76, and 103 (i) of the Electoral Act 2006 clearly express the intention of the legislature that the candidate who contests, wins or loses election. Omehia averred that the Supreme Court, by its findings referred to, actually made new laws.

The former governor further argued that the decision of the court where it declared Amaechi as the winner of the election in which he allegedly did not contest was not based on any fact, available evidence, law or precedent but on its decree that "it is only a party that canvasses for votes that wins an election."

Omehia, therefore, asked the apex court to make an order restoring the parties to their status quo as of the day preceding the date of the judgment (October 24, 2007).