A private legal practitioner lawyer Tachie Antiedu, has asserted that it would be a herculean task for a party who petitions the Supreme Court over a matter to have them depart from their unanimous decision.
The lawyer says the court cannot be attacked over a unanimous decision when the facts available to the justices do not point to any different outcome.
He explained the court always assigns reasons for their rulings including unanimous decisions hence people must read the reasons instead of attacking the judges.
The lawyer noted that the law provides ways cases are determined and when the court rules, they provide the basis for their decisions.
Lawyer Antiedu further explained that in cases where there is a majority decision with some of the judges dissenting from the majority decision, the party involved could have a much easier approach to seek for a review.
However, in cases where the decision is unanimous, the parties involved will have a tall order in convincing the court that it erred in its ruling, he added.
He posited that one must provide new reasons or compelling facts different from already argued facts to change the minds of the judges who reached a unanimous decision on a matter to depart from their original ruling.
Meanwhile, he has advised lawyers to conduct their cases well and not leave all the job to the judges to do.
He said the judges deal with the facts presented before them and when they arrive at their decisions based on the facts presented before them, they should be attacked.