Supreme court cant reverse self on zamfara apc imbroglio

I think there may be a bit of a language barrier or cultural reference that's causing some confusion here.

It seems like you're referring to a recent controversy in Nigeria involving the Supreme Court, the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the state of Zamfara. However, I'll need some clarification to better understand the context.

From what I gather, the controversy revolves around the APC's inability to field candidates in the 2019 general elections in Zamfara due to a court ruling. The APC had initially filed candidates, but the court later disqualified them, citing irregularities in the party's primaries.

The Supreme Court has since been involved in the matter, with some parties seeking to reverse the earlier court ruling. However, the Supreme Court has maintained that it cannot reverse its own earlier decision, which is a fundamental principle of judicial review.

In other words, the Supreme Court has a doctrine of "res judicata," which means that once a court has made a final decision on a matter, it cannot revisit or reverse that decision. This is to ensure the stability and finality of judicial decisions, as well as to prevent the abuse of the judicial process.

So, in the context of the Zamfara APC imbroglio, the Supreme Court has indeed refused to reverse its earlier decision, citing the doctrine of res judicata. This means that the APC's inability to field candidates in Zamfara remains in place, and the party will not be able to participate in the elections in that state.

Please let me know if this clarifies the situation, or if you have any further questions or concerns!