Appeal Court Verdict On Plateau Petitions: What Nigerians Should Know

A COMPARATIVE FINDINGS IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PETITION, BORNO NATIONAL ASSEMBLY VERDICT AND THE PLATEAU STATE COURT OF APPEAL VERDICTS RESPECTIVELY.

BY: Ambassador Bitrus Yerima

ISSUES IN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION PETITION

The supreme court found that the issue bordering on double nomination to be a purely pre-election matter and also an internal affair of the party.

The court also referred to an earlier decision of the court in respect of the double nomination of Shettima and resolved that issue has been settled as such not open for further litigation.

The court also resolved that a candidate of another party cannot sue the candidate of the APC in respect of how INEC treats that other party as to nomination and sponsorship.

The court resolved that nomination and sponsorship is a pre-election matter and not to be ventilated at the election petition tribunal. The court also found that the Appellants lack the locus to challenge the nomination and sponsorship.

BORNO STATE HOUSE OF REPS PETITION OF HON. ASKIRAWUTHE COURT OF APPEAL’S RESOLUTION.

The Court of Appeal on the 20th day of October 2023 dismissed the appeal whose sole ground was hinged on disobedience of the Supreme Court order which had ordered the Respondent’s party the PDP to conduct primary election in a particular way but PDP did the primary differently.

The court of appeal in dismissing the appeal held thus:

That section 285(1)(a) of the 1999 constitution defines the powers and scope of the election tribunal to look into events that happened on the day of election.

Disobedience with court order is not a ground to nullify any election as it is a pre-election matter. The aggrieved aspirant can contest that only in a regular court. The tribunals have a limited special scope and pre-election matters have no place at the election tribunal.

The Tribunal is only tasked with the responsibility to look at events that happened contemporaneously with election.

PLATEAU STATE VERDICTS.

The judgement of the court of appeal was only centered on compliance with Plateau State High court order that ordered for repeat congress.The court of appeal assumed jurisdiction over preelection matters.

The issue of nomination and sponsorship was the crux of the APC petition and all other petitions which is a Pre-election matter that the Supreme Court has settled.

The court of appeal deliberately chose not to look at the evidence of the PDP before the tribunal. The court of appeal did not deliver the judgments based on the law and the facts as the law as it is, is quite different from the position of the court of appeal.

PDP complied with the order of the Plateau state High Court by conducting repeat congress on the 25th September, 2021.

None of the parties in the said order of the high court challenged the repeat congress after the congress.

The Report of the repeat congress was tendered and admitted in evidence.The repeat showed that PDP complied with the order of the Plateau State high court.

By section 285(12) of the 1999 constitution and section 84(14) of the Electoral Act, 2022 only an aspirant can challenge the nomination and sponsorship of any candidate at an election.

The Tribunal cannot entertain preelection matters only the Federal High Court can do so and that can only happen 14 days after the conduct of the primary election. None of the Aspirants of the PDP challenged any candidates of the PDP anywhere after the primary election.

It was shown that PDP has a valid structure which is why INEC recognized the candidates of the PDP on the ballots. PDP tendered judgments of the Federal High Court and Court of Appeal judgments in Augustine Timkuk but the court of Appeal refused to make reference to those judgments.

The candidates of the PDP were nominated and sponsored by the national working committee as required by section 50 of the PDP constitution 2017 as amended.
The alleged non-compliance if there is any was by the state chapter and not the national leadership of the party and the nomination and sponsorship would not have been invalid.

The judgments were not arrived at based on the evidence placed before the court. The judgment of the court of appeal nullifying the elections was pervese and should not stand.

Amb. Yerima is the National President, Gospel Advancement Leadership Initiative (GALI)

_________________________________________________________________

BUY CHEAP GOOD USED CARS IN EXCELLENT CONDITION