Victor EzejaLegal experts have faulted the ruling of the Federal High Court sitting in Kano that nullified the candidature of Dr Alex Otti in the Abia State 2023 governorship election under the Labour Party.
The court presided over by Justice M N Yunusa on Thursday, 18 May 2023 nullified the candidature of the Abia State Governor-elect, Dr Alex Otti and all the candidates of the Labour Party in Abia and Kano States.
The court held that their emergence was not in compliance with the provisions of the 2022 Electoral Act. It specifically ruled that the Labour Party failed to submit its membership register to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) within 30 days before their primaries and that such renders the process invalid.
As gleaned from a copy of the judgment delivered by the court, one Mr Ibrahim Haruna Ibrahim filed a case with suit No FHC/KN/CS/107/2023 against the Labour Party and INEC, seeking a declaration that the party violated some provisions of the Electoral Act and therefore had its candidates stand disqualified and cannot be declared winner of an election.
“The party that has not complied with the provisions of the electoral act cannot be said to have a candidate in an election and cannot be declared winner of an election; this being so, the votes credited to the 1st defendant is a wasted vote,” the Judge ruled.
READ ALSO: Abia’s Development Prospects Under Alex Otti
Reacting, Human rights lawyer, and president of the Credibility Group, Chief Goddy Uwazurike, said the judgment is fraught with a lot of errors. He said it is a press pre-election matter and is already statute-barred.
Uwazurike, a former president of the Igbo think tank, Ikenga, said there was no evidence of the service of the originating documents on any of the parties to the suit, adding that the court has no jurisdiction to try the matter.
In a statement made available to Prime Business Africa, Uwazurike said: “I doubt this judgment in form and substance.
“The plaintiff did not disclose his locus standi in the Abia state election.
“It is a pre-election matter which should have been brought not later than 14 days after the primaries. This originating summons was filed after the election of the candidates had been done and dusted. Therefore the candidates ought to be made parties to this suit. There was no evidence of service of the originating documents on any party. There is no record of any respondent filing a response. There is no record of any lawyer for the respondent being present in court.”
“Making an order against a person who is not a party to a suit is alien to our legal system.
“Finally, the wonder of this originating summons being filed, argued and judgment delivered in seven days. Even the language of the order was not judicial. In other words, no jurisdiction,” Uwazurike contended.
Another human rights lawyer, Inibehe Effiong also faulted the judgment saying it is a pre-election matter and that under Section 285 of the Constitution “all pre-election matters must be filed within 14 days of an event,” but the suit was filed on 11 May 2023, whereas Otti emerged as the gubernatorial candidate of LP during primaries held in June 2022.
Writing on his Twitter handle @InebeheEffiong, Effiong also argued that the Kano court lacked jurisdiction on the matter.
He said such judgment could expose the judiciary to ridicule.
“Based on this Judgment Order, this case was filed on the 11th day of May 2023. Alex Otti emerged as the gubernatorial candidate of LP during primaries held in June 2022. Section 285 of the Constitution states that all pre-election matters must be filed within 14 days of the event,” Effiong wrote.
Continuing, he said: “A case relating to an election is either a pre-election matter or a post-election matter (election petition). If the case filed by Ibrahim Haruna Ibrahim at the Federal High Court in Kano was/is a pre-election matter, it should have been filed within 14 days of the primaries.
“How can a court assume jurisdiction in a matter that is indisputably statute-barred? This is shocking. Also, no candidate was joined as a party in this suit. I have noted that Abia is specifically mentioned in the judgment. A court in Kano cannot nullify primaries outside Kano.
“The jurisdiction of the Federal High Court cannot be invoked this way. Nullifying primaries of candidates, and even declaring votes scored as wasted votes in this circumstance, goes against all established principles of law and fair hearing. The court lacked jurisdiction.
“This type of judgment has the potential of exposing the judiciary to avoidable public ridicule.”
Also reacting to the ruling, a human rights lawyer, Festus Ogun, argued that the judgment cannot stand.
According to him, no court can nullify the candidacy of a person duly elected into office on the ground that he was not validly nominated.
In a statement shared via his Twitter @mrfestusogun, Ogun, a constitutional lawyer said: “No court can nullify the candidacy of a person duly elected on the ground that he was not validly nominated, after the election. Once an election has been conducted, the issue of nomination pending in any court becomes academic and any order arising therefrom will be in vain.
“Should you fail to successfully challenge the nomination of a candidate before the conduct of an election, it becomes “otilo”, otiose and academic after the conduct of the election. In fact, save for qualification issues, you cannot raise it at the Tribunal.”
Explaining further why the judgment cannot stand, those whose interests are adversely affected were not joined as party to the suit. He also pointed out that the litigant has no locus standi to institute the case in the first place, adding that under the Electoral Act, 2022, only an aspirant who actually participated in the primaries can challenge the candidate of any party.
Mr Ogun wrote: “This judgment cannot stand. Here is why.
“1. The Suit was instituted over a month after the election has been conducted and winners, including Alex Otti, have emerged.
“2. Those whose interests are adversely affected were not joined as a party to the suit.
“3. Who is Ibrahim Haruna Ibrahim? Under the Electoral Act, 2022, only an aspirant who actually participated in the primaries can challenge the candidate of any party.
“4. The issue of party membership is an internal affair of a political party which the court cannot entertain.
“5. The suit is academic and the judgment cannot serve any purpose since the election had already been conducted. “6. The suit is an abuse of court process. The judgment CANNOT survive appellate scrutiny. It will be quashed on appeal.”
In another tweet, he also raised questions on the time frame between when the case was filed (11 May) and when judgment was served (18 May).
“How can you file a lawsuit in May 11 and get judgment on May 18? When was the suit assigned? When were the court papers served on INEC and Labour Party? Defendants have about 30 days to respond. When was the suit heard? How many days was the judgment delivered? Nigeria!!!” Ogun tweeted.
Victor Ezeja is a passionate journalist with six years of experience writing on economy, politics and energy. He holds a Masters degree in Mass Communication.
Follow Us