Kogi APC: Court Dismisses Suit against Use of Indirect Primary
The Abuja Division of the Federal High
Court has dismissed the suit challenging the planned adoption of
indirect system of electing candidate of the All Progressives Congress
(APC ) for the November 16, 2019 governorship election in Kogi State.
Justice Taiwo Taiwo, in a judgment
delivered yesterday, dismissed the suit on the grounds that it was
affected by the 4th alteration to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria.
The plaintiffs, Destiny Aromeh, Isah
Abubakar, Noah Aku and Joy Onu, are said to be of the Haddy Ametuo-led
executive committee of the APC in the state.
They had in an exparte application
marked: CS/833/19, asked the court to restrain the party from adopting
the indirect voting mode of selecting its candidate for the November 16,
governorship election.
The plaintiffs, who also claimed to be
delegates in the primary election slated for August 29, predicated their
actions on the grounds that the indirect system of voting if allowed,
would not provide a fair and level-playing ground for all participants.
They urged the court to determine
whether the APC can adopt the indirect primary with regard to the
pendency of the suit filed by Haddy Ametuo, Salam Adejoh (suing for
themselves and on behalf of other members) of the SEC elected on May 19,
2018.
But in his ruling yesterday, justice Taiwo dismissed the suit for being incompetent and lacking in merit.
According to the judge, the suit became
incompetent because it was based on another suit, which was heard and
determined well outside the 180 days provide by law for pre-election
matters.
Justice Taiwo said that with the reliefs
sought by the plaintiffs, it was clear that the matter was a
pre-election matter, governed by the Fourth Alteration to the 1999
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended.
He said, “The suit, being incompetent, could not invoke the jurisdiction of the court.
“It is bound to be dismissed and it is
hereby dismissed. The court cannot therefore delve into the merit of the
case as it has no jurisdiction to do so”.
The judge had in a short ruling on
August 9, 2019, declined to grant the restraining order sought by the
plaintiff but rather ordered an accelerated hearing in the main suit.
Comments