The Supreme Court has dismissed a suit filed by the People’s Democratic Party challenging the eligibility of the President-elect, Bola Tinubu to contest the presidential election that was held on February 25th.
The PDP contended that the manner the APC and Tinubu nominated Mr Shettima as a Vice Presidential candidate for the election, was in gross breach of the provisions of the Electoral Act,
The party had argued that there was evidence to establish that Mr Shettima was nominated twice, both for the Vice Presidential position, as well as for the Borno Central Senatorial seat, an action the PDP maintained was in contravention of the law.
Delivering judgment the Supreme Court held that the issue of locus is important.
A plaintiff’s locus is linked with the court’s jurisdiction.
A plaintiff must show harm or substantial harm done to him by the action he is complaining about.
The appellant relied greatly on section 248(14c) of the constitution.
This section deprived the appellant of the locus as its bars interference of political parties into the affairs of other political parties.
The appellant did not participate in the election or nomination of the 4th respondent( Shettima.
Section 84 of the electoral act only empowers an aspirant of a political party to institute an action in a pre-election matter.
No political party can challenge the Nomination of the candidates of another political party, no matter how pained any person may be on how a political party nominated its candidate, the person must remain an onlooker.
In a unanimous judgment, the court held that the appellant failed to show documentary evidence that the 4th respondent ( Shettima) was a candidate of double nomination.
There are exhibits before the court that the 4th respondent withdrew his nomination or candidature for the senate before accepting the nomination of the vice president
The 4th respondent did the needful before accepting the nomination of the vice president in line with section 31 of the electoral act
The case of Uche Nwosu cited by the plaintiff is not applicable, it was a case of two political parties, nominating one person for a particular position.
The determination of a pre-election matter has a time limit, the 180 of the trial court to exercise its jurisdiction and the 60 days for the appellate court to exercise its jurisdiction has lapsed.
The suit was a waste of judicious time of the court.
A cost of N2million is awarded against the plaintiff in Favour of the respondents.
Related posts:
Supreme court dismisses suit challenging Wike’s qualification to contest Rivers gov’ship election
Update: Supreme Court dismisses PDP’s petition in Kogi Election
Supreme Court strikes out suit challenging virtual court sittings
Supreme Court dismisses case challenging Tinubu’s candidacy
Tribunal dismisses suit challenging PDP victory in Adamawa
South African court dismisses Henry Okah’s suit challenging terrorism conviction
Court dismisses suit challenging eligibility of Senator Omo-Agege
Oyebanji wins as court dismisses suit challenging victory at APC primary
