Yakubu Busari
A Federal High Court sitting in Jos Division on Friday has reserved the judgement on the preelection suit instituted by Danyaro D.Sarpiya challenging the All Progressives Congress, APC, the election of Dr Nentewa Yilwatda , and INEC seeking the leave of court to dismiss the primaries conducted by APC that saw the emergence of Dr Nentawe as the party’s candidate.
Counsel to the claimant /Applicant , Barr .S.A.Abbah told the court that the aggrieved client brought six matters for determination, however, the counsel to the first defendant Barr.Harrison Ogbole , SAN, told the court that indeed he appreciated that the claimant brought six issues but they’re seeking the court for the extension of time which is dated 13/10/22 and is a motion presented by order 26 of the Federal High Court where he moved the motion and that wasn’t opposed by the claimant counsel.
Justice Dorcas Agishi the presiding judge after she carefully listened to the presentation granted the two motions as prayed.
The Claimant, Plaintiff argued that there is an application by the 2nd defendant which is dated 21st July, 2022 praying the order of the court to strike out the suit for incompetence but that application has been taken over by events. This application should be struck out, especially in light of subsequent proceedings, Counsel to the 1&2 defendants Barr. P.H. Ogbole and Barr. Mathew Burkaa immediately applied for the withdrawal of the motion dated 4th October, 2022.
Justice Agishi strike out the motion of 4/10/22 as prayed Barr.Abbah of the claimant also apply to withdraw in reaction to P.O. dated 9/10/22 and the two applications were hereby struck out.
Barr Harrison Ogbole told the court that before the court, we filed a notice of P.O. on behalf of the first defendant dated 19 September 2022 praying the court to strike out the plaintiff suit on its entity for one of the jurisdictions filed also on grounds of one which the suit is the status bar and it contravenes the provision of the constitution of 1999 as amended under the federal republic of Nigeria particularly section 285 subsection 9.
He also adopted the same motion paper together with it 11 paragraphs of affidavit supported and embodied affidavit is their motion urging the court to strike out the plaintiff suit which is provided by the law and rules of the court and he explained that they filed a written address dated 19/09/2022.
According to Ogbole , SAN, “he prays your lordship to adopt the same written address and we urge the lordship to strike out or dismiss the claimant for one jurisdiction.
In response the claimant, Barr .Ogbole , says their counter affidavit was filed in a further and better affidavit dated 13/10/2022 by order of this court which was properly served which the same motion was disposed by the Chairman of APC, Hon Rufus Bature of 20 paragraphs affidavit alongside further and better affidavit and has written address of 13 /10/2022 they adopted it as their argument.
He urged the court that their argument is that they are calling on the court to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction and time wasted.
Barr .Abbah while responding to the argument told the court that he file his 6 paragraphs counter affidavit dated 23rd September 2022 and that motion was accompanied by an address which he adopt as the claimant’s argument to oppose them and urging the court to overrule the objections raised by the defendants and dismiss their applications.
The 2nd defense counsel, Barr. Mathew Burkaa says their motion dated 04/10/2022 file same date requesting for 7 orders supported by 7 paragraphs of affidavit deposed by Dr. Jibrin Kamga Bancir the Director General of Dr. Nentawe Yilwatda , APC flag bearer before his being removed was supported by a written address and he adopted it by urging the court to strike out and grant his application as pray.
Barr Abbah whilst reacting to the response through a counter affidavit filed a further and better affidavit dated 7 paragraphs on 13/10/2022, he adopted the same urging the court to uphold as prayed.
Meanwhile, Counsel to the 2nd Respondent Barr Burkaa says, “our case before the court is that our client contested an election conducted by the party APC and monitored by INEC and won in a landslide and the plaintiff is in court challenging the outcome of the election.
INEC in a letter before the court show clearly that the plaintiff with the letter written and signed by him has withdrawn his candidature”.
When we came to court and raised the issue, the plaintiff turned around to say he didn’t sign. We showed the court that the report of INEC and the result of the party corroborate our position.
Whether the plaintiff’s 4 votes translate to his withdrawal from the race?
It is clear that at the time of withdrawal, those 4 voted for him before he withdrew from the race, which the document before the court revealed.
He also alleged that there was no delegates election and no Elections that take place because no delegates to conduct the primary election.
We were able to show the court that even in the plaintiff documents,16th and 17th May 2022, there were delegates Elections in the whole of plateau state.
The documents to prove that fact was the plaintiff’s own, and we have drawn the attention of the court to the document.
On why INEC was not represented in court, under Section 84 subsection 5 gives INEC, the power to monitor primary elections, that same power is bestowed on INEC in Section 82 Subsection 5 said if you don’t give INEC notice to monitor your election, the results of that election will be invalidated.
INEC doesn’t have an interest in who is the Candidate of APC, INEC has conducted Election, and if INEC were to be in court, is like avail the court of the same information he has given to us.
We exhibited the INEC report, they exhibited the same, whether INEC is in court or not is immaterial, INEC is able to show neutrality in the matter.
And pointed out that the matter is an inter-party issue, and INEC is not interested in who is the Candidate of the APC.
INEC report shows that Dr. Nentawe Yilwatda won the election, APC conducted the election in guidelines of the laydown rules of electoral guidelines.
INEC has discharged its part, whether INEC is here or not it doesn’t matter.
If it were to be General Elections, that is a different ball game, because there is no way the election is being challenged in court without INEC being there.
You should realize that this election is conducted by APC, INEC only comes to monitor, by APC, Natewe, and the plaintiff.
So INEC’s absence doesn’t have anything to do with the veracity of the case.
So they are neutral parties that don’t have an interest in what is happening within the political party, having declared the primary election and issued the result.
If the 2nd defendant has not won the election, but come to court alleging winning, INEC would have come to court to say no, this result you have issued is incorrect or not the 2nd defendant won.
On his confidence with the position on the matter so far, he said he is very much relaxed because we have to look at the law as it relates to this case, the facts and logic are on our side.
In his interview with the Counsel to APC, said the party primary was conducted in the state, and the plaintiff is challenging the candidature of Nentewe.
On our part, we are saying that the primary conducted was in line with the party guideline and in accordance with the electoral act and the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
We are also contesting that Mr Sarpiya has withdrawn his candidature from the race, and then lacks the locus standi to bring the action before the court.
The issues have been canvassed, preliminary objection raised, and now we are awaiting the date for Judgement that will be communicated to the parties.
We are hopeful and prayerful for positive Judgement.
In his submission, the counsel to the Claimant applicant said the court fix today to hear the grievance of my client, challenging the conduct of primary APC in the state.
However, the court has adjourned the matter for Judgement.
Our prayers before the court is for the disqualification of the candidate of APC on the basis that the party primary election conducted was not in consonant with the electoral Act, and that of APC.
