Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) V. Obasi Uba Ekeagbara & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

IBRAHIM SHATA BDLIYA, J.C.A. 

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court Abuja, (the Lower Court) in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1086/2014, delivered on the 27th of June, 2016, by OKON ABANG, J. The 1st €¢and 2nd respondents (who were the Plaintiffs) at the Lower Court instituted the suit against the appellant and the 3rd and 4h respondents (who were the defendants) by an originating summons filed on the 22nd of December 2014 which was amended on the 12th of February, 2015. The 1st, 2nd and 4th respondents were members of the 3rd appellant.

The appellant conducted its primary election on the 8th of December 2014 as provided by Section 87(4) B(i)(ii) of the Electoral Act 2010 (amended) and its Constitution. At the conclusion of the primary election, the 4th respondent was declared as the elected candidate, while Dr. Sampson Uchechukwu Ogah came 2nd. The 4th respondent then completed and signed INEC FORM CF.001 containing facts, information and documents which were submitted to the 4th respondent by the appellant as its candidate for the Governorship election which was conducted on the 11th of April, 2015 for Abia State.

The 1st and 2nd respondents were dissatisfied with the election of the 4th respondent, hence they instituted the suit at the Lower Court on the 22nd of December, 2014 by an originating summons, which was later amended. After the hearing of the suit, the learned trial Judge delivered his judgment on the 2ih of June, 2016, granting the reliefs sought by the 1st and 2nd respondents. Peeved and piqued by the decision of the Lower Court, the appellant filed a Notice of appeal, on the 28th of June 2016. Another Notice of appeal was filed on the 19th of July, 2016. However, the appeal has been argued on the Notice of appeal filed on the 19th of July, 2016.

The appellant filed its brief of argument dated 20th and filed on the 21st of July 2016, wherein eight (8) issues have been distilled from the Notice and grounds of appeal, on page 2 thereof. The eight (8) issues are thus:

(1). Whether the trial Judge was wrong when he assumed jurisdiction to adjudicate on the suit when the initiating Originating Summons was not signed in any manner known to law. Ground XXXII.

(2). Whether the trial Judge was wrong in assuming jurisdiction to adjudicate over the suit when the 1st and 2nd Respondents had no cause of action as at the date the suit was initiated. Grounds I, II, II and IV.

(3) Whether the trial Judge was wrong in granting the reliefs sought in the amended Originating summons founded on questions 1 and 2 which were outside the ambit of section 31 (5) and (6) of the Electoral Act, 2010 ( as amended). Grounds V, XXIV & XXV.

(4). Whether the trial Judge was wrong when he held that the issue was whether 4th Respondent paid his taxes as and when due and was thus disqualified to participate in the Appellant’s primary election. Grounds VI, VII, VIII, X, XI, XII and XXII.

(5). Whether the trial Judge was wrong when he held that the suit had nothing to do with forgery or making of false document under the criminal law. Grounds IX and XXX.

(6). Whether the trial Judge was wrong when he placed on the defence to prove that the information provided in Form CF001 and the attached documents were correct, true and genuine. Grounds XIII and XIV.

(7). Whether the trial Jude was wrong when he held that the 4th Respondent who was sponsored by the appellant was not qualified to contest the election on the platform of the Appellant having given false information on the matter of payment of his taxes.

Grounds XV,XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXVI, XXVII, and XXVIII.

(8). Whether the trial Judge was wrong when he granted the reliefs sought in the Originating Summons. Ground XXIII and XXIX.