Cosmos Odion Irabor v. National Rescue Movement (NRM) & Ors (2024)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

KENNETH IKECHUKWU AMADI, JCA (Delivering the leading judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja delivered on the 19th July, 2024 by Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite. The appellant commenced this suit No: FHC/CS/319/2020 at the lower court by an originating summons challenging the nomination of the second respondent as the candidate of the 1st respondent in the forthcoming Edo State Gubernatorial Election.

The notice of appeal was filed on the 31 July, 2024. The record of appeal was transmitted on the 8/82024. The appellant’s brief of argument was filed on 9/8/2024.

The 1st respondent’s brief of argument was filed on 13/8/2024. The 2nd respondent’s brief of argument was filed on 12/8/2024.

The 3rd respondent’s brief was filed on 16/8/2024. The appellant filed a composite reply brief of argument in respect of the 1st and 2nd respondents briefs on 14/8/2024. The appeal was heard on 20/8/2024.

Statement of relevant facts

The appellant, an aspirant at the primary election of the 1st respondent held on 24th February, 2024 conducted by the National Executive Committee of the 1st respondent presided over by Ambassador Isaac Chigozie Udeh the National Chairman of the 1st respondent at 126, New Lagos Road, Benin City, Edo State monitored by officers of the 3rd respondent to wit Messrs Aisha Abubakar and Mercy Omoregie for the nomination of the Governorship candidate of the party for the 2024 Edo State Governorship Election.

The appellant claims that in furtherance of the primary election, the 1st respondent adopted consensus method of primary owing to the fact that he was the only aspirant who purchased its expression of interest and nomination Form for the primary.

That the primary election for the nomination of its candidate was held on 24th February, 2024 conducted by the National Executive Committee of the 1st respondent presided over by Ambassador Isaac Chigozie Udeh the National Chairman of the 1st respondent at 126, New Lagos Road, Benin City, Edo State monitored by officers of the 3rd respondent to wit Messrs Aisha Abubakar and Mercy Omoregie for the nomination of the Governorship candidate of the party for the 2024 Edo State Governorship Election wherein the he was endorsed as the consensus candidate of the 1st respondent. That shockingly, the 2nd respondent started parading himself as the candidate of the 1st respondent from a different primary conducted by non-National Executive Committee of the 1st respondent.

That he commenced this suit by an originating summons dated 8th March, 2024 challenging the purported nomination of the 2nd respondent. That issues were joined.

That the respondents filed their counter-affidavits denying his averments and particularly the 1st respondent in its counter-affidavit stated that the 2nd respondent was nominated as its consensus candidate when the appellant withdrew his participation in the primary election, but there was no written consent of all cleared aspirants indicating their voluntary withdrawal from the race as well as their endorsement of the consensus candidate pursuant to section 84(9) of the Electoral Act, 2022. That in spite of this lack of credible evidence of voluntary withdrawal, the learned trial Judge held that his case has no merit.

Appellant brief of argument

In his brief of argument the learned counsel for the appellant raised two issues for determination thus:

1. Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he held that the 2nd respondent emerged as the consensus candidate of the 1st respondent on the ground that the appellant withdrew from the primary
2. Whether the learned trial Judge was right in upholding the nomination of the 2nd respondent as the candidate of the 1st respondent despite that the primary which produced the 2nd respondent as the candidate of the 1st respondent was conducted by a faction of the 1st respondent and not by the national executive committee of the 1st respondent contrary to Articles 7.3.17 (g)(j) and 18 Schedule 3(a) and (b) of the Constitution of the National Rescue Movement (NRM), the provisions of INEC regulations and guidelines for the conduct of political party primaries and section 84(9) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

On issue one, counsel argued that it is trite law that an issue of withdrawal of participation in a primary must be supported by evidence of such withdrawal. That there was no evidence before the lower court showing that the appellant withdrew from the primary. That there was no letter of withdrawal nor affidavit of withdrawal from the race deposed to by the appellant.