Dr. Umar Ardo V Admiral Murtala Nyako & Ors (2014)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KUMAI BAYANG AKA’AHS, J.S.C.

The principal aim of the appellant in bringing this appeal is to persuade this Court to reverse itself on the decision regarding who an aspirant is in the following cases:

(a) Lado vs CPC (2011) 18 NWLR (Part 1279) 689;

(b) Uzodinma vs Izunaso (No.2)(2011) 17 NWLR (part 1275) 30;

(c) Ikechi Emenike vs Peoples Democratic Party & Ors (2012) 12 NWLR (part 1315) 556;

(d) PDP vs Timipre Sylva & 2 Ors/Timipre Sylva vs PDP & 2 Ors (2012) 13 NWLR (Part 1316) 85; and

(e) Emeka vs Okadigbo & 4 Ors (2012) 18 NWLR (part 1331) 55.

According to learned counsel for the appellant the definition of an aspirant in those cases is contrary to what the law provides in Section 156 of the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended) and this has occasioned hardship and miscarriage of justice against the appellant as a person aspiring, striving or seeking to contest election to hold political office and is therefore urging this Court to revisit those cases with a view to reversing itself first, the Acts.

On 12/10/2011, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as 2nd Defendant/Respondent published at page 53 of This Day Newspaper ,the time table for the conduct of the Gubernatorial Primary Election in Adamawa State.

On 14/10/2011 the appellant who is a bonafide member of the Party purchased, completed and submitted Form Code PD 002/G/2011 Primary Election) his Expression of interest Form for Gubernatorial Nomination 2011 to the 2nd Respondent preparatory to screening. On 17/10/2011, the Gubernatorial Screening Committee screened and cleared both the appellant and 1st Respondent in the primary to dominate the candidate of the Party for the Governorship election in Adamawa State slated for 2012. The Special Ward Congresses to pick the three Ward Ad-Hoc Delegates in all the 226 wards of the State was fixed for 19/10/2011. It was at this stage that the appellant noticed that the procedure adopted by the 2nd Respondent in the conduct of the election of the (3) Ward Ad-Hoc Delegates was discriminatory and so decided to go to court by instituting an action in the Federal High Court Yola on 2/11/2011 and sought for the following reliefs in paragraph 47 of the Statement of Claim:

“47. The Plaintiff states that the Gubernatorial primary of the 2nd Defendant held in Yola, Adamawa State on Monday, 24th October, 2011 wherein the 1st Defendant was nominated the candidate of the 2nd Defendant in the 2012 Gubernatorial election in Adamawa State is invalid and void by reason of-

(a) the discriminatory membership revalidation exercise carried out by the Adamawa State Chapter of the 2nd Defendant in October, 2011 in which known supporters of the plaintiff were excluded;

(b) the refusal to issue and /or sell Delegate Nomination Forms of the 2nd Defendant to known supporters of the plaintiff thereby denying them opportunity to be elected Ad-Hoc Delegates to participate in the nomination of the candidate of the 2nd Defendant in the 2012 Gubernatorial Election in Adamawa State at the Gubernatorial primary held in Yola, Adamawa State on Monday,24th day of October, 2011.

(c) Lack of valid notice to the plaintiff, as an aspirant or to his campaign organisation or supporters of the date of the Ward Congress of the 2nd Defendant purported to have held on the 21st day of October, 2011. WHEREOF the plaintiff seeks from this Honourable Court the following reliefs:-