Hyde Onuaguluchi V. Peoples Democratic Party & Ors (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ISAIAH OLUFEMI AKEJU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

At the Federal High Court holden at Enugu, the appellant who was the plaintiff commenced Suit No. FHC/EN/64/2011 through the originating summons filed on 22/3/2011, against the 1st and 2nd respondents as the defendants seeking the determination of the following questions:

a. whether having regard to Section 87 (1) (2) & (3) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and paragraphs 27 (v), 30 (e) (f) and PART V of the 1st defendant’s Electoral Guidelines for Primary Elections 2010, the Exclusion of the plaintiff after having been screened and cleared by the 1st defendant having satisfied all the necessities from participating in the Primary Elections to the Enugu West Senatorial Seat of Enugu State, can be said to satisfy the requirement of fairness and the Law.

b. Whether having regard to Section 87 (1), (2), (3) and (9) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) which requires that each qualified aspirant shall be given the opportunity of being voted for and the candidate of each political party shall emerge through either direct or indirect primaries, the purported primary election of the 1st Defendant on January 11, 2011 which excluded the plaintiff from being voted for, can be a valid primary election from which the 1st Defendant can produce a lawful candidate for the Enugu West Senatorial Election.

c. Whether having regard to Section 87 (4), (c) (1) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) and Paragraphs 28A (1) and B, PART V of PDP Electoral Guidelines for Primary Elections 2010, the purported holding of the Enugu West District National Assembly Primary Elections by the 1st Respondent on January 11, 2011 at Awgu instead of Oji river which is the 1st Defendant’s Enugu West Senatorial district Headquarters without giving notice of the designated venue or centre and specified date to the plaintiff before the Primary Elections, can be said to satisfy the requirement of fairness and the Law.

d. whether having regard to Paragraph 15 (c) (1) of Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution and Section 86 of the Electoral Act 2011 (as amended) the certification by the 2nd Defendant that the Enugu West Senatorial Primary Election purportedly held at Awgu on January 11, 2011 by the 1st Defendant, satisfied the requirement of the Law is sustainable whereas: the plaintiff who was qualified and cleared by the 1st defendant to contest, had no notice of the purported primary election and was excluded from the said primary election as shown on the primary election declaration paper (attached herewith) which had the names of OAU Onyema, Victor Umebuani and Ike Ekweremadu as the only three contestants; the purported primary election was said to have been held at Awgu instead of Oji River which is Enugu West District Headquarters of PDP; there was no notice given to the plaintiff of the purported primary election, the 2nd defendant had no letter from the 1st defendant, signed by Dr Okwesilieze Nwodo, the then Chairman of the 1st defendant, stating the names of contestants and the authenticated delegate list.

e. Whether having failed to conduct a lawful primary election for the Enugu west Senatorial Zone purportedly held on January 11, 2011, the 1st defendant can present any other candidate as substitute other than the plaintiff who won the primary election conducted on January 10, 2011 at Oji river since the 1st defendant failed to conduct any other primary election at 1st defendant’s Enugu West Senatorial District Headquarters at Oji River except that which was won by the plaintiff on January 10, 2011 as stipulated by both the 1st defendant’s guidelines for the said primary election, and Section 87 (4) (c) (1) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended).

f. Whether the plaintiff is not entitled to be the one duly returned as elected in the Enugu West Senatorial Primary Election conducted on the 10th of January, 2011.

g. And as a corollary, whether the plaintiff is not entitled to recover from the 1st defendant the sum of N2,200,000.00 (Two Million, Two Hundred Thousand Naira) being the sum paid as expression of interest and nomination forms respectively but was expressly excluded from participating in a lawful primary election.

Consequent upon the above questions, the appellant sought the following reliefs and orders:

a. A declaration that the holding of the Enugu West National Assembly (Senate and House of Representatives) primary elections by the 1st respondent at Awgu on January 11, 2011 without giving notice of designated venue or centre and specified date to the plaintiff before the said primary elections, is a nullity.

b. A declaration that the purported holding of the Enugu West National Assembly (Senate and House of Representatives) primary elections by the 1st defendant/respondent at Awgu on January 11, 2011 without giving the plaintiff opportunity of being voted for by excluding him from the Senatorial primary election is a nullity.

c. A declaration that the 1st defendant cannot validly present any other name other than the plaintiff’s name as its candidate for Enugu West Senatorial Zone for the April 2011 National Assembly Election in Enugu State since he verily believes that had he been given notice of the purported primary election of January 11, 2011 and had his name been on the ballot, he was sure to win the primary election as he did in the primary conducted on 10th January, 2011.

d. A declaration that the 2nd defendant cannot accept any replacement in substitution of the plaintiff by any reason whatsoever having won the primary election conducted on 10th January, 2011 and there was no cogent and/or verifiable reason for the secret primary election of January 11, 2011, which excluded the plaintiff.