People’s Democratic Party & Anor V. Jidou L. Sebastine & Anor (2015)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH TINE TUR, J.C.A. (Delivering the Lead Ruling)

The People’s Democratic Party held her primaries on 26th November, 2013 to vote in a candidate to contest the general elections into the Kalong Council Ward in Shendam Local Government Council of Plateau State. At the close of voting the 1st respondent emerged with the highest number of votes cast at the primaries.

Nevertheless, his name was substituted by the Peoples Democratic Party in favour of the 2nd appellant/applicant whom it was alleged was not a contestant at the primaries. Being aggrieved the 1st respondent proceeded to the High Court of Justice, Jos, Plateau State by originating summons to challenge the decision of the 1st appellant/applicant.

On 24th February, 2014, Mann, J., of the High Court of Justice, Plateau State holden at Jos delivered judgment in favour of the 1st respondent holding at page 147 lines 4-20 of the printed record as follows:

“Section 23(1) of the PLASEC Law, 2011 forbids a political party from substituting any candidate for any election whose name has been submitted to the Commission under Section 21 of the Law. The case of PDP vs. Sylva (supra) at page 121 paragraphs “G”-“H” is relied on to submit that that law should be respected by this Court.

My short answer to the forgoing argument is that the said Section 23(1) of the PLASEC Law, 2011 forbids a political party, not a Court, from substituting a candidate. At any rate, this Court has the jurisdiction to grant the reliefs sought. Section 87(9) of the Electoral Act, 2010 makes the plaintiff’s grievance Justiceable. Issue 2 is therefore hereby resolved in favour of the plaintiff and against the 1st and 3rd defendants.

Finally, the three questions for determination in this suit are answered and resolved in favour of the plaintiff and against the 1st and 3rd defendants. The plaintiff is entitled to all the four reliefs sought by him and reproduced at the beginning of this judgment. See Gassol vs. Tutare (supra). That shall be the judgment of this Court.

SGD: Justice D.G. Mann, Judge, 24/02/2014.”

The three questions his Lordship determined in favour of the 1st respondent read as follows:

“1. Whether given paragraph 5(b) of the 1st defendant’s guidelines for the conduct of the party primaries, the plaintiff who scored the highest number of votes is not the winner of the primary election of the 1st defendant to be entitled to be given Certificate of Return of 1st defendant and to be presented to the 2nd defendant to contest the general election into Kalong Ward Councillorship seat.

2. Whether given paragraph 5(g)(1) of the 1st defendant’s guidelines for the conduct of the party primaries, the plaintiff’s name alleged not to be in the register after having been screened and cleared by the 1st defendant to contest the primary election of the 1st defendant is a ground for disqualifying him after having been declared the winner of the Ward primary election.
3. Whether given paragraph 5(b) of the 1st defendant’s guidelines for the conduct of its primary elections, the 3rd defendant who did not stand for election on the date of the election and not declared a winner of the Kalong Ward primary election is entitled to be given Certificate of Return by the 1st defendant to be submitted to the 3rd defendant to be recognized and presented for the general election.”

Aggrieved by the judgment of the learned trial Judge, the 2nd appellant/applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal, Jos on 24th February, 2014. On 3rd December, 2014 the appeal was dismissed. This Court held at page 63 lines 4 to page 69 lines 1 to 10 of the judgment as follows:

“I hereby direct that the leader of the Legislative Arm of Shendam Local Government Area Council shall swear in the 1st respondent within seven days of the delivery of this judgment failing which the Deputy Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Jos Judicial Division, Plateau State is to enforce this judgment in accordance with the provisions of Order 19 rule 5 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2011.

On the whole the appeal fails and is dismissed with N50,000.00 costs in favour of the 1st respondent and N50,000.00 costs to the 2nd respondent.”

The Leader of the Shendam Local Government Legislative Council has till date, failed, refused or neglected to comply with the judgment of the Court of Appeal. There is no evidence that the Leader has lodged an appeal against the decision to the Supreme Court. 2nd applicant brought this motion on 18th December, 2014 praying for the following reliefs:Courts & Judiciary