By Yemi Oyeyemi, Abuja
In a case to give bite to a Court of Appeal declaration that Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act is an assault on the right of political appointees to seek elective office without resigning 30 days before, a governorship and two House of Representatives aspirants have dragged the All Progressives Congress APC and Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before a Federal High court in Abuja over threats to disqualify them in the 2023 general elections.
Just Wednesday, the Court of Appeal set aside the judgment of a Federal High Court sitting in Umuahia, Abia State which voided the provision of Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act 2022, insisting that the man who filed the suit did not have the locus standi to do so.
However, determining the appeal on its merit, the appellate court held that the controversial provision of the Act is unconstitutional because it violates Section 42 (1)(a) of the Constitution and denied a class of Nigerian citizens their right to participate in election.
It appears on the basis of the appellate court’s position, political appointees, many believed to be in the background, are fighting back, seeing they have the locus standi.
Three aspirants, Ambassador Sodique Baba Abubakar, Sodique Lawal Abubakar and Bindir Umar Buba are praying the court to stop APC and INEC from disqualifying them on the strength of their being political appointees and section 84 (11) and (12) of the Electoral Act 2022.
The suit marked, FHC/ABJ/CS/641/2022 was instituted on their behalf by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Adeniyi Akintola SAN.
The three plaintiff are contending that section 84 (11) and (12) of the new Electoral Act is discriminatory against them and unconstitutional and therefore should not be permitted by the court to be used to disqualify them on account of their mere political appointment.
In their originating simmons filed on May 11, the plaintiffs want the court to determine whether being Nigerians covered by sections 66, 177, 182 of the 1999 Constitution can be subjected to any other conditions, rules or guidelines for the purpose of election into the office of the Governor of Bauchi State and House of Representatives respectively by APC under section 221 of the Constitution other than the qualifications and criteria set out in sections 66, 177 and 182 of the Constitution.
They also ask the court to determine whether being card carrying members of APC and political appointees they can be prevented or barred from participating in its political Convention, Congress or Primaries merely because they are political appointees..
Plaintiffs further sought determination of whether the directive of APC based on section 184 (12) of the Electoral Act 2022 that political appointees must resign their positions 30 days before they can participate in its Convention, Congress or Primaries for the purpose of standing as political party candidates in the coming election is Constitutional.
Besides, they also asked the court to determine whether section 84 (11) and (12) of the Electoral Act 2022 is not in conflict with section 84 (3) of the same Electoral Act and whether or not by virtue of section 1 (1) and (3) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria, the Constitution is not Supreme and Superior to all other legislations and statutes including the Electoral Act 2022.
Upon resolution of the issues in their favour, the plaintiffs asked the court to declare that the APC’s directive that political appointees should resign from their respective posts as a result of section 84 (11) and (12) of the Electoral Act 2022 is unconditional and therefore null and void.
They sought order declaring as unconstitutional, illegal and unlawful the APC’S directive that political appointees must resign from their positions before they can participate as voting delegates or be voted for in the convention or Primaries of the party.
Plaintiffs applied for an order of injunction restraining APC and INEC either by themselves or agents from preventing, hindering or stopping them from attending, participating in party congress, convention or primaries for the purpose of voting or being voted for as candidates in the forthcoming elections and in any congress, convention or primaries.
In their 26 paragraph affidavit in support of the suit, the 1st plaintiff, Sodique Abubakar claimed to be a political appointee and currently serving as Nigeria’s Ambassador to Republic of Chad.
The 2nd Plaintiff, Sodique Lawal Abubakar claimed to be a Special Assistant in the Federal Capital Territory Administration FCTA while the 3rd defendant, Bindir Umar Buba asserted to be National Coordinator, Social Investment Program in the Ministry of Humanitarian.
They averred that they have obtained expression of interest froms to contest in the primaries of the APC for nomination as candidates in the coming election.
Plaintiffs further hinted that pursuant to signing of the Electoral Act into law, there has been threats that political appointees will be disqualified from contesting primaries of APC because of section 84 (11) and (12) of the Electoral Act 2022.
The affidavit deposed to by one Oluwafemi Abimbola, a legal practitioner on behalf of the plaintiffs averred that sections 65, 66, 107, 131, 137,;177 and 182 of the 1999 Constitution covered qualification requirements of aspirants to political posts in Nigeria.
They claimed that Article 2 of APC Constitution affirmed Supremacy of Nigeria’s Constitution but the same party breached the section with its directive of May 7th that all political appointees must resign 30 days before it’s primary election.
Plaintiffs stated that section 84 (11) and (12) are at the moment standing on their way to achieve their political ambitions and that unless,the APC and INEC are restrained from the thread, they will be prevented from participating in the primary for nomination as candidates.
Meanwhile, no date has yet been fixed for hearing of the suit.
