The Federal High Court, Abuja on Tuesday fixed July 15 to deliver judgment in a suit filed by Mr. Friday Iwok and others against Peoples Democratic Party over conduct of the state’s primary elections in violation of the party’s guidelines.
Justice Obiora Egwuatu of the court fixed the date after counsel for the parties in the suit adopted all their processes and presented their positions for and against the suit.
Straightnews had reported that the plaintiffs- Mr. Friday Iwok and 31 others- had sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the PDP and the elected ad-hoc delegates who emerged from the ward congresses conducted as 1st to 3rd defendants respectively.
In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/606/2022 and filed on May 4, 2022, the plaintiffs had challenged the PDP Ward Congresses that led to the election of three ad-hoc delegates from each of the 329 electoral wards in Akwa Ibom State, and urged the court to declare the outcome of the party’s congress nullity.
The applicants, however, filed a suit, asking the court to set aside the results of the ward congress organised on April 30 to elect three ad-hoc delegates who voted in the party’s primaries.
They claimed that election was not conducted to choose the ad-hoc delegates in the state.
The judge, on May 18, made an order directing parties to maintain a status quo ante bellum pending the hearing and determination of the matter.
Despite the order, the PDP, on May 22, conducted its primaries using the said delegates.
The primaries were conducted to elect its candidates for the 2023 House of Assembly and House of Representatives elections.
The applicants had, on May 15, accused the PDP of flouting the order of the court in going ahead with the just-concluded primary polls in the state despite the court order.
The aggrieved members, through their lawyer, Ahmed Raji, SAN, told Justice Egwuatu that his order made on May 18 was disregarded by the defendants.
Raji, therefore, prayed the court to set aside the primary election which was conducted on May 22, having failed to obey the court order which directed parties to maintain a status quo ante bellum.
Ahmed Raji, SAN, counsel to the Plaintiffs prayed the court to cancel all the primaries conducted by the PDP, as a breach of the court order.
Raji also sought an order seeking to restrain INEC from accepting the list of candidates who were emerged from any of the primaries conducted by the PDP.
Upon resumed hearing on Tuesday, lawyer to the PDP, Paul Usoro, SAN, and counsel for the 3rd to 131st defendant, Uwemedimo Nwoko, SAN, disagreed with Raji’s submission.
Mr. Usoro, counsel to the defendants, reminded the court of a six-paragraph counter affidavit and written address which where dated 10th June and filed same day.
Read also: Iwok vs PDP: Court adjourns Case to June 14
He urged the court to dismiss the application, citing the existent laws that the Court has no authority to stop the conduct of an election by a party and also based on the fact that the court has no jurisdiction to grant their application.
Similarly, Mr Uwemdimo Nwoko, SAN, told the court he has filed an 18-paragraph affidavit on behalf of the Ad-hoc delegates. He furthered that the court never made such an order of status quo ante Bellum.
He reminded the court that it would have been impossible for the court to stop the primaries of the PDP.
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria urged the Court to rely on the wisdom of Solomon in its judgement, wherein a woman asked for a living child to be divided so that the two of them would have no living child.
He said the plaintiffs want to disrupt the entire process and render the PDP without any candidate for the election, whereas the court has no such jurisdiction.
In adopting processes on the substantive matter, Nwoko argued that no evidence abound that the plaintiffs showed interest in the Ward congress primaries.
According to him, the exhibit they showed as proof of participation is the receipt by Senator Albert Akpan, a PDP governorship aspirant.
“One man went and bought 1,000 forms and anybody in the world can just come and claim he is part of the 1,000 beneficiaries. We have tendered the 987 receipts of the entire winners of the Ward congresses. We have tendered the entire result sheets of the entire 329 wards, and the local government summaries of collated results of congress.”
Mr Nwoko submitted that the plaintiffs have not proved any of their allegations.
”They have not proved that they bought forms; they have not proved that they submitted their forms and have failed to prove that elections did not hold. The burden of proof is on their shoulders. I urge My lord to allow them to sink with the heavy burden on their shoulders.’’
But, Raji, Counsel to the Plaintiffs, argued, among other things, that there is no provision for screening of aspiring delegates and referred to a letter by the State Publicity Secretary of the PDP that announced the primaries for April 30.
He stated that the names of cleared aspiring delegates were sent to the respective wards in the state, saying it was an indication that the people were excluded from the exercise.
Still on the matter, Paul Usoro, SAN said Exhibit E submitted by the plaintiffs, letter by the Publicity Secretary, Borono Bassey, did not preclude any member of the party from participating in the congress of April 30, 2022.
Usoro, Counsel to the 2nd Defendant, averred that the letter urged all members of the party across the state to take part in the exercise in their respective wards.
He referred the court to the submissions of the plaintiffs where they acknowledged that the Ward Congress Committee was set up by the NWC of the Party with Dr Ibrahim Umar as its chairman.
”Yet, in the same petition, they said that the State Chapter of the party arbitrarily conducted the exercise. Apart from the 31 of them who claimed to be aspirants, there is no voter in any ward who has come out to claim that he was denied access to vote.”
The learned silk also argued that the burden of proof is on the plaintiffs and they have failed to present evidence showing materials never went to the wards.
He also reasoned that they failed to bring any Ward official, empowered to handle Ward issues, to come and testify that there was no congress in his ward.
He also explained that the party did not screen any aspiring delegate but only cleared people who met stipulated guidelines.
Counsel for the INEC, Abdulaziz Sani, SAN, on his part, declared his neutrality in the matter.
Meanwhile, Ahmed Raji, Counsel to the Plaintiffs, told the court of pending applications which include:
1.A motion to strike out some of the names of the plaintiffs from the suit.
- A motion to set aside some actions of the defendants of 26th May, 2022.
- A motion by the second defendant for stay of execution of 19th May, 2022
4. A motion for Stay of Execution by 3rd to 331 defendants of 19th May, 2022
- Defendants preliminary objections dated 21st May, 2022.
- 3rd to 331st defendants preliminary objections of 24th May.
Counsel to the Plaintiffs, Raji proposed an application to strike out some names of plaintiffs on the grounds that they are no longer interested in the suit.
This was not opposed by counsels to the defendants.
Justice Egwuatu accordingly struck out the names of the five persons from the plaintiffs.
The 2nd Defendant’s Counsel, Paul Usoro told the court of another motion for extension of time to file and serve the 2nd Defendant Memorandum of appearance on May 31, 2022.
He then applied for withdrawal of the matter.
Justice Egwuatu, therefore, adjourned the matter till July 15 for judgment.
