Can A Court Intervene In The Internal Affairs Of A Political Party?

By Ojo Emmanuel Oluwatobi

Political parties are the fulcrums of democracy. Without political parties, democracy cannot function effectively. It is imperative to note that political parties are the creation of the constitution. This particular fact is strengthened by the fact that the registration of political parties is governed by the provisions of the fons et origo, the constitution of the land. See the case of LP & ORS v. OYATORO(2016) LPELR-CA/AK/32/2012. Therefore, it is safe to assert that a political party is a body that possesses legal force and constitutional recognition in Nigeria.

However, there is a question that bugs the mind when it comes to political parties. Are the political parties omnipotent? Do they have the power over their internal affairs to the point that even the court cannot intervene in their affairs? These questions undoubtedly pop up in every mind. It is the intent of this writer, to illuminate the mind of the reader on the position of the law on whether or not the court has jurisdiction over the internal affairs of a political party.

THE IMPORTANCE OF JURISDICTION IN ANY COURT PROCEEDING

As a preliminary point, it is important to know that jurisdiction is, to any court proceeding, what oxygen is, to man, and what water is to fish. No court proceeding no matter how beautifully conducted can hold sway without the court possessing jurisdiction. Issues of jurisdiction are so important, that they can be raised anytime, even on appeal. This has been judicially amplified with admirable lucidity in the case of UBA PLC & ORS V. ADEMOLA (2008) LPELR-CA/B/130/2005, where the penultimate court, per Shoremi J.C.A held that;

“Jurisdiction is the life wire of a Court as no Court can entertain a matter where it lacks jurisdiction. Issue of jurisdiction can be raised at any time even on appeal to the Supreme Court. Because of its decisive nature…”

WHETHER OR NOT A COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO INTERVENE IN THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF A PARTY

As earlier stated, the political parties are deemed to be capable of conducting their internal affairs, and as such, there must not be undue interference from any segment of the society, the courts included. The courts have in a plethora of cases held that the court has no jurisdiction to intervene in the internal affairs of a political party. In the case of ARDO & ANOR v. NYAKO & ORS (2013) LPELR-CA/YL/15/2012 (CONSOLIDATED), the court of appeal, per Per DENTON-WEST, J.C.A., held that;

“However it is a notorious principle of law that courts have no right whatsoever to descend into the internal affairs of political parties as to choose their candidates for them.”

This position is more vividly expounded in the case of AGI v. PDP & ORS (2016) LPELR-SC.256/2016, where the Supreme Court held that;

“… a party is supreme over its own affairs……A party is like a club. A voluntary association. It has its rules, regulations, guidelines and Constitution. Members join the party on their own free will. By joining they have freely given their consent to be bound by the rules, regulations, guidelines and Constitution of the party. These rules of the party must be obeyed by all members of the Party, as the party’s decision is final over its own affairs. Members of a Party would do well to understand and appreciate the finality of a party’s decision over its domestic or internal affairs. The Court would only interfere where the party has violated its own rules…”

As stated earlier, the court has the jurisdiction to intervene in the internal operations of a political party when the parties fail to adhere to their own constitutions or rules as the case may be. The power of the court to intervene in the internal affairs of political parties when they violate their own rules is ingeniously deployed by the Supreme Court in the case of Ugwu v. Ararume (2007) ALL FWLR (Pt. 377) 807 at 875 – 876, Paras. A – A (SC), where the apex court held that political parties are bound to comply with their own guidelines concerning the party primaries and the resultant emergence of candidates that will represent the party in elections. The Supreme Court authoritatively asserted the following words;

“An observer of the Nigerian political scene today easily discovers that the failure of the parties to ensure intra-party democracy and live by the provisions of their Constitutions as to the emergence of candidates or elections is one of the major causes of the serious problems hindering the enthronement of a representative government in the country. If a political party was not to be bound by the provisions of its Constitution concerning party primaries, why would there be the need to send members of the parties aspiring to be candidates for electoral offices on a wild goose chase upon which they dissipate their resources and waste time? Would it not have made better sense in that event for the political parties to just set out the criteria for the emergence of their candidates for electoral offices and then reserve to themselves (i.e. the parties) the ultimate power to decide who should contest and who should not.”

CONCLUSION

In light of the foregoing, it is safe, to assert unequivocally that, a court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain issues that border on the internal affairs of a party, except the parties fail dismally and abysmally, to conduct their activities in accordance with the rules which they have ingeniously and proactively calibrated for themselves. Political parties are, therefore, implored to ensure that they follow their own constitutions to the letter. Any attempt by the political parties to deviate from their own rules or constitution will inevitably confer the courts with the jurisdiction to intervene in their internal affairs!

Ojo Emmanuel Oluwatobi is a law student in the Faculty of Law, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Kaduna state. He is a dynamic writer, brilliant researcher, and a passionate lover of knowledge. He can be reached via 08145929919, or emmanueltobi447@gmail.com.

Source:TNL