Whether a Candidate Can Complain of Denial of Right of Delegates To Vote In a Political Party Primary?

CASE TITLE: ALIYU v. NAMADI & ORS (2022) LPELR-58823(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 4^TH NOVEMBER, 2022

PRACTICE AREA: ELECTORAL MATTERS

LEAD JUDGMENT: BOLOUKUROMO MOSES UGO, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on Electoral Matters.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the decision of the Federal High Court (trial Court), Dutse Judicial Division, delivered on the 18th September 2022 by Hassan Dikko, J.

Appellant, in his Originating Summons, sought determination of several questions among which was whether having regards to the flagrant breach of the provisions of Section 84 (5) (b)(i) and (ii) of the Electoral Act 2022, INEC’s Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Political Party Primaries, Articles 20.4(ii)(b) of the Constitution of the All Progressives Congress, Articles 22(ii), 25 and 26 of the All Progressives Congress’ Guidelines for the Nomination of Candidates for the 2023 General Elections read together with All Progressives Congress Notice of Conduct of Special Congress issued by the All Progressives Congress National Organizing Secretary, whether the 1st Defendant was validly nominated on the 27th May, 2022 as the candidate of the 2nd Defendant in the forthcoming 2023 Gubernatorial Election in Jigawa State.

Appellant’s grouse was about the conduct of the Governorship primary election of the 2nd Respondent in Jigawa State on 27th May 2022, in which 1st Respondent was declared the winner and the 2nd Respondent’s Governorship candidate for the 2023 general elections. The Appellant contested that primary election. In fact, the second respondent, his political party, declared him to have scored 13 votes in that primary election, as against the 1st respondent, who was said to have scored 1220.

Appellant’s complaints in the originating summons, in the main, were that Eight Hundred and Twenty-Seven (827) Party Delegates, out of a total number of 1435 delegates in the State from the various Wards in Jigawa State supporting him and directly sponsored by him as State Delegates for the 2nd Respondent’s Ward Congresses in the State, all of whom he further claims to have bought 2nd Respondent’s Delegate forms to contest as State delegates to vote in the said Governorship election and were successfully screened and ‘won unopposed’ as State Delegates of 2nd respondent Ward Congresses of 16th and 17th May 2022 as the said Delegate elections ”did not hold and the 2nd respondent’s Officials who were appointed to superintend it did not show up, which made all of the 827 Delegates to win unopposed,” were not allowed to vote in the indirect primary election of 2nd respondent that held on 26th and 27th May 2022.

His delegates, having so emerged unopposed, were the only lawful Delegates and ought to participate in the APC Governorship Primary in Jigawa State which was scheduled to hold at Aminu Kano Triangle, Dutse, Jigawa State on the 25th May 2022 by 10.30am. The said Primary election originally scheduled for 25th May 2022 was ‘surreptitiously’ changed to the 26th May 2022 in flagrant breach of 2nd respondent’s Regulations and Guidelines on Gubernatorial Primaries.

Upon service on them of the originating summons, 1st and 2nd respondents’ entered conditional appearances and simultaneously raised preliminary objections to it by way of motions to challenge the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain his summons. They both argued that the appellant lacked locus standi to make his complaints of the disenfranchisement of his said unopposed 827 Delegates so the Court also lacked jurisdiction over his summons.

The learned trial judge heard parties on the preliminary objections and the substantive suit together. He first ruled on the objections and determined that the appellant lacked locus standi to complain on behalf of his said 827 delegates so his Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain his summons. On that basis, he struck out the originating summons but considered the merits of the complaints therein. The Court adjudged the appellant to have failed to make out a case for its grant and so dismissed it.

The Appellant appealed both arms of the judgment.

ISSUES:

The Court determined the appeal based on the following issues for determination:

“1. Whether the trial Court was not right in its decision that the appellant who was an aspirant in the primary election for the nomination of the gubernatorial candidate of Jigawa State of the 2nd respondent lacked the requisite vires/locus standi to complain about infractions pertaining to the provisions of Section 84(5)(b)(i) and (ii) of the Electoral Act 2022, INEC’s Regulations and Guidelines for the conduct of the Political Party Primaries, Articles 22(ii), 25 and 26 of the All Progressives Congress Guidelines for the Nomination of Candidates for the 2023 General Elections.

2. Whether having regards to the totality of the affidavit and documentary evidence placed before the trial Court it was right in holding that appellant did not prove his claims to warrant the grant of his Originating Summons.”

DECISION/HELD:

In the final analysis, the Court dismissed the appeal. The order of the trial Court ignoring the appellant’s originating summons for lack of proof was affirmed.

RATIOS:

• ELECTORAL MATTERS – NOMINATION AND SPONSORSHIP OF CANDIDATE – Who has the locus standi to complain of failure to comply with the provisions of the Electoral Act and the guidelines of a political party in the selection or nomination of a candidate of a political party for election
• ELECTORAL MATTERS – POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY – Procedure to be adopted by a political party that adopts the system of indirect primaries for the choice of its candidate
• ELECTORAL MATTERS – POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY – Whether a candidate has the locus to complain of denial of the right of delegates to vote in a political party primary
• ELECTORAL MATTERS – POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY – When the cause of action to complain of infractions of the provisions of the Electoral Act and the Regulations and Guidelines of a political party in the conduct of its party primary election will arise
• ELECTORAL MATTERS – POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY – Whether a slight adjustment of the time of the primary election contrary to the Guidelines and Timetable of a political party renders the election null and void