CASE TITLE: NWAGBARA & ORS v. INEC & ORS
JUDGMENT DATE: 11TH JANUARY, 2023
PRACTICE AREA: PRE-ELECTION MATTER
LEAD JUDGMENT: RITA NOSAKHARE PEMU, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on pre-election matters.
FACTS:
The 2nd Respondent – Peoples Democratic Party had notified the 1st Respondent – INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION of its intention to elect three (3) Ward Ad-hoc Delegates at a special Ward Congress across all the 184 Wards of Abia State. This, in preparation for the nomination of its candidates into the various elective offices in the 2023 General Election in Abia State.
It is the Appellants’ case that the 2nd Respondent acted contrary to the provisions of Section 82 of the Electoral Act 2022.
The primary was for the purposes of nominating the party’s candidates for the offices of Governor of the State, member of the National Assembly and election of National Delegates.
The Appellants, who are members of the 2nd Respondent hail from their respective Wards of the 184 Wards in Abia State. They were the aspirants/candidates who aspired to contest for the elections to the delegates’ state offices in the said three (3) Ward Ad hoc delegates at a special Ward Congress.
They had bought their Nomination Forms from the appropriate Head Offices of the 2nd Respondent. They were screened for the exercise. On the scheduled date which was on 4th May, 2022, the Appellants (as aspirants to the “…. three (3) Ward Ad Hoc delegate at a Special Ward Congress and their supporters) turned out to vote in the direct election of the “three (3) Ward Ad-hoc Delegates at a Special Ward Congress” but were informed that the said Congress had been postponed indefinitely.
However, it was announced two days later that the said election to the “three (3) Ward Ad-hoc Delegates at a Special Ward Congress had taken place on the 6th of May 2022.”
The Appellants alleged that this was a sham and contrary to all known democratic principles provided for in the laws and 2nd Respondents’ Constitution and Guidelines. That the 2nd and 3rd Respondents had elbowed the Appellants out.
That the three (3) Ward Ad-hoc Delegate at special Ward Congress, allegedly held on the 6th of May 2022, was in flagrant breach of the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), The Electoral Act 2022; INEC Regulations and Guidelines 2018, as well as the 2nd Respondent’s Constitution and Guidelines for the conduct of Primary Elections 2022.
At the close of the trial, the Court dismissed the case of the Appellants. The Appellants dissatisfied with the judgment, appealed the same.
ISSUES:
The Court determined the Appeal on the Appellant’s issues as follows:
1. “Considering the provisions of our election related laws and Guideline of 2nd Respondent. Were the Appellants not aspirants with legitimate cause of action good enough to have activated the jurisdiction of the Hon. trial court.
2. Was the Hon. trial Court right to have held that the Appellant’s cause of action was statute barred and not justiciable?
3. Whether the Hon. trial Court did not wrongly abdicate its duty to have gone ahead to try and determine the Appellant’s challenge on the illegality of the 2nd Respondent’s purported election of the “…three (3) Ward Ad-hoc Delegate at a Special Ward Congress” at the 184 Wards of Abia State said to have taken place on 6th May 2022 etc., as the Hon. trial Court hide under the disguise of “…there is no need to look into it on merits.”
4. Considering the weight and preponderance of evidence adduced by the Appellants, did they not tilt the scale enough for the Hon. trial Court to have found judgment in favour of the Appellants?
DECISION/HELD:
The appeal was dismissed.
RATIOS:
- APPEAL- GROUND(S) OF APPEAL: Whether a specific finding of the Court can only be attacked on appeal by a specific ground of appeal
- APPEAL- OMNIBUS GROUND OF APPEAL: Whether an omnibus ground can be used to raise an issue of law
- ELECTORAL MATTERS- POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY: Who is an aspirant that can complain about the conduct of a political party primary; whether an ad hoc delegate is an aspirant
- ELECTORAL MATTERS- POLITICAL PARTY PRIMARY: Position of the law on the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain pre-primary election matters and complaints on the conduct of a political party primary; whether a party who did not participate in a primary election can bring an action against it
- ELECTORAL MATTERS- NOMINATION AND SPONSORSHIP OF CANDIDATE: Whether the court has jurisdiction to interfere with matters that concern the internal affairs of a political party
- EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Whether a party seeking declaratory reliefs must establish his entitlement to the reliefs upon the strength of his own case
- EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Whether he who asserts must prove
- WORDS AND PHRASES- “AD HOC”: Meaning of “ad hoc”
Login or subscribe via primsol.lawpavilion.com to read the full judgment
