…… delegates can’t invalidate outcome of primary, SAN clarifies
The controversy surrounding the Federal High Court judgement of last Thursday by the Hon. Justice Iyang Ekwo in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/165/2024 may have been laid to rest as the Certified True Copy (CTC) as released by the Court did not make any Order nullifying the primary election of the Edo State chapter of PDP which produced Asurinmen Ighodalo (Esq) as the party flag bearer.
The CTC revealed that the Hon. Judge gave an order for the inclusion of 378 delegates as part of the 3 Ad-Hoc Ward Delegates to participate in the February 22 PDP primary election.
Mean while, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Wahab Shittu has claimed that Section 84, Subsection 14 of the Electoral Act specifically pertains to the Edo State PDP primary issue. He contended that this rule clarifies that only a candidate, not a delegate, has the right to dispute the results of a primary election. The learned Senior Advocate made this clarification in an interview on Channels Television.
The CTC reveals that the Judge made no pronouncement on the validity or otherwise of the candidature of the PDP, Dr. Asurinmen Ighodalo (Esq) and his running mate, Osarodion Ogie (Esq), as against media reports which misled the public on the validity of the primary election.
In his ruling as seen from the CTC document, the judge declared that “The Plaintiffs and the other 378 delegates, whose names and election results appear on Exhibits BID 8A to 8L were elected and to allow the Plaintiffs and the 375 other lawfully elected delegates participate in the primary election of February 22, 2024.”
According to him, “A Declaration is hereby made that by virtue of the provisions of Article 50 (3) of the Constitution of the 2nd Defendant (as amended in 2017), the Plaintiffs together with the other lawfully elected delegates, whose names and election results appear on Exhibits BID 8A to 8L herein, are the lawfully elected Ward Congress Delegates in their respective wards and by virtue of which the Defendants cannot exclude them from participating as 3 Ad-Hoc Ward Delegates at the Governorship primary election of Edo State slated for the 22nd of February, 2024 or any other date.”
He continued: “An Order is hereby made directing the Defendants who are bound by the provisions of Section 82 of the Electoral Act, 2022 and Article 50 (3) of the 2nd Defendant’s Constitution (as amended in 2017) to abide by the outcome of the 3 Ad-Hoc Delegates Ward Congress of February 4, 2024, at which the Plaintiffs and the other 378 delegates, whose names and election results appear on Exhibits BID 8A to 8L were elected and to allow the Plaintiffs and the 375 other lawfully elected delegates participate in the primary election of February 22, 2024″.
The Judge added: “An Order of Mandatory Injunction is hereby made restraining the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants from unlawfully excluding the Plaintiffs and the other lawfully elected delegates whose names and election results appear on Exhibits BID 8A to 8L herein, from participating as 3 Ad-Hoc Ward Delegates in the Governorship election primaries of the 2nd Defendant slated for the 22nd of February, 2024 or any other date.”
Speaking on Channels TV, Shittu contended that Section 84, subsection 14 of the Electoral Act, 2022 clarifies that only a candidate, not a delegate, has the right to dispute the results of a primary election.
The learned Senior Advocate used the Supreme Court case of Osagie versus Enogama from 2022, which upheld this interpretation to buttress his point. He emphasized that according to the Supreme Court’s decision in that case, delegates do not have the legal standing to challenge the outcomes of primary elections.
Making the clarification on Channels TV, the learned Silk said, “If you look at Section 84, Subsection 14 of the Electoral Act, it is clear enough to explain this Edo State case. The outcome of a primary can only be challenged by the aspirant and not the delegates. If you look at the case of Osagie versus Enogama, the case was decided by the Supreme Court in 2022. What the Apex Court decided is that delegates do not have the locus standi to challenge the outcome of a primary. So whether the judgment pronounced by the Federal High Court can stand remains to be seen when it gets to the Supreme Court.”