The court set aside the congress on the ground that they were not conducted in compliance with the Electoral Act 2022 and the APC Constitution.
The suit was instituted by a group of aggrieved APC members led by Realwan Okpanachi.
Plaintiffs in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/329/2023 are Rilwan Okpanachi, Yahaya Saidu Nuhu, Omaonu Clement Arome, Mustapha Ibrahim Idoko, Aku Umar Goodman and Abu Steven Okpanachi Onechiojo, while APC and INEC are 1st and 2nd defendants respectfully.
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Ogwu Onoja, SAN, argued that the APC breached section 84 of the Electoral Act and section 13 of its constitution by concocting a purported list of delegates and submitting the same to the Independent National Electoral Commission without the knowledge of registered members of the party in the state.
Delivering Judgement, Justice James Omotosho barred the INEC from recognising or using the delegates list that emerged from the congresses to select its governorship standard bearer.
He agreed with the plaintiffs that the APC in Kogi State failed to conduct ward and local government congresses as stipulated by relevant provisions of the law.
He dismissed the preliminary objections raised by APC that the court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and warned that the APC must conduct its affairs by the laws, adding that impunity as exhibited in the instant case will lead to anarchy.
The Justice ordered the APC leadership to conduct fresh nominations that would comply with section 84 of the Electoral Act, 2022, and section 13 of the party’s constitution.
The judge held that during the trial of the case, the APC failed to disclose the venues and times where the purported ward and local government congresses were held and also failed to report to the INEC officials that purportedly monitored the elections.
Similarly, Justice Omotosho held that the APC failed to produce the result sheet to show the scores recorded by the participants in the purported Ward and Local Government congresses.
Furthermore, he noted that the major document put at the disposal of the court to justify the conduct of the purported February 7 congresses, did not contain a single name of any human being but signatures of imaginary participants at the purported congresses.
Thus, the judge held that the exhibit was worthless and that no probate value can be attached to it because it runs afoul of section 133 of the Evidence Act.
The court ordered APC to conduct special Ward and Local Government congresses in line with the provisions of the relevant laws, especially section 84 of the Electoral Act and section 13 of the APC’s Constitution.
Earlier the justice also dismissed the claims of the APC that the plaintiffs are not Its members but parading old membership cards, adding that the party ought to have made its membership register available to the court to dispute the membership claim of the plaintiffs.
