CaseLaw
Saulawa V. Kabir (2009) CLR 12(i) (CA)
Judgement delivered on December 10th 2009
Brief
Facts
The appellant was nominated by the 5th respondent. All Nigeria Peoples' Party as its candidate for the 21st April, 2007 Election into the House of Representatives for the Katsina Central Federal Constituency seat having won the party's primaries held on the 5th day of December, 2006. However, on 19Ih January, 2007, the 5"1 respondent wrote to the 2nd respondent, INEC wherein it sought to substitute the appellant for Alhaji Yusuf Sule in the said election. The appellant filed suit no. FHC/ABJ/CS/125/2007 at the Federal High Court, Abuja against the 2nd and 5th respondents and also the said Alhaji Yusuf Sule seeking the interpretation of the court as to the legality of the purported substitution in the light of the provision of section 34(1) and (2) of the Electoral Act, 2006. The Federal High Court delivered its judgment on the 3rd day of April, 2007 holding, inter alia, that the appellant still remained the validly nominated candidate of the 5th respondent for the aforementioned election. In spite of this decision and without any appeal against it, the 2"d respondent refused to obey the order of the court and excluded the appellant from the election. The election which also had the 1st respondent as a candidate sponsored by the Peoples' Democratic Party eventually held on 21st April, 2007 wherein the 2nd respondent declared the 1st respondent as the winner and accordingly returned him as validly elected.
It was therefore this violation of the appellants' right to contest as the validly nominated candidate of the 5th respondent but was unlawfully excluded by the 2nd respondent that the appellant on 14th May, 2007 filed his petition No. NA/EPT/KTS/40/2007 against all the respondents herein before the National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Katsina. The following declarations were sought by the appellant in the said petition:
The said tribunal after hearing arguments on the written addresses filed by all the counsel in respect of both the notice of preliminary objection and on the substantive petition (all being on issues of law) delivered its judgment on the 6lh day of September. 2007, dismissing in its entirety all the reliefs sought by the appellant in his petition. The tribunal held inter alia that the appellant has no locus standi to present the petition and that the petition discloses no reasonable cause of action.
Dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower tribunal, the appellant filed his notice of appeal.