Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, dismissed the suit challenging the tenure elongation of the John Odigie-Oyegun led National Working Committee, NWC of the ruling APC.
Mr Dimgba, in two separate judgments on the matter, held that the suits had become hypothetical and academic, as the party had reversed the decision to extend the tenures of the officials.
“Having the read and carefully examined all the attachments to the suit, I hold that there was an attempt to extend the tenure of members of the party’s National Working Committee (NWC), due to expire on June 30, 2018, for another one year”, the Judge held.
Mr Dimgba held that the resolution of the NEC of the part, in its meeting held on the 27th February, 2018, was a case of party organ trying to extend its tenure, which he noted was different from the case the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, where it was the National Convention of the party that set up the Care Taker Committee.
He said if the attempt to extend the tenure of Mr Odigie-Oyegun led an executive committee of the APC had matured, it would have amounted to a violation of the constitution of the party and that of the country.
The Judge recalled that the party had commenced congresses to elect its officials at wards and local government levels and had also slated June to hold its national convention to elect officials of the party at the national level.
Recalled that a member of the party in Imo State, Okere Uzochukwu had, in his suit, marked, FHC/ABJ/CS/219/2018 and filed on March 2, 2018, challenged the moves to extend the tenure of the John Odigie-Oyegun led executive of the party.
The second suit, challenging the decision to extend the tenure of the Mr Odigie-Oyegun led NWC of the APC was filed by some aggrieved members of the party, led by Ademorin Aliu Kioye.
The plaintiffs had, on March 15, 2018, secured an ex-parte order directing the defendants to show cause why members of the NWC of the APC should not be barred from parading themselves as national officers of the party.
Respondents in the suit include the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, APC, National Chairman of APC, Chief John Oyegun and the National Organising Secretary of the party, Senator Osita Izunaso.
Ahmed Raji, a SAN, representing the plaintiff, had informed the court that the matter borders around Section 223 of the constitution which fixes the tenure of elected officials of political parties to a maximum of four years.
He said one of the questions the court should answer is whether the provision of Section 223 of the constitution, as regards tenure of political parties’ officials is mandatory.
He argued further that the NEC’s decision to unilaterally extend the tenure of the NWC was contrary to Section 223 of the constitution and urged the court to avoid any interpretation that would render it useless.
Mr Raji also dismissed a claim by the defendants that the issue is a domestic affair of the APC and one that does not require the intervention of the court.
According to him, if the NEC of the party can single-handedly extend the tenure of party officials, it will pose a bad precedent for democracy in the country and urged the court to grant the reliefs sought by the plaintiffs in the originating summons.
Responding, the first defendant (INEC), said it remains neutral in the suit but, will abide by whatever decision reached by the court.
According to Joseph Daudu, a SAN, counsel to the 2nd defendant, the plaintiffs’ suit is based on speculation as the NEC of the APC did not breach the party’s constitution nor Section 223 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
He added that the party itself is making efforts to resolve the issue.
“If there is a breach of the party’s constitution then the court can be invited. Politicians should be allowed to do their job in as much as it is legal and within the ambit of the law”, he said.
In urging the court to dismiss the suit, Mr Daudu said the plaintiffs did not provide any instrument showing that before the end of the tenure of the NWC, there is an extension.
Similarly, Akin Olujimi, also a SAN, counsel to the APC Chairman, while aligning himself with the submission of the 2nd defendant, urged the court not to engage in speculation.
“What they are asking the court is to engage in speculation. Instead of the resolution, they came with newspaper reports which cannot prove anything”, he submitted.
Mr Olujimi further submitted that there is no cause of action for the suit and urged the court to dismiss it.
In the same vein, Ogwu Onoja, counsel to the 4th defendant who completely adopted the submission of both Daudu and Olujimi told the court that his client was not supposed to be part of the suit.
He said the issue involving the 4th defendant is whether he can contest the election and still come back as a member of the executive committee.
Mr Onoja, argued that article 31 of the party’s constitution allows a member of the executive to contest election without resigning from office.