A Federal High Court in Abuja
has dismissed a suit praying for the removal of Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu as
the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party and the
rehinstatement of his predecessor, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur, to the office
which he resigned from over 10 months ago.
The suit marked FHC/ ABJ/CS/2014 was instituted by a member of the PDP in Adamawa State, Aliyu Gurin, but Tukur, who was a defendant in the suit filed a counter-claim, seeking the same set of main prayers like the plaintiff.
Their prayers were based on the grounds that Mu’azu’s appointment flouted the provisions of Section 45(1) and (2) of the party’s constitution.
Like the plaintiff, Tukur argued that his resignation from office on January 15, 2014 failed to comply with the provisions of the party’s constitution, which required that a 30-day pre-resignation notice must be given to the National Executive Committee of the party.
The PDP, Mu’azu and the Independent National Electoral Commission were joined as defendants in the suit.
Justice Evoh Chukwu in his judgment in the suit on Tuesday dismissed both the main suit and Tukur’s counter-claim, describing them as constituting an abuse of court process.
The court held that the plaintiff lacked locus standi to institute the suit.
It also dismissed Tukur’s counter-claim which he filed as defendant in support of the plaintiff’s case was strange and unknown to law.
The judge dismissed the main suit and awarded N100 in favour of each of the PDP, Mu’azu and INEC, to be paid by the plaintiff.
The court held that Gurin lacked the locus standi to institute as his interest in the issue he brought before the court was not in any way greater than the interest of the other party members.
The judge agreed with the PDP and Mu’azu that Gurin’s suit was speculative because he failed to prove how Mu’azu’s appointment negatively appointed his intention to seek election into the House of Representatives, under the PDP.
Justice Chukwu said Gurin had not been stopped from running for the House of Representatives seat which he claimed to be aspiring for.
He therefore held that the injuries which he claimed he could suffer with Mu’azu’s continued stay in office were “speculative, self-inflicted and imaginary. They are not actual”.
Tukur had claimed in an affidavit in support of the counter-claim that, he was made to merely step aside as the National Chairman following pressures mounted on President Goodluck Jonathan, who is the leader of the party, to remove him (Tukur) in order to allow seven governors who defected from the party to return to the party.
He had maintained that he remained the National Chairman of the party in the eyes of the law and urged the court to declare the purported appointment of Mu’azu by the National Executive Committee of the party as “null and void being inconsistent with section 45(1) and (2) of the party’s constitution”.
The suit marked FHC/ ABJ/CS/2014 was instituted by a member of the PDP in Adamawa State, Aliyu Gurin, but Tukur, who was a defendant in the suit filed a counter-claim, seeking the same set of main prayers like the plaintiff.
Their prayers were based on the grounds that Mu’azu’s appointment flouted the provisions of Section 45(1) and (2) of the party’s constitution.
Like the plaintiff, Tukur argued that his resignation from office on January 15, 2014 failed to comply with the provisions of the party’s constitution, which required that a 30-day pre-resignation notice must be given to the National Executive Committee of the party.
The PDP, Mu’azu and the Independent National Electoral Commission were joined as defendants in the suit.
Justice Evoh Chukwu in his judgment in the suit on Tuesday dismissed both the main suit and Tukur’s counter-claim, describing them as constituting an abuse of court process.
The court held that the plaintiff lacked locus standi to institute the suit.
It also dismissed Tukur’s counter-claim which he filed as defendant in support of the plaintiff’s case was strange and unknown to law.
The judge dismissed the main suit and awarded N100 in favour of each of the PDP, Mu’azu and INEC, to be paid by the plaintiff.
The court held that Gurin lacked the locus standi to institute as his interest in the issue he brought before the court was not in any way greater than the interest of the other party members.
The judge agreed with the PDP and Mu’azu that Gurin’s suit was speculative because he failed to prove how Mu’azu’s appointment negatively appointed his intention to seek election into the House of Representatives, under the PDP.
Justice Chukwu said Gurin had not been stopped from running for the House of Representatives seat which he claimed to be aspiring for.
He therefore held that the injuries which he claimed he could suffer with Mu’azu’s continued stay in office were “speculative, self-inflicted and imaginary. They are not actual”.
Tukur had claimed in an affidavit in support of the counter-claim that, he was made to merely step aside as the National Chairman following pressures mounted on President Goodluck Jonathan, who is the leader of the party, to remove him (Tukur) in order to allow seven governors who defected from the party to return to the party.
He had maintained that he remained the National Chairman of the party in the eyes of the law and urged the court to declare the purported appointment of Mu’azu by the National Executive Committee of the party as “null and void being inconsistent with section 45(1) and (2) of the party’s constitution”.
No comments:
Post a Comment