The Kwara Government and the Kwara State Independent Electoral Commission (KWSIEC) have prayed a Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)’s suit seeking to stop the Sept. 21 local government elections.
The duo, in a separate preliminary objection and counter affidavit, told Justice Peter Lifu that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter.
They also urged the court to make an order dismissing or striking out the suit for being an abuse of court process.
Alternatively, they prayed the court to make an order dismissing for being statute barred.
In the preliminary objection marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1061/2024 filed by Johnson Usman, SAN, on behalf of KWSIEC (2nd defendant), the lawyer gave five grounds why the suit ought to be dismissed.
He argued that the PDP’s suit was predicated on the local government election in Kwara fixed for Sept. 21 and that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit “which deals with Kwara State Local Government Election being not election conducted or recognised under the Electoral Act, 2022.”
Usman, who argued that the PDP lacked the requisite locus standi to file the case, said the suit was incompetent.
Besides, he argued that the suit was statute barred, hence, the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain same.
The Kwara Attorney General (AG), Senior Sulyman, SAN, who was sued as 3rd defendant in the case, equally argued in the same vein in his preliminary objection and counter affidavit filed before the court.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the PDP, the plaintiff, had, in the suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/1061/2024, sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), KWASIEC, Kwara AG, Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and State Security Service (SSS) as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.
PDP, had through its team of lawyers led by Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, told the court that KWASIEC was in grievous contravention, breach and violation of Sections 9, 28, 29 and 106 of the Electoral Act 2022, Sections 20 (1) and 21 (1) of Kwara State Local Government Electoral (Amendment) Law, 2024.
PDP claimed that all the conditions and precedents contained in Local Government Electoral Laws in Kwara were deliberately jettisoned by the state’s electoral body under unacceptable circumstances.
It alleged that KWSIEC had applied to INEC for the register of voters in Kwara to use the same in the conduct of the LG polls.
The party said the action was in breach and violation of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the Electoral Act, 2022, as well as Kwara State Local Government Electoral (Amendment) Law, 2024.
NAN reports that Justice Lifu had, on July 29, granted the PDP’s ex-parte motion stopping INEC.from releasing the national voters’ register to KWSIEC to conduct the Sept. 21 LG poll pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
When the matter was called on Friday, PDP’s lawyer, Ademola Abimbola, told the court that the matter was adjourned till today for hearing of all the pending applications, including the substantive matter.
Abimbola also informed the court that KWSIEC served on them a motion, seeking to set aside the interim order of the court in August and that they responded with a counter affidavit on Sept. 4.
He said he would love to know if counsel to KWSIEC intend to proceed with the matter or not.
Usman, however, said he was ready for today’s hearing, including their motion to set aside thr interim order.
The senior lawyer expressed worry over the manner the PDP responded to their applications.
Usman said after serving the preliminary objection on the plaintiff, the PDP went to Ilorin to serve the KWSIEC, even though his office is in Abuja.
Besides, he said after serving the PDP with their motion seeking to vacate the interim order in August, the party only served him this morning even though it filed its response on Wednesday.
The last time we came, I said upon serving the plaintiff our preliminary objection, they went to Ilorin to serve the 2nd defebdabt in Ilorin when I am in Abuja we served the the other application , even though they filed two days ago, they only serve me today
Adamu Bello, who appeared for INEC, sought to withdraw all the processes filed, including their amended counter affidavit filed on Aug. 21.
After the oral application was not opposed, the judge granted it.
The PDP lawyer then informed the court that his client just forwarded a letter dated Aug. 28 to him.
Abimbola said the letter was addressed to PDP chairman in the state, inviting the party to a peace meeting despite an injunction restraining parties from taking any step pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
“There is two things I can deduce here. The 2nd defendant (KWSIEC) is in contempt of court. Therefore the 2nd defendant cannot be heard in this case,” he said.
But the senior lawyer opposed Abimbola’s oral application in strong terms.
Usman argued that in the first instance, there was no evidence placed before the court of any alleged disobedience to the order.
“My lord, speaking from the inner bar, I am hearing this allegation for the first time and my learner friend holds me a duty to inform me to confirm from my client,” he said.
Besides, he argued that such application cannot be made orally by any means.
“All the facts alleged are concrete facts that cannot be given by a lawyer in the bar. It must come by affidavit and that has not been done. Therefore, his application cannot be granted,” he added.
Usman said if Abimbola felt that KWSIEC was in disobedience of court order, he knew the proper thing to do.
“He should do the needful, serve the 2nd defendant and we will take it from their,” he added.
He urged the court to discountenabce the entire allegation, saying “there is no document to show to court but he is only speaking from his phone.”
Abimbola then said that he forwarded the electronic copy of the letter to Usman some minutes after the hearing had already started.
“You did that while the court was sitting right? But the learner silk has been here since morning,” the judge said.
When Abimbola attempted to read the letter, Usman vehemently objected.
“I objected because reading it will be prejudicial,” he said.
But Abimbola insisted he could raise the application orally, citing two previous cases.
He said KWSIEC’s disobedience to court order was tied to the issues of the election.
On his part, Usman argued that the authority cited by Abimbola was directly against the PDP lawyer and in his (Usman’s) support.
He said in the case Abimbola cited, a formal application was filed but in the instant case, he had not done that.
“So having not filed same, that authority should be used against him,” he said.
Usman also disagreed with Abimbola’s sought for adjournment.
“There is no reason for adjournment. What he is seeking, he can do it at any time and day.
“Application for committal can even be heard after judgment.
“The election is 21st of this month, 16 days from today. The election affects the entire state. It is in our interest that this matter be heard.
“Preparation for election involves huge money and without the election, the state will not receive allocation from FAAC. It is a known fact,” he said.
The Kwara AG equally opposed Abimbola’s plea for an adjournment, citing Order 26, Rule 2 of the Federal High Court.
Sulyman argued that such request is an application to bring an application, which he said, was unknown to law.
“This is so because there is no formal application before the court.
“Besides, there is nothing placed before the court to warrant this. It is just a mere allegation.
“We urge the court to dismiss it as time wasting and order that we proceed,” Sulyman said.
Justice Lifu, who ordered the PDP to make a formal application of the allegation, adjourned the matter until Sept. 11 for hearing of all pending applications, including the substantive suit.
