The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has held that the
Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lawfully
de-registered the National Unity Party (NUP) as a political party
in Nigeria.
Justice Taiwo Taiwo found that INEC validly exercised its powers
in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), when it
terminated NUP’s political party status.
He held that the party provided no evidence that it met the
criteria for it not to be de-registered.
The judge made the pronouncement on Friday in NUP’s suit filed
on February 24, 2020 via a February 21 originating summons.
The suit sought four reliefs, including an order nullifying its
or any other party’s de-registration by INEC “until election is
fully conducted in the 774 local government councils and the 36
states of the Federation.”
The other reliefs included: a declaration that INEC has no power
under section 225A of the Constitution “to de-register the
Plaintiff as a political party or any other political party for
failure to win any of the offices mentioned therein or score
certain percent of votes mention therein without the completion of
election in the 774 Local Government Areas in Nigeria and all the
states of the federation.
“An order of perpetual injunction restraining INEC “from
de-registering, sanctioning or taking any other administrative
decision” against the NUP as a duly registered political party in
Nigeria.
In support of the application, the party filed an 18-paragraph
affidavit deposed to by Abigail Audu on January 21, 2020.
Mr. C.K. Eburuo appeared for the plaintiff, while Mr. Emeka
Obegolu represented INEC.
Dismissing the plaintiff’s case, Justice Taiwo held, among
others, that the Plaintiff failed to prove its case.
“On the violation of section 225A(c) of the Constitution
(supra), the Plaintiff has contended that chairmanship and
councillorship elections are yet to be conducted in various states
and as such it ought not to be de-registered.
“This court finds this untenable as it will be preposterous to
interpret the said provisions to be dependent on purported conduct
of all local government or area council elections at whatever time
it is conducted,” he said.
The court also took judicial notice of the fact that all
elections contemplated within the ambit of section 225A of the
Constitution have been held since NUP’s registration as a political
party.
Furthermore, it noted that local government and councillorship
elections have also been held by various states and that in some
states where such elections have not yet held, the positions are
presently occupied by interim chairmen appointed by the Governor of
the states.
“There is nothing before the court to show that the plaintiff,
even in the states where elections into local governments have been
held, has met the criteria for it not to be de registered.
“Furthermore, the Plaintiff has not shown how the exercise of
the power was at variance with the law or ultra vires. The act of
de-registration of the Plaintiff is within the vested
constitutional powers of the Defendant.
“…I cannot but come to the conclusion that the Plaintiff has
failed to prove its case…The reliefs being sought cannot in anyway
be granted in the light of the Constitutional provisions under
which the suit was brought,” Justice Taiwo held.
The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has held that the
Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lawfully
de-registered the National Unity Party (NUP) as a political party
in Nigeria.
Justice Taiwo Taiwo found that INEC validly exercised its powers
in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), when it
terminated NUP’s political party status.
He held that the party provided no evidence that it met the
criteria for it not to be de-registered.
The judge made the pronouncement on Friday in NUP’s suit filed
on February 24, 2020 via a February 21 originating summons.
The suit sought four reliefs, including an order nullifying its
or any other party’s de-registration by INEC “until election is
fully conducted in the 774 local government councils and the 36
states of the Federation.”
The other reliefs included: a declaration that INEC has no power
under section 225A of the Constitution “to de-register the
Plaintiff as a political party or any other political party for
failure to win any of the offices mentioned therein or score
certain percent of votes mention therein without the completion of
election in the 774 Local Government Areas in Nigeria and all the
states of the federation.
“An order of perpetual injunction restraining INEC “from
de-registering, sanctioning or taking any other administrative
decision” against the NUP as a duly registered political party in
Nigeria.
In support of the application, the party filed an 18-paragraph
affidavit deposed to by Abigail Audu on January 21, 2020.
Mr. C.K. Eburuo appeared for the plaintiff, while Mr. Emeka
Obegolu represented INEC.
Dismissing the plaintiff’s case, Justice Taiwo held, among
others, that the Plaintiff failed to prove its case.
“On the violation of section 225A(c) of the Constitution
(supra), the Plaintiff has contended that chairmanship and
councillorship elections are yet to be conducted in various states
and as such it ought not to be de-registered.
“This court finds this untenable as it will be preposterous to
interpret the said provisions to be dependent on purported conduct
of all local government or area council elections at whatever time
it is conducted,” he said.
The court also took judicial notice of the fact that all
elections contemplated within the ambit of section 225A of the
Constitution have been held since NUP’s registration as a political
party.
Furthermore, it noted that local government and councillorship
elections have also been held by various states and that in some
states where such elections have not yet held, the positions are
presently occupied by interim chairmen appointed by the Governor of
the states.
“There is nothing before the court to show that the plaintiff,
even in the states where elections into local governments have been
held, has met the criteria for it not to be de registered.
“Furthermore, the Plaintiff has not shown how the exercise of
the power was at variance with the law or ultra vires. The act of
de-registration of the Plaintiff is within the vested
constitutional powers of the Defendant.
“…I cannot but come to the conclusion that the Plaintiff has
failed to prove its case…The reliefs being sought cannot in anyway
be granted in the light of the Constitutional provisions under
which the suit was brought,” Justice Taiwo held.