The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by the National Democratic Congress (NDC) challenging key provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 relating to the qualification and disqualification of candidates for elective offices.
Delivering judgment on Tuesday, Justice Muhammed Umar held that the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/635/2025, lacked merit, ruling that the disputed provisions of the Electoral Act complement, rather than conflict with, the 1999 Constitution.
The NDC had instituted the suit against the Attorney General of the Federation, the Clerk of the National Assembly, Senate President Godswill Akpabio and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), seeking declarations that Sections 138 and 77(5) of the Electoral Act 2026 were unconstitutional.
The party also asked the court to declare that issues relating to the qualification of candidates could still be challenged after the conduct of elections.
However, Justice Umar upheld the preliminary objections raised by the defendants, holding that the plaintiff was merely asking the court to interpret the provisions of the Constitution and the Electoral Act.
"The plaintiff is invoking the interpretative jurisdiction of this honourable court in respect of the provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 on the one hand and the 1999 Constitution on the other hand," the judge said.
The court further ruled that attaching INEC's election timetable to the originating summons did not make the matter a pre-election case.
"The fact that the defendant's timetable is attached cannot make the case within the contemplation of Section 285... there is no deposition that raises questions as to the timetable," Justice Umar held.
On the objection filed by the Clerk of the National Assembly, the court held that the NDC failed to comply with the statutory requirement of serving a pre-action notice before commencing the suit.
Justice Umar ruled that the failure to serve the required notice rendered the suit incompetent against the Clerk of the National Assembly and consequently struck out the action against the second defendant.
On the substantive issues, the judge rejected the NDC's argument that Section 138 of the Electoral Act was inconsistent with the constitutional provisions governing the qualification and disqualification of candidates.
According to the court, while the Constitution prescribes the qualifications and disqualifications for elective offices, the Electoral Act provides the procedure and timeline for challenging disputes arising from political party primaries.
"Any aggrieved party who intends to challenge any candidate that emerged at the primary election of a political party on grounds of disqualification must do so at the pre-election stage," the judge ruled.
Justice Umar held that Section 138, when read alongside other provisions of the Electoral Act, complements the Constitution rather than contradicting it.
"The provision of Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026 complements the provision of the Constitution, but is not in conflict with it. The contention of the plaintiff that Section 138 is inconsistent with the Constitution is of no merit," he said.
The court also declined to invalidate Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act, holding that the issue had already been settled by the Court of Appeal.
Justice Umar noted that the appellate court had previously pronounced on the provision and stressed that lower courts are bound by judicial precedent.
No comments:
Post a Comment