Supreme Court Dismisses PDP’s Suit Against Tinubu, Shettima | SEE REASONS
The Supreme Court has dismissed a suit filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) seeking for the disqualification of Bola Tinubu, the president-elect and Kashim Shettima, the Vice President-elect.
Recall that PDP had filed a suit seeking for the disqualification of Shettima from the 2023 presidential election on the grounds of double nomination.
The PDP had in its suit, claimed that Shettima’s nomination as Tinubu’s running mate, was in breach of the Provisions of sections 29(1), 33, 36 and 84 (1)(2) of the Electoral Act 2022.
Delivering the lead judgement on the matter on Friday, Justice Adamu Jauro held that the PDP’s suit praying disqualification of Tinubu and Shettima was grossly lacking in merit and dismissed it.
Justice Adamu Jauro slammed a fine of N2 million on PDP for poke nosing into the internal affairs of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in the conduct of its primary elections and nomination of its candidates.
Justice Jauro agreed with Tinubu’s lawyer, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, that PDP acted as busy body and meddlesome interloper in the ways and manners it dabbled into APC’s affairs unjustly.
The Apex Court held that apart from the fact that PDP lacked requisite jurisdiction to institute the suit, the party also failed to provide scintilla of evidence that Shettima engaged in double nomination.
The claim of PDP on the alleged double nomination of the Vice President-elect was described as most unfortunate and a clear deliberate mischief to mislead the Court and the country.
The Supreme Court also agreed with Fagbemi that no matter the pains of PDP on how APC conducted its primary election and nominated its candidates, PDP must remain onlooker.
“It is abundantly clear that the Appellant (PDP) in the totality of its position in the instant case, is peeping and poke nosing into the affairs of another party as a busy body and meddlesome interloper,” he said.
The Court held that the action of PDP was painful because it used the social media to set a booby trap for the Supreme Court to blackmail it.
“this is most unfortunate, unwarranted and uncalled for” the court ruled.
According to the judges, a political party has no right to challenge the action of another party, or the decision of INEC, in respect of another party.
They added that for a person to have locus standi to challenge the nomination process of a political party, the person must be a neutral person and an aspirant to that position, and a member of the party.
