Alex Enumah in Abuja
Justice Obiora Egwuatu of a Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday held that Mr Ahmed Ododo can lawfully fly the flag of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the forthcoming governorship election in Kogi State.
Justice Egwuatu made the decision while delivering judgment in a suit seeking his disqualification over alleged breach of the electoral laws.
Ododo had emerged winner of the APC primary election of April 14, for the selection of the party’s candidate in the November 11, governorship election in Kogi State.
However, displeased over his emergence, an aspirant of the APC, Mr Abubakar Achimugu, had approached the Federal High Court, Abuja, asking that Ododo be disqualified from contesting the November 11 governorship election on grounds that he did not resign his employment with the Kogi State public service 30 days before contesting the governorship primary.
Delivering judgment in the suit on Tuesday, the court held that contrary to the claim of Achimugu, evidence showed that Ododo resigned his appointment more than 30 days before participating in the APC primary.
According to Justice Egwuatu, exhibits tendered by the defendants showed that while Ododo’s resignation letter was received by the Office of the Kogi State Governor on March 8, that of the 3rd defendant, Mr Salami Deedat, was received on March 9.
The court while noting that an employee or appointee’s resignation letter comes into effect the moment the notice is received, held that the employee would not be held responsible if the employer neglected to act on it either by continuing with the payment of salary.
“Satisfied that they resigned their appointment on March 8 and 9, more than 30 days before the April 14 primary…the suit is bereft of any merit and accordingly dismissed.
Earlier, the court dismissed the preliminary objection of the defendants claiming that the suit was statute barred having been filed more than 14 days as required by law.
The judge agreed with the plaintiff that the cause of action actually occurred on April 14, when Ododo and Deedat contested the primary and not when they purchased the expression of interest and nomination form. “It is one thing to purchase form and it is another thing to participate in an election”, Egwuatu held.
The plaintiff in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/584/2023, claimed that Ododo breached Section 182 of the Constitution, Section 84 of the Electoral Act, 2022, and Article 7 of the APC’s Constitution in participating in the April 14 governorship primary of the APC.
Achimugu argued that Ododo’s failure to resign his appointment with the Kogi State Government, 30 days to the primary, made him ineligible for the November 11, guber poll.
The APC, Ododo, the deputy governorship candidate, Salami Momodu Deedat and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) were 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th respondents respectively.
Amongst the issues brought before the court for determination is that whether the 2nd defendant is eligible to participate in the forthcoming governorship election slated for November 11, 2023, in view of the fact that both at the time of submitting of nomination and expression of interest forms and the conduct and declaration of primary election results Ododo and Deedat remained civil/ public servants and employees of Kogi State Government, contrary to the provisions of Section 182 (2), Section 84 (10) and (11) of the Electoral Act, 2022 Guidelines for the nomination of candidates.
If the answer is in the affirmative, plaintiff wants the court to amongst others declare that the 2nd and 3rd defendants are not qualified or eligible to have participated in the primary election being persons both employed in public service of Kogi State, they failed and neglected to resign, withdraw or retire from employment at least 30 days to the April 14, 2023 when the primary election was conducted.
They are also asking the court to declare that the 2nd and 3rd defendants at the time of the concluded primary election of April 14, 2023 and April 15 when results was announced were not qualified or eligible, not validly nominated, and the purported nomination is unconstitutional, not eligible to bear the flag of the APC, as its gubernatorial candidate for Kogi State governorship election slated for November 11, 2023.
Another declaration “That the 2nd defendant is not eligible or qualified to contest for the office of Kogi State Governor, in the November 11, poll, being a person employed in the public service of Kogi State and failed to resign 30 days to the primary election.
Subsequently, they prayed the court to make an order nullifying and setting aside the screening and participation of the second and third defendants in the April 14, gubernatorial primary election for the nomination of the candidate of APC, having been in breach of Section 182 of the Constitution and Section 84 of the Electoral Act, 2022, Article 7 of the APC Constitution.
Another order disqualifying the 2nd defendant from contesting the office of Kogi State governor on November 11, 2023
“An order compelling the 4th defendant to remove the name of the 2nd defendant from the list of candidates vying for the governorship seat of Kogi State and substituting same with the name of the plaintiff.
“An order directing the 1st defendant to recognize and forward name of the plaintiff to the 4th defendant as APC’s valid and authentic gubernatorial candidate for the governorship election in Kogi State.
“An order of perpetual injunction restraining 2nd defendant from parading himself as gubernatorial candidate of the APC.
Another order restraining APC and INEC from dealing with Ododo as the governorship candidate of the APC and that in the event Ododo is declared winner of the November 11, 2023 guber election, before the case is fully determined, the certificate of return issued to him by INEC should be withdrawn.
Arguing through his lawyer, Mr Josiah Daniel-Ebune, the plaintiff insisted that Ododo breached Sections 20, 21, 124, 147 of the Constitution and Section 159 of the Evidence Act, when he failed to resign his appointment with the Kogi State Government at the time he purchased the Expression of Interest Form and also stood for the primary election that produced him as candidate.
The aggrieved governorship aspirant urged the Judge to invoke the provisions of the law to disqualify the gubernatorial candidate on the grounds of illegality in the ways and manners he emerged.
The lawyer cited several provisions of the law and Supreme Court judgment in similar matters to determine the status of Ododo at the time he stood for the primary election and asked the Court to grant the request of the plaintiff.
Responding, Ododo asked the Federal High Court to dismiss Achimugu’s suit for lacking in merit.
According to his lawyer, Mr Musa Abdullahi, SAN, contrary to the allegations in the suit, Ododo retired legitimately from the employment of Kogi State as required by law.
Ododo further stated that he broke no law at the time he picked the Expression of Interest Form of his party and at the time he stood for the primary election and won.
According to him, he tendered his resignation on March 8, 2023 through the office of the State Governor and that same was received by the appropriate body the same day.
He drew the attention of the Court to section 306 of the 1999 Constitution adding that whether his resignation was acknowledged, accepted or not, it has started taken effect from the date of submission.
Ododo said that the plaintiff in the suit could not contradict his claim of resignation with any documentary evidence especially with either pay slips or salary payment.
Besides, the APC governorship candidate argued that the plaintiff jumped the gun in the way and manners he instituted the suit adding that the cause of action had not arisen at the time case was filed.
He therefore asked the court to rely on his 19 paragraphs affidavit and dismiss the case of the plaintiff for lacking in merit and for being incompetent and baseless.
The position of the gubernatorial candidate was adopted by APC through its counsel Mr Abdulwahab Mohammed, SAN who demanded that the suit be dismissed with substantial cost.
