CORAM

PARTIES

1. ALL PROGRESSIVE CONGRESS (APC)2.    ALH. UHAR HARUNA(APC CHAIRMAN, KANO STATE)3.    ALH KAYATU MUSA DORAWAR SALLAU  APPELLANTS

HON DANLADI IDRIS KARFI

RESPONDENTS 

AREA(S) OF LAW

No Available

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The 3rd Appellant and the 1st Respondent were members of the 1st Appellant (All Progressive Congress). Both the 3rd Appellant and the 1st Respondent contested in the party’s primary for the Kura/Garum Mallam constituency seat into the Kano State House of Assembly which was won by the 3rd Appellant. The 1st Appellant then submitted the name of the 3rd Appellant to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as its candidate for the General Election. Dissatisfied with the outcome of the primaries election, the 1st Respondent filed an action at the Federal High Court Kano State. At the trial, the primary election was declared inconclusive; the 3rd Appellant then filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal against the judgment of the tribunal which was dismissed and the 3rd Appellant ordered to vacate his seat which he already occupied in respect of the said constituency. The court also directed the 1st Appellant, the All Progressive Congress (APC) to conduct a fresh Primary election for the purpose of a bye election that would be conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Still dissatisfied with the Judgement, the 3rd Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Applicant herein during the pendency of the appeal filed before the Court an application praying the Court to join Abdullahi Mohammed and the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) as the 4th and 5th Respondents as they contested against the 3rd Appellant in the main election and had earlier filed an unsuccessful petition against the election which announced the 3rd Appellant as representative of the constituency. This ruling is with respect to the application.

HELD

Application Dismissed

ISSUES

? Whether having regard to the affidavit In support of this application and the exhibits attached thereto; the applicants have shown sufficient Interest to justify the grant of the relief sought? ? Whether In view of the clear constitutional provision to wit, section 246 (3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and the plethora of the decided authorities of this court on the same issue, this Honourable Court has the jurisdiction to entertain this application?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 amended.

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT