A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has adjourned till September 17 to deliver judgement in a suit filed by an aspirant of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) for the Yola North/Yola South/Girei Federal Constituency of Adamawa State, House of Representatives seat, Engr. Bashir Abubakar seeking an order compelling the party to recognize him as its duly nominated candidate for the 2027 general election.
The trial judge, Justice Chigozie Onah, adjourned the matter on Friday, after parties in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1166/2026, with the ADC, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and Mr. Abubakar Babazango as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents, adopted their written addresses in the matter.
While adopting his written address on behalf of his client, counsel to the plaintiff, A. Ashaolu urged the court to discountenance the preliminary objection raised by the respondents for being misconceived.
In its objection to the suit, counsel to the ADC, the first respondent, P.I Oyewole urged the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s suit for lack of jurisdiction.
According to Oyewole, the issue of nomination of candidate of a political party remains an internal affair of the party and not justiciable, insisting that, the plaintiff is inconsistent in his claims before the court, which he said, makes the case dead on arrival.
He said, the chairman of the six member committee set up to conduct the ADC primary election in Yola South/Yola North/Girei federal constituency of Adamawa state, Nicholas Mseliza did not have the consent of any members of the committee before deposing to a further affidavit before the court.
Counsel to the 3rd respondent in the suit, Festus Kayode Idepefot, SAN, while adopting his brief, urged the court to dismiss the suit of the plaintiff for lacking in merit.
The plaintiff, in his suit, wants the court to declare him the lawful winner of the party’s primary election conducted on May 21, 2026, for the Yola North/Yola South/Girei Federal Constituency, alleging that his name was unlawfully substituted with that of Babazango despite emerging victorious in the exercise.
Abubakar contended that he secured the highest number of lawful votes cast during the primary election and was duly declared the winner in accordance with the ADC Constitution.
He argued that any substitution of his name contravenes the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Electoral Act 2026, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections 2026, and the constitution of the ADC.
According to the suit, the ADC has no lawful candidate for the constituency other than him, insisting that any attempt by the party to field Babazango in the forthcoming election would be invalid and liable to be nullified by the court.
Among the reliefs sought, Abubakar prayed the court to declare him the validly nominated ADC candidate for the House of Representatives election, hold that Babazango was not lawfully nominated, and restrain the party from presenting him as its candidate.
He also sought a perpetual injunction preventing the ADC from recognizing or presenting Babazango as its candidate for the constituency, as well as an order directing INEC to accept his name as the validly nominated candidate of the party.
In addition, the plaintiff asked the court to award him N25 million as the cost of litigation against the ADC and INEC.
In an affidavit filed in support of the suit, Abubakar stated that he contested the primary election alongside six other aspirants and polled 33,931 votes to emerge winner.
He maintained that the election was conducted without any irregularity and that the party’s electoral committee submitted a report confirming his victory and nomination as the ADC flag bearer for the constituency.
The plaintiff further told the court that he petitioned the national leadership of the ADC twice over the alleged unlawful substitution of his name but received no response, prompting him to seek judicial intervention.
However, Babazango has challenged the competence of the suit through a preliminary objection.
He argued that the action was incompetent because it was commenced against the wrong parties and that the originating summons was not properly endorsed by the plaintiff.
Babazango also contended that the suit was statute-barred, having been filed outside the mandatory 14-day period prescribed for pre-election matters, calculated from May 21, 2026, when the cause of action allegedly arose.
Justice Chigozie Onah, adjourned the matter until September 17 for judgment in the suit.
END
Comments