Adamawa Election: Court Declines To Hear Binani’s Motion, Queries Jurisdiction

A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, refused to hear an ex-parte motion filed by the All Progressives Congress candidate in the Adamawa governorship election, Senator Aisha Ahmed, popularly called Binani.

Justice Inyang Ekwo, instead, ordered the APC candidate’s counsel, Mohammed Sheriff, to address the court on the issue of jurisdiction before hearing the substantive motion.

Upon resumed hearing on the matter, Afeez Matomi announced appearance for Governor Ahmadu Fintiri, the third respondent in the suit, shortly after the sheriff mentioned his name.

Justice Ekwo then asked Matomi if he had been served.

The lawyer told the court that though they were yet to be served, they had filed a motion to counter part of Binani’s prayers.

He said they got the hint about the ex-parte motion through social media, hence, they decided to file a motion.

But the judge, who declined to listen to Fintiri’s lawyer, said it was imperative for counsel to go by what the law says.

Ekwo then ordered Sheriff to proceed on addressing the court.

The lawyer said his ex-parte motion was filed on April 17 and he was ready to move it.

The judge said though he was ready to hear Sheriff, the lawyer must address the court on issue of jurisdiction before he proceeded.

“I am ready too but you have to address me on jurisdiction,” he said.

Justice Ekwo, who ordered Sheriff to address him on whether the court had the jurisdiction to hear the matter, held that the application would be taken together with the issue of jurisdiction on the next adjourned date.

He, consequently, adjourned the matter until April 26 for hearing of the motion and an address on jurisdiction.

The News Agency of Nigeria reports that Binani and the APC, in the motion ex-parte marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/510/2023, had sued the Independent National Electoral Commission, the Peoples Democratic Party and its candidate, Governor Fintiri, as 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents respectively.

Binani, through her lawyer, Hussaini Zakariyau, SAN, had sought a judicial review of the administrative decision of INEC on April 16 in respect of her declaration as the winner of the governorship election held on March 18 and the supplementary poll of April 15.

She is also seeking an order of prohibition and certiorari preventing INEC and its agents from taking any further steps towards the declaration of the winner of the elections pending the determination of her application for judicial review.

The application was brought pursuant to Order 34 Rules 1a, Order 3(1) & 3(2) a, b, c, Order 6 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure Rules), 2019 and Section 251 (1)q & r of the 1999 Constitution, as well as Section 149 & 152 of the Electoral Act, 2022.

Giving grounds why the motion should be granted, Binani stated that after the collation of results, INEC declared her as the winner of the elections but the PDP and its candidate, Governor Fintiri, resorted to fighting and causing a public disturbance which led to the beating and manhandling of an INEC staff.

This crisis, she said, led INEC to cancel the initial declaration which it had no power to do as only the election petition tribunal was vested with such powers.

By cancelling her declaration, Binani contended that INEC usurped the powers of the election petition tribunal which was the only court vested with powers on a declaration from the conduct of an election.

In the application, she averred that a judicial review existed to enable the superior court to checkmate the actions and decisions of inferior courts as well as the legislative and administrative arm of government including agencies and public officers.

The applicant further submitted that INEC, being an agency of the government, could have its actions, records, and decisions checked by the court and only a court could nullify the actions of an INEC official and not INEC itself.

NAN