The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, has dismissed a suit seeking to challenge the Cross River State Governor’s, Ben Ayade’s position as the All Progressive Congress’s candidate for the Cross River North Senatorial District in the forthcoming election.
The suit filed by Cecelia Adams, a participant in the APC’s May 28 primary election, sought to overturn an initial judgment by the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Adam had zero votes at the May 28 primary election and refused to participate in the fresh one conducted on July 14, 2022.
Following Martin Orim’s resignation from the 2023 senatorial race, a new election was held, resulting in Ayade being the only contestant and ultimate winner.
In the originating summon filed on July 26, 2022, Adam prayed the Federal High Court to issue an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, from recognising Orim, Ayade, or any other person as the APC’s candidate for Cross River Senatorial District in the forthcoming National Assembly elections.
Adam also pleaded for a court relief that ordered INEC to recognise, accept and publish her name as the candidate of the APC for the Cross River North Senatorial District.
Ayade’s counsel, Mike Ozekhome (SAN), argued that the claimant had no right to the reliefs sought before the court.
Read more: Supreme Court affirms Aliero as Kebbi PDP senatorial candidate
Justice Nkeonye Maha, who presided over the Federal High Court sitting, upheld Ozekhome’s claim and dismissed Adam’s claim in its entirety, stating that Orim complied with the provision of section 31 of the Electoral Act, 2022, in validating his withdrawal process from the senatorial race and that the APC also adhered to the requirements of Section 33 of the Electoral Act, 2022, in organising fresh primary.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, Adams proceeded to the appellate court seeking to overturn the ruling of the lower court.
The Appeal Court, however, upheld Justice Maha’s ruling stating that since the lower court’s judgment reflected the actual stance of the law, the appellate court had no reason to interfere in such judgment. “We stand by the decision of the lower court to hold that the appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed”, the court held.
Stella Adeniyi
