A chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in Ebonyi State, has dragged the national and state leadership of the party before the federal high court sitting Abuja, seeking the nullification of the dissolution of the executive structure the party in the state.
Friday Nworie in an originating summons by his counsel, Nkemakolam Okoro Esq, also wants the court to inbalidate the appointment of the defendants as 4th to 12th defendants in the suit as officers of the party.
Defendants in the suit include the All Progressive Congress, Independent National Electoral Commission, The Inspector General of Police, Stanley Okoro, Ozoemena Njoku, Engr Ogbonnaya Igboke, Charles Ofoke, Chidi Ogbuatu, Barr Ikaa Ikaa Ukeni and Chief Paulinus Ali.
Others are Chief Joseph Ozigbo, Odo Oluchi Joseph and Francis Obike Nweze.
The plaintiff in the originating summon prayed the court to declare that the conducts of the 1st Defendant through its Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC), in the dissolution of the entire state executive committee of the All Progressive Congress(APC) in Ebonyi State, was done in contravention of the constitution of the 1st Defendant.
other relief sought by the plaintiff include a declaration that the Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC), of the 1st Defendant, has no powers as donated by the constitution of the 1st Defendant, to dissolve the entire state executive committee of the All Progressive Congress(APC) in Ebonyi State.
He, therefore, prayed the court to set aside, set aside, nullify and invalidate the purported dissolution of the entire executive structure of the All Progressive Congress in Ebonyi State, by the Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee(CECPC) of the 1st Defendant, as same was ultra vires the powers of the Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) of the 1st Defendant, and therefore unconstitutional, unlawful, void and of no effect whatsoever;
An order of the Court, setting aside, nullifying and invalidating the purported appointment of the 4th – 12th Defendants as members of the caretaker committee of the 1st Defendant, in Ebonyi State;
An order of the Court, setting aside, nullifying and invalidating all steps, actions, decisions, resolutions, appointments made or taken in any form whatsoever, by the 4th -12th Defendants, pursuant to their purported appointments as members of the caretaker committee of the 1st Defendant in Ebonyi State and;
An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st , 2nd and 3rd Defendants from recognizing the 4th– 12th Defendants as officers of the All Progressive Congress in Ebonyi State in whatever form.
Also Read: Covid-19 Vaccine: PDP Blames Buhari Over Nigeria’s Disqualification by WHO
Nworie also wants the court to determine whether by a calm reading and interpretation of Articles 2, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3,17iv,18 and 21 of the constitution of the All Progressive Congress (APC), the dissolution of the entire executive committee party structure in Ebonyi State, by the Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee(CECPC) of the 1st Defendant herein, was done in compliance with the constitution of the 1st Defendant;
Whether by a calm reading and interpretation of Articles 2, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3,17iv,18 and 21 of the constitution of the All Progressive Congress (APC), the appointment of the 4th – 12th Defendants as members of the caretaker committee of the All Progressive Congress,( APC) in Ebonyi State, by the Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee(CECPC) of the 1st Defendant was done in compliance with the constitution of the 1st Defendant herein.
He argued that the Honourable Court has the unfettered discretion to grant the reliefs sought in the matter, adding that the 1st Defendant was bound by its constitution, and that any infraction of it constitution, gives a right of action to the Plaintiff, which in turn, clothes the Honourable Court with jurisdiction to entertain this matter.
“We humbly refer this Honourable Court to the case of Gana V SDP & ORS(2019)LPELR-47153(SC); Mato V Hember & Ors(2017)LPELR-42765(SC). We also refer this Honourable Court to Article 2 of the constitution of the All Progressive Congress.
“It humbly submitted that it is only registered members of the 1st Defendant that can be appointed into positions in the 1st Defendant. The 4th – 13th Defendants herein, who are members of the Peoples Democratic Party, as at the time of their appointment as members of the caretaker committee of the 1st Defendant, are therefore not qualified to be so appointed. We humbly refer this Honourable Court to Articles 9.1,9.2 and 9.3 of the constitution of the 1st Defendant.
“It is further our respectful submission that by virtue of Article 17iv of the constitution of the 1st Defendant, the appointment of the 4th – 13th Defendants into the caretaker committee of the 1st Defendant is a nullity as most of them are holding executive offices in the government of David Umahi and or are not registered members of the APC, contrary to the provisions of Articles 9.1-9.3 of the constitution of the APC.
“We submit most humbly, that by article 21 of the constitution of the All Progressive Congress, that the Plaintiff herein is entitled to be heard before the decision, dissolving the entire state executive committee of Ebonyi State, which he is a member thereof, was made. We humbly refer this Honourable Court to the case of FEDERAL MEDICAL CENTRE, IDO-EKITI & ORS v. FOLORUNSO KAYODE MICHAEL(2012) LPELR-20406(CA), where the Court of Appeal held as follows: The importance of natural justice cannot be scuttled away within the administration of justice. The Courts have always insisted on natural justice because it is the surest safeguard against injustice’. The rule of natural justice of audi alteram partem simply means “hear the other side”. The rule of audi alteram partem postulates that the court or other Tribunal must hear both sides at every material stage of the proceeding before handing down a decision. It is a rule of fairness. A court or Tribunal or other body cannot be fair unless it considered both sides of the case as may be presented by the parties. See Akuma v. Silver Eagle Shipping Agencies Ltd. (1987) 4 N.W.L.R. part 65 at 472, Agbahomovo v. Eduyegbe (1999) 3 N.W.L.R. part 594 at 170, Orugbo v. Una (2002) 16 N.W.L.R. part 792 page 175 and Olufeagba v. Abdur-Raheem (2009) 18 N.W.L.R. part 1173 page 384 at 452 paras A – C and 454 para B.” Per FASANMI ,J.C.A (Pp. 19-20 paras. C)
“We submit that the 1st Defendant is bound by the rules of natural justice which is incorporated into its constitution which is also binding on it. We further refer my Lord to the case of PROFESSOR JERRY GANA, CON v. SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY & ORS (2019) LPELR-47153(SC), where the apex court held as follows:
“It does appear from the brief of argument of the 1st – 5th Respondents that they dispute the contention of the Appellant, premised on ONUOHA v. OKAFOR (1983) 2 SCNLR 244; PDP v. SYLVA (2012) 13 NWLR (pt. 1316) 85 (SC) at 154; LAU v. PDP (2018) 4 NWLR (pt. 1608) 60 (SC) at 123; APC v. KARFI (2018) 6 NWLR (pt. 1616) 479 (SC) at 526, that a political party, like any other organisation, is bound by its Constitution. In all the foregoing cases, this Court took a firm position that a political party is bound by its own Constitution. All members of the political party are also bound by the provisions of the Constitution of the political party they belong. Obaseki, JSC in ONUOHA v. OKAFOR (supra) had put it forcefully thus – The party like any other corporation, operates within the guidelines, the powers and duties set out in its Constitution. All its members are bound by its provisions and their rights and obligations created by their Constitution can be remedied as provided by the Constitution if breached by any of its members – Accordingly, the rights and obligations of the members of the SDP (1st Respondent), including the Appellant and the 5th Respondent, are defined by their party Constitution. They, both the party and its members, “are bound by its provisions and their rights and obligations created by their Constitution can be remedied as provided by the Constitution, if breached” either by the party or any of the members of the party.”Per EKO ,J.S.C (Pp. 15-16 paras. B)
“We submit most humbly that the conducts of the 1st Defendants, in this matter are contrary to the provisions of the constitution of the 1st Defendant herein . This Honourable court is most humbly urged to so hold.
“It is further submitted on behalf of the Plaintiff herein, that the constitution of the 1st Defendant, did not donate any powers of dissolution or appointment of caretaker committee in a state, to the Caretaker/Extraordinary Convention Planning Committee (CECPC) of the 1st Defendant. We humbly refer my Lord to Articles 18 and 19 of the constitution of the 1st Defendant herein.
“We submit most humbly, that the Plaintiff herein, has by the suffusing facts, deposed to in the supporting affidavit to this Originating Summons, whon, that he is entiled to the reliefs sought in this suit. We urge this Honourable Court to grant the prayers sought in this Originating Summons”.
