The plaintiff, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/751/2022, maintained that Atiku is not constitutionally qualified to participate in the presidential contest.
By Emma Ogbuehi
Even as former Vice President Atiku Abubakar revels in his victory at the presidential primaries of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on Saturday, those working to ensure that his name is not on the ballot in the 2023 presidential election are not relenting.
Atiku garnered a total 371 votes to emerge the winner and presidential flag-bearer of the main opposition party.
But on Tuesday, a constitutional lawyer, Mr. Johnmary Jideobi, approached the Federal High Court in Abuja to challenge Atiku’s eligibility to contest the 2023 presidential election.
The plaintiff, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/751/2022, maintained that Atiku is not constitutionally qualified to participate in the presidential contest.
Consequently, he posed two legal questions for the court to determine, afterwhich he sought for seven principal reliefs against Atiku, PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), who were cited as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants in the matter.
The Attorney-General of the Federation was also joined as the 4th defendant.
Specifically, the plaintiff, asked the court to determine; “Whether by the combined provisions of sections 1(1) & (2), 25 and 131(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), only a Nigeria citizen by birth can contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?”
As well as, “Whether by the combined interpretation of sections 1(1) & (2), 25(1) & (2) and 131(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and giving the circumstances surrounding the birth of the 1st Defendant, he can be cleared by the 2nd and 3rd Defendants to contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?”
It will be recalled that on Monday, February 21, 2022, the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja struck out a similar suit that sought to disqualify Atiku from vying for the presidency in 2023.
Just as in the extant case, the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/177, challenged Atiku’s eligibility on the premise that he is not a Nigerian by birth.
A group, under the aegis of the Incorporated Trustees of Egalitarian Mission for Africa, had in the suit, urged the court to determine; “Whether section 25 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), is the sole authority that spells out ways by which a person can become a Nigerian citizen by birth?
“Whether by the provisions of section 131(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), only a Nigeria citizen by birth can contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?
As well as, “Whether by the combined interpretation of section 25(1) & (2) and 131(a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and giving the circumstances surrounding the birth of the 1st Defendant (Atiku), he can be cleared by the 2nd and 3rd Defendants to contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria?.
Upon determination of the questions, Plaintiff applied for a declaration that by the provisions of the Constitution, “only a Nigerian citizen by birth can contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
It urged the court to declare that given the circumstances surrounding Atiku’s birth, he cannot be cleared by either PDP or INEC to vie for Presidency.
However, the court, in the judgement that was delivered by Justice Inyang Ekwo, struck out the suit for want of merit.
The court held that Plaintiff, which is described as a “busy body”, lacked the locus standi to institute the action.
Justice Ekwo held that since Plaintiff was bereft of the locus standi, the court, therefore, lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the case.
He held that reliefs Plaintiff sought before the court was outside the scope of its registration as a Non-Governmental Organization.