A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Abuja has rejected claims by Niger Delta Affairs Minister, Pastor Usani Uguru Usani, to being the Cross River State governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Justice Olukayode Adeniyi yesterday dismissed Usani’s suit in which he sought to be declared winner of the party’s governorship primary. Usani claimed to have won the September 30, 2018 primaries by 47,313 votes, but the party’s leadership submitted Senator John Owan Enoh’s name, who allegedly came second with 1,4013 votes, to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as its governorship candidate.
The minister prayed the court to, among others, declare him the actual winner of the primary; order the APC to send his name to INEC as its candidate, and for INEC to accept him as the candidate of the APC for the March 2 election.
Justice Adeniyi, who resolved all the issues raised by Usani for determination against him, noted that documentary evidence tendered by the claimant, and facts in his supporting affidavits, showed vital legal flaws, which the court could not overlook.
He noted that Usani’s case was incredible and not justifiable, and so denied the court the jurisdiction to hear and determine it.
One of the flaws in Usani’s claim, the judge noted, was that while he claimed to have won the September 30, 2018 primary, a report of the primary, issued by the Resident Electoral Commissioner and tendered by the claimant, showed that the primary was held between September 30 and October 1, 2018.
Justice Adeniyi also noted that by the documentary evidence tendered by Usani, it was clear that the primary he claimed to have won was an illegal one, because it was conducted solely by the state executives which have no power, under the law, to conduct a governorship primary.
The judge said since Usani did not challenge the outcome of the October 1 primary, which Senator Enoh claimed to have won, the court would not bother itself determining whether or not it was a valid primary.
He also faulted Usani’s heavy reliance on a on a September 20, 2018 judgment by Justice O. A. Musa (also of the High Court of the FCT), saying the judgment was not helpful to his case.
According to him, while the judgement directed the APC and INEC to recognise and deal with the Godwin Etim John-led state executive, it did not say the executive has the power to conduct governorship primary.
He said: “For clarity, this court, upon evaluation of the depositions in the affidavits filed by the claimant to support the originating summons, and the totality of the documents attached to further support his case, identified vital legal flaws and factual contradictions which render his case unsustainable.
“These vital flaws include – whereas it is the case of the claimant that the Election Committee set up by the National Working Committee (NWC) of the first defendant (APC) conducted the primary election in context in this suit in collaboration with the state executive, documentary evidence on record showed that the purported primary was conducted solely by the state executive of the first defendant, without the input, authorisation or endorsement of the election committee, contrary to the provisions of paragraphs 14 and 20 of the first defendant’s guidelines.
“Whereas it is the case of the claimant that the primary held and concluded on September 30, 2018; the purported INEC Monitor’s report produced by the claimant states unequivocally that the election spilled over to 2pm of October 1, 2018.
“If INEC’s report is to be believed, as the claimant has urged the court to, that the election ended by 2pm on October 1, 2018; it then becomes apparent that the Certificate of Return, a copy of which is attached to the same INEC report, which states that the same was given to the claimant on September 30, 2018, is clearly faulty and unreliable.
“Indeed the said Certificate of Return is irregular and invalid on some other fronts, as the court had found in the foregoing; the some having not been shown to have been given by the proper persons as required by the guidelines of the first defendant.
“The contradiction in the case of the claimant, as to the period the election held is fundamental and material, and goes to the root of his case. As such, the contradiction cannot be overlooked or waved aside.
“The position of the law is that where the case made out by a party in an affidavit supporting originating summons is self-contradictory and lacking in credibility, it becomes needless to look at the counter affidavit filed by the adverse party.
“On the basis of the foregoing analysis of the case of the claimant therefore, the irresistible conclusion I must come to is that the primary election purported by the claimant to have held on September 30, 2018, to determine the governorship candidate of the first defendant in Cross River State for the 2019 elections, which he claimed to have won, is legally and factually flawed.”
