The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Sunday sacked the governor of Plateau state, Caleb Mutfwang of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recognise Nentawe Goshwe of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the March 18 Plateau state governorship election.
Justice Elfrieda Williams-Dawodu, who led a three-member panel of Justices of the appellate court, while delivering the lead judgment, cited Section 177 of the Constitution, noting that the PDP did not validly sponsor Manasseh for the governorship election.
The panel held that the party violated the court order that a valid congress be conducted in the 17 local government areas of that state by conducting Congress in only five local government areas of the state, and as such, it is a nullity.
The court, while dismissing the decision of the Plateau state governorship election petition tribunal, held that the issue of qualification is both a pre-election and a post-election matter, contrary to the findings of the tribunal, which held that the appellant lacked the legal right to contest the validity of the respondent.
The court also noted that, under Section 134 of the Electoral Act, it is the sole right of a political party to sponsor its candidate having met the necessary requirements to do so.
While evoking Section 136 of the Electoral Act, the court ordered INEC to retrieve the certificate of return issued to Governor Mutfwang and issue a fresh certificate of return to Goshwe.
INEC had declared Mutfwang the winner of the March 18 governorship election in the state after he scored 525,299 votes to defeat 17 other candidates, including Goshwe, who polled 481,370.
Goshwe challenged Mutfwang’s election at the tribunal, claiming that the governor was not validly nominated and sponsored by his party (PDP) and that PDP has no structure to sponsor any candidate for the governorship election.
He equally alleged that Mutfwang’s election was not conducted in compliance with the Electoral Act, adding that the PDP candidate did not win the majority of lawful votes cast during the election.
However, in a unanimous judgment, a three-member panel of the tribunal headed by Justice R. Irele-Ifijeh dismissed the petition for lacking merit.
Not satisfied with the judgment of the Tribunal, the APC candidate appealed to the Court of Appeal, praying the court to declare him the winner on the grounds that the governor was not qualified to have contested the election because he was not validly sponsored and nominated by a political party, the PDP.
He also argued that the PDP lacked the structure and was not qualified to sponsor any candidate in the election.
The APC candidate also told the appellate court in his notice of appeal that there was over-voting and non-compliance with the 2022 Electoral Act during the 2023 governorship election in the state.
In arguing his appeal last week, lead counsel to the appellants, Prof. Goke Olagoke (SAN), urged the court to set aside the judgment of the tribunal and declare his client as the winner.
He told the court that the appellants’ case is that the 2nd respondent (Governor Mutfwang) was not qualified to contest the election because of lack of valid sponsorship by a political party, contrary to section 177 (C) of the 1999 Constitution.
Olagoke said his submission was predicated on various court judgments, including the appellate court’s decisions, adding that the court is bound to abide by the decisions for consistency.
But, in a motion dated October 30 but filed on November 2, 2023, the governor, through his legal team led by a former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice (AGF), Godwin Kanu Agabi (SAN), urged the appellate court to strike out some grounds of the appeal for being incompetent.
He equally filed a notice of preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court to adjudicate on the appeal.
Attacking the competency of the appeal, Agabi drew the court’s attention to the fact that the nomination and sponsorship of a candidate for election is purely an internal affair of a political party, which the court has no jurisdiction to inquire into.
He submitted that the word qualification used by the petitioner is misleading as the issue raised by the petition bordered on nomination and sponsorship.
After listening to submissions of counsel to both parties, the three-member panel reserved judgment in the appeal, which it delivered on Sunday, November 19.