The judgement dashed ADA promoters’s hopes that the court would compel INEC to register the association as a political party.
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday dismissed a suit filed by a political association, the All Democratic Alliance (ADA), seeking registration as a political party by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
According to the judge, the plaintiff, initiated wrongfully initiated the suit by originating summons despite containing allegations of fraud.
“Adopting this mode of suit is in itself hostile,” he said, indicating that the plaintiff should have adopted a writ of summons which offers an opportunity for the parties to call and cross-examine witnesses’ testimonies on contentious issues raised in the suit.
ADA and its promoters had filed the suit following INEC’s rejection of the ADA’s registration, stating that the association failed to meet the necessary criteria and that their submission was merely a “letter of intent” rather than a formal application for registration.
In September last year, ADA was listed by INEC as part of 14 pre-qualified political associations.
But by February, only two out of the eight, according to INEC, met all requirements to be registered as a political party.
According to INEC, while the Democratic Leadership Alliance (DLA) was registered after meeting all legal requirements, the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) was registered by virtue of a court order.
But the promoters of ADA, including Umar Ardo, accused INEC of double standards and fraud, alleging that the commission registered NDC while unfairly denying ADA. They wondered how a court could order NDC’s registration when it never made the list of pre-qualified associations.
They urged the court to compel INEC to register ADA as a political association.
However, the judge held that allegations of crime or fraud alleged by ADA could not be proved through the originating summons.
He held that such a legal challenge requires a writ of summons, which allows for full trial, including oral testimony and cross-examination of witnesses, unlike originating summons which is restricted to affidavit evidence.
“It is a well-established issue of law that the appropriate mode of commencement of a suit where there is an allegation of fraud is ‘writ of summons’,” he said.
Mr Nwite noted that the mode of commencement of a suit is fundamental, as it determines jurisdiction, and where improperly used, it robs the court of jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The judge further held that the procedure adopted deprived the second and third defendants in the case of the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses on depositions contained in the affidavit evidence, and thus “will affect their right to fair hearing,”
The judge held that the matter was instituted by improper procedure and could not be sustained. The preliminary objection of the defendants stands.
“I am of the view and I so hold that the appropriate order is to set aside the entire proceedings,”
he ruled that the suit is lacking in merit and thereby dismissed..
According to Ardo, of the 171 political associations that submitted expressions of interest for registration, only 14 were shortlisted for further screening.
He stated that NDC was not among the political associations that applied or participated in the screening, adding that it was shocking that a group that was not shortlisted suddenly appeared with a registration certificate.
While rejecting INEC’s claims that NDC was registered based on a court order, Ardo questioned the legal foundation of the claims.
Details later…..
