Connect with us

Politics

Breaking: 2023: Former Vice-President, Atiku Can Run For Nigeria’s Presidency If He Wants – Court Rules

Published

on

An Abuja division of the  Federal High Court, has dismissed a suit seeking to challenge the eligibility of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s to contest for the office of the president.

Justice Inyang Ekwo on Monday dismissed the suit on the grounds that the plaintiff that instituted the case lacked the locus standi (legal right) to do so.

A group called the Incorporated Trustees of Egalitarian Mission for Africa (EMA) had instituted a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/177/2019 against Mr Atiku, PDP, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

The plaintiff (EMA) had filed the suit on February 11, 2019, seeking the court to disqualify Mr. Atiku as the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

They also sought the court to restrain Mr Atiku from contesting the presidential election over alleged circumstances surrounding his citizenship.

On April 26, 2021 Adamawa State Government, through its Attorney-General (AG), had sought an order of the court to be joined in the suit as the 5th defendant which was granted by the court.

The state government told the court that Mr Atiku was eligible to contest for the office of the president as he is a citizen of Nigeria from Adamawa State.

They contended that the suit threatened the right of  Nigerian citizens of Adamawa origin who cover 12 out of the 21 Local Government Areas in the state.

What the judge ruled

The plaintiff (EMA) prayed the court to declare that considering the provisions of  Sections 25(1) &(2) and 131(a) of the constitution and the circumstances surrounding the former vice president’s birth, he cannot contest for the office of the presidency.

The presiding judge who described the plaintiff as “busy body and meddlesome interloper,” held that the plaintiff had no legal right to challenge Mr Atiku’s Nigerian citizenship.

Justice Ekwo dismissed the suit on the grounds that the plaintiff that instituted the suit lacked the legal right to do so.