A Federal High Court in Abuja has been asked to stop the All Progressives Congress from replacing Alhaji Kabiru Masari as the running mate to the party’s presidential candidate, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.
Dejoymedia reported that shortly after Tinubu emerged as the APC presidential candidate, and Masari’s was submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission as an interim vice presidential candidate popularly called placeholder.
However, two chieftains of the APC, who were delegates in the party’s primaries and convention, Zakari Maigari and Zubainatu Mohammed, approached the court to stop INEC from accepting a change of vice presidential candidate from the APC.
The APC, National Executive Committee, Tinubu and Masari were joined as defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ CS/1059/2022 dated July 4, 2022.
The plaintiffs in the suit filed by their lawyer, Hakeem Kareem, want the court to determine whether having regard to the combined effect of Sections 142(1) and Sections 29(1), 31 and 33 of the Electoral Act 2022, it is legally permissible for the fourth defendant to withdraw as the vice-presidential candidate of the first defendant and the running mate of the third defendant so as to be substituted or replaced with another person by the first defendant.
They also want the court to determine whether in view of the joint ticket provision in Section 142(1) of the 1999 Constitution, the withdrawal of the fourth defendant as the candidate for the office of Vice President does not entail automatic withdrawal of the third defendant as the candidate for the office of President.
The plaintiffs also want the court to, among others, determine whether having regard to the combined effect of Sections 142(1) and Sections 29(1), 31 and 33 of the Electoral Act 2022, it was legally permissible for the 4th defendant to withdraw as the vice-presidential candidate of the 1st defendant and the running mate of the 3rd defendant so as to be substituted or replaced with another person by the 1st defendant as its candidate for the office of Vice President for purpose of the February 25, 2023 presidential election.
They also want the court to determine whether in view of the joint ticket provision in Section 142(1) of the 1999 Constitution, the withdrawal of the 4th defendant as the candidate for the office of Vice President does not entail the automatic withdrawal of the 3th defendant as the candidate for the office of President for purpose of the 2023 general elections.
The plaintiffs pointed out that Section 187 (1) of the 1999 Constitution creates the governorship candidate and deputy governorship candidate joint ticket, just as Section 142(1) establishes the joint-ticket for the presidential candidate and Vice-presidential candidate.
Source punchng
