Judge refers Jonathan’s eligibility suit to appeal court

Justice Ahmed Mohammed of a
Federal High Court in Abuja has
referred a suit challenging the
eligibility of President Goodluck
Jonathan to seek re-election to the
Court of Appeal in Abuja for
determination.
The ruling by the judge on Monday
made it two cases now pending
before the Court of Appeal,
challenging Jonathan’s eligibility to
seek re-election in the forthcoming
poll.
There are at least three other suits
seeking the same prayer still
pending before the Federal High
Court.
Justice Mohammed made the order
of referral following an application
filed on November 28 by the
plaintiffs in the suit – Adejumo
Ajagbe and Olatoye Wahab.
The Attorney-General of the
Federation, Mr. Mohammed Adoke,
who is a defendant in the suit, had
opposed the application for referral
while the Independent National
Electoral Commission – the second
defendant – did not oppose the
application.
Hearing of the substantive suit had
yet to commence when the
plaintiffs asked the court for the
referral on the grounds that the
suit involved “a substantial
question of law,” on which the
Court of Appeal has to make
pronouncement “as soon as
possible.”
Earlier, Cyriacus Njoku had filed an
appeal before the Court of Appeal
in Abuja to challenge the judgment
of Justice Mudashiru Oniyangi of the
Federal Capital High Court,
declaring Jonathan eligible to stand
for re-election.
The plaintiffs in the two cases are
seeking a court order declaring
Jonathan ineligible to contest the
next presidential election on the
grounds that he had exhausted the
two terms allowed by the
Constitution, having earlier taken
the oath of the office of the
President to complete the tenure
of the late President Umaru
Yar’Adua.
Justice Mohammed on Monday
dismissed Adoke’s opposition to
the referral application. He held
that not only did the plaintiffs had
the legal right to file the suit, it also
amounted to an abuse of court
process because parties in the case
were different from the one
decided by the FCT High Court.
The judge held that the fact that
the case had yet to be decided by
the appellate court implied that
the issue of the interpretation of
Sections 135 and 137 of the
Constitution had not been finally
put to rest.
He ruled, “The fundamental feature
of the issue is that there is no
decision yet by the appellate court
as it relates to the interpretation of
sections 135 and 137 of the
Constitution in relation to the
tenure of office of the President,
concerning whether or not the oath
of office taken by President
Jonathan after the death of
President Umar Yar’Adua should be
regarded as an election.
“It is my humble view that the
constitutional issue raised by the
plaintiffs’ present suit involves
substantial question of law that
requires reference to the Court of
Appeal for determination in
accordance with Section 295(2) of
the Constitution.
“In the final analysis, it is my
humble view that the present
occupant of the office of the
President of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria, Dr. Goodluck Ebele
Jonathan, was sworn-in as
Commander-in-Chief of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria after the death
of Alhaji Umar Musa Yar’Adua in
2010.
“The issue of whether he is
deemed as having been elected in
the first instance, by the said oath
of office, imposes a substantial
question of law, in the sense that
no such situation existed or
occurred in the history of this
country, and therefore, there is no
previous decision on the matter by
courts in this country.”