The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division on Tuesday held that President Goodluck Jonathan is eligible to re-contest in the March 28 presidential election.
The judgement of the court was sequel to an appeal brought by Cyriacus Njoku challenging the decision of an Abuja High Court, which had on March 1, 2013 dismissed the suit he (Njoku) filed to stop Jonathan from re-contesting in the 2015 general elections.
In a lead judgement delivered by Justice Abubakat Yahaya, the full panel of the court unanimously held that Jonathan had only spent one term in office as the president going by the provisions of the Constitution.
The court noted that it is fundamental that where a party lacks locus, the court cannot assume jurisdiction.
It was on that premise that the court upheld the decision of the lower court, which dismissed Njoku’s suit for lack of locus standi.
“We agree with the lower court that the appellant has no locus to sue,” the court held.
On the cause of action, the court held that the case of the appellant was speculative and imaginary as none of the reliefs he sought accrued to him any benefit.
The court had earlier noted that a cause of action is what gives right to a plaintiff to sue in a matter.
On the issue of taking oath of office and allegiance twice by the President, the court held that the constitution is the ground norm and sacrosanct to the extent that all other laws emanated from it and such it must be respected and obeyed by every Nigerian.
It said the court of law is therefore duty bound to consider the entire provision of the constitution.
Yahaya on behalf of others ruled: “In this appeal, it is not controverted by the appellant that the first oath taken by the first defendant (Jonathan) was the oath he took as the Vice President and not as President.
“But he took the oath in May 2010 to complete unexpired tenure of late Umaru Musa Yar’Adua.
“Section 37(1)(b) disqualifies a person from contesting for president if he had been elected twice. Disqualification is through election and not oath taking.
“Election is a process of choosing a person to occupy a position by voting.
“When election is given its literal meaning, it connotes when a voting is employed to choose a person for political office.
“This did not take place when Jonathan stepped into the shoe of his Principal who went to the great beyond.
“To say these things were done is to import words not used by the constitution.
“Section 146(1) of the Constitution cannot be deemed an election for a VP to step into the office of a President.
“Election involves conducting primaries by party, nomination, election and announcement of results.
“All these processes were not done.
“If a VP succeeds a President that dies, that cannot be challenged.
“It is a mode of stepping into the vacant office provided for by the constitution.
“When a President dies, the Vice President automatically becomes President as provided for by Section 130 (1)(2) of the 1999 Constitution.”
In addition, the court also held that oath taken by Jonathan in May 2010 was a constitutional process.
He noted that going by Section 135 (2)(b), the President took the oath of office for the first time in May 2011 adding that 2010 oath was to complete the unexpired term of Yara’Adua.
The court also noted that if the first respondent is disqualified as prayed by the appellant, the system of election would have then be altered.
It added: “It was not election that produced the first respondent in May 2010.
“The oath he took then was not an oath of elected President as provided for by Section 180 of the constitution.
“The process which produced the first respondent in 2010 was not election but a constitutional process.
“This was different to what happened in 2011.
“The process of election was followed in 2011.
“The oath of office taken in 2011 was the first oath taken by the first respondent as an elected President having fulfilled all the process of election.”
Justice Yahaya however noted that the case of Buba Marwa relied upon by the appellant was not applicable in the instant case.
She held: “The first respondent had not been elected as President before 2011 and his two terms cannot end in 2015.
“If you are not disqualified, then you are qualified to contest.
“The first respondent is not disqualified and on that note, he is qualified to contest.
“The appeal lacks merit and fails in its entirety.
“It is hereby dismissed.
“Judgement of lower court is hereby affirmed.
“The sum of N50,000 each is to be paid as cost to each of the defendant.”
Our earlier story: The Court of Appeal has declared President Goodluck Jonathan as eligible to stand for the March 28 presidential election.
In the opinion of the court, Jonathan has not contested for the office of the president and elected twice.
This was contrary to the position of those who approached the court seeking the disqualification of the President from standing for the election.
Jonathan, the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, the plaintiffs argued, had taken the oath of office of the president twice and as such was ineligible to stand for election again.
The judgment was still on as at press time.
More details soon.