Trouble now looms in the camp of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party following controversies surrounding the list of delegates for the primary election of the party expected to start from this month.
Interestingly, the federal high court in Abuja presided over by Mr Justice Obiora Egwuatu had adjourned the case to May 25 for hearing on the substantive case. The suit was filed by Mr Friday Iwok. Before adjourning the matter, the judge had ordered that the parties involved should maintain the status quo.
The various interested parties have been giving their own interpretations to the judgment. But the dicey thing is that the PDP is now at a cross road on the matter. If they decide to make use of the disputed delegates list for the primary election and court judgement does throws the list away, it would mean that the PDP would not have any candidate at the end of the day.
On the other hand, if the party decides not to use the list, the only option before them is to conduct a fresh delegates’ election. But this does not appear feasible considering the time left before the start of the primaries.
But what really did the judge have in mind when he ordered that status quo be maintained? Mr Inibehe Effiong, a Lagos based legal practitioner said the judge was not referring to status quo post bellum, but status quo.
He advised PDP to be circumspect not to conduct any primaries but should allow the matter to remain pending until the substantive suit is determined.
Another lawyer, Mr Emem Benson said in his opinion that the development was a dangerous signal for the party. “A great and inherent danger lie ahead for the PDP in the interim injunction order made this morning by the Federal High Court in the effect of the order is the possibility that where in the event that the court in its final judgment finds that the process leading to the election of ad-hoc delegates was irregular, such will be declared illegal, null and void, and the consequence may be that any candidate elected with the participation of such illegally elected ad-hoc delegates may equally have his candidacy nullified. A further effect of this could leave the PDP with no candidate for the 2023 Governorship Election in Akwa Ibom state.”
2023 Election: Mammoth Crowd Besiege Aspirant In Rivers Community
Mr Bassey Etim, an Uyo based lawyer, in his legal opinion however said “the full legal maxim (Latin phrase) is – status quo ante bellum, meaning “the situation as it existed before the war”.
“The simple legal interpretation to My Lord’s ruling is to the effect that the position wherein parties to the suit were, before the conduct which gave rise to the cause of action pending before the court must be sustained.
“Now, what was the position of Parties before the ‘action’ that gave rise to the Cause of Action? Simple – Parties were in a position where there existed no Ad-hoc Delegates.
LEGAL REASONING
“TAKE NOTICE that the matter is adjourned for the Hearing and Determination of the Substantive Suit.
“The crux of the issue in the Substantive Suit, which has given rise to, or is the Cause of Action, is – on the determination;
Otu, Agara Battle For C’River APC Guber Ticket * Owan Enoh May Emerge Otu’s Running Mate
(1) Whether there was conduct of ad-hoc delegate elections in the 329 wards in Akwa Ibom State? (2) Granted though not conceding that it was done, whether same was properly so done and or conducted?
“The above issues are what the Court shall seek to determine in the substantive suit, which is the contention of the Parties to the suit. In law, at this stage Parties are deemed to have joined issues, or simply put, to have locked their horns.
“Therefore, it would be legally erroneous to hold that, the Court have asked that the Ad-hoc delegate list (or whatever so called) be sustained. If this were to be so, then what would the Court determine in the Substantive Suit that is adjourned to Wed 25 May, 2022?
“What the Court therefore meant by “status quo” is that, before the advent of the said Ad-hoc delegates, there existed no quarrel and there was no contention as to the legitimacy or legality of the status of the ‘Already Existent Statutory Delegates’. ‘So, maintain that status(status quo) till I determine the legality or otherwise of this’ ONE in contention ‘.
SUBMISSIONS
“In Submission therefore, it is my well considered view:
1. That the FHC sitting in Abuja in its Ruling, has not UPHELD the outcome of the alleged conduct of the Ad-hoc delegates’ elections which were purportedly or allegedly said to have been conducted across the 329 wards in Akwa Ibom State. If that was so, then the matter would not have been adjourned to Wed 25 May, 2022, as the court do not sit nor give order in vain.
2. That the FHC Abuja sitting in Abuja has not CANCELLED the alleged outcome of the conduct of the Ad-hoc delegates’ elections which were purportedly or allegedly said to have been conducted across the 329 wards in Akwa Ibom State.
3.That the FHC sitting in Abuja Ruled that STATUS QUO be maintained – meaning that Parties should not rely on the RES (subject of litigation) whether to the benefit or detriment of either of the Parties till Judgment(the determination of the substantive suit.).”
