The Federal High Court in Abuja has struck out a suit filed by a member of the House of Representatives, Miriam Onuoha (Imo-APC), challenging the recognition of Uchenna Agasu as the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate for the 2027 election.
Justice Salim Ibrahim, in a judgement, held that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear and determine the case on the ground that a court of coordinate jurisdiction had determined a similar suit.
|
|
Justice Ibrahim, who upheld the preliminary objection filed by Mr Agasu, described the suit as “an abuse of court process.”
Although the judgement was delivered on 24 August, its certified true copy was made available to the News Agency of Nigeria on Friday.
|
|
|
|---|
Background
Ms Onuoha, who is the chairperson of the House of Representatives’ Committee on Tertiary Education Trust Fund, had filed the suit to challenge INEC’s recognition of Mr Agasu as the APC candidate.
She had named APC, Mr Agasu, and INEC as the 1st to 3rd defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1568/2026.
The lawmaker, in the originating motion dated 20 July and filed by George Ibrahim, SAN, sought an order setting aside the purported upload of Mr Agasu’s name by INEC on its portal on 11 July as APC’s candidate for Isiala/Mbano/Okigwe/Onuimo Federal Constituency seat of Imo in the 2027 general elections.
Stay Ahead with Premium Times
Follow us on Google News and never miss breaking stories, investigations, and in-depth reporting.
Add as a preferred source on Google
Ms Onuoha sought an order directing the commission to forthwith upload her name as the APC candidate for the constituency seat.
She also sought an order of injunction restraining Mr Agasu from parading himself as the candidate of the party for the constituency seat, among others.
But APC and Mr Agasu disagreed with Onuoha’s submissions.
Mr Agasu, in his preliminary objection filed by his counsel, Paul Ananaba, SAN, prayed the court to dismiss the suit as a gross abuse of court process.
He argued that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case on the ground that an Owerri court had, on 25 June, delivered a judgement on a similar case.
He further submitted that the earlier judgement remained subsisting and that the present proceedings amounted, in effect, to an invitation to the instant court to rehear a question already determined by another judge of the same court.
INEC’s position in the suit
INEC, in its affidavit of facts and written address filed by Johnson Usman, SAN, stated that it would abide by the court’s determination.
Mr Usman further explained that under the prevailing nomination arrangement, political parties themselves uploaded candidates’ particulars through the access granted by the commission.
He stated that the APC uploaded Mr. Agasu’s name on 11 July, and that name remained on the portal as of the hearing date.
ALSO READ : Election: PDP wins Orlu, Orsu and Oru East Federal Constituency seat of Imo
Delivering the judgement, Justice Ibrahim said that before going into the substantive suit, the court would look at the preliminary objection filed by Mr Agasu in line with the previous Supreme Court decision.
He agreed with Mr Agasu’s submission that the Owerri suit and the instant case were on the same subject matter.
“This court does not express any opinion upon whether the judgement of Owoibo, J. was rightly or wrongly decided.
“An allegedly erroneous judgement is not thereby rendered nonexistent.
“Until set aside by a court invested with appellate authority, it remains a subsisting judicial determination which a court of coordinate jurisdiction is bound to respect.
“It follows that, having found that this court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the plaintiff/respondent’s substantive suit, the proper order to make in the circumstances is to strike out the instant suit.
“I therefore hold that, having regard to the subsisting judgement of the Federal High Court, Owerri Judicial Division, delivered by Hon. Justice I.N. Owoibo on 25th June, 2026, in Suit No. FHC/OW/CS/70/2026.
“The fact that the Federal High Court, by virtue of Section 19(1) of the FHC Act, which makes the court one, but based on administrative convenience, the Chief Judge divided the court into different divisions pursuant to the powers of the Chief Judge.
“See Orji v Chima (Supra) per KEKERE-EKUN, JSC (as he then was, now CJN) and also to the fact that this is a gross abuse of court process as this court is a court of coordinate jurisdiction with the Owerri division.
“I therefore find merit in the preliminary objection and hold that it ought to be sustained.
“Accordingly, I hereby sustain the preliminary objection and strike out Suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/1569/2026…There shall be no order as to costs,” the judge ruled.
(NAN)
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
More News
