Imansuangbon goes to appeal court, challenges Olumide’s candidacy

It is not yet Uhuru for Olumide Akpata, the governorship candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the upcoming September 21 election in Edo State as a former governorship candidate of the LP, Barrister Kenneth Imansuangbon, has dragged Akpata, the LP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to the Court of Appeal.

Dissatisfied with the decisions of Justice Babatunde Quadri of the Federal High Court of Benin and Justice Obiora Egwuatu Abuja who dismissed his applications on July 15 and 22, 2024 respectively, he headed to the Court of Appeal.

In the notice before the Court of Appeal of Abuja with

In Case No. FHC/ABJ/CS/472/2024, on the first ground of his appeal, Imansuangbon stated that “the trial judge erred in law and arrived at a perverse decision causing a miscarriage of justice to the plaintiff/appellant when he dismissed the plaintiff/appellant’s complaint based on the argument of the first defendant/respondent in his preliminary objection before the lower court.

“That the trial was statute barred, without regard to section 285(13A) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (Fifth Amendment) Act (No. 10), 2023, to which the attention of the court below was drawn during the hearing of the trial.”

The particulars of the ground being that “the trial judge found in his decision that the letter transmitting the personal details of the 1st and 2nd defendants/respondents as contained in the INEC Form EC9 to the 4th defendant/respondent (the Independent National Electoral Commission) was received by the 4th defendant/respondent on 24th March 2024.”

Further, “the trial judge also concluded that the starting date for calculating the time allowed to complete the pre-election questions in the circumstances was March 24, 2024.

“A simple arithmetic calculation of the 14 days provided by law, from the date of submission of the said INEC EC9 form of the 1st and 2nd respondents (i.e. 24th March, 2024), to 12th April, 2024, the date on which the applicant/appellant filed his complaint, reveals a total of 18 days in between.”

Imansuangbon seeks an order granting leave to appeal, an order setting aside the decision of the lower court and an order directing the third respondent/respondent to forthwith issue a certificate of return to the applicant/appellant as the winner of the primary election held on Friday, February 23, 2024.

Also challenging the decision of the Federal High Court of Benin in Notice of Appeal No. FHC/ABJ/CS/472/2024, Imansuangbon based his appeal on nine grounds, including that “the trial judge erred in law when he failed, refused and/or neglected to consider, rule, decide, in any manner, the first respondent’s motion/application seeking an extension of time to file its pleadings in response to the writ of summons which the applicant/appellant fiercely or vehemently opposed under the constitutional provision prohibiting extension of time in election-related matters and thereby violated the applicant/appellant’s right to a fair trial.”

Imansuagbon, for his second ground, stated that “the trial judge erred in law and thereby caused a miscarriage of justice to the complainant/appellant.”

On the third ground, he argued that the trial judge erred when he held that “the plaintiff argued that since every pre-election matter must be resolved no later than 14 days from the date of the event, decision or action complained of in the suit, an aggrieved candidate need not wait to exhaust the second defendant’s internal dispute resolution mechanism.”

The relief sought by Imansuangbon includes an order granting leave to appeal, an order setting aside the decision of the lower court, an order striking out all processes filed by the first respondent with the trial court, an order directing the second respondent to forthwith issue a certificate of return to the applicant as the winner of the primary election held on Friday, February 23, 2024 and an order directing, commanding or otherwise mandating the second respondent to submit, forward or otherwise transmit the name of the applicant to the third respondent as the winner of the primary election.

In his ruling, Justice Quadri said the complaint was premature and not supported by any substantial evidence. The Court therefore upheld Olumide Akpata’s candidacy for the LP governorship in the forthcoming elections.