Court okays YDM’s moves over certificate of registration

The Federal High Court yesterday endorsed legal steps taken by the Young Democratic Party (YDP) to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to re-issue it with a certificate of registration bearing May 2, 2014, the original date it registered as a political party.

Justice Gabriel Kolawole, who granted the motion exparte moved by counsel to the party, Mr. Gordy Uche, said he was satisfied with both the accompanying affidavit and oral submissions of counsel. He also added that the application was meritorious.

Justice Kolawole ruled, “I have read through the motion exparte and oral submissions of counsel to the applicant. It appears that the respondent (INEC) has complied partially with the judgments of both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal.

“But the thrust of the case of the applicant is that INEC did not back-date the certificate of registration to the date it was deemed to have been registered as a political party.

“Having stated that the application has merit, I hereby grant prayer one as contained in the motion paper. Prayer two, having been withdrawn, is hereby struck out.”

The court thereafter directed the applicant to file and serve all the processes of the suit to the respondent (INEC) within five days and adjourned the case to November 24, 2016 for hearing.

In the suit, the party had asked for an order of mandamus compelling the Independent National Independent Commission (INEC) to re-issue it with a certificate of registration bearing the date of May 2, 2014, being the date it was registered as a political party in compliance with the orders of the court.

In a motion exparte brought pursuant to order 34, rules 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Federal High Court rules, the applicant is demanding from INEC the sum of N50 million, being damages for unlawful and unconstitutional denial of her rights and privileges as a political party.

The applicant is also asking for a declaration of the court that the refusal of INEC to comply with the judgment of a Federal High Court in suit N0. FHC/ABJ/CS/736/2014 between Young Democratic Party Vs Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), delivered on March 4, 2015, directing the electoral body to issue it with the certificate of registration bearing the date of May 2, 2014, being the date it was deemed registered by operation of law, is unlawful, illegal and unconstitutional.

In the said judgment in reference, Justice Ahmed Mohammed, also of the Federal High Court, had, on March 4, 2015, held that “it is clear that from whatever angle one looks at the peculiar circumstances of this matter, the defendant (INEC), has not discharged its obligation of informing the plaintiff of the decision not to register it as a political party within 30 days stipulated in section 78 (4) of the Electoral Act.

“The effect of not informing the plaintiff within 30 days of the defendant’s decision not to register plaintiff as a political party is clearly spelt out in section of the Act, and which is that the plaintiff is deemed to have been registered as a political party by operation of law.”

Although INEC appealed against the decision of the trial court, it lost as the Justice Tinuade Akomolafe-Wilson-led three-member panel of the court on December 8, 2015, affirmed the judgment of the lower court.

In the suit with No. FCH/ABJ/CS/891/2016 filed by Gordy Uche, the party, which predicated its case on 23 grounds that INEC had only partially complied with the judgment of the court by issuing it a certificate of registration dated January 11, 2016, to take effect from December 8, 2016 and not properly dated as May 2, 2014.

The applicant further stated that it complained repeatedly to the respondent to re-issue her with another certificate of registration to correct the error to no avail.

“That the applicant dissatisfied with the conduct of the respondent, then briefed the law firm of Gordy Uche, which wrote a letter dated June 6, to the respondent, demanding full and immediate compliance with the said judgment with respect to date of the certificate of registration.

“It is also the position of the applicant that although the said letter from its counsel was received and acknowledged by INEC, the Commission has refused to fully and correctly implement the said judgment of the court in its favour”.