A Federal High Court, Abuja has voided the participation of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate, Andy Uba, in last month’s Anambra governorship election.
This was contained in a verdict delivered by Justice Inyang Ekwo who held that the June 26 primary of the APC that produced Uba as its flag-bearer was not validly conducted.
It should be recalled that Chief George Moghalu, an aspirant in the APC primary election had challenged the process and the result of the primary election which produced Uba as the party’s candidate.
Moghalu, who happened to be the plaintiff, sued the party, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and Uba as 1st to 3rd defendants respectively.
While delivering the judgment, Justice Ekwo was in alignment with the plaintiff’s arguments that the June 26 primary election contravened the provisions of the Electoral Act and the APC guidelines for the conduct of the primary election.
The Judge held that the plaintiff had successfully demonstrated that the exercise was not conducted in line with the law and the party’s guidelines.
He said: “Therefore, the case of the plaintiff succeeds on its merit.”
The Judge further disclosed that the APC (1st defendant) cannot be a beneficiary of the November 6 election that produced the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) candidate, Prof. Charles Soludo, as the winner of the election.
Therefore, the judge declared that the ruling had no candidate in the Anambra governorship election by not including the name of Moghalu in the primary election, and the conduct of the poll in contravention of the Electoral Act and the party’s guidelines.
He ordered that “The 2nd defendant (INEC) is compelled to delist the name of the 1st defendant and 3rd defendant from the Nov. 6, Anambra governorship election.”
According to the judge, every election conducted contrary to the 1st defendant guideline is in nullity.
He held: “The real issue was not whether accredited members of 1st defendant voted on that day but whether the election was conducted in accordance with the election guidelines of 1st defendant.”
