Feb. 14 poll: Court urged to stop Jonathan from running

Election is fast approaching! Barely 12 days to the general elections, a suit has been filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja challenging the eligibility of President Goodluck Jonathan.

The plaintiffs, who are Prof. Tunde Samuel, Dr. Junaid Mohammed, Mr. Razak Adeosun and Yahaya Ezemoo, are pleading with the court to restrain Dr. Jonathan from contesting, putting himself forward and or accepting to contest for the office of President, Federal Republic of Nigeria at the 2015 presidential election.
The only defendant in the matter, which is already assigned to Court 7, is the President.

No date has been fixed for the hearing of the application, which was filed by a team of crack lawyers mostly Senior Advocates.

The counsel in the matter are Yusuf Ali (SAN), A. B. Mahmoud(SAN), Adebayo Adelodun(SAN), Sirajo Chedi (SAN), Dr. Tunji Abayomi, Prof. Wahab Egbewole, K.K. Eleja and A.O. Usman.


Six more Senior Advocates will join the team whenever the legal fireworks begin because the plaintiffs have asked for two SANs from each of the six geopolitical zones.

Relying on Sections 135 to 146 of the 1999 Constitution, the plaintiffs averred that Jonathan cannot take the oath of office more than twice as president.

They also said under the constitution, any President of Nigeria cannot be in office beyond eight years of two terms.

They said if Jonathan is allowed to contest and is sworn in as president, he would be spending 10 years in office contrary to the spirit and intendment of the 1999 Constitution.

They urged the court to determine three issues and sought for six reliefs in the originating summons.

The plaintiffs’ prayers are as follows:

*whether having regards to the intendment and general scheme of the Constitution, especially the provisions of sections 1 (1) &(2), 135 (1)& (2), 137(1)(b), 140 (1) &(2),142 (1)&(2) and 146(1)(3)(b)(c) thereof, it is constitutional, lawful, legal and permissible for a person to occupy the office of the president for a cumulative and or aggregate period of more than eight years;

•whether having regards to the intendment and the general scheme of the Constitution, especially the provisions of Sections 1(1) & (2) and 135(1) thereof, the defendant is eligible to seek re-election or contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria for another term of four years, which will bring his cumulative and or aggregate period in office as president beyond the eight years maximum period allowable by the Constitution;

•whether having regards to the intendment and the general scheme of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) especially section 1(1) & (2), 135 (1)&(2), 137 (1)(b), 140 (1) & (2), 142(1)& (2) and 146(1) (3) (b)& (c) thereof, the period the defendant served as President from May 6, 2010 to May 28, 2011, ought not to be reckoned with and taken into cognisance in computing the total period he has spent and could spend in office as President of Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The plaintiffs asked for these reliefs.

•a declaration that having regards to the provisions of the Constitution, it is unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal and not permissible for any person to occupy the office of the President for more than a cumulative and or aggregate period of eight years when the country is not at war and it is practicable to hold election into the office of President;

•a declaration that having regards to the Provisions of the Constitution, the defendant, is not eligible to seek re-election into the office of President for another term of four years from 2015, as that would have permitted him to occupy the office of President, for more than the eight years maximum period allowable by the Constitution for anyone to occupy the office of the President;

•a declaration that in computing the period already spent in office as President by the defendant, the period from May 6, 2010 to May 28, 2011 should / ought to be reckoned with.

•a declaration that having spent a period of more than four years in office as President reckoned from May 6, 2010, the defendant is without competence, eligibility, authority or entitlement to contest for the same office for another term of four years;

•an order of injunction restraining the defendant from contesting, putting himself forward and or accepting to contest for the office of President at the 2015 presidential election;

•and, for such further or other relief(s) to which the plaintiffs may be found entitled by the Honourable Court in consequence of the relief(s) earlier adumbrated on the Originating Summons.

A member of the legal team, who spoke in confidence, explained why the latest suit is different from others before on the eligibility of Jonathan.

The source said: “The suit is challenging the eligibility of Mr. President to spend beyond eight years in office in the light of constitutional provision that forbids any person to stay in office beyond eight years.

“And also there is a court decision in an election petition case on Adamawa State, where it was held that no circumstances should warrant anyone to hold an elective office beyond eight years.

“In Marwa and 1 other v. Admiral Murtala Nyako and others (SC 141/2011), the court held that ‘the constitution has no room for a cumulative tenure exceeding eight years.’

“This suit is different from the previous ones challenging Mr. President because he had neither declared his intention nor was he confirmed as a presidential candidate for 2015 polls.

“Thus, the previous suits were speculative. This suit is hinged on the fact that having spent six years in office, the president is seeking another term of four years. Yet the constitution says a President can hold office for two terms of eight years.”

Source: The Nation