A governorship aspirant of the Labour Party (LP), Barrister Kenneth Imansuangbon, has asked the court to disqualify, Barrister Olumide Akpata, the governorship candidate of the party for the Saturday, September 21, election.
In a suit No. FHC B/CS/26/2024 and filed at the Benin Division of the Federal High Court by his Counsel, A.A. Malik & Co, Imansuangbon said that the LP, the second defendant in the suit, erred by declaring Akpata the winner of the party’s gubernatorial primary conducted on February 23, 2024.
This is also as the aspirant filed another suit in the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court where he alleged Akpata and his running mate to have lied under oath and supplied false information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
In the Abuja suit filed on April 12, 2024, Akpata who is the first defendant, was joined in the suit by his running mate, Alufohai Faith, LP and INEC as the second, third and fourth defendants respectively. Like in the second suit filed in the Benin division, Akpata was only joined by LP and INEC as the first, second and third defendants.
In the Benin suit, Imansuangbon said Akpata was not qualified to have contested the primary having violated the provisions of the section 222(c) of the Nigeria Constitution as well as Article 28 of the party’s guidelines for the conduct of the primary.
Imansuangbon further averred that votes garnered by the first defendant in the primary be declared invalid and wasted. The plaintiff, who listed nine issues for determination and 18 others for declaration by the court, asked the court to set aside the LP February 23 governorship primary in the Edo State.
He asked the court to determine if Akpata is qualified to have contested the primary having failed to sign or endorse the indemnity form issued him by the second defendant.
He also asked the court to determine if the votes garnered in the purported primary should not be voided and wasted in the face of outright disregard to the constitutional provisions of the country and that of the party.
Similarly, Imansuangbon asked the court to determine if he that scored the second highest votes in the said primary should not be declared the winner and validly nominated to be the governorship candidate of the LP.
Alternatively, the court was asked to determine if the LP conducted the February 23 governorship primary in a manner outlined, prescribed or otherwise circumscribed by section 84 of the electoral Act, 2022.
That the court should also determine if the primary did not run foul of the provisions of section 84(2), (3), (4) & (5) of the electoral Act, 2022. In his declaration, the plaintiff told the court to bar the INEC or any other agent, from recognizing Akpata as the governorship candidate of the LP for the September 21 Edo governorship poll.
He also called for the withdrawal of the certificate of return issued by the second defendant to the first defendant as the purported winner of the said primary. While asking for the sum of N20 million as cost of the suit, Imansuangbon asked that a fresh primary should be conducted not later than 30 days of the judgement of the court.
However, for the Abuja Division of the suit, Imansuangbon alleged Akpata supplied false information to the INEC according to information provided in their form EC9. He said where Akpata claimed to have been Akpata Olumide Anthony, but filled his name to be Akpata Olumide Osaigbovo.
Similarly, his running mate who said that she was born in 1981, claimed to have had her first school leaving certificate same year she was born. She was also alleged to have gotten three certificates – OND, HND and PGD in the same year(2005).
According to Imansuangbon, their actions contravene the provisions of section 29(5) of the 2022 electoral Act and also section 182(i),(a) &(j) of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Government of Nigeria as amended.
He thus sought for their disqualification and restrained from participating in the September 21 governorship election in Edo State. Imansuangbon Abuja suit was accompanied with the affidavits in support of the originating summon.
Discussion about this post