Judge refers Jonathan’s eligibility suit to appeal court

Justice Ahmed Mohammed of a Federal High Court in Abuja has referred a suit challenging the eligibility of President Goodluck Jonathan to seek re-election to the Court of Appeal in Abuja for determination.

The ruling by the judge on Monday made it two cases now pending before the Court of Appeal, challenging Jonathan’s eligibility to seek re-election in the forthcoming poll.

There are at least three other suits seeking the same prayer still pending before the Federal High Court.

Justice Mohammed made the order of referral following an application filed on November 28 by the plaintiffs in the suit – Adejumo Ajagbe and Olatoye Wahab.

The Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Mohammed Adoke, who is a defendant in the suit, had opposed the application for referral while the Independent National Electoral Commission – the second defendant – did not oppose the application.

Hearing of the substantive suit had yet to commence when the plaintiffs asked the court for the referral on the grounds that the suit involved “a substantial question of law,” on which the Court of Appeal has to make pronouncement “as soon as possible.”

Earlier, Cyriacus Njoku had filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal in Abuja to challenge the judgment of Justice Mudashiru Oniyangi of the Federal Capital High Court, declaring Jonathan eligible to stand for re-election.

The plaintiffs in the two cases are seeking a court order declaring Jonathan ineligible to contest the next presidential election on the grounds that he had exhausted the two terms allowed by the Constitution, having earlier taken the oath of the office of the President to complete the tenure of the late President Umaru Yar’Adua.

Justice Mohammed on Monday dismissed Adoke’s opposition to the referral application. He held that not only did the plaintiffs had the legal right to file the suit, it also amounted to an abuse of court process because parties in the case were different from the one decided by the FCT High Court.

The judge held that the fact that the case had yet to be decided by the appellate court implied that the issue of the interpretation of Sections 135 and 137 of the Constitution had not been finally put to rest.

He ruled, “The fundamental feature of the issue is that there is no decision yet by the appellate court as it relates to the interpretation of sections 135 and 137 of the Constitution in relation to the tenure of office of the President, concerning whether or not the oath of office taken by President Jonathan after the death of President Umar Yar’Adua should be regarded as an election.

“It is my humble view that the constitutional issue raised by the plaintiffs’ present suit involves substantial question of law that requires reference to the Court of Appeal for determination in accordance with Section 295(2) of the Constitution.

“In the final analysis, it is my humble view that the present occupant of the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, was sworn in as Commander-in-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria after the death of Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in 2010.

“The issue of whether he is deemed as having been elected in the first instance, by the said oath of office, imposes a substantial question of law, in the sense that no such situation existed or occurred in the history of this country, and therefore, there is no previous decision on the matter by courts in this country.”