A suit challenging the eligibility of President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria to take part in the presidential election, for another 4-year term in office, has been referred to the Court of Appeal, Abuja division for proper adjudication.
The legal action was moved to the appellate court by Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court in Abuja for interpretations of sections 135 and 137 of the constitution, as they relate to tenure of the office of the President.
Justice Mohammed said he had taken a look into the four issues formulated for determination and eight reliefs sought by the plaintiffs and discovered that they were the same.
He said the issues raised were the same in content and fact with another suit earlier referred to the Court of Appeal for judicial interpretation of section 135 and 137, as they relate to the tenure of the President.
He further stressed that no court had pronounced any judgement on the issue before now, hence the need to refer it to the appellate court.
The plaintiffs are insisting that President Jonathan was ineligible to be elected president for another term of office having taken oath of office twice for the same office.
On February 10, the Supreme Court of Nigeria dismissed an appeal filed by a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Mr Umar Ardo, challenging the decision of the Court of Appeal that stopped him from joining in the appeal challenging President Goodluck Jonathan’s eligibility to contest in the 2015 election.
The court dismissed the motion after it was moved by Ardo’s Lawyer, Mr Amuda Kannike, seeking to withdraw the appeal.
In dismissing the appeal, the panel of seven justices led by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, said the appellant had no business joining in the appeal challenging Jonathan’s eligibility, stating that no law stopped him from participating in the just concluded convention of the party.
A PDP member, Cyriacus Njoku, had approached an Abuja High Court to stop Jonathan from contesting in the 2015 election.
Justice Mudashiru, now elevated to the court of appeal, who presided over the matter at the high court of the Federal Capital Territory, had dismissed the suit, saying the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain it.
