Home Politics Tribunal Strikes Out APM’s Petition Against Tinubu, Gives Reasons

Tribunal Strikes Out APM’s Petition Against Tinubu, Gives Reasons


The Petitioner’s case rests on the sole ground of alleged invalid nomination of Tinubu’s running mate, Sen. Kashim Shettima.


Petitioner claimed that Shettima’s nomination as Tinubu’s running mate was in breach of the provisions of the Electoral Act and Constitution.


The issue of qualification or nomination of any candidate is a pre-election matter and should have gone to the Federal High Court.


Even if this court has jurisdiction on issue of nomination of 3rd

Respondent (Shettima), the matter is statute barred and

incompetent. The petitioner’s suit should have been filed within

14 days after the cause of action as required by law.


Section 84(3) of the Electoral Act says that a political party shall

not impose nomination qualification or disqualification criteria

outside of those in the Constitution. The provision applicable to

qualification and disqualification in an election petition are

sections 131 and 137 of the Constitution.


The petitioner (APM) has no locus standi to challenge the

nomination of the candidate of another political party (APC).

They lack locus standi to raise issue of valid nomination of

Kashim Shettima.


The issue of double nomination against Sen. Shettima was settled by the apex court in the case of PDP Vs. APC & Ors. and cannot be relitigated any further (In this case, the Supreme court held that “section 284(14)(c) of the constitution does not extend to a party poking into the affairs of another party, no matter how pained and disgruntled it may be.”wink


Political parties are not enjoined to conduct fresh primaries to produce a new Vice-Presidential candidate as it is the sole discretion of a Presidential candidate to nominate his associate and it is not subject to primaries per section 142 of the Constitution.

RELATED POSTS:  Kwara Governor, Abdulrazaq Accuses Lai Mohammed Of Working Against Him In The 2019 Elections, APC State Secretary Corroborates Claim


The 5th Respondent Masari should not to have been joined as a party as there is no claim against him.



Petition does not disclose reasonable cause of action

Grounds for petition are incompetent

Petitioner failed to prove the lone ground of his petition

Petition is an abuse of court process

Petition liable to struck out for being incompetent

Petition by APM is devoid of any merit and dismissed.

  You may also like this...
Previous articleBandits Kill 11 Year Old Daughter of Police Officer In Gusau
Next articleMay 26 Supreme Court Ruling On Shettima’s Double Nomination Suit Is Final And Binding On All Parties — PEPC