Written by on March 8, 2022

Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday stopped President Muhammadu Buhari, Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, and Senate President, Ahmad Lawan from tampering with the newly amended Electoral Act 2022.

The Judge in his ruling on an ex-parte application by the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP agreed that the Electoral Act has become a valid law and cannot be tampered with without following due process of law.

Specifically, the court restrained all the defendants in the suit from removing section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act or preventing It from being implemented for the purpose of the 2023 general elections.

The PDP dragged President Buhari before the court challenging a fresh move to tamper with the newly amended Electoral Act signed into law some days ago.

Buhari issued along with the Attorney-General of the Federation AGF and Minister of Justice, Senate President, Speaker, House of Representatives, Clerk of the National Assembly, Senate Leader, House of Representatives Leader, and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

Also joined as defendants in the suit are Deputy Senate President, Deputy Speaker, House of Representatives, Deputy Senate Leader, and Deputy House of Representatives Leader.

The main opposition party in the suit filed on its behalf by James Onoja SAN prayed the Federal High Court for an order of interim injunction restraining Buhari and other defendants from refusing to implement the duly signed Electoral Act or in any manner withholding the Electoral Act from being put to use including the provisions of section 84 (12) of the said Act pending the resolution of the suit.

PDP also applied for an order of the court stopping the National Assembly from giving effect to President Buhari’s request to remove section 84 (12) from the Electoral Act or take any step that will make the provision inoperative pending the resolution of the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction.

Justice Ekwo granted the interim injunction request and adjourned further hearing in the matter till March 21.

Reader's opinions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Current track