 |
| David Lyon |
The Federal High Court sitting in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, has fixed November 14, two days to the governorship election in the state, to deliver a judgement on a suit filed by Senator Heineken Lokpobiri challenging the emergence of Chief David Lyon as the Candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Lokpobiri, the immediate past Minister of State for Agriculture and Rural Development, in the suit applied for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the APC from presenting Lyon to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the party’s candidate for the November 16 election.
He further prayed the court to give an order of perpetual injunction stopping INEC from accepting and publishing David Lyon as the flag bearer and an order barring INEC from excluding him as the APC candidate.
Lokpobiri requested orders stopping Lyon from parading himself as the APC candidate and INEC from recognizing Lyon or putting his image on the ballot paper as the party’s governorship candidate.
He further asked the court to compel INEC to treat him as the lawful candidate of APC and to accord him the rights and privileges of a candidate of APC in the gubernatorial election.
Lokpobiri averred that a governorship primary election committee was constituted by the National Secretariat of the APC under the chairmanship of Yobe State Governor, Mai Mala Buni and that the committee in compliance with the directive of the party conducted the primary poll through direct primary procedures.
He noted that the primary election was conducted throughout the state with the involvement of local government and ward chairmen of the party with six governorship aspirants including himself participating in the process.
Lokpobiri claimed that he won majority of lawful votes in five local government areas comprising Ekeremor, 48,113; Sagbama, 24,890; Ogbia, 13,349; Yenagoa, 18,258 and Kolokuma/Opokuma 6,809 votes.
He said he won the primary poll with 111,439 to defeat Lyon, who polled 326 votes but unlawfully declared the winner.
Speaking after court proceeding, the lawyer to Lokpobiri, Fitzgerald Olorogun, said his client was done with the case and was hopeful to reclaim his stolen mandate.
He said: “We presented our cases, canvass our arguments and we are hopeful that Heineken Lokpobiri will reclaim his stolen mandate. We have confident in the court’s ability to do justice, and the facts are very clear, a lot of documents to show where the justice of the matter will take and my lord will respond. The parties involved have canvassed their cases and it is now left for the court to give judgement on the 14th of November.
But the lawyer to APC, Sydney Ibanickuka, said they filed many preliminary objections challenging the competence of the suit.
He said: “It should be recalled that at last sitting the court adjourned till today for adoption. The suit commenced by the originating summons and plaintiffs seeking the court to interpret documents that are attached to their issue.
“We on our side as respondents have filed several preliminary objections challenging the competence of the suit and sundry other issues because of the nature of the suit itself. The court has said in its usual procedure for the adoption of all filed processes, the court will during judgement trash them one after the other.
“But we are persuaded and convinced that this is not a matter to be commenced by originating summon proceedings and for the court to come and interpret documents because they have several conflicting and contradictory issues that require that witnesses should be called for the court to get to the justice of the matter.
“We will not preempt the decision of the court. We will wait for the court’s ruling whether or not to sustain the preliminary objections, but as far as the law is concerned we have done what we ought to do.
“The court has been the last hope of the common man, and has always been a tool of social engineering. It should be known that the entire judiciary is on trial here, let us wait and see.
“We brought in preliminary objections, some challenging that the suit was brought out of time hence its incompetence, among several others objections which any court should look into and grant them as prayed.
“Whatever comes we will juxtapose it with the provision of the law, if it is in line we applaud the court and if not we know the next step to take.”
