The Supreme Court on Monday affirmed Dr Dauda Lawal as the properly nominated governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Zamfara state for the March 11 2023 governorship election.
The apex court in a unanimous judgment of a five-member panel of Justices of the Court dismissed an appeal brought against the nomination by another governorship aspirant, Dr Ibrahim Shehu Gusau.
In the lead judgment delivered by Justice Adamu Jauro, the Supreme Court upheld submissions of the counsel to the governorship candidate, Damian Dodo, SAN, that his client was legally and lawfully nominated in line with the provisions of the law.
“In view of the resolution of the issues against the Appellant, the appeal is dismissed, parties are to bear their cost”, Justice Jauro held and upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeal which had on January 6, 2023, endorsed the second primary election that produced Dr Dauda Lawal.
Lawal had in the primary election polled 442 votes to emerge victorious over Dr Ibrahim Shehu Gusau and other aspirants.
Justice Jauro held that a Federal High Court in Gusau which nullified the primary elections twice had no jurisdiction at the time it adjudicated upon the suit instituted by Dr Gusau.
The Court of Appeal Sokoto Division had on June 6 last year, upheld the primary election which produced Lawal as the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for the March 11, 2023, governorship election in Zamfara state.
The first PDP governorship primary election held on May 25, 2022, was challenged at a Federal High Court in Gusau and was nullified.
The High Court in its judgment ordered a fresh primary election which was conducted on September 23, 2022 but was also quashed by the same court for irregularities.
Not satisfied with the High Court decision, Dauda Lawal, Adamu Maina-Waziri, the Chairman Primary Election Committee; and retired Col. Bala Mande approached the Appeal Court for redress.
Respondents in the appeal were Dr Ibrahim Shehu-Gusau, Alhaji Wadatau Madawaki, Hafiz Nahuche and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
In a unanimous judgment of the three-member panel, the Court of Appeal held that the appellants proved all the seven grounds of appeal canvassed by their counsel and that the court resolved all in their favour.
The appellate court dismissed all the preliminary objections on the competency of the appeal on the basis of judicial provisions and the interest of a fair hearing, saying that technical defaults could not supersede judicial provisions.
It held that the high court Judge was wrong to discountenance documents submitted by INEC and that the trial court did not stipulate the period of conducting a re-run election and notices of participation.
