Arise drags APC to court over Ekiti North primary, insists he won lawfully

Senator Ayo Arise has initiated legal proceedings against the All Progressives Congress (APC) challenging the outcome of the Ekiti North Senatorial District primary election, asserting that he was the rightful winner. This action underscores the critical role of the judiciary in upholding internal party democracy and ensuring compliance with electoral laws in Nigeria. The case will likely delve into the specifics of the APC's primary election guidelines and the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, particularly concerning the conduct and monitoring of party primaries. The Federal High Court's jurisdiction in pre-election matters will be central to the dispute, highlighting the ongoing judicial efforts to sanitise the nomination process for elective offices.

The landscape of Nigeria's electoral jurisprudence is once again illuminated by a significant pre-election dispute, as Senator Ayo Arise has reportedly dragged the All Progressives Congress (APC) to court over the Ekiti North Senatorial District primary election. Senator Arise insists that he lawfully won the exercise, challenging the party's declared outcome. This legal challenge is not merely an internal party squabble but a crucial test of the mechanisms designed to ensure transparency and fairness in the selection of candidates for public office. It brings to the fore the enduring tension between the autonomy of political parties and the imperative of judicial oversight in safeguarding democratic principles.

This development highlights the judiciary's pivotal role in resolving disputes arising from party primaries, which are often the most contentious stage of the electoral cycle. The integrity of the general elections is inextricably linked to the credibility of the candidate nomination process. When aspirants perceive irregularities or unlawful conduct during primaries, recourse to the courts becomes a fundamental avenue for redress, shaping not only the immediate political contest but also the broader practice of internal party democracy in Nigeria.

This article will examine the legal framework governing party primaries in Nigeria, the jurisdiction of the courts in pre-election matters, and the implications of such disputes for political parties and the electoral system. It will explore how the judiciary navigates the delicate balance between non-interference in internal party affairs and the enforcement of statutory and constitutional provisions that mandate democratic processes within political parties.

The nomination of candidates by political parties for elective positions in Nigeria is primarily governed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and the Electoral Act, 2022. Section 221 of the Constitution vests the power to canvass for votes and sponsor candidates in political parties. The Electoral Act, 2022, particularly Section 84, outlines the procedures for the nomination of candidates through direct, indirect primaries, or consensus, mandating that these processes be monitored by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Historically, the conduct of party primaries has been a fertile ground for disputes, leading to extensive litigation. The Electoral Act, 2022, sought to strengthen the regulatory framework for primaries, including provisions that penalise non-compliance. For instance, Section 84(13) stipulates that where a political party fails to comply with the provisions of the Act in the conduct of its primaries, its candidate for election shall not be included in the election for the particular position in issue. This provision underscores the legislative intent to compel political parties to adhere strictly to the rules.

Furthermore, the APC, like other political parties, operates under its own constitution and guidelines, which must align with the national legal framework. The APC Constitution typically outlines the rights and obligations of members, including the right to vote and be voted for, provided they are fully registered and financially up-to-date. Any deviation from these internal rules, especially when it contravenes the Electoral Act, can form the basis for a legal challenge, as seen in Senator Arise's case. The judiciary has consistently held that political parties must obey their own constitutions and guidelines, as established in cases like *Uzodinma v. Izunaso (No. 2)* [2011] 17 N.W.L.R (Pt. 1275) 30.

The jurisdiction to entertain pre-election matters in Nigeria has been a subject of evolving jurisprudence. Under the Electoral Act, 2022, and reinforced by recent amendments, the Federal High Court holds exclusive jurisdiction over pre-election matters relating to elections into the National Assembly, State Houses of Assembly, and Governorship positions. This jurisdictional clarity aims to streamline the resolution of disputes arising from party primaries and candidate nominations, preventing forum shopping and conflicting judgments that plagued earlier electoral cycles.

Senator Arise's challenge will likely hinge on proving that the APC's conduct of the Ekiti North Senatorial primary election violated either the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022, or the party's own constitution and guidelines. Grounds for such challenges often include allegations of non-compliance with the procedure for direct or indirect primaries, manipulation of delegate lists, or outright fraud. The burden of proof lies with the aspirant to demonstrate that the irregularities were substantial enough to affect the outcome of the primary election.

Nigerian courts have, over time, navigated the delicate balance between the 'internal affairs' doctrine and the need to enforce statutory compliance. While courts generally respect the autonomy of political parties in managing their internal affairs, this deference does not extend to situations where a party acts in flagrant disregard of its own rules or the provisions of the Electoral Act. The Supreme Court, in cases like *Onuoha v. Okafor* (1984) SCN, initially emphasized non-interference in internal party matters, but subsequent judgments have shown a willingness to intervene where statutory provisions or party constitutions are breached, particularly in candidate nomination.

A crucial aspect of pre-election litigation is the strict adherence to timelines. The Electoral Act mandates political parties to submit the names of their nominated candidates to INEC not later than 180 days before the date of the general election. Any court order for fresh primaries must consider this timeline, as failure to comply can lead to the party being unable to field a candidate for the election. This highlights the urgency and time-sensitive nature of pre-election disputes.

Furthermore, the case may draw parallels with instances where courts have nullified primary elections due to unlawful conduct, such as the landmark judgment concerning the Zamfara State APC primaries, where the Supreme Court nullified all elections won by the party due to its failure to conduct lawful primaries. Such precedents underscore the judiciary's commitment to ensuring that only candidates who emerge from a valid and lawful primary process are allowed to contest general elections.

Senator Ayo Arise's legal action against the APC over the Ekiti North Senatorial primary election serves as a potent reminder of the judiciary's indispensable role in safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria's electoral process, even at the intra-party level. For legal practitioners, this case reinforces the importance of meticulous adherence by political parties to both the Electoral Act, 2022, and their internal constitutions and guidelines during candidate nomination. Any perceived deviation from these frameworks provides fertile ground for litigation, with potentially far-reaching consequences for the party and its aspirants.

Practitioners should closely monitor the court's interpretation of the specific allegations of non-compliance and the application of relevant sections of the Electoral Act, particularly Section 84, and the APC's constitution. The outcome will not only determine the legitimate candidate for the Ekiti North Senatorial District but will also contribute to the evolving jurisprudence on internal party democracy and judicial intervention in pre-election matters. This case, like many before it, underscores the need for political parties to institutionalise transparent and lawful primary election processes to minimise disputes and foster public confidence in the democratic system.