Back To Top

 Peter Obi Asked Court To Dismiss PDP Suit Seeking To Disqualify Him For Replacing Okupe As Running Mate
July 22, 2022

Peter Obi Asked Court To Dismiss PDP Suit Seeking To Disqualify Him For Replacing Okupe As Running Mate

Peter Obi, the Labour Party’s nominee for president, has requested that a Federal High Court in Abuja dismiss the PDP’s lawsuit trying to have him disqualified for naming Doyin Okupe as his replacement.

Recall that the PDP had taken Peter Obi to court over his choice to replace Okupe as his running partner for the 2023 election with Yusuf Datti Baba-Ahmed. In addition to asking to prohibit Bola Tinubu, the presidential candidate for the All Progressives Congress (APC), from replacing Okupe as his running mate, the PDP also asked to prevent the LP presidential candidate from replacing Okupe.

Alex Ejesieme (SAN), the attorney for Obi and Okupe, responded to the originating motion by asking the court to dismiss the PDP lawsuit on four grounds.

In addition to asking to prohibit Bola Tinubu, the presidential candidate for the All Progressives Congress (APC), from replacing Okupe as his running mate, the PDP also asked to prevent the LP presidential candidate from replacing Okupe.

2023: PDP Drags Peter Obi, Bola Tinubu To Court, Demands For Their Disqualification

Alex Ejesieme (SAN), the attorney for Obi and Okupe, responded to the originating motion by asking the court to dismiss the PDP lawsuit on four grounds. Ejesieme argued that the PDP’s suit is speculative, conjectural, and devoid of hard facts.

He said: “The plaintiff has not disclosed any reasonable cause of action to activate the jurisdiction of this court. The subject matter of the plaintiff’s suit is not situated within the jurisdictional confines of the Federal High Court. The plaintiff’s suit is a gross abuse of court process.”

The PDP had earlier stated that the term ‘placeholder’ is unknown to the Electoral Act, accusing Okupe of publicly admitting that he was a mere placeholder.

Responding, Ejesieme said, “Assuming it is established that the 3rd (Tinubu) and 6th (Obi) defendants did indeed make media publications indicating the alleged placeholder status of the 4th (Kabiru Madari) and 7th (Okupe) defendants, does that in its own right constitute a wrongdoing sufficient to activate the cause of action on the plaintiff? “Is the conduct of the elections for which the defendants are to contest in, bound by the statements made in the media? Obviously not, my lord.”

Spread the love
Prev Post

Man Weeps Uncontrollably Over News By Gov. Obaseki To Ban…

Next Post

Tackling Gender Based Violence: Anambra Govt. Births Children, Sexual Offences…

post-bars

Leave a Comment

Related post