The Supreme Court, Abuja on Monday, affirmed the nomination of Dauda Lawal-Dare as the validly nominated candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in Zamfara State for the March 11 governorship election.
In a unanimous judgment of a five-man panel of justices of the apex court, the appeal brought against the nomination by another governorship aspirant, Ibrahim Gusau, was dismissed on grounds that it lacked merit.
In an appeal marked SC/CV/92/2023, Justice Adamu Jauro upheld the judgment of the Court of Appeal which had on January 6, endorsed the second primary election that produced the candidate.
Justice Jauro in a lead judgment upheld submissions of the counsel for the governorship candidate, Damian Dodo, SAN, that his client was legally and lawfully nominated in line with the provisions of the law.
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.
Dauda Lawal-Dare had in the primary election polled 442 votes to emerge winner.
The Court of Appeal, Sokoto Division, had in June 6 upheld the primary election which produced Dauda Lawal-Dare as the candidate of the PDP for the March 11, 2023, governorship election in Zamfara State.
Earlier, 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 ordered for fresh primary election which was conducted on September 23, 2022.
However, the results of the election was also quashed by the same court for irregularities.
Displeased, Dauda Lawal-Dare, Adamu Maina-Waziri, the Chairman Primary Election Committee; and retired Col. Bala Mande approached the Appeal Court for redress.
In a unanimous judgment read by Justice Abubakar Talba on behalf of others, the Court of Appeal held that the appellants succeeded to prove all the seven grounds of appeal canvassed by their counsel and that the court resolved all in their favour.
The justice held that technical defaults could not supersede judicial provisions.
He dismissed all the preliminary objections on competency of the appeal on the basis of judicial provisions and interest of fair hearing
The justice maintained that the High Court was wrong to discountenance documents submitted by INEC and that the trial court did not stipulate the period of conducting re-run election and notices of participation.