Former chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Bamanga Tukur, on Wednesday, debunked the claims that he took the leadership of the party to court over the appointment of Adamu Mu’azu as the chairman after his resignation.
Tukur resigned after much pressure from chieftains of the party to pacify five aggrieved governors who defected to the All Progressive Congress (APC).
Tukur, through his lawyer, Adamson Adeboro, told judicial correspondents in Abuja on Wednesday that his client was joined as a defendant in the matter by the plaintiff, Aliyu Gubrin, who also joined Mu’azu, the party and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants.
He said he only filed a counter-claim on behalf of the former chairman.
Adamson said: “My client, Bamanga Tukur, was not the plaintiff in the suit filed to oust Adamu Mu’azu. As a matter of fact, he was joined as 2nd defendant in the suit”.
It would be recalled that Justice Evoh Chukwu had, on Tuesday, dismissed the plaintiff’s suit seeking to oust Mu’azu and PDP chairman on the ground that he does not have locus standi to institute the action.
Less than two days after the case was decided, Gubrin, through his counsel, Lilian Ojimma, filed an appeal against the judgement of justice Chukwu at the Court of Appeal.
In the appeal, Gubrin is begging the court to set aside the judgement and rule that Mu’azu’s appointment, as the national chairman of the party was illegal.
In the appeal, the appellant held that Justice Chukwu erred when he held that he (appellant) lacks the locus standi to institute the action.
He told the court that the lower court erred when he held that the PDP complied with the provision of the party’s constitution without making a pronouncement on whether the 30 days’ notice required under Section 47(5) of the 1st respondent’s constitution is discretionary and reached wrong conclusion thereby occasioning miscarriage of Justice.
Source: Daily Independent