The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court has dismissed the All Progressives Congress (APC)’s suit seeking the removal of Governor Aminu Tambuwal of Sokoto State for defecting from the party to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on August 1, 2018.

Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a judgement on Tuesday, refused to grant the request on the ground that the Court of Appeal voided similar suits in several rulings.

Mr Ekwo said that since the Appeal Court’s judgements, which held that governors could not forfeit their seats on defection grounds, had not been set aside by the Supreme Court, they remained the law and binding on lower courts.

Mr Tambuwal, elected as governor on the APC’s platform, had, on August 1, 2018, defected to PDP less than a year before the expiration of his tenure.

APC had, in the originating summons marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/449/2022 and filed on April 5, 2022, asked the court to invoke sections 177, 179 and 189 of the 1999 constitution to declare the governorship seat of Sokoto State vacant on account of defection by Mr Tambuwal to another party.

The party sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), PDP and Mr Tambuwal as first to third defendants, respectively.

It sought an order declaring all actions, functions and duties performed by Mr Tambuwal from August 1, 2018, to May 28, 2019, as unconstitutional, unlawful, illegal, null and void.

It also prayed for an order compelling the governor to immediately refund all salaries received from August 1, 2018, to May 28, 2019, to the end of that tenure, including allowances and security votes.

Besides, APC sought a declaration that Mr Tambuwal was unfit to hold public office for violating the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as Amended).

Justice Ekwo held that lawyers ought to have counselled their clients regarding pending matters before the Supreme Court.

He said it would amount to an exercise in futility for a Federal High Court to decide on a matter pending before the apex court.

The judge, who held that the case of APC failed and lacked merit because of the position of the Court of Appeal on similar matters, dismissed the suit.

(NAN)