JUST IN: Fresh Headache For Tinubu As Party Heads To Supreme Court Seeking His Disqualification (DETAILS)

JUST IN: Fresh Headache For Tinubu As Party Heads To Supreme Court Seeking His Disqualification (DETAILS)

The Action Alliance has announced that it will appeal the decision of the Court of Appeal in Abuja, which dismissed its appeal against the Independent National Electoral Commission, the All Progressives Congress, and its presidential candidate, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.

The suit sought Tinubu’s disqualification from running in the 2023 election on the grounds that he forged his Chicago State University certificate and falsely claimed to have attended Government College, Ibadan. The party claimed Tinubu lacked the necessary qualifications to run for president.

The AA prayed the court for “a declaration that by virtue of Sections 224, 23 and 24 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the constitution of the APC, the office of the president of Nigeria is to be occupied by a man of integrity and impeccable character”.

Read Also See What Janemena Was Caught Doing To This Guy Publicly (VIDEO)

Previously, on December 13, 2022, the trial court ruled that the plaintiff’s suit was statute-barred. However, in an appeal filed on December 21, 2022 and labeled: CA/ABJ/CV/ 1475/ 2022, the AA asked the court to vacate the trial court’s decision.

On behalf of the second respondent, the APC, Babatunde Ogala SAN argued that the appellant’s brief of argument was statute-barred and that the appeal was academic.

When the appeal was heard on February 3, 2023, Julius O. Ishola, on behalf of the APC, adopted the notice of preliminary objection and second respondent’s brief of argument filed and prayed the court to dismiss the appeal for lack of merit.

In response to the notice and brief, the appellant’s counsel urged the court to dismiss the objections and allow the appeal.

In a unanimous decision, the Appeal Court agreed with counsel for the second and third respondents and dismissed the appeal for being statute-barred, having been filed more than 22 years after the alleged cause of action occurred.

The court also stated that the appellant lacked locus standi to file the suit and referred to it as a meddlesome interloper.