Abuja High Court dismisses Oshiomhole’s purported suspension from APC at ward level

Lawyers to erstwhile All Progressives Congress (APC) National Chairman, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, have clarified the circumstances that led to his controversial ouster from office.

Oshiomhole, a former two- term governor of Edo State, shortly after leading the party to victory at the 2019 general election, was forced to exit office.

President Muhammadu Buhari was to step in, having prevailed on various litigants to sheathe their sword.

The intervention culminated in the setting up of an Extraordinary Caretaker/Convention Planning Committee currently led Governor Mai Mala Buni.

The tenure of the Buni-led interim APC leadership has continued to be extended ahead of the party’s national convention.

An Abuja High Court had in July 2020, dismissed a suit challenging Oshiomhole’s position over having been purportedly suspended by the party at the ward level.

The Abuja High Court sitting in Jabi, dismissed the substantive suit filed by Comrade Mustapha Saliu, Oshawo Steven and four others over the purported suspension of the former APC National Chairman by his ward 10, Iyamho, Etsako West Local Government Area of Edo State.

The Court in a ruling by Justice D.Z. Senchi, dismissed the said Suit with Suit No: FCT/HC/CV/837/2020, following the application filed by Counsel to the Plaintiffs/Applicants on the 1/7/2020 asking to discontinue the suit.

Recall that following the suit filed by the plaintiffs, the High Court had asked Oshiomhole to step aside as National Chairman of the APC pending the determination of the substantive suit.

Consequently, the Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Lower Court, and Oshiomhole stepped aside.

The plaintiffs were expected to return to the lower court to commence the hearing of the substantive suit, instead they filed an application seeking a withdrawal of the substantive suit.

Counsel to Oshiomhole, Ginika Ezeoke of D.D. Dodo & Co. had argued that the 1st and 2nd Defendants were not opposed to the application for withdrawal, but that the Court should dismiss the suit on the basis that “parties had filed pleadings and issues joined.”

In its Ruling, Hon. Justice Senchi ruled thus: “Pursuant to the Motion on Notice, No. FCT/HC/M/8148/2020, dated and filed on 1/7/2020 discontinuing this suit at the instance of the plaintiffs/applicants and the defendants/respondents not opposing the application for discontinuance, the application is hereby granted and suit is dismissed. Parties to bear their respective cost, if any.”