Activist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has asked  Federal High Court in Port Harcourt to dismiss a suit by Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Social Democratic Party (SDP) and others.

He said the court lacked jurisdiction to hear the suit because it was not properly filed.

Falana noted that PDP did not pay a filing fee, which is a requirement in instituting an action.

Other respondents in the suit are Prince Nwafor, Gokana Geoffrey, Dagogo Green, Jonathan Joy- Success, Lawson Sarah, Deinma Tamunobelema, Goteh Amegua, Vincent Solomon, Progress Ayiteh, Gibson Ukuoma, Pamarieri Tobin, Obua Amobi and King Gboms.

PDP had prayed the court to declare that the defendants were not entitled to contest in 2023 elections for Senate, House of Representatives and state Houses of Assembly for any constituency in Rivers.

The party said they could not nominate, sponsor or field any of the defendants as candidates “having failed to hold valid primaries for the nomination of candidates, as required by law and Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) guidelines”.

But the defendants, through their counsel, led by Falana, are praying the court for an order striking out the suit for non-payment of filing fees and on the grounds that the court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate on it.

The SAN initiated the action on the grounds that “the plaintiff did not pay fees on July 7, to file the purported Originating Summons in the matter”.

He added: “The plaintiff and some of staff of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Judicial Division, fraudulently endorsed that the Originating Process in the matter was filed on July 7, irrespective of the fact that no filing fees was paid for filing of the Originating Summons on July 7.

“Payment of filing fees is a pre-condition to or condition precedent to the court’s assumption of jurisdiction.

“Thus, payment of filing fees is a pre-condition to the validity of the Originating Summons.

“The Originating Summons in this matter which was purportedly filed on July 7 without payment of filing fees on  July 7, is grossly incompetent and this court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain this suit.”

The defendants/applicants argued that the plaintiffs used the Remita Retrieval Reference (RRR) No. 330679620750 to purportedly file the suit and backdated the filing to July 7.

They said the payment for the Remita actually was done on July 8, which is more than 14 days from May 26 when SDP’s primary was held.

It was further argued that the payment of the RRR was done outside the constitutionally prescribed 14 days provided for in Section 285(9) of 1999 Constitution (as amended) for paying for and filing pre-election matters.

The defendants/applicants added that since no filing fee was paid on July 7, the plaintiffs’ suit, filed on July 7, is “incompetent and dead”.

The matter has been adjourned till November 7 for mention.

THE NATION