A Federal High Court in Abuja has stayed
proceedings in the suit seeking to restrain
the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) for deploying
electronic card readers for elections.
Justice Adeniyi Ademola ordered stay of
further proceedings in the suit Friday while
ruling on an application to that effect filed
by lawyer to the All Progressives Congress
(APC), Lateef Fagbemi (SAN).
Alex Iziyon (SAN) had initiated the suit on
February 26, 2015 on behalf of four
political parties, arguing that the proposed
use of card readers for elections was a
violation of the Electoral Act, which
prohibits electronic voting. It is his
contention that the use of card reader was
an introduction of electronic element to
the voting process.
One of them, Action Alliance (AA) withdrew
from the suit later, denying that it
instructed the filing of the suit.
Another of the plaintiffs, Allied Congress
Party of Nigeria (ACPN) has also indicated
its intention to withdraw from the suit
marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/173/2015, leaving the
United Democratic Party plaintiffs in the
suit.
Friday, Fagbemi, accompanied by former
Attorney General of the Federation (AGF),
Akin Olujinmi (SAN) and Kola Awodein
(SAN) drew the court’s attention to an
application for stay of proceed, which he
filed before the Court of Appeal, Abuja.
The APC and some other defendants in the
suit had appeal the court’s ruling of March
13, abridging their time to respond to the
substantive suit. While the others applied
to the trial court for stay of proceedings,
the APC applied to the Court of Appeal.
Fagbemi urged the trial court to stay
further proceedings pending the outcome
of his appeal.
Iziyon, who had insisted that the court
hear the substantive suit with all pending
preliminary applications, objected to
Fagbemi’s application. He faulted
Fagbemi’s application on the ground that
he ought to have first, sought a stay of
proceedings before the trial court before
approaching the appellate court.
Ruling, Justice Ademola held that it was
just for his court to stay proceedings in the
case in view of the fact that the Certified
True Copy (CTC) of the application by
Fagbemi carried the appeal number of the
appeal he (Fagbemi) filed.
When an appeal is assigned number, it
implies that the appeal has been entered
and the appellate court has taken
cognisance of the appeal. The lower court
has no option than to await the outcome of
such an appeal.
Justice Ademola noted that the CTC of the
motion (filed at the appellate court by
Fagbemi and served on the trial court)
carries the appeal No: CA/121/2015.
He added that the counsel to the 2nd
defendant (Fagbemi) has done what is
required under the law. He held that in
view of the development, the only option
opened to the court was to stay
proceedings pending the outcome of the
appeal.
Justice Ademola consequently stayed
proceedings.