Federal High Court held that if Sylva was allowed to contest the next election, it meant a person could contest as many times as he wanted
The Court of Appeal, Abuja division, has set aside the disqualification of Timipre Sylva as the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Bayelsa State for the November 11, 2023 election in the state.
The three-member panel of Justices in a unanimous decision set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which had previously disqualified Sylva from participating in the gubernatorial poll.
The Court of Appeal determined that the litigant, Mr. Demesuoyefa Kolomo, who initiated the suit leading to Sylva’s disqualification, lacked the legal standing (locus standi) to do so.
As a result, the appellate court not only overturned the high court’s verdict but also imposed a N1 million cost against the respondent, Kolomo.
The panel equally awarded the sum of N1 million in favour of Sylva in the appeal marked: CA/ABJ/CV/1061/2023 between Sylva vs. Kolomo and two others.
Federal High Court Verdict
On October 9, 2023, the Federal High Court in Abuja has disqualified the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Chief Timipre Sylva, from contesting the November 11 election in Bayelsa State.
The ruling was delivered by Justice Donatus Okorowo.
Okorowo ruled that Sylva, having been sworn in twice and ruled for five years as governor of the state, would breach the 1999 constitution as amended if allowed to contest again.
The judge stated that Sylva was not qualified to run in the forthcoming November poll because he would have spent more than eight years in office as governor of the state if he wins and is sworn in.
While citing the case of Marwa vs Nyako at the Supreme Court, Okorowo maintained that the drafters of the country’s constitution stated that nobody should be voted for as governor more than two times and that the parties to the suit agreed that Sylva was voted into office two times.
According to the judge, the Supreme Court has also ruled in the case of Marwa vs Nyako that nobody can expand the constitution or its scope.
It held that if Sylva was allowed to contest the next election, it meant a person could contest as many times as he wanted.
