Bauchi CSOs Pray Court To Vacate Order On PRP Governorship Primary

Concerned civil society organisations (CSOs) in Bauchi State have asked the State High Court to reconsider and suo motu set aside the interim order restraining the conduct of the gubernatorial primaries of the People’s Redemption Party (PRP) in the state.

According to the groups, the appeal became necessary to preserve public confidence in the judiciary and demonstrate fidelity to the provisions of the Electoral Act, democratic principles and established judicial precedents.

Addressing journalists at a press conference in Bauchi yesterday, the coalition, convened by Najim Nuruddeen, said, “We respectfully call upon the court to take necessary steps within a reasonable time to vacate and set aside the said order which, in our considered opinion, appears inconsistent with the express provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 and established principles governing judicial non-interference in internal political party affairs.”

The organisations noted that courts are expected to exercise caution and restraint in matters relating to party primaries and internal political processes, particularly where the Electoral Act expressly limits judicial intervention.

They also appealed to party supporters, political stakeholders, and members of the public to remain calm, peaceful, and law-abiding, stressing that the issues arising from the order would ultimately be subjected to lawful judicial scrutiny and appellate review where necessary.

The coalition further cautioned politicians and political actors across party lines against exploiting the current judicial development to create unnecessary political tension or overheat the polity in Bauchi State.

According to the groups, democracy thrives best in an atmosphere of peace, political maturity, and responsible conduct.

They warned against a repeat of the tense political atmosphere allegedly witnessed during the African Democratic Congress (ADC) crisis involving Nafiu Bala Gombe and David Mark in Bauchi State.

The coalition recalled that the incident drew politicians from different political divides into activities capable of escalating tension and undermining public peace. It therefore urged stakeholders to avoid inflammatory statements, political provocation, and actions capable of threatening democratic stability.

While insisting that due judicial processes should be allowed to take their lawful course, the coalition clarified that its intervention was neither politically motivated nor intended to undermine the judiciary.

Rather, the groups said their position was founded on the defence of constitutional democracy, the supremacy of the law, the integrity of democratic processes, and the preservation of public confidence in the judiciary.

“No democracy can flourish where express statutory provisions are disregarded with impunity. The judiciary must continue to remain the last hope of the common man while ensuring strict adherence to constitutional and statutory limitations governing judicial powers,” the coalition stated.

Najim Nuruddeen expressed concern over the interim order issued in Suit No. BA/181/2026 between Idrees Safiyanu Gambo versus the People’s Redemption Party, Shehu Buba Umar, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

According to the coalition, the court restrained the PRP from conducting its gubernatorial primary election or congress in Bauchi State pending the determination of the motion on notice, while also restraining INEC from supervising or participating in the exercise.

The groups acknowledged that court orders are meant to be obeyed and respected by all authorities and individuals.

However, they argued that the judiciary is equally bound by the Constitution and laws enacted by the National Assembly, stressing that courts must operate strictly within the jurisdiction conferred upon them.

The coalition maintained that Section 88(4) of the Electoral Act 2026 expressly prohibits courts from granting interim, ex parte, or interlocutory orders restraining the conduct of party primaries, congresses, or conventions.

According to the groups, “The provision of the law is clear, mandatory, and admits no ambiguity whatsoever. Once the law expressly removes or limits the jurisdiction of the court over a particular subject matter, any order made contrary thereto becomes null, void, and of no legal consequence.”

The coalition further argued that appellate courts in Nigeria have consistently warned against undue judicial interference in the internal affairs of political parties except where expressly permitted by law.

Citing judicial precedents including Onuoha v. Okafor, Dalhatu v. Turaki, Lado v. CPC, Madukolu v. Nkemdilim, and Alawiye v. Ogunsanya, the coalition maintained that political parties are voluntary associations entitled to regulate their internal affairs within constitutional and statutory limits.

The groups said it was difficult to understand how an order restraining party primaries could be granted despite the clear provisions of the Electoral Act and settled judicial authorities cautioning against such interference.

They added that the Supreme Court has consistently held that jurisdiction is fundamental to the validity of judicial proceedings and that courts possess inherent powers to set aside orders made without jurisdiction.

The coalition reaffirmed its commitment to the promotion of good governance, the rule of law, democratic accountability, and the protection of democratic institutions, urging citizens and stakeholders to stand firmly in defence of constitutional order and democratic principles.