By Ikechukwu Nnochiri
ABUJA—The Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory, Justice Lawal H. Gummi, yesterday fixed November 24 to deliver judgment on a suit challenging the decision of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to jettison its controversial zoning arrangement.

The suit, which was filed by a presidential aspirant of the party, Alhaji Sani Aminu Dutsinma, is praying the high court to invoke its original jurisdiction and stop President Goodluck Jonathan from contesting the 2011 presidential election under the platform of the PDP, contending that the Northern part of the country, under the discarded zoning formula, still have till 2015 to relinquish presidency to another region.

Plaintiff asks court to stop Jonathan

Presiding Justice Gummi slated the matter for judgment after listening to legal arguments from both counsel to the PDP and the plaintiff yesterday.

Arguing the matter in court yesterday, the National Legal Adviser of the PDP, Chief Olusola Oke, urged the court to strike out the case in its entirety for want of jurisdiction to meddle in a domestic affair of a political party, insisting that the plaintiff lacked the locus to seek redress for an act that he said was non-justiceable.

Chief Oke informed the court that the plaintiff had failed to pay his party dues for the past three years, even as he disowned Dutsinma as one of the presidential aspirants of the PDP for the 2011 general election.

PDP disowns plaintiff

In an 8-paragraphed counter affidavit filed against the suit by the PDP, it insisted that “the plaintiff woefully failed to establish by credible evidence his claim that the defendant at one time or the other zoned its presidential ticket to the North and excludes aspirants from the South.

“The call by the plaintiff is anti-unity, anti-cohesion, anti-solidarity and anti-nationhood. It offends the constitutional provision against discrimination on ground of place of origin or place of birth. It is divisive and should be dismissed by this court.

“It is our submission that nomination of candidate of a political party has always been regarded as domestic affair. If internal democracy must be deepened, no individual aspirant should be given advantage over the other by reason of his place of origin.

“Unless, therefore, the plaintiff can show that the incumbent president is a person disqualified under section 137 (1) (b) of the constitution by reason of having being elected to such office at any two previous elections, the invitation to exclude him would constitute a violation of his right as a Nigerian citizen.”

It would be recalled that Dutsinma dragged both the party and its national chairman, Dr Okwesilieze Nwodo, to court, contending that the reason the party voided its zoning arrangement was to pave way for President Jonathan to run for the presidency under its umbrella.

He urged the high court to compel the party, its organ and members to respect and adhere to the provision of Article 7.2 (c) of its constitution as amended in 2009, by ensuring that only a Northerner is allowed to fly the party’s flag come 2011, adding that the Northern part of the country still have till 2015 to hand-over presidential power to another region.

The plaintiff equally maintained that except the party holds a national convention with a view to effecting amendments on certain provisions of its constitution, that it will be acting in nullity by making the office open to all aspirants.