PDP sues to get Sylva barred from governorship poll saying he has been sworn-in twice

altPEOPLES Democratic Party (PDP) officials in Bayelsa State have filed a legal suit against the All Progressives Congress (APC) gubernatorial candidate in the impending December 5 elections former governor Chief Timipre Sylva claiming he is ineligible to run.

 

In a move which heightens the political temperature in the state, the PDP and its candidate, incumbent governor Seriake Dickson, have instituted legal action against Chief Sylva, challenging his eligibility on the grounds that he had been elected twice and no longer would be sworn in. Governor Dickson and the PDP have approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking Chief Sylva’s disqualification.

They are asking the court to determine whether Chief Sylva was qualified to contest as a candidate in the light of the provisions of Section 182 (1) (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended. Their suit noted that Section 182 (1) (b) of the constitution states that no person shall be qualified for election to the office of governor of a state if he has been elected to such office at any two previous elections.

According to the  PDP Chief Sylva who, having already been elected and served for a cumulative period of about four years and seven months as the governor of the state was qualified to seek for re-election a third time for a fresh term of four years. They claim that allowing Chief Sylva to contest in the December 5 governorship election would mean that he would be serving more than the maximum period of eight years allowed by the constitution, hence his ineligibility.

Chief Serena Dokubo-Spiff, the acting chairman of the PDP's Bayelsa State chapter, said that as a democratic and law-abiding entity, his party and its leadership took the legal decision to check what it regarded as recourse to impunity and disregard to law and order. He added that what was at stake was the necessity to guard against any abuse of the democratic process and the protection of the sanctity of the constitution.

Comments