POROYE & ORS v. MAKARFI & ORS

Dissatisfied with the judgment of the Court below, the appellants who were the 1st to 9th respondents at the Court below appealed to this Court pursuant to the leave of Court granted on 2nd February, 2017 by the Court below. The notice of appeal contained seven (7) Grounds of appeal. However, upon receipt of the records of appeal, two additional grounds 8 and 9 were raised to the earlier notice that was filed on 6th February, 2017.
The gist of this case goes as follows: The appellants, as Plaintiffs had taken out an originating summons at the trial Court. In support of the said originating summons is an affidavit of 46 paragraphs on pages 7-14 of the record (Vol.1). Attached to the said supporting affidavit were various documents marked as Exhibits AS1 to AS16. According to the appellants, as contained in their brief of argument, “the main reason behind the filing of this suit was the need to ensure that confusion existing within the 4th respondent, did not in any way affect the smooth functioning of the South West Zonal Committee of the 4th respondent and its States Executive Committees in Ekiti, Ogun, Osun, Ondo, Oyo and Lagos.
It was contended that the South West Zonal Committee of 4th respondent had been elected at a special South West Zonal congress, held in October, 2014 to hold office for a period of four years in accordance with the Constitution of the 2nd respondent. It was further contended that the States Executive Committees of the 4th respondent in the said six States were elected and inaugurated on 10th May, 2016 for a term of 4 years, Learned appellants’ senior counsel made reference to certain letters said to have been issued by the National Working Committee of the 4th respondent. The said letters were marked as Exhibits AS8A, AS8B, AS8C, AS8D AS8E, AS8F at pages 222 to 232 of Vol.1 of the records. It was contended that by the said letters, the National Working Committee of the 4th respondent recognized the States Executives as constituted as the authentic organs of the party empowered to organize and implement all party programmes and events in the States. Also attached to the affidavit in support of the Originating Summons of the appellants is a document marked as Exhibit AS5 at pages 209 to 210 of Vol.1 of the records, to show the National Working Committee of the 4th respondent as the authentic body to function on behalf of the 4th respondent in the South West Zone.
The appellants also contended that by the document marked Exhibit AS9A at pages 233 to 234 of Vol.1 of the records, written by the National Working Committee of the 4th respondent to the 3rd respondent, it conveyed its recognition of the South West Zonal Executive committee elected at the special South west Zonal Congress of the party held on 11th October, 2014 to hold office for a period of 4 years till end of October, 2018. Also referred to was the document attached to the Affidavit by the appellants marked as Exhibit AS9B at pages 235 to 237 of Vol.1 of the records, which they contended was a letter written by the National Working Committee of the 4th respondent to the 3rd respondent dated 19th May, 2016 informing the 3rd respondent that the State Executive Committees elected at the Congresses conducted by the 4th respondent in Ondo, Ekiti, Osun, Oyo, Ogun and Lagos States were the one entitled to organize and implement all party programmes and events in the States.
The appellants further contended that all the exhibits attached to the supporting affidavit of the summons raised concerns about the efforts being made by some people, they described as, undemocratic persons in the 4th respondent to create illegal and parallel executive committees in the States and warned the 3rd respondent not to deal with such illegal parallel committees.
The appellants referred to the decision of the Federal High Court differently constituted in suit No. FHC/L/CS/605/2016 between Chief Pegba Otemolu Vs. Independent National Electoral Commission and Ors, given on 11th May, 2016, an interlocutory order restraining the 4th respondent herein, that is, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the National Chairman and the National Secretary of the 4th respondent from conducting or permitting or recognizing any election into the offices of the South West Zonal Executive Committee pending the hearing and determination of the originating summons. Learned senior counsel submitted that it was based on the above that the appellants instituted the suit.
In the appellants’ brief of argument settled by learned Senior Counsel, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN filed on 6th April,

…………………….B…………………….