This appeal is against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Makurdi Division delivered on 29th November 2017, who affirmed the dismissal of the appellant's suit by the Federal High Court, Makurdi Division in a judgment delivered on 10th December 2015.

The appellant and the 1st respondent were among five contestants on the platform of the 2nd respondent, the All Progressives Congress (APC) who contested the National Assembly primary election conducted by the party on the 10th December 2014 to select its candidate for the House of Representatives for the Kwande/Ushongo Federal Constituency of Benue State in the general election slated for 14th February 2015. There were complaints from some of the aspirants against the candidature of the 1st respondent and one Barr. George Uchi on the ground of non-compliance with the Party's Guidelines, in that they did not pay for the nomination form and did not produce evidence from any of the designated banks to show that they had paid their nomination fee. It was also alleged that they did not possess screening certificates. According to the appellant, in spite of the complaints, the election was allowed to go on. The aggrieved parties were advised to file a petition with the relevant organ of the 2nd respondent. The 1st respondent won the election by scoring 229 votes. The appellant came second with 110 votes. On 18/12/2014, the 1st respondent's name was forwarded to the 3rd respondent as the party's candidate for the election..

After the election, in compliance with the 2nd respondent's 2014 Guidelines for the Nomination of Candidates for Public Office (Exhibit GN2), the appellant appealed to the 2nd respondent's Appeal Committee for the National Assembly Primary Elections for Benue State against the 1st respondent's participation in the primary election. His appeal was successful. The committee recommended that, having scored the highest number of votes among the qualified contestants, he should be considered as the party's candidate. It was the appellant's contention that the National working committee (NWC) of the National Executive Council (NEC) of the 2nd respondent endorsed the finding and recommendation of the appeal committee and directed that he be issued with INEC forms to be immediately forwarded to the 3rd respondent as the party's candidate. Notwithstanding these facts, it was the name of the 1st respondent that was forwarded to the 3rd respondent as the party's candidate.

Another complaint was that the 1st respondent was not qualified to contest the primary election because his appointment as a Magistrate with the Benue State Judiciary was terminated for violating the code of conduct for Judicial Officers and for being of "doubtful integrity".

He therefore took out an Originating Summons before the Federal High Court, Makurdi Division on 6/2/2015 seeking the determination of several questions

Affidavits, counter affidavits, further and better affidavits and written addresses were filed and exchanged between the parties. The 1st and 2nd respondents, who were the 1st and 2nd defendants at the trial Court also filed a motion on notice challenging the Court's jurisdiction to entertain the suit. The grounds for the objection to Court's jurisdiction were that reliefs 1 - 8 of the Originating Summons are incompetent because they do not allege an infraction of Section 87 (9) of the Electoral Act, 2010, as amended; that the questions raised for determination on the originating summons are different from the issues raised and argued in the claimant's written address; and that the originating summons was incompetent because it could not be ascertained that it was signed by an identifiable legal practitioner. The objection was considered along with the substantive suit.

In a considered judgment delivered on 10/12/2015, the preliminary objection was overruled. The Court resolved all the questions in the substantive suit against the appellant and dismissed the suit. The appellant was dissatisfied with the decision and appealed to the lower Court. The 1st and 2nd respondents cross appealed against the decision overruling their objection to the Court's jurisdiction. In a considered judgment delivered on 25/9/2017, the appeal and cross appeal were dismissed.

The appellant is still dissatisfied and has further appealed to this Court