A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Tuesday dismissed a suit by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) seeking to reclaim the seat of a Benue State House of Assembly member following his defection.
The court held that it could not assume the constitutional powers vested in the Speaker and the Benue State House of Assembly to declare the lawmaker’s seat vacant.
Daily Trust reports that the PDP had dragged the lawmaker representing Okpokwu Constituency, Anthony Attah, to court, seeking to have his seat declared vacant after his defection to the All Progressives Congress (APC).
The PDP specifically joined the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the APC, and Attah as the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd respondents, respectively, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2408/2025.
It asked the court to determine, among other issues, whether votes cast for a party could be transferred to another political party after a legislator defects. The party also sought declarations that Attah’s continued occupation of the seat was unlawful, that all legislative actions taken since his defection were null and void, and that he should refund all salaries and privileges received after leaving the PDP.
However, Justice Muhammed Umar, in his judgment, held that although Attah did not deny defecting from the PDP to the APC, the court could not usurp the constitutional powers vested in the Speaker and the Benue State House of Assembly to declare his seat vacant.
Justice Umar observed that the plaintiff’s case “borders on the defection of the third defendant who won the election… under the plaintiff” and noted that “the third defendant did not deny his defection to the second defendant.”
The judge, however, held that the constitutional procedure for declaring the seat vacant had not been completed.
“The announcement of the defection of the 3rd defendant from the plaintiff to the 2nd defendant is not enough,” the judge clarified.
Justice Umar explained that under Section 109 of the 1999 Constitution, the House of Assembly must first declare the seat vacant, after which the Speaker is required to communicate the vacancy to INEC for the conduct of a bye-election.
He held that “unless and until this is done, the 1st defendant cannot act,” adding, “Therefore, this court cannot usurp the powers of the Speaker or the honourable members of the House of Assembly.”
The judge also rejected the preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit, holding that the originating summons disclosed a reasonable cause of action.
Justice Umar ultimately dismissed the substantive suit, concluding, “On the whole, this application has no value, and it is hereby dismissed.”