The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has gone to the Appeal court to challenge an Abuja High Court ruling which said it has no powers to disqualify party candidates standing for elections.

In its three rounds of appeal, INEC said the judge erred in law because the power of the court to disqualify candidates under Nigeria’s Electoral Act 2006 is only when a candidate submits false information to the commission.

The electoral body wants the Appeal Court to declare that it can also disqualify a candidate when information supplied to INEC is complete but the candidate is not qualified. Insisting that Atiku Abubakar, the AC presidential flag bearer stands disqualified, INEC spokesman, Philip Umeadi explained why the electoral body is appealing the Abuja Court ruling saying that it had no interest whatsoever other than for clear interpretation of the role of INEC when the court said that INEC, as a body, could screen and verify claims but cannot disqualify candidates.

Said he: "The court ruling was just an affirmation of our position and stand that we can’t disqualify. It is the constitution and the court that can disqualify. Ours is just to give effect to the constitutional provision of eligibility and otherwise of a candidate. We actually appealed the ruling because of Section 32 (5) of the Electoral Act, which says that the candidature of a person can be contested in court when discovered he made false claims.

"We then want to know what happens when a person makes true claims about himself and he is not qualified to contest and wants to. The Act did not say what would happen in that situation. For instance, if a person is a foreigner who should not contest and he says so, but wants to contest or he is underage and he declares his true age and he is indeed, underage and wants to contest.

Since he didn’t lie about his age, he can’t be said to have perjured and yet by the qualifications stipulated for the position he is eyeing, he is ineligible. The Act did not say what would happen in such circumstance. That is why we appealed, not because of any person or interest.

"In the case of Alhaji Atiku, he didn’t lie. He said he had been indicted and he came with a court judgment on a suit challenging the indictment of one of those indicted and was granted leave to enforce his fundamental rights. This is a fundamental rights issue. It is personal. You can only approach to grant you leave to enforce your rights. Another person cannot do it for you. It is your right.

"The said judgment will not avail the vice president. We don’t have any problem with him.

We have tried to match the judgment with the provisions of the law and see if it can avail him, but it cannot.

"It is left for the vice president to go to court and obtain leave and should the court ask that we include his name to contest, we will not blink an eyelid before doing so. Others have gone to court to do this and their names were cleared."

Umeadi stated that Dr. Orji Uzor Kalu of Abia State and presidential standard bearer of the Progressive Peoples Alliance (PPA) falls into this category, explaining why his name will be in the list of cleared presidential candidates.

He said that the same thing applied to Governor Ali Modu Sheriff of Borno State, Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau of Kano as well as former governor of Kogi State, Prince Abubakar Audu, who he claimed went to court and obtained orders compelling INEC not to exclude them from being cleared on the basis of their indictment.

In all the instances, Umeadi said, the commission had never dealt with candidates but their parties in case of non-clearance and substitution.

"On receipt of the report of indictment, we informed the parties to substitute the candidates. We wrote all of them, including AC, PPA PDP and co," he said.