Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shettima must be disqualified- AA alleges double nomination

Action Alliance ‘AA’, A political party contesting in the 2023 general elections has again charged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the All Progressives Congress (APC); its presidential candidate for the general election, Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his running mate, Kashim Shettima, before a Federal High Court in Abuja over suspected double nomination.

The party (Action Alliance), in its previous suit which is still undecided before the Federal High Court, Abuja Division is seeking the exclusion of the All Progressive Congress from the 2023 presidential election over suspected act of mendacity on the part of, Bola Tinubu, the presidential candidate.
Moreover, in a recent suit inaugurated on July 28, the accuser ‘AA’ is again pursuing the exclusion of the ruling party ‘APC’ on the grounds that it has selected a candidate for more than one constituency in the 2023 presidential elections.

The action according to the Action Alliance, in the recent suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1256/2022, attained by correspondents on Thursday, had infringed the Electoral Act, Section 35 of the Constitution, 2022.
The case filed on behalf of the accuser by Ukpai Ukairo, has Independent National Electoral Commission, All Progressive Congress, Bola Tinubu and Kashim Shettima as 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants respectively.

In a document in favour of the suit deposed to by Kalu Agu, the plaintiff sued that the All Progressive Congress violated the law when it submitted the name of Kashim Shettima both as the aspirant for Borno state Central Senatorial and as Vice President in the 2023 general elections.
“That Borno state Central Senatorial Zone and the Presidential Election are two diverse constituencies. That the Complainant applied through me for the certified original copies of the Forms EC9 of the 4th defendant for the Borno state Central Senatorial Zone and the Presidential election but as we speak, the 1st defendant is adjourning the release of it to the appellant”.