Efforts by the immediate past national chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Bamanga Tukur, to come back to lead the affairs of the party hit a brick wall, as a Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday, dismissed the suit filed by a member of the House of Representative, Aliyu Gubrin, challenging Tukur’s resignation and the appointment of Adamu Mu’azu as his replacement.

Gubrin had urged the court to stop Mu’azu from acting as the chairman of the party and halt the scheduled national convention of the party slated for December 10 and 11, 2014.

He further urged the court to rule that the resignation of Tukur was invalid, arguing that it was not in compliance with the party constitution and the Electoral Act 2010.

The presiding Judge, Justice Evoh Chukwu, however, held that Gubrin had no locus standi to institute the action, adding that he had not suffered any precise injury above all other members of the party.

The court further said that Gubrin’s position on the appointment of Mu’azu as the national chairman of the party breached Section 47(5) of the party’s constitution.

The court further held that Gubrin’s statements on the protection of the party’s constitution has no effect, saying that the decision of the National Working Committee, NWC, of the party to appoint Mu’azu who is from the same political zone as Tukur is in conformity with Section 47(6) of the party’s constitution and makes the complaints of Gubrin baseless.

The national leadership of the PDP had kicked against the suit and urged the court to strike it out, claiming that the issue was an internal affair of the party.

The current chairman of the party had also protested that Gubrin failed to use all internal machineries within the party before going to court, which he said is against the provisions of Section 61 of the party’s constitution.

Following the party’s notice of preliminary objection challenging Gubrin’s locus standi, Tukur decided to challenge his successor in the open by applying to the court to be joined in the suit as a co-defendant and counter claimant in a move to benefit from the suit even if the court holds that Aliyu Gubrin does not have locus standi to institute the action.