A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has dismissed a suit by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) that sought to have the House of Representatives seat of Hussaini Jallo declared vacant over his alleged defection to the All Progressives Congress (APC). Justice James Omotosho, who delivered judgment on Tuesday, held that the party did not place credible evidence before the court to establish that the lawmaker left the PDP, according to The Eagle Online.
Jallo represents the Igabi Federal Constituency of Kaduna State in the lower chamber of the National Assembly.
Why it matters
The ruling turns on a question that recurs in Nigerian politics: what a party must actually prove when it accuses an elected member of crossing to a rival platform. Under the 1999 Constitution as amended, a legislator who defects automatically forfeits the seat, but the exception for defections caused by a split within the party means courts must examine the facts closely rather than accept the claim at face value.
Here, the court found the facts were not there. The decision leaves Jallo in place and signals that newspaper reports and uncertified records will not carry a case of this kind on their own.
What the court said about the evidence
Justice Omotosho accepted that the PDP had the standing to bring the action. A party that sponsored a candidate who later defects, he held, is entitled to ask the court to compel the Speaker of the House of Representatives to declare the seat vacant.
The problem was proof. Among the materials the PDP tendered was a newspaper publication reporting the alleged defection. The court described that item as documentary hearsay with no probative value. It also rejected uncertified copies of House votes and proceedings dated March 18, 2025, which the party said recorded the announcement of the defection. Under the Evidence Act 2011, the judge held, only a certified true copy of such a document can be admitted.
The court further noted that the Independent National Electoral Commission, in its filings, said it never received any membership register showing that Jallo had joined the APC. The first and second defendants also denied that any defection occurred or that the events described in the March 18, 2025 proceedings took place.
That left the burden with the PDP, and the party did not meet it. It produced neither an APC membership register nor a membership card for Jallo. The lawmaker maintained that he never resigned from the PDP, and the party did not counter that with a resignation letter.
Justice Omotosho restated the principle that a party seeking declaratory reliefs must win on the strength of its own case rather than on the weakness of its opponent. The exhibits the PDP relied on, he concluded, were wholly insufficient to support its claims, and the suit lacked merit.
A recurring test for Nigerian political parties
The judgment adds to a line of decisions in which courts have insisted on hard documentation in defection disputes. A claim that a lawmaker has moved to another party is not enough on its own; the accusing party must show the move actually happened, whether through party records, a resignation letter or other admissible proof.
The constitutional provision at the centre of the case cuts both ways. Defection ordinarily costs a legislator the seat, but a member who leaves because of a division in the party is protected. Courts therefore have to establish what occurred before deciding which rule applies.
The Eagle Online reports that the PDP's case failed at that first step, since the court found no reliable evidence of a defection at all.
For Jallo, the outcome preserves his mandate for Igabi Federal Constituency. For the PDP, it is a setback in its effort to use the courts to reclaim seats it says were taken from it.
The ruling can still be challenged on appeal, and the PDP's next move will show whether it intends to pursue the matter further or accept the judgment.
