Federal High Court sitting in Minna has dismissed an application seeking to amend the names of parties in a suit challenging the All Progressives Congress (APC) primary election that produced Yakubu Auna as the party’s candidate for the Magama/Rijau Federal Constituency ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The suit was instituted by APC aspirant, Shehu Auna, through his attorney, Abubakar Danjuma, challenging the validity of the party’s primary election conducted on June 16, 2026, which returned Yakubu Auna as the party’s flag bearer for the constituency.
At the resumed hearing, the plaintiff urged the court to grant an application seeking to amend the names of parties in the suit. However, counsel to the defendants opposed the application, arguing that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient justification for the amendment.
The defence further contended that granting the application would overreach issues already raised in their preliminary objection before the court.
In a ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Abdullahi Aminu Dan-Ige, held that the plaintiff failed to establish sufficient grounds for the proposed amendment. The court consequently dismissed the application, describing it as lacking merit and incompetent.
Following the ruling, Justice Dan-Ige adjourned the matter until July 22, 2026, for further proceedings.
Speaking with journalists after the court session, counsel to the plaintiff, Abubakar Danjuma, said the dismissal of the application did not affect the substantive suit challenging the APC primary election.
“Our application for amendment was dismissed, but that does not amount to the dismissal of the substantive suit before the court,” he said.
Danjuma maintained that no valid APC primary election was conducted in the Magama/Rijau Federal Constituency on June 16, 2026, insisting that the suit is challenging the legitimacy of the exercise that allegedly produced Yakubu Auna as the APC candidate.
“We are in court to challenge the purported APC primary election. The dismissal of the amendment application has no bearing on the substantive matter before the court,” he added.