NRM-1 APC-0

Justice Komba Kamanda has dismissed the preliminary objections raised by Lawyer Wara Serry Kamal on behalf of the National President, Secretary General and other executive members of the main opposition All Peoples Congress (APC) against the plaintiff’s applicant, the National Reform Movement (NRM), a pressure group of the APC party.

According to respondent counsel, Lawyer Wara Serry Kamal objections, the plaintiff’s motion before the court is a constitutional matter that can only be determine by the Supreme Court for interpretation and not the High court.

She submitted for the matter to be struck out with cost as the High Court lacks the jurisdiction to determine such a constitutional matter brought for an interpretation by the plaintiffs, Minkailu Koroma and four others who, she said, are not registered, nor paid up, executives or legates members of the APC; and that there is no evidence of party Membership Card produced by plaintiffs before the court.

Respondents Counsel further raised objection as to whether the originating notice of motion file by plaintiffs is a correctly sealed, file and served by law.

Lawyer Wara Serrey Kamal supported her submissions pursuant to Section 124 Act No.6 of 1991 national constitution of Sierra Leone and the case Bubuake Jabbie, John Benjamin and the Sierra Leone People’s Party (SLPP) 2005 and that of case of Samuel Hinga Norman.

The Plaintiff’s Counsel Lawyer Hindolo M. Gevao in reply said his clients are register and paid up members of the APC party and that the case before the court is not related to the 1991 national constitution but the APC 1995 party constitution referencing the said party delegates’ conference.

In his ruling, Justice Kamanda said that the plethora objections raised by defendants counsel could not be supported by law and therefore dismissed the originating notice of application dated 15th January, 2020 file by defendants applicant and ordered plaintiff’s counsel to proceed with his motion applications with no order of cost.

He said if the plaintiffs should have come to court under Section 35 Sub-Section 2 of the 1991 constitution that should have been a different case for determination, but what the defendant referenced falls under Section 124 of 1991 constitution of Sierra Leone.

Justice Kamanda furthered that the plaintiff as an applicant and their membership to a political party is a sufficient capacity to institute action against political party.

“The court of which the matter is presently before, has vital power and jurisdiction to determine the case, as what is before the court is not for an interpretation of the 1991 constitution of Sierra Leone but rather seeking the enforcement of the APC 1995 party constitution and the Political Party Registration Commission (PPRC) Act of 2002, referencing the party national delegates’ conference, “Justice Kamanda said.

The case was adjourned to the 11th May, 2020 for hearing.