"My lords, please permit me to reiterate that the first leg of the Appellants grouse relates to nomination of a candidate by a political party.

"Article 14(b) of the Electoral Guidelines for primary Elections 2014 of the 1st respondent also provides:- "(a) An aspirant to the gubernatorial primary election shall not be qualified to be nominated or to contest the primary election if he/she (b). Presents a false certificate or declaration of age for the purpose of the primary election or for any other purpose."

"For purpose of clarification, I seek to restate that Section 87 of the Electoral Act can only be invoked properly where an aspirant challenges his political party for failure to comply with any of the conditions stipulated under the said Section of the Act.

"The provision of Article 15(2) of the guideline also provides as follows:- "An aspirant shall ensure that all the information supplied by him in the relevant nomination form are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. Any aspirant who gives false information or makes false declaration in the nomination form shall be disqualified."

"By the provision of Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act, the position of the law is well established that, where a candidate makes a false declaration in his form CF001, a person aggrieved may seek redress. However, the purport of Section 31(5) is not designed to disqualify a candidate who is otherwise qualified to contest the relevant election under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

"On the first complaint adumbrated above, I entirely agree with the finding of the lower Court that the alleged non-payment of party subscription fee is of no moment or relevance. By the provisions of Paragraph 48(f) of the Guidelines, payment or non payment of party subscription fee is not a ground to disqualify a candidate who win primary election to contest an election, provided that the said party approves the candidate to represent it at the election.

"To disqualify a candidate for falsification, the infraction must relate to the very point on which the qualification depends. Thus, where the alleged falsified document is not a qualifying factor under the Constitution of Nigeria, its presentation cannot disqualify an otherwise qualified person. Again see the case of AD v. Fayose under reference supra." Per OGUNBIYI, J.S.C. (P. 86, Paras. E-G)  JOE ODEY AGI, SAN v. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY & ORS(2016) LPELR-42578(SC)

"... The above makes it very clear that a party is supreme over its own affairs. See Dalhatu v Turaki (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt.843) p. 310 Onuoha v. Okafor & Ors (1983) 14 NSCC p.494. Uzodima v Izunaso (No 2) (2011) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1275) p. 30 PDP v Sylva (2012) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1316) p. 85. A party is like a club. A voluntary association.

"The act of making a false document or altering a genuine one for same to be used. See Black Laws Dictionary, 8th Edition, is what forgery is." Per MUHAMMAD, J.S.C. (P. 115, Paras. F-G)  JOE ODEY AGI, SAN v. PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC PARTY & ORS(2016) LPELR-42578(SC)

"As rightly introduced by the appellant's counsel, it is well settled that it is the claim of the plaintiff that determines the jurisdiction of the Court, See Adeyemi v Opeyemi (1976) 9 -10 SC 31, Tukur v Gongola State (1989) 4 NWLR (Pt. 147) 517, and Uwazurike v. Nwachhukwu (2013) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1342) 503. ?In determining whether or not it has jurisdiction, a Court is to restrict itself to the case put forward by the plaintiff and not the construction given to the plaintiff's case by a Defendant.