A Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt has adjourned to November 4, 2026, hearing in a suit challenging the nomination of the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, Rt. Hon. Kingsley Chinda, as the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Rivers State.
The suit, numbered FHC/PH/CS/3/2026, was instituted by Samuel Amatonjie against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Chinda, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the APC, the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Clerk to the National Assembly.
The plaintiff is asking the court to determine whether Chinda validly defected from the PDP to the APC in accordance with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, before participating in the APC governorship primary and emerging as the party’s candidate for the 2027 Rivers State governorship election.
At Wednesday’s proceedings, Amatonjie informed the court that he was served with processes filed by some of the defendants on September 28 and requested additional time to study and respond to them.
After hearing from the parties, the presiding judge, Justice Mohammed Turaki, adjourned the matter to November 4, 2026, for hearing.
Speaking with journalists after the proceedings, Amatonjie said the suit was instituted as a public interest litigation to seek an interpretation of Section 68 of the Constitution concerning defection by a member of the National Assembly.
He said the central issue was whether Chinda’s defection from the PDP to the APC had been completed as of May 9, 2026, when he was screened for the APC governorship primary, and May 21, 2026, when he emerged as the party’s governorship candidate.
According to him, Chinda’s resignation and defection letter was read on the floor of the House of Representatives by the Speaker on June 2, 2026.
Amatonjie said the court would determine whether Chinda was constitutionally entitled to participate in the APC screening and primary before the formal reading of his defection and resignation letter.
He, however, stressed that he was not asking the court to determine generally whether Chinda had a right to contest the governorship election.
“I am not saying he does not have the right to contest the position of governor in Rivers State. What I am saying, by virtue of the said provision of the Constitution, Section 68, is whether, as at the material time he picked that ticket, his defection from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress had crystallised,” Amatonjie said.
Among other reliefs, the plaintiff is asking the court to declare that the constitutional requirements governing defection by a member of the National Assembly must be complied with before such a person can validly participate in a political party’s governorship primary.
He is also seeking declarations that INEC cannot validly recognise or publish Chinda as the APC governorship candidate if the court finds that he had not validly defected from the PDP before the APC screening and primary.
The plaintiff further wants the court to disqualify Chinda from the 2027 Rivers State governorship election if the court grants the reliefs sought.
The PDP’s counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Paul Daudu, said the matter was adjourned because the plaintiff required time to respond to processes filed by the defendants.
“It was slated for hearing, but the plaintiff asked for adjournment because he needed to respond to the processes filed by the first, second and third defendants. That is essentially what happened,” Daudu said.
Daudu described the case as a challenge to Chinda’s nomination by the APC, adding that the plaintiff’s position was that Chinda did not resign from his position as Minority Leader of the House of Representatives at the appropriate time.
“He is saying that he is not qualified to contest. We believe otherwise. It’s left for the court to decide,” he said.
Counsel to Chinda, Dike Udenna, also confirmed the adjournment, saying the plaintiff had requested time to respond to preliminary objections and counter-affidavits filed by the defendants.
He said the matter had consequently been adjourned to November 4, 2026, for hearing.
The court is expected to determine the constitutional questions raised by the plaintiff and the responses of the defendants before deciding the reliefs sought in the suit.
