The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the Peoples Democratic Party's (PDP) attempt to nullify the September 2024 local government elections in Kwara State.

The court ruled that the party could not convert an earlier pre-election suit into a fresh challenge to the outcome of the polls.

Justice Peter Lifu, in a judgment on the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1061/2024, held that the PDP had already participated in the election, pursued its grievances before the appropriate election petition tribunals and failed to appeal the decisions before returning to the Federal High Court.

The judge said the amendment sought by the PDP fundamentally changed the character of the original case.

"The amendment fundamentally altered the character of the action," Justice Lifu held.

Daily Trust reports that the case had its roots in the PDP's legal effort to stop the September 21, 2024 council elections conducted by the Kwara State Independent Electoral Commission (KWASIEC).

The party had initially asked the court to restrain KWASIEC from conducting the elections and prevent the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from releasing the national voters' register to the state electoral body.

Justice Lifu had in July 2024 granted an interim order restraining INEC from releasing the register to KWASIEC, but the order was subsequently vacated before the election.

The elections consequently went ahead across the state on September 21, 2024, with the PDP taking part in the exercise.

The party later challenged the results through about 24 election petitions, according to the judgment, but all the petitions were dismissed and no appeal was lodged against the decisions.

The legal setback followed when the PDP returned to the Federal High Court and sought to amend its originating summons to include a relief asking the court to nullify the local government elections.

It was this move that Justice Lifu rejected, holding that the amendment effectively transformed the original case from a pre-election dispute into a post-election challenge.

According to the judge, such a challenge belonged to the election petition process and could not be introduced through an amendment to an existing suit before the Federal High Court.

"The court lacked jurisdiction to start as an election tribunal," he ruled.

The judgment drew a distinction between the legal remedies available before an election and those available after an election has been conducted.

Justice Lifu held that having participated in the polls and subsequently pursued election petitions, the PDP could not abandon the outcome of that process and seek substantially the same relief through another proceeding.

"The plaintiff voluntarily participated in the said elections, presented election petitions, and failed in all of them," the court held.

The court also found that the amended case had become statute-barred, meaning that the PDP could no longer pursue the relief it introduced after the expiration of the applicable statutory period.

"Having been so reconstituted, the suit was caught by the statutory limitation period," Justice Lifu held.

The judge further upheld the preliminary objection of the defendants that the PDP's continued pursuit of the matter constituted an abuse of court process.

He said allowing the party to return to the Federal High Court after the conclusion of its election petitions would amount to using another judicial process to relitigate issues that ought to have been determined through the prescribed electoral litigation procedure.

"It was impermissible for the plaintiff to return, by way of an amended originating summons, to seek reliefs which it could no longer obtain through the election petition process," Justice Lifu held.