The Independent National Electoral
Commission told a Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday that the
issuance of Certificate of Return to Uche Ogah on June 30, recognising
him as the governor-elect of Abia State, was in compliance with the
court order delivered on June 27.
INEC also said the notice of appeal,
filed by Okezie Ikpeazu against the said judgment, which removed him as
the Governor of Abia State and ordered the issuance of fresh Certificate
of Return to Ogah, did not operate as a stay of execution of the
judgment.
The electoral body stated this through
its lawyer, Mr. Alhassan Umar, when a motion filed by Ikpeazu, seeking a
stay of execution of the judgment, came up for hearing on Monday.
The motion for a stay of execution of
the judgment was slated for hearing on Monday before Justice Okon Abang,
who had delivered the verdict on June 27.
Justice Abang had, in his judgment
delivered on June 27, sacked Ikpeazu for allegedly disclosing false
information in relation to his tax clearance details to the Independent
National Electoral Commission in his form nominating him as the
candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party for the 2015 governorship
election in the state.
The judge, also in the said judgment,
ordered Ogah, the governor’s rival who was the first runner-up in the
primary that produced Ikpeazu as the candidate of the PDP, to take over
as the state’s governor.
A few hours after INEC presented the
Certificate of Return to Ogah on Thursday in Abuja, however, an Abia
State High Court in Osisioma issued an order, stopping the state Chief
Judge or any other judge from inaugurating Ogah, the governor-elect.
On Monday, however, the judge acceded to
the request by Ikpeazu’s lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), to
adjourn the hearing of the motion till Thursday.
Umar, while earlier reacting to the
motion for adjournment, and other oral applications made during the
proceedings, said the commission had already issued the Certificate of
Return to Ogah before the processes of the notice of appeal against the
judgment was served on the commission.
He explained that the notice of appeal
and the motion for a stay of execution of the judgment did not operate
as a stay of execution of a court’s verdict in a pre-election case.
According to him, the law will expressly
state so if it intends to make a notice of appeal to operate as a stay
of execution in a pre-election case.
The INEC lawyer pointed out that why a
notice of appeal operated as a stay of execution of a judgment delivered
by election petitions tribunal in an election petition was because it
was expressly provided for under Section 143(1) of the Electoral Act.
Umar added, “We do not object to the application for adjournment.
“On the issue of enrolment order of this
court, the third defendant/respondent (INEC) issued Certificate of
Return to the plaintiff/respondent as ordered by this court.
“My Lord, on the issue of time of service of the processes, with due respect, the certificate speaks for itself.
“My lord ordered the third defendant to
issue Certificate of Return forthwith and upon service of the order, my
lord, on June 28, 2016, the 3rd defendant issued a Certificate of Return
accordingly.”
He added, “The certificate of return was
issued after we were served with the motion on June 28. We had issued
the certificate upon being served with the motion.
“The certificate bears the date.
“By the issuance, I meant it was signed on June 28, but the actual presentation of the certificate was on June 30.
“My lord, we had no difficulty in issuing the certificate because election matters are suis generis (are in class of their own), and where the law intends that an appeal should operate as a stay, it is expressly stated so.”
Shortly after Ikpeazu’s motion for a
stay of execution was mentioned on Monday, his lawyer, Olanipekun, asked
for an adjournment of the case till Thursday to enable his team to
complete the filing of its reaction to Ogah’s counter-affidavit filed in
opposition to the motion.
But Ogah’s lawyer, Dr. Alex Izinyon
(SAN), urged the court to shun the request for an adjournment, set aside
the order of the Abia State High Court in Osisioma, restraining the CJ
of the state from swearing-in Ogah as governor and reiterate the
judgment of the court.
Izinyon argued that by going ahead to
obtain such an order from inauguraing Court without bringing the order
to the attention of Justice Abang on Monday, Ikpeazu had resorted to
self-help.
The senior advocate asked the court to
set aside the Abia State High Court’s order and reiterate the judgment
since Ikpeazu’s motion for a stay of execution had allegedly achieved
essentially what the motion intended to achieve.
Izinyon stated, “My lord, the question
to ask borders on the integrity and the sanctity of this order obtained
from the Abia State High Court and the application before this court
now.
“They are asking for a date when they
have in their pocket a court order, which has tied the hands of the
plaintiff, preventing him from presenting himself for swearing-in,
contrary to the order of this court.
“My lord, what is paramount here is that
the applicant, Okezie Ikpeazu, went somewhere else to get this order
from another High Court.
“We submit with respect that the
applicant did not bring this to your lordship’s attention. They have not
told your lordship that they went somewhere else to obtain the order.
“Now that we have brought this to the
attention of the court, our application is that your lordship will undo
the act of the applicant by setting aside the order because it was made
during the pendency of this application.”
Olanipekun, in his counter-response, accused INEC and Ogah of being the ones resorting to self-help.
He argued that there was no
justification for presenting the Certificate of Return to Ogah on June
30 after INEC had received the notice of appeal and the motion for stay
of execution on June 28.
He asked the court to quash the Certificate of Return issued to Ogah by INEC.
He said, “I urge your lordship to set
aside the Certificate of Return purportedly issued by INEC on June 28
and handed over to the plaintiff/respondent on June 30 during the
pendency of the processes before the Court of Appeal.”
But in his ruling, Justice Abang refused
to set aside the enrolled court order, saying Section 19 of the Sheriff
and Civil Processes Act, relied on by Olanipekun, did not define
processes to include the enrolled court order.
Describing Olanipekun’s application
asking for the voiding of the court’s enrolled order as lacking in
merit, Justice Abang said the court had the power to enrol its order at
any time after judgment had been delivered.
The judge said he would determine
whether he could set aside the order made by the Abia State High Court
and whether he could void the Certificate of Return issued to Ogah and
whether the provisions of Section 143(1) of the Electoral Act applied to
the judgment of his court in a pre-election case or not.
But before the adjourning the case, the
judge warned lawyers and a section of the media, whom he accused of
misrepresenting the court’s judgment without first availing themselves
of the details of the court’s verdict.
He said for instance some commentators
on television said his judgment, removing Ikpeazu from office as
governor, was based on Section 24(a) of Constitution, whereas the said
provision was not mentioned at all in his verdict.
INEC has suspicious motive –Embattled gov
But Ikpeazu alleged on Monday that INEC had a “suspicious motive”.
The Chief Press Secretary to the
Governor, Eyinnaya Apollos, said this during a telephone interview with
one of our correspondents while reacting to INEC’s submission that
Ikpeazu’s appeal could not stop the execution of last week’s judgment.
“For INEC to say that confirms our suspicions that the commission has a special interest in the matter,” he said.
Apollos said an appeal against the
judgment removing his principal from office had been filed before the
Court of Appeal on Monday.
In a separate statement, Ikpeazu
described the plot to unseat him as an attempted coup d’etat in a
democracy and vowed to fight to protect his mandate.
The governor was quoted as saying this
when he received members of the Abia State Executive Council who paid
him a solidarity visit in Government House, Umuahia, on Monday.
Ikpeazu wondered how someone, who never
stood for an election, would want to become governor through what he
described as “the back door”.
He added, “The plot to remove me as
governor is a coup d’etat. I can’t imagine that somebody, who never
contested election, is seeking to be made a governor through the back
door. I can’t understand the rush by INEC to issue Uche Ogah a
Certificate of Return. I also can’t comprehend the rush to swear him in.
“Are you telling me that I don’t have a
right to appeal a judgment against me? Or are you telling me that if it
was a death sentence, I should be killed before appealing?”
Iziyon, the counsel for Ogah, said he
would not take issue with Ikpeazu on the matter, but would wait for the
Thursday ruling before making any comment on the suit.
No comments:
Post a Comment