Governorship Tussle: Ikpeazu raises 50 grounds of appeal

Details of the appeal filed by the Abia State Governor Okezie Ikpeazu against his removal from office by the Federal High Court, Abu­ja, have shown that the gov­ernor presented 50 grounds why the judgement should not stand.

Justice Okon Abang had on June 27, 2016 removed Ikpeazu from office over al­leged forgery of tax papers.

In the suit with Number FHC/ABJ/CS/71/2016, Jus­tice Abang ordered the Inde­pendent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to is­sue a Certificate of Return to Dr. Uche Ogah, who came second in the People’s Dem­ocratic Party (PDP) prima­ry election.

The governor through his counsel, Chief Wole Ola­nipekun (SAN), in his no­tice of appeal dated July 4, 2016, raised 50 grounds of appeal and demanded the nullification of the judge­ment of the lower court. 

The respondents in the case are Ogah (first), the PDP (second), INEC (third) and Sir Friday Nwanozie Nwosu (fourth).

Ikpeazu argued that the trial judge erred in law and came to a wrong decision in holding that the appellant was ineligible to participate in the primary election of the sec­ond respondent by reason of presenting false information to the third respondent in INEC Form CF001 and conse­quently granting all the reliefs claimed by the first respondent in his originating summons.

He further declared that the lower court also erred in law and reached a perverse de­cision when after finding thus: “The cause of action arose in this matter when the first and second defendants forwarded Form CF001 containing al­leged false information to the Independent National Elec­toral Commission.” It went ahead to disqualify the appel­lant from being a candidate at the second respondent’s pri­mary election and declared the first respondent as the winner of the primary election.

On his third ground of ap­peal, Dr. Ikpeazu noted that the lower court erred in law and acted without jurisdic­tion when it purported to en­force/apply the provisions of the PDP Electoral Guidelines for primary elections 2014 in determining the originating summons before it without the PDP Guidelines being put in evidence before it.

In another ground of ap­peal, Ikepazu pointed out that Justice Abang erred in law and reached a perverse deci­sion when it held in respect of the Supreme Court decision in Ekagbara vs Ikpeazu (2016) 4 NWLR (pt. 1503) 541 thus: “In fact, in the above cited case, Supreme Court in a way de­parted from its earlier decision in Kharki vs PDP… Supreme Court also held that this court has jurisdiction to entertain a suit questioning the qualifica­tion of an aspirant in a prima­ry election by a fellow aspirant when the aspirant whose qual­ification is being questioned did not pay tax as at when due or where there are lapses in the tax paper of such aspirant… In Ekagbara vs Ikpeazu (supra), the Supreme Court also held that it does not really matter that this will involve the exam­ination of tax administration in Abia State of Nigeria.”

In his fifth ground of ap­peal, Ikpeazu declared that trial judge erred in law and came to a perverse decision when he asked thus: “It is ei­ther that the information are false or correct, I do not think it is a case of forgery. I do not think facts are in dispute. Even if the affidavits of the parties are in dispute, they are not in my view in dispute on material facts… It is for the first to sec­ond defendants to show that the information contained in documents attached to Form CF001 submitted to INEC are not false … I think the court can conveniently use the affi­davit evidence placed before it to resolve issues in contro­versy. This suit was properly commenced by an originat­ing summon”.

In the 17th ground of ap­peal, Ikpeazu observed that the lower court misdirected itself and reached a perverse decision when it held that the appellant presented false in­formation to INEC by reason of the alleged differences be­tween the tax receipts and the tax certificate with respect to the tax return for 2013.

In the last ground of appeal,the governor stressed that the decision of the lower court was/is against the weight of evidence, and therefore asked the Court of Appeal to allow his appeal and set aside all the main and consequen­tial orders made and granted by the lower court.

He also asked the appel­late court to dismiss or strike out the amended originating summons in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/71/2016.

We’re yearning for Ogah, say Akwukwuegbu, others

Meanwhile, some elders and community leaders in Abia met on Wednesday at the Campaign Office of Ogah in Umuahia, the state capital and declared their support for him.

Led by the Tradition­al Prime Minister of Ibeku Kingdom, Chief Uche Akwuk­wuegbu (Bawas) who read the communique at the end of the meeting, the elders said that “Abia masses are yearning for Ogah.”

The leaders urged mem­bers of the public to disre­gard the Concerned Elders’ endorsement of Ikpeazu, de­scribing them as “those who have contributed in no small measure to the collapse and stunted growth of Abia State.”

Akwukwuegbu said that as the true representatives of the people, “we condemn in its en­tirety the purported meeting held in Abuja by some people from Abia State in the name of Concerned Elders Forum of Abia State, and that their res­olutions do not reflect in any way the reality on ground.

“That the true position of things in the state is that all Abians are yearning for Dr. Uche Ogah, hence the wild cel­ebration that was witnessed in all streets and villages in Abia.”