Executive governor of Abia State, because the Chief Judge is not going to remain in hiding forever.”
Ubani, who disclosed that Ogah’s team of legal counsels were prepared for the task ahead, said, “if the Chief Judge continues to hide, we would explore other available alternatives to ensure that the right thing is done, which is swearing in Dr. Ogah as the executive governor of the Abia state.”
Genesis of legal battle
However, chronicling how the legal battle between Ogah and Ikpeazu started, Ubani said: “This issue came up as a result of the Primary of the Peoples Democratic Party which was held on December 8, 2014.
“My friend, and client, Dr. Uche Ogah and by the special grace of God the current governor of Abia State was a participant. He was manipulated out because the irregularities of that primary was glaring for all to see. Before we could start the Primary the delegates that were not supposed to be there were already inside the stadium. That irregularity produced Ikpeazu as the PDP candidate.
“But that was not the issue. The main issue all started when we sought to look at the documents presented by Dr. Okezie Ikpeazu which is a requirement of the law. The law says if you want to contest an election you must file in an affidavit, fill a form, disclose your educational qualification, your birth certificate and your tax papers. Now, the issue of tax is very critical. It is a constitutional requirement that if you want to contest an election in any political party you must have paid your tax for three years as at when due.
“Section 177(c) of the 1999 constitution says that a party must sponsor a candidate before he contests a general election. If a party don’t sponsor you, you can’t run for election. For that to happen, it means such a candidate must have complied with the guidelines of a political party before he is qualified to contest.
“But in Ikpeazu’s case, we went through his papers and discovered that he had lied. There were so many lies on the face of his tax papers. One of the things we discovered was that he was alleged to have started paying tax when he was not yet in the employment of the Abia State Government. Two, the serial numbers on his tax receipts were evidence of deception. The 2013 serial number showed as if it was the beginning of the tax payment, whereas, the 2011 receipt showed as if it was the last payment. The serial numbers were conflicting. The conflict showed that Ikpeazu had not paid his tax as at when due in accordance with the law.
“Third, was the issue of figures. Let us assume he was supposed to earn N500,000 per annum but in his tax papers, it was showing above N1million.
“He said his tax was being deducted at source. But the question is. If that was so, why the discrepancies in your taxable income. Is it not what he was earning, he should be taxed on. We found so many discrepancies in his tax certificate.
Why the case delayed
“And the law in Section 31 of the 2010 Electoral Act as amended gives a co-aspirant the opportunity to examine the documents of an opponent to validate whether he was qualified to contest for the primary election in the first place, because it is a pre-election matter. And if you find out in his disclosures and declarations that he has given a false or misleading information, the section guarantees you the right to apply to a Federal or State High Court for a redress. You also have the right to ask that that candidate be disqualified because he was not qualified in the first place to run for primaries.
“Section 31(6) says if such a candidate was found to have declared false information, he is liable to be disqualified by the court. When we found all that, we proceeded for Originating Summons, but they (Ikpeazu’s legal team) came up with the issue that the court has no jurisdiction. So, we had to trash it out at the Supreme Court. That was why time was wasted, because this matter would have been settled a long time ago.
“So, when the Supreme Court ruled that the lower court has jurisdiction to hear the case, we had to come down to the Federal High Court again to start all over.”
Allegations of bias
He added: “Ikpeazu’s team alleged bias against Justice Adeniyi Ademola that he has been compromised and all manner of frivolous allegations. So, the Justice said, ‘look I hands off the case, I don’t want anything that will tarnish my image.’ For sanctity of the Justice and the judiciary, he transferred the case back to the Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN for reassignment.
“The CJN now reassigned the case to Justice Okon Abang, who went on to hear the case. They came again with all manner of applications. But if you read the judgement of Justice Abang, it was comprehensive. He took time to tackle all the applications they brought, including the issue of jurisdiction, which had already been decided by the Supreme Court. All these were tackled before the Court came to the merit of the case. They (Ikpeazu’s team) agreed that on the face of the tax papers, the disclosures were false, but that it was a mistake. This in law is an admission.
“If this was a mistake, it means on the face of the law you are not qualified to participate in the electoral process. Does it now mean that the Dr. Uche Ogah, who came second in that primary should go empty handed? the court said no. Even though election has taken place and Dr. Okezie Ikpeazu won, since he was not qualified to have participated in the election ab initio, the proper order is to ask him to vacate the seat. PDP as a party should have presented a qualified candidate for the general election.”
Justice Okon Aban’s ruling
“Again, now that the Supreme Court has held in the case of Otti vs. INEC, that PDP is the winner of April 11, 2015 election in Abia State, the PDP is the party that ought to replace the candidate that was not qualified. This is exactly what Justice Okon Abang ruled on June 27, 2016.
“The Judge ordered that Ikpeazu should vacate the office and that INEC should issue a Certificate of Return to Dr. Uche Ogah immediately and he should be sworn in immediately by the Chief Judge of Abia State. And this was exactly what INEC did. There was no contrary order to that judgement. It’s the extant law,” he declared.
Ikpeazu’s appeal
On the appeal by Ikpeazu, the former Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association, NBA Ikeja Branch, said: “Now they have appealed. The fact remains that appeal does not operate as a stay of execution. Every elementary student of law knows this. They still have to obtain an order of stay before you can stay execution of judgement. Now, it’s a different scenario when it’s a judgment of the tribunal. Many lawyers are making a mistake that for the fact that Dr. Okezie Ikpeazu has appealed, there should have been an automatic stay of execution.
“But this is not true. Section 143 of the electoral Act 2010 as amended says if you appeal after your election has been validated by the Tribunal, your appeal operates as a stay automatically if it’s within 21 days. But in a pre-election matter like this one, it does not apply. You still have to obtain a separate order from the appeal to stay execution.
INEC did the right thing
“So, the allegation that INEC was in a hurry to issue Certificate of Return to Dr. Ogah, despite their appeal is a wrong assumption. The problem we have in Nigeria is we tend to do certain things wrong and when it becomes a norm, we feel that is the way it should be. No, the normal thing is that when a court makes a pronouncement, you have to obey it, you don’t look behind you or begin to read meanings.
“I must say that INEC’s action was very historical and good for the development of our laws and judicial system. For the first time obeyed our laws and issued Dr. Uche Ogah Certificate of Return. Dr. Ogah was supposed to be sworn in immediately as the courts have ordered, in the absence of any contrary order
No comments:
Post a Comment