Needless hullabaloo in Abia

Ordinarily, Abians should be in mourning mood going by the shocking and unexpected death of one of their illustrious sons, Ojo Maduekwe, at the age of 71 on Wednesday, June 29, in Abuja.
Regardless of whether Maduekwe, who was more visible at the national and international arena, impacted the lives of his people at home significantly or not, one issue he would have gladly made himself available to resolve is the fast looming anarchy that is staring his kith and kin on the face over who is now their authentic governor, Okezie Ikpeazu or Uche Ogah?
It was the ruling of a federal high court sitting in Abuja on Monday, June 27, which decided that Ikpeazu, Abia State governor, was not qualified to hold the office, that set the tune for the raging hullabaloo trending in Abia, if nothing is done urgently to avert the situation.
During the ruling by Justice Okon Abang, Ogah, who came a distant second during the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) primaries in 2014, was ordered to be given the Certificate of Return by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and installed the new governor of the state.
At the said primary for Abia State governorship poll, Ogar received 103 votes behind Ikpeazu who got 487 votes.
Abang, the presiding judge, gave judgment in a suit filed by Ogah, a PDP member‎ and governorship aspirant in the Abia State election, against Ikpeazu.
Ogar had contended in the suit that Ikpeazu evaded tax prior to his election, and as such was‎ not qualified to hold an elective office.
The judge upheld the argument and ordered the removal of Ikpeazu for submitting false information to the PDP in the course of the party’s primary election.
Justice Abang also ordered the INEC to declare Ogah, the President of Masters Energy Group, as the elected candidate by withdrawing the Certificate of Return earlier issued to Ikpeazu and handing it over to Ogah.
However, what exacerbated the tension that started building up in Abia since June 27 when Justice Abang made his judicial pronouncement was the issuance of the Certificate of Return to Ogah on Thursday, June 30, by INEC and the report that he was headed for Umuahia to be sworn in as the new governor.
In issuing the certificate of return to Ogah, the INEC Commissioner in charge of the South East, Lawrence Nwurukwu, said the commission did so in compliance with the court order which directed INEC to issue the certificate to Ogah with immediate effect.
Nwuruku said: “The situation is, we are simply obeying the court order. The court said with immediate effect, we should issue him Certificate of Return, and that is what we have done.
“If the court tomorrow issues another order, we will obey the same. By the grace of God, I am the INEC Commissioner in charge of South East. I will do the same thing if the court orders us to issue the certificate to another person.
“In this case, the court ordered us to issue the certificate to the person who won the election and that is Uchechukwu Ogah. I was the person who issued the Certificate of Return to Governor Ikpeazu because he was declared winner of the election then. Now the court is saying otherwise.”
This is, perhaps, the latest‎ in a series of legal battles Ikpeazu has faced since assuming office.
His election was previously challenged by banker, Alex Otti, candidate of the All Progressives Grand Alliance‎ (APGA) in the April 2015 governorship election.
Although an election petition‎ tribunal upheld Ikpeazu’s election, he was sacked at the appeal court before the Supreme Court returned him to power.
I have been trying to get a handle on the legal import of the looming crisis in Abia, but it appears the judiciary, by its submissions, is even the one deepening the flame of misunderstanding hovering around who, for now, should be held accountable as the governor of God’s Own State as Abians call their state.
Take, for instance, the submission of Constitutional lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN).
He said: “It is hogwash, unnatural, curious and questionable. It constitutes a blatant breach of the hallowed doctrine of ‘lis pendes’… What is the hurry about it when the sitting governor has already appealed with a motion for stay of execution? The certificate is dead on arrival, as dead as ‘dodo’, having regard to the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and Electoral Act.
“As soon as INEC became aware of the appeal and motion for stay of execution, it should have been guided by discretion and waited…
“Meanwhile, in law, the governor remains the governor until the appellant’s appeals are exhausted at the Supreme Court. This is a constitutional right… To be sure, the Abia High Court has powers and coordinate jurisdiction to grant the injunction it did to prevent electoral crisis.”
The issues that are contending for interpretation in the Justice Abang ruling are: issuance of Certificate of Return, vacation of office by Ikpeazu, and swearing-in of Ogah by the Abia Chief Judge.
Already, INEC had complied with the order on Certificate of Return. But the effort to get Ogah sworn in on Thursday, June 30, was thwarted by the “non-availability” of the Abia Chief Judge, which would have paved the way for Ikpeazu to vacate office and eventually getting all the other orders complied with.
I did not expect that Ikpeazu would not head for the courts to stop his removal. What rankles me is whether he had made the right moves to stop the court’s pronouncement regarding his status.
Ogah and his handlers believe that only the appeal court could have issued a stay of the execution of Abang’s ruling, and not the Osisioma Ngwa high court where the governor procured an interim injunction restraining the Chief Judge from swearing in Ogah.
“The order did not emanate from a higher court, but from a court of coordinate jurisdiction and does not in any way vitiate or invalidate the earlier judgment of the Federal High Court in which the Chief Judge of Abia State was ordered to swear in Dr. Uche Sampson Ogah. Only a higher court, in this case Court of Appeal, has the jurisdiction to reverse the judgment of the Federal High Court.
“Note also that appeal of Dr. Okezie Ikpeazu before the Court of Appeal does not operate as a stay over the judgment of Justice Okon Abang. In the absence of any express order of the high court or the Court of Appeal ordering stay of execution, the judgment of the Federal High Court delivered on June 27, 2016 should be obeyed by all the parties,” Monday Ubani, Media Adviser to Ogah, said.
If history is anything to go by, we should be guided by the Rivers State scenario involving Rotimi Amaechi and Celestine Omehia.
One recalls that though the court made similar pronouncement bordering on Certificate of Return, handing and taking over of office and swearing-in by then Chief Judge of Rivers State, the case still ran its full course till the Supreme Court gave its landmark judgment.
Although some of the sections of the Supreme Court in the case had been tinkered with to suit the Electoral Act, for instance, that those taking part in election must have passed through the electoral processes, the Act is still clear on cases like the latest one.
Section 143 (1) of the Electoral Act states that: “If the election tribunal or the court, as the case may be, determines that a candidate returned as elected, was not validly elected, then if Notice of Appeal against that decision is given within 21 days from the date of the decision, the candidate returned elected shall, notwithstanding the contrary decision of the election tribunal or the court, remain in office pending the determination of the appeal.”
There is also a second scenario in Section 143 (2) of the Electoral Act: “The candidate whose election is nullified or set aside shall remain in office pending the expiration of the period of 21 days which is the period for an appeal.”
Even, in Section 17 of the Court of Appeal Act, the court enjoins a restraint when a notice of appeal and motion for stay of execution are filed. The parties are to maintain the status quo.
Therefore, if an appeal in legal terms is akin to stay of execution, why the hullabaloo?