Rape of Justice in Abia

The Judiciary, like it is always held is the hope of the common man, but not in every situation. The recent ruling on the prolonged legal tussle between Chief Okezie Erondu, Chairman Aba South Local Government Area and Dr.Christian Okoli, the Action Congress Candidate in the January 19, 2008 Local Government polls in Abia State by the Abia Local Government Election Appeal Tribunal sitting in Umuahia under the chairmanship of Hon. Justice Agwu Ukpai Kalu is a typical case.

On January 19, 2008 the Abia State Independent Electoral Commission (ABSIEC) conducted elections in 16 out of the 17 local government areas in the State. Chief Okezie Erondu, the Progressive Peoples Alliance candidate was announced winner of the election in Aba South by ABSIEC.Dr.Christian Okoli; the AC candidate was dissatisfied with the result and went on appeal.

On November 6, 2008 the Local Government Election Petitions Tribunal led by Chief Magistrate John Ukpabi gave judgment in favour of Dr Christian Okoli, the AC candidate. The ruling further directed ABSIEC to swear in Dr Okoli immediately in consonance with the stipulations of section 215(1) of Abia State Local Government Law No.3 of 2006, which reads thus: “any candidate declared winner by the electoral tribunal as elected shall from the time of the decision of the election tribunal be deemed to be duly elected until any determination of the competent High Court to the contrary on the appeal.”

To strengthen the above position, the Chairman of the tribunal went further to interpret the portion of the law thus: “the intention of the lawmaker in respect of subsection (1) to my humble view is that the loser at the election tribunal vacates office the office immediately the election tribunal makes the pronouncement that the petitioner won the election. The loser has the right of appeal but must appeal after vacating office. In other words, the person declared winner by the election tribunal immediately takes over the running of the office.”

But ABSIEC in flagrant disrespect to the provisions of the above law refused to issue Dr Okoli certificate of return that would have necessitated his swearing in as ordered by the tribunal. The body instead against the enabling law and decision of the tribunal went on appeal on November 17; 2008.Investigations by this publication alleges that the sympathy on Chief Erondu by ABSIEC is based on the reason that Chief Erondu was a Commissioner in ABSIEC before he resigned to contest the election; and also that these judges who constituted the appeal panel has sympathy for the government.

In the course of the appeal, Dr.Okoli was allegedly framed up in the kidnap of Professor Stephen Emejuaiwe, the ABSIEC Chairman. He was subsequently incarcerated. Delivering judgment recently on the appeal, Justice Agwu Ukpai Kalu noted that Dr Okoli was not qualified to contest the election. The basis of his contention was that Dr Okoli could not produce ABSIEC form 7 which qualified him as a candidate.

Justice Kalu’s position is seriously opposed by Peter Ofor a public affairs analyst in the State who contended thus “The election itself was shoddily conducted and ABSIEC did not find it expedient to issue even results to winners because they assumed it was an all PPA affairs, more so when PDP withdrew from the race. Based on this fact, the Commission failed to do what the law required it to do at the appropriate time. They never envisaged any viable opposition and therefore went to sleep.”

According to sources, when Dr Okoli’s counsel, Max Njoku came up with a petition against the election, ABSIEC was jolted from sleep and the body now allegedly made the following discoveries (i) that Chief Erondu did not pay the mandatory ABSIEC nomination fee of N212, 000 as required by the law. Consequently he was not issued with nomination form by ABSIEC.It is further revealed that he did not tender these documents during trial (ii) That Erondu had no unit result of the election to tender to prove that he won the election.

The law makes it mandatory that the non-payment of the screening fee disqualifies a candidate. But a source alleges that Chief Erondu had these things going because of his personal relationship with Professor Emejuaiwe.

Also in the ABSIEC’s form the following anomalies were discovered: While the form was dated 31/12/07,the party’s letter conveying Dr Okoli’s nomination was dated 2/1/08.This raises the question of how can claimed to be disqualified before his name was submitted. The name on the controversial form 9 was Nwachukwu Okoli Chukwuma while the actual name of the AC candidate is Dr Okoli Christian Nwachukwu.

Sources further noted that other names contained in the said form 9 which are claimed to be disqualified in the election are serving councilors in Aba South LG under PPA.Rather Justice noted in his ruling that he would not comment on the names since they were not a matter before the tribunal.

Opponents of the ruling are of the opinion that the ruling smacks of favouritism.They are anchoring their claims on the fact that the Chief Judge of the State is bound to retire next year and that Justice Agwu Ukpai Kalu is allegedly playing the government’s card to be found worthy of replacing the Chief Judge.

Pundits also contend that Justice Kalu committed a blunder when he stated that the AC candidate’s name, Okoli Christian Nwachukwu must have been previously submitted to ABSIEC by his party which was why it appeared on the said form 9.On this note they argue that the crucial evidence was neither before him nor the trial tribunal since ABSIEC could not produce any other list of candidates by AC other than the one of 2/1/08.The argument further stressed that even the said form 9 was seriously impugned by counsel to Dr Okoli; and that the law required ABSIEC to come and give evidence but ABSIEC failed to comply, even despite repeated summons, ABSIEC refused to appear before the trial tribunal to support the document.