The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has registered the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) as one of the political party in the country.
The registration of UPN the number of parties to 26.
INEC’s Director of Education, Oluwale Uzzi announced UPN’s registration on Friday.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said that Temporary Voter Cards (PVCs) will not be used for the upcoming governorship elections as well as the 2015 general elections.
The commission also announced that it has issued over one million PVCs to registered voters in Ekiti and Osun, ahead of the coming governorship elections.
Besides, INEC said it registered 227, 964 new voters in the just concluded Continous Voters Registration in Ekiti and Osun states.
In all, 347, 741 voter cards were issued in Ekiti; 697,574 were issued in Osun.
According to a statement issued by Mr. Kayode Idowu, Chief Press Secretary to INEC Chairman, INEC stated that, “For the avoidance of doubt, Temporary Voter Cards that were issued in 2011 will not be used for the upcoming governorship elections as well as the 2015 general election.”
For Ekiti and Osun, Idowu said all unclaimed cards were taken to local government offices of INEC for onward issuance ahead of the upcoming elections.
Collections can only be made by legitimate holders as INEC rules forbid collection by proxy.
Hence those who were not able to collect theirs during the period are advised to go to their local government office of the Commission for collection.
For other states where distribution of PVCs and Continuous Voter Registration are upcoming, Idowu said: “previously registered persons need to use the display of the Register of Voters that will precede CVR to double-check their names on the register. This is important because, should they find their names missing on the register, they could use the opportunity of the CVR to get their data re-captured.”
He said: “Continuous Voter Registration is not for persons who lost their Temporary Voter Cards, or who wish to vote in areas other than where they got registered in 2011. Should such persons re-register during CVR, the act will amount to double or multiple registration, which is a punishable electoral offence. What the law provides for is that persons who lost their voter card should write the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) of their state of domicile for replacement; while voters willing to relocate should write the REC, through the Electoral Officer (EO) of the local government where they are presently domicile, to request the transfer of their data.”
On the coming Ekiti and Osun governorship elections, he said: “INEC is more convinced than ever that preparations being made for the conduct of free, fair and credible governorship elections in Ekiti and Osun states as well as the 2015 general election are on course. The Commission nevertheless took strong notice of the challenges encountered during the recent exercises, and it has factored the lessons learnt into ongoing processes and preparations.”
The Commission, Idowu added, “also noted with regret, however, the persisting tendency towards impunity by some partisans and their supporters in the electoral process”. “Unless politicians abide at all times by relevant rules and codes of ethics, and also persuade their supporters to do likewise, the Nigerian electoral process would be hindered from attaining international best standards that INEC is working hard to take it.”
On the issued PVC, For Ekiti, the statement stated that “ a total of 657, 256 cards were printed by INEC for PVC distribution in the state. By 9th March when the distribution ended, 347, 741 cards (representing 52.93%) were collected by verified holders. INEC’s rules forbid collection by proxy, in order to prevent abuses that could frustrate the whole intention to check electoral malpractices for which the cards are being produced in the first place. Of the number of cards collected by holders during that exercise, 164, 839 (46. 9%) were for males while 182, 902 (53.1%) were for females.
“The uncollected cards were at the end of the exercise taken to respective local government office of the Commission for onward collection by verified holders. More recent records show that a total of 371, 925 PVCs, representing 56.50% of the total volume produced for the state, had been collected as at the 11th of April, 2014. Of this figure, 177, 305 cards (47.14%) were for males and 194, 620 (52.86%) for females. This left a balance of 285, 331 cards as at that date.
“For the CVR, the Commission recorded 78, 875 new registrants in Ekiti State – that is, pending the removal of cases of multiple registration and the application of INEC’s business rules for printing Permanent Voter Cards. This figure was made up of 34, 160 (45.6%) males and 40, 715 (54.4%) females.”
For Osun, Idowu said, “there were 1, 256, 569 PVCs produced for registered voters in Osun State ahead of the distribution exercise. By the end of the exercise on 9th March, 697, 574 cards (55.5%) were collected by verified holders, comprising 327, 388 (46.9%) males and 370, 186 (53.1%) females.
“ The unclaimed cards were at the end of the exercise taken to respective local government office of INEC in the state for onward collection by holders. More recent records show that a total of 736, 570 cards, representing 59.6% of the total volume produced for the state, had been collected by verified holders as at 23rd April, 2014. This left a balance of 519, 999 cards as at that date.
“For the Continuous Voter Registration, 149,089 new registrants were recorded in Osun – pending removal of multiple registrations and the application of INEC’s business rules for printing Permanent Voter Cards. This figure was made up of 70, 024 (47%) males and 79, 065 (53%) females.”
… For Osun, Ekiti guber elections too
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has said the Temporary Voter Cards will not be used for the upcoming governorship elections as well as the 2015 general election.
The commission also announced that it has issued over one million Permanent Voter Cards to registered voters in Ekiti and Osun ahead of the upcoming governorship elections in the states.
Besides, INEC said it has also registered 227, 964 new voters in the just concluded Continous Voters’ Registration in Ekiti and Osu.
According to the breakdown, 347, 741 PVC were issued in Ekiti while 697,574 were allocated in Osun.
A statement issued by Mr. Kayode Idowu, Chief Press Secretary to INEC Chairman, stated that, “For avoidance of doubt, Temporary Voter Cards that were issued in 2011 will not be used for the upcoming governorship elections as well as the 2015 general election.”
For Ekiti and Osun, Idowu said all unclaimed cards were taken to local government offices of INEC for onward issuance ahead of the upcoming elections.
He explained that collections can only be made by legitimate holders as INEC rules forbid collection by proxy.
A group, the Network on Police Reform in Nigeria (NOPRIN) yesterday praised the Governing Council of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) for its recommendation that some individuals be prosecuted by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) for alleged violation of electoral laws
It urged the AGF to take up the challenge and ensure that those indicted are actually prosecuted to serve as deterrent for others.
The NHRC had in a recommendation to the AGF, reported by the media yesterday, suggested the prosecution of some 41 people including former Edo State Governor, Prof Oserhiemen Osunbor and an Electoral Commissioner with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mrs Ayoka Adebayo be prosecuted for election related offences.
NOPRIN, in a statement yesterday, said it “believes that the only way to check impunity for crime and human rights abuse is to ensure that those indicted are tried under relevant laws and borough to account.
“This will create deterrence and send a strong message to perpetrators that crime and abuse will no more be tolerated and those who commit them will no longer be protected by impunity.
The group, in the statement by its National Coordinator, Okechukwu Nwanguma, argued that electoral offences by those, who ought to prevent them particularly, electoral officials and law enforcement agents deny Nigerians their right to participate in governance.
“Reform of our electoral system will not work unless those who subvert electoral laws are punished as deterrence.
“This is coming at a most auspicious time when elections are around the corner. Acting on the NHRC’s recommendations is necessary to send a clear warning to the indicted and other intending electoral offenders that the days of impunity are over.
“NOPRIN therefore, calls on the AGF to prioritise the sanctity and integrity of our electoral system by acting promptly and courageously on the recommendations of the NHRC.
“The AGF should ensure the immediate arraignment and prompt trial of all those indicted in the overall interest of Nigerians,” it said.
•We need assurance that INEC will conduct credible poll
Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi has taken exception to Vice-President Namadi Sambo’s description of the state as a war front, saying that the remark is unbecoming of the number two citizen.
He said the pronouncement, which was reminiscent of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s “do-or-die” slogan, may directly or indirectly provoke insecurity, ahead of the June 21 governorship poll.
Describing the statement as worrisome and unfortunate, the governor said the state needed a cogent assurance by the Independent Natio0nal Electoral Commission (INEC) that it would conduct a credible poll.
Fayemi spoke with reporters in Ado-Ekiti, the state capital, at the weekend on the preparations for the election and implications of the Vice-President’s statement.
He said: “The Vice-President is someone I relate with very well. He and I are on the board of the Nigeria Integrated Power Project (NIPP). He chairs the NIPP and I represent the Southwest in the power project in the country. Through that, we meet fairly regularly.
“ The Vice-President has every right to push for his party in any election. That is his legitimate right. But, what the media reported him to have purportedly said was quite unfortunate because we are not at war in Ekiti. We have been here three and a half years and Ekiti is one of the most peaceful states in this country today. So, for somebody who occupies one of the highest offices in the land as our Vice President, to reduce the importance of his office and promote insecurity, either directly or by subterfuge, and in this case it is pretty much directly and it wasn’t used figuratively, he used it in a matter of fact that he was going to a war front.
“It is very reminiscent of former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s do-or-die statement, which is really unbecoming of the person who occupies the number two office in the land. I still would like to take the Vice-President on himself. I hope he would deny saying that and it would be some form of reassurance. I think it is the underlying text that should worry us.”
Fayemi said the statement should be taken seriously by lovers of democracy and sanctity of the ballot box, in view of the unfolding alleged unruly behaviour of prominent Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftains in the Southwest.
He added: “ All of us also saw what happened at Ilaje-Ese Odo and the role played by a minister of government, who does not even come from the state and has no responsibility in the state. The Resident Electoral Commissioner came out openly and said ‘let them challenge what I’m telling you in your report. This was what this person did.’
“The INEC ought to be sending a very strong signal to Mr. President himself that we would not take kindly to this kind of interference by the minister of state in an election that we want as a precursor for the 2015 presidential election”.
The governor alleged that certain unscrupulous elements are sewing fake uniforms for fake soldiers and policemen, ahead of the election.
Fayemi said: “Ihe Ekiti election is even far more important than the 2015 election because, if confidence is lost in INEC’s preparation and eventual implementation of the Ekiti election, that will rub off terribly on the 2015 election. I mean the INEC is already on the tenterhook. We know what happened in Anambra.
“I think INEC together with Inter Agency Committee and Security that would be involved in the election to give people a lot of reassurance,, following the Vice President’s statement. I think it is very unfortunate. I think it is unbecoming of his office.
“I think the Vice-President really ought to withdraw the statement and reassure Nigerians that the agenda for Ekiti election is not going to be determined in Aso Rock but by Ekiti people because it is a referendum on the performance of the current government in Ekiti. It is not a national election. It should not be reduced to a national election. So, that would be my reaction to the unfortunate remark of the Vice President”.
Fayemi urged political leaders to learn from the lessons of history to avoid a repeat of the past tragedy that shook the nation to its foundation. He warned against bungling Ekiti poll as the INEC did in Anambra State, stressing out that the Ekiti will definitely react differently.
He added: “This is Ekiti and people who are familiar with the history here would know that this is not a very good place to rig election. You can afford to manipulate elections in Anambra because Anambra has a lot of rich people who are even richer than the governor.
“My friend, Peter Obi, used to say to me when he was still the governor that there were so many people with mobile police and security that they throw him off the street, even when he was still governor. So, election is not what Anambra people see as a big deal; yes, they are interested but it is not for them any big deal. In Ekiti, you will discover that everybody is interested in what happens because we have 2.5million governors in this state.
“Every single indigene believes he has what it takes; that he understands government and that he knows how to govern. So, you can’t say such a person does not have an opinion. And when you try to manipulate elections in a place like Ekiti, the result has not been palatable. Whether you refer to 1964/65; Ekiti was even more of a resistance zone than Ikenne and, of course, when you talk of 1983, we all can remember what happened here. Even though our son was the person that perpetrated the crisis, they still did not spare him and his supporters.”
THE Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and presidency officials call them unity rallies. In reality, however, they are full-blown political campaigns that stop just short of enunciating campaign promises. The rallies are addressed by President Goodluck Jonathan, and the rally train has moved from one city to another purporting to unite squabbling PDP groups, and presenting grassroots mobilisers to party supporters and potential voters. During the rallies, the mobilisers themselves fall over one another to embrace and proclaim the president’s undeclared but no less ambiguous intention to contest the 2015 presidential poll. It would require very brave INEC officials to curb the president’s undisciplined approach to the polls. Either such brave officials no longer exist or, perhaps, the men who occupy the highest office in the land, as exemplified by President Jonathan himself, have become less fastidious about electoral rules and indeed all other laws.
Nobody thinks the president will not contest. Indeed, no one thinks any person of substance will attempt to contest against President Jonathan for the party’s ticket. More crucially, no one expects that the PDP would present anyone but President Jonathan as its candidate next year. Previously, there was some small talk about whether President Jonathan was qualified to seek re-election, or whether he did not in fact sign a one-term deal with his backers, especially his reluctant northern backers. Now, everyone knows that that small talk was pure balderdash, and the supposed one-term deal absolute hogwash. No sane politician will sign a one-term deal nor, if he did, agree to step down after his first term. The jobholders around him would kick him in the groin if he pretended to be honourable enough to keep his word, and his ethnic group would murder him if he as much as exhibited the slightest reluctance to seek re-election.
If indeed President Jonathan signed or promised a one-term deal, he had absolutely no intention of honouring it even from the outset. The gusto with which he is seeking re-election and the zeal with which he breaches electoral and moral laws unchecked are infallible proofs he has nothing but contempt for one-term deals so-called. Shortly after last week’s Nyanya blast in Abuja in which about 75 people died, the president attended another unity rally in Kano where he swore at Governor Rabiu Kwankwaso of Kano State, inveighed against the opposition, and promised what he described as the recapture of Kano from the opposition. Nothing was done about succouring victims of the blast and their families, and no administrative steps were taken to ensure the government’s promises to the Nyanya injured were redeemed.
The president had earlier attended another rally in Enugu where he addressed the entire Southeast zone and hurled boyish innuendoes at opposition leaders. Said he: “Somebody will come and say they are progressives and you begin to ask how progressive are they, where you cannot win a councillorship or chairmanship election unless your brother is the dictator, where you are a maximum dictator and you are progressives; progressive to where? Progressives to hell or to where?” Quite apart from vulgarising political ideologies in his idiosyncratic syntax, the president also made some stridently exaggerated, if not downrightly jejune, claims about the bigness and sanctity of his party. But above all he talked of how his party won the Southeast in 2011 and how it intends to win it again in 2015. The zone, through its well-known and fawning spokesmen, cheered him on and assured him of their loyalty and support.
Nothing will stop the president’s campaign rallies: not the bombs of terrorists, nor the abduction of scores of schoolgirls from school dormitories, nor any disaster of truly horrendous proportions, nor even the barking but toothless electoral commission that vows to assert its independence. President Jonathan has restarted his visit to traditional rulers, and will embark on anything his aides and political strategists suggest, including talking sophomoric philosophy, religion and ethnicity. But let him and his defenders not tell us he is not campaigning. For when the real campaigns start, the president is unlikely to do better than he is unlawfully doing now, jumping the starter’s gun, and revelling in impunity and a one-sided race.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has not suspended the plan for constituency delineation, contrary to claims a national daily yesterday, the commission has said.
Also, INEC Chairman, Prof Attahiru Jega, has “never blamed the National Assembly for not passing an enabling law for the exercise”, the commission said yesterday.
“No such law is required,” INEC said last night in a statement in Abuja by Mr Kayode Idowu, the Chief Press Secretary to INEC Chairman.
The statement said: “The constituency delineation programme by INEC is well underway, and this is best evidenced by the inauguration of the Nation Committee on Constituency Delimitation in Abuja at the instance of the commission on Monday, March 31, 2014. This committee, besides INEC, involves the chief executives of relevant organisations, such as the National Boundaries Commission (NBC), the National Space Research Development Agency (NASRDA), the Surveyor-General of the Federation, and the National Population Commission (NPoPC), among others.
“INEC also never ‘highlighted the gerrymandering role of the National Assembly in the matter’, as the newspaper claimed, because no such role is being played. What the Commission has always said is that whatever constituency arrangement it comes up with will have to be validated by the National Assembly, as required by the 1999 Constitution (as amended), before it could become effective.
“This is to categorically state that the editorial in question does not reflect the facts of the ongoing delineation exercise.”
I recently stumbled on a story in one of the national dailies. It was captioned “Journalist wins contract breach case against INEC”. The story reads: “For breaching the payment of N7.5 million to Godson & Godman Ventures Limited, a Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Apo has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to pay the firm the sum and a 10 per cent interest, running from the day of the judgment until the debt is liquidated. Justice U.P. Kekemeke gave the order in the case brought against INEC by Ken Ugbechie, a former editor of Daily Times, for the media consultancy and publishing firm. INEC was not represented in court.
“Ugbechie had dragged INEC before an Abuja High Court over the agency’s alleged refusal to pay him for contract executed… In his statement of claim, Ugbechie said his company was, on January 19, 2010, awarded contract to inspire and generate expository articles, commentaries, news analysis, editorial and comments, among others, to sufficiently enlighten the electorate on all that the commission was doing to ensure a hitch-free 2011 general elections. He averred in an affidavit in support of the suit that the said contract was thoroughly verified by INEC officers after completion. According to him, despite repeated demands, the defendant has refused to pay the said N7.5 million due his company since the execution of the contract.
“He added that after the receipt of the plaintiff’s solicitors’ demand letter, the defendant referred the matter to its Alternative Dispute Resolution, ADR, Department, adding that his lawyer also had a meeting with the director of ADR, wherein it was decided that the matter be referred to the Public Affairs Department for confirmation. According to him, the department had since confirmed that the contract was creditably executed by the plaintiff, but despite this, the defendant would not pay the said contract sum”.
This is a landmark judgement delivered against a recalcitrant federal agency which had elected to trample on the rights of an individual who had no other option than to approach the court for protection. Many journalists have, in the past, fallen victims to this type of crooked treatment in the hands of highly placed individuals and government officials who take delight in “using and dumping” these professionals at their whims and caprices.
Now, let us analyse this judgement. The “undefended list procedure” is a procedure within the Abuja legal jurisdiction and contained in the Abuja High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules. It is similar to the summary judgment procedure in the rules of the Lagos High court. The procedure is adopted in both jurisdictions to provide an easier and faster avenue to determine cases which are straightforward and not likely to go to trial as the defendant, in most cases, is expected to admit the claims brought against him.
Basically, the plaintiff, that is, the party instituting the suit, believes that the defendant has no defence – hence the resort to this time-saving procedure. The plaintiff will state this in his affidavit in support and attach all relevant documents, which must naturally point unmistakably to the defendant’s liability for the claims against him. The matter should be so straightforward that an independent observer examining the documents can reach the conclusion that there is an obligation left to be performed by the defendant.
The procedure is usually employed for cases of debt arising from simple contracts and monetary claims generally. However, the monetary claim must be liquidated or ascertainable by simple means, but in practice, plaintiffs will include the total figure for which they claim so as to save the court from making any arduous calculations. The snag here is that the suit cannot be initiated until the judge has read through the processes and is satisfied that it merits inclusion in the “undefended list”. Otherwise, it is sent to the general cause list, which is naturally for contentious matters where issues will be joined. In this case, Ogbechie must have had all his documents intact, which on the surface shows that there is some money to be paid and the judge must have been satisfied that it is a straight-forward debt recovery case and that the documents were sufficient to support his claim.
According to the story, INEC did not make any appearance at the suit, even after it was served with notice of the suit. This is not unusual in this kind of cases. Ordinarily, the plaintiff must serve the defendant with the processes after the judge must have given leave to include it in the undefended list. The defendant in turn is expected to file his notice of intention to defend, together with an affidavit disclosing a defence within five days to the date on which the case is set for hearing. The judge will consider the affidavit and if it discloses a valid defence, the defendant will be granted leave to defend the suit and the case will be transferred to the general cause list.
If the judge cannot find a valid defence in the filed affidavit, or the defendant fails to file anything before the date for hearing, the judge’s only duty is to grant judgment against the defendant on the said date, and no more. That is the situation in this case as INEC did not make any appearance at all; talk less of filing an affidavit disclosing a defence. The law is clear on this point. The judgment given will be valid and can be enforced just as any other judgment.
It is not uncommon for the court to make an order for post-judgment interest when it gives a monetary judgment. This is done to dissuade judgment debtors from sitting pretty and dragging their feet over payment of a sum granted against them. However, for the order to be made, the plaintiff or judgment creditor must have included it in its reliefs. The court does not award benefits that are not sought. It was a good thing that the lawyers to Ogbechie included this in their reliefs and the interest continues to read for as long as INEC refuses or fails to pay the sum.
ADR is a substitute to litigation which should be explored by disputing parties more regularly. It will help to clear the courts of many cases, especially frivolous suits that only require patience and understanding between the parties to resolve. People include this clause in their agreements but still run to the law courts at the first sign of trouble. Others do not honour the clause, or if other forms of ADR are adopted, they do not abide by the resolutions or decisions reached, leading them, eventually, to litigation.
The case here is a classic example of a government agency which, according to the story, even has a dedicated ADR Department. Unfortunately, the department has little effect on the operations or the enforceability of any resolutions reached. The courts still had to be visited in this straight-forward matter of “A” provides certain services at agreed rate that “B” refuses to pay. Where government agencies rubbish the ADR process, how will private individuals be encouraged to adopt it? The ADR that is systematically being introduced by the courts themselves has not been received as well as expected by the same populace that decries the snail’s pace of justice.
Government agencies should be at the forefront of the efforts to increase the acceptability of ADR procedures by their responsible adoption of it. As INEC has shown, that is not the case. One need not go into the list of cases against government agencies in courts. It will not be surprising if it is found that such cases constitute 30 percent of the case load in most jurisdictions. Individual citizens can be unruly and uncivil, but governments in Nigeria and their agencies, including the federal government, are at the forefront of uncivilised practices that include reckless disregard of the law and its machinery through incessant breach of contracts and trampling on the rights of private citizens. Certainly, there are lessons to be learnt from this judgement!
The All Progressives Congress (APC) in Osun State has accused the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) of blackmailing the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC), Mr. Rufus Akeju.
APC described the PDP’s statement that it would not consider the result of the August 9 governorship election credible unless Akeju is replaced as “blackmail”.
In a statement by its Publicity Director, Kunle Oyatomi, APC said: “This stance is an attempt by the PDP to corrupt the electoral process by arm-twisting the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to replace a man the PDP has found impossible to manipulate with one that will do its bidding during the poll.”
The party alleged that the PDP stalled the suit to determine the truth or otherwise of its allegation against the REC.
APC said: “The truth is that during the general elections in April, 2011, the PDP approached the Federal High Court, sitting in Osogbo, by way of originating summons, seeking the determination of five issues, all relating to the competence/legality or otherwise of the REC (Akeju) to conduct the April 2011 general elections in Osun State.
“An order preventing the REC from conducting the elections was granted on March 28, 2011, and INEC appealed against it at the Court of Appeal, Akure.
“It is important to emphasise again that the interlocutory orders granted by the Federal High Court, Osogbo, has been properly appealed against and thence puts enforcement and further proceedings in the case in abeyance pending the outcome of the appeal.
“Curiously, it was the counsel to the Plaintiff/now Respondent (PDP), against all known practices in law, that approached the lower court for stay of proceedings. The practice, which the court described as ‘curious and bizarre’, albeit, was granted and the proceedings stayed.
“Besides, INEC Chairman Professor Attahiru Jega has challenged the PDP to produce proof that Akeju is compromised. Until the PDP does so, Akerju remains innocent.
“So for the PDP to keep repeating a false allegation against an innocent person is pure blackmail and an attempt to corrupt and manipulate the process to rig itself to power. This nonsense must stop.”
Anambra State Elections Petitions Tribunal in Awka, yesterday was told that the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) nominated Governor Willie Obiano and not Dr Chike Obidigbo for the November 16 election.
Chief Victor Umeh, factional national chairman of the party testified yesterday that Obiano’s name was submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) with that of his deputy, Dr Nkem Okeke.
He said he signed the forms as chairman of the party, with Alhaji Abdulahi Shinkafi as national secretary.
Umeh was being cross examined by counsel to Obidigbo, Maduabuchi Oba in the case by Obidigbo challenging the nomination of Obiano by the party.
He told the tribunal that the primary conducted by APGA was monitored by INEC, adding that any other leadership not recognised by INEC, which produced a candidate, was not valid.
“I was the validly elected national chairman of APGA and recognised by INEC at the time the nomination of the party’s candidate took place.”
“I was not a party in the suit that said Chief Maxi Okwu was validly elected chairman of APGA. Prior to that judgment, there was a judgment of the Appeal Court staying execution in the judgment of the Enugu High Court, which removed me and my executive as officers of APGA.”
“We filed a stay of execution and on April 8, 2013, the Court of Appeal at Enugu granted a stay of execution and that was the day Maxi Okwu was purported to have emerged as the national chairman and his colleagues.”
Umeh has threatened to take Justice Abdul Kafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja, before the National judicial council (NJC).
He said yesterday that judicial impertinence was the problem in Nigeria, adding that his members would petition Kafarati to NJC.
The factional national chairman said his stay of execution was neither dismissed nor thrown out as being speculated, adding that what happened was that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear it.