Ade Adesomoju, Abuja
A Federal High Court in Abuja will today
(Friday) hear and rule on the application filed by the embattled
Governor of Abia State, Okezie Ikpeazu, seeking a stay of execution of
the judgment of the court which removed him from office on June 27.
The hearing, our correspondent learnt, will take place before Justice Okon Abang by 11am today.
Already a large detachment of regular
and riot policemen has surrounded the court premises to maintain a
peaceful atmosphere during the proceeding.
It was learnt that the judge decided to
hear and rule on Ikpeazu’s application today because it is the last
official working day before the court begins its annual vacation next
Monday.
The judge had earlier on July 4, fixed
Thursday (yesterday) for the hearing of the application but the court
could not sit due to the extension of the eid-el-fitri holiday announced
by the Federal Government on Tuesday.
It was learnt this morning that the
judge directed its registrars to contact lawyers to the parties in the
suit to appear in court for the hearing by 11am today.
Justice Abang had in his judgment
delivered on June 27, sacked Ikpeazu for allegedly disclosing false
information in relation to his tax clearance details to the Independent
National Electoral Commission in his form nominating him as the
candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party for the last year’s
governorship election in the state.
The judge, also in the said judgment,
ordered the governor’s rival who was the first runner-up in the primary
that produced Ikpeazu as the candidate of the PDP, Mr. Uche Ogah, to
takeover.
The judge held that Ikpeazu was not
qualified to be PDP’s candidate having disclosed false information to
INEC in violation of his party’s election guidelines and the Electoral
Act and thereby ordered that Ogah be sworn in as governor in Ikpeazu’s
stead.
A few hours after INEC presented the
Certificate of Return to Ogah on Thursday in Abuja, an Abia State High
Court in Osisioma issued an order, stopping the state Chief Judge or any
other judge from swearing-in Ogah, the governor-elect.
Shortly after Ikpeazu’s motion for stay
of execution was mentioned earlier on Monday, his lawyer, Chief Wole
Olanipekun (SAN) asked for an adjournment of the case till Thursday to
enable his team to complete the filing of its reaction to Ogah’s
counter-affidavit filed in opposition to the motion.
But, Ogah’s lawyer, Dr. Alex Izinyon
(SAN), urged the court to shun the request for an adjournment, set aside
the order of the Abia State High Court in Osisioma restraining the
Chief Judge of the state from swearing in Ogah as governor, and
reiterate the judgment of the court.
Izinyon argued that going ahead to
obtain such an order from the Abia High Court without bringing the order
to the attention to Justice Abang on Monday, Ikpeazu had resorted to
self-help.
Izinyon asked the court to set aside the
Abia State High Court’s order and reiterate the judgment since
Ikpeazu’s motion for stay of execution had allegedly achieved
essentially what the motion intended to achieve.
In his counter-submission, Olanipekun
urged the court to quash the enrolled order which it issued on the
strength of the judgment, arguing that it ought not to have been issued
without the parties being given a time lag to exhaust their rights of
appeal.
But in his ruling, Justice Abang refused
to set aside the enrolled court order, saying section 19 of the Sheriff
and Civil Processes Act, relied on by Olanipekun did not define
processes to include the enrolled court order.
Describing Olanipekun’s application as
for the voiding of the court’s enrolled order as lacking in merit,
Justice Abang said the court had the power to enroll its order at any
time after judgment had been delivered.
But the judge said in his ruling on
Monday, that he would after the hearing of the application for stay of
execution, determine whether he could set aside the order made by the
Abia State High Court.
He also said he would determine whether
he could void the certificate of return issued to Ogah and whether the
provisions of section 143(1) of the Electoral Act applied to the
judgment of his court in a pre-election case.
Source: Punch
Post a Comment