APGA: One party, two presidential candidates

Forum 1 year ago

APGA: One party, two presidential candidates

DUE to leadership crisis and litigation, the All Progressives Grand Alliance, APGA, literally have two candidates- Professor Peter Umeadi and Chief Chekwas Okorie, in today’s presidential election.

Both candidates do not belong to the same camp. They are turbulently factionalized. While Umeadi has respite, Okorie is jostling for a return to status quo via the courts. In fact, in the eyes of Umeadi, Okorie is a blight and vice versa. For whatever its worth, both men have their respective claims and pursuits anchored in different authorities with some semblance of legitimacy.

The issues

While Umeadi’s respite stems from the fact that Chief Victor Oye has the recognition of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, as the national chairman of the party, Chekwas Okorie anchors his faith in the Supreme Court judgment that restored Chief Edozie Njoku as the national chairman of the party.

Incidentally, the Supreme Court in the judgment delivered on October 14, 2021, in Appeal No. SC/CV/687/2021 made a slip of the pen and put Chief Victor Oye instead of Njoku as the national chairman. Retired Justice Mary Odili led the panel. Thinking it to be a clerical error, Njoku on May 6, 2022 drew the attention of the Panel to the error.

Details of the Supreme Court Judgment, by Okorie

In a statement, Okorie, who had since unveiled his running mate, Hajiya Hadiza Mohammed, at a public function in Abuja, explained in details the apex court judgement and its import.

He said: “On 9th May 2022, the error was duly corrected, especially on page 13 of the judgment where the name of Chief Edozie Njoku, the authentic National Chairman of APGA was duly reflected. Surprisingly, Chief Victor Oye whose name was appropriately substituted with that of Edozie Njoku wrote a petition to the Inspector General of Police alleging that Chief Edozie Njoku forged the judgment of the Supreme Court. It was shocking that the Nigeria Police in its investigation deliberately refused to follow the proper procedure of verifying the authenticity of the judgment from Hon. Justice Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili (retired), who wrote and delivered the lead judgment and later made the correction or from the remaining four Justices who delivered their concurrent judgments as well.

The Police did not also interrogate the Senior Executive Bailiff of the Supreme Court, Mr. Paul Bawa Ajiake, who served the lead judgment, four concurrent judgments and an enrolled order of the court on all the parties in the Suit including the Independent National Electoral Commission and swore to an affidavit of service to validate his action. Instead, the Police relied on a surreptitious letter written to it by Hajo Sarki Bello, the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court, to charge Chief Edozie Njoku, the National Chairman of APGA and Chukwuemeka Nwoga, the National Youth Leader of APGA for forgery.”

Njoku’s arraignment by Police

The action of the Police led to the incarceration of Njoku and Nwoga at the Suleja Correctional Centre by an FCT high court in December, 2022. However, two days later, they were granted bail by the Court and the matter was later adjourned to 14th February, 2023.

“On resumption of hearing, the Police amended its charges against the two defendants to now include Mrs Ogunseye Adebiyi who was Secretary to Justice Mary Odili at the material time as an accused person and justice Odili as a witness.

Police amendment of charges

Counsel to the police authorities, CSP Ezekiel Rimansomte told Justice Mohammed Madugu that it was necessary to bring Adebiyi to court to explain her role in the forgery allegations.

He said: “We filed an application to amend the charge. One of the reasons why we decided to file for amendment is because we want to place a clear picture of the alleged offence which the accused person is standing trial for.

“We went through the file and saw that Mrs Ogunseye Adebiyi was the personal assistant to the Hon. Justice Mary Peter Odili retired from the Supreme Court.

“She confessed in writing that yes, because of the application the accused person made to Justice Odili, Justice asked her to alter the judgment of October 2021 to reflect the name of the first defendant. The first and second defendants have been duly charged. I don’t know why the third defendant is not in court. The court bailiff assured me that the third defendant will be in court this morning. I don’t know if she in court”.

Rimansomte later applied for a short adjournment and March 13, 2023 was booked for continued hearing.

Njoku’s clarion call

Addressing a press conference after the hearing, Njoku warned that the general elections were in jeopardy should they be excluded from participating in the exercise.

“We have just come out of the high court in Bwari where the national youth leader, and myself were charged for forging a Supreme Court judgment. It is a sort of a ploy to also delay matters. The secretary of the presiding judge who has retired was equally charged and a request was made for a bench warrant for her arrest. Luckily, the judge said it was ridiculous. And in that process, the persecutor, Ezekiel Rimansomte, also made it clear that I forged no document.

“So, I wonder why and how myself and the national youth leader will be charged when the police have made it abundantly clear that I forged no document.

“But it has become very, very clear to us that there is a ploy to delay the judgment of the Supreme Court and the prosecutor purposely did not serve the so-called secretary of the presiding judge. And he asked for a short adjournment. He did everything humanly to see that the date of return would be far away.

“I know that Nigerians are watching. The Supreme Court is watching and many people are asking questions now. The Supreme Court needs to exonerate itself from this hurricane blowing towards the elections of 2023 being cancelled because of unlawful exclusion. We keep shouting about it and all Nigerians know that there is a process coming by where there is going to be an unlawful exclusion.

“We are calling on the NBA, NJC, and the Supreme Court to please act as swiftly as possible. It has been made clear by the CJN that Oye is not the national chairman of APGA.

“It’s been made clear that those presiding over the affairs of APGA which INEC is recognizing were not present in Owerri which means they are not the executives to preside over any primary election that will be accepted by INEC.”

Implications

To many keen political observers, there is palpable tension around APGA and its sprawling beyond the party to the threshold of the INEC ecosystem. Amid this, a few questions agitate the minds. What is the implication of the High Court slating March 13 for hearing of the case, weeks after the February 25 presidential poll and two days after March 11 governorship state assembly elections? Does APGA have two presidential candidates- Okorie and Umeadi? What is the implication for APGA? With the insight from Njoku that Oye lacks the locus to nominate candidates through the primaries and the warning against possible unlawful exclusion, what then happens to the general elections in the event that INEC eventually ignores Njoku? Again, what if Oye and the police were right in prosecuting Njoku and company? Well, only the courts could produce answers to these questions.