His contention was that since Dr Ikpeazu was not qualified to run for the primary election because of the alleged forgery of his tax papers, he who came joint fourth(with 5 votes) should be declared the governor of the state as he and only Dr Ikpeazu signed the result sheet. On why he should be preferred against Dr Ogah who came second in the primaries, he argued strenuously that Dr Ogah and other contestants did not sign the result sheet apart from Dr Ikpeazu who apparently is now no longer qualified to have run for the primaries. As I predicted in most of my write-ups before now, he had his case thrown out for lacking merit and substance. Forgery is a criminal offense which requires proof beyond reasonable doubt and since he was unable to prove forgery, he had his matter dismissed. However the judge acknowledged that the tax papers of Dr Ikpeazu contained some discrepancies. In the case of Dr Ogah at Federal High Court, Abuja he did not allege forgery or tax evasion, he commenced his action under originating summons after obtaining the documents and affidavits of Dr Ikpeazu in accordance with S31(4) of the Electoral Act 2010 and his allegation is that the gubernatorial candidate of PDP, Dr Ikpeazu gave false information(not falsification, not forgery) of his tax payments. This is in accordance with Section 31(5-6) of the Electoral Act, 2010 as Amended. Section 87(10) of the Electoral Act, 2010 as Amended gives a co- contestant right to approach the court, either federal high court or state high court for a remedy where he or she finds out that the information disclosed by his or her opponent contains false information. Now Section 31(6) of the Electoral Act provides that where the court is satisfied from the evidence presented that the candidate has given false information as provided in the Act, that candidate is liable to be disqualified. Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court Abuja examined the affidavit of Dr Ogah and the counter affidavits of Dr Ikpeazu and found out that indeed the tax papers of Dr Ikpeazu contained several lies on its face. In one instance he was alleged to have paid tax when he was not yet employed, in another instance he was alleged to have been taxed on amount that was not his annual salary, in another he allegedly paid more than he is supposed to pay. There were several other lies on the tax papers. In all these, the three years tax was paid with one booklet and all in one day! To compound his problems, the serial number of the tax receipts showed that the beginning of the serial number was used for the tax receipt of 2013 and that of 2011 was used for the last serial number, what false information is more than this? His tax documents did not indicate that he paid his tax as and when due in accordance with the Tax laws, the constitution of 1999 Section 24(f) and in accordance with the Electoral Guidelines of PDP 2014, Articles 13 and 14. As to whether tax is a constitutional issue, please see S177(c) of the 1999 constitution. S177(c) of the 1999 constitution as amended provides that a candidate must belong to a party and must be sponsored by that party. For a party to sponsor a candidate for the gubernatorial election, he or she must have fulfilled all the conditions stipulated in their guidelines including tax payment stipulated in article 14(a) which provides that if the candidate fails to so do, he or she shall be disqualified. Therefore tax is constitutional requirement since the party’s guidelines made provision for it. Dr Ikpeazu also swore an oath after disclosing his tax details that the information therein were from him and he alone should be held responsible for any false or misleading information that may lead to his being accepted as qualified when he is not. He finally stated under the same oath that if it is found out that the information disclosed about his tax payments were false, he should be disqualified. He signed it, and it was sworn to before a Commissioner of Oath in Aba High Court Registry, Abia State. Dr Ikpeazu’s legal team in their counter affidavit got the Board of Internal Revenue to bring in a letter in which they attempted to rationalize all these discrepancies, including admitting that these serial numbers were indeed a mistake! They tried to rationalize the discrepancies in payments by arguing that he was indeed outside the service for the period of January to June of that particular year but that he paid tax as a private person. If that is true, how come in his tax papers they put him under employment of Abia State from January to December ending of that year. These are false information and they were not corrected in the documents he submitted to INEC. The documents certified by INEC does not contain the after- thought explanation of the Board which wouldn’t have come from them if not for the discovery that Dr Ikpeazu’s documents contained false information. Since the Board is appointed by the government of Dr Ikpeazu would it not be foolhardy to expect a truthful information from such tainted persons now that Dr Ikpeazu is allegedly in trouble? By the way, when does a document become correct and accurate just because the maker say so? If on the face of the document it is a lie, it is a lie irrespective of what anyone may have to say especially from a known tainted maker, in this case the Board of Internal Revenue working in Umuahia under Dr Ikpeazu who cannot be free to disclose truthful information about his tax papers at least for now until the coast is clear as to who takes over the governor’s seat. In any case that information from the Board of Internal Revenue cannot and will not alter what is already submitted to INEC for which he was pronounced qualified to participate in the primary election. Justice Okon Abang yesterday refused to grant a stay against his judgement of 27th June, 2016 in a sister case initiated by a group of PDP stalwarts in Abia. The court ruled that since the Certificate of Return has already been given to Dr Uche Ogah, he does not see what to stay anymore in his judgement. On Dr Uche Ogah’s matter proper, the judge held that since Dr Ogah’s lead counsel Dr Iziyon SAN has consented that appeal has been entered by the Appellant, the Appeal Court which is now seised of the matter will determine applications if any and also determine the merits of the appeal proper. He refused to grant any stay to the appellant, in this case to Dr Okezie Ikpeazu. The matter as it it stands today is that Dr Uche Ogah is the governor of Abia, legally speaking, but he must be sworn in and take his oath of office, declare assets before he can start to act in that capacity as a governor. A very funny injunction was earlier on in the week obtained in Osisioma Ngwa High Court restraining the Chief Judge of Abia from swearing in Dr Ogah. I understand that that order has been extended to God knows when. That injunction is patently illegal, disorderly and unknown to law. Indeed can a court properly called restrain a public officer from carrying out his or her duty donated to him or her by law? I don’t know of any such precedent. The Chief judge of Abia therefore cannot be validly restrained from swearing in Dr Uche Ogah. If she fails, refuses and or neglects to carry out her constitutional duty, it will be a ground for disciplinary action against her by the National Judicial Commission in the near future. The Court of Appeal will also ultimately pronounce on this absurdity in the near future. Our judiciary which we have absolute confidence on, knows how to resolve knotty issues like this. I have discussed Section 141 and 143 of the Electoral Act 2010 as amended exhaustively in my previous write ups and I hope that my colleagues and non learned minds will appreciate the import of those sections on pre and post election issues. Both sections are applicable to issues arising from Tribunal decisions and do not concern pre elections matters. A reading of S133(2) of the Electoral Act, 2010 as amended gives us a clearer view of the definition of tribunal and court used in those two sections. The latest decision in Jev and Iyortom by the Supreme Court has finally settled the issue of whether a person who is the right candidate for the general election but whose name was not submitted by the Party to INEC can be sworn in even though he did not participate in the general election. That case said yes, he can, provided that he is the right candidate whose name should have been submitted to INEC instead of the wrong candidate who eventually won the election. Once again I call on the Attorney General of the country, the Chief Justice of Nigeria and the inspector General of Police to ensure the orderly and immediate swearing in of Dr UCHECHUKWU Sampson Ogah OON as the next governor of Abia State as nature abhors a vacuum which is actually the case now in Abia State. May the God of Abians guide the necessary Agencies aright to get it right this time around in terms of obedience to court orders and enthronement of rule of law and order in the polity. Long live Nigeria, Long live Abia State, our God’s Own State. Monday Onyekachi Ubani Legal Practitioner.]]>