Court stops APC from conducting congresses in Rivers
A State High Court in Port Harcourt, Rivers State has barred the National Working Committee of the All Progressives Congress (APC) from conducting ward and local government congresses.
The lawsuit, filed by Peter Ohochukwu and Haija Ndidi-Chukwuma on behalf of themselves and all elected executive members of the APC in the state, named the APC, the Inspector General of Police, IGP, the Nigeria Police, and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, as defendants.
Justice Godwin O. Ollor, in his ruling on the ex parte motion on Thursday, also restrained the defendants, their representatives, officers, or agents from conducting, supervising, holding, monitoring, or otherwise organizing any elections for the Rivers State executive committee.
Justice Ollor emphasized that his ruling was based on the merits of the application and the oral arguments presented by the plaintiffs’ counsel, Collins Dike.
The court also barred the national leadership of the APC from attempting to suspend the state executives led by Emeka Beke.
The judge further restrained the APC’s national chairman, secretary and the party itself from interfering with the activities of the elected APC executives in the state, led by Beke, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice for an interlocutory injunction.
DAILY POST reports that Justice Ollor adjourned the case to September 9, 2024, for the hearing of the motion on notice.
Speaking to journalists outside the courtroom, counsel for the claimants, Collins Dike said, “After the very erudite judgement of My Lord Honorable S. H. Aprioku, the national office wrote a letter in which they disclosed their plans to hold an elective congress specifically for Rivers State.
“Invariably what they intended to achieve with that was to ensure the judgement of Honorable justice Aprioku was rendered a nullity.
“The judgement of Honorable justice Aprioku was very clear, that the tenure of office of the elected executives of the party was still subsisting, was still valid, until the four years term the constitution gave them expired.
“But curiously, these people, in spite of the fact that there’s no vacancy in the various offices that make up the executive committee, went behind and started planning how to hold an elective congress, in-spite of the fact that they are fully aware of that judgement, they have been served with that judgment.
“So, it is for that reason that we said no. They have created a new cause of action by their attempt to proceed with plans to hold an elective congress. And if we do not do anything, they will foist a fait accompli on the court with respect to the judgement of Honorable Justice S. H. Aprioku by purporting to hold that elective congress.
“And it is for that reason that we have gone on to say that no, what they want to do is contrary to the law.
“And we are happy that the court was convinced with the facts we presented, convinced with the argument we presented. And the court has in very clear terms, restrained them from proceeding in the interim pending when the court will be hearing all the parties.”
