Reps Deputy Speaker, Kalu’s  mandate threatened

*As Tribunal reserves judgement in LP, AA petitions seeking his disqualification

From Boniface Okoro, Umuahia

The National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Umuahia, Abia State capital, on Monday, August 14, 2023, reserved judgement in petitions seeking the nullification of the electoral victory of the Deputy Speaker of House of Representatives in the February 25, 2023 Presidential and National Assembly elections, RT. Hon. Benjamin Kalu, for allegedly bearing multiple identities.

The Labour Party (LP), the Action Alliance (AA) and their candidates in the said National Assembly poll dragged Kalu to the Tribunal asking the panel to sack the Deputy Speaker from the Green Chamber of the National Assembly. 

The Labour Party Candidate for Bende Federal Constituency, Chief Iheanyi Frank Chinasa, is contending that Kalu, who was the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, was bearing nine names without a proper change of name. He therefore asked the Tribunal to nullify his election for allegedly altering his name illegally and at will.

Chinasa, through his Lead Counsel, Yunus Ustaz Usman (SAN), during the adoption of his final written addresses by the parties on Monday, cited the discrepancy in various names found in the documents Kalu submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), insisting that the changes in the names were without a valid change of name. The Petitioner submitted that this should be the basis for which the tribunal should disqualify Kalu’s candidacy as he is deemed not to have been qualified to stand for the election.

LP and its candidate told the three-man panel headed by Justice Samson P. Gang, that the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives was not qualified to have contested the poll because he “does not possess a School Certificate at all in his name.” 

According to the petitioners, the representative of Bende Federal Constituency “used different names contained in different educational School Certificates other than the name he now answers which is: Kalu Benjamin Okezie.” 

Some of the cited names used by Hon. Kalu include Umunna Okezie in First School Leaving Certificate 1983; Osisiogu Benjamin Okezie in FSLC and testimonial issued in 1988 as well as in WASC 1991, Law degree certificate. In his NYSC discharge certificate 2011, Kalu Benjamin Okezie appeared while in Call to Bar certificate 2006, Benjamin Okezie Osisiogu was used.

In their “highly documented” petition, LP and its candidate displayed nine certificates with different names which Kalu used at will to suit any situation he found himself and wondered why the First Respondent (Kalu) failed to tender the original certificates bearing the various names he claimed; saying the he rather relied only on photocopies in all the documents submitted to the tribunal..

Counsel to the Petitioner, Yunusa Ustaz  Usman (SAN), asked the Tribunal to determine  “whether there are irreconcilable contradictions, disparities, discrepancies and inconsistencies in the names” on Kalu’s certificates.

Usman further argued that the onus solely lies on the First Respondent to prove that the certificates submitted to INEC were genuine, owing to the different names on them.

“The respondent submitted nine certificates with nine different names and we are saying that nobody can claim that those certificates belong to him. 

He further argued that “it is fraudulent for one person to allegedly bear several names with various/plethora of affidavits and documents of changes of names that he uses chamelonically to suit his changing environment.” 

The learned silk asserted that Kalu failed to tender any document aside from affidavits, to show that the certificates bearing different names belonged to him. 

“No affidavit nor regularisation can cure the defects of the certificates unless the issuing authorities changes the names on the certificate.”

“So we are praying the Court to disqualify him based on the fact that none of the nine certificates can be said to belong to him. It’s for the court to decide. We can’t say more than that,” Usman said.

Counsel to the respondents fought back in defence of the lawmaker and his mandate, urging the Tribunal to dismiss the petitions for lacking in merit.

Kalu’s counsel, Kelvin Nwufo, argued that the contention that the Deputy Speaker presented certificates with inconsistent names did not hold water since they all belong to him and he has regularised the names.

He argued that his client followed the due process of the law in doing his change of name, adding that the inconsistencies in Kalu’s names were “validly harmonised” through Deed of Proof and official gazette of the Federal Government where the lawmaker’s change of name was recorded.

He said: “The judgement the petitioners were citing has a different principle of law. The Petitioners are raising issues that are concerned in a judgement in the case of the Peoples Democratic Party versus Deji, they are saying that the Supreme Court said in view of that judgement, Benjamin Kalu is not qualified to contest the election. But in that case, the Supreme Court said a change of name is properly done by the virtue of a Deed of Proof and publishing same in the official gazette of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and that was what our client did.”

Responding to the allegation that Kalu did not submit any original certificate, Nwufo said that his client submitted his First School Leaving Certificate, University Degree Certificate and Law School Certificate to INEC.

“Our prayer to the Court in summary is the dismissal of the petition on the ground that our client is qualified and he did what the law requested of him to do in the change of his name. 

“Besides, the issue of change of name has been judicially determined by a High Court judgement and there was no appeal on it, so bringing it now before the tribunal is of no effect,” Nwufo submitted.

In his submission, counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC), Virgilus Nwankwo, contended that the petitioners’ allegation that Kalu used different names to suit different situations did not imply fraud.

He said that the petitioners have failed to prove that the first Respondent “is not the owner of the certificates with different names or that the names do not belong to him.”

Citing a Supreme Court judgement: Oyetola vs Adeleke, he argued that the onus of proof lies on the petitioners to prove that the documents tendered by the First Respondent did not belong to him.

In the AA and its candidate, Ifeanyi Chukwuka Igbokwe, petitions, they want the 2023 poll for Bende Federal Constituency nullified and fresh poll conducted for unlawful exclusion of their party logo and candidate’s name on ballots and result sheets.

The Chairman of the tribunal, while admitting the addresses by the parties, said a date for judgement would be communicated to the parties in due course.