HEARING in the suit over who gets the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, ticket between Tony Nwoye and Andy Uba for the November 16, 2013 governorship election in Anambra State continues today at the Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
The Ejike Oguebego’s faction of the PDP in Anambra State, which elected Chief Andy Uba as the party’s candidate is in court to challenge the decision of the National Working Committee, NWC, to recognise Ken Emeakayi’s faction which produced Mr. Tony Nwoye as the flagbearer.
The Ejike Oguebego’s faction of the PDP in Anambra State, which elected Chief Andy Uba as the party’s candidate is in court to challenge the decision of the National Working Committee, NWC, to recognise Ken Emeakayi’s faction which produced Mr. Tony Nwoye as the flagbearer.
While Oguebego is the first plaintiff, Andy Uba is the second.
The presiding judge, Justice H.A. Nganjiwa, while adjourning sitting yesterday, affirmed that today’s hearing would settle on accelerated hearing towards dispensing with the motion on notice and interlocutory injunctions emanating from the case before the originating summon and substantive suit would be considered.
At yesterday’s hearing, Jude Nnodum, counsel to Ejike Oguebego, factional chairman of the Anambra PDP and Andy Uba, plaintiffs in the case, apologised to the judge and the defense team asking for extended time to update and file the necessary documents to reflect the co-joining of the interested party.
On Justice Nganjiwa’s decision to first dispense with the motion on notice and interlocutory objections today, B.C. Igwilo, who held brief for U.I Igweneme, counsel to 3rd and 4th defendants in tune with Mensha N. Kalu, counsel to 1st defendant, contended that it would be improper in view of existing question marks over the jurisdiction of the court.
Justice Nganjiwa, while upholding his decision said: “In view of Order 29 Rule 1, it is not out of place to do away with the interlocutory objections and motion on notice first. After that we can determine and rule on the question of whether the court has jurisdiction or not.”
In a chat with Vanguard after yesterday’s hearing, plaintiffs’ counsel declined opening up on the nature and content of the injunctions to be determined.
“We all have to come tomorrow and hear the plaintiffs out and response from the other side. The matter is going on in court now. If we begin to talk outside of the court, we would be preempting the proceedings. Let’s just wait till tomorrow,” he explained.
0 comments: