Court Of Appeal Restores Umeh As APGA National Chairman

The Court of Appeal sitting in Enugu has nullified the judgement of a lower court which sacked Victor Umeh as the National Chairman of the All Progressives Grand Alliance APGA).

An Enugu High Court had last February sacked Mr Umeh and other members of the party’s National Working Committee (NWC).

Lead counsel to the appellant, Wole Olanipekun, who led Patrick Ikwueto and others, had urged the special panel comprising Justice Paul Galinje (Chairman), Kwasami F.A. and Tom Yakubu, to set aside the judgment of the lower court, arguing that the respondent, Jude Okuli, who filed the suit had no locus to do so.

He explained that the respondent was expelled from APGA before he filed the suit in the lower court, adding that he did not go to the lower court to ask for reinstatement before the trial judge reinstated him.

While noting that the lower court delivered a contradictory judgment, Mr Olanipekun said the fact that APGA was not joined as a party could be fatal to the case and has rendered the matter incompetent.

He said the trial judge made himself a plaintiff counsel by extending the case of the respondent (Okuli) and posing questions himself and answering in favour of the respondent.

Mr Olanipekun noted that even when the judge found out that the parties in the matter sharply disagreed over affidavit evidence, he did not call for oral evidence as required by the court and went ahead to deliver judgment.

He had said that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter since it bothered on the internal affairs of a political party.

Lead counsel to the respondent, Onyechi Ikpeazu had argued that the case could not be defeated by reason of non-joinder of APGA, for the main reason that the complaint was directed to Mr Umeh, personally based on his arbitrary conduct.

Mr Ikpeazu said it wasn’t really an APGA matter but a grouse between individuals within the party, just as he contended that the appellant didn’t make the issue of locus standi the main grouse in the appeal.

Reacting to the issue of lack of jurisdiction raised by the appellant, Mr Ikpeazu said the law was clear that where a party or a member of the party violated the constitution of the party, the court would have jurisdiction.

He said where the allegation was for the court to interpret a provision of the constitution with a view to determine that a particular party had principle that exceeded its rights, it was a matter in which the court had jurisdiction.