By Ikechukwu Nnochiri Abuja
The Supreme Court, yesterday, dismissed an appeal that sought to sack Governor Theophilus Orji of Abia state from office on grounds that he was not validly nominated by the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to contest the last general elections.Orji described the judgement as victory for democracy.

The suit which was filed by a factional gubernatorial candidate of the PDP in the state, Chief Ikechi Emenike, challenged the validity of a parallel primary election that saw the emergence of Governor Orji as the flag-bearer of the party in the state.

Specifically, whereas Emenike participated and won the primary election that was conducted by the State Executive Committee of the party, Gov Orji on the other hand emerged from a congress conducted by the National Executive Committee, NEC, of the PDP, with both exercises allegedly monitored by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

Aside his contention that the Governor emerged from a kangaroo process, the appellant told the apex court that as at the time the said primary elections were conducted, Governor Orji was not a member of the PDP. “The fourth respondent [Gov. Orji] did not submit any nomination form for the election or any membership registration card of the PDP which is one of the requirements in the nomination form.

The substance of our case is that having regard to the provisions of sections 87 [3], [4] and [6], the conduct of the PDP in handpicking Governor Orji is an affront to Section 87 [9] of the Electoral Act.

However, in their unanimous judgment, a five-man panel of justices of the Supreme Court held that only the NEC of a political party has the powers to nominate a candidate to be sponsored for any given electoral contest.

In the lead judgment which was prepared and read by Justice John Afolabi Fabiyi yesterday, Supreme Court maintained that “the court below did a nice job by affirming Orji’s victory. The court said, “the point relating to membership of the 4th respondent was raked up and unduly elevated at appeal.

Even if it were to be found that the 4th respondents membership was faulty, it will still not validate the appellant’s nomination by an unauthorised State Executive Committee which ‘modified’ Exhibit 7- the 1st Respondents Electoral Guidelines without due vires.”