By Tony EDIKE, Enugu
THE Local Government Elections Petitions Tribunal sitting in Enugu State yesterday struck out five petitions brought by candidates of opposition Progressives Peoples Alliance, PPA against the declaration of Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Chairmanship candidates in last December’s local government polls in the state.

The affected local government areas are Nkanu West, Nkanu East, Enugu South, Udenu, and Igbo Eze South.
PDP candidates were returned in all 17 local government areas of the state but candidates running on the platform of the PPA in the five local government areas had filed petitions asking the tribunal to nullify the election of the PDP candidates in their respective areas on various grounds ranging from alleged late submission of their names to the Enugu State Independent Electoral Commission (ENSIEC) to non participation of the PDP in the elections held in the respective local government areas.
The three_man tribunal presided over by Barrister C.V.C Ezeugwu  delivered rulings on preliminary objections raised separately on each of the petitions by the respondents  which included the Chairmen of the affected local governments, the ENSIEC, the PDP and the Chief Returning officer for each local governments during the elections.

The affected council chairmen were Ejike Ani ( Nkanu East), Nwabueze Okonkwo (Enugu South), Christopher Omeje (Igboeze South)  Godwin Abonyi (Udenu) and Ekene Okenwa (Nkanu West)

Barrister Ezeugwu who read the judgments in each case separately, held that the petitions were incompetent following the failure of the various petitioners to sign their petitions as is mandatorily  required by the state’s local government electoral laws.

He said this lapse was fatal to the case of the petitioners as it robbed the tribunal of the jurisdiction to hear the matter.
He also agreed with the respondents that the core issues raised by the various petitioners for determination by the tribunal were not justiciable.

The various respondents’ lawyers led by PMB Onyia Esq had raised the preliminary objections challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear the petitions which were originating processes that had not been signed by their authors as required by law.

They had also argued that the issues raised by the petitioners were pre_election matters which according to them were outside jurisdiction of the tribunal.

The Petitioners’ counsel Chuma Oguejiofor had however urged the tribunal to dismiss the objection arguing that the matters raised in the petitions were within the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear and determine.

He had also argued that the respondents had not filed  valid memoranda of appearance in each of the cases adding that the signatures in the memos were not only irregular but that the memos were photocopies and not the originals.

However, in its ruling, the tribunal agreed with the respondents that there were flaws in the memorandum of appearance filed by the petitioners but held that the respondents should have filed a separate motion to set them aside but instead allowed themselves as well as the respondents to take further steps in the matter.

It held that further actions taken on the matter by the petitioners without challenging the competence of the respondents’ memoranda of appearance amounted to a waiver of those rights.

The petitioners declined comments on whether they would be appealing the rulings but said they will study them closely with their lawyers before deciding what next step to take.