rji, a former commissioner, challenged Ikonne's emergence in the Federal High Court in Umuahia, claiming that the ad-hoc delegates' list used in the supposed primary was doctored and that PDP did not have a delegates' congress in the state.

He appealed to the Court of Appeal in Owerri on December 7, 2022, after Justice Evelyn Anyadike of the Umuahia Federal High Court dismissed his complaint, FHC/UM/CS/111/2022, on November 30.

The appellate court reserved judgement last week.

Concerned Lawyers for the Advancement of Democracy called the Umuahia Federal High Court ruling "a miscarriage of justice."

The group led by Thomas Ikechukwu Iko, Esq., contended with the judge that the appellant's alleged non-physical presence at the principal location constituted withdrawal from the race.

"Orji showed beyond reasonable doubt that he participated in the election," it said.

"The verdict as delivered by Justice Anyadike has impacted severely on the democratic tenet since it is hard to reconcile the evidence made available to the judge and the judgement that was rendered," the group said in a press statement.

"Being absent is not one of them, despite the fact that the plaintiff was never absent," Concerned Lawyers for Advancement of Democracy added.

"The Appellant never did" send a withdrawal letter to the party, the lawyers said.

It pondered why the trial court made its decision.

Worrying is that the judge ignored petitions in the primary election contestation, which was tainted by irregularities and cannot generate a trustworthy outcome.

It accused the PDP of fostering impunity and a lack of internal democracy and called on the judiciary to defend Nigeria's democracy from politicians' rascality.

The group also encouraged the judiciary to restore public faith in courts as the final hope of the common man, stressing that injustices foster bad governance.

Orji's lawyer, Rilwan Idris, asked the Appellate Court to overturn the Umuahia Federal High Court's ruling.

He also requested an order dismissing the first and second respondents' (PDP and Ikonne) motion on notice and an extension for their counter-affidavits to the original summons, dated September 26, 2022, and filed September 28.

Vanguard said that the ex-lawmaker wanted "an order pursuant to Section 15 of the Court of Appeal Act, CAP. C36, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004, granting the reliefs sought in the appellant's originating summons filed on June 7, 2022."

In his grounds of appeal, Orji argued that the trial court erred when it stated that "the lone issue is whether this Honourable court has the power to grant the defendants an extension of time with which to file their preliminary objections and counter-affidavits to the originating summons, considering the circumstances of this case."

"The subject matter of the suit is a pre-election affair, and the court lacks the competence to make an order of extension of time," he said.

"The principle of law established in the case of CHINDA vs. INEC (2019), which is binding on the trial court, is to the effect that the court does not have the powers to issue an extension of time in pre-election matters," Orji added.

He further claimed that the trial court erred in law when it found that he failed to present any evidence of his objection to the PDP Electoral Panel against the exclusion of statutory delegates and the use of an illegitimate list of ad hoc delegates during the primary election.

The former Leader of the Abia State House of Assembly said his protest against the exclusion of statutory delegates from voting at the primary began at the primary venue on May 25, 2022, and was followed by protest letters on May 26 and 29.

He criticised the trial court for ruling that, despite being screened and cleared for the primary, he failed to show that he "really and physically" participated by being present at the main location.

Orji challenged anyone with proof of his withdrawal or resignation letter to present proof.

The former Commissioner for Industry also argued the trial court erred when it found that the third defendant, the Independent National Electoral Commission, was legally notified of the PDP congress and that only INEC could complain about whether the notification satisfied the legal 21-day minimum.

"The plaintiff not being the third defendant whose duty it is to supervise the same, she cannot be heard to complain," the trial court said.

Orji said that "the issuance of a valid notice for the holding of a party congress is an obligatory and statutory condition of the Electoral Act" and that failing to comply with it violates the entire Act.

As a party impacted by the primary, he claimed the right to complain.

On appeal, Orji disagreed with the trial court that he neglected to identify what number of delegates constituted a quorum, arguing that his originating summons affidavits clearly showed that the quorum was not formed.

He further disagreed with the trial court that he contradicted himself on the total number of statutory delegates to the primary, stating that Exhibit 2 labelled "SCOURJ 2" and not "Exhibit 1" was a duplicate of a list of 2,200 delegates.

The candidate said that "PDP is not a public authority" and "exhibit SCOURJ 2 (and not exhibit 1 relied upon by the court) was not prepared by a public entity to necessitate the necessary certification of the document before it could be admitted."

He claimed that the total number of votes returned was fewer than one-third of the primary's statutory delegates.

Stakeholders and party members are concerned about the PDP governorship flag bearer's health, who has been out of circulation for some time.

(Source: www.vanguardngr.com)