Two chairmen emerge in Anambra PDP few months to governorship election

Confusion can best describe the mood in the Anambra State chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) following the emergence of two chairmen of the party in the state.

An Abuja High Court delivered a judgment two days ago, removing the current state Chairman of the party, Chief Ndubuisi Nwobu, and ruled that Ejike Oguebego is the chairman of the party in the state.

Tribune Online gathered that the judgment, which came two weeks to the conduct of the governorship primary election of the party, had created fear and apprehension among the 16 aspirants of the party.

Already, Oguebego has announced the postponement of the ward delegates election even when the committee set up for the exercise had arrived and were set to conduct the election.

In his reaction, on Thursday, Chief Ndubuisi Nwobu described the judgment as an effort in futility, adding that the courts are on strike and the plaintiff in the matter, Mr Chukwudi Umeagba and the national leadership of the party, had long withdrawn from the matter.

He contended that there was a subsisting judgment of the High Court of Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, which is a court of coordinate jurisdiction, adding that the recent judgment could not vitiate the initial judgment of Justice A.O. Musa in 2017.

According to Nwobu, “the implication is that there is a valid and subsisting judgment protecting the leadership of Nwobu-led executive committee of the party and the judgment has not been set aside. It is binding on all until set aside by any appellate court.”

But according to the suit filed by Oguebego, there was no validly conducted congress that elected Nwobu as state chairman of the party, adding that before the presidential primary election of the party, only the local government and ward congresses were conducted, adding that Nwobu was sworn in as caretaker chairman of the party.

Deepening the confusion further, the 16 aspirants of the party are at sea over their fate in the June 26 primary election if the exercise would actually take place following the recent judgement.

None of the aspirants offered to comment on the situation as, according to them, it is sub-judice and contemptuous of the court process.


You might also like
Comments

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. AcceptRead More