Amaechi Vs. Omehia: Between Immunity Clause And PDP’s Truancy In Rivers

By

Senior Fyneface

senior_fyneface@yahoo.com

Who should have been the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Rivers State in the April 14 election? Chibuike Amaechi or Celestine Omehia?  This is the crux of the legal tussle between Amaechi and the trio of PDP, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and Omehia.

The way several interest groups have interpreted the matter could best be described as blurred perception of the real issues at stake and at worst an outright mischief which of course has been a major preoccupation of the human mind especially politicians. Following the diverse interpretations so far generated, it has become imperative to situate the matter within the proper and correct context for a clearer understanding of the tussle.

The issues involved in the case as presented by the two sides actually had nothing to do with the persons of Amaechi or Omehia. The former speaker would have pursued the case with the same vigour no matter the person involved whether his brother from his father’s side or another brother from elsewhere in the state. Amaechi has no personal grudges, nor a case against Omehia but against INEC and the PDP. It is important to clarify this fact because it is the truth but unfortunately had been blurred by mischievous interpretations by different interest groups. Infact, the issues in the case could rightly be described as a fight to institutionalise democratic norms and values.

It all started when in what looked like a unanimous endorsement at the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) primaries conducted in December 2006, the former Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Chibuike Amaechi scored 6,527 out of the 6,575 votes caste.

As the winner in the primaries that was adjudged to be ‘free and fair’ by the PDP standard, Amaechi’s name was submitted to INEC on December 14 as the governorship flagbearer. The commission subsequently published same as the PDP candidate for the April 14 election as stipulated in Section 32(1) and (2) of the Electoral Act 2006.

In what could rightly be referred to as a palace coup, the PDP replaced Amaechi’s name with Omehia and resubmitted same to INEC as its candidate in outright violation of Section 34 (2) of the Electoral Act.

The candidacy of Omehia was nullified by an Abuja High Court which set aside INEC’s substitution of Amaechi’s name for that of Omehia. Despite the court ruling, INEC issued Omehia the certificate of return as the governor- elect for Rivers state.

Amaechi insisted that he was the substantive governorship candidate in view of the earlier ruling by the High Court. However, before the Appeal Court could give its judgment on the case, the PDP issued a press statement claiming it had expelled Amaechi from the party and the Appeal Court rode on this statement and struck out Amaechi’s case few days to the April governorship election on the ground that it lacked the jurisdiction to hear the case.

Pushing the matter further, Amaechi went to the Supreme Court which on May 11, 2006, threw the case back to the Appeal Court for hearing. The Supreme asked the lower court to expeditiously determine the appeal and cross appeal on merit. Rather than examine the case, the Appeal Court agreed to Omehia’s request to stay further action, referring the case back to the apex court for clarification and this was to pave the way for Omehia’s swearing-in as the governor of the state.

Certain issues needed to be clarified to help the ordinary Rivers people appreciate that the legal tussle between the former speaker and the PDP/Omehia represents a healthy development in institutionalizing democratic norms in the state. Amaechi is not actually fighting for himself but to checkmate or rather stop the practice in the state where just a few privileged people take the entire state for a ride. Why was Amaechi removed in the first instance? Why did the Rivers State PDP or whosoever, failed to follow due process and furnish INEC with details of the EFCC indictment against Amaechi to fulfill the condition for such removal from the ballot? Was Amaechi convicted in the first instance by the EFCC? Ameachi’s winning of the PDP Gubernatorial ticket in Rivers State and his expulsion from the party by the gangsters, which of the incidents precedes the other?

Is it possible for the EFCC to indict Amaechi for corruption and grant Odili a clean bill? Who actually received and disbursed the state funds throughout the eight-year rule- Amaechi or Odili? Did members of the former Rivers State Legislature at any time formally complained of fraud or mismanagement of funds allocated for legislative duties? Answers to these questions would help situate the Amaechi-Omehia saga in proper context.

From all indications, the EFCC was willingly dragged into the plot to replace the former speaker and that was done with the believe that Amaechi like every other simple-minded Riversman would have simply accepted his faith as an act of God but this was not to be.

To say that Amaechi was removed because of the indictment by EFCC was a clear distortion of facts and a mischief. Rather in the party’s rush to please certain chieftains failed to follow due process as stipulated in the Electoral Act.

Nearly all the information concerning the reasons for the replacement of Amaechi could rightly be adjudged to be mere rumours. Media reports alleged his indictment by the EFCC on corruption charges and till today, the commission had not said it indicted the former speaker nor given any indication that he has been charged to court for alleged corruption. So it could have been rightly said that he was innocent until proven guilty.

However, because the EFCC angle was part of the grand conspiracy to replace Amaechi to make it look unintentional, the architects of the plot immediately went ahead to execute their plans undermining due process. Rather than confront the former speaker with the facts from the EFCC indictment as claimed and get him to appreciate the situation his candidacy would put the party into if he was allowed to continue to be on the ticket, he was recklessly replaced.

Curious minds would have been terribly bothered that the Appeal Court ordered indefinite stay of proceedings in the case, in an outright disobedience to the order of the Supreme Court that the case should be decided quickly for the preservation of certain relieves in the appeal. Why is the appeal court refusing to quickly hear and trash the case, if they know Amaechi has no locus standi in the case?

From media reports on the case, what Amaechi wanted was very simple: the courts should decide whether his replacement for whatever reasons followed due process as stipulated in the Electoral Act and party’s guideline. Good enough, the former speaker has promised to accept whatever decision the court would hand out after exhaustively hearing and examining the case.

The big question is: Why has the Appeal Court refused to hear Amaechi’s case? In this case, the Appeal Court had disobeyed the Supreme Court directives that the case should be heard expeditiously by the Appeal court. Rather than do so, the lower court decided to seek clarification on the order of the apex court.

Finally under compulsion, the Appeal Court sat in Abuja for over seven hours and listened to all pending applications bordering on jurisdiction and the one seeking leave by INEC to furnish the court with fresh evidence over Amaechi’s alleged indictment by the EFCC.

Now a new angle has been introduced by Omehia. At the July 16 hearing in Abuja, he insisted that based on the immunity clause in the constitution, no court can try him on both civil and criminal matters. Omehia through his counsel cited Section 308 of 1999 Constitution which he claimed shields him from criminal or civil matters.

Whatever the outcome of the July 20 decision of the court may be, Rivers people for sure would be better for the current happenings between Amaechi on one side and PDP, INEC, Odili, and Omehia on the other.