Court Adjourns Jailed Akwa Ibom Professor’s Electoral Fraud Case

A law suit instituted between the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) and Professor Ignatius Uduk over alleged
electoral fraud during the 2019 general election in Akwa Ibom State
was yesterday adjourned.

A High Court 4 in Uyo, the state capital, adjourned the case
following objections raised against the legal representation of
INEC.

Professor Uduk was dragged to court for allegedly committing
electoral malpractice in his area of supervision during the
election.

The presiding Judge, Justice Archibong Archibong, adjourned the
case to July 19, 2021, to enable INEC respond on point of law to
its decision to withdraw the letter introducing Clement Onwenwunor
as the principal counsel representing the commission in the
case.

Counsel to the accused, Abasiodiong Ekpenyong, had opposed the
replacement of Kpoobari Sigalo with Clement Onwenwunor, who had in
previous sitting presented a letter to the court introducing
himself as the lead counsel for INEC.

Ekpenyong argued that the document filed by the prosecution was
not done as known to law and provided for by the Akwa Ibom State
criminal law.

He said the fiat was authorised by the Attorney General of the
state instead of the federal government, saying INEC was a federal
agency.

Ekpenyong argued that since the Attorney General of the state
issued the fiat for the prosecution, he usurped the powers of the
Attorney General of the Federation, and as such, there was no
charge before the court, and asked that the case to be
dismissed.

In his response, counsel to INEC, Clement Onwenwunor, told the
court to adopt the rejoinder filed on July 12, 2021, in respect to
the objection, adding that counsel to the accused did not cite the
law that was bridged.

He said since the objection to his fiat was presented verbally,
he also responded verbally, noting that if the court considered the
submissions of the accused, it should also consider his own.

Onwenwunor further stated that the objection that the fiat must
be obtained from the Attorney General of the Federation was not
correct, adding that the powers of the AG of the federation,
according to the 1999 Constitution as amended, can be exercised at
any time.

He argued that he does not need a fiat from the AG of the
federation as the state can authorise a private practitioner.

After submissions from both counsel, the court accepted the fiat
sent in by INEC’s counsel, but counsel to the accused opposed the
acceptance on the premise that the name of the practitioner was not
stated in the letter.

Accordingly, counsel to INEC sought the withdrawal of the letter
for proper filing, and the court granted the request.

A law suit instituted between the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) and Professor Ignatius Uduk over alleged
electoral fraud during the 2019 general election in Akwa Ibom State
was yesterday adjourned.

A High Court 4 in Uyo, the state capital, adjourned the case
following objections raised against the legal representation of
INEC.

Professor Uduk was dragged to court for allegedly committing
electoral malpractice in his area of supervision during the
election.

The presiding Judge, Justice Archibong Archibong, adjourned the
case to July 19, 2021, to enable INEC respond on point of law to
its decision to withdraw the letter introducing Clement Onwenwunor
as the principal counsel representing the commission in the
case.

Counsel to the accused, Abasiodiong Ekpenyong, had opposed the
replacement of Kpoobari Sigalo with Clement Onwenwunor, who had in
previous sitting presented a letter to the court introducing
himself as the lead counsel for INEC.

Ekpenyong argued that the document filed by the prosecution was
not done as known to law and provided for by the Akwa Ibom State
criminal law.

He said the fiat was authorised by the Attorney General of the
state instead of the federal government, saying INEC was a federal
agency.

Ekpenyong argued that since the Attorney General of the state
issued the fiat for the prosecution, he usurped the powers of the
Attorney General of the Federation, and as such, there was no
charge before the court, and asked that the case to be
dismissed.

In his response, counsel to INEC, Clement Onwenwunor, told the
court to adopt the rejoinder filed on July 12, 2021, in respect to
the objection, adding that counsel to the accused did not cite the
law that was bridged.

He said since the objection to his fiat was presented verbally,
he also responded verbally, noting that if the court considered the
submissions of the accused, it should also consider his own.

Onwenwunor further stated that the objection that the fiat must
be obtained from the Attorney General of the Federation was not
correct, adding that the powers of the AG of the federation,
according to the 1999 Constitution as amended, can be exercised at
any time.

He argued that he does not need a fiat from the AG of the
federation as the state can authorise a private practitioner.

After submissions from both counsel, the court accepted the fiat
sent in by INEC’s counsel, but counsel to the accused opposed the
acceptance on the premise that the name of the practitioner was not
stated in the letter.

Accordingly, counsel to INEC sought the withdrawal of the letter
for proper filing, and the court granted the request.