APGA Abia State chapter has come out to disagree with the decisions reached by the Appeal Court judges in favour of Gov. Okezie Ikpeazu in their press statement just released.

In that same press statement, the party urged Gov. Okezie Ikpeazu and his camp to learn how to accept court judgements or decisions without creating a state of violence or sponsoring protests with state funds.

APGA PRESS RELEASE

The All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA)  Abia State has received the news of the judgement  of Court of Appeal siting in Abuja which upheld the election  of Dr. Okezie  Ikpeazu as the Governor  of Abia State after dismissing the verdict of an Abuja High Court  presided over by Justice Okon  Abang which earlier found Dr.  Ikpeazu guilty of supplying  false tax information and removed him as Governor. 
As a law abiding party with the utmost  interest of Abians at heart,  APGA is happy that the Uche Ogah led PDP faction and their supporters  have emulated the Alex Otti/ APGA example of peaceful conduct by accepting the judgment though unfavorable  in good faith and with absolute  equanimity while preparing  to explore the option of appeal  at the Supreme  Court; this is how a civilized and responsible  people behave in a democracy.
APGA hopes that the Dr. Okezie Ikpeazu -led faction of the PDP and their supporters would learn a lesson  from this and subsequently desist from the misuse of public funds through sponsored protests,  violence,  threats,  and general breach  of public peace whenever a judgement  goes against them; that is the only way  to show leadership responsibility  against selfish desperation.
In keeping to our long standing high regard for the judiciary and the Rule of Law, we respect the verdict  of the Court of Appeal and thus do not intend to embark  on a reckless voyage of pouring venom and vituperation against the Learned  Justices and their judgement the way the Ikpeazu PDP faction and their supporters do. However,  as interested parties we wish to make few critical but objectionable  observations in the judgment ;
First,  in the judgment,  the Appeal court held that  ” The inadequacies  of the tax receipts  cannot  be visited on Ikpeazu “.  The Court  premised this decision  on the basis  that Ikpeazu was not the one that prepared  the said documents.  We completely  disagree  with this decision  because  every taxable  adult whether  a private  individual or a government  employee /appointee  is expected  to know what he pays or what is being  deducted from his salaries as tax,  and therefore should care about the accuracy or otherwise of the information on his tax receipts,  especially  when  such details  are meant  to be submitted  for the purpose of an election.
Also the law does  not require the tax agency to be the supplier of the information to the appropriate electoral /political  institution, rather the aspirant who has been issued with such documents/information, such a person  is also expected by law to suffer injuries arising from any false information hence the need for accuracy  and thoroughness. So the attempt by the court to shift the consequences to the agency  that  cannot  be punished  here is unacceptable  to us.
Would the court have endorsed documents  showing  one year tax clearance or any other untrue information  from the accused just because  the information  contained  therein was not prepared  by him?
Could any other questionable explanation, even if it was an afterthought, from Abia state  Board of Internal  Revenue have corrected the false information, exonerated  the accused or justified  the false information he supplied when the agency in question  remains under the control of the accused?
We believe that the law must have envisaged  criminal connivance  between individuals  and institutions like a tax agency the way it is obtainable in Abia hence the constitutional prescription of punishment  against individuals that supply  false information.
Secondly and most importantly  the court claimed that the Federal  High Court presided  over by Justice  Abang lacked the jurisdiction  to have heard the case because it was not properly  filed having been signed by three lawyers for the Plaintiff  against  the requirement of one identifiable  legal practitioner, and accused the Judge  of assisting the litigant.
While APGA does not intend to delve deeply  into this purely technical  issue of filing/jurisdiction, we are,however, alarmed by its resurrection by the Appeal court when the Supreme  Court had earlier decided  on the issue  of jurisdiction  against  Ikpeazu  which necessitated it’s directive for the Federal  High Court to commence accelerated hearing in the case ab initio.
Without doubt,  the hasty dismissal  of the jurisdiction  of the Trial Court by Appeal court against what the Supreme Court had earlier decided must have aided its  decision to scratch  the key issues of tax on the surface. This leaves  us with the conviction that a thorough job may not have been done in this matter.
Finally,  APGA wishes to express its dismay over the not too impressive and honorable  utterances  of the Justices of the Court of Appeal since the just decided  case was brought before them.
We regret to state that our careful observation  suggests that the Judges derived joy using derogatory words against individuals rather than apply fair legal terms in accepting  or dismissing cases or applications of individuals  without necessarily  insulting  such persons  who have merely expressed  their rights in the most acceptable and constitutional  manner by coming to court.
The judges used such words against  APGA and her candidate  while dismissing the APGA joinder appeal,  and they also repeatedly  used such words  in the most insulting manner against Justice Okon  Abang, against known modern judicial  practices.
The Judges forgot that Justice Abang was a lone Judge  who was likely  to make more mistakes  in deciding  a case, unlike Appeal court with five justices who would put heads together  to decide a case.
Also when the Appeal court initially  ruled on the issue of jurisdiction  in favour  of Ikpeazu before the commencement of trial proper, the Supreme  Court took contrary position against the Appeal court but in support  of the earlier decision  of the Federal High Court,  the Supreme Court didn’t  resort to insulting the Appeal court Justices even though it upturned their verdict; we therefore  appeal to the Judges to behave better next  time by shunning  this swagger  of arrogance  that evokes  suspicious hostility.
As usual  we appeal to all Abians  across political  lines to shun political and sectional hate,   those engineered by selfish politicians. The present legal battle  is aimed at opening our democratic space while bringing to an end years of political docility and impunity that has held Abia down for the good of all; that is the beauty of democracy which can only be understood  and appreciated by those with knowledge  of democracy. 

Abia must be better.

Signed
Rev.  Augustine  Ehiemere
State Chairman,  APGA

OP pls add this source to the topic

http://www.abiafactsnews.com/apga-abia-state-disagrees-with-court-of-appeal-decisions-and-advises-ikpeazu-to-learn-from-ogah/

With the title

APGA ABIA STATE DISAGREES WITH COURT OF APPEAL DECISIONS AND ADVISES IKPEAZU TO LEARN FROM OGAH

I was reading then I saw the name justice okon abang and i stopped knowing fully well that okon abang is an incompetent justice,infact he's not fit to be justice but in Nigeria even a goat can be president so far he is from a particular region.
That's how we voted in a uneducated man without Waec result now see where we are now.