The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, has ordered members of the interim State Executive Committee of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in Rivers State, to appear before it on February 20, to show cause why the party should not be restrained from registering new members in the state.

Ruling on an ex-parte motion that was filed by an aggrieved chieftain of the party in the state, Barrister Otonye Briggs, Justice Gabriel Kolawole, specifically ordered the Interim Chairman and Secretary of APC in Rivers state, Chief Davis Ikanya and Mr Emeka Beke, respectively, to ensure that they appear in court on that date.

Others the court summoned were the Interim National Chairman of APC, Chief Bisi Akande and the National Secretary of the party, Mr Tumsa Musa Tijani.

Justice Kolawole, stressed that though the plaintiff, Briggs, approached the court for an ex-parte order, he said in view of the fact that there seems to be a sharp division in the party vis-a-vis allegation that the interim state officials were imposed on other APC members in Rivers State by those at the national level, there was need to give all the defendants the opportunity to defend themselves.

Consequently, the judge ordered that all the defendants should be served with the motion on notice to enable them to appear and explain why the plaintiff should not be granted all the reliefs he is seeking before the High Court.

Aside APC, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, was equally joined as a defendant in the suit.

Specifically, the plaintiff who was the governorship candidate of the APC during the last general election in Rivers State, through his lawyer, Mr Joseph I. Ekwueme,  is asking the court to determine if : “within the meaning and requirement of Article 9.1(ii), 9.3(i) & (ii) and 9.4(ii) of the constitution of APC, the 2nd set of defendants, particularly the 4th and 5th (Ikanya and Beke), who are not registered members of APC and who were not members of any of the legacy parties (ACN, ANPP & CPC), that merged and became APC, are entitled and or competent to convene, call, organize or hold any meetings of APC, River State and or represent or speak or and on behalf of the APC, Rivers State in any gathering, meeting, function and or activity, particularly one called by and or organized by the 6th defendant (INEC) or in any way manage the affairs of the party.

“Within the meaning and requirement of Article 13.3 (iii), (iv) & (vi) of the APC constitution, whether the 1st set of defendants (Akande and Tijani), in upholding the aims and objectives under Article 7(iii) of the 1st defendant’s constitution, the 2nd and 3rd defendants, in the performance of their functions and or exercise of their powers the interim  national leaders or members of the National Executive Committee of the 1st defendant can validly appoint, recognize and or approve the 2nd set of defendants particularly the 4th and 5th defendants who are not registered members of APC and who were not members of any of the legacy parties that merged and became APC, as the interim state executive committee of APC, Rivers State”.

Consequently, the plaintiff, among other things, beseeched the court for a declaration that the defendants, having not registered in their respective wards of residence, works and or origin, in line with Article 9.1(ii), & 9.4(ii) of APC constitution and having not been members of any of the legacy parties which merged and became APC, are not bonafide members of APC.