It is not yet Uhuru for Senator Ifeanyi Araraume as the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC is yet to issue him with Certificate of Return as the actual winner.
A number of cases concerning who won the APC ticket and eventual winner are on until the Federal High Court declared Araraume winner.
Despite what the court ordered, Araraume is yet to be used with the CoR by the INEC.
The electoral who gave reasons why it has ignored Araraume says it is still studying the conflicting judgments arising from the courts last Thursday as to who should be the rightful occupants of the senatorial position.
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, had on Thursday, ordered that Ararume be issued with the CoR within 72 hours, but the order given by Justice Taiwo Taiwo, on INEC, was countered hours later on the same day by an Owerri High Court presided by Justice E. O. Agada, who restrained the same commission from issuing Ararume with the instrument to return to the Senate, where he once occupied for the same zone.
INEC National Commissioner and Chairman Information and Voter Education Committee, Festus Okoye, as saying: “Based on the multiplicity of judgments and orders in the Imo North matter the Commission will carefully study them and do the needful.”
According to him “As at today there are over 13 cases either filed or decided by the various courts relating to the Imo North Senatorial bye-election. The recent ones relate to the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja and the ex-parte Order from State High Court in Owerri.
“The Legal Department of the Commission will meet and present a memo to the Legal Services, Clearance and Compliance Committee of the Commission. The Legal Services and Clearance Committee will in turn deliberate on the matter and present a memo to the Commission.
“The Commission will deliberate on the matter, take a decision and inform the public. Hence, these judgments must of necessity pass through our processes and procedures. We are not a Court of law. We do not have adjudicatory powers.
“We give effect to judgments and orders of courts based on their tenor, context and our understanding of the judgment or orders we have been directed to give effect to.
