Some aggrieved members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Abia State have petitioned Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman of National Judicial Council (NJC), over alleged refusal by a Federal High Court Judge in Umuahia to hear a pre-election matter.

Lawyer to the aggrieved members, Nnamdi U. Nwokocha Ahaaiwe, in the petition, accused Justice Evelyn Anyadike of delaying the hearing of a case between Mr Ndudi Nwagbara and six others, versus the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The petitioners are challenging the process that led to the three-man ad hoc delegates’ list that produced a former Abia State University Vice-Chancellor, Prof Uche Ikonne, as PDP’s governorship candidate on May 25, 2022.

The petitioners said they had written to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court since July 27, 2022 with another follow-up letter dated August 15, 2022.

The petition read in part, “A perusal of the aforesaid communication will show that the gravamen of our complaint is that contrary to the express and extant directives of both the National Judicial Council (NJC) and the Practice Directions issued by the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, our case was adjourned from the 21st day of July 2022 to the 30th day of September 2022 by the Federal High Court 1, Umuahia, which proceeded on vacation, contrary to the extant directives that all Courts hearing pre-election matters should not go on vacation until they conclude the cases pending before them which ought to be heard on a day-to-day basis.”

The petition added that despite the scheduled court hearing, the judge had proceeded on vacation, contrary to the extant directives.

It continued, “We applied to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria to assign the case to any vacation Court in Nigeria for hearing, in view of the several steps still to be taken in the matter. By the 30th day of September 2022, when the hearing in the case is set to resume, if nothing urgent is done, there will be barely a month and nine days to the expiration of the constitutionally regulated lifespan of the case.

“In view of the foregoing, we urge you, sir, to give appropriate directives, which will not only safeguard the legitimate lawful right of our clients to a quick and unhindered access to court but also protect the image, integrity and reputation of the judiciary at large.”