Ugochinyere's primary emergence was unanimously upheld by the federal high court, the court of appeals, and the Supreme Court, which also ruled him qualified to run for office. As a result, any challenge to his emergence on the grounds of the primary's pre-election venue is without merit.
It is therefore unexpected that the first tribunal rendered a contradictory decision, nullifying Ugochinyere's victory in response to a petition submitted by a candidate who finished third, garnered just 2000 votes, and received support from just one polling place out of 346.
The LP candidate, whose legal challenge to Ugochinyere's election was also dismissed, was among the contestants who had contested the primary venue of Ugochinyere at the Federal High Court and lost.
As has been done by other appeal courts, including the Supreme Court, this ruling has once again put the problems to rest.
The Centre for Judicial Integrity Watch responded by hailing the Appeal Court ruling as a democratic triumph, citing the Tribunal's lack of authority to consider sponsorship and the location of the PDP primaries.
The Center told the Court to avoid giving the impression that it is picking and choosing on issues of law that are well-established with a wealth of judicial precedent and constitutional provisions. The Center expressed shock at the decision of the same Appeal panel to refuse to uphold the other lawmaker's election, Jonas Okeke, whose primary election took place at the same location as Emeka.