Two Abia Communities Head to Appeal Court to Challenge Non-Recognition by Assembly

Two autonomous communities in Ohafia Local Government Area of Abia State, Eziukwu Ebem and Ekeluogo Ebem, have filed an appeal against the judgment of the Abia State High Court that upheld their exclusion from the list of recognized autonomous communities in the state.

Back in 2002, both communities were created from the former Ebem Oha autonomous community by the state government, and their respective traditional rulers were presented with staffs of office.

In 2010, Ezie S.A Okorie challenged the legality of the creation of Eziukwu Ebem and Ekeluogo Ebem as autonomous communities, calling for their abrogation in a suit numbered HOH/21/2010.

The court dismissed the suit and declared the creation of the two autonomous communities as lawful.

Another suit, HOH/21/2010, was filed by opponents of the two autonomous communities, demanding their abrogation.

In 2015, the Abia State House of Assembly made an amendment to Law No. 8, which concerns traditional rulers and autonomous communities in the state.

When the law became public in 2016, it was discovered that Eziukwu Ebem and Ekeluogo Ebem were not included in the list of recognized autonomous communities in Abia State.

After seeking administrative measures to rectify the omission of the two communities from the Schedule to Law No. 8 of 2015, which proved unsuccessful, the leaders of the two communities sought legal intervention.

On February 8, 2024, the Abia State High Court, Umuahia Judicial Division, delivered a judgment in two suits numbered HOH/133/2016 and HOH/134/2016, upholding the exclusion of the communities by the House of Assembly.

Unsatisfied with the ruling, the communities have now approached the Owerri Division of the Court of Appeal, arguing that their autonomous communities should not be abolished.

They have also filed an application for a stay of execution pending the determination of the appeals. The appeals are based on the grounds that the House of Assembly’s decision was taken without a fair hearing from the affected communities and that the judgment, if allowed to stand, will result in a miscarriage of justice.