Two communities in Ohafia Local Government Area of Abia State, Eziukwu Ebem and Ekeluogo Ebem, have appealed against the judgment of the Abia State High Court which upheld their exclusion from the list of duly recognised autonomous communities in the state.
The two autonomous communities were in 2002 created out of then Ebem Oha autonomous community by the state government and each of their traditional rulers were presented staffs of office.
However, in 2010, one Ezie S.A Okorie went to court with suit No: HOH/21/2010 to challenge the legality of the creation of Eziukwu Ebem and Ekeluogo Ebem as autonomous communities and called for their abrogation.
The court dismissed the suit and pronounced the creation of the two autonomous communities as lawful.
Another suit, numbered HOH/21/2010, was filed by the opponents of the two autonomous communities, who demanded their abrogation.
In 2015, the Abia State House of Assembly effected an amendment to law No. 8 which borders on traditional rulers and autonomous communities of the state.
When the law was made public in 2016, it was discovered that Eziukwu Ebem and Ekeluogo Ebem autonomous communities were missing from the list of recognized autonomous communities in Abia State.
After seeking administrative measures to correct the omission of the two autonomous communities from the Schedule to Law No. 8 of 2015, which did not yield any dividend, the leaders of the two communities sought judicial intervention.
However, on February 8, 2024, the Abia State High Court, Umuahia Judicial Division delivered a judgement in two suits numbered HOH/133/2016 and HOH/134/2016, instituted by the two communities, and affirmed their exclusion by the House of Assembly.
Not satisfied with the ruling of the court, the communities have approached the Owerri Division of the Court of Appeal, saying that their autonomous communities should not be abrogated.
They have also filed an application for stay of execution pending the determination of the appeals.
The appeals are predicated on the grounds that the decision of the House of Assembly was taken without fair hearing from the affected communities and that the judgment, if allowed to stand, will result in the miscarriage of justice.