No Judge Disowned Supreme Court Judgment On Uzodimma, says Imo Govt.

 The Imo State government has dismissed as puerile, ludicrous, and irresponsible the recent at­tempt by enemies of the State to rubbish the profile of Governor Hope Uzodimma through fake news.

It said the fake news being cir­culated in the social media pur­porting a Supreme Court judge to have apologised to Imo people over the ruling five years ago was one in a series of failed attempts to rubbish the reputation of Uzo­dimma.

Commissioner for Informa­tion, Public Orientation and Strategy, Hon Declan Emelumba regretted that the purveyors of the fake news appear not to be tired even when “they have failed woefully and repeatedly in their satanic mission to destroy the governor politically.”

He, however, promised to match them in their game so as not to confuse the public, especial­ly Imo people, on the true nature of issues.

“We shall continue to counter them lest they get away with these tissues of lies and propaganda aimed at tarnishing the image of the governor, no matter how incredible and ridiculous,” the Commissioner declared.

According to Emelumba, in their haste to impersonate the so-called Supreme Court justice who purportedly apologised, blaming her action on eye in­fection, no name was given and the place and event where she made the statement were not also given.

He noted that those who con­tinue to dwell on the Supreme Court judgment have refused to accept defeat even when Uzodim­ma roundly trounced them in last year’s governorship election.

He said: “Because the opposi­tion continues to live in denial, it has never occurred to them that after the Supreme Court judgment, PDP sought a review where the learned Justices threw the books at them with a heavy cost. They also had another op­portunity to test their popularity in another election, yet Uzodim­ma floored them in all the 27 local government areas of the State. Is it not time for them to go hide their faces in shame?”

The Commissioner blamed the social media for aiding the opposition in the publication of unsubstantiated materials, espe­cially the instant one that seeks to denigrate the integrity of a Supreme Court judge.