Category: Judiciary

Abuja:  A Federal High Court, Abuja on Wednesday, described as “unlawful” the appointment of Federal Character Commission (FCC)’s Chairman, Muheeba Dankaka, and the Secretary, Bello Tukur, from the northern region by former President Muhammadu Buhari.

Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a judgment, held that the former president had failed to comply with the provisions of the laws in the duo’s appointment.

“Therefore, I find that there has been failure of the 1st defendant to comply with the provision of Section 14 (3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Section 4 (1) (a) of the FCC Establishment (FCCE) Act, 2004 and Section 4 of the Guiding Principles and Formulae for the Distribution of all Cadres of Posts,1997 made pursuant to Section 4 (1) (a) of the FCCE Act, 2004,” he said.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that a human rights advocate, Festus Onifade, had, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/709/2021, sued President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), FCC, Dankaka and Tukur as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.

In the originating summons dated and filed on July 19, 2021, the lawyer sought interpretation to two questions.

These include, “Whether by the combined provisions of Sections 7 and 8 (1) and (2) (a), (b), and (c) of the third Schedule, Part 1 of1999 Constitution (as amended) and Section 4(1) of the Subsidiary Legislation (GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND FORMULAE FOR THE DISTRIBUTION OF ALL CADRES OF POSTS) 1997 of the Federal Character Commission (Establishment,) Act 1995,.

He, therefore, sought a declaration that the president (1st defendant) is bound to observe and comply with the provision of the Sectons 7 and 8 (1), (2) (a) (b) (c) of the Third Schedule, part 1 of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended) in the appointment of persons to the office of the chairman and Secretary of FCC.

He sought an order directing the president to immediately dissolve and reconstitute the FCC’s board in accordance with the laws.

Onifade equally sought an order directing the president to immediately appoint other persons into these positions in compliance with the provisions of the constitution and the Act of National Assembly, among others.
NAN reports that while Dankaka is from Kwara, Tukur hails from Taraba.

Buhari had, on April 28, 2020, appointed Dankaka as the chairman of the commission for a five-year tenure and was confirmed by the Senate on June 2, 2020.
Also the ex-president approved the appointment of Tukur as FCC’s secretary on April 14, 2017 and was reappointed on March 12, 2021 for a term of four years(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)/ Flowerbudnews

======
Details later

The Nigeria Bar Association, NBA, has described the suspension of the Chief Judge of Osun State, Justice Oyebola Ojo by the State Governor, Ademola Adeleke as an assault on the judiciary.

The NBA in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Akorede Habeeb on Saturday, said the action of the Governor and the state government is an abuse of the rule of law and descration of the Nigerian constitution.

It reads, “The NBA unequivocally condemns this unlawful action by the Osun State Government. The action of the State Government is an abuse of the rule of law and a desecration of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 ( as amended).

“In very vivid terms, the actions of Governor Adeleke and the Osun State House of Assembly are an unwarranted assault on the Judiciary and aimed at intimidation.

“The NBA wishes to categorically state that the provisions of the 1999 Constitution are not ambiguous as to the way and manner a Chief Judge of a State could be removed from office. Certainly, a State House of Assembly resolution for a Chief Judge to “step aside” is unknown to the law of our land.

“Furthermore, the law has since been settled in Nganjiwa v FRN (2017) LPELR-43391 (CA) that any misconduct attached to the office and functions of a judicial officer must first be reported to and determined by the National Judicial Council (NJC). Specifically, the Supreme Court in Elelu-Habeeb & Anor v AG Federation & Ors (2012) 12 NWLR (Pt 1318) 423 has clearly stated that the Chief Judge of a State cannot be removed under any guise including the infamous “step aside style” by the Osun State Government without recourse to the NJC.

“The NBA is further worried and troubled that in going about its unlawful endeavour, the Osun State Government chose to ignore the lawful order of interim injunction granted by the National Industrial Court sitting in Ibadan, which restrained the Governor of Osun State from interfering with the office of the Chief Judge of Osun State.

“This is untoward, coming from a democratically elected state government. All decisions of the court must be obeyed and complied with until they are set aside by a superior court of competent jurisdiction.

“The NBA’s position is anchored on the constitutional doctrine of separation of power and the independence of the judiciary. The tenure of a judicial officer can not and should not be subject to the mood of politicians”

The body further disclosed that it will not recognise Governor Adeleke’s appointment unless the state government complies with the provision of the law.

It reads further, “To this extent, the NBA and its members shall not recognise Hon. Justice Olayinka Afolabi as the acting Chief Judge of Osun State, because the provisions of the law must be complied with strictly, in the removal of, and/or appointment of the Chief Judge of Osun State.

“The NBA shall take all necessary steps to ensure this impunity and brazen abuse of office does not stand!

Abuja: A Federal High Court, Abuja on Friday, refused to grant an application by Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State asking it to vacate its Sept. 26 interim order for lack of jurudiction.

Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling, rather adjourned the suit indefinately in view of the fact that an appeal had been entered at the Court of Appeal in respect of the issue before him by the speaker and the state’s assembly.

He also refused to grant Akeredolu and the speaker’s request to strike out or dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

The judge held that it would be wise for the court to adjourn the matter “sine die” pending the outcome of the appeal in order to avoid judicial rascality.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the speaker and the assembly had, on Oct. 20, appealed against the interim order made by Justice Nwite on Sept. 26.

In their appeal filed at the Appeal Court, Abuja, they sought two reliefs.

These include, “an order setting aside the ex-parte order of the lower court made on Sept. 26.

“An order allowing the appeal and directing that the substantive matter be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.”

NAN reports that the judge had, on Sept. 26, restrained the state’s assembly from impeaching Aiyedatiwa over alleged gross misconduct.

Nwite gave the interim order in a ruling shortly after Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Kayode Adewusi, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.

He also restrained Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarding same to the lawmakers for an approval as the new state’s deputy governor based on a letter of resignation purportedly authored or signed by Aiyedatiwa, pending the hearing and determination of the interlocutory application.

The embattled Deputy Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, sued the I-G and DSS as 1st and 2nd defendants.

Others joined in the suit include Akeredolu, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

In the application dated and filed by Mr Adelanke Akinrata on Sept. 21, Aiyedatiwa sought for four reliefs.

But Akeredolu, through his counsel, Kassim Gbadamosi, SAN, had, on Oct. 4, sought an order setting aside the entire proceedings conducted in the case on Sept 26, including the interim order of injunction made by the court, same having been irregularly obtained for lack of jurisdiction.

The governor also sought an order striking out or dismissing the suit for lack of jurudiction.

Besides, the speaker of the assembly, in his application filed by his lawyer, Femi Emodamori, on Oct. 27, equally sought an order that the suit was incompetent and that the court lacked both substantive or procedural jurisdiction to entertain same.

But Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, on Oct. 30, prayed the court to dismiss Akeredolu and the speaker’s applications, insisting that they lacked locus (legal right) to canvass such arguments.

Adegboruwa argued that since the speaker and the assembly (4th and 6th defendants) filed the appeal, he prayed the court to adjourn the case sine die (indefinately) to await the decision of the Court of Appeal.

He urged the judge to allow parties go to the appellate court in order not to waste the time of the court on arguments on whether it had jurisdiction or not and to avoid contesting with the superior court.

Delivering the ruling on Friday, Justice Nwite agreed with Adegboruwa’s submission that the court cannot wrestle jurisdiction with the Appeal Court, including on the pending ruling that was supposed to be delivered on the arguments preferred by the parties on Oct. 16.

“From the foregoing reliefs, there is no gainsaying that the reliefs being sought in that appeal affect the jurisdiction of the court and are also the same reliefs being sought by the 3rd and 4th defendants in their applications.

“Indeed, to indulge in such action will amount to judicial rascality.

“In view of the foregoing analysis, I am of the humble view and I so hold that the application of the plaintiff (Aiyedatiwa) is well founded and meritorious.

“Consequently, the matter is hereby adjourned sine die,” the judge declared.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng) /Flowerbudnews

Osun State Governor, Ademola Adeleke, has appointed Justice Olayinka Afolabi as the acting Chief Judge of Osun state with immediate effect, following the approval of the resolution of the House of Assembly.

This was disclosed by the spokesperson for the governor, Olawale Rasheed, in a statement obtained in Osogbo on Thursday.

Afolabi is next in line in order of seniority to the Chief Judge, Justice Adepele Ojo.

Earlier, Adeleke, had approved the resolution of the State Assembly, that recommended the suspension of Ojo.

The spokesperson for the governor, Olawale Rasheed, in a statement said the House had approved Ojo’s suspension at its plenary.

“Meanwhile, following the approval of the resolution of the House by the governor, the deputy governor has been directed by the governor to perform the swearing-in ceremony of the acting Chief Judge of Osun State which will be held tomorrow at the Executive Lounge, Governor’s Office, Osogbo,” the statement partly read.

Giving further details of what transpired at the plenary, Press Secretary to the Speaker, Tiamiyu Olamide, in a statement, said the Assembly resolved that the House Committee on Judiciary, Public Petitions and Legal Matters should investigate petitions submitted against Ojo by inviting her.

The committee was given seven days to report its findings to the House.

The statement read, “This decision was taken during the plenary on Thursday, the House also resolved that pending the outcome of the investigation, the Chief Judge of Osun State Honourable Justice Oyebola Adepele Ojo should step aside, not for any disciplinary action, but to allow for proper investigation.

“This House decision is in line with the investigative powers vested on the House of Assembly by the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended).

“The Executive Arm was also advised to immediately swear in the next judge in order of seniority as the acting Chief Judge of Osun State in order not to create a vacuum in the office while the executive was also advised to notify the National Judicial Council and the State Judicial Service Commission of the resolution of the House.”

Meanwhile, the suspended Chief Judge has sued Adeleke, the state Attorney General and the Osun State Judicial Service Commission before the National Industrial Court in Ibadan, Oyo State.

Earlier on Thursday, the suspended CJ, through her lawyer, Mr. Oladipo Olasope (SAN), obtained an interim order restraining the governor and other defendants from removing her from office.

Justice J.D. Peters, ruling on the motion ex parte marked NICN/IB/6123, made “an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants by themselves or their agents or privies howsoever so-called from interfering with removing, reversing or terminating the appointment and conditions of service of the applicant as the as the Hon. Chief Judge of Osun State including but not limited to salaries and other pecuniary benefits pending the determination of the interlocutory application.”

The judge made a similar order in the case of the Secretary to the Osun State JSC, Michael Obidiya, who also sued the governor to block his planned removal.

Both matters were adjourned till December 12 for hearing of Motions on Notice.

Abuja:   The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, has taken over a N5 billion fraud case filed by the Economic Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against former Aviation Minister, Stella Oduah, and others in compliance with a court order.

David Kaswe, the Chief State Counsel from the AGF’s Chambers, told Justice Inyang Ekwo shortly after the matter was called for hearing.
Upon resumed hearing, Kaswe notified the court that the AGF was taking over the matter and that his office had written to the EFCC but the commission was yet to release the case file to enable them commence the trial.

He, therefore, sought an adjournment.
But Justice Ekwo reminded the lawyer that it was the order of the court that the AGF should take over the case.

The judge, who said that the office of the AGF did not need to write the anti-graft agency, said the EFCC was bound to obey the order.

Kaswe, however, said that his office took into cognisance the fact that the EFCC had just had a change of leadership.  Justice Ekwo adjourned the matter until March 28.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the judge had, on July 21, ordered the AGF’s office to take over the N5 billion fraud case shortly after the arraignment of Oduah, a Chinese construction giant, CCECC, and others.
The development occured after the anti-corruption agency’s lawyer, Offem Uket, was unable to provide a direct answer to the judge’s question on why the agency failed to produce in court persons behind breaching his privacy through text messages on his phone and another group who petitioned the chief justice of Nigeria regarding the ongoing case
“I will give a date for trial and make a consequential order because you have allowed this matter to degenerate this way.

“You think you can shield any of these persons who have interfered in these proceedings?” he asked rhetorically.

“I make an order that the AGF shall take over this case and the EFCC shall hand over the records of proceedings to the office of the AGF,” the judge had ruled.

NAN reports that Oduah, a former senator representing Anambra North Senatorial District at the 9th National Assembly, and others were arraigned on July 21 on 25-count charge.
She was arraigned alongside CCECC Nigeria Ltd, the Nigerian subsidiary of China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC) established by the Chinese government to execute international contracts and economic cooperation.

Also joined in the charge are Gloria Odita, Nwosu Emmanuel Nnamdi and Chukwuma Irene Chinyere.

Others include Global Offshore and Marine Ltd, Tip Top Global Resources Ltd, Crystal Television Ltd and Sobora International Ltd.
They all pleaded not guilty to the counts and were admitted to bail in terms of the administrative bail earlier granted them by the anti-graft agency.

In the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/316/2020 and filed by the EFCC on December 17, 2020, the defendants are being accused of laundering various sums of money totalling about N5,052,415,984 between February and June 2014.

The EFCC accused the defendants of conspiracy to commit money laundering, transferring, taking control and taking possession of proceeds of fraud, aiding and abetting money laundering and opening anonymous bank accounts.

Specifically, the prosecution alleged in two of the 25 counts that Oduah, a former Aviation Minister, and Odita opened anonymous “Private Banking Nominee” dollar and naira accounts with First Bank Ltd, thereby committing an offence contrary to Section 11(1) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 11(4) (a) of the same Act.

In the charge, CCECC Nigeria Limited was alleged to have transferred over N2.5 billion into the naira account of a Private Banking Nominee between March 31 and June 6, 2014.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng) / Flowerbudnews

…..As plaintiff seeks adjournment to respond to Google’s plea

Abuja:   The Google LLC, an American multinational technology company, has urged a Federal High Court, Abuja to dismiss the 150 million dollars suit filed by a Nigerian, Mr Chianugo Peter, against it and GoDaddy.com.

Google, the 2nd defendant in the suit, told Justice Obiora Egwuatu that Peter’s claims were unmeritorious, unworthy and should be dismissed in its entirety.

The company made the averment in its statement of defence dated Nov. 9 and filed Nov. 10 by its lawyer, Mark Mordi, SAN.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Peter had sued GoDaddy.Com LLC and Google LLC as 1st and 2nd defendants over allegations bordering on the shutdown of his YouTube Audio domain name after eight years of promotional and marketing works.
The plaintiff, through his lawyer, Emmanuel Ekpenyong of Fred-Young & Evans LP, filed the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/238/2023 on April 14.
Peter sought the court declaration that he registered the YouTube Audio business name, commenced trademark registration on the logo of the business name.
He also said that he secured the YouTubeAudio.com domain name from the GoDaddy in good faith to carry out genuine business to host his application thereon to attract users.
He also sought a declaration that since GoDaddy and Google encouraged him to make use of the YouTubeAudio.com domain name for the past eight years, “they are estopped from claiming that the domain name infringes any of their trademarks or deny the plaintiff the use of the YouTubeAudio.com domain name.
“A declaration of this honourable court that the plaintiff is entitled to compensation from the defendants for the loss of the YouTubeAudio.com brand and goodwill which has accrued on the brand and domain name for eight years of promotional and marketing works from 2nd July, 2015 to 7th December, 2022.”
Peter, therefore, sought an order directing the defendants to pay him the sum of $50 million for promotional and marketing works on the YouTube Audio business name and YouTube Audio.com domain name for eight years from July 2, 2015 to Dec. 7, 2022.
“An order of this honourable court directing the defendants to pay the sum of 100, 000, 000 dollars to the plaintiff for loss of anticipated profits associated with the brand equity and goodwill of YouTube Audio and YouTube Audio.com domain name.
“An order of this honourable court directing the defendants to pay the Plaintiff the sum of N50, 000, 000 (Fifty Million naira) to enable the plaintiff to carry out fresh registrations of its new name and secure an alternative domain name to host its application to attract users.
“An order of this honourable court directing the defendants to pay the sum of N10, 00, 000 (Ten Million naira) paid to the plaintiff’s counsel for prosecution of this suit.”
NAN observes that though GoDaddy.Com LLC had neither been represented in court nor filed any application since the commencement of the case, Google LLC had responded.
In its reaction, Google argued that Peter did not act in good faith when he registered the YOUTUBE AUDIO business name and the YouTubeAudio.com domain name.
According to the company, the plaintiff was aware of his lack of bona fide claim because he approached it before he commenced operation “and acknowledged the 2nd defendant (Google)’s rights.
It gave reasons Peter should not be entitled to any of the reliefs sought in his statement of claim.
According to Google, the plaintiff does not own the YOUTUBE trademark nor does he have a bona fide claim to use or register any mark that incorporates or is similar to the YOUTUBE trademark.
“The 2nd defendant is the international owner of the duly registered and famous ‘YOUTUBE’ word and ‘YOUTUBE GO’ logo trademarks in Nigeria and worldwide.
“The 2nd defendant started using its YOUTUBE trademark in February 2005 internationally.
“In addition, the 2nd defendant’s YOUTUBE trademark was first registered in Nigeria in 2007.

“Such use and registration in Nigeria was prior to the plaintiff’s use in Nigeria, which only commenced in 2015,” the company argued.

When the matter was called on Monday, plaintiff’s counsel, Jude Otakpor, told the court that while he was in receipt of Google’s statement of defence, GoDaddy was yet to put up appearance in court.

The lawyer, who appeared for Google, Okimute Ohwahwa, said she had an application for extension of time to regularise their processes.
Ohwahwa said their statement of defence was dated Nov. 9 and filed Nov. 10.

Otakpor did not oppose Ohwahwa’s oral application and Justice Egwuatu granted it.
But Otakpor, however, sought an adjournment to enable them file a reply to Google’s statement of defence.

The judge, who adjourned the matter until Feb 12, directed that a hearing notice be issued on GoDaddy. /Flowerbudnews

By Taiye Agbaje

By Taiye Agbaje