Tag: Court

An FCT High Court sitting in Maitama has granted leave for the judicial review of Magistrate Abubakar Mukhtar’s criminal summons against Sen. Monday Okpebholo, the All Progressives Congress (APC)’s governorship candidate in the Saturday election in Edo.

Justice O.C. Agbaza, who granted the motion ex-parte moved by Okpebholo’s lawyer, Adaze Emwanta, held that the reliefs sought succeeded on the whole.

The judge, in the ruling on the motion marked: M/12340/2024 on Wednesday and the certified true copy of the order made available to NAN on Thursday, adjourned the matter until Oct. 28 for hearing.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mukhtar, the presiding magistrate at Wuse Zone 2, had, on Sept. 12, summoned Okpebholo for allegedly making a false statement on his date of birth.

The APC candidate was asked to appear before the court at 12 noon tomorrow, Sept. 20, by Mukhtar.

He was accused of claiming conflicting dates of birth in his nomination forms submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to contest the election.

The case, with suit no CR/W22/816/2024 before the magistrate, was instituted by an indigene of Edo, Honesty Aginbatse.
Against this order, Okpebholo, through his lawyer, Emwanta, filed a suit before Justice Agbaza of FCT High Court.
The applicant listed Mr Aginbatse and Mukhtar, who is Magistrate Grade 1 in the FCT, as 1st and 2nd respondents.
The motion, dated and filed on Sept. 17 sought two orders pursuant to Section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); Orders 44 Rule 3 and 43 Rule 1 of FCT High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2018 anf under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
The prayers included “an order granting the applicant leave to file an application for judicial review involving an Order of Certiorari against the order of the 2nd respondent; in issuing criminal summons against the applicant, upon the charge/request of the 1st respondent herein.
“An order granting leave for the applicant to file an application for judicial review involving an Order of Prohibition against the order of the 2nd respondent; in issuing criminal summons against the applicant, upon the charge/request of the 1st respondent herein.”
In the 11-ground of arguments filed by his lawyer, the APC candidate said the order issuing criminal summons against him over alleged date of birth forgery was made by Mukhtar without caution and due diligence.
He averred that the charge was contrived by Aginbatse as a ploy to scandalise his image ahead of the Saturday’s poll and to prevent him from presenting himself a d a candidate in the election.
He said the allegations made on the face of the charge before the Magistrate Court sitting at Wuse Zone 2 presided over by Mukhtar had earlier been resolved at the registry of the Supreme Court by virtue of a Deed Pool and gazetted in the official gazette of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on Aug. 1.
“On the 1st of August, 2024, the Deed of Regularisation of Personal particulars of Okpebholo Monday, the applicant herein was published on Page 272 No 131, Vol. 111 of the Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette.
“A copy of the official gazette containing applicant’s Deed of Regularisation of personal particulars is attached to the affidavit of facts and marked “Exhibit AP 3,” he said.
However, Okpebholo said on Sept. 12 at about 5pm, his attention was drawn to a criminal summons against him and signed by the magistrate which was flying on the social meda.
He said he observed that the magistrate ordered the summons in respect of an allegation of making false statement concerning his date of birth for which he had already done a Deed of Regularisation.
Besides, he said the aforesaid document bearing his name as accused person was not served on him, but was immediately posted on the social media to scandalise his public image ahead of the gubernatorial polls.
Okpebholo said the hearing of the criminal summons was intentionally fixed on September 20 (Friday), the eve of the election, as a ploy to prevent him from presenting himself as a candidate in the polls.
“The applicant is now desirous of bringing an application for an Order of Certiorari and an Order of Prohibition against the acts of the respondents herein in publishing Exhibits AP 4A and AP 4B, when he has not been served as required by law, just to frustrate his bid to participate in the election being the leading candidate,” he said.
In another development, Justice Peter Lifu of a Federal High Court, Abuja, on Thursday, reserved ruling on a motion on notice filed by the APC seeking to amend its originating summons in the suit against INEC, Asue Ighodalo and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
Justice Lifu also reserved ruling on Ighodalo and PDP’s notice of preliminary objection seeking the dismissal of the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

NAN reports that the APC’s motion sought an order removing Ighodalo’s name from the suit, because the party sponsoring was already a party in the suit.

The APC’s lawyer, Andrew Emwanta, argued that the amendment was to remove irrelevant references and to meet the purpose of the suit, which is to seek the determination of INEC’s statutory powers to disqualify an erring political party under Section 84(13) of the Electoral Act, 2022, and in pursuance of the plaintiff’s right of action as guaranteed by Section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

But, in separate preliminary objections adopted and argued by Ighodalo’s counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, and PDP’s lawyer, Bashir Folorunsho, they urged the court to strike out APC’s motion on notice.

After listening to the parties’ submissions, Justice Lifu reserved ruling on the matter and said a date would be communicated to the parties.

A Magistrates’ Court in Abuja on Friday, adjourned hearing in the case filed against Sen. Monday Okpebholo, the All Progressives Congress (APC)’s governorship candidate in the Saturday election in Edo, indefinitely.

Magistrate Abubakar Mukhtar adjournment followed an order of Justice O.C. Agbaza of the FCT High Court granting leave for Okpebholo to file an application for the judicial review of Mukhtar’s criminal summons against him.

Justice Agbaza, who granted the motion ex-parte moved by Okpebholo’s lawyer, Adaze Emwanta, adjourned the matter until Oct. 28 for hearing.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the magistrate had, on Sept. 12, summoned Okpebholo for allegedly making a false statement on his date of birth.

The APC candidate was asked to appear before the court at 12 noon today, Sept. 20, by Mukhtar.

He was accused of claiming conflicting dates of birth in his nomination forms submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to contest the election.

The case, with suit no CR/W22/816/2024 before the magistrate, was instituted by an indigene of Edo, Honesty Aginbatse.
Against this order, Okpebholo, through his lawyer, Emwanta, filed a suit before the FCT High Court.

The applicant listed Mr Aginbatse and Mukhtar, who is Magistrate Grade 1 in the FCT, as 1st and 2nd respondents.
After the ex-parte motion was moved, Justice Agbaza granted the two reliefs sought.

However, when the matter was called on Friday at the Magistrate Court sitting at Wuse Zone 2, neither Aginbatse nor Okpebholo was in court.
Lawyer to Aginbatse (complainant), R.O. Azinye, told the court that the matter was slated for mention.
Azinye informed the court that the defendant (Okpebholo) had not been served despite several attempts to do so.
He said in view of that, he had filed a motion ex-parte for substituted service on Okpebholo.
But before the lawyer proceeded to adopt his application, the magistrate drew his attention to the order of the FCT High Court that granted leave for judicial review.
Mukhtar held that following the order for a judicial review of the summons issued against Okpebholo, the case be adjourned sine die (indefinitely) pending the determination of the motion on notice pending before the FCT High Court.
NAN reports that Okpebholo’s motion, dated and filed on Sept. 17 sought two orders pursuant to Section 6(6)(b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); Orders 44 Rule 3 and 43 Rule 1 of FCT High Court Civil Procedure Rules, 2018 anf under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
The prayers included “an order granting the applicant leave to file an application for judicial review involving an Order of Certiorari against the order of the 2nd respondent; in issuing criminal summons against the applicant, upon the charge/request of the 1st respondent herein.
“An order granting leave for the applicant to file an application for judicial review involving an Order of Prohibition against the order of the 2nd respondent; in issuing criminal summons against the applicant, upon the charge/request of the 1st respondent herein.”
In the 11-ground of arguments filed by his lawyer, the APC candidate said the order issuing criminal summons against him over alleged date of birth forgery was made by Mukhtar without caution and due diligence.
He averred that the charge was contrived by Aginbatse as a ploy to scandalise his image ahead of the Saturday’s poll and to prevent him from presenting himself a d a candidate in the election.
He said the allegations made on the face of the charge before the magistrate had earlier been resolved at the registry of the Supreme Court by virtue of a Deed Pool and gazetted in the official gazette of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on Aug. 1.
Okpebholo said on Sept. 12 at about 5pm, his attention was drawn to a criminal summons against him and signed by the magistrate which was flying on the social meda.
He said he observed that the magistrate ordered the summons in respect of an allegation of making false statement concerning his date of birth for which he had already done a Deed of Regularisation.
Besides, he said the aforesaid document bearing his name as accused person was not served on him, but was immediately posted on the social media to scandalise his public image ahead of the gubernatorial polls.

Okpebholo said the hearing of the criminal summons was intentionally fixed on September 20 (Friday), the eve of the election, as a ploy to prevent him from presenting himself as a candidate in the polls.

Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, set aside the interim order restraining the Kwara government from conducting local government elections scheduled for Sept. 21

.Justice Peter Lifu, in a ruling, vacated the order on the grounds that it has expired by the provisions of the law, having lasted for more than 14 days.

Justice Lifu agreed with the submissions of Johnson Usman, SAN, counsel to the Kwara State Independent Electoral Commission (KWSIEC), and the Kwara Attorney General (AG), Senior Sulyman, SAN.

1. “It is on record that the same ex-parte order has been pending since July 29, 2024,” he said.
   According to the judge, ex-parte order should not last beyond 14 days
   “Since it has lasted more than 6 weeks, it is hereby set aside,” he declared.
   Justice Lifu, in another ruling also dismissed the contempt charge filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to commit the Chairman of KWSIEC, Alhaji Baba Okanla, to prison on allegations of violations of valid court order.
   The judge dismissed the application on the ground that the contempt of court charge initiated against the Kwara electoral body chair was not served on the contemnor as required by law.
   Justice Lifu, who upheld the arguments of Usman and Sulyman, said that since contempt charge is a criminal charge, it ought to have been served personally on the KWSIEC chairman and not through any other party or person.
   He said that the failure of the PDP’s lawyer, Ademola Abimbola, to serve the contempt charge on Okanla was a fundamental breach of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution which denied the contemnor a fair hearing.
   He said that from the record of the court, there was no evidence of personal service on Baba while at the same time, there was no evidence of substituted service order obtained from the court to serve the contemnor through substituted means.
   “I have carefully and painstakingly perused the arguments for and against the motion to commit the contemnor to prison.
   “Proceeding of contempt affects citizen’s liberty and where liberty of person is at stake, due process of the law must be carefully followed.
   “In the instant case, the fundamental right of the contemnor to fair hearing as enshrined in Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was breached by not serving him personally and this makes the motion for committal to prison to be liable to dismissal and is hereby dismissed,” Justice Lifu held.
   The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the judge had, on July 29, granted the PDP’s ex-parte motion to stop INEC from releasing the national voters’ register to KWSIEC for the Sept. 21 local government election in the state, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
   The PDP, the plaintiff, had, in the suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/1061/2024, sued INEC, KWASIEC, Kwara AG, Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and State Security Service (SSS) as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.
   PDP, had through its team of lawyers led by Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, told the court that KWASIEC was in grievous contravention, breach and violation of Sections 9, 28, 29 and 106 of the Electoral Act 2022, Sections 20 (1) and 21 (1) of Kwara State Local Government Electoral (Amendment) Law, 2024.
   PDP claimed that all the conditions and precedents contained in Local Government Electoral Laws in Kwara were deliberately jettisoned by the state’s electoral body under unacceptable circumstances.
   It alleged that KWSIEC had applied to INEC for the register of voters in Kwara to use the same in the conduct of the LG polls.
   The party said the action was in breach and violation of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the Electoral Act, 2022, as well as Kwara State Local Government Electoral (Amendment) Law, 2024.
   However, Abimbola alleged that KWSIEC, through a letter dated Aug. 28 and addressed to the state’s PDP chairman, invited the party to a peace meeting despite an injunction restraining parties from taking any step pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
   Against the development, the PDP lawyer commenced the contempt proceeding against the state’s electoral commission chairman.

A Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday, restrained the Ministry of Solid Minerals Development, SKECC Nigeria Ltd and others from taking any action that would jeopardise a suit filed in respect of a mining site in Kishi, Oyo State.

Justice Emeka Nwite, who gave the order, also ordered the seven other defendants, including the plaintiffs to maintain a status quo pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

The order followed an oral application moved by the applicants’ counsel, Adeola Adedipe, SAN, to the effect.

The applicants; AU Fields Ltd and First Monument Exploration Ltd, had sued SKECC Nigeria Ltd, Daye Shi, Yong Yuan, Jilong Yiu, Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and Federal Ministry of Solid Development as 1st to 6th defendants.

Also joined in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1106/2024 include Minister of Solid Minerals Development, Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) as 7th to 9th defendants.

The plaintiffs’ motion on notice was dated and filed on Aug. 6 by a team of lawyers led by Kazeem Gbadamosi, SAN.

They sought “an order of interlocutory injunction restraining the 1st to 4th defendants or their agents, from mining, exploring, escavating or prospecting for mineral resources on the plaintiffs’ property or anywhere else in Nigeria, pending the determination of this suit.”

Giving a 28-ground argument, the two companies averred that they owned exploration licenses and they operate with the permission and consent of the rightful owners of the landed property situated within Kishi in Oyo State.

They said they applied to the ministry and the minister for exploration licenses on the piece of land afore-described via application number: 44438 SSML.

According to them, the application made by the plaintiffs was granted and a license approved by the 6th and 7th defendants in favour of the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs said they also applied to the ministry and the minister “for exploration licenses on the piece and parcel of land afore-described via application numbers: 53680 EL and 59347 EL, which are now under processing for approval.”

They said their (plaintiffs’) workers on or about July 13 observed that the 1st to 4th defendants, through their workers and servants began moving into their land with heavy machines and equipment for the purpose of commencing exploration or prospecting for mineral resources.

They argued that SKECC Nigeria Ltd had no legal basis to venture into exploration and to prospect for mineral resources on their land or any land within the Nigeria because it is a building development company and not one licensed by the CAC to carry out any business relating to mining or exploration.

The duo said it was illegal for the ministry and the minister to have awarded a mining, exploration, and/or prospecting license to SKECC Ltd to mine, explore, or prospect on their land or any where else.
“The license purportedly awarded to the 1st defendant by the 6th and 7th defendants is a sham and is completely illegal,” they alleged.
The applicants described the act of the company and its managers in mining, exploring or prospecting for mineral resources as economic crimes.
They said unless the illegal activities of the company is stopped, it would continue unabated.
When the matter was called on Thursday, Adedipe told the court that the matter was slated for hearing.
But lawyer to the ministry and the minister, Abdulamid Ibrahim, informed the court that they were only served last week and they were still within time to respond.
Ibrahim, who sought an adjournment, said he was only briefed about the matter yesterday and was still studying the court processes.
He informed the court that there was no urgency in the matter, as the core issue only bordered on who should be the legitimate owner of the site.
“We, as regulators of the mining industry, are obligated to treat all parties fairly.
“In the interest of justice, it is better for the court to adjourn,” he said, emphasising the need for the ministry’s legal team to verify the claims and present its position on the next adjourned date.
On his part, Adedipe stressed the urgency of the case, stating that SKECC’s workers had invaded the site and were actively working there.
The senior lawyer, who argued that it was based on the importance of the case that an affidavit of urgency was filed and the matter assigned to the vacation judge, prayed the court to make an order directing all parties to maintain a status quo in order not to jeopardise the subject matter.
After listening to the parties, Justice Nwite agreed with Adedipe.
He subsequently ordered the parties to “maintain status quo” and refrain from taking any steps that could render his final verdict nugatory.
The judge adjourned the matter until Oct. 4 for hearing.

An Upper Area Court sitting in Kado, Abuja has restrained the police from investigating a paternity dispute against former Minister of Special Duties and Inter-Governmental Affairs, Kabiru Turaki, pending the hearing and determination of the case.

The presiding judge, Shehu Ahmadu, in a ruling, ordered the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and his officers not to accept any complaint from Musa Baffa, Uwani Arabi and their daughter, Hadiza Baffa, in relation to the ex-minister as the matter is already before the court.

The judge gave the order following an ex-parte motion moved by Turaki’s counsel on Sept. 2 and a certified true copy of the order made available to newsmen on Friday in Abuja.

The judge said: “respondents are hereby restrained, especially 4th to 10th respondents from accepting any complaint from the 1st to 3rd respondents (parents and daughter) especially the 2nd respondent (Hadiza) or carrying any investigation relating to the applicant as the matter is already before a competent court of law, the Upper Area Court Kado FCT, in CV/35/2024 until the determination of the motion on notice before this court.

“This order Is given under the hand and seal of the honourable judge.”
Turaki had, in the motion number: M/26/2024, sued Musa Baffa (father), Hadiza Baffa (daughter), Uwani Arabi (mother) and Nigeria Police Force as 1st to 4th respondents respectively.

Others listed in the application include the I-G, DIG Sylvester Alabi (DIG Force CID), AIG Muhammad Dan Kwara (Force CID), CP Musbahu Ajani (CP Admin, Force CID), CSP Mohammed Gashua and SP Ibrahim Shugaba as 5th to 10th respondents.
In the substantive suit marked: CV/35/2024 filed before the court, Turaki sued Musa, Hadiza and Uwani as 1st to 3rd defendants.
The ex-minister denied being responsible for Hadiza’s pregnancy which resulted in a baby girl.
He alleged that Hadiza had a boyfriend who he said was responsible for the pregnancy.
The ex-minister alleged that sometimes in 2016, Uwani, who was a person known to him In Kano before her marriage to Musa, called him on phone and sought his advice on her plans to relocate her daughter, Hadiza, “who was then schooling, according to her, at University of Maiduguri, because of the activities of Boko Haram.”
He said he advised Uwani to secure and.ission for her daughter at Bayero University, Kano; Usman Danfodiyo University, Sokoto, or University of Ilorin.
Turaki said after some weeks of the previous discussion, Uwani called and told him that she was coming to Abuja together with Hadiza and begged him to arrange an accommodation for them.
He said he obliged by securing an accommodation at Ideal Guest House, Garki which Is a furnished apartment that are let out for short or long stay.
He said Uwani secured admission for Hadiza at Baze University in Abuja and he supported her with N1 million out of the N3 million for registration fees.
He alleged that Uwani pleaded with him to serve as Guardian for her daughter, Hadiza.
The ex-minister, who averred that he took responsibility of Hadiza’s upkeep, said he was surprised to discover that Hadiza connived with her mother to change her surname to Turaki without his knowledge and consent.
He alleged that when Hadiza’s criminal acts became so intense, he drive her away and directed his staff not to allow her close to her office anymore.
He alleged that after walking out on the daughter and the mother for a month or there about, Uwani called him on phone and requested to see him.
He said during the meeting, Uwani told him that her daughter was pregnant and she said he was responsible.
Turaki averred that he outrightly denied the allegation describing it as a blackmail.
He alleged that Musa, Hadiza’s father, who he said had abandoned the daughter for 28 years, called him around May regarding the issue.
But in a statement of defence jointly filed by the parents and daughter, they denied Turaki’s allegations.
Hadiza and Uwani averred that it was the ex-minister who reached out 3rd defendant (Uwani) and offered to help her daughter “by enrolling her into Baze University in Abuja, bear the cost of her education and accommodation; and serve as her guardian.”
According to them, the plaintiff (Turaki) committed to doing everything for the 2nd defendant because according to him, he considers her as his daughter.
They alleged that it was Turaki who suggested the university contrary to his claim.
They said Hadiza’s registration fees when she gained admission in 2014 was N950, 000 and that the ex-minister gave her $2000 dollars for the fees.
Uwani said contrary to Turaki’s claim, the former minister offered to serve as Hadiza’s guardian.
Uwani, who said she never requested or prompted for such decision, said as at that time she did not suspect that Turaki had sinister motives towards her daughter.
Hadiza averred that she never suspected that Turaki’s benevolence towards her was to take her advantage
Uwani said contrary to Turaki’s claim that she begged him to give her daughter a car, the woman said she never had any of such discussion with the former minister.
According to her, it was the plaintiff who called her to pick up the Toyota Almera from his office at T.Y. Danjuma Street, Asokoro and she was surprise to see that the car particulars carried her name as “Hadiza Turaki.”
On her part, Hadiza alleged that it was Turaki who had changed her name to “Hadiza Turaki” by putting same on the vehicle papers he bought for her and persuaded her to use the same name on her Guarantee Trust Bank account number through which he sent monies to her severally through his account officer.
Hadiza alleged that she had challenges with her education, faced physical and emotional trauma when the ex-minister “exploited her under the guise of being her guardian.
She alleged that he frequently visited her in the apartments and several times lured her into having illicit sexual relationship with him.
She further averred that the plaintiff severally threatened her not to let her parents know that he was taking advantage of her thus, she was scared and traumatised, and the trauma affected her and her studies.
According to her, when the plaintiff realised that she was passing through psychological and physical trauma, he kept promising to marry her and began to build romantic phone and WhatsApp conversations with her.
Hadiza alleged that when she discovered that she was pregnant for Turaki, she informed him and he took several steps, including phone calls made to her trying to compel and pushing her to abort the pregnancy.
She said she decided to keep the pregnancy against all odds when she was advised against terminating it and the risk involved.
She alleged that Turaki became wild against her when she refused to listen to him.
Hadiza said she delivered the baby girl on April 3, 2023
“And when the plaintiff later saw the baby, he acknowledged that she was his daughter as a result of the striking resemblance with him,” she alleged.
She further alleged that the ex-minister even paid monies for the antenatal, delivery and post natal services of the baby girl at Nizamiyye Hospital.
The matter was adjourned until Sept. 24 for continuation of hearing.

Flowerbudnews

A Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday, admitted 10 #EndBadGovernance protesters charged with treason to a N10 million bail each with one surety each like sum.

Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling on their bail applications, agreed with the submissions of the counsel for the defendants.

Justice Nwite ordered that each of the defendants’ sureties must own a landed property in Abuja and submit the documents of the property to the registrar of the court.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Federal Government had, on Sept. 2, arraigned the protesters on counts bordering on treason, intent to destabilise Nigeria, conspiracy to commit felony and inciting mutiny, among others, which are punishable under Section 97 of the Penal Code.
The Federal Government, through the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, field the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/454/2024 on Aug. 30 against the defendants.
10 of the 124 persons arraigned included Michael Adaramoye also known as Lenin; Adeyemi Abayomi, Suleiman Yakubu, Opaluwa Simon, Angel innocent, Buhari Lawal, Mosiu Sadiq, Bashir Bello, Nuradeen Khakis and Abdusalam Zubairu.
NAN reports that some youths staged a nationwide protest against economic hardship between Aug. 1 and Aug. 10 in the country.
The demonstration turned violent in some parts of the country, with looting and vandalism recorded in some states.
The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty.

Flowerbudnews

The Kwara Government and the Kwara State Independent Electoral Commission (KWSIEC) have prayed a Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)’s suit seeking to stop the Sept. 21 local government elections.

The duo, in a separate preliminary objection and counter affidavit, told Justice Peter Lifu that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

They also urged the court to make an order dismissing or striking out the suit for being an abuse of court process.

Alternatively, they prayed the court to make an order dismissing for being statute barred.

In the preliminary objection marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1061/2024 filed by Johnson Usman, SAN, on behalf of KWSIEC (2nd defendant), the lawyer gave five grounds why the suit ought to be dismissed.
He argued that the PDP’s suit was predicated on the local government election in Kwara fixed for Sept. 21 and that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit “which deals with Kwara State Local Government Election being not election conducted or recognised under the Electoral Act, 2022.”
Usman, who argued that the PDP lacked the requisite locus standi to file the case, said the suit was incompetent.
Besides, he argued that the suit was statute barred, hence, the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain same.
The Kwara Attorney General (AG), Senior Sulyman, SAN, who was sued as 3rd defendant in the case, equally argued in the same vein in his preliminary objection and counter affidavit filed before the court.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the PDP, the plaintiff, had, in the suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/1061/2024, sued the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), KWASIEC, Kwara AG, Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and State Security Service (SSS) as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.
PDP, had through its team of lawyers led by Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, told the court that KWASIEC was in grievous contravention, breach and violation of Sections 9, 28, 29 and 106 of the Electoral Act 2022, Sections 20 (1) and 21 (1) of Kwara State Local Government Electoral (Amendment) Law, 2024.
PDP claimed that all the conditions and precedents contained in Local Government Electoral Laws in Kwara were deliberately jettisoned by the state’s electoral body under unacceptable circumstances.
It alleged that KWSIEC had applied to INEC for the register of voters in Kwara to use the same in the conduct of the LG polls.
The party said the action was in breach and violation of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the Electoral Act, 2022, as well as Kwara State Local Government Electoral (Amendment) Law, 2024.
NAN reports that Justice Lifu had, on July 29, granted the PDP’s ex-parte motion stopping INEC.from releasing the national voters’ register to KWSIEC to conduct the Sept. 21 LG poll pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
When the matter was called on Friday, PDP’s lawyer, Ademola Abimbola, told the court that the matter was adjourned till today for hearing of all the pending applications, including the substantive matter.
Abimbola also informed the court that KWSIEC served on them a motion, seeking to set aside the interim order of the court in August and that they responded with a counter affidavit on Sept. 4.
He said he would love to know if counsel to KWSIEC intend to proceed with the matter or not.
Usman, however, said he was ready for today’s hearing, including their motion to set aside thr interim order.
The senior lawyer expressed worry over the manner the PDP responded to their applications.
Usman said after serving the preliminary objection on the plaintiff, the PDP went to Ilorin to serve the KWSIEC, even though his office is in Abuja.
Besides, he said after serving the PDP with their motion seeking to vacate the interim order in August, the party only served him this morning even though it filed its response on Wednesday.
The last time we came, I said upon serving the plaintiff our preliminary objection, they went to Ilorin to serve the 2nd defebdabt in Ilorin when I am in Abuja we served the the other application , even though they filed two days ago, they only serve me today
Adamu Bello, who appeared for INEC, sought to withdraw all the processes filed, including their amended counter affidavit filed on Aug. 21.
After the oral application was not opposed, the judge granted it.
The PDP lawyer then informed the court that his client just forwarded a letter dated Aug. 28 to him.
Abimbola said the letter was addressed to PDP chairman in the state, inviting the party to a peace meeting despite an injunction restraining parties from taking any step pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
“There is two things I can deduce here. The 2nd defendant (KWSIEC) is in contempt of court. Therefore the 2nd defendant cannot be heard in this case,” he said.
But the senior lawyer opposed Abimbola’s oral application in strong terms.
Usman argued that in the first instance, there was no evidence placed before the court of any alleged disobedience to the order.
“My lord, speaking from the inner bar, I am hearing this allegation for the first time and my learner friend holds me a duty to inform me to confirm from my client,” he said.
Besides, he argued that such application cannot be made orally by any means.
“All the facts alleged are concrete facts that cannot be given by a lawyer in the bar. It must come by affidavit and that has not been done. Therefore, his application cannot be granted,” he added.
Usman said if Abimbola felt that KWSIEC was in disobedience of court order, he knew the proper thing to do.
“He should do the needful, serve the 2nd defendant and we will take it from their,” he added.
He urged the court to discountenabce the entire allegation, saying “there is no document to show to court but he is only speaking from his phone.”
Abimbola then said that he forwarded the electronic copy of the letter to Usman some minutes after the hearing had already started.
“You did that while the court was sitting right? But the learner silk has been here since morning,” the judge said.
When Abimbola attempted to read the letter, Usman vehemently objected.
“I objected because reading it will be prejudicial,” he said.
But Abimbola insisted he could raise the application orally, citing two previous cases.
He said KWSIEC’s disobedience to court order was tied to the issues of the election.
On his part, Usman argued that the authority cited by Abimbola was directly against the PDP lawyer and in his (Usman’s) support.
He said in the case Abimbola cited, a formal application was filed but in the instant case, he had not done that.
“So having not filed same, that authority should be used against him,” he said.
Usman also disagreed with Abimbola’s sought for adjournment.
“There is no reason for adjournment. What he is seeking, he can do it at any time and day.
“Application for committal can even be heard after judgment.
“The election is 21st of this month, 16 days from today. The election affects the entire state. It is in our interest that this matter be heard.
“Preparation for election involves huge money and without the election, the state will not receive allocation from FAAC. It is a known fact,” he said.
The Kwara AG equally opposed Abimbola’s plea for an adjournment, citing Order 26, Rule 2 of the Federal High Court.
Sulyman argued that such request is an application to bring an application, which he said, was unknown to law.

“This is so because there is no formal application before the court.
“Besides, there is nothing placed before the court to warrant this. It is just a mere allegation.

“We urge the court to dismiss it as time wasting and order that we proceed,” Sulyman said.
Justice Lifu, who ordered the PDP to make a formal application of the allegation, adjourned the matter until Sept. 11 for hearing of all pending applications, including the substantive suit.

By Chidi Anselm Odinkalu

Seven years after his emergence as Nigeria’s military Head of State, in the third quarter of 1974, General Yakubu Gowon placed a telephone call to the then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Taslim Elias. The subject matter of the call, according to Atanda Fatayi Williams, himself then a Justice of the Supreme Court (and future CJN) with whom the Chief Justice discussed the matter, was a complaint by the Head of State “about the manner in which the courts in the country were being used for the indiscriminate swearing of affidavits in which allegations of corruption were made against public functionaries.”

General Gowon’s agonists had their origins in events in his home state, Benue-Plateau (as it was then known). First, he had been forced to let go of a trusted minister from his state, Joseph Tarka, after one Godwin Daboh Adzuana deposed to an affidavit with quite damaging allegations of corruption against the minister. Gowon’s call to the CJN followed in the wake of another affidavit sworn to this time by Aper Aku (who later became the first elected governor of Benue State in 1979) accusing the then military governor of Benue-Plateau State and Gowon’s relation, Joseph Gomwalk, of what Fatayi Williams later described as “corruption on a vast scale.”

Rather than address the allegations of corruption, the General sought the help of his Chief Justice to shut down the disclosures. In the then incumbent, Gowon found a Chief Justice who was willing to go beyond the call of the law to fulfil the importuning of his Chief of State. Following consultations with his peers at the Supreme Court, CJN Elias convened a meeting of the Advisory Judicial Committee (AJC), as the apex mechanism for judicial governance was then called. Led by the CJN, the membership of the AJC included the Attorney-General of the Federation, all the Chief Justices (as they were then called) and Grand Khadis of the States; as well as the President of the Federal Revenue Court.

This high judicial conclave decided unanimously that “except in connection with proceedings already pending, the courts would no longer allow affidavits to be sworn in court by aggrieved citizens.” Public reaction was immediate and understandably visceral to a decision which was unconcealed in its design to instrumentalise the judiciary in order to hide inconvenient facts on behalf of the regime in power. To make matters worse, the AJC could not cite any legal authority or basis for their decision. They were collectively the highest judicial figures in the country and their word represented the law, or so they thought. It was abuse of judicial power on a colossal scale. Judicial authority was shot and it is arguable that it never recovered.

When a new military regime overthrew General Gowon in July 1975, their narrative and rationale harked back to the corruption allegations and the desperation of the regime to procure a cover-up with the ex-cathedra assistance of the judiciary high command. An early casualty of the new regime was Chief Justice Elias whom they forced to abdicate. They also took the hacksaw to judicial tenure, retiring senior judges compulsorily.

Then as now the judiciary in Nigeria was the author of its own defenestration. The real scandal then was that the decision to foreclose disclosure of inconvenient facts in affidavits occurred without dissent among the AJC. It showed the regimental and cloistered tendencies of the herd at their finest, even one comprising people claiming to be learned.

The best that can be said of the immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria, Olukayode Ariwoola, is that he well and truly defanged the judiciary. When he was not in Port Harcourt cavorting with Nyesom Wike and his Group of Five Governors so-called; he was in Abuja dreaming us schemes to jump his next available family member or political satrap into a judicial sinecure. The unanimity of sentiment at his departure went beyond shame-faced relief.

Monday Phillips Ekpe writes delicately that the judiciary that Olukayode Ariwoola left behind made a habit of “rubbishing its own touted image” with “embarrassing and rampant unpredictability of judgements.” Onikekpo Braithwaite complains less delicately of a judiciary overcome by “mounting allegations of corruption, as well as the menace of conflicting judgements.” The Board of Editors of the Punch newspaper sadly acknowledge the reality of a judiciary characterized by “pervasive corruption” and of courts which “have become houses of rot and victims of state capture…. At 75 per cent, the judiciary and the Independent National Electoral Commission have the lowest public trust among Nigerians.”

On the back of this chastening diagnosis, many senior lawyers have stepped in with a rich and telling bouquet of recommendations for the new CJN, running the gamut from the platitudinous to the patronizing and everything in between. Former president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olisa Agbakoba, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), desires reforms that are both “transformational and radical.” As part of that menu, one of his later successors, Augustine Alegeh (SAN), wants attention to “delays in the dispensation of justice and the uncertainty of the judgements of our courts.”

These references to “uncertainty” in or “conflicting” judgements are coinages deployed by lawyers to avoid saying that some judgements are corrupt on their face. That, sadly, is the state of the courts that the new Chief Justice inherits. Indeed, a panel of the Court of Appeal has recently been constrained to describe as “scandalous” a High Court shielding former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello, from criminal proceedings.

But that is only a tip of the proverbial iceberg. In this state of transition in the highest judicial office in the land, three words of caution are useful.

First, a CJN in search of a legacy needs clear priorities. Many of the suggestions to the new Chief Justice focus on institutional or administrative re-design. In reality, however, the principal problem that ails Nigeria’s judicial system is that the guardrails and incentives for ethical judicial service have been destroyed by a concert of senior judicial figures, senior lawyers and senior politicians. Reversing this needs a new coalition for public good in the judiciary. Without a re-engineering of the incentive structure, every effort at institutional re-design is bound to collapse. That begins with attention to appointment, preferment, accountability and discipline. Restoring consequences for judicial malfeasance will be key.

Second, a reverse engineering of the political capture of the Nigerian judicial system is essential. Evidence of this political capture is seen daily in the implausible decisions and improbable orders that issue in most cases of partisan political salience; in the speed with which such cases are assigned priority to the exclusion of the regular judicial docket; and in the improbable consistency in the line-up of judicial actors involved in these judicial concatenations. If politicians find themselves regularly before courts that are no longer beholden to their blandishments, they may be forced to rethink their approach to politics.

Third, a CJN who desires a constructive legacy must know whom to avoid. With some exceptions – such as the aforementioned Olisa Agbakoba and Augustine Alegeh – many senior lawyers who are now crawling out of the wood works were nowhere to be seen or heard from when the immediate past CJN was busy wreaking havoc. If anything, some of them could be described with some justification as having been part of his enablers. Much of what emanates from these kinds of sources at this time could be at best self-serving. A CJN who desires to succeed needs to seriously avoid occupational intimacy with these kind.

A Chief Justice who seeks to accomplish any of these will encounter challenges. One who desires to accomplish all may even struggle to survive in office. Such could be the extent of the political push-back. But that is why the task of reforming Nigeria’s judicial system is now clearly well beyond the technocratic or professional incest of lawyers and judges. It is now political and only a Chief Justice willing to enlist citizens in that urgent task can scratch the surface.

*A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu*

•

Abuja:  – The Federal Government on Monday arraigned a 70-year-old Briton, Andrew Martin Wynne, and nine others for allegedly attempting to overthrow President Bola Tinubu.

The Inspector General of Police (IGP) brought the charges before the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The other accused persons are Michael Tobiloba Adaramoye, Adeyemi Abiodun Abayomi, Suleiman Yakubu, Comrade Opaluwa Eleojo Simon, Angel Love Innocent, Buhari Lawal, Mosiu Sadiq, Bashir Bello Nurudeen Khamis, and Abduldalam Zubair.

They were alleged to have committed the treasonable offence between July 1 and August 4 during a week-long nationwide protest when they broke into the Abacha Army Barracks and openly called on the military to take over the constitutional government of President Tinubu.

The IGP also alleged that the accused attempted to force their way into the seat of power.

They were also accused of inciting the public against the government and destroyed several public properties, including police stations, a High Court complex, and National Communication Commission (NCC) facilities.

The offences were said to have been committed in Abuja, Kano, Kaduna, and Gombe, among other locations.

Simon Lough, the Counsel for the IGP, urged the court to remand the accused in prison pending trial.

The accused, however, pleaded not guilty to the charges when they were read to them. (GBN)