Flowerbud News

Tag: Court

  • Tariff hike: Tribunal orders substituted service of interim order on MultiChoice

    Tariff hike: Tribunal orders substituted service of interim order on MultiChoice

     

    Flowerbudnews

    A Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal (CCPT) sitting in Abuja has granted an application for substituted service of the interim order, restraining Multi-Choice Nigeria Limited from its plan to increase tariffs on DStv and Gotv packages beginning From May 1.

    The three-member tribunal, presided over by Saratu Shafii, granted the applicant’s motion following allegations that officers of the pay-TV firm in Abuja office refused to receive service of the order and other court documents.

    The applicant, Festus Onifade, told News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Wednesday that the CCPT bailiff alleged that one of the company’s top managers at the Abuja office said the documents be channelled through their Lagos office, which is the headquarters.

    The tribunal, therefore, gave the order of substituted service pursuant to Section 48 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018; and Part N, Order 14 Rule 11(1) of the CCPT Rule, 2021.

    In the certified true copy of the order of substituted service, Shaffi directed that the ex-parte order in suit number: CCPT/OP/2/2024, be pasted at the corporate headquarters or any known address of the branches of the Multi-Choice Nigeria Limited across Nigeria.

    She also ordered that the documents be sent to the company’s “known email address, social media handles and any means of communication publicly known for Multi-Choice and shall also be pasted in the CCPT communication outlet.

    The documents had since been pasted at the Multi-Choice Abuja office located at Wuse II.

    NAN reports that the tribunal had, on Monday, stopped MultiChoice from increasing its tariffs and cost of products and services scheduled to begin today.

    The panel, who gave the order following an ex-parte motion moved by Ejiro Awaritoma, counsel for the applicant, restrained the firm from going ahead with impending price increase pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice filed before it.

    Onifade, in the suit marked: CCPT/OP/2/2024, had dragged Multi-Choice Nigeria Ltd and Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) before the tribunal.

    In the suit filed on April 29, Onifade, also a legal practitioner, sought two orders.

    These include, “an order of interim injunction of this honourable tribunal restraining the 1st defendant whether by themselves, her privies, assigns by whatsoever name called from going ahead with impending price increase schedule to take effect from 1st May, 2024, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

    “An order restraining the 1st defendant from taking any step(s) that may negatively affect the rights of the claimant and other consumers in respect of the suit pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice.”

    Multi-choice had recently announced a price increment across its DStv and GOtv packages effective May 1, 2024.

    The pay-TV company claimed the price hike was due to the cost of business operations in Nigeria.

    NAN reports that the company had, on April 1, 2022, hike the prices of all its packages despite public outcry.

    Prior to the effective date, Onifade filed a suit before Thomas Okosun-led CCPT, seeking an order restraining Multi-Choice from going ahead with planned increase, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice dated and filed on March 30, 2022.

    Although the tribunal granted the ex-parte motion, directing parties to maintain status quo ante bellum, the company went ahead with the price increase on DStv and Gotv subscriptions and other products on the said date.

    The claimant, however, raised the issue of contempt, accusing MultiChoice of disobeying the tribunal order which restrained them from going ahead with the price increase.

    He accused the company of having penchant for disregard to court order.

    And on April 11, 2022, after the arguments by counsel for the parties, the tribunal again ordered MultiChoice to revert back to the old prices by maintaining status quo of its March 30, 2022 order, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter.

    But this was all to no avail as counsel for MultiChoice, Jamiu Agoro, challenged the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear the matter as the claimant lacked the locus to institute the action.

    Agoro had argued that the order of the tribunal made on April 11, 2022, asking MultiChoice to revert to old rates was made against a completed act, the firm, having increased its tariffs on April 1, 2022.

    The lawyer argued that MultiChoice had already configured all their devices for the increase in tariff to take effect before the tribunal made its order.

    Agoro added that there was no evidence presented before the tribunal of damage that the claimant had suffered.

    The Thomas Okosun-led tribunal, on Sept 6, 2022, consequently dismissed Onifade’s suit, saying the power to regulate prices of goods and services does not reside in the FCCPC, the regulatory agency.

    According to the tribunal, the power to regulate prices of goods and services only resides in the president.

    However, the judgement, which had been appealed against, is presently before the Court of Appeal in Abuja..

    Onifade, in the instant suit, is contesting that Multi-Choice had failed to follow due process of law in accordance with Section 128 of FCCPA, 2018, in its announcement of the price hike on the grounds of short notice given to customers.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Tukur Mamu: Court warns FG against lack of diligent prosecution

    Tukur Mamu: Court warns FG against lack of diligent prosecution

     

    Flowerbudnews

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Monday, warned the Federal Government (FG) against lack of diligent prosecution in the charge filed against former terrorist negotiator, Tukur Mamu.

    Justice Inyang Ekwo gave the warning following the disappearance of the FG’s lawyer, David Kaswe, in court prior to the resumed hearing in the case.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mamu was arraigned, on March 21, 2023, on 10 counts of terrorism financing, among others, but pleaded not guilty to the counts.

    Justice Ekwo, on April 27, 2023, declined to admit him to bail on the grounds of ill-health, after the Department of State Service (DSS) opposed the bail application.

    However, the judge, on Dec. 19, 2023, granted Mamu’s plea to have access to his own personal physician due to his alleged deteriorating health condition.

    Justice Ekwo, in the ruling, ordered that Mamu’s medical doctor should be allowed to treat him subject to the supervision of the DSS’ team of physicians.

    When the case was called on Monday, Kaswe, who entered his name on the cause list for the prosecution, was not in court.

    Mamu’s counsel, Abdul Mohammed, SAN, urged the court to stand down the matter to await Kaswe’s return.

    When the case was called again after the judge had delivered a judgment, the prosecution lawyer was still not in court

    Mohammed then said he would have applied that the charge be struck out because Mamu, since arraignment, had not been admitted to bail and that the court directed accelerated trial of the case.

    The senior lawyer added that despite being in court this morning, Kaswe was not in court even at 10am.

    The lawyer then notified the court of their motion on notice which he said the prosecution had responded to.

    Justice Ekwo granted his prayer to move the application.

    Mohammed said the motion, dated and filed Feb. 23, sought an order transferring Mamu to Kuje Correction Centre for proper medical attention.

    He said the motion had a 24-paragraph affidavit and Exhibits A to G.

    He said the court, recognising the fact that the defendant must be alive to face trial, ordered that he should be granted access to medical officers of his.

    Mohammed alleged that the order had not been complied with.

    “This application is brought so that we will take the defendant to the prisons because they always obey court order there, so that if we go there, he will have access to his medical officer.

    “It is completely within the discretion of the court and we do not want to bring application for contempt as that will take time.

    “Therefore, we want the court to vary the order and the defendant will stay in the Kuja Correctional Facility. That is what we are asking for,” he said.

    The judge, who deemed the counter affidavit of the prosecution filed on Feb. 27 as being adopted in compliance with the rules of the court, said he was aware that the prosecution was informed of the hearing date by the court registrar.

    Besides, he said he was also aware that Kaswe, who was to appear for the prosecution, was in court in the morning.

    Justice Ekwo, however, expressed surprised over “the miraculous disappearance” of the Federal Government’s lawyer in court.

    “I am also aware that the prosecution was in court this morning, but as to the miracle of disappearance of the prosecution as at the time this matter comes up for hearing is beyond my understanding,” he said.

    According to him, the prosecution understand that this is a court that stands on the side of justice and if you bring a person to stand trial, you should be bold enough to face the person during trial.

    “This antic of the prosecution is only being tolerated in today’s proceeding.

    “If the prosecution demonstrates that they are not ready to prosecute this matter either diligently or expeditiously, the court will make the right decision at that point,” the judge warned.

    Justice Ekwo, subsequently, adjourned the matter until May 20 for ruling on Mamu’s application to be transferred to Kuje Correctional Centre.

    NAN reports that Mamu, who is standing trial over his alleged relationship with terrorists that were involved in the March 28, 2022 attack on an Abuja-Kaduna-bound train, was arrested on Sept. 6, 2022, by Interpol in Cairo, Egypt, on behalf of the Nigerian government.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Court awards N300m fine against police over alleged killing of 3 Shiite’s members in Zaria

    Court awards N300m fine against police over alleged killing of 3 Shiite’s members in Zaria

     

    Flowerbudnews

    A Federal High Court sitting in Kaduna has ordered the police authorities to pay a cumulative sum of N300 million to the parents of three Shiite members allegedly killed by its officers while on Islamic procession in 2022 in Zaria.

    Justice Hawa Buhari, in a judgment, held that the “applicants’ rights as guaranteed under Sections 33, 38, 39, 40, 42 and 46 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); Order 2, Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 11 and 12 of the Fundamental Right (Enforcement Procedure) Rules 2009; Article 4, 8, 10, 11 and 12 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights 2004 is hereby enforced.”

    The judge held that the sum of N100 million which must be paid to each parents of the deceased, making a total of N300 million, as compensation and general damages, would attract a 10 per cent interest per anum until the amount is fully paid.

    Justice Buhari, in the judgement delivered on April 22, 2024, and a certified true copy of the judgment order made available to newsmen on Sunday in Abuja, consolidated the three separate suits filed by the three next-of-kins of the deceased.

    “Upon respective counsel move and adopt their respective processes, the court consequently considered same and hereby orders as follows:

    “Suit No: FHC/KD/CS/138/2022, Suit NO: FHC/KD/CS/140/ 2022 and Suit No: FHC/KD/CS/146/2022 are hereby consolidated.

    “The sum of N100,000,000.00 (One Hundred Million Naira) be paid to each parents of the deceased as compensation and general damages with a 10 % interest per anum until the amount is fully paid.

    “The respondents shall tender a public apology to the applicants in one national daily for the breach of their fundamental right,” she declared.

    It would be recalled that three applicants; Magaji Yusuf, Muhammad Lawal and Aliyu Badamasi had filed the suits marked: FHC/KH/KD/138/2022, FHC/KH/KD/140/2022 and FHC/KH/KD/146/2022 respectively before the court.

    They alleged that on August 8, 2022, the officers of the Nigerian Police shot and killed Jafar Magaji, Aliyu Lawal and Muhsin Badamasi while observing their religious act of worship; Ashura Procession in Zaria City.

    They had sued the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Assistant Inspector-General of Police Zone 7, Kaduna State Police Commissioner, AC Surajo Fana (Area Commandant, Zaria), Ibrahim Zubairu (Divisional Police Officer, Kasuwan Mata, Sabon Garin, Zaria Division), and Kasim Muhammad (DPO, Zaria City Division) as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

    The applicants, in the motions on notice dated September 26, 2022 and filed September 26, 2022, by their team of lawyers, including H.G Magashi, M.D Abubakar and Dr Yusha’u Shaikh, sought seven reliefs.

    They sought a declaration that the shooting and killing of Jafar Magaji, Aliyu Lawal and Muhsin Badamasi on the said date while on religious procession was illegal, unconstitutional and flagrant violation of their fundamental right to life as guaranteed by Section 33 of the 1999 Constitution and Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Right Act Cap A9 LFN, 2004.

    They, therefore, prayed the court for an order mandating the respondents jointly and severally to pay to them the sum of N200 million each for violation of the fundamental rights of their deceased brothers.

    They equally sought an order, directing the respondents to tender a formal apology to them by publishing same in two national dailies that are circulating in northern Nigeria.

    But the respondents, in their preliminary objection dated and filed on November 8, 2022, sought an order striking out the three suits for want of jurisdiction.

    Besides, they also filed a counter affidavit in opposing the suits

    But Justice Buhari agreed with the submission of the applicants’s counsel, and assumed jurisdiction on the matter.

  • Ex- judge’s daughter seeks share of late father’s property

    Ex- judge’s daughter seeks share of late father’s property

     

    Flowerbudnews
    Ann Eniyamire, the daughter of former Abuja Customary Court of Appeal President, Justice Moses Bello, on Wednesday, prayed an FCT High Court sitting in Bwari to declare that she is entitled to 11.11 per cent of all her late father’s property, including estates.

    Eniyamire told Justice Mohammed Madugu, through her lawyer, Yahuza Mahraz, to grant her the entitlement in line with her late father’s will.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that in the suit marked: CV/667/2024, Eniyamire sued Reverend Father Ezekiel Awolumate and Christ the King Catholic Church Okene Parish as 1st and 2nd defendants.

    Her lawyer contended that his client was short-changed by the executor of the will, Reverend Father Ezekiel John (1st defendant) and another.

    The claimant, in the affidavit attached to the motion, deposed that her late father instructed that all his assets be shared between his wife and the children following an 11.11 per cent sharing formula.

    She, therefore, accused the defendants of adopting a sharing formula of 4.16 per cent.

    Eniyamire, who has 38 reliefs, urged the court to reverse the alleged decision of the defendants, relieve them of their duties (as executors of her father’s will) and restore 11.11 per cent of her father’s property to her.

    She also sought a declaration that the claimant is entitled to a share of 1/9 or 11.11 per cent of all her late father’s assets of shares and stocks.

    She equally sought an order directing the defendants to account, tender and hand all necessary documents
    with regards to administration, management and distribution of the estates of the claimant’s late father to any appointed administrator general, among others.

    When the matter was called on Wednesday, Mahruz told the judge that hearing on his case was ripe.

    But the defendants’ counsel, Adewale Adegboyega, told the judge that he had filed a preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit.

    Justice Madugu, who said it was not convenient to take the matter today, consolidated the defendants’ notice of preliminary objection and the claimant’s motions so that they could be taken together in tye next adjourned date.

    He then adjourned the matter until June 4 for definite hearing.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Court dismisses money laundering charge against ex-AGF, Adoke

    Court dismisses money laundering charge against ex-AGF, Adoke

     

     

    Flowerbudnews

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Friday, dismissed the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)’s money laundering charge filed against former Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Monster of Justice, Mohammed Adoke.

    Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a ruling on Adoke’s no-case submission, said he found that the EFCC had been unable to prove the essential ingredients of the evidence adduced in counts one to four of the 10-count charge filed against the ex-AGF and his co-defendant, Aliyu Abubakar.

    Justice Ekwo, who held that the evidence were manifestly unreliable, consequently upheld Adoke’s no-case submission.

    He, therefore, declared Adoke discharged and acquitted of the money laundering charge.

    However, the judge held that the anti-graft agency had been able to make a prima facie case against Abubakar, the oil magnate, in counts five, six, eight and nine of the charge preferred against him.

    But he struck out counts one, seven and 10 against the businessman.

    The judge therefore adjourned until April 22, April 23 and April 24 for Abubakar to open his defence.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the EFCC had sued Adoke and Abubakar on a 10-count amended charge bordering on money laundering offences.

    The matter, which began in 2017, had lasted for about 7 years(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

     

    Details later

  • Court dismisses senior lawyers’ suit challenging appointment of judges in Kogi

    Court dismisses senior lawyers’ suit challenging appointment of judges in Kogi

     

    Flowerbudnews
    A Federal High Court, Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by seven senior advocates of Nigeria against National Judicial Council (NJC) and others over alleged unlawful appointment of judges in Kogi.

    Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, held that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi to institute the action and that the suit itself lacked merit.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the aggrieved seven lawyers, who also hail from Kogi, are Yunus Usman, SAN; Jibrin Okutepa, SAN; Patrick Okolo, SAN; Abdullahi Haruna, SAN; Reuben Atabo, SAN; Shaibu Aruwa, SAN and Johnson Usman, SAN.

    The plaintiffs, in the originating summons marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/05/2024, sued the NJC, Kogi State Judicial Service Commission (KSJSC), Governor of Kogi and Attorney-General (A-G) and Commissioner for Justice in the state as 1st to 4th defendants respectively.

    They sought a mandatory order restraining the defendants from appointing new judicial officers until there is strict compliance with the laws.

    In the originating summons dated Jan. 4 but filed Jan. 8, they sought a declaration that the selected candidates for onward transmission to NJC for appointment as judges was not “totally based on merits, competence, sound knowledge of the law, professional expertise and skill, seniority, fairness, equity and equality.”

    They argued that the same was marred by political and ethnic influence contrary to the provisions of Rule 3 (6)(i)-(iv) and Rule 4(4)(a) of the NJC Guidelines and Procedural Rules for the Appointment of Judicial Officers of all superior Courts of Records in Nigeria, 2014 and Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    They also alleged that the KSJS was doing the bidding of the governor.

    The NJC, in its counter affidavit, urged the court to strike out the suit for want of jurisdiction.

    The application was based on the grounds that the suit did not disclose a course of action against the NJC and that the plaintiffs lacked locus standi to file the matter

    The 2nd to 4th, in their counter affidavit and a preliminary objection, prayed the court to dismiss the suit.

    It would be recalled that the chief judge of the state, in a letter to the Lokoja Branch of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), shortlisted some judicial officers to be appointed into the state’s High Court, Sharia Court of Appeal and Customary Court of Appeal.

    NAN reports that the NJC had suspended the process of the appointment of judges and kadis into the state’s judiciary, saying the development was to maintain a fair and just judicial system following a letter by the seven senior lawyers intimating it on a suit instituted against the appointment.

    Delivering the judgment on Thursday, Justice Omotosho noted that though the plaintiffs brought the suit on their own behalf and the marginalised people of Okun origin and Ibaji Local Government Area (LGA) of Kogi, he said: “interestingly, none of the plaintiffs were in consideration for appointment as Judicial officers.”

    “In fact, they are senior legal practitioners who are uninterested in becoming judges in Kogi State.

    “In fact it has not shown that the acts of the defendants injured the interests of any of the plaintiffs in any way.

    “They never participated in the recruitment process neither were they appointed by the marginalised people of Okun origin and Ibaji LGA to fight their cause for them if any,” he said

    He said while the court was aware that the courts had expanded the realms of locus standi in some cases to include public interest litigation, there are still limits to it.

    “For instance, Fundamental Rights Enforcement suits under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules have expanded locus standi to even non-governmental organisations to bring action on behalf of a person whose rights have been infringed.

    “This suit as far as this court knows is not a fundamental rights suit.

    “There must be some form of link between the actions of the defendants and the rights of the plaintiffs instituting an action.

    “Without any such link, it amounts to an academic suit which in the opinion of the court has no basis,” he said.

    The judge, who held that the plaintiffs had no peculiar rights to protect in the suit, said it was plainly obvious that the suit was speculative without any substance.

    “This court will not be used to answer any academic or hypothetical question which does not touch on real or threatened breach of rights.

    “The plaintiffs cannot arrogate to themselves the powers they lack.

    “The plaintiffs, even though are indigenes of Kogi State, cannot take the place of the people of Okun origin and Ibaji LGA, as they are the ones who have supposedly suffered the said injury.

    “Therefore, this suit is bound to be dismissed for lack of locus standi of the plaintiffs,” he said.

    Justice Omotosho further held that assuming without conceding that the plaintiffs had locus standi, he wondered if instituting the action was the right course of action.

    “The opinion of this court on this issue stems from the fact that the plaintiffs are ably represented in the 1st defendant (NJC) and in fact, are deemed to be members of the 1st defendant through their representatives in the body,” he said.

    He said Section 20 to the Third Schedule of the Constitution 1999 (as amended) provides that five members of the NBA who have been qualified to practise for a period of not less than 15 years and at least, one of whom must be a senior advocate, are members of NJC.

    “It is crystal clear from the above composition of the 1st defendant that the plaintiffs, who are members of the Nigerian Bar Association by virtue of the Legal Practitioners Act, are represented in the body.

    “The plaintiffs ought to have exhausted the avenue of going through their representatives in the 1st defendant before it can ripen into a suit before this court if they have locus standi at all, having assumed being members of the 1st defendant by representation.

    “This is the essence of the doctrine of ripeness and exhaustion,” he declared.

    Besides, the judge said he also took judicial notice of the fact that NBA president is a member of the appointment committee of the NJC and participates in interviewing candidates for the bench.

    According to him, the intention and purpose of this is to bring all the complaints of the different branches of NBA to the notice of NJC through the president.

    He said similarly, the judicial service commissions of states also have representation of NBA as part of the members.

    “The appointment of qualified persons to the bench of the High Court of Kogi State is done on the recommendation of NJC.

    “And where the persons fulfill all the requirements of NJC, their names are sent to the governor for appointment.

    “The recommendation of the NJC is upon the advice by the Kogi State Judicial Service Committee,” he said

    The judge said that based on Section 158 (1) of the 1999 Constitution, NJC cannot be subject to the direction or control of any other authority or person.

    According to him, the import of the above provision is that the 1st defendant has unfettered discretion and powers in the recommendation of persons to be appointed as judges of High Court, Kadis of Sharia Court of Appeal and judges of Customary Court of Appeal.

    “Thus this court cannot interfere with such discretion as this provision serve as some form of ouster clause for which the court lacks the powers to look into.

    “Thus allegations of bias made against the defendants holds no water in the light of the facts put forward by the defendants.

    “This suit has no legs to stand on and will accordingly be dismissed,” he said.

    Justice Omotosho equally held that though the plaintiffs alleged that most of the courtrooms of the High Court of Kogi had been neglected and were in a state of disrepair, he said that Okutepa, 2nd plaintiff in the suit, during oral examination as 1st prosection witness, admitted that he was not the maker of the video evidence or the photographs.

    “That it was made by someone else and they (plaintiffs) simply downloaded the video and photographs and attached same as exhibits in the further affidavit,” he said.

    According to Justice Omotosho, the general principle of tendering a document before a court is that such document must be tendered by the maker of the said document.

    “This is to allow the adverse party the opportunity to cross examine the maker,” he added.

    He said the two exceptions to the principle are if the maker is dead or the maker can only be procured by involving the party in so much expenses that could be outrageous in the circumstances of the case.

    “From the above holding, it is clear that where a document is tendered which is not tendered by the maker, it loses its probative value and it is deemed as a mere paper.

    “The Video CD and the photographs even though frontloaded by the plaintiffs are still liable to be expunged by the Court for being hearsay evidence.

    “The said documents having not been tendered in evidence by the maker of the documents are hereby expunged from evidence.

    “Upon the expunging of the said documents, there is nothing to show that the court rooms of the High Court of Kogi State is in state of disrepair as the reliefs claims are bare without any credible evidence.

    “Consequently, relief 5 fails for lack of proof. In final analysis, the plaintiffs lack locus standi to institute this action.

    “Assuming it has requisite locus standi, the suit lacks merit and it is hereby dismissed,” the judge declared.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Court transfers suit against Catholic priests, others to Lagos division for adjudication

    Court transfers suit against Catholic priests, others to Lagos division for adjudication

    Flowerbudnews

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, transferred a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed against Catholic Archbishop of Lagos, Most Rev. Alfred Adewale Martins, and others to Lagos division of the court for adjudication.

    Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a judgment, held that it was in the interest of justice to transfer the matter since majority of the parties reside in Lagos.

    “I find that apart from the 4th defendant whose residence this court can take judicial notice as being in Abuja, the applicant, by the averments in the affidavit in support of this case, is in Enugu; the 1st respondent resides in Lagos, the 2nd respondent resides in Lagos, the 3rd respondent by the averments in his counter-affidavit, resides in Lagos, and the 5th respondent resides in Lagos.

    “With this evidence, I am of the opinion that this matter ought to have been filed in the Lagos Division of this court.

    “The expenditure imposed on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th respondents to defend this case in Abuja is not such that ought to be ignored.

    “Furthermore, as much as this suit is by affidavit evidence, the court must avoid a situation where in the consideration of the said affidavit evidence, it finds the need to invite parties to give oral evidence to resolve any area of conflict thereof.

    “Parties must be within the relevant territorial jurisdiction to avoid miscarriage of justice being occasioned on any of them.

    “It is in the interest of justice that this matter even though commenced in this division, to be heard in Lagos division.

    “I therefore make an order pursuant to the provision of Section 22 (1) of the Federal High Court transferring this case to Lagos division of this court forthwith for adjudication.

    “This is the order of this court,” the judge declared.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the applicant, Rev. Fr. Peter Ronald Scott, through his lawyer, Chibuzor Obiajunwa, had filed the suit to seek the protection of court against alleged threat of arrest and detention by the police.

    In the originating motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/473/2022 and filed on April 8, 2022, Scott sued Most Rev. Martins, Rev. Fr. David Kipkrono, Mr Athoney Onwudiwe Ebo, Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, and Commissioner of Police, Lagos State, as 1st to 5th respondents respectively.

    He sought a declaration that Martins, Kipkrono and Ebo (1st to 3rd respondents) are not entitled to use I-G or the police commissioner (4th or 5th respondent) “to arrest or detain him in the guise of a police investigation over the decision of Mr Ebo Lawrence Chimaobi (3rd respondent’s son) to pursue his vocation abroad and all circumstances connected thereto.

    “An order of the court perpetually restraining the 1st to 3rd respondents from using the 4th and/or the 5th respondents, their agents, privies, associates, agents or any member of his congregation in the guise of a police investigation over the decision of Mr Ebo Lawrence Chimaobi to pursue his vocation abroad and all circumstances connected thereto. ”

    Scott, in his affidavit, averred that he was duly authorised to reside in Nigeria and presently in charge of the Nigerian Priory of a Catholic Congregation known as the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX), and was duly registered as an incorporated trusteeship.

    According to him, SSPX was founded in 1970 by Archbishop Marcel Francois Marie Joseph Lefebvre and against the wishes of the mainstream Catholic Church in 1988, and he consecrated four bishops to continue his work.

    “This resulted in his excommunication as well as the society from the mainstream Catholic Church, till date,” he said.

    Scott, therefore, alleged that Kipkrono, the parish priest of Saint Matthew Catholic Church, Amukoko, Lagos, and Lawrence’s father had accused him of kidnapping Lawrence, a 23-year old son, who completed his Electrical and Electronic Engineering degree from the Federal University of Technology, Owerri, in 2020, and proceeded to carry out his National Service programme at the SSPX’s present headquarters in Nigeria.

    He alleged that they had threatened to get him arrested because Lawrence had deeply desired to become an SSPX priest and in January 2022, he was accepted into the society’s seminary and also obtained a religious visa to Argentina.

    But in a counter affidavit deposed to by Mr Ebo, who is Lawrence’s father, the 1st to 3rd respondents disagreed with Scott.

    Ebo alleged that Lawrence was indoctrinated into Scott’s church during his first year in the university between the age of 15 and 16.

    He averred that upon completion of his degree programme, Lawrence was posted to Abuja for his National Youth Service but was advised and threatened by Scott to work his posting to Enugu State so as to continue the teachings and indoctrination into Scott’s church.

    Ebo said though he tried to get his son to work with a specialised company, he said Scott successfully convinced him (Lawrence) to work with the church.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Gov Aiyedatiwa gives lawyer 7-day ultimatum to retract certificate forgery allegations

    Gov Aiyedatiwa gives lawyer 7-day ultimatum to retract certificate forgery allegations

     

    Flowerbudnews

    Gov. Lucky Aiyedatiwa of Ondo State, on Monday, gave a legal practitioner, Oladotun Hassan, a seven-day ultimatum to retract his allegation of certificate forgery levelled against him or be sued.

    Aiyedatiwa, in a letter titled: “Defamatory Publications Against Mr Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa” written by his counsel, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, also demanded an apology in three national dailies.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the letter, dated April 8, was made available to newsmen in Abuja.

    “The above matter refers. We are solicitors to His Excellency, the Governor of Ondo State, Mr. Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa (“our Client”) on whose behalf we write this letter on the above subject matter.

    “It has come to the attention of our client that by an unsolicited letter dated June 2, 2023, you caused to be authored and submitted to the Nigeria Police Force, an unsubstantiated complaint of misrepresentation, certificate forgery, examination malpractice and perjury, against our client.

    “Whereas, you are not a registered voter in or an indigene of Ondo State to possess the requisite locus to ground your said complaint.

    “Your petition was cleverly routed through unauthorized sources within the police force and without recourse to our client, a report was purportedly submitted to you by the police dated February 19, 2024.

    “You thereafter caused the said report to be widely circulated as the basis of a malicious design to disqualify our client from participating in the governorship primary election in Ondo State.

    “You thereafter caused another letter to be written to the National Secretariat of the All Progressives Congress (APC) with the same purpose of disqualifying our client from participating in the governorship primary election of the said party fixed for April 2024.

    “You have since led a vicious campaign of calumny against our client through these and other false publications, all of which have brought our client into public ridicule and opprobrium, albeit without any justification whatsoever,” he said.

    The senior lawyer also accused Hassan of writing another letter on April 5, alleging that Aiyedatiwa, instead of clearing his name on the alleged forgery, the governor conspired with DIG Sylvester Alabi to compromise police integrity.

    “The determination of whether a candidate sat for any examination conducted by the West African Examinations Council has been simplified by the organization through technology, and it is accessible to all.

    “Upon your chorused repetition of this falsehood against our client, we took steps to conduct a verification exercise and indeed confirmed the authenticity of his West African School Certificate Examination results.

    “We challenge you to proceed to do the same with the following particulars:

    “Name of the Candidate: Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa Centre Number: 15592
    Examination Number: 019
    “Centre: Ikosi High School, Ikosi-Ketu, Lagos State. Date of Examination: May/June, GCE O/L, 1982.

    “The search will bring out the following results in favour of our Client: English Language: 8; Bible Knowledge: 6; Economics: 4; Health Science: 8; Commerce: 3; Accounts: 7; Business Management: 8,” he said.

    Adegboruwa alleged that Hassan’s intention was to stop Aiyedatiwa from contesting in the APC primary slated for April and the November governorship election in the state.

    He, therefore, gave him seven demands, including “adequate compensation for the false and libelous publications,” against the governor within seven days of receiving the letter of face a criminal charge.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Lawyer asks Appeal Court to dismiss CAC’s appeal against judgment on incorporated trustees

    Lawyer asks Appeal Court to dismiss CAC’s appeal against judgment on incorporated trustees

     

    Flowerbudnews
    A lawyer, Emmanuel Ekpenyong, has prayed the Court of Appeal, Abuja to dismiss an appeal filed by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) challenging a lower court’s judgement that nullified some sections of Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), 2020 on incorporated trustees.

    Ekpenyong, a constitutional lawyer and human rights crusader, from the law firm of Fred-Young & Evans LP, told an Appeal Court in his brief of argument made available to newsmen on Monday.

    The document was dated March 27 but filed March 28.

    It would be recalled that Justice James Omotosho of a Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja, had, on April 18, 2023, nullified some sections of CAMA, 2020 which were considered to infringe on the fundamental human rights of persons in Nigeria, following a suit filed by Ekpenyong.

    The lawyer had, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1076/2020, sued the National Assembly, CAC and the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice (AGF) as 1st to 3rd defendants respectively.

    In the originating summons dated and filed on Aug. 31, 2020, the lawyer prayed the court to determine whether the provisions of Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848 and 851 of CAMA infringed on his freedom of thoughts, conscience and religion; freedom of association and peaceful assembly and right to access to court.

    Ekpenyong asked the court to determine whether these rights had been infringed on as guaranteed under Section 38, Section 40 as well as Section 4 (8), Section 6 (6) (b), Section 36 (1) and Section 251 (1) (e) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    Delivering the Judgement, Justice Omotosho agreed with Ekpenyong that the powers granted to CAC to regulate and administer incorporated trustees in Nigeria under Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847 and 848 of CAMA 2020 infringed on his right to freedom of thoughts, conscience and religion.

    The judge, who held that the lawyer had locus standi to institute the suit, struck down Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848 and Section 851 of CAMA 2020, declaring same to be null and void, having been inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution.

    Dissatisfied with the judgment, the CAC, in its notice of appeal dated May 25, 2023 and filed June 9, 2023 by Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, sued Ekpenyong and AGF as 1st and 2nd respondents respectively.

    The commission gave five grounds why the appeal should be allowed and the judgment delivered by the trial court be set aside.

    In one of the grounds, it argued that Justice Omotosho erred in law when he entertained Ekpenyong’s claim under the fundamental rights action even when it was apparent from the claim filed that he lacked the locus standi to have instituted the action.

    In the brief of argument with appeal number: CA/ABJ/CV/373/2023 dated and filed Dec. 12, 2023, the CAC wants the appellate court to determine “whether from the totality of evidence, the trial court was correct in holding that Ekpenyong was able to prove that Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, and 848 of CAMA infringed on his fundamental rights,” among others.

    The commission, therefore, submitted that the trial judge was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction, heard and determined the case of the 1st respondent and then granted all the reliefs in the originating summons.

    “We urge your Lordships to uphold this appeal,” it said.

    But Ekpenyong, in his brief of argument, gave four issues for determination.

    These include “whether the wide powers granted to the appellant (CAC), an agency of the executive arm of the Federal Government of Nigeria under Sections 839, 842-848 of CAMA to remove the leadership of religious associations and other incorporated trustees under any guise and replace them with whoever it pleases as interim managers as well as manage the affairs and accounts of such associations is draconian, unconstitutional and an infringement of the 1st respondent’s fundamental human rights?

    “Whether the combined provisions of Sections 839, 842, 843, 844, 845, 846, 847, 848 and 851 of CAMA which grants the appellant too much powers over religious associations and other Incorporated Trustees and empowers the appellant to act based on its own whims to interfere in the management of religious associations and other incorporated trustees is reasonably justified in Nigeria’s constitutional democracy?

    “Whether in light of the provision of Section 4 (8), Section 6 (6) (b), Section 36 (1) and Section 251 (1) (e) of the Nigerian Constitution, the provisions of Section 851 of the CAMA, 2020 which gives the appellant powers to oust and usurp the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, is unconstitutional?

    “Whether religious associations and other incorporated trustees as a vehicle which the 1st respondent and other Nigerians exercise their fundamental human rights enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution must be overly burden with too many restrictions and laws to fetter their liberty?”

    Ekpenyong, in his argument, submitted that the freedom of thoughts, conscience and religion as well as the freedom of association and peaceful assembly constituted one of the pillars of a democratic society.

    He contended that Sections 38 and 40 of the constitution provided freedom for him to exercise his thoughts, conscience and religion either alone by himself or in association with those who share his faith and beliefs.

    “The 1st respondent belongs and is a member of the Catholic faith and exercises his constitutional right to associate and practice his religion and faith by participating in the traditions, practices, doctrines and teachings under the Catholic Archdiocese of Abuja registered with the appellant as an association with Reg. Number 6797 since 26th May, 1992,” he said.

    He said his religious association is led by distinguished Catholics who are also the trustees of the association.

    The lawyer, therefore, said that the excessive powers granted to CAC, an agency of government, by the offending provisions of CAMA, 2020 to suspend trustees of his religious association and other incorporated trustees and appoint interim managers of its own choice who may not profess the same beliefs with him or belong to his association and powers to even manage the accounts of the association, is provocative, draconian and barbaric.

    According to him, it is also an affront on Nigeria’s Constitution which granted the freedoms to the 1st respondent and other persons in Nigeria in the first place.

    He argued that the limitation of the freedom of thoughts, conscience and religion and peaceful assembly and association under Section 45 of the constitution is to prevent anarchy by ensuring that persons in Nigeria practice their religion and beliefs without infringing on others’ freedoms.

    “Since the offending provisions of CAMA, 2020 infringed on the 1st respondent’s constitutional and fundamental human rights which is capable of retrogressing Nigeria back to the dark days of the draconian military regime, the trial court was right in law to strike down the offending provisions of CAMA, 2020 in order to safeguard the constitutional freedom of the 1st respondent and other persons in Nigeria,” he argued.

    The AGF, who is the 2nd respondent, is yet to file his brief of argument.

    No date has been fixed for hearing.

    It would be recalled that on March 21, 2023, Justice Inyang Ekwo of a FHC, Abuja had equally restrained the CAC from suspending or appointing trustees of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and the churches.

    Justice Ekwo, in that judgment in a suit filed by the Registered Trustees of CAN, held that the provisions of Sections 17 (1), 839 (1) and (7) (a), 842 (1) and (2), 851 and 854 of CAMA, 2020 and Regulations 28, 29 and 30 of the Companies Regulations (CR), 2021 were not applicable to CAN, the churches and other religious body.