JUDICIARY
PDP Reserves Right to Suspend, Expel You, Court Tells Wike
A Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday told the immediate past governor of Rivers state, Barr. Nyesom Wike, that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has the right to suspend or expel him if the action is done in accordance with the law.
Justice James Omotosho stated this in a judgement he delivered on a suit filed by Wike prior to the 2023 general elections to seek a court order to stop the PDP from taking action against him without a fair hearing.
The former governor had sued the PDP, its National Working Committee (NWC), and its National Executive Committee (NEC) as 1st to 3rd respondents.
Wike, in the suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/139/2023) dated and filed Feb. 2 by his lawyer, Joshua Musa, SAN, also joined the National Chairman of PDP, Dr.
Iyorchia Ayu, National Secretary of PDP, Senator Samuel Anyanwu, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as 4th to 6th respondents, respectively.He had prayed for an order directing all parties to maintain the status quo and stay all actions in the matter relating to the threat to suspend or expel him by the 1st to 5th respondents pending the hearing and determination of the originating motion.
Wike asked the court to enforce his fundamental right to freedom of association, which he alleged was about to be breached by the defendants.
However, the PDP through its lawyer, Johnson Usman, SAN, disagreed with Wike’s submission.
Usman argued that the case was only based on speculation, as Wike had failed to provide any evidence to substantiate that the respondents intended to suspend or expel him from the party.
He said the party had not contemplated suspending or expelling members of the G5 Governors or the Integrity Group, despite engaging in anti-party activities.
Usman said Wike and four other governors engaged in anti-party activities by forming the Integrity Group and campaigning for another presidential candidate in the Feb. 25 election.
The senior lawyer argued that a member who voluntarily joined an association must abide by its rules.
Usman, who argued that the ex-governor must have exhausted the internal mechanisms of the party first, said the court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the matter, which, he said, was only within the realm of conjuncture.
He further argued that it was not enough for Wike to institute the suit on fundamental rights enforcement grounds.
Justice Omotosho had, on Feb. 2, given an interim order against the party and others listed in the face of Wike’s ex-parte motion.
The judge, who extended the restraining order on Feb. 14, held that all parties should maintain a status quo pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
Delivering judgement on Wednesday, Justice Omotosho said the court had considered the processes filed by parties and the arguments of counsel.
He held that suspending or expelling the applicant without affording him the right to defend himself would breach his fundamental rights as enshrined in the party’s and Nigeria’s constitutions.
Omotosho said that though the party had the right to suspend or expel its members, this must be done in compliance with its own laws.
The judge said that though Section 46(1) of the law vested jurisdiction on the court if one’s rights had been breached, he said the court would not dabble into the internal affairs of any political party, except where the rights of a member had been violated by the party without recourse to its own laws.
According to him, fundamental human rights are rights enshrined in the Constitution of Nigeria and are sacrosanct.
“Where this right ought to be enforced, the court will do everything within its reach to ensure this. However, as fundamental and sacrosanct these rights are, they are not absolute,” he said.
Justice Omotosho, therefore, agreed that any member of a political party who appeared before a disciplinary committee should be given the opportunity to defend himself.
“If not, any decision taken shall be null and void,” he said.
“This court is convinced that the applicant is entitled to a fair hearing and that the respondent also has the right to discipline its members in accordance with the law,” he added.
The judge further said that Wike had the right to associate and that the threat to dismiss him without inviting him to defend himself contravened Article 57 (1) (2) of the party.
He said that the party’s national chairman, Dr. Iyorchia Ayu, and his agents were bound to promote constitutional democracy.
JUDICIARY
Convict Gets 2 yrs Jail Term for Illicit Drug Deal
A Federal High Court Lagos, on Monday, convicted and sentenced a 45-year-old man, Hassan Majid, to two years imprisonment over drug trafficking.
The defendant was charged by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) on a two-count charge bordering on illegal deal in 1.7kg of Cannabis Sativa.
He pleaded guilty to the charge.
After his plea, the prosecutor, Chidinma Onyekachi, applied for a review of the facts of the case.
Onyekachi tendered several documents before the court such as a request for scientific aid form, a drug analysis form, a certificate of test analysis and statement of defendant, among others.
She urged the court to proceed and convict the defendant based on evidences adduced as well as plea by defendant.
Accordingly, Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke admitted the evidences as exhibits.
The court, consequently, convicted the defendant as charged.
Before the sentence, defence counsel, Oreofe Ogunleye, begged the court to show mercy on the convict being a first time offender.
Ogunleye added that he would turn a new leaf.
Delivering the judgement the court held that although it had listened to the convict’s plea for mercy.
The court, consequently, sentenced the convict to two years imprisonment with effect from Jan. 19, with an option of N500,000 fine to be paid into the consolidated Federal Government account.
According to the charge, the convict was said to have committed the offence on Jan. 19, at the Ayetoro Ijanikin area of Lagos metropolis.
He was said to have possesed and dealt in 1.7 kg of cannabis sativa alias hemp, without lawful authority.
The offences contravened the provisions of sections of the NDLEA Act Cap N30 Law of the Federation, 2004.(NAN)
JUDICIARY
Court Dissolves 14-year-old Marriage Over Alleged Spiritual Incompatibility
A Mapo Grade A Customary Court in Ibadan, on Wednesday, dissolved the 14-year old marriage between one John Akinwumi, a commercial driver, and his estranged wife, Toyin.
Akinwumi had pleaded with the court to put an end to his 14-year-old marriage with Toyin on grounds of alleged constant domestic violence and spiritual incompatibility.
He told the court, presided over by Mrs S. M. Akintayo, that his wife refused to take care of him, even when he was seriously ill.
Akinwumi said that a year after their marriage, things went so rough for him, while his wife suddenly changed, adding that they were always fighting as a result of the absence of love and affection.
He said that this was in spite of his estranged wife’s relatives assisting him to start a transport business.
Akinwumi, therefore, prayed the court to dissolve his marriage to the wife, as it was no longer working.
”My lord, all I need now is separation because the marriage is not working.
”I was okay before I met her but it’s like we are not meant to be together,” he told the court.
Akinwumi, however, promised to give the two children, who are still staying with their mother, N25,000 as their monthly feeding allowance.
However, the respondent opposed the prayer for separation, adding that she still loved her husband.
She, was, however, silent on most of the allegations levelled against her.
”My lord, I still love Akinwumi. There is no reason for him to abandon me at this time.
”For almost a year now, he had left the children and I in penury.
”Akinwumi has not been catering for the children regularly and the children are girls who need more attention,” she said.
Delivering judgment, Akintayo held that there was a valid traditional marriage between Akinwumi and Toyin due to the payment of bride price.
She said that there was nothing anyone could do since the petitioner said that he was no more in love with the respondent.
Akintayo, therefore, pronounced the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent dissolved, while he ordered the duo to maintain peace.
He also granted the order restraining Toyin from harassing, threatening and interfering with the personal life of the petitioner. (NAN)
JUDICIARY
Court Slams N500,000 Fine Against Union Over Name, Logo Duplicates
Justice Musa Liman of the Federal High Court Bauchi on Friday ordered a union, Centre for the Improvement of Traditional Qur’anic Schools in Nigeria, to pay a N500,000 fine for name and logo duplication.
Liman said that the money would be paid as damages to the applicant, the Incorporate Trustees of Association of Masu Karatun Allo Na Tsangaya, Bauchi.
The judge held that the applicant is called: ‘Incorporated Trustees of the Association Masu Karatun Allo Na Tsaganya, Bauchi’, in the Hausa Language, and in English, it translates to the name ‘Centre for the Improvement of Traditional Qur’anic Schools in Nigeria, Bauchi branch.
“Which is the name used by the applicants for their own organisation, and the Hausa subtitle ‘Cibiyan Bunkasa Makaranta Tsangaya a Nigeria’, is the equivalent name of the first plaintiff in Hausa Language.
“The two names are confusingly similar and if the Executive Governor of Bauchi State is vulnerable to the confusingly similarity in the name of the first plaintiff and those of the defendants’ association, I could not find a better demonstration of the fact that the name of the parties are confusingly similar and confusing,” he said.
Liman held that the defendants had clearly include the name, the symbol and trademark of the first plaintiff in all legal ramifications.
“I thereby unequivocally state that the name as well as the logo belongs to the first plaintiff and the defendants should not use the said name as well as the symbol of slate as their logo.
“I also award N100 cost in favour of the plaintiff to be paid by the defendants and this is the justice of the court,” he said
Earlier, Counsel to the plaintiff, Mr Auwal Ibrahim, had told the court that the defendant was using same name and symbol as that of his client, which confused the general public both the elites and the unlettered.
He argued that the plaintiff approached the court for clarification, declaration, and direction as to how the name should be used, and who is entitled to the use of the name. (NAN)