JUDICIARY
Supreme Court Strikes out Perjury Suit Against Buhari
The Supreme Court on Monday struck out the suit seeking the disqualification of President Muhammadu Buhari in the 2019 presidential election over alleged perjury.The suit was filed by Kalu Kalu, Labaran Ismail and Hassy El-Kuris, all legal practitioners.Delivering judgment, the Justice Mary Odili-led panel of five justices held that the case was statute barred and therefore dismissed.
News Agency of Nigeria ( NAN) reports that the justices during the introduction of appearances wondered why Mr Abdullahi Abubakar, State Counsel from the Federal Ministry of Justice will be representing a private individual. Abubakar had announced his appearance for the first respondent (General Muhammadu Buhari (Rtd) in the suit.They warned him to desist from such act of using public office to defend a private litigation.Muhammad Dattijo, while addressing the counsel sited the President Bill Clinton’s numerous private cases while in the office.“Clinton in his numerous private litigation, he never used government organs but rather personally sponsored all his private cases,”.He warned that his actions contravene the Code of Conduct for public servants which has consequences.Odili in her judgment said, ‘the court notes the inappropriate appearance of Mr Abdullahi Abubakar state counsel from the Federal Ministry of Justice, representing the first respondent Gen. Muhammad Buhari Rtd in his personal capacity.“This practice must be discouraged, appeal haven been withdrawn is hereby dismissed,”” Odili said.The juctices had warned AbubakarThe appellants grievances had arisen from the dismissal of their suit at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, on grounds that it was statute barred and as such could not be heard.They had approached the apex court to nullify the candidacy of President Buhari in the just concluded presidential poll over allegations of perjury.The appellants specifically wanted Buhari’s nomination and subsequent victory at the Feb. 23 presidential election nullified on the grounds that President Buhari lied on oath in his form 001 that he submitted to INEC for the purpose of clearance for the presidential election.They asked the apex court for an Order to set aside the judgment of the court of appeal and hear the matter on merit and grant the reliefs sought in the Originating Summons.Among the reliefs sought are a declaration that Buhari submitted false information regarding his qualification and certifcate to INEC for the purpose of contesting election into the office of the President of Nigeria and that he should be disqualified.They also prayed for an order of court directing INEC to remove Buhari’s name as a candidate of APC and another order restraining Buhari from parading himself as a candidate in the 2019 presidential election and also APC from recognising Buhari as a candidate.The Court of Appeal in a unanimous judgment delivered by Justice Mohammed Idris, had on July 12, held that the singular fact that the suit was filed outside the 14 days provided by the law robbed the court of jurisdiction to entertain the it.The Federal High Court had in May declined to grant the request of the appellants on the grounds that the suit was not filed within the time allowed by law and therefore sustained the preliminary objection raised by Buhari at the hearing.The appellants had through their counsel, Ukpai Ukairo, presented 12 grounds for the setting aside of the judgment of the Court of Appeal, amongst which are;That the ”Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law in relying on a Preliminary Objection withdrawn and struck out by the Court of Appeal in striking out and dismissing the appeal.“The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law and breached the right of the appellants to fair hearing by relying on a preliminary objection, withdrawn by the 2nd Respondent and struck out by the Court, thus being a case not made out or relied upon or abandoned by a party in entering a decision in a judgment.“They erred in law in holding that ‘the failure of the Registrar to sign the Originating Summons is fatal and goes to the issue of jurisdiction’ and thereby struck out the Originating Summons.Also that “The Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that delving into the other issues raised in the appeal will be regarded as an academic exercise as the case has been held to have been statute barred by virtue of Section 285(9) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) 4th alteration and robs this court of its jurisdiction”.According to Ukairo, the appellants in the brief of argument distilled two issues for determination, (i). Whether the Learned Trial Judge was right in relying on the processes filed by the 1st defendant through a Law Officer in the Ministry of Justice?(ii). Whether the Learned Trial Judge was right in holding that the suit was statute-barred by computing the number of days from Sept. 28, 2018 when the 2nd Respondent held its primary election wherein the 1st Respondent was elected as a candidate of the 2nd Respondent?The appellants had approached the appellate court to nullify and set aside the Judgment of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court which declined to hear their suit instituted to challenge the educational qualification of President Buhari before the conduct of the 2019 general election.But the appellate court in a judgement delivered held that the suit had been caught up by the Fourth Alteration to the 1999 Constitution which stipulate a 14 days time period within which an election matter must be filed.Though the appellate court agreed with the trial court that the suit was statute barred having filed out of time, it however disagreed with the trial court on the date the cause of action took place.Justice Ahmed Mohammed had in his judgment held that the cause of action took place on Sept. 28, 2018 when the APC held its primary election to select candidate of the party in the 2019 general election.But the appellate court however held that the cause of action took place on Oct. 18, 2018, the date Buhari submitted his form 001 to INEC for the purpose of clearance for the presidential election.The appellants had filed the suit on Nov.5, 2018, claiming October 25, the date INEC published the list of successful candidates in the 2019 general election as the date the cause of action arose, making the suit to be competent.The three man panel of the justices of the Court of Appeal had also dismissed the suit based on the preliminary objection filed by the APC’s lawyer challenging the jurisdiction of the suit on the grounds that it is incompetent.The justices held that the failure of the Registrar of the Federal High Court to transmit the record of proceedings was fatal to the originating summons and makes the suit incompetent.The decision had prompted the appellants to approach the apex court in their further quest for justice. (NAN)
A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed Sept. 24 to hear the two separate motions filed by the Edo Government and the House of Assembly challenging the reinstatement of Philip Shaibu as deputy governor.Justice James Omotosho fixed the date following two motions on notice filed by the state’s Attorney General (AG) and House of Assembly by their lawyers, Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, and Ken Mozia, SAN, respectively.
In the motion dated and filed July 18 by Iyamu, the AG sought two orders. He prayed the court for an order “staying the execution of the judgment in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/478/2024 Between RT. HON. COMRADE PHILIP SHAIBU v. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE AND 5 ORS delivered on the 17th day of July, 2024 pending the determination of the appeal filed against the said judgment. “He also sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents from giving effect to the July 17 judgment pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.Also in the motion dated and filed July 18 by Mozia, the Edo lawmakers sought an order suspending the judgment and restraining Shaibu from parading himself or attending any official function as deputy governor pending the hearing and determination of their appeal.The applicants, in their grounds of argument, said being dissatisfied with the judgment, they had appealed against it vide a notice of appeal dated July 18 and filed same day.“The said notice of appeal raises serious and arguable grounds.“It raises the issue of the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court to entertain the subject matter of this suit,” they said.They argued that their right of appeal would be stifled if the application was not granted.The applicants said the smooth operation of the machinery of the state government would be impeded if Shaibu “is allowed to take over as the Deputy Governor of Edo State having regard to his recent open declaration of support for the rival political party (The All Progressives Congress).”“Monetary damages would be an adequate compensation to the 1st respondent (Shaibu) should it turn out that this application ought not to have been granted,” they argued, among others grounds.Report says that Justice Omotosho had, on July 17, voided the impeachment of Shuaibu as the deputy governor of Edo.Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment, ordered his reinstatement to office on the grounds that the house of assembly failed to comply with due process in the purported impeachment.The judgment was on the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/478/2024 with Shuaibu as the plaintiff.The reinstated deputy governor had sued the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), the Deputy Governor of Edo, the AG, Chief Judge of Edo, Speaker of Edo House of Assembly and the Edo State House of Assembly as 1st to 6th defendants respectively.Justice Omotosho had held that the allegation on which the assembly based the impeachment proceedings was untenable in law and did not constitute a gross misconduct.(NAN)
The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division on Monday affirmed the conviction of the dethroned traditional ruler of Shangisha in Magodo, Mutiu Ogundare, for faking his own abduction.
The court, however, reduced Ogundare’s sentence to 12 years from the 15 years initially handed down on him by the lower court.
Report says that Justice Hakeem Oshodi of the Lagos State High in Ikeja, had on Sept.
27, 2022, sentenced the convict to 15 years imprisonment.Ogundare was charged alongside his wife, Abolanle and his brother, Opeyemi Mohammed.
They were arraigned on three counts of breach of peace and fake abduction, preferred against them by the Lagos State government.
The lower court had discharged and acquitted Ogundare’s wife, Abolanle, saying that she had no link to the crime.
The court, however, found Ogundare and Mohammed guilty as charged.
Dissatisfied with the judgment, Ogundare, approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the decision of the lower court.
When the case was called on Monday, the lead Justice, Justice Peter Bassi, upheld the judgment of the lower court in counts one and two and upturned count three.
Other Justices of the panel were Justice Bayero and Justice Folashade Ojo, who agreed with the judgment of the lead justice.
Bassi said that Ogundare’s appeal succeeds in part and reduced his sentence to 12 years.
The court held that the appellant would serve 10 years imprisonment for count one and two years for count two.
On the third count, the court upturned the sentence of the lower court, in respect of false representation to release a kidnapped person.
The convict was first remanded on July 16, 2017, in Kirikiri correctional centre by an Ogba Magistrates’ Court, for alleged fake abduction.
The state had stated that the convicts committed the offences on July 5, 2017, along Centre for Management Development Road, Ikosi-Isheri Local Council Development Area.
The state said that Ogundare, staged the kidnap to blackmail the state government. (NAN)
A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Monday, ordered the release of the international passport of Ali Bello to enable him travel to the UK for medical examination and consultation.
Justice Obiora Egwuatu, in a ruling on Bello’s motion on notice moved by his lawyer, Abubakar Aliyu, SAN, ordered the deputy chief registrar of the court to release his travel documents.
Justice Egwuatu directed Bello to return the international passport to the deputy chief registrar of the court on or before Sept.
15.The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had filed an alleged money laundering charge against Bello, Abba Adaudu, Yakubu Siyaka Adabenege and Iyadi Sadat as 1st to 4th defendants respectively.
Although they were arraigned before Justice Egwuatu, they all pleaded not guilty to the charge.
Bello, through his counsel, Aliyu, had, in the motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/573/2022, sought an order granting him the permission to travel to the UK for medical checkup.
In the application dated April 2 but filed April 5, the applicant sought two reliefs, including an order releasing his international passport in the custody of the deputy chief registrar of the court.
Bello said the purpose of the routine cardiologic follow-up was to review his medication and undergo cardiac tests scheduled for July of each year and as required based on medical advice.
He said the court had, on two occasions, granted him leave to travel between August 2023 and December 2023 and that he did travel and return the international passport to the deputy chief registrar of the court before the expiration of the times granted.
He, therefore, undertook to return the travel passport as he had always done if leave is granted and upon his return.
He equally undertook to be law abiding in the UK should his application be granted.
But in opposition, the EFCC filed a counter affidavit of five-paragraphs deposed to by Abubakar Salihu Wara on April 19, 2024.
Mr Rotimi Oyedepo SAN, lead counsel to the the anti-graft agency, argued that Bello had not placed any medical report before the court to show the health condition that necessitated the medical appointment.
Oyedepo said that Exhibit ‘A’ attached to the application did not disclose the email address of the sender and the receiver of the said medical appointment and had not exhibited anything to show that Exhibit ‘A’ emanated from London Centre for Advanced Cardiology.
He argued that Bello might tamper with the evidence in the charges against him if the application is granted.
But Bello, in a further affidavit, disagreed with the EFCC’s submission.
Delivering the ruling, the judge asked if Bello had placed enough material before the court to enable the court grant the application.
According to Justice Egwuatu, it is on record that this court granted bail to the applicant.
“Since the grant of bail, he has not breached the terms of bail and has been coming to court to stand his trial.
“It is not controverted that this court had on two previous occasions granted the applicant similar prayers.
“On those two occasions, that is, between the 1st to 31st of August, 2023 and 17th of December, 2023 and 10th January, 2024, the applicant did not breach the terms of the permission granted.
“Applicant’s depositions that ‘on the two occasions, I returned my International Passport to the Deputy Chief Registrar of this court was not denied by the respondent (EFCC).
“There is no evidence before this court that the applicant breached the terms of the grant or the terms of the bail granted to him by this court.
“The grounds for opposing this application now by the prosecution are anchored on Paragraphs 4 (a) to (g) of the counter affidavit.
“I have examined these paragraphs vis-a-vis the response of the applicant,” he said.
The judge said that there was no evidence before the court by the EFCC that the name of the London hospital “and address are not in existence and no contrary evidence disputing the fact that the applicant has a scheduled appointment with the said cardiologist.”
According to him, there is also no evidence before this court that the applicant while on bail did or attempted to interfere with evidence or collude with any person to tamper with evidence.
“The law is trite and clear: facts not disputed or challenged are deemed to have been accepted and/or admitted by the party against whom they are averred.”
“I therefore believe the depositions of the applicant,” the judge said.
Justice Egwuatu further said that a defendant ought to be healthy to be able to stand the rigors of trial.
“It has to be noted that the health of every citizen is very important consideration to the state, whether he is a defendant/suspect or a free man.
“I wholeheartedly subscribe to the view that a defendant should be alive to stand trial and face the just desserts of his crime if he is adjudged guilty as charged.
“As stated by Obadina JCA in Ani vs. State (2002) 11 WRN 53 at 68:’..it is only the living that can praise God, so also it is only the living that can be tried, convicted and punished for an offence..” he quoted.
The judge subsequently granted Bello’s prayers being sought.(NAN)
Tinubu Approves Management Unit for Health Sector Renewal Investment Initiative
SharePresident Bola Tinubu has approved the establishment of the Sector-wide Coordinating Office-Programme Management Unit (SCO-PMU) domiciled in the Office of...
FG Denies Slash in Students’ Allowances
Share The Federal Government says it has no plan to slash scholarship students’ allowances as recently projected in the media.The...
Planned Protests: CAN calls for calm and patience
ShareBy Laide Akinboade, Abuja The Christian Association of Nigeria, CAN, on Friday, has urged Nigerians to calm and patient with...
Senate Consultant Scores Benue LG Bureau High on Projects Execution
ShareThe Consultant for Senate Standing Committee on States and Local Government Administration, Engineer Kayode Adegbayo has described the quality of...
Doctor Mark Ogbodo: A Man Destined for Success
ShareBy Paul Ugah Henry Miller once said, “Every man has his own destiny, the only imperative is to follow it,...
Ignore Anti -government Protests, Wike Begs Abuja Residents
ShareBy Laide Akinboade, Abuja Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Barr. Ezenwo Nyesom Wike has called on residents of the...
Reps Commit to Ensure Legislations for Better Skills Acquisition, Management
ShareBy Ubong Ukpong, Abuja The House of Representatives on Thursday pledged its continuous commitment to ensure legislations that would align...
Economic Sabotage: Senate Summons Petroleum Minister, NNPCl, CBN, NPA, Others for Interrogation
ShareBy Eze Okechukwu, Abuja The Senate is blowing hot over alleged economic sabotage by stakeholders within the petroleum sector, thus...
Dialogue with Organisers of August 1 Protest, AANI Urges FG
ShareBy Johnson Eyiangho, Abuja The Alumni Association of the National Institute (AANI) has advised the Federal Government to dialogue with...
Stigmatization: CSO Urges Kogi Gov to Assent Bill Protecting HIV Patients
ShareFrom Joseph Amedu, Lokoja Civil Society Organisation, Initiative for Grassroot Advancement in Nigeria (INGRA), has called on the Kogi State...