Ayodele Fayose, Ekiti State Governor
|
Rather than granting the prayers for
interim injunction, Justice Ahmed Mohammed ordered the defendants in the suit,
including the APC factional Speaker of the House of Assembly, Adewale Omirin,
and the Chief Judge of the state, Justice Ayodeji Daramola, to appear in court
on April 16. The court ordered the defendants to appear in court to show cause
why the order of interim injunction being sought by the plaintiffs halting the
impeachment proceedings should not be granted.
Sahara Reporters report continues:
Ekiti State Governor, Ayodele
Fayose, and his deputy, Kolapo Olusola, on Wednesday failed in their legal bid
to stop the impeachment moves being made against them by the All Progressives
Congress members of the state House of Assembly.
A Federal High Court in Abuja on
Wednesday rejected their prayers contained in an ex parte application seeking
interim injunction to set aside the impeachment notice served on them and halt
further moves to remove them from office.
The court only granted prayers
contained in the ex parte application relating to service of the court
processes on the defendants.
Rather than granting the prayers for
interim injunction, Justice Ahmed Mohammed ordered the defendants in the suit,
including the APC factional Speaker of the House of Assembly, Adewale Omirin,
and the Chief Judge of the state, Justice Ayodeji Daramola, to appear in court
on April 16.
The court ordered the defendants to
appear in court to show cause why the order of interim injunction being sought
by the plaintiffs halting the impeachment proceedings should not be granted.
Apart from Omirin and Justice
Daramola, other defendants in the suit are the Inspector General of Police, Mr.
Suleiman Abba, and the Independent National Electoral Commission.
The plaintiffs in the suit are the
Speaker of the House of Assembly (described as being occupied by the Peoples
Democratic Party factional Speaker, Olugbemi Joseph Dele); Ekiti State House of
Assembly, Fayose and Olusola.
Counsel for the plaintiffs, Mr.
Ahmed Raji, had sought the interim injunctions halting the impeachment moves
through an ex parte application dated and filed on April 7, 2015.
He had urged the court to grant the
interim injunction setting aside the impeachment notice already served on the
governor and the deputy and also restraining the defendants from taking any
further steps in the impeachment moves.
The lawyer argued that the act by
Omirin to issue an impeachment notice and serve same on the governor and the
deputy governor as Speaker of the House of Assembly amounted to impersonating
the incumbent Speaker.
“The gravamen of our complaint is
that a former Speaker of the parliament, the Ekiti State House of Assembly, in
the person of the 1st respondent (Omirin) is trying to impersonate the 1st
plaintiff (Dele) who is the current Speaker of the parliament,” Raji said.
Part of the orders sought in the ex
parte application are “An order of injunction restraining the 1st defendant
(Dele) and other errant members of the 2nd plaintiff (Ekiti State House of
Assembly) from further taking any step or engaging in unlawful activities
relating to the impeachment of Peter Ayodele Fayose and Dr. Kolapo Olusola as
governor and deputy governor of Ekiti State.
“An interim order of injunction
restraining the Chief Judge of Ekiti State from taking any step or action in
relation to the request of the 1st defendant (Omirin) for the purpose of
appointing a panel of seven persons to investigate the purported allegations of
gross misconduct against Peter Ayodele Fayose and Dr. Kolapo Olusola.
“An interim order of injunction
restraining the police from continuing to abet, give cover, protection or lend
credence to the activities of the 1st defendant and other errant members of the
2nd plaintiff for self-help in disruption of legislative proceedings in the
Ekiti State House of Assembly.
“An interim order of injunction
setting aside the purported notice of impeachment and all the steps taken by
the 1st defendant and other errant members of the 2nd plaintiff in relation to
the purported issuance and service of the notice of impeachment for the purpose
of commencing. And concluding impeachment proceedings against Peter Ayodele
Fayose. And Dr. Kolapo Olusola.”
The plaintiffs had urged the court
to grant the prayers and make the interim injunctions to subsist pending the
determination of their motion on notice for interlocutory injunctions seeking
the same set of prayers.
Raji urged the court to grant the
prayers “in the interest of justice, public order, peace and safety of the
people of the state”.
But the judge in his ruling rather
than granting the interim injunctions ordered the parties to appear in court to
convince the court why the plaintiffs’ prayers for interim injunction should
not be granted.
Justice Mohammed ruled, “The order
is hereby made directing the 1st to 4th defendants (Omirin, IGP, INEC and Ekiti
CJ), to appear before this court on April 16, 2015 and show cause why the
interim order sought by the plaintiffs via an ex parte motion dated April 7,
2015 should not be made by this court.”
But the court granted other prayers
contained in the ex parte motion relating to service of the court processes,
including the main suit) on the defendants.
The court granted leave to serve
Omirin and Justice Daramola, who reside in Ekiti State, outside jurisdiction.
It also ordered that Omirin and the
Ekiti State Chief Judge be served through advertisement in a national
newspaper.
It also made a separate order that
the Chief Judge be served with processes of court through the office of the
Chief Registrar of of the Ekiti State High Court.
In their main suit,
FHC/ABJ/CS/302/2015, the plaintiffs are seeking nine prayers among which is
“an order setting aside the purported notice of impeachment and all steps taken
by the 1st defendant (Omirin) with other errant members of the 2nd plaintiff
(Ekiti State House of Assembly) in relation to the purported issuance and
service of the said notice of impeachment for the purpose of commencing and
concluding the impeachment proceedings against Peter Ayodele Fayose and Dr.
Olusola Kolapo, except and until there is absolute compliance with provisions
of section 36(1) and section 188(1), (2), (3) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution
(as amended).”
Other prayers being sought by the
plaintiffs include, “An order prohibiting the 1st defendant (Omirin) and other
errant members of the 2nd plaintiff (Ekiti State House of Assembly) from
further taking any step, or engaging in unlawful activities relating to the
impeachment of Peter Ayodele Fayose and Dr. Olusola Kolapo, except and until
there is absolute compliance with provisions of section 36(1) and section
188(1), (2), (3) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
“An order prohibiting the Chief
Judge of Ekiti State from taking any step or action in relation to the request
of the 1st defendant (Omirin) for the purpose of appointing a panel of seven
persons to investigate and purported allegations of gros misconduct against
Peter Ayodele Fayose and Dr. Olusola Kolapo, except and until there is absolute
compliance with provisions of section 36(1) and section 188(1), (2), (3) and
(4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”
Justice Mohammed on Wednesday ordered that hearing notices be served on all the defendants and adjourned the matter till April 16.
Justice Mohammed on Wednesday ordered that hearing notices be served on all the defendants and adjourned the matter till April 16.
No comments:
Post a Comment