By Taiye Agbaje

A Contractor, Mr Christian Igbo, on Tuesday, said he will appeal a ruling by an FCT High Court, Abuja setting aside its June 22 judgment directing the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) to pay over N29 million balance of the contract sum legitimately awarded and executed by him.
Igbo made this known through his lawyer, Pascal Obioha, shortly after Justice Edward Okpe vacated the judgment he earlier delivered against the NSCDC on the grounds that it was given without jurisidtcion.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Okpe had, on June 22 in a judgment, ordered the NSCDC to pay Mr Igbo over N29 million balance of the contract sum following his execution of the projects awarded by the corps.
The judge also restrained the NSCDC, its Commander-General (C-G), Ahmed Audi; and others from further harassing the contractor over a completed contract.
But in a motion on notice marked: CV/2115/2023 filed by its Director of Legal Services, Umar Mohammed, the corps sought an order setting aside the judgment delivered on June 22 directing them to pay Igbo his balance (N29, 360, 697.00) of the contract sum.
Giving six grounds why the judgment should be vacated, Mohammed argued that the court gave the judgment without jurisdiction.
Evelyn Charles-Iyanya, who appeared for NSCDC during proceedings, urged the court to set aside Relief 4 as contained in Igbo’s originating motion on the payment of the judgment sum of over N29 million, having fallen outside the fundamental rights enforcement rules of the court.
She said the judgment was delivered without jurisidtcion.
But Igbo’s counsel, Pascal Obioha, prayed the court to dismiss NSCDC’s application on the grounds that the court had become functus officio to vacate the judgment it delivered.
The lawyer maintained that the court had jurisdiction to have given the June 22 judgment and that the court as at this time, lacked the powers to either review, revisit or set aside its own judgment, as doing so would amount to the court sitting on appeal over its own decision or judgment.
Obioha, in a counter affidavit, said Igbo’s originating motion was dully served on the respondents which enabled them to put up several appearances before the court, but they decided not to file counter affidavit to oppose their application.
He said the court gave them several opportunities to defend the suit or raise objection as to the jurisdiction of the court, where necessary, but they waived their right to do so.
The lawyer, who submitted that the court gave the judgment on merit, said by the content of the said judgement, the court had become functus officio in the matter.
But delivering the ruling on Tuesday, Justice Okpe agreed with the NSCDC that he gave the judgment without jurisidtcion.
He said after perusing the applications filed by parties, he agreed with the NSCDC that Relief 4 of the contractor seeking for the payment of the judgment sum did not fall under the fundamental rights enforcement rules as canvassed by the claimant.
Besides, the judge held that Igbo failed to respond to the argument of counsel to the security agency that Relief 4 ought to be set aside, having granted without jurisidtcion.
He said where a respondent did not respond to arguments raised by an applicant, such argument would be deemed to have been admitted by the party.
According to him, the respondent (Igbo) did not file a reply to douse the applicant (NSCDC)’s prayer.
“Therefore, Relief 4 cannot be assessed through the application filed by the respondent (Igbo),” he said.
He said the jurisidtcion of the court cannot be exercised where the main claim was not for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of the claimant.
Okpe held that from the facts available before the court, Relief 4 falls under a contract, and cannot be brought under the enforcement of fundamental rights rules.
“If a judgment is a nullity, the court which made it can set it aside based on Supreme Court decision,” he said.
He said the submission had dislodged Igbo’s argument.
“Therefore, the court has the power to set aside its own judgment or decision where it is null and avoid or there is a fundamental defect.
“Where an order of the court is a nullity, the court that made it is empowered to set it aside and an appeal is not necessary.
“It is now settled that a party cannot confer jurisdiction on the court where there is none,” he said.
The judge consequently set aside the order directing the NSCDC to pay Igbo the balance sum of over N29 million allegedly being owed.
Speaking after the ruling, Obioha vowed to appeal the ruling.
The lawyer, who decsribed the ruling as strange, insisted that the court had become functus officio to review the judgment it delivered.
He said this was even more so that the NSCDC did not file any defence to controvert their application.
NAN reports that Igbo had, in an originating motion on notice marked: CV/2115/2023 and filed by Obioha, sued the NSCDC, the C-G, and some agency’s officials.
Others joined as respondents include Fabian Ejezie (Finance), Mpamugo Ifeanyi Bartholomew, Victor Olarenwaju, Mr Kukuyi (Accountant General Staff in Charge of CPO) and Chukwuemeka Okeke.
Igbo, managing director of Davenchris Ventures LTD, IB-Technicals Ltd and Chrisreubben Enterprises, had sought seven reliefs which include an order to enforce his fundamental human rights of freedom, personal liberty, fair hearing and human dignity as guaranteed by Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution.
The judge, while delivering the judgment in favour of Igbo on June 22, had held that where an application was not controverted by a party, averments therein would be deemed to have been admitted by the party.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

=======
edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Taiye Agbaje

The Legal Consultant of Abuja Markets Management Limited (AMML), Mr Kunle Kolawole, has called on President Bola Tinubu and the National Assembly to intervene in the ongoing crisis rocking the company.
Kolawole, who made the call on Friday at a news briefing in Abuja, said the management crisis had impacted negatively on the AMML, one of the FCT-owned revenue generating companies.
The lawyer alleged that the Group Managing Director of Abuja Investments Company Limited (AICL), Mr Abubakar Maina, and his cohorts had continued to frustrate the operations of AMML against valid court judgment and order.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Donatus Okorowo of a Federal High Court, Abuja had nullified the redeployment of Alhaji Abubakar Faruk, the Managing Director (MD) of AMML, by the immediate-past Minister of FCT, Mohammed Bello.
The judge also nullified the reconstitution of the AMML Board of Directors chaired by Mr Maina on Feb. 21 by the ex-minister on the grounds that it contravened the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), 2020.
Besides, Justice R.B. Haastrup of a National Industrial Court, Abuja, on July 26, also nullified the termination of Faruk’s employment by Maina on behalf of AMML’s shareholders against a valid court judgment.
Kolawole, however, said that the decision of the embattled MD to challenge his redeployment and the reconstitution of the AMML board, “both done illegally, did not go down well with the powers that be in the FCT, specifically, by some staff of the FCT administration and the AICL, who viewed the court action as a challenge to their powers and authorities.”
He alleged that Maina convened an unlawful general meeting of members of AMML on July 17 where a supposed decision to terminate Faruk’s appointment was taken.
He said the purported termination letter was published in national dailies.
Besides, he said Maina wrote to bankers of AMML to “freeze/PND the AMML accounts with the aim of crippling its operations and makes it difficult for AMML to fulfil its operations and its tax obligations to government.”
The lawyer, who alleged that there had been sponsored defamatory media campaign against AMML and its MD, said meetings were also held with traders with a view to inciting them against the company.
Kolawole said “the escalating lawlessness of Maina has led him into constituting himself and his company secretary as the board of AICL despite a clear presidential order dissolving the said board.”
The AMML Legal Adviser, Mr Felix Edache, said President Tinubu, in a letter dated June 27, directed the dissolution of the boards of Federal Government parastatals, agencies, institutions and government-owned companies.
Edache alleged that despite the directive, Maina continued to sign AMML board resolution, even against court order.
“We humbly appeal to the incoming minister of FCT, the National Assembly, the IGP and the Presidency to direct Mr. Sadiq Abubakar Maina, FCTA (Federal Capital Territory Administration) and AICL to simply obey court orders and allow peace and tranquility in our markets and FCT,” he said.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)
=======
Edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Ruth Oketunde

Ms Oluwafunke Adeoye, a Nigerian Human Rights lawyer, has been announced as the winner of the 2023 Waislitz Global Citizens Choice Award for her outstanding performance in the Criminal Justice sector.

Adeoye who is the founder and Executive Director, Hope Behind Bars Africa, an NGO, made history as the first person working in criminal justice sector to win the global award, which comes with a 75,000 dollars prize.

The NGO provides free legal services and direct support to indigent incarcerated individuals, while also promoting criminal justice reforms through research, evidence-based advocacy and technology.

Adeoye said that she was inspired to begin the initiative in 2018 after some personal encounters with the justice system.

She said that her father who was once a victim, had been arrested and detained for a crime he did not commit several years ago.

Adeoye’s organisation has supported no fewer than 7,000 incarcerated individuals through their numerous interventions, ranging from providing access to justice, welfare, support and rehabilitation and reformation of ex-inmates.

Currently, the organisation is set to launch “Justicepadi”, a tech platform that hope to revolutionize legal aid in West Africa and expand its work for justice-seeking individuals.

The Waislitz Global Citizens Choice Awards recognises the excellent performance of individuals in their work to end extreme poverty and effect positive change in their communities and around the world.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

=======
Edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Ijeoma Popoola

A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, on Thursday, adjourned until Aug. 15 for hearing of an application seeking to stop prosecution of the suspended Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele.

The court will also, on the same day, entertain an application by the Federal  Government seeking to appeal the bail granted Emefiele by the court on July 25.

Justice Nicholas Oweibo gave the date to enable defence to reply to prosecution’s further counter-affidavit to its application.

The counter-affidavit was served on defence just before Thursday’s proceedings.

Oweibo held that prosecution’s application was ripe for hearing but defence had yet  to respond to the further counter-affidavit served it in court on Thursday.

The judge, therefore, said that the two applications would be taken jointly on Aug. 15.

Earlier, prosecution counsel, Mrs K. A. Fagbemi, told the court that prosecution’s application filed on Aug. 3 had been served on the defence which, she said, had  responded.

However, defence counsel, Mr Victor Opara (SAN), submitted that the application was not ripe for hearing.

“Our conception is that, by reason of principle of priority of applications, our application is superior,’’ he said.

Opara also lleged that prosecution had consistency disobeyed the order of the court and should not be allowed to move its application.

Fagbemi then said that, by the principle of priority, the prosecution’s application came first and was ripe for hearing.

She urged the court to hear the application.

After listening to the arguments, Oweibo held that both applications would be taken on the same day.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that in its application filed on Aug. 3, the Federal Government is seeking leave to appeal against the July 25 ruling by Oweibo in which he granted Emefiele bail.

The Federal Government also asked the court to stay execution of its order remanding Emefiele in the custody of the Nigerian Correctional Service and to make an order remanding him, instead, in the custody of the State Security Service.

In his application dated Aug. 7 and filed on Aug. 8, Emefiele is praying the court to stop the Federal Government from further prosecuting him on the charge of illegal possession of a firearm and ammunition or any other charge.

Emefiele’s application is also seeking an order of the court discharging him of all charges brought against him by the government.

He claimed that the government was disobeying a subsisting order of the court granting him bail on July 25 and, therefore, could not lawfully prosecute him.

The application filed through his lawyers led by Mr Joseph Daudu (SAN) is pursuant to Section 6(6)(a) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and some sections of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. (NAN) (www.nannew.ng)

Edited by Ijeoma Popoola

By Bosede Olufunmi

The Police on Thursday arraigned a 29-year-old domestic worker, Alkasim Hamza, before a Sharia Court in Kano for alleged breach of trust.

Hamza, who lives at Tal’udu Quarters, Kano State, is facing a two-count charge of criminal breach of trust and cheating.

The prosecutor, Insp. Abdullahi Wada, told the court that the complainant, Umar Aminu-Ahmad, who also resides at Tal’udu Sabin Titi Quarters, reported the matter at Fagge Police Station, Kano, on Aug.5.

Wada alleged that the complainant had entrusted his vehicle to the defendant for repairs with N1.7 million securely kept inside the boot of the car.

The prosecutor alleged that the defendant brought back the vehicle and later discovered that the sum of N500,000 had been taken from the total amount.

He further told  the court that the defendant had allegedly denied knowledge of the money.

The prosecutor said the offences contravened the provisions of Sections 202 and 206 of the Penal Code.

The defendant, however, pleaded not guilty to the charges.

The Judge, Malam Umar Lawal-Abubakar, granted the defendant bail in the sum of N50,000 with  one surety in like sum.

Lawal-Abubakar, who ruled that the surety must be the defendant’s relation, however, ordered the defendant to be remanded correctional centre pending the perfection of his bail conditions.

He adjourned the case until Aug.22 for mention. (NAN))

By Taiye Agbaje

A contractor, Mr Christian Igbo, on Tuesday prayed an FCT High Court, Abuja to dismiss an application by the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) seeking an order setting aside its judgment against the corps and others.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Edward Okpe had on June 22 in a judgment, ordered the NSCDC to pay Igbo over N29 million balance of the contract sum legitimately awarded and executed by him.
The judge also restrained the NSCDC, its Commander-General (C-G), Ahmed Audi; and others from further harassing the contractor over a completed contract.
But in a motion on notice marked: CV/2115/2023 filed by its Director of Legal Services, Umar Mohammed, the corps sought an order setting aside the judgment delivered on June 22 directing them to pay Igbo his balance (N29, 360, 697.00) of the contract sum.
Giving six grounds why the judgment should be vacated, Mohammed argued that the court gave the judgment without jurisdiction.
When the matter was called on Tuesday, Evelyn Charles-Iyanya, who appeared for NSCDC, moved the motion on notice filed by Mohammed dated July 20 and filed July 25.
She urged the court to set aside Relief 4 as contained in Igbo’s originating motion on the payment of the judgment sum of over N29 million, having been delivered without jurisidtcion.
But Igbo’s counsel, Pascal Obioha, prayed the court to dismiss Charles-Iyanya’s application on the grounds that the court had become functus officio to vacate the judgment it delivered.
The lawyer maintained that the court had jurisdiction to have given the June 22 judgment and that the court as at this time, lacked the powers to either review, revisit or set aside its own judgment, as doing so would amount to the court sitting on appeal over its own decision or judgment.
Obioha, in a counter affidavit he filed, argued that Igbo’s originating motion was dully served on the respondents which enabled them to put up several appearances before the court, but they decided not to file counter affidavit to oppose their application.
He said the court gave them several opportunities to defend the suit or raise objection as to the jurisdiction of the court, where necessary, but they waived their right to do so.
The lawyer, who submitted that the court gave the judgment on merit, said by the content of the said judgement, the court had become functus officio in the matter.
“That I know as a fact that when a court becomes functus officio, that court cannot be expected to review its judgement or sit on appeal over its own judgment when the court’s jurisdiction was properly invoked,” he said.
He said the NSCDC’s motion was grossly incompetent and constituted an abuse of court process.
The lawyer, who averred that the motion was strange and alien to law practice, the rules of the court and legal jurisprudence, said it was brought in bad faith.
“This application is vexatious and a ploy to frustrate the applicant from reaping the fruits of the judgment in his favour,” Obioha said, urging the court to dismiss the motion.
Justice Okpe, after listening to the parties, reserved ruling on a date to be communicated to them.
NAN reports that Igbo had, in an originating motion on notice marked: CV/2115/2023 and filed by Obioha, sued the NSCDC, the C-G, and some agency’s officials.
Others joined as respondents include Fabian Ejezie (Finance), Mpamugo Ifeanyi Bartholomew, Victor Olarenwaju, M. Kukuyi (Accountant General Staff in Charge of CPO) and Chukwuemeka Okeke.
Igbo, a businessman and managing director of Davenchris Ventures LTD, IB-Technicals Ltd and Chrisreubben Enterprises, had sought seven reliefs which include an order to enforce his fundamental human rights of freedom, personal liberty, fair hearing and human dignity as guaranteed by Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution.
The judge, while delivering the judgement on the suit filed in January, held that where an application was not controverted by a party, averments therein would be deemed to have been admitted by the party.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamzat

By Femi Ogunshola

A constitutional lawyer and right activist, Dr Kayode Ajulo has cautioned some Nigerians against making derogatory comments on judges sitting at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT).

He said such comments were troubling and uncalled for.

Ajulo said this in a message in Abuja on Tuesday which he titled:  “Navigating Democracy: Unraveling the Nigerian PEPT and Public Perceptions”.

He said: “Particularly alarming trend is the growing disrespect for the judiciary, characterised by absurd conspiracy theories, slanderous remarks, and baseless allegations often targeting the Honourable Justices.”

He said such trend thrived due to historical perceptions of partiality, polarisation, and the rapid spread of misinformation via social media.

Ajulo said that regrettably, there had been a growing trend of public disregard for both the ongoing tribunal and the broader Nigerian judiciary.

According to him, one malignant trend I have noticed, which is slowly becoming the norm, is the utter disregard and disrespect of the judiciary by Nigerian citizens.

He said this is characterised by ludicrous conspiracy theories, slanderous statements and false accusations, which were majorly targeted at the justices.

Ajulo said such trend was fueled by various factors, including historical instances of perceived judicial partiality, political polarisation, and the amplification of false information through social media.

He said it was imperative to recognise that a healthy democracy relied on the judiciary’s independence and credibility, making it crucial to address and counteract such negative sentiments.

The legal practitioner said the proliferation of misinformation often eroded public trust in the judiciary and undermined the fundamental tenets of democracy.

“In less than 24 hours, I have come across two separate posts on social media which are perfect examples of the negative sentiments in question.

“In the first post, the writer accused a former governor and minister of writing the judgment of the presidential election tribunal, which is yet to be announced.

“In the second post, which was a video, a pastor displayed the pictures of the presiding Justices, and asked his congregation to make certain declarations and ‘lay hands on the Justices’.

“In addition to these, I have also come across several comments castigating and berating the Justices, whilst accusing them of partiality and questionable practices,” he said.

According  to him, what is most upsetting about these accusations is the fact that the Justices in question, by virtue of their calling, the ethics guiding this prestigious profession, and the nature and sensitivity of their offices are not afforded the luxury of addressing these false claims.

He said the plight of the presiding Justices, and the judiciary was a sad one which forced him to act as a voice to an institution unable to defend itself from such onslaught.

“After going through a number of these posts, articles and videos, I have come to the conclusion that these attacks are premeditated and can be traced to have originated from some particular groups and political affiliations.”

He said the Nigerian PEPT remained the canvas capturing Nigeria’s democratic essence, principles, and sentiments.

He added that the Justices presiding over it remained the guardians of justice, entrusted with the monumental task of upholding democracy’s core values. (NAN)

Edited by Edith Bolokor/Chioma Ugboma

By Joan Nwagwu

The Federal Government says it has withdrawn the contempt of court proceedings against organised labour for embarking on a nationwide protest.

This is contained in a letter addressed to the lead counsel to the NLC, Falana and Falana’s Chambers and obtained by the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Tuesday in Abuja.

The letter dated Aug. 7 to Falana’s Chambers was signed by the Solicitor General of the Federation, Mrs  B.E. Jeddy-Agba.

NAN reports that the Federal Ministry of Justice had through the National Industrial Court (NICN), issued the leadership of organised labour summons on contempt of court for embarking on the protest.

NAN also recalls that organised labour had threatened to embark on a nation-wide strike from Aug. 14, if the Federal Government failed to withdraw its contempt of court charges.

Organised Labour had embarked on mass protest over anti-poor policies of government, especially the removal of subsidy that had brought untold hardship to Nigerians.

The letter reads: “Kindly recall the exchange of correspondence between the ministry and your office on the need for compliance with the extant court orders, restraining industrial action of any kind on the part of the Nigeria Labour Congress and Trade Union Congress.

“The position of the ministry was informed by the need to safeguard the integrity of the court and prevent avoidable service disruption or damage to public facilities.

“Inspite of these exchanges/interventions, the labour unions on Aug. 2, proceeded with the industrial action through public pretests”.

It also said the protest led to disruption of work and the eventual pulling down of the gate of the National Assembly.

“The foregoing, it said, prompted the ministry to initiate contempt proceedings by tiling Form 48 on the same 2nd August 2023 in accordance with Section 72 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act and Order 9 Rule 13 of the Judgment (Enforcement) Rules.

“It is trite that issuance of Form 48 is just the starting point in contempt proceedings which will only crystalise upon the issuance of Form 49 and the consequential committal order.”

It noted that upon the intervention of President Bola Tinubu and the decision of the labour unions to call-off their industrial action after meetings with the President and leadership of the National Assembly.

“The ministry did not proceed further with the contempt proceedings, which would have required the issuance of Form 49 within two days of the issuance of Form 48.

“It is self-evident that the none-issuance of Form 49 as at Aug. 4, renders the contempt proceedings inchoate.

“You may therefore wish to advise or guide the labour unions on the practice and procedure of contempt proceedings.

“Also  particularly to the effect that the issues or concerns raised by NLC in its communique on the proceedings, have been overtaken by events,” it said. (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Emmanuel Oloniruha

Sen. Ifeanyi Ararume has described as an abuse of court process, the appeal filed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), seeking to upturn the judgment of a Federal High Court, which ordered his reinstatement as non-executive chairman of the Board of the newly-created NNPCL.

Araraume argued that the appeal by NNPCL was not only incompetent and lacking in merit but also a waste of the precious time of the court, which must be dismissed with a huge cost.

His position was contained in his brief of argument filed July 31 by his team of lawyers, led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN.

Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, had, in a judgment on April 18, 2023, ordered the immediate reinstatement of Araraume as NNPCL’s board chairman.

The court had, in its judgment, held that his removal after his appointment by former President Muhammadu Buhari was illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional, null, and void and had subsequently nullified the president’s action.

Besides, the court had also ordered the defendants which included Buhari, NNPCL and the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), to pay Araraume the sum of N5 billion being damages he suffered following his unlawful removal as NNPCL’s board chairman.

In addition, the court had declared as a nullity all decisions and actions taken so far by the board in the absence of Araraume.

Dissatisfied by the judgment, NNPCL had approached the Court of Appeal, Abuja, to challenge the decisions and orders of Justice Ekwo of the Federal High Court delivered on April 18.

The NNPCL, in its appellant’s brief of argument, dated June 30, but filed July 3, presented 18 grounds upon which it was challenging the entire decision of the trial court.

Specifically, the appellant through its lead counsel, Mr Yusuf Ali, SAN, urged the appellate court to set aside the judgment in favour of Araraume because the trial court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit, having been statute barred.

He averred that the trial court misled and mis-applied the relevant statutory provisions which led it to the wrong decisions; that Araraume failed to adduce convincing, believable, cogent and compelling evidence in support of his suit; and that the trial court ought not to have entertained the suit, which was filed via originating summons.

The appellant argued that the trial judge erred in law in holding that the president was wrong in removing Araraume as Board Chairman, adding that the constitution, PIA, 2021 as well as the NNPCL’s Memorandum and Article of Association, “give the power to appoint and remove the the Non-Executive Chairman of the appellant to the 2nd respondent, under the long established and judicially settled principle of he who have the power to hire can fire.”

In addition, the appellant submitted that where a person’s appointment is removed by the person who confirmed the said appointment, such person is not bound to give reason in the letter of termination/ removal as done in this case.

The appellant noted that where the person who confirmed the appointment chose not to give reason for his action, “it is not for the court to embark on a voyage of discovery and import reasons or motive for the termination of the appointment.”

Similarly, NNPCL argued that the trial court erred in its interpretation of the constitution, Petroleum Industry Act, 2021, Section 288 of the Company and Allied Matter Act, to the extent that because the NNPCL was not incorporated as a statutory incorporation, the president can control the NNPCL, adding that the issue of control was never before the court.

The appellant accordingly raised six issues for determination through which it wanted the appellate court to resolve the appeal.

On the first issue, NNPCL submitted that the trial court acted requisite vires to have entertained Araraume’s suit in view of Section 254(c)(1) of the Constitution, Section 2 of the Public Officers Protection Act and Section 307 of the Petroleum Industry Act, (PIA), 2021.

According to the appellant, the trial court erred in law when it went ahead to hold that the case of the claimant was not statute barred, despite evidence that the suit was filed eight months outside the three months provided by the law.

On the second issue, NNPCL argued that the trial judge was wrong to have entertained the Araraume’s suit on Originating Summons, explaining that where facts in dispute were riotous, hostile and in conflict, Originating Summons was inappropriate.

Besides, the appellant accused Justice Ekwo of not giving them fair hearing when it refused to hear and determine their application for a stay of execution they had filed on January 20, 2023.

NNPCL claimed that at the proceedings of Jan. 23, the attention of the trial court was drawn to application for stay of execution but, “the trial court refused to hear (the) same despite the fact that its attention was drawn to it.”

Faulting the judgment of the Federal High Court, further, the appellant claimed that the trial court was wrong to have ordered Araraume’s reinstatement while at the same time awarding damage on the grounds that such amounted to double compensation.

It was also the submission of the NNPCL that the trial judge erred in law when it granted the declarative reliefs in favour of Araraume even when he did not offer cogent, reliable, believable or convincing evidence to support his claims or prove his entitlement to the claim or even disclosed any cause of action against the appellant.

They therefore urged the court to determine the appeal in their favour and set aside the judgment of Justice Ekwo delivered on April 18, 2023.

Responding, Araraume faulted the appeal for being incompetent on the grounds that the said brief of argument was filed by a non-party in the suit.

According to Araraume, there is no proper appellant before the Court of Appeal because the NNPCL that he sued is different from the Nigerian National Petroleum Company that filed the brief of argument and as such it lacked the locus standi and the legal personality of any brief of argument in this appeal or to prosecute same.

“We submit that this is not a case of misnomer, but consistent with the position and attitude of the “Appellant” as if the 2nd respondent defendant sued by the 1st respondent at the court below was still a parastatal of government.”

Meanwhile, Araraume has urged the court to dismiss the appeal with substantial cost for being a gross abuse of court process.

According to him, the trial court acted within its constitutional and statutory jurisdiction when it entertained, heard, and determined his suit against the NNPCL, then President Buhari and the CAC.

Araraume claimed that NNPCL was wrong in challenging the court’s jurisdiction on the premise that his case was a labour or employment related matter, which should be heard by the National Industrial Court.

“In view of the clear position of the 1st respondent as Director/Non-Executive Chairman of the appellant, it was wrong and incorrect to regard the 1st respondent as an employee of the appellant or employee of the 2nd respondent.”

Araraume further argued that his case arose from the operation of the appellant as a corporate entity incorporated under the CAMA, 2020.

On the issue of protection Araraume in the reply filed by his lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, pointed out that the provisions of Section 2 of the Public Officers Protection Act and Section 307 of the PIA, 2021 were not applicable to the suit as statutes of limitation.

According to him, “an elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is not a Public Officer,” adding that the Public Officers Act was intended to protect the officer from detraction and unnecessary litigation but never intended to deprive a party of legal capacity to ventilate his grievance in the face of stark injustice.

Besides, Araraume submitted that the mode of commencement of the suit was appropriate being one of the interpretation of the provisions of the constitution, CAMA, 2020 and PIA, 2021, since there was no hostile or hotly contested facts.

In addition, he submitted that the necessary parties were before the court; and, as such, there was no breach of the right to fair hearing of any non-party.

“The court below was right to have granted the reliefs sought in the circumstances, (the) same having been proved in accordance with the law, and there being no defence thereto.”(NAN)

Edited by Ismail Abdulaziz