TheNewsGuru

Tag: Federal High Court

  • 2023: Rivers APC ask court to disqualify all PDP candidates

    2023: Rivers APC ask court to disqualify all PDP candidates

    The Rivers state All Progressives Congress APC has sued the Peoples Democratic Party,( PDP) it’s governorship candidate, Sim Fubara. thirty-one others and the Independent National Electoral Commission, to the Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, citing issues of neglect of electoral act.

    Consequently, the APC has now called on the court to serve notice of disqualification to all PDP candidates whose names weren’t forwarded and the failure to properly sign the document as and when due.

    Meanwhile, APC counsel CC Dike moved a motion exparte for substituted service to all the respondents when the case was mentioned in court on Tuesday.

    The court subsequently granted the order which allows the plaintiff to serve the respondents by pasting the court processes on their building.

    Presiding Judge, Justice, Ayuah Phoebe before adjourning till 31st of August, 2022 for hearing, directed the plaintiff to effect service to the respondents before the next adjourned date.

  • Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer defeats FG in court, get N52m compensation

    Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer defeats FG in court, get N52m compensation

    The Federal High Court sitting in  Akwa, Anambra state has ordered the Nigerian Army and other security agencies who invaded Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer’s house on the day of his brother’s burial two years ago to pay him the sum of 50 Million naira as compensation.

    Nnamdi Kanu’s lawyer, Ifeanyi Ejiofor’s house was invaded by joint forces of security operatives from the country.

    The court, led by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, ruled in favour of Ejiofor, following the invasion of the lawyer’s home by operatives of the federal government.

    Meanwhile, the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB has reacted to the defeat of the federal government by the counsel to its leader, Ifeanyi Ejiofor in court.

    This judgment came two years after security agents invaded Ejiofor’s home during the burial of his brother in Oraifite.

    According to the court, the money is compensation for the gross violation of Ejiofor’s rights

    The court also awarded N2m as cost for the action against the Police and the Army.

    In its reaction, IPOB commended the Judge for delivering such a ruling against the Federal Government.

    A statement by IPOB’s spokesman, Emma Powerful, reads: “We, the global family of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) under our great leader Mazi Nnamdi KANU commend all the fearless Judges who gave justice to all IPOB cases littered in all courts in Nigeria.

    “We commend the recent judgment delivered in favour of the IPOB Counsel, Barrister Ifeanyi Ejiofor whom Nigeria Government and its compromised security agencies attacked and murdered his Personal Assistant, abducted others, and burnt his personal car and country home at Oraifite Ekwusigo LGA of Anambra State.

    “We commend the Judge who, without minding the intimidation from the Government of Buhari and his Fulani kinsmen, delivered a landmark judgment against Nigeria Government and her compromised security agencies and ordered them to compensate him for the evil they did to him. The only crime that Barr. Ifeanyi Ejiofor committed was a defense lawyer to IPOB and Mazi Nnamdi Kanu. Barr. Ejiofor is only doing his professional job as an Attorney, according to law. But he has always been harassed, intimidated, and threatened and has lost persons around him and properties worth millions from the Nigerian State in the course of doing his professional job.

    “IPOB salutes men and women of the Bench who don’t yield to the oppressive government of Nigeria but delivered justice to IPOB members who have been illegally abducted, tortured, detained, and denied freedom in many security detention facilities across Nigeria.

    “IPOB will not forget to appreciate Justice Ademola of Abuja High Court, who gave justice to our leader Mazi Nnamdi KANU in 2015 that he committed no crime against any man or nation.

    “This honourable Judge granted the unconditional release of our Leader Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in 2015, which unmasked the injustice that the current Judge, Justice Binta Nyako of Federal High Court Abuja, is trying so hard to mask again against Nnamdi Kanu.”

  • Court restrains FG over disputed e-Customs Concession Project

    Court restrains FG over disputed e-Customs Concession Project

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has restrained the Federal government from enforcing or giving effect to the controversial Customs Modernisation Project otherwise known as e- Custom allegedly executed by its agents on May 30, 2022.

     

    The agents who allegedly executed the disputed concession project are the Nigerian Customs Service, Trade Modernisation Project limited, Huawei Technologies Company Nigeria Limited and African Finance Corporation.

     

    The court also issued an order of interim injunction against the Federal government or its agents acting through the Federal Executive Council FEC from retrospectively ratifying the decisions to concession the Custom Modernisation Project also known as the e- custom project to the Trade Modernisation Project limited, Huawei Technologies Company limited and African Finance Corporation.

     

    The restraining order issued by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Abuja division of the court shall last till the hearing and the determination of a suit brought against the Federal Government by two aggrieved companies.

     

    An enroll order issued by the court dated June 17, 2022, is signed by Justice Inyang Eden Ekwo and sighted by our correspondent.

     

    The two aggrieved companies are, E-Customs HC Project Limited and Bionica Technologies ( (West Africa) Limited which jointly challenged the alleged unlawful and fraudulent concession of the e-custom project to African Finance Corporation.

     

    Counsel to the two aggrieved companies, Mr Anone Usman had on behalf of the two plaintiff’s argued an ex-parte application in which he prayed the Federal High Court for interim orders against the defendants to protect the interest of his clients.

     

    Justice Inyang Ekwo while ruling on the ex-parte application granted the prayers of the plaintiffs having placed sufficient evidence of interest in the concession project.

     

    The Judge also granted permission to the aggrieved companies to serve a Writ of Summons and all other processes on the African Finance Corporation at its head office, located Ikoyi, Lagos through DHL courier services.

     

    Defendants in the suit are the Federal government of Nigeria, Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Finance Minister, Infrastructure Regulatory Concession Commission, (IRCC) Nigeria Custom Service, Trade Modernization Project limited , Huawei Technologies limited, African Finance Corporation and Bergman Security Consultant and Supply limited as 1st to 9th defendants respectively.

     

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports that Justice Ekwo subsequently fixed June 28 for hearing in the matter.

    Court

     

    In their statement of claims, the two plaintiffs narrated how they proposed to carry out Custom Modernisation Project through several government officials for the benefit of the Nigerian Customs Service.

     

    They claimed that after a series of meetings and negotiations with some of the defendants, President Mohammudu Buhari granted anticipatory approval for the e- custom Project.

     

    They avered that on September 2, 2020, the Minister of Finance presented a memo with the number EC2020/153 to the Federal Executive Council, the highest decision-making body of the federal government and secured approval for the two plaintiffs to be granted the award of the concession.

     

    Plaintiffs further claimed that trouble started when the Nigeria Customs Service unilaterally reviewed the Federal Executive Council approval and imposed other conditions among which are shareholding formulae and governance structure on them.

     

    They claimed that the power of the Nigeria Customs Service to unilaterally review FEC approval was protested and that the Comptroller General of the agency stood his ground.

     

    Plaintiff asserted that to their surprise, they read in the news that the Nigeria Customs Service had executed a concession agreement with the Trade Modernisation Project on May 30, 2022, with Huawei Technologies Company and African Finance Corporation in total breach of the Concession Agreement vetted by the AGF in conjunction with the Minister of Finance.

     

    They avered that Tade Modernisation Project Limited was incorporated in April 2022 at the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) with one Alhaji Saleh Ahmadu a close friend of the Comptroller General as the Chairman.

     

    Plaintiff asserted that the new company, having been just incorporated in April 2022 could not have obtained and did not obtain the full business case compliance certificate from the Infrastructure Regulatory Concession Commission IRCC and the approval of the Federal Executive Council to carry out e- custom project.

     

    They, therefore, asked the court to make a declaration that the decisions of the federal government and its agent to enter into a concession agreement with Trade Modernisation Project Limited, Huaewai Technologies Company and African Finance Corporation in respect of the e-customs project is illegal, null and void, having been made in gross violation of Section 2 of the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission Act 2005.

     

    They also asked the court to declare that e-Customs HC Project limited is the approved and rightful concessionaire for the e-customs project as approved by the Federal Executive Council at its meeting on September 2, 2020, and in line with Section 2 of the Infrastructure Regulatory Concession Commission Act.

     

    They also applied for an order of the court directing the Federal Government through AGF, Finance Minister, IRCC and Customs to consulate the e- custom project with the 1st plaintiff, (E-Customs Project Limited) as approved by FEC in its September 2020 meeting.

     

    Besides, the two plaintiffs asked the court to compel the defendants to pay them a sum of two hundred million naira (N200M) as the cost of litigation.

  • EXTRADITION: Court to hear Abba Kyari’s case on Friday

    EXTRADITION: Court to hear Abba Kyari’s case on Friday

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled hearing for Friday in the extradition proceedings initiated against suspended Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Abba Kyari by the Federal Government.

     

    Justice Inyang Ekwo chose the date on Thursday to enable the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) file a formal response to Kyari’s notice of primary objection challenging the competence of the extradition application filed by the AGF.

     

    The AGF applied to the court for permission to surrender Kyari to authorities of the United States in relation to his alleged link with international fraud suspect, Abbas Ramon (aka Hushpuppi).

     

    United States of America, USA, had requested for Kyari to face trial over his alleged involvement with a notorious internet fraudster, Ramon Abbas, popularly known as Hushpuppi, till April 27.

    Kyari

     

    Kyari is wanted in the U.S. to stand trial for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, money laundering, and identity theft.

     

    A grand jury had on April 29, 2021, filed an indictment against him with the approval of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, after which a warrant was issued for his arrest.

     

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports that the application for his extradition was brought before the court by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN.

     

    It would be recalled that Malami had said the extradition application was based on a request by the Diplomatic Representative of the U.S. Embassy in Abuja for Kyari to be surrendered for trial.

     

    The AGF, in an affidavit that was filed in support of the extradition application, said he was satisfied that the offence in respect of which Kyari’s surrender was sought, is not political or trivial.

    Kyari

     

    He said he was also satisfied that the request for Kyari to be surrendered, was not made to persecute or punish him on account of his race, religion, nationality or political opinions, but in good faith and in the interest of justice.

     

    According to him, Kyari, “if surrendered, will not be prejudiced at his trial and will not be punished, detained or restricted in his personal liberty, by reason of his race, nationality or political opinions”, adding that having regard to all the circumstances in which the alleged offence was committed, it would not be unjust or oppressive, or severe a punishment, to surrender him.

     

    Malami, noted that there was no criminal proceeding pending against Kyari in Nigeria, bordering on the same offence for which he is wanted in the USA.

  • 2023: Lawyer drags Atiku to court over citizenship status

    Former Vice president and presidential flagbearer of the peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has been dragged to court by a lawyer Johnmary Jideobi, asking that the Federal High Court in Abuja should disqualify him.

    The  Abuja-based lawyer, claims that Atiku is not a full fledged Nigerian and shouldn’t be allowed to contest in the forthcoming general elections.

    Recall that Atiku had emerged the presidential flag bearer of the PDP for the 2023 general elections after polling a total of 371 votes to defeat his closest challenger, Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State who garnered 237 votes.

    Johnmary Jideobi, in his suit, is challenging Atiku’s Nigerian citizenship, despite serving as vice president from 1999 to 2007.

    Jideobi,  argued that Atiku is not a Nigerian citizen by birth as required by the country’s laws and does not qualify to run for the office of the President.

    Also joined as defendants in the suit are the PDP, the Independent National Electoral Commission, and the Attorney General of the Federation, AGF.

    According to him, the former Vice President only “acquired his citizenship of Nigeria by virtue of the 1961 plebiscite which integrated some people of Northern Cameroon into Nigeria as new citizens of Nigeria.”

    The plaintiff further told the court that it would amount to a grave desecration of the otherwise sacrosanct and inviolable provisions of Sections 1(1) & (2), 25 and 131(a) of the Constitution if Atiku is allowed to participate in the 2023 presidential election as the PDP candidate.

    He also said that the court must ensure that the INEC shall not allow any person or group of persons take control of the government of Nigeria or any part thereof except in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.

    Furthermore, Jideobi prayed the court to declare that “by virtue of Sections 1(1) & (2), 25 and 131(a) of the Constitution, it is only a Nigerian citizen by birth that is constitutionally eligible to contest for the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    He further seeks a “declaration that given the circumstances of the birth of the first defendant (Atiku), he is not constitutionally qualified to stand for election into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    The plaintiff seeks an “order of the court disqualifying the first defendant – Atiku Abubakar – from contesting for election to the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    He also begged the court to declare that the “PDP does not have a candidate for the office of the president in the 2023 presidential election to be organised by the third defendant.”

    He sought an order of perpetual injunction stopping the former Vice President and 2019 presidential candidate of the PDP from running for the office of the President of Nigeria or occupying such office by whatever means and throughout his lifetime an order to stop the PDP from fielding Atiku as its candidate for the 2023 presidential election and an order to restrain the INEC perpetually from accepting and or publishing Atiku’s name as a candidate of PDP for the office of the President.

    The court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of the case.

  • Court restrains MC Oluomo, 8 others from collecting levies from commercial drivers

    The Ikoyi Federal High Court has ordered the Chairman of the Lagos State Park and Garages Management, Musiliu Akinsanya, aka MC Oluomo, and eight others to stop collecting levies from commercial drivers.

    Justice Peter Lifu gave the order in respect to an ex parte application filed by a lawyer, Mr Olukoya Ogungbeje.

     

    The lawyer filed the application on behalf of himself and a new transport union, Transport Union Society of Nigeria.

    Court
    Musiliu Akinsanya, aka MC Oluomo

     

    Other respondents in the suit are the Registered Trustees of the National Union of Road Transport Workers, Registered Trustees of Road Transport Employers Association of Nigeria, Registered Trustees of the Nigerian Association of Road Transport Owners, Alhaji Lawal Othman, Lagos State Government, Attorney-General of Lagos State, Inspector-General of Police and the Director of State Security Service.

     

    In the application supported by a 34-paragraph affidavit, Ogungbeje prayed the court to restrain the respondents from “forceful imposition, collection, extortion of any transport union levies, dues, fees, or monies from any person, commercial vehicle driver and/or transporter that is not a member of the respondents pending the hearing and determination of the substantive originating motion filed before the court.”

     

    The counsel also prayed the court to restrain the respondents from “arresting, detaining, harassing, embarrassing, humiliating, inviting, seizing, and confiscating any commercial vehicle, disturbing and/or interfering with the lawful transport business operations of the applicant and its transport union members in connection with the facts of the case pending the determination of the substantive originating motion.”

     

    Earlier, Justice Lifu had ordered the respondents in the suit to present their reasons within seven days why the reliefs sought by the applicants should not be granted.

     

    At the resumed hearing, Ogungbeje informed the court that the processes were served on the respondents and added that they failed to respond.

     

    On that ground, Justice Lifu granted the reliefs of the applicants.

     

    He adjourned the case till June 6 to determine the applicants’ motion to add other parties to the suit.

  • Why we are at Okorocha’s home – EFCC

    Why we are at Okorocha’s home – EFCC

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has explained why its operatives laid siege to the Abuja residence of former Governor of Imo State, Rochas Okorocha.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports the EFCC in a statement as saying the move followed the refusal of Okorocha to honour invitations after jumping the administrative bail earlier granted him by the Commission.

    Recall that operatives of the EFCC on Tuesday morning arrived at the Maitama, Abuja home of the former Governor to effect his arrest.

    EFCC had on January 24, 2022, filed a 17-count criminal charge bordering on diversion of public funds and properties to the tune of N2.9 billion against Okorocha.

    The case was assigned to Honourable Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    According to the Commission, attempts to arraign Okorocha was twice stalled owing to the absence of the ex-governor, who the EFCC said evaded service of processes.

    “At the last adjourned date, March 28th, 2022, Justice Ekwo before adjourning until May 30th, 2022, had warned that it was “the last adjournment I shall grant in this matter”.

    “In the circumstances, the Commission is left with no option than to effect the arrest of Senator Okorocha and bring him to trial,” the statement by EFCC reads.

  • Student, three others jailed for wire fraud in Ibadan

    Student, three others jailed for wire fraud in Ibadan

    A student of the Polytecnic ibadan,Gbadamosi Joseph Adebayo has been sentenced to 6 months in jail by the Federal High Court in Ibadan for wire fraud.

    Another set of persons whose names were given as Tijani Wasiu Oluwakemi, Olunlade Quadri Olamilekan and Olaogun Segun Damilola were also convicted for the same offence.

    These internet fraudsters were arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for criminal impersonation and related offences.

    They all pleaded “guilty” to the charge when it was read to them individually.

    Meanwhile Justice Uche Agomoh ordered Gbadamosi to pay $200 in restitution to his victim.

    Oluwakemi, Olamilekan and Damilola were convicted by two different Federal High Courts and a State High Court after pleading guilty.

    Oluwakemi was arraigned before Justice Agomoh; Olamilekan before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abeokuta; Damilola before Justice Sherifat Adeyemi of the Federal High Court, Ibadan.

    Tijani was sentenced to one year imprisonment; Olamilekan to nine months jail term; Damilola to six months community service.

    The convicts were ordered to make restitution to their victims and forfeit various devices and a car.

  • ELECTORAL ACT: Court of Appeal was wrong to say claimant had no locus standi to have brought the action- Oyesanya SAN

    ELECTORAL ACT: Court of Appeal was wrong to say claimant had no locus standi to have brought the action- Oyesanya SAN

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr Adekunle Oyesanya, has faulted Wednesday’s decision of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, on Section 84(12) Of Electoral Act, saying “they were in error to have held that the claimant had no locus standi to have brought the action”.

    While delivering judgment on Wednesday, the three-member panel headed by Justice Hamma Barka held set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court in Umuahia which voided the provision of Section 84(12) of the Electoral Act 2022.

     

    The Court of Appeal held that the Federal High Court, Umuahia, had no jurisdiction to have entertained the case as the plaintiff, Nduka Edede, lacked the locus standi to have filed the suit in the first instance.

     

    The court added that Mister Edede did not establish any cause of action to have warranted him approaching the court on the issue because he did not establish that he was directly affected by the provision.

     

    The Court of Appeal then struck out the suit filed by Edede, but referred the appeal against the Federal High Court judgement to the Supreme Court for interpretation.

     

    Reacting to the development, the senior advocate said: “With the greatest respect to Their Lordships of the court of appeal, they were in error to have held that the claimant had no locus standi to have brought the action.

     

    “The Supreme court has laid it down in a number of cases, including FAWEHINMI V BABANGIDA( 2003) that every citizen has a right to bring an action that challenges the constitutionality of a statute.

     

    “However, the Court, in my opinion, was right in striking down section 84(12) of the Electoral Act. That section fails the test of being consistent with the constitution.