TheNewsGuru

Tag: High Court

  • Gov. Obaseki swears in 2 new judges in Edo

    Two High Court judges, Orobosa Omotoso and Terry Momodu, were sworn in on Monday by Gov. Godwin Obaseki of Edo.

    Speaking at the occasion, Obaseki said that his administration remains committed to strengthening the state judicial system for optimal justice delivery and sustenance of the democratic process.

    He said: “We realize that without an effective judicial system it will be impossible to practise our democracy.

    “We are proud of the reputation of the entire judiciary in the Edo State for its independence, integrity and its industry.

    “We constantly celebrate the fact that at a certain time when allegations were being regularly made regarding judges, our judiciary remained well respected and scandal-free.”

    He expressed optimism that the newly sworn in judges would build on the legacies left behind by their predecessors.

    Omotoso, in her response, commended the governor for his administration’s resolve to re-position the state’s judicial system.

    She pledged the commitment of the new judges to the discharge of their duties to the best of their abilities.

    Omotoso was born in 1967 and called to the bar in 1989 while Momodu, also born in 1967, was called to the bar in 1991.

     

  • Tambuwal swears-in four new judges

    Governor Aminu Waziri Tambuwal Wednesday swore-in four new judges that will serve in the state High Court and the Sharia Court of Appeal.

    Those sworn in as High Court Judges were Kabiru Ibrahim Ahmad and Isah Mohammed Bargaja while Kasimu Yusuf and Umar Liman Sifawa were sworn-in as Khadis of the state Sharia Court of Appeal.

    Speaking at the ceremony held at the Government House, Tambuwal said the appointment followed due process and all those appointed were qualified legal representatives who merited their positions on the Bench.

    He said judicial officers in the state have shown great determination to ensure effective service delivery.

    He said since the inception of present administration, he has not received any complaint against judicial officers directly or indirectly from the National Judicial Council (NJC) or the state Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

    “For about a decade now, there was no appointment of judges in Sokoto state. So for us, today’s event is a milestone which will help in strengthening the judiciary.

    “I want to assure you, and indeed the legislative arm of government, of our continued support and cooperation. This is essential if we hope to ensure rapid development of democracy in the country,” the Governor added.

    While congratulating the new appointees on their appointments, Tambuwal expressed confidence that they will approach their new responsibilities with due dignity, integrity and commitment.

    The event was witnessed by the Speaker of the state House of Assembly, Hon Salihu Maidaji, Chief Judge of the state, Justice Bello Abass and the Grand Khadi, Abdulkadir Saidu.

     

  • Court fixes date for Olisa Metuh’s no-case submission ruling

    Court fixes date for Olisa Metuh’s no-case submission ruling

    An FCT High Court, Maitama, on Wednesday fixed April 23 for ruling on the no-case submission filed by Olisa Metuh, a former PDP spokesman, accused of alleged destruction of evidence.

    Metuh was arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC ), on a two-count charge bordering on alleged destruction of evidence.

    The case which was before Justice Ishaq Bello, was adjourned until April 23, with consent of counsel as the court did not sit.

    The case was earlier adjourned until March 7, for ruling on Metuh’s no- case submission.

    Metuh’s counsel, Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), had on Oct. 10, 2017, told the court that they would enter a no-case submission at the close of the prosecution’s case

    Arguing the no-case submission, Ikpeazu had told the court that the prosecution had not established any case to warrant the defendant to be called to enter his defence.

    He said that the application was in pursuant to the provisions of Sections 302 and 357 of ACJA.

    He added that the defendant had a constitutional liberty and could not be prosecuted where he either refused to make a statement or withdraw any part of his writing in the course of making a statement.

    He said that the defendant had a right to cancel any part of his statement voluntarily.

    He reminded the court that the charge by EFCC was that Metuh destroyed his statement and obstruct the EFCC officials by willfully tearing his statement.

    Ikpeazu added that a piece of paper not signed did not qualify as a statement by the defendant, and urged the court to discharge and acquit the defendant.

    The prosecuting counsel Mr Sylvanus Tahir, urged the court to establish whether or not a prima facie case had been made against the defendant

    He added that cancellation was different from tearing which was obstruction, and urged the court to call upon the defendant to enter his defence.

     

  • Chieftaincy review: We’re not celebrating High Court judgement – Olubadan

    The Olubadan of Ibadan, Oba Saliu Adetunji on Sunday said he and his supporters are not celebrating the State High Court’s judgment which declared the panel that recommended the review of the Olubadan Chieftaincy Declaration a nullity.

    Recall that an Oyo State High Court, on Friday, declared the panel and the activities it produced as illegal.

    This means the 21 obas crowned on the heels of the review of the chieftaincy law would forfeit their crowns, if the judgment is not upturned.

    The Olubadan said the review had divided Ibadan indigenes, adding that this did not gladden his heart as the father of all.

    His Imperial Majesty, who spoke through his Director of Media and Public Affairs, Mr Adeola Oloko, said: “We are not celebrating or humiliating anybody. For us, there is no victor, no vanquished. To be candid, the incident has divided Ibadan indigenes. This is displeasing to the Olubadan because he is the overall father of all indigenes. What we want is the unity of all Ibadan indigenes and preservation of the Ibadan Chieftaincy system.

    “The high chiefs have the right to appeal the judgment. However, we shall wait for the outcome of the appeal, if they do. Otherwise, we expect them to comply with the judgment.”

    The Osi Olubadan, Senator Rashidi Ladoja, who refused to accept the beaded crown, challenged the establishment of the panel and its recommendations in court.

    Justice Olajumoke Aiki delivered the judgment in the case filed against Governor Abiola Ajimobi and Justice Akintunde Boade, who chaired the judicial commission of enquiry that reviewed the declaration.

    Ajimobi, on May 19, last year, set up a judicial commission of enquiry to review the 1957 Olubadan Chieftaincy Declaration and other Related Chieftaincies laws in Ibadan.

    Accordingly, a report was submitted by the panel last August and a White Paper on the report was published in the Oyo State Gazette No. 14, Vol. 42 by Authority on August 23, last year and the amended declaration on regulating the selection to the Olubadan of Ibadan Chieftaincies and Related Matters published in the Oyo State Gazette No. 15, Vol. 42 by Authority in Ibadan on August 24, last year.

     

  • Justice Ademola: FG appeals against High Court’s judgement, files fresh case at CCT

    The Federal Government has filed an appeal against the decision of Justice Jude Okeke upholding the no case submission in the corruption case against Justice Adeniyi Ademola, Mrs. Olabowale Ademola and Mr Joe Agi.

    A source in the Presidency confirmed this development to State House correspondents in Abuja on Thursday.

    The source stated that filing the appeal was informed by the need to save the war against corruption.

    The source revealed that the government, through the Ministry of Justice, had also filed a fresh case in the Code of Conduct Tribunal against Justice Ademola and wife “for living above their means and failure to declare their assets.’’

    TheNewsGuru.com reports that Justice Okeke of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, on Wednesday, upheld the no case submission by the defence in the corruption case against Justice Adeniyi Ademola, Mrs Olabowale Ademola and Mr Joe Agi.

    The judge struck out the 18-count charge preferred against the defendants after holding that the prosecution failed to prove any of the allegations despite the provisions of sections 53 and 60 of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act.

    However, sources in the Presidency informed State House Correspondents that the government had been advised to appeal against what is described as “a very strange outcome indeed considering the underlying facts.

    “It is even stranger that the trial was not allowed to continue considering the applicable statutory provisions.

    “Section 53 (1) of the ICPC Act raises a presumption that any gratification accepted or obtained by an accused person must have been corruptly accepted or obtained until the contrary is proved. Section 60 of the Act does not apply to the case.

    “Of interest is the decision of the learned trial judge that the offence of giving and receiving gratification was not made out by the prosecution against the defendants in the face of the evidence held in court.

    “Prosecution witnesses gave testimony of the payment of N30 Million in three tranches by Mr Joe Agi (SAN), into the account of Mrs Olabowale Ademola, the wife of Justice Ademola. Agi was a legal practitioner who actually had cases in the court of Justice Ademola.

    “The defendants, however, claim that the money was a gift from common friends for the benefit of Justice Ademola and Mrs Ademola to support the wedding of their daughter’’, the source narrated.

    The source added that the evidence of the defence suggesting that the source of the money was not Agi, was unclear at best and ought not to have formed the basis of the learned trial judge’s conclusion at this stage of the proceedings.

    “What was clear was that the last tranche was paid shortly before Justice Ademola granted a garnishee order in favour of Agi’s client to the tune of about $637 million.

    “Prior to this, it was also not disputed that Justice Admola’s son had received a BMW vehicle worth about N8,500,000 from Agi.’’

    The presidency source continued: “One of the charges dismissed relates to the possession of firearms by Justice Ademola without a valid licence.

    “On this, Honourable Justice Okeke held that the Firearms Act made provision for a time lag, that is, for Justice Ademola to continue to hold on to his firearms and ammunition even after the expiration of his licence.

    “In this case, a new licence was tendered in a situation where Justice Ademola ought to have tendered a renewal of his old licence. Being in possession of two licences in respect of the same firearm ought to have raised some questions for the defendants to resolve.’’

    According to sources, within the prosecution, the ruling suggests that the learned trial judge proceeded to ascribe probative value to the evidence of prosecution witnesses at the stage of a no case submission when he ought only to have considered whether a prima facie case had been made out by the prosecution against the defendants.

    “The learned trial Judge had held that there was no link between the gratification received by Justice Ademola and the judgment he delivered in favour of Agi.’’

    The source maintained that the ruling failed to address the relevance of section 53 of the ICPC Act which raised a presumption of corruption in respect of the gratification in question.

    The source said this and other troubling questions must be addressed in an appeal against the ruling.

    When contacted for official comments of the presidency, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu denied the existence of a rift between the Executive and Judicial arms of government over this issue and other recent judicial decisions posing a challenge to the war against corruption.

    According to him, the relationship between the two arms of government has been very cordial, adding that nothing has happened to change the nature of the relationship.

     

    NAN

  • Supreme Court affirms Tambuwal as Sokoto Gov, others High Court to retry Dahiru’s case

    Supreme Court affirms Tambuwal as Sokoto Gov, others High Court to retry Dahiru’s case

    The Supreme Court on Friday declined to remove Governor Aminu Waziri Tambuwal from office as Sokoto State duly elected governor.

    However, the appellate court ruled that a case filed by Senator Umaru Dahiru challenging the nomination of Tambuwal as candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the April 2015 governorship election be retried at the Federal High Court.

    Recall that Dahiru contested for the governorship election in the December 2014 primaries of the APC, but lost to Tambuwal, who eventually went on to win the gubernatorial poll conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in April 2015 and was subsequently sworn-in as Governor on May 29 of the same year.

    Friday’s ruling followed an earlier judgment given by the Supreme Court in June this year which dismissed application by the Sokoto State chapter of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and it’s governorship candidate, Senator Abdallah Wali, to be joined as parties to Dahiru’s suit.

    In a judgement written by Hon Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammed JSC and read by Hon Justice CC Nweze JSC, the court held that rather than consider the case as mere academic exercise, the High Court should retry the case on its merit.

    Counsel to Tambuwal, Paul M. Kassim Esq, who led six other lawyers, said the defence are are satisfied with the ruling and will get set for trial at the Federal High Court.

    “Our position remains unchanged, that our client was validly nominated by the APC and was duly elected Governor by the good people of Sokoto State,” he told reporters after the judgement.

    In the June ruling by now retired Justice Sulaiman Galadima JSC, the Supreme Court held that PDP and Wali lacked the locus standi to apply to be joined in the suit, describing the two as interlopers who should not take part in a matter purely involving another party.

    Even though Sokoto PDP had announced that they will not challenge the election of Tambuwal in 2015, they however, through case number SC/67/2016, sought to be joined as parties in Dahiru’s suit on the grounds that if it succeeds, Wali should be declared winner of the election.

    In a notice of motion for joinder filed at the apex court by EK Ashiekaa SAN, Wali and PDP contended that having participated in the 2015 governorship election, and having scored the next highest number of votes cast after that of Tambuwal, they have sufficient grounds to be joined in the case.

    They said the reliefs sought by Dahiru would have an effect on the outcome of the Sokoto governorship election by creating a vacuum.

    “That the vacuum likely to be created by the success of the Appellants appeal can only be filled by the applicant who scored the next highest returned votes,” they argued.

    Justice Galadima however struck out the application, foreclosing any move by the PDP to get APC removed from power in Sokoto through the back door.

    No date yet has been set for hearing on the interlocutory appeal filed by Senator Umar Dahiru challenging the ruling of the Appeal Court which held that his case at the Federal High Court against Tambuwal’s emergence as APC candidate for the April 2015 governorship election could not proceed since it has been overtaken by events and will be a mere academic exercise if it proceeds.