TheNewsGuru

Tag: ondo

  • Impeachment: Court declines Akeredolu’s plea to vacate interim order, adjourns suit indefinitely

    Impeachment: Court declines Akeredolu’s plea to vacate interim order, adjourns suit indefinitely

    AFederal High Court, Abuja on Friday, refused to grant an application by Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State asking it to vacate its Sept. 26 interim order for lack of jurisdiction.

    Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling, rather adjourned the suit indefinitely in view of the fact that an appeal had been entered at the Court of Appeal in respect of the issue before him by the speaker and the state’s assembly.

    He also refused to grant Akeredolu and the speaker’s request to strike out or dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

    The judge held that it would be wise for the court to adjourn the matter “sine die” pending the outcome of the appeal in order to avoid judicial rascality.

    The speaker and the assembly had, on Oct. 20, appealed against the interim order made by Justice Nwite on Sept. 26.

    In their appeal filed at the Appeal Court, Abuja, they sought two reliefs.

    These include, “an order setting aside the ex-parte order of the lower court made on Sept. 26.

    “An order allowing the appeal and directing that the substantive matter be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.”

    The judge had, on Sept. 26, restrained the state’s assembly from impeaching Aiyedatiwa over alleged gross misconduct.

    Nwite gave the interim order in a ruling shortly after Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Kayode Adewusi, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.

    He also restrained Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarding same to the lawmakers for approval as the new state’s deputy governor based on a letter of resignation purportedly authored or signed by Aiyedatiwa, pending the hearing and determination of the interlocutory application.

    The embattled Deputy Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, sued the I-G and DSS as 1st and 2nd defendants.

    Others joined in the suit include Akeredolu, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

    In the application dated and filed by Mr Adelanke Akinrata on Sept. 21, Aiyedatiwa sought for four reliefs.

    But Akeredolu, through his counsel, Kassim Gbadamosi, SAN, had, on Oct. 4, sought an order setting aside the entire proceedings conducted in the case on Sept 26, including the interim order of injunction made by the court, same having been irregularly obtained for lack of jurisdiction.

    The governor also sought an order striking out or dismissing the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

    Besides, the speaker of the assembly, in his application filed by his lawyer, Femi Emodamori, on Oct. 27, equally sought an order that the suit was incompetent and that the court lacked both substantive or procedural jurisdiction to entertain same.

    But Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, on Oct. 30, prayed the court to dismiss Akeredolu and the speaker’s applications, insisting that they lacked locus (legal right) to canvass such arguments.

    Adegboruwa argued that since the speaker and the assembly (4th and 6th defendants) filed the appeal, he prayed the court to adjourn the case sine die (indefinitely) to await the decision of the Court of Appeal.

    He urged the judge to allow parties to go to the appellate court in order not to waste the time of the court on arguments on whether it had jurisdiction or not and to avoid contesting with the superior court.

    Delivering the ruling on Friday, Justice Nwite agreed with Adegboruwa’s submission that the court cannot wrestle jurisdiction with the Appeal Court, including on the pending ruling that was supposed to be delivered on the arguments preferred by the parties on Oct. 16.

    “From the foregoing reliefs, there is no gainsaying that the reliefs being sought in that appeal affect the jurisdiction of the court and are also the same reliefs being sought by the 3rd and 4th defendants in their applications.

    “Indeed, to indulge in such action will amount to judicial rascality.

    “In view of the foregoing analysis, I am of the humble view and I so hold that the application of the plaintiff (Aiyedatiwa) is well founded and meritorious.

    “Consequently, the matter is hereby adjourned sine die,” the judge declared.

  • Aiyedatiwa prays court to dismiss Akeredolu, others’ plea to vacate interim order

    Aiyedatiwa prays court to dismiss Akeredolu, others’ plea to vacate interim order

    The Ondo Deputy Governor, Mr Lucky Aiyedatiwa, on Monday prayed to a Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu’s application seeking to set aside the Sept. 26 interim order restraining the state assembly from initiating an impeachment process.

    The deputy governor’s Counsel, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, prayed Justice Emeka Nwite to dismiss the oral application by Akeredolu’s Lawyer, Mr Kassim Gbadamosi, SAN, and counsel to other defendants, insisting that they lacked locus (legal right) to canvass such argument.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Nwite had, on Oct. 16, fixed today for hearing preliminary objections by Akeredolu, Ondo State House of Assembly and its speaker for today.

    The judge also fixed hearing in Aiyedatiwa’s substantive suit and other processes for today, besides adjourning to rule on their arguments whether the court should discontinue the suit or not.

    The judge had, on Sept  26, restrained the state’s assembly from impeaching Aiyedatiwa over alleged gross misconduct.

    Nwite gave the interim order in a ruling shortly after Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Kayode Adewusi, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.

    He also restrained Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarding same to the lawmakers for an approval as the new state’s deputy governor based on a letter of resignation purportedly authored or signed by Aiyedatiwa, pending the hearing and determination of the interlocutory application.

    The embattled deputy governor had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, sued the I-G and DSS as 1st and 2nd defendants.

    Others joined in the suit include Akeredolu, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

    In the application dated and filed by Mr Adelanke Akinrata on Sept. 21, Aiyedatiwa sought for four reliefs.

    When the matter was called, Adegboruwa notified the court that the speaker and the assembly (4th and 6th defendants) filed a notice of appeal and subsequently filed their brief of appeal on Oct. 20 against the Sept. 26 interim order of the trial court and that the appeal had been entered on Oct. 20 contrary to their arguments.

    He, therefore, prayed the court to adjourn the case sine die (indefinately) to await the decision of the Court of Appeal.

    He urged the judge to allow parties go to the appellate court in order not to waste the time of the court on arguments on whether it had jurisdiction or not and to avoid contesting with the superior court.

    Adegboruwa, who prayed the court to allow them proceed to Appeal Court, said it was at the request of the speaker and the assembly because they had shown that they did not have confidence in the court.

    Besides, he said the appellants also filed an application before the upper court to abridge the time to hear the matter, hence, it would soon be ripe for hearing

    But Akeredolu’s counsel, Gbadamosi, disagreed with Adegboruwa, saying such submission could be likened to a stay of proceedings.

    He argued that such application was unknown to law, asking “whether he (Adegboruwa) has made an application for stay of proceedings on an appeal which he did not file.”

    “It is as if it is a stay of proceedings when there is no such application before your lordship, especially when he did not file a notice of appeal,” he said.

    The senior lawyer, who admitted that an appeal was filed by two of the defendants, said the speaker and the assembly did not file a stay of proceedings to warrant such application.

    “There are several parties to this suit and each one of them has the right to approach the court either to set aside or file an appeal within that jurudiction. It is their constitutional right,” he said.

    He, however, disagreed that the appeal had been entered at the Court of Appeal, “because they are still trying to perfect the record at the court of appeal.

    “Assuming that the record has been entered which we are not conceding, the position of the law is that an appeal will not operate as a stay of proceedings or execution of the order of the court,” citing Order 4, Rule 11(1), 2021, of the Appeal Court.

    He said besides their application for the court to set aside the order and their prayer for the suit to be struck out in its entirety, Gbadamosi said the court lacked jurisidtcion to entertain the suit.

    According to him, that a party exercised his right to file an appeal does not mean the party does not have confidence in the court as being suggested.

    He urged the court to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

    Gbadamosi also argued that Adegboruwa’s application was akin to arresting the ruling of the court.

    “We urge my lord not to accede to the request of arresting your lordship’s ruling and go ahead to deliver it because we are here for ruling and hearing of all pending applications,” he said.

    Lawyer to the 4th and 6th defendants’, Femi Emodamori, and counsel for the 5th defendant (chief judge), Mutalubi Adebayo, SAN, and DSS lawyer aligned with Gbadamosi’s submission.

    Emodamori also argued that in the event that the court might granted the plaintiff’s application to adjourn indefinately pending the determination of the appeal, the ex-parte order should be set aside.

    “Your lordship granted an ex-parte order pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit, but the learner silk said the court should adjourn sine die pending the application at appeal.

    “The implication is that the ex-parte order will be converted to interlocutory injunction , which then become pending the hearing and determination of the entire case, not even here but at appellate court.

    “That is a fundamental error my lord. You have to be very weary of the legal implication of that.

    Also arguing, Gbadamosi said the defendants were entitled to be heard on their application for the court to vacate the interim order.

    He insisted that the order had elapsed, hence, the need to set it aside.

    “We urge my lord not to extend the order because your lordship do not have jurudiction to do so.

    ” I can be overruled but to make the submission is my right.

    “Pursuant to Order 26, Rule 10, this court should hold that this order has elapsed and should not be renewed,” he said.

    Adegboruwa also disagreed with the lawyers, saying they cannot approbate and reprobate on same issue.

    He argued that the defendants cannot asked the court to determine the status of the ex-parte order because such application is prohibited under the same Order 26, Rule 10 that it cannot be made after 14 days of when a party became aware.

    Besides, the lawyer argued that the defendants did not have any application before the court challenging the order made on Sept. 26 beyond their appeal.

    “My colleague for 4th and 6th defendants said his application is predicated on alleged fundamental development which he never disclosed to the court or plaintiff.

    “I urge my lord to decline that application for deliberate concealment of facts and non-disclosure,” he said.

    Adegboruwa equally urged the court to hold that that the interim order was the subject matter of the appeal of the 4th and 6th defendants.

    “It is our humble submission that this honourable  court should not fall for the trap being set by the 4th and 6th defendants to delve into the status of such order as suggested by 4th and 6th defendants.

    “First is that all parties today agreed that there is a pending appeal against the said order file by 4th and 6th and they cannot seek my lord’s determination extempore of the status of order which they are prosecuting the appeal,” he said.

    According to him, the argument of the 4th and 6th defendants is self defeatist because if they claim that time has expired allegedly for the plaintiff to renew the said order, time has also expire under the same said rule for the defendants to complain of the said order after 14 days of becoming aware by their notice.

    “Finally, I urge this honourable court not to overrule itself having directed that the order granted abide till pending motion on notice because Order 26, Rule 10 of the court was already in existence as of the time the Sept. 26 order was made,” he said.

    The senior lawyer also disagreed that his application was an attempt to arrest the ruling of the court to continue of discontinue the matter.

     

  • Impeachment: Court fixes date to hear Akeredolu, Aiyedatiwa’s applications

    Impeachment: Court fixes date to hear Akeredolu, Aiyedatiwa’s applications

    A Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, fixed Oct. 30.to hear a preliminary objection filed by Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State against a suit filed by his deputy, Mr Lucky Aiyedatiwa, to stop his impeachment by the state’s House of assembly.

    Justice Emeka Nwite, who adjourned the matter after Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, opposed the submission of Kassim Gbadamosi, SAN, lawyer to Akeredolu, on his insistence to have his application heard, also fixed same date for hearing the deputy governor’s counter affidavit.

    Justice Nwite equally fixed the hearing of an application filed by the Ondo State House of Assembly and its Speaker challenging the jurisidtcion of the court and a motion for stay of execution of the interim order of the court filed by the lawmakers for same date.

    The judge, who directed Adegboruwa to ensure that the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and the Department of State Service (DSS), the 1st and 2nd defendants in the suit, were served with all their processes, including the notice of hearing, asked all parties to put their house in order ahead of the next adjourned date.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Nwite had, on Sept  26, restrained the Ondo State House of Assembly from impeaching Aiyedatiwa over alleged gross misconduct.

    Nwite gave the interim order in a ruling shortly after Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Kayode Adewusi, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.

    He also restrained Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarding same to the lawmakers for an approval as the new state’s deputy governor based on a letter of resignation purportedly authored or signed by Aiyedatiwa, pending the hearing and determination of the interlocutory application.

    The embattled deputy governor had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, sued the I-G and DSS as 1st and 2nd defendants.

    Others joined in the suit include Akeredolu, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

    In the application dated and filed by Mr Adelanke Akinrata on Sept. 21, Aiyedatiwa sought for four reliefs.

    Upon resumed hearing on Monday, Adegboruwa informed the court that based on Akeredolu’s preliminary objection served on them on Oct. 9, he had responded with a counter affidavit.

    He also notified the court about an application dated Oct. 3 and filed by the speaker and the assembly, seeking a stay of execution of the interim order stopping the lawmakers from continued with the impeachment process.

    He argued that going by the application and recent events, the speaker and the assembly had insisted on non-compliance with the court order, despite their application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit.

    The senior lawyer said that despite the order, the 4th and 6th defendants (speaker and House of assembly) had continued to act in contempt of the court order.

    “Pursuant to this development, the plaintiff has filed an affidavit of facts dated 16 October, 2023, exhibiting the decision of the 4th and 6th respondents in respect of the order of your lordship,” he said.

    He said the I-G and the DSS were yet to be served with their processes, including the counter affidavit in response to Akeredolu’s preliminary objection.

    Adegboruwa, however, prayed the court to allow them serve the I-G and the DSS to avoid issues of lack of fair hearing.

    He urged the court to hear the preliminary objection in conjunction with their substantive suit which, he said, was already ripe for hearing in the next adjourned date.

    But Gbadamosi disagreed with Adegboruwa on his application seeking a leave to serve the I-G and the DSS before the court could hear their preliminary objection.

    He said the court, based on its ruling on Oct. 9, said the matter for today would be for hearing of all pending applications.

    “The court was aware of the time constraint when he adjourned for ruling and hearing of pending applications,” he said.

    The senior lawyer argued that the prayer for an adjournment was an invitation for the court to overrule itself.

    He also disagreed with Adegboruwa on issue of contempt raised.

    According to him, parties to a proceeding must be heard on all applications before the court.

    He said affidavit of facts cannot take the place of Order 35 of the FHC Rules which set out procedures for contempt.

    He said besides, the plaintiff had not taken any step as to committal proceeding in accordance with the rules

    “So there is no contempt proceedings pending before you on issue of contempt,” he said.

    Gbadamosi also disagreed that the originating summons of the plaintiff was ripe for hearing.

    He urged the court to hear their preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court and not to wait for an indolent parties (I-G and DSS) on issue of non-service.

    The lawyer argued that the I-G and DSS were aware of the suit but decided not to come to court because they were unconcerned.

    Counsel to the speaker and house of assembly, Femi Emodamori, and that of the state’s chief judge (5th defendant), Grace Benson, aligned with Gbadamosi’s submission.

    But Adegboruwa disagreed with the defence lawyers.

    He said since Akeredolu served his application on the I-G and the DSS, Aiyedatiwa cannot be denied same opportunity to serve the defendants before hearing the matter.

    He said though his counter affidavits to 3rd, 4th and 6th defendants were served today, the I-G and DSS ought to be served too

    According to him, non-appearance of 1st and 2nd defendants in court will not and should not nullify their right to be served.

    He also clarified that there was no contempt charge filed by the plaintiff but an affidavit of facts to make the defendants purge themselves of their contemptuous acts.

    Justice Nwite, who held that he would not embark on proceeding that would result in exercise in futility, adjourned the matter until Oct. 30 for ruling or hearing of all pending applications.

    Earlier, Nwite dismissed Aiyedatiwa’s plea for indefinite adjournment of his suit pending the outcome of the reconciliation committee set up by the All Progressives Congress (APC) to settle the dispute between him and Akeredolu and based on the petition written by the state’s lawmakers against the judge.

    In a ruling, the judge held that it was in the interest of justice to continue with the suit.

    He said the suit cannot be put on hold since there were different political parties which made up the assembly and that counsel to the defence indicated their disagreement to the reconciliatory effort.

  • Impeachment: Ajulo calls for ceasefire, reconciliation amid ongoing plot against Ondo Deputy Gov.

    Impeachment: Ajulo calls for ceasefire, reconciliation amid ongoing plot against Ondo Deputy Gov.

    Dr Kayode Ajulo (SAN), a constitutional lawyer, has appealed to stakeholders and elders in the state to intervene and resolve the looming impeachment threat against the Deputy Governor of Ondo State.

    Ajulo said this in a statement in Abuja on Sunday against the backdrop of the political turmoil gripping Ondo State.

    He said the unfolding crisis has cast a shadow over the state’s political landscape and disrupted its governance, particularly due to the extended absence of Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu.

    He added that this is coupled with the ongoing impeachment proceedings against the Deputy Governor, Mr Lucky Aiyedatwa.

    Ajulo said he believed in Ondo State’s inherent ability to overcome these challenges independently.

    He, therefore, urged key stakeholders to establish a reconciliation committee aimed at restoring stability to the state and the welfare of its citizens.

    “This intervention is necessary following my interactions with several stakeholders in the State in recent times, which indicated that there is room for reconciliation of issues.

    The calls for this have been from within and outside of the country. Everyone is watching, and no sensible and reasonable soul and a patriotic citizen could ignore the palpable development in the State.”

    He said the State needed to move forward to ensure that the welfare, well-being, and security of the people of the state were paramount.

    Ajulo said that the protracted challenges faced by Ondo State are adversely affecting its citizens’ well-being and hampering overall progress.

    He said, while governance continues, conflicting interests had created hurdles for the state.

    To address this crisis, Ajulo called for the establishment of a reconciliation committee, comprising representatives from both the political class and the public.

    He proposed a committee composition that includes respected state elders, former leaders, religious figures, and representatives of the youth and women.

    Ajulo vehemently opposed the notion of external intervention, adding that Ondo State must take the lead in resolving its internal issues.

    He warned against allowing the National Assembly to step in, as this could impede the state’s development.

    He urged all stakeholders to heed the call for a reconciliation committee as a sign of their deep commitment to the state’s well-being.

    He added that this was an appeal for a peaceful, state-led solution to the challenges facing Ondo State.

  • Impeachment: Ondo deputy governor, Aiyedatiwa withdraws lawsuit against Akeredolu, Ondo Assembly

    Impeachment: Ondo deputy governor, Aiyedatiwa withdraws lawsuit against Akeredolu, Ondo Assembly

    Lucky Aiyedatiwa, the Ondo State deputy govenor, on Monday, told the Federal High Court in Abuja he was withdrawing the lawsuit he filed to stop his impeachment proceedings by the Ondo State House of Assembly.

    Other defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023 were the Governor of Ondo State;  the Speaker of the House of Assembly, the Chief Judge of Ondo State; the House of Assembly; the Inspector-General of Police; the Department of State Services.

    Mr Ebun-olu Adegboruwa (SAN), the deputy governor’s lawyer explained to the court that the deputy governor wished to withdraw the suit following the intervention of the leadership of the All Progressives Congress in the matter.

    According to him, there was no fuether need to address the matter in court, saying that the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress, Abdullahi Ganduje, had set up a reconciliation committee on October 6, to mediate the dispute between some of the parties to the suit.

    He added that going ahead with court proceedings could frustrate the reconciliation efforts by the APC leadership.

    He also pointed out that the Ondo State House of Assembly wrote a petition to the National Judicial Council on October 3, 2023, against the presiding judge, Justice Emeka Nwite.

    He urged the court to wait for the decision of the NJC on the petition before going ahead with the matter.

    However, the representing the Ondo State Governor, Kazeem Gbadamosi (SAN), and that of the Chief Judge of Ondo State, Mutalib Ojo (SAN), have vehemently opposed Adegboruwa’s withdrawal, asking the court to go ahead with the case.

    In his submission, counsel for the Assembly, Femi Emodamori, said the Ondo Assembly had already withdrawn the petition against the judge.

    Justice Nwite adjourned till October 6 for ruling.

    Recall that the deputy governor of Ondo state Aiyedatiwa had approach the court to stop impeachment proceedings against him.

     

  • Impeachment: Drama as Ondo Assembly counsel denies writing petition against Abuja judge

    Impeachment: Drama as Ondo Assembly counsel denies writing petition against Abuja judge

    There was a mild drama at Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, as counsel to the Ondo House of Assembly, F. E. Emodamori, denied being the author of a petition written against Justice Emeka Nwite at National Judicial Council (NJC).

    Emodamori, who appeared for the state assembly and its Speaker, Olamide Oladiji, refuted the allegation levelled against him by Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, lawyer to the embattled Deputy Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Nwite had, on Sept. 26, restrained the Ondo State assembly and its speaker from impeaching Aiyedatiwa, over alleged gross misconduct pending the hearing and determination of the interlocutory application.

    The judge gave the interim order in a ruling shortly after Kayode Adewusi, counsel who appeared for Aiyedatiwa, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.

    The judge also restrained Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarding the name of same to the lawmakers for an approval as the state’s new deputy governor based on a letter of resignation purportedly authored or signed by Aiyedatiwa.

    The deputy governor had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, sued the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and the the Department of State Services (DSS).

    Others joined in the suit are Gov. Akeredoku, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

    In the application dated and filed by Adelanke Akinrata on Sept. 21, Aiyedatiwa sought for four reliefs.

    The judge, after granting the reliefs, fixed today for hearing of the motion on notice.

    Upon resumed hearing on Monday, Adegboruwa informed the court development about the matter.

    He said on Oct. 6, the All Progressives Congress (APC) set up a reconciliation committee headed by former Katsina State governor to settle the issues.

    “In line with extant practice and procedure of this honourable court to encourage parties to promote settlement, it is our humble view that the court allows and encourage the reconciliation effort as the continued prosecution of this suit may be hostile to those efforts,” he said.

    Besides, Adegboruwa said on Oct. 3, the speaker and the assembly (4th and 6th defendants) submitted a petition to NJC “accusing this very court of compromise and deploying all manners of unprintable epithets against the court.”

    He said the petition is still pending before the NJC

    “The consequence of that petition is to express lack of confidence in this honourable court.

    “And if the allegations are investigated and found to be correct  God forbid, the consequence will be that this court may not be in the position to proceed on the determination of this suit,” he said.

    The senior lawyer, therefore, prayed the court to direct the speaker and the assembly, through their counsel, Emodamori, to serve all parties in the suit with the said petition in order for them to respond too.

    He also prayed the court to direct them to stop further attack on the judge

    “I watched on television news where they described my lord as ‘a certain judge,’” he said.

    Adegboruwa said that the derogatory comment was also confirmed in a letter dated Sept. 29 and authored by Emodamori to the state’s chief judge.

    He, therefore, urged the court to adjourn the suit sine die (indefinitely) to await the outcomes of the APC reconciliatory effort and the petition file to the NJC.

    But Kassim Gbadamosi, SAN, counsel to Akeredolu, who objected to indefinite adjournment, said Ondo State was not a one-party state.

    He said the APC’s move was only to reconcile Akeredolu and Aiyedatiwa which did not affect other political parties which made up the assembly.

    “They cannot impose their whims on the house which has APC, PDP, Labour Party and APGA,” he said.

    He also said whatever allegations Adegboruwa raised about media engagement were mere documentary hearsay.

    “Your lordship should take it with a pinch of the salt,” he said.

    He equally said he had not seen the petition against the judge, describing it as hearsay.

    “My learner friend did not even bring a copy of the petition, so it should be regarded as hearsay my lord,” he said.

    He said giving an indefinite adjournment in a matter of this nature is like giving judgment on the matter which had not been heard, going by the earlier interim order.

    Gbadamosi prayed the court to refuse the application.

    He said instead, the court should order parties to address it on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the matter.

    Making his submission, Emodamori denied calling Nwite “certain judge “

    “Speaking from the utmost duty of a counsel to speak the truth from the bar, I want to say with all categorical assertion that I never used and will never use or encourage any one to use such derogatory language or gutter language against your lordship either in the letter the learner silk referred to or in any media interaction on the subject matter,” he said.

    Emodamori admitted that the speaker and the assembly indeed wrote a petition against the judge, but denied being the author.

    “It was authored by the 6th defendant (house of assembly) and signed by the 4th defendant (speaker) and not counsel.

    “Regrettably my lord, it was in that petition that that unacceptable language ‘certain judge’ was used.

    “It was used regrettably by the parties who authored the petition.

    “So I will never use that language. My learner silk knows that I also have respect for him.

    “He is one of my own role models. I am shocked that the same person alleged this against me,” he said.

    Justice Nwite, who condemned the act, said it was unfortunate that lawyers would allow themselves to be used by politicians to denigrate the court.

    “I know how I have managed my career, to build my carry as a judge.

    “Why should somebody in his own opinion decide to dent my image which I have built for long.

    “If you know that you are not comfortable with that interim order, you approach the court and apply that it should be varied.

    “The  Nigerian Bar Association too is not helping matters. When you see this kind of things, you asked what is the need?

    “Anybody who has been following my adjudication will know that I am not the kind of judge who can compromise. It is quite regrettable,” he said.

    The judge adjourned the matter until Oct. 16 to rule on whether the matter be adjourned indefinately or not.

    He also ordered that hearing notices be served on the I-G and the DSS, who were not represented in court.

    NAN

  • BREAKING: Police rescue 8 kidnapped CAC members in Ondo

    BREAKING: Police rescue 8 kidnapped CAC members in Ondo

    The Ondo State Police Command on Saturday said it had rescued eight Christian worshippers who were kidnapped on Friday afternoon by gunmen at Elegbeka in Ose Local Government Area of the state.

    The abducted persons are members of the Christ Apostolic Church (CAC), Oke Igan, Akure, the state capital.

    The victims were said to be travelling in the church bus to Ifon, in Ose council area of the state for a burial ceremony, when they waylaid and dragged in to the bush by the gunmen.

    SP Olufunmilayo Odunlami-Omisanya, the Police Spokesperson, who confirmed the development in a statement, said the victims were rescued unhurt.

    Odunlami-Omisanya said those rescued were seven women and one man, while efforts were on to rescue others unhurt.

    “Good news!, 8 victims rescued, effort is on to rescue others unhurt.

    “The victims said that they were on their way to a wake keep; on getting to Ajagbale via Elegbeka on Ifon/Owo expressway, they were accosted by five gunmen who shot sporadically and forcefully took them in to the bush,” she said.

  • 25 choir members abducted by gunmen in Ondo state

    25 choir members abducted by gunmen in Ondo state

    Oke -Igan in Akure the Ondo State capital was on Saturday morning thrown into confusion as gunmen kidnapped 25 choir members of the Christ Apostolic Church, (CAC).

    It was gathered that the victims were en route Ifon in Ose Local Government Area of the state to attend the burial ceremony of a parent of one of them.

    According to sources in the church, the abduction has left the families and the church in distress.

    An eyewitness, who craved anonymity, added that the kidnapped choir members had embarked on the journey from Akure in a branded vehicle belonging to the church.

    He added that the vehicle was later discovered abandoned on the roadside in the Elegbeka community.

    The Owo-Ifon-Benin road where the abduction occurred has gained notoriety as a hotbed of criminal activities, including kidnappings and armed robberies due to its bad state.

    The Ondo State Police Command confirmed the incident and has assured the public of its commitment to ensuring the safe return of the victims.

    25It said the police were informed that a church bus with the inscription CAC was abandoned around the Elegbeka area, and there are suspicions that the passengers in the vehicle were kidnapped.

    “The police anti-kidnapping squad and other tactical teams have been deployed to the area to rescue the victims and arrest all involved in the crime,” the spokesperson said.

  • Court stops impeachment of Ondo State deputy governor

    Court stops impeachment of Ondo State deputy governor

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, restrained the Ondo State House of Assembly from impeaching the state Deputy Governor, Mr. Lucky Aiyedatiwa, over alleged gross misconduct.

    Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling shortly after Aiyedatiwa’s counsel, Kayode Adewusi, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.

    The judge also restrained Gov. Rotimi Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarded the same to the lawmakers for approval pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter.

    Justice Nwite held that after listening to Adewusi, he was of the view that the interest of justice would be met by granting the application.

    “Therefore, the application of the applicant succeeds,” he said.

    The embattled deputy governor had, in a motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, sued the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and the the Department of State Services (DSS).

    Others are Gov. Akeredoku, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State, and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.

    In the application dated and filed by Mr Adelanke Akinrata on Sept. 21, Aiyedatiwa sought four reliefs.

    The judge further made an order of interim injunction restraining Akeredolu, his servants or privies from harassing, intimidating, embarrassing, and preventing Aiyedatiwa from carrying out the functions of his office as deputy governor of Ondo State.

    Justice Nwite, who granted all the reliefs adjourned the matter until Oct. 9 for hearing.

    Aiyedatiwa had, also in another suit marked: AK/348/2023 prayed to the High Court in Akure to stop the state’s house of assembly from proceeding with the impeachment proceedings against him pending the hearing and determination of the suit filed in the court on Monday.

    NAN

  • I’ve not been served impeachment notice – Ondo deputy gov, Aiyedatiwa

    I’ve not been served impeachment notice – Ondo deputy gov, Aiyedatiwa

    The embattled Deputy Governor of Ondo State, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, says he has not been served any impeachment notice by the state House of Assembly.

    Aiyedatiwa stated this in a statement he personally signed on Monday in Akure and made available to newsmen.

    The Assembly had on Wednesday during a plenary session, directed the clerk of the House to write the deputy governor over allegations of gross misconduct levelled against him.

    According to Aiyedatiwa, the statement was a response to a claim by Olatunji Oshati, Chairman, House Committee on Information, that he has been served an impeachment notice by the Assembly.

    “I find it especially worrying that the spokesman of the House of Assembly would go on national television to speak on such matter without any evidence to show that such letter has been delivered to me.

    “More disturbing is the fact that even when he was asked if the letter had been delivered, he gave no coherent answer.

    “A sensitive constitutional matter of this nature; impeachment process should not be conducted on the pages of newspapers and television screens.

    “In effect, I reiterate that if such letter of allegations of gross misconduct against me exists, I have not seen it and I have not been served.

    “I, therefore, urge Mr. Speaker, The Honourable Chief Judge of Ondo State, and members of the public to take note,” he said.

    The deputy governor concluded that he was “in the dark regarding any allegation” against him by the state House of Assembly.