The Alhaji Kawu Baraje-led faction of the Peoples Democratic Party on
Monday lost its bid to obtain an order of court to re-open its
secretariat in Abuja which was sealed off by the police on September 7.
The Lagos High Court in Ikeja presided over by Justice Ganiyu Safari refused to grant the order, saying the faction failed to back its allegation with sufficient evidence to show that it was the Alhaji Bamanga Tukur-led PDP that used the police to seal off the secretariat.
Safari said he could not give an order for the re-opening of the secretariat when none of the respondents, including Tukur, had any “direct control” on the police.
While re-affirming its September 2 ruling in which he ordered parties to maintain the status quo, he urged the Baraje faction to file any evidence in its possession linking the respondents to the sealing of the secretariat.
The judge also said the claimants were at liberty to file a separate application against the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Mohammed Abubakar, if they had evidence to show that the police had sealed off the secretariat on their own volition.
Counsel for the Baraje faction, Mr. Robert Emukpoeruo, had alleged that it was the Tukur-led executive that used the police to seal off his clients’ secretariat.
Emukpoeruo alleged that the action was in breach of the order of the September 2 ruling which asked parties to maintain the status quo.
He said, “After they filed papers they deployed and stationed Armoured Personnel Carrier in the secretariat.
“We are praying your Lordship to order them to move their APC from the secretariat whether injunction has been granted or not; or whether injunction is being sought or not.”
In his response, counsel for Tukur and others, Mr. Ajibola Oluyede, argued that it was the Baraje faction who had flouted the September 2 order by going ahead to set up a secretariat after the court ordered the parties to maintain the status quo.
He said he was contemplating filing a contempt suit against the respondents for allegedly flouting the order.
Oluyede, who described Emukpoeruo’s allegation as a “mere emotional outburst,” argued that the claimants failed to adduce any evidence to back the allegations and that the police had, out of their discretion, sealed off the secretariat.
He said, “Under that circumstance, only the police can tell your Lordship what prompted them to seal off the offices. So it is only the proper respondents that can answer that question. Unfortunately, they are not here. My clients are not the proper respondents.”
Both parties also disagreed on what was truly the status quo referred to in the September 2 ruling.
Oluyede said the “status quo ante” referred to the “legal National Executive Committee” that was in existence before “some rebels” went to announce another faction of the party.
But Emukpoeruo said the status quo was referring to the state of the affairs before APC was deployed in his client’s secretariat.
Earlier, there was a squabble over who was to represent the Tukur-led PDP, but the court later ruled that it would only accord recognition to Oluyede for being the one to first file response to the suit and the only counsel on record.
Oluyede maintained that he was instructed by Tukur on the telephone to enter defence for the respondents.
But the two other lawyers, Messrs Onwuka Igwe and Emeka Etiaba, had laid claim to separate instructions from the National Legal Adviser of the party, Mr. Victor Kwon, to represent the respondents.
Baraje, Dr. Sam Jaja and the Secretary of the ‘New PDP’, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola; and the PDP (as the fourth defendant), had filed the suit against Tukur and three other members of his National Executive Committee.
The other defendants in the suit are the Deputy National Chairman of the party, Uche Secondus; Women Leader, Dr. Kema Chikwe; and the National Publicity Secretary, Olisah Metuh.
The claimants stated in their interlocutory application dated September 2, 2013 that they are suing “for themselves and on behalf of the National Executive Committee of the PDP elected on August 30, 2013.”
The Lagos High Court in Ikeja presided over by Justice Ganiyu Safari refused to grant the order, saying the faction failed to back its allegation with sufficient evidence to show that it was the Alhaji Bamanga Tukur-led PDP that used the police to seal off the secretariat.
Safari said he could not give an order for the re-opening of the secretariat when none of the respondents, including Tukur, had any “direct control” on the police.
While re-affirming its September 2 ruling in which he ordered parties to maintain the status quo, he urged the Baraje faction to file any evidence in its possession linking the respondents to the sealing of the secretariat.
The judge also said the claimants were at liberty to file a separate application against the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Mohammed Abubakar, if they had evidence to show that the police had sealed off the secretariat on their own volition.
Counsel for the Baraje faction, Mr. Robert Emukpoeruo, had alleged that it was the Tukur-led executive that used the police to seal off his clients’ secretariat.
Emukpoeruo alleged that the action was in breach of the order of the September 2 ruling which asked parties to maintain the status quo.
He said, “After they filed papers they deployed and stationed Armoured Personnel Carrier in the secretariat.
“We are praying your Lordship to order them to move their APC from the secretariat whether injunction has been granted or not; or whether injunction is being sought or not.”
In his response, counsel for Tukur and others, Mr. Ajibola Oluyede, argued that it was the Baraje faction who had flouted the September 2 order by going ahead to set up a secretariat after the court ordered the parties to maintain the status quo.
He said he was contemplating filing a contempt suit against the respondents for allegedly flouting the order.
Oluyede, who described Emukpoeruo’s allegation as a “mere emotional outburst,” argued that the claimants failed to adduce any evidence to back the allegations and that the police had, out of their discretion, sealed off the secretariat.
He said, “Under that circumstance, only the police can tell your Lordship what prompted them to seal off the offices. So it is only the proper respondents that can answer that question. Unfortunately, they are not here. My clients are not the proper respondents.”
Both parties also disagreed on what was truly the status quo referred to in the September 2 ruling.
Oluyede said the “status quo ante” referred to the “legal National Executive Committee” that was in existence before “some rebels” went to announce another faction of the party.
But Emukpoeruo said the status quo was referring to the state of the affairs before APC was deployed in his client’s secretariat.
Earlier, there was a squabble over who was to represent the Tukur-led PDP, but the court later ruled that it would only accord recognition to Oluyede for being the one to first file response to the suit and the only counsel on record.
Oluyede maintained that he was instructed by Tukur on the telephone to enter defence for the respondents.
But the two other lawyers, Messrs Onwuka Igwe and Emeka Etiaba, had laid claim to separate instructions from the National Legal Adviser of the party, Mr. Victor Kwon, to represent the respondents.
Baraje, Dr. Sam Jaja and the Secretary of the ‘New PDP’, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola; and the PDP (as the fourth defendant), had filed the suit against Tukur and three other members of his National Executive Committee.
The other defendants in the suit are the Deputy National Chairman of the party, Uche Secondus; Women Leader, Dr. Kema Chikwe; and the National Publicity Secretary, Olisah Metuh.
The claimants stated in their interlocutory application dated September 2, 2013 that they are suing “for themselves and on behalf of the National Executive Committee of the PDP elected on August 30, 2013.”
No comments:
Post a Comment