nigeria news today and breaking news

Court affirms order restraining Oshiomhole’s arrest

court affirms order restraining oshiomholes arrest 5eeafd8747cda

Ade Adesomoju, Abuja

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday reaffirmed its interim order restraining the Edo State Government, Governor Godwin Obaseki and others from acting on the report of the state Judicial Commission of Inquiry which indicted the suspended National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress, Adams Oshiomhole, for corruption.

Justice Ahmed Mohammed, had in his June 1, 2020 ruling on an ex parte application filed by Oshiomhole, asked parties to the suit not to take any step including any plan to arrest the suspended APC chairman.

At the resumed hearing in the case on Tuesday, Justice Mohammed, while restating the June 1, 2020 order, said “the orders of the court made on June 1st still subsist pending the resolution of the issue of jurisdiction.”

He said this while adjourning the suit till June 29 for further hearing.

The Judicial Commission of Inquiry led by Justice James Oyomire (retd.) was set up by the Edo State Government to investigate and make recommendations over the construction of the Edo Specialist Hospital and supply of equipment for the hospital, during the tenure of Oshiomhole as the governor of the state.

The commission in its report issued in May this year indicted Oshiomhole’s administration for breach of the state’s Public Procurement Law.

As part of the eight recommendations contained in the white paper which the state government issued on the strength of the report, the JCI urged the Ministry of Justice to institute civil and criminal actions against those found culpable in the breach of the law.

Oshiomhole had through his lawyer, Ehiogie West-Idahosa, filed an application on May 27, 2020, seeking an order restraining the respondents from acting on the recommendations contained in the report.

West-Idahosa told the court on Wednesday that he was served with the notices of preliminary objection by the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and the 6th respondents.

He said he had filed responses to the objections but had yet to serve some of the respondents.

Two respondents’ lawyers, Kingsley Idahosa representing the 1st to the 4th respondents, and U. S Danbarawa representing the 6th respondent accepted service on their clients.

But the 5th respondent was not represented in court on Wednesday.

Copyright PUNCH.

About the author

mrbenedictleo

Leave a Comment