Guardian Jonathan Challenges Court’s Jurisdiction To Entertain Sanusi’s Suit Saturday, 15 March 2014 02:26 Written by Bertram Nwannekanma Category: National PRESIDENT Goodluck Ebele Jonathan has filed a preliminary objection challenging the suit filed by the suspended governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Mallam Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, at a Federal High Court, Abuja against the President over his removal. Sanusi has in an originating summons filed by his lawyers, Mr. Kola Awodein and Mr. Abubakar Balarabe Mahmoud, all Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) sought for a declaration by the court that President Jonathan has no statutory power to suspend the Plaintiff from office as Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria. In the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/139/2014, which also had the Attorney General of the Federation and the Inspector General of Police as co-defendants, the embattled CBN governor is challenging his suspension by the President. But the President in a preliminary objection filed through his counsel, Dr. Fabian Ajogwu challenged the jurisdiction of the court presided over by Justice Gabriel Kolawole to entertain the suit. In the Preliminary Objection filed on March 11, 2014, Dr. Fabian wants the court to determine by whether in the light of Section 254C(1) (a) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (Third Alteration) Act, 2010, the Federal High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the suit. It is the contention of Ajogwu that by virtue of Section 254C(1), (a) of the Constitution, the National Industrial Court is vested with jurisdiction to the exclusion of other Courts to entertain the matter as the dispute between the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant relates to matters arising from the employment of the Plaintiff by the Federal Government of Nigeria represented by the President. He contended further on behalf of the President that the legality of the suspension of Mr. Sanusi is settled by a recourse to the Supreme Court decision in Okomu Oil Palm Co. Ltd v. Iserhienrhien, which affirmed the provisions of S.11 of the Interpretation Act, 2004 to the effect that where an enactment confers a power to appoint a person either to an office or to exercise any function, whether for a specified period or not, the power includes power to remove or suspend him, and to appoint someone else to act in his place for such time as is expedient. The application could not be taken, when the matter came up on Wednesday due to the absence of the trial judge and was subsequently adjourned till March 19, this year for mention.
Posted on: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 06:55:06 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015