Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, has given an order setting aside any purported process or notice of any allegation of gross misconduct against the embattled Edo State deputy Governor, Philip Shaibu describing the process or notice is a violation of Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
An injunction restraining the Defendants and their agents, privies and representatives from interfering with, restricting, disempowering and/or preventing the Plaintiff from discharging his constitutional duties and functions as the duly elected Deputy Governor of Edo State in a joint and equal ticket with the 2nd Defendant the Governor of the Edo State.
In the suit case No FHC/ ABJ/ CS/ 321/ 2024 the Plaintiff, sought an order forthwith reinstating/restoring the full and total rights and privileges attached or accruing to the office of the Plaintiff as duly elected Deputy Governor of Edo State which include, but not limited to the restoration of all media team, press crew attached to the office of the Plaintiff as deputy Governor of Edo State and relocating the Plaintiff back to his Office within the Government House of the 1″ Defendant.
The summons was taken out by Prof. Oladoyin Awoyale, SAN of DOYIN AWOYALE SAN & CO. on behalf of the Deputy Governor, Philip Shaibu.
The restraining order is against the Edo state government, the Governor of the state , Godwin Obaseki, the State House of Assembly and the Speaker, Hon. Blessing Agbebaku.
Also restrained are the Clerk of the House of Assembly, the Chief Judge of the State, the Inspector-General of Police, and Director General of State Security Service.
The originating summons brought pursuant to, “ORDER 3 RULE 9 OF THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT (CIVIL PROCEDURE) RULES, 2019
“SECTION 6(6)(b); SECTION 36, SECTION 39 AND 188 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, 1999 (AS AMENDED)
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION
Whether as a democratically elected Deputy Governor of Edo State in a joint ticket with the 2nd Defendant, the Plaintiff is not entitled to remain in office as such; freely exercise his rights, privileges and discharge his constitutional duties to the people of Edo State as deputy Governor of Edo State within the full time allocated to the office by the Constitution, Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended), without intimidation, threats of coerced resignation and/or illegal removal from office by the 3rd, 4th, 5th Defendants at the instigation and support of the 1 and 2nd Defendants.
“Whether under and by virtue of section 36(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999) as amended, the Plaintiff is not entitled to fair hearing from the Defendants in the determination of his Civil rights and obligations in relation to his office as deputy Governor of Edo State either generally or in the cause of the process of his removal from office.
“Whether by the combined provisions of Sections 36 and 188 of the Constitution, Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended), any process for the removal of a Deputy Governor of a State can be contemplated, construed and/or carried out without regard and adherence to the principles of fair hearing, due processes and express procedures as stipulated by the Constitution.
Two week Wednesday, the Assembly commencement of the impeachment proceedings against the embattled deputy Governor, alleging among others things, perjury, abuse of office and for revealing official secrets of government.
The Majority leader of the State House of Assembly and member representing Ovia North East 1, Charity Aiguobarueghian, recalled a petition against the deputy governor which dated March 5, 2024 was endorsed by 21 out of the 24 lawmakers.
The Majority leader maintained that the number of lawmakers that signed the petition have met the required two – thirds as stipulated in the Constitution.
Leave a Reply