Court finally stops EFCC, Police, DSS, CCT from probing Saraki


By Fikayo Olowolagba

Federal High Court in Abuja has requested the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and three others from continuing with their renewed probe of Senate President, .

The Department of State Services (DSS), the Independent Corrupt Practices and different associated offences Commission (ICPC) and the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) are additionally affected by the restraining orders.

Massive Recruitment at the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) – APPLY NOW

Justice Taiwo gave the decision on Tuesday following two ex-parte motions filed by Saraki with two basic rights enforcement functions, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/507/2019 and FHC/ABJ/CS/508/2019.

The orders, in keeping with the decide, are to subsist pending the hearing and conclusion of the 2 basic rights fits by Saraki.

Earlier, Saraki’s lawyer, Sunday Onubi, arguing informed the court that the respondents would trigger irreparable damages to the applicant’s rights if not restrained earlier than the substantive fits have been heard.

READ ALSO : Top Gist : “If you follow a man home and he forces himself on you, it’s not rape” – Rape apologist says

Onubi prayed the court that, “for an order directing the respondents, by themselves, their servants, agents, privies or officers to stay all actions in connection with the subject matter of this suit, pending the hearing and determination of the originating motion on notice.”

He stated the motion was supported by 37 paragraphs affidavit, deposed to by the applicant (Saraki), with 4 displays connected, marked ABS 1, to ABS 4

Justice Taiwo in his ruling stated: “There is little question that the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules 2009 is a particular continuing with its acknowledged guidelines and process.

“By the supply of Order 4(3) of the Fundamental Rights-Civil Procedure Rules, 2009, the court might, if happy that hardship could also be induced to the applicant earlier than the service of an utility the place liberty or lifetime of the applicant is concerned, hear the appliance ex parte upon such interim reliefs because the justice of the appliance might demand.

“There is little question that, in making the interim reliefs or orders, the court is guided, even within the train of its discretion judicially and judiciously utilized by the regulation and statues.

“Here comes within the guidelines and naturally, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“One of the issues, which is paramount, is the hardship the applicant might undergo, between the service of the processes and the hearing of the principle motion, amongst others.

“I’ve gone by the affidavit in assist of the ex parte utility significantly paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, and 35.

“I additionally duly thought of the averments within the affidavit of urgency and all of the displays connected.

“I’m of the view, after due consideration of the aforesaid averments, that this court must make the order being sought by the applicant pending the hearing and dedication of the originating motion on discover.

“To do in any other case and to not restrain the respondents by asking them to not keep actions will outcome within the court being confronted with a fait accompli.

“I additional come to my conclusion that the applicant is entitled to this order in view of the trite regulation that when the court is seized of a matter, events are certain to not do something that may make worthless any order of the court by staying motion.

“This is akin to ordering that events keep the established order. However, the court should make a constructive order.

“Therefore the appliance made ex parte pursuant to the regulation, succeeds. The respondents are hereby directed, both by themselves, their servants, brokers, privies or officers to remain all actions in reference to the topic of this suit pending the hearing and dedication of the origination motion on discover.

“I additional order that the respondents shall be served fort with the originating processes they usually shall file, inside 5 days of being served, their responses.

“The hearing is fixed for May 23.”

Justice Taiwo made an analogous pronouncement in relation to the second motion



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.