Jonathan Nwokpor
Keep up with latest news and be part of our weekly giveaways and airtime sharing, follow our WhatsApp channel for more update. Click to Follow us
A Federal High Court in Abuja has been requested by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to reject the reliefs that Lagos State Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu is seeking in his basic right enforcement suit, calling them speculative.
In response to Sanwo-Olu’s original summons, the EFCC informed Justice Joyce Abdulmalik in its counter-affidavit that the governor’s action in this case is only speculative.
As you might recall, Sanwo-Olu, via his attorney Darlington Ozurumba, had sued the anti-graft agency as the only defendant, alleging that the agency threatened to arrest, detain, and prosecute him during his time as general.
The governor asked seven questions and requested eleven reliefs in the original summons, which was filed on June 6 and had the date of the summons marked FHC/ABJ/CS/773/2024.
Sanwo-Olu requested a declaration that, in accordance with Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution, “the plaintiff, as a citizen of Nigeria, is entitled to right to private and family life as a minimum guarantee encapsulated under the Constitution of the Republic of Nigeria, 1999 before, during and after occupation of public office created by the Constitution.”
Additionally, he wants the court to rule that the EFCC’s threat of investigating, arresting, and detaining him while he was governor was unlawful based on a communal reading of Sections 35(1) & (4) and 41(1) of the constitution.
The governor asked the court to rule that his political rivals’ persistent harassment, threats of arrest, and incarceration against him at the EFCC’s instigation—based on a politically motivated and baseless accusation of corruption—amounts to abuse of public office and misuse of executive authority.
Therefore, he requested an order prohibiting the EFCC from intimidating, harassing, arresting, detaining, interrogating or prosecuting him in connection with his tenure as the governor of Lagos State, among others.
In contrast to the governor’s assertions, the anti-corruption agency stated in its counter-affidavit dated October 30 but submitted on October 31 by its attorney, Hadiza Afegbua, that the EFCC neither invited nor threatened to infringe upon his right to freedom of movement nor infringed upon his right to personal liberty, family life, or privacy.
On Monday, the EFCC’s objection was sighted in Abuja.
Ufuoma Ezire, a Superintendent and Litigation Secretary in the EFCC’s Legal and Prosecution Department, said in the application that he was familiar with the case’s facts in his deposition to the counter-affidavit.
He asserts that I have the defendant’s agreement, authority, and permission to testify in this counter-affidavit.
“That I have read and understood the plaintiff’s affidavit in support of the originating summons and I hereby state that the depositions in Paragraph 4, 5, 6, 7 and even 8 are not true and are calculated attempt to mislead the honourable court.
“That the depositions in paragraph 4 sub 4(iv), 4(v), 4(vi), 4(vii), 4(viii), 4(ix), 4(x), 4(xi), 4(xii), 4(xiv), 4(xvi), 4(vii), 4(xviii), 4(xix), 4(xx), 4(xxi) ,4(xxii), 4(xxiv) and 4(xxv) of the plaintiff’s affidavit are unfounded, untrue and unknown to the defendant and are hereby denied,” Ezire said.
According to the official, the commission had neither invited the governor nor threatened to arrest any of his employees, domestic or foreign, and was not looking into the governor.
“That I know as a fact that the defendant invites members of the public for interview, interrogation or any engagement vide a written invitation, phone calls or text messages by any of its officers who shall introduce himself or herself by name, rank, designation, and Section to enable the invitee trace the officer easily.
“That no officer of the defendant could have invited the plaintiff or his aides without furnishing them with such detailed particulars of himself.
“That contrary to the depositions in paragraphs 5 of the plaintiff affidavit, the defendant did not intimidate, harass or threatened the plaintiff or subjected him to any trauma,” he said.
According to him, the agency did not know of any threat to detain Sanwo-Olu’s “aides,” allegations of mismanagement or misappropriation of Lagos State finances, or the possibility that the applicant’s right to liberty or ownership of both movable and immovable property would be violated in this case.
“That the action of the plaintiff in this case is mere conjecture and speculations as there is no petition or any intel gathered before the defendant to warrant the men and officers of same to invite, threaten to arrest the plaintiff at the moment.
“That the entirety of the dispositions contained in the plaintiffs’ affidavit are not true, as the application is misconceived and brought in bad faith to mislead this honourable court.
“That the defendant is not in a position to deny or confirm the depositions in paragraphs 4 and 4(iii) as the defendant is not a party to the conversation between deponent and the plaintiff.
“That it will be in the interest of justice to refuse the reliefs sought by the plaintiff,” Ezire added.
Please don’t forget to “Allow the notification” so you will be the first to get our gist when we publish it.
Drop your comment in the section below, and don’t forget to share the post.
