Court hears Melaye recall suit August 7

By Vivian Okejeme Abuja

Th e Federal High Court, Abuja, has fi xed August 7, to hear the suit that stopped the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from going ahead with process for the recall of Senator Dino Melaye. Th e August 7, adjourned date thereby abridged the originally adjourned date of September 29, for hearing of the matter. INEC had, through its lawyer, Mr. Sulayman Ibrahim, requested accelerated hearing of the suit. Consequently, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba exercised his discretion to hear the matter within the court’s vacation period.

Arguing the matter, INEC said it was constrained under Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, to conclude the recall process within 90 days. It earlier asked the court to vacate the interim order that stopped it from going ahead with the recall process.

It further challenged the legality of the restraining order that Justice John Tsoho of the high court issued against it on July 6. Justice Tsoho had ordered all the parties involved in the recall process to maintain their status quo until September 29, when the case was previously adjourned to. Meanwhile, two sets of applicants were applied to be joined as interested parties in the matter.

One Mr. Michael Olowolayemi, through his lawyer, Mr. Ponsak Biyan, applied to be joined as a coplaintiff in the matter. Th e second application was fi led by three persons, Chief Olowo Cornelius John Anjorin and Malam Yusuf Adamu, who sought to be joined as codefendants in the matter. Opposing the application, the Commission’s lawyer submitted that the interlocutory application were deliberate ploy to delay hearing of the matter. He, however, withdrew its counter-affi davit to enable the matter to be heard expeditiously.

Melaye, who currently represents Kogi West Senatorial District, had, in the suit, prayed the court to declare that the petition his constituents presented to INEC for his recall was illegal, unlawful, wrongful, unconstitutional, invalid, null and void and of no eff ect in law. He also asked the court for a declaration that the petition purportedly forwarded to the INEC was invalid and of no eff ect, alleging that it was signed by fi ctitious, dead and non-existing persons in his senatorial district

Leave a Reply