I read with interest the above article by one Comrade Salihu on Daily Trust of November 2, 2019. Nothing made it more interesting than the deliberate attempt to tell a story which was put forward as being factual but which actually contained mostly a fictional account of what clearly is the product of the imaginative mind of the writer.
It is sad that individuals will present halftruths to the world in the name of facts all the while pretending to be merely keen observers of a scenario when they are tainted with so much partisanship that it leaks all through the story they tell.
It is even sadder that the writer begins his piece by making the false claim that the piece is written from a place of moral rectitude but then proceeds to contrive a story that is completely false and not based on the actual events that unfolded between Alhaji Sani Dauda, his Daughter Nasiba, her ex-husband Abubakar.
I will attempt in this piece to point out the fallacious positions stated as facts in the comrade’s article while presenting the true position of affairs as they actually happened for the whole world to see.
The comrade begins his piece by presenting a picture that paints Sani Dauda as seeking out judges that are what he referred to as ‘plaintiff friendly’ to initiate cases before in respect to the issue of his daughters divorce with Abubakar. While I will not go into this matter at this point, it will become clear soon enough as between Abubakar and Sani Dauda which of the parties went out to seek favourable judges and attempt to gave unfair advantage against the other.
The comrade presents as a fact the assertion that Nasiba Sani Dauda was still married to Abubakar when she entered into the marriage relationship that commenced on November 9, 2019, between herself and Kaloma.
This statement is false.
Even the police who have been used by Abubakar to further his cause against Sani Dauda and his family do not actually agree with Abubakar that the marriage between him and Nasiba still subsists.
In the process filed by the police as a response to the action taken out by Sani Dauda and others against Abubakar and the police, the police concede that the marriage between Abubakar and Nasiba has been dissolved and also that the judgment upon which Abubakar’s claim respecting the subsistence of the marriage hinged has indeed been quashed.
This fact can be easily verified by a simple application to the High Court for a certified true copy of the process filed by the police in the case between Sani Dauda and Abubakar i.e. SUIT NO: KDH/KAD/982/2019.
The truth of the matter between Sani Dauda, Nasiba Sani Dauda and others is that once the fact of the nonexistence of a marriage between Abubakar and Nasiba is verified as true the entire case built up by Abubakar and his apologists crumbles like a park of cards.
While it is true that Nasiba got a judgment dissolving her marriage with Abubakar before the Sharia Court T/Wada and the judgment was set aside by the Upper Saria Court Kawo, it is also true that the judgment of the Upper Sharia Court Kawo was eventually quashed by the Grand Kadi of the Sharia Court of Appeal with the implication that the judgment earlier given by the sharia Court T/Wada was automatically restored pending a decision by a superior court nullifying the said judgment.
Rather than pursue the appeal to get the judgment of the Sharia Court T/Wada set aside, Abubakar has continued to claim to all who would care to listen that his marriage with Nasiba continues to subsist on the basis of the judgment of the Upper Sharia Court Kawo which even the police who acted as his allies in arresting and detaining Sani Dauda have agreed is no longer a subsisting judgment.
Comrade talks about Abubakar as being a kind hearted gentleman who cannot hurt a fly but the facts as witnessed firsthand by Nasiba do not agree with his assertions.
Now, I do not doubt that the comrade’s experience with Abubakar may be one wherein Abubakar has been kind and warm towards him. I however do not agree with the comrade that he can use his own personal experience or the experience of others as a basis to generalise and state that Abubakar was not capable of abusing Nasiba as she claims he did.
You will agree with me that the same individual who may be a kidnapper or a murderer or an armed robber at night may also be a loving husband and a doting father during the day.
Nasiba has stated repeatedly that she left the marriage between herself and Abubakar because of his abuse. She has also contended that in the over one year and about 11 months since the Sharia Court sitting in T/Wada dissolved her marriage with Abubakar, he has not called her once or attempted once to reach out to her parents in a bid to attempt reconciliation with her.
In fact he never interacted with her in anyway after the divorce until he heard that she was getting married and quickly set up machinery for her arrest and that of her father and others using his relationship with the police to good effect in seeing to the accomplishment of his purpose.
Permit me to ask the question here, ‘would a caring, loving and kindhearted fellow whose wife decides to divorce him blot her completely out of his life and not reach out to her or her family for over 22 months in a bid to at least attempt reconciliation but be quick to use his friends in power to ensure her father’s arrest and also continue even to this day to attempt the facilitation of her own arrest? ’
I do not think so.
In any case, notwithstanding any persons personal experience with Abubakar, such experience cannot be used as a basis to make the kind of sweeping and universal declaration made by the Comrade when he posits by implication of his piece that Abubakar is kind and god fearing and so Nasiba cannot be telling the truth when she states her own experience with Abubakar as being anything but one of overflowing kindness.
The half-truths put forward by the Comrade continue into his assertion that ‘Even though the judgment of the Upper Sharia Court was subsequently appealed against by Nasiba at the Sharia Court of Appeal, Kaduna she nonetheless filed a similar one at the High Court of the Federal Capital Teritory.’
Nothing in the entire piece credited to the Comrade demonstrates his partisanship and his attempt to tell tales with the view of buying cheap converts to the not entirely true story being told by Abubakar all though the entire script that has continued to unfold in relation to this matter.
The true state of affairs is that while the appeal filed by Abubakar is even up to now still pending before the Upper Sharia Court, Daura Road, Abubakar went to the Area Court Gudu Abuja to file SUIT NO: TR/CV233/18 (Abubakar Musa Abubakar vs. Nasiba Dauda wherein he sought an order from that court directing Nasiba to return to his house as his wife.
It was the above action that necessitated Nasiba’s lawyers to file a case before the High Court of the FCT requesting the Court to quash the proceedings before the Area Court Gudu for being an abuse of court process considering that the appeal filed by Abubakar is still pending before the Sharia Court, Daura Riad, Kaduna.
It is hence not true as the Comrade has tried to suggest that Nasiba just decided to go about filing cases against Abukakar. In fact it is Abubakar who has been going around filing cases which Nasiba has simply attempted in every case to defend or respond to.
I have supplied the case number of the case filed by Abubakar in Gudu, Abuja so that anyone who doubts my position can have the opportunity of verifying my claims. Any such person can also go to the FCT High Court and request a certified true copy of the process filed by Nasiba before that court in SUIT NO: M/8929/2019. A careful reading of the process will show that unlike the Comrade has sought to show that Nasiba was on a filing spree of cases she simply brought that action to seek the High Court of the FCT to consider the fact that Abubakar cannot continue to go around the country filing cases against her while his appeal against the ruling of the Sharia Court T/Wada Kaduna is still pending in respect of the same issue.
I had stated earlier in this piece that before the end I will show that if anyone is guilty of seeking favorable courts in the script that has played out between Abubakar and Alh. Sani Dauda it is actually Abubakar and not ASD.
To begin with ASD never filed any case against Abubakar except one, i.e. the case before the High Court of Kaduna State seeking to enforce his human rights which he insists were violated by the police at the request of Abubakar.
Nasiba Sani Dauda filed one case for divorce against Abubakar and after she agreed to swear as to her claims as required under Islamic law the Sharia Court T/Wada granted her divorce from Abubakar.
After the divorce was granted Abubakar achieved through the Upper Sharia Court within a number of hours what would normally take 1 to 4 weeks or even more to achieve.
He filed an appeal against the judgment of the Sharia Court T/Wada on the same day the Court entered judgment in the divorce case and also argued an application for interlocutory injunction on the same day for stay of execution of the judgment of the Court sitting in T/Wada and was able somehow to get the orders made.
Some of my readers may not understand the feat that Abubakar achieved that day so I will make it plain for better understanding.
Now after an appeal is filed it is actually possible to bring an application for ‘interim’ injunction not ‘interlocutory’ injunction.
The difference between the two is simple, an interim injunction is made when the court hears only one party to the case where he suggests that it is necessary because of the urgency of what he is seeking from the courts for the court to hear only him and make an interim order which usually expires after 7 days. The idea of the interim order is to ensure that nothing is done to subject matter of the dispute in the interim that can adversely affect it in a manner that make an eventual judgment in the persons favor to become unenforceable.
To make it even plainer using this very case at hand, the interim order would have the implication of stopping Nasiba from enforcing the divorce granted by the T/Wada Court and hence getting married to anyone within the period that it subsists (usually 7 days).
The interim order is also usually made and a return date is stated when the parties would usually return to court this time for the court to hear both parties’ side of the argument and decide whether it should make an ‘interlocutory’ order staying the judgment in issue until the appeal is decided.
It is hence clear that an interlocutory order is never made at the instance of one party, this is because by its implication it is supposed to stop the execution of the order of the court which is appealed against until the appeal has been finally decided.
An interlocutory order is also impossible to get on the same day the application for it is made because you have to serve the other side with the processes you filed seeking the order and that side will be given time to respond which is usually not less than two days from when you served them with the process you filed seeking the order.
In the case of Abubakar, he filed the appeal against the judgment of the Court in T/Wada on the 5th of January 2018 and on the same day was able to get an interlocutory order from that court without serving Nasiba or her lawyers with any process of court and without either Nasiba or her lawyers having the opportunity to be heard on the issue.
I urge my readers to ask any lawyer they know if this feat as achieved by Abubakar is possible to achieve in law. You will be surprised at the answer you will receive.
The Comrade seeks to paint ASD as the one who went out seeking favorable courts to achieve whatever twisted plan against Abubakar when in actual fact it is Abubakar who has gone out and is still going out as such as the facts show.
You may also wish to verify my claims stated herein as to this ordinarily impossible feat as achieved by Abubakar by simply approaching the Kaduna State High Court to request the process filed by Abubakar’s lawyers in SUIT NO: KDH/KAD/982/2019.
I will not end this piece without saying that I know it is possible that the Comrade was fed a load of half-truths which he did not have the time to verify before rushing to write the piece under reference. If this is the case I urge our comrade like I have done everyone else seeking to find the truth in this matter to simply approach the courts mentioned in this piece to seek the documents mentioned for the purpose of obtaining the truth.
If however our comrade is armed with the true facts but simply decided to write the half-truths contained in his article then shame on him for using the power of the written word to spread falsehood.
Midat is a Kaduna based journalist
