Edo Impeachment: Shaibu Sues Assembly, Others, Court to Hear Suit April 19

The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled April 19 for the hearing of a lawsuit brought forth by Philip Shaibu, the impeached Deputy Governor of Edo, against the state house of assembly and other parties involved.

Shaibu Sues Assembly, Others, Court to Hear Suit April 19

The case, presided over by Justice Inyang Ekwo, was set for hearing on Friday following the appearance of a legal team led by Alex Ejesieme, SAN, who sought a date for the proceedings.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) observes that though the suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/405/24, was not listed on the cause list, the lawyers, who said they were for the defence, came to the court.

Just before adjourning, one of the lawyers informed Justice Ekwo that the case was initially slated for Thursday, but due to a public holiday, the court did not convene.

“So in obedience to court, we came today,” he said.But Justice Ekwo, who held that he could not preside over a matter that was not in the file, directed them to liaise with the court registrar for the next adjourned date.The matter was consequently fixed for April 19 for hearing.

READ ALSO: The Real People Destroying Our Economy are Yet to be Jailed-Sowore reacts Over Bobrisky’s Jail Term

In the suit dated March 26 but filed March 27, Shaibu sued the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police; State Security Service (SSS) as 1st and 2nd respondents.

Shaibu also joined Hon. Justice S.A. Omonua (rtd.), the Chairman representing himself and members of the Panel of Seven Appointed by the 4th Defendant; the Chief Judge of Edo; and Prof. Theresa Akpoghome as 3rd to 5th respondents.

Shaibu, in the suit filed by O.A. Gbadamosi, SAN, also listed Mr President Aigbokhian; Mr Oghogho Ayodele Oviasu and the Edo State House of Assembly as 6th to 8th respondents respectively.

In the originating motion on notice, a declaration that the threat and failure of the 3rd to 8th respondents to give him a fair hearing in the impeachment proceedings commenced by the 8th respondent is illegal, unconstitutional, and a gross violation of his fundamental right to fair hearing, pursuant to Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

He sought a declaration that the failure of the 8th respondent (assembly) to serve the purported impeachment notice on him personally and on each member of the House of Assembly, in line with Section 188(2) of the 1999 Constitution is a violation of his right to fair hearing.

Shaibu also sought a declaration that the inclusion of the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th respondents as chairman and members of the seven-member Investigation panel to investigate allegations contained in a purported impeachment notice to the applicant is tainted by a reasonable likelihood of bias and will result in a violation of the applicant’s fundamental right to fair hearing, guaranteed by virtue of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended.”

He sought an order directing the respondents not to take any further steps in violating his fundamental right to fair hearing, guaranteed by virtue of Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

He also sought an order directing the 3rd, 5th, 6th and 7th respondents to recuse themselves from sitting as Chairman and members of the 7-Man Investigating Panel appointed by the 3rd respondent, on account of the likelihood of bias on their part against him, among other reliefs.