Ernest Chinwo in Port Harcourt
A Rivers State High Court sitting in Port Harcourt monday dismissed an application by the Director General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), Dr. Dakuku Peterside, to stop a N6 billion libel suit brought against him by former Rivers State Governor, Dr. Peter Odili.
Odili had, in the suit, demanded N6 billion damages from Peterside, who was the governorship candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the 2015 general election in the state, for defamation which arose from a statement credited to him (Peterside) when he held a press conference after Governor Nyesom Wike’s Supreme Court victory.
Odili averred in the suit that Peterside had alleged in the press conference that Wike, during his victory thanksgiving service, stated that Odili helped him to secure the Supreme Court victory.
Odili said Dakuku’s statement was false and malicious, and that Dakuku misrepresented and twisted what Wike said at the thanksgiving service.
Peterside, through his counsel, Rowland Otaru (SAN), had raised a motion that the suit should be dismissed as he was not properly served and also challenged the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter.
Ruling on the application at the resumed hearing of the matter yesterday, the presiding Judge and Chief Judge of Rivers State, Hon. Justice Adama Iyayi-Laminkara, said the claim by the defendant that he was served notice of the suit through a wrong address did not hold water as there was no difference between the address of the defendant and the address where the notice was served.
Laminkara also ruled that the Court has jurisdiction to hear the suit and awarded a cost of N40,000 against the defendant.
She however adjourned further hearing on the suit to February 23, shortly after the cross examination of the claimant, Odili, by lead-counsel to Peterside, Otaru (SAN).
Speaking to journalists shortly after the court proceedings, Otaru said they would take other desirable steps to ensure that the Court sets aside its October 11, 2016, ruling where it ordered a substituted service to them.
He said, “Our challenge of the Court processes was struck out but that does not matter. The Court has its discretion, either to grant or dismiss. That is what the law says. So, but we will take other steps if desirable. I cannot say that we are going on appeal now, you can see that I continued with cross-examination of the witness.
“We are affected by the decision of the Court. Once a decision is taken, one of the parties must be affected. We were asking that the Court should set aside the proceedings of October 11, 2016. There is no problem about that. The judge has the discretion to grant or to refuse.”
Also addressing journalists, lead counsel to Odili, Kanu Agabi (SAN), expressed the hope that with the dismissal of the application, the suit would proceed in earnest.
Agabi said, “In essence, they challenged the jurisdiction of the Court but the judge ruled that the processes were duly served and the case should proceed and we have proceeded with the cross examination.
