The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed June 24 to hear two separate fundamental rights enforcement suits filed by the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki, challenging the decision of the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission (EFCC) to probe him.
The court had in a ruling on an ex parte motion last week, ordered the anti-graft agency and other agencies involved in the probe of Saraki over corruption allegations to suspend the probe.
At the resumed hearing Thursday, Mr. Sunday Onobi, counsel to Saraki, informed the court that he had served all parties in the suit with the processes of the court, including the order of the court.
“We have served all the respondents the originating process and the order of the court and we have also received the fourth respondent’s (EFCC) counter affidavit to which we need to respond,” the counsel said.
The Solicitor -General of the Federation, Mr. Dayo Apata who represented the Attorney -General of the Federation, Mr Abubakar Malami (SAN), also told the court that he had filed a counter affidavit to the originating summons filed by Saraki.
Counsel to EFCC, Mr. Chile Okoromma, also said that he had filed a counter affidavit and a written address in response to Saraki’s suit and will serve the processes on all parties.
The trial judge, Justice Taiwo Taiwo ruled that parties should serve and reply to all processes and adjourned the matter until June 24.
Saraki had approached the court with an ex parte application filed along with the substantive suit praying the court for an order to stop the respondents from probing him.
The respondents include the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Department of State Services (DSS), the Inspector-General of Police, EFCC, Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission and the Code of Conduct Tribunal.
The court had ordered the respondents to stay action on the probe pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice filed by Saraki.
Justice Taiwo said he granted Saraki’s prayers to avert a situation where the court would be faced with a situation of fait accompli.
He also said that granting the order was in line with a settled principled of law that once a suit was filed, all parties to it must refrain from taking any action capable of rendering the suit nugatory.