•Deputy governor opts out, counsel exits panel
Adibe Emenyonu in Benin City
The retired Justice S.A. Omonuwa seven-man panel set up by the Chief Judge (CJ), of Edo State, Justice Daniel Okungbowa, to investigate allegations of gross misconducts against the Deputy Governor, Mr. Philip Shaibu, yesterday, ruled that it would continue its investigation as there was no court order foreclosing it.
The ruling came after counsel to Shaibu, Professor Oladoyin Awoyale (SAN), raised objection to the continuation of the investigation in view of the order of an Abuja Federal High Court.
The court had adjourned the case filed before it by Shaibu to April 8, 2024, for parties in the matter to come and show cause why the court should grant or refuse the prayers for interlocutory injunction against the impeachment processes initiated by the Edo State House of Assembly against the deputy governor.
Justice Omonuwa (Rtd), while giving his ruling said the Federal High Court in Abuja only asked parties to come and show cause and did not say it should not sit.
The deputy Clerk (Legal) and counsel to the Edo State House of Assembly, Ohiafi Joe, while arguing his position, said by virtue of the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Section 188 (10), as amended, no court has the right to prevent the House of Assembly, or the panel so set up, from performing its constitutional responsibilities.
Ohiafi further argued that Awoyale (SAN), must convince the panel that the provision of the constitution had been altered for the panel to sustain his argument.
In his ruling, the chairman of the panel, Justice Omonuwa (Rtd), said the panel would continue and asked the House of Assembly to state its case.
Responding to the ruling, Awoyale told the panel that his client would not be able to continue to participate in the investigation and sought the panel’s permission to be excused.
When asked whether he was waving his right to defend his client, the Senior Advocate of Nigeria, responded in the negative, stressing that parties must obey the court decision that they should appear before it to show cause.
Probed further if he was “arresting the ruling of the panel”, Awoyale (SAN) answered again in the negative and reiterated the need to obey the court which would be sitting on Monday, April 8, 2024.
However, the panel yesterday, adjourned further sitting till today, Thursday April 4, for the respondent to open his defence.
Earlier, the House of Assembly through its Deputy Clerk, Legal, Joe Ohiafi, had presented Assembly’s allegations against Shaibu before the panel after Awoyale sought the leave of the panel to withdraw from further participation in the panel’s proceedings.
Awoyale had drawn attention of the panel to the order of Abuja High Court dated 28th day of March, 2024 in suit N0.FHC/ABJ/CS/405 2024 between the Deputy Governor of Edo State, Inspector General of Police and 7 others.
He said the court in its interlocutory order held that the Respondents, their Assigns, Agents howsoever called to show cause on the return date why the reliefs of the motion should or should not be granted the applicant.
He further stated that the order and the originating processes had been served on all the parties in the suit, adding that the matter has been adjourned to April 8, 2024 for the parties to show cause.
“My Lord, in view of this position, our client would not be able to further take part in the proceedings of this panel until the Federal High Court determines this issue one way or the other.
“My Lord, I submit respectfully that further taking part in this proceeding, would foist a faith accompli on the court in Abuja- a situation of helplessness.
“My Lord, we submit further that parties are bound to obey court orders, we submit further taking part in the proceeding would violate the order of court”.
But Ohiafi opposed the submissions and cited section 188 subsection 10 of the 1999 Constitution and contended that no court or panel can stop the proceedings of the House of Assembly.
The panel however pointed out that there was no court order as indicated by Shaibu’s Counsel but only that parties should show cause while it rose to consider the arguments òf the Counsel to the parties.
It held that Shaibu did not have any court order stopping it from sitting and agreed with the submission of the Deputy Clerk, Legal to the State Assembly that, “no court can stop the panel, especially as there was court stopping the panel from sitting.”
This paved the way for the Assembly to open its case at the panel against Shaibu.
