Evans gets court’s nod to proceed with case

By Lukman Olabiyi

Justice Abdulaziz Anka of the Federal High Court, Lagos, has ruled that the fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by suspected kidnapper, Chukwudumeme Onwuamadike, aka Evans, against Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and others was ripe for hearing.
Evans, through Olukoya Ogungbeje, had filed a N300 million fundamental rights enforcement suit against the IGP and others, including the Nigerian Police, Commissioner of Police, Lagos State, and the Lagos State Anti-Robbery Squad as second, third and fourth respondents, respectively, alleging wrongful detention.
On Tuesday, during proceedings, Ogungbeje had informed Justice Anka that the N20,000 costs awarded against him had been paid and the matter was ripe for hearing.
Counsel to the police commissioner and SARS, Emmanuel Eze, opposed him on the grounds that the applicant had not complied with the court’s order by serving the IGP and the police in Abuja. Besides, he said Ogungbeje did not seek the court’s leave to hear the suit during vacation.
“He has not got the leave of court for the matter to be heard during vacation. That is the condition precedent for hearing any matter during vacation,” he said.
Relying on Section 215 of the Constitution and Order 5, Rule 8, of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules, 2009, Eze argued further that the police commissioner in Lagos and the IGP were distinct personalities. He added that Ogungbeje had only served the police commissioner at Alagbon in Lagos, but was yet to serve the IGP in Abuja.
According to him, “he has not taken steps to clothe this court with jurisdiction to hear this case,” adding, “Since Ogungbeje has refused to do the right thing, we are asking the court for costs of N300,000.”
Countering him, Ogungbeje said the IGP and the police were served on June 29, 2017, at the addresses contained in the originating motion and the proof of service was in the court’s file.
He also said, “Order 5, Rule 2 of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules has made it clear that service on the respondents’ agents will amount to personal service on respondents,” he said.
Delivering ruling yesterday, Justice Anka dismissed the objections of Eze and agreed with counsel to Evans that service on the first and second respondents had been properly effected.
In his ruling, Justice Anka also held that leave was not required for the matter to be heard during vacation, as Order 4, Rule 5 of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules of 2009 enjoins the court to pursue speed and justice on issues of fundamental human rights.
The court subsequently fixed August 29, 2017, for the hearing of the suit.

from The Sun News http://ift.tt/2uRe5UD
via IFTTT