Court rejects Akeredolu’s request to overturn interim ruling, adjourns lawsuit indefinitely
Court rejects Akeredolu’s request to overturn interim ruling, adjourns lawsuit indefinitely
By Matthew Atungwu
A Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday denied Governor Rotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State’s request to have his Sept. 26 temporary injunction revoked due to lack of jurisdiction.
In a verdict, Justice Emeka Nwite decided to defer the lawsuit indefinitely due to the speaker and the state legislature having filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal over the matter at hand.
Additionally, he turned down requests by Akeredolu and the speaker to dismiss the lawsuit due to lack of jurisdiction.
In order to prevent judicial misbehavior, the judge concluded that it would be prudent for the court to postpone the case “sine die” until the appeal’s decision.
On October 20, the speaker and the legislature filed an appeal against Justice Nwite’s temporary ruling from September 26.
They requested two reliefs in their appeal, which was filed with the Appeal Court in Abuja.
Read Also: Ondo: PDP slams Akeredolu, says resume or resign
Among them is “an order setting aside the lower court’s September 26 ex-parte order.”
“An order allowing the appeal and directing that the substantive matter be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.”
Shortly after Aiyedatiwa’s attorney, Kayode Adewusi, brought the ex-parte motion to that effect, Nwite issued the interim injunction.
In addition, he stopped Akeredolu from proposing a replacement deputy governor and sending it to the legislature for approval as the new state’s deputy governor on the basis of a resignation letter allegedly written or signed by Aiyedatiwa, while the interlocutory application was being heard and decided.
Justice Nwite concurred with Adegboruwa’s assertion, made on Friday, that the court cannot share jurisdiction with the Appeal Court. This also applied to the ongoing ruling that was scheduled to be delivered on October 16th based on the reasons presented by the parties.
“From the foregoing reliefs, there is no gainsaying that the reliefs being sought in that appeal affect the jurisdiction of the court and are also the same reliefs being sought by the 3rd and 4th defendants in their applications.
“Indeed, to indulge in such action will amount to judicial rascality.
“In view of the foregoing analysis, I am of the humble view and I so hold that the application of the plaintiff (Aiyedatiwa) is well founded and meritorious.
“Consequently, the matter is hereby adjourned sine die,” the judge declared.
