Judge Amina Mohammed of the Federal Superior Court, the Judicial Division of Awka, has reserved the judgment in the lawsuit, which seeks to disqualify the governor of the state of Anambra, Professor Charles soluding to seek a re -election, the use of advice not chosen to direct the issues of the 21 areas of the local government in the state, contrary to the Constitution of Nigeria and a subsistent sentence.
Judge Mohammed postponed the lawsuit for his trial on a date that will still be announced, after all parties in the matter adopted their writings written and other processes before their court on Tuesday.
The lawsuit initiated by an activist and former candidate for Governor of Anambra, Dr. Ifeanyichukwu Okonkwo, also seeks to prohibit three of the predecessors of Soludo, Dr. Chris Ngige, Peter Obi and Willie Obiano of occupying a public office for the same reason.
The first to eight defendants respectively include the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the governor of the State of Anambra, the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Justice, the State of Anambra and the Chamber of the Assembly of the State of Anambra.
Also read: Solud promises to make an anambra destination for investments
Others are ancient governors-Ngige, Obi and Obano- by themselves and on behalf of their transition presidents and councilors, and Mr. Livinus Onyenwe by himself and in the name of the transition presidents that served under the Soludo Administration.
Okonkwo, who also demands exemplary damage of N100 billion in his favor, brought the claim in accordance with the subsistent judgment of Judge Lewis Allagoa of the Federal Superior Court in a claim without FHC/in/CS/90/2005.
He also wants an order of the Court to force the defendants from the second to 8 to make a public account before the court, of all the funds, illegally spent by them or agents and private, during their respective administrations, while executing their illegal and unconstitutional usurpation of offices in the areas of the local government council in the state of Anambra.
Before the court was postponed to his trial, Okonkwo, who appeared for himself, sought the court to adopt his written speeches, which contains his arguments.
The plaintiff to blast the court that the originating summons contain only one Question: “Whether the continuous violation of the 2nd to 8th defendants of exhibit a, The Judgment in Suit Number Fhc/in/cs/90/225 Between The Parties delivered On Sepminger 2006, which Execution has taken EFFECT, The Defendants Not Appealing Same Nor Obtaining Any Stay/Injunction, The Plaintiff is entitled to use a Foundation The (Unreported Judgment, exhibition a) Look for additional relief against the first accused and for the court to make declaratory reliefs and order the orders of protection/effectiveness and application of the State of Law under the constitution of law.
Citing Besong vs. Ochineke (2023), Okonkwo argued that the case is not a matter of affidavit and an affidavit of counterparts, but based on a valid sentence, against which there is no appeal, and backed by the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court in the lawyer of the Federation Federation against the Prosecutor-General of ABIA and 35 states (2024 4).
By asking the court to also consider the case of Ajao vs. AAO (1986), argued that the validity of a sentence cannot be questioned if there is no appeal against him.
He urged the court to protect his own trial, which has never been appealed, trusting in the case of Oguebego vs. PDP (2016).
Responding on behalf of the second to the 8th accused, a high -level state lawyer in the Ministry of Justice of the State of Anambra, Peter Odili, reminded the court that they presented a preliminary objection, asking the court to reject the jurisdiction on the matter.
Odili said that the affected defendants also presented an answer on the point of law the opposition of the plaintiff to their notification of preliminary objection.
By adopting his own writings written, he urged the court to reject jurisdiction and dismiss the call of origin due to lack of merit.
Previously, Judge Mohammed granted the motion of the defendants from 2 to 8 in the notice of the extension of time, to regularize his affidavit, the written addresses and other processes in opposition to the call of origin of the plaintiff and consider the processes as archived and have been served properly, the appropriate rates, having been paid.
Nigerian tribe