By Adebisi Onanuga and Oziegbe Okoeki
An Ikeja High Court on Wednesday ordered the Lagos State House of Assembly to maintain status quo in the ongoing investigation of former Lagos State governor, Akinwunmi Ambode.
This is just as Ambode’s lawyer, who had appeared at the Assembly complex for the sitting of the joint committee of the House probing expenditures of the ex-governor, was not allowed into the venue of the sitting of the committee.
The joint committee has, however, adjoined its probe of Ambode indefinitely in deference to the court’s ruling that status-quo should be maintained.
Justice Yetunde Adesanya gave the order while ruling on an ex parte motion filed by Ambode through his counsel, Tayo Oyetibo, SAN.
The court had on Tuesday ordered Oyetibo to put the respondents on notice before hearing all applications.
This is contrary to earlier reports that the court ordered respondents to appear in court yesterday.
When Oyetibo applied to move the ex parte motion dated October 28 on Tuesday, Justice Adesanya declined.
Read Also: Purchase of 820 buses probe: Court adjourns Ambode’s suit to Nov. 20
She said she would rather hear the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction on their merits, directing service of the originating processes, accompanying processes and all pending applications on the 1st to the 12th defendants.
The respondents are the Lagos State House of Assembly, Speaker Mudashiru Obasa; House Clerk, Mr. A.A Sanni; Chairman of the Ad hoc Committee set up by the House to probe the procurement, Fatai Mojeed and members of the Committee. They are: Gbolahan Yishawu, A.A Yusuff, Yinka Ogundimu, Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, M.L Makinde, Kehinde Joseph, T.A Adewale and O.S Afinni.
During resumed proceedings for interlocutory injunction filed by the former governor dated October 28, 2019, before the court yesterday, his counsel, Tayo Oyetibo (SAN) confirmed service on the respondents as earlier directed by the court.
Oyetibo thereafter expressed his readiness to move same.
But counsel to the respondents, Oshinowo Adenike opposed the application.
She stated that they were served with the motion very late on Tuesday, October 29, 2019 and would need an adequate time to regularise the position of the respondents.
Justice Adesanya granted her request and adjourned the matter till November 20, 2019 at the instance of the parties.
Ambode had instituted the suit against the Lagos State House of Assembly to contest the constitutionality of the probe of the Bus Rapid Initiative (BRI) buses, which were procured based on budgetary approval as part of the Bus Reform Project of the state government designed to revolutionise public transportation in line with global best practices.
According to his statement of claim before the court, Ambode said contrary to deliberate misrepresentation of facts by the lawmakers, the procurement of the 820 buses was well captured in the 2018 Appropriation Law, which was duly approved by the House.
He also averred that having prescribed the manner of withdrawal of funds in Sections 3 and 4 of the 2018 Appropriation Law, it was unconstitutional for the House to attach another condition in Section 9 of the law for further approval to be sought before incurring any expenditure on the purchase of the buses.
Highlighting the specific breach of his constitutional rights to fair hearing by the House, the former governor said on August 27, 2019 during proceedings of the Assembly, some lawmakers thoroughly vilified and disparaged him as having purchased the buses without budgetary approval and that the procurement was a waste of public funds, while at the end of the proceedings, the House resolved to constitute an Ad Hoc Committee to probe the procurement.
He stated in his averment that it was “surprising that the very lawmakers, who contributed actively in vilifying, disparaging and denigrating” him constituted the bulk of the members of the Committee, which was a clear derogation of his right to fair hearing.
Ambode stated that in continuation of deliberate misrepresentation of facts on the issue, the House falsely claimed that an invitation had been extended to him to appear before the Committee, but that he failed to honour the said invitation.
He added that the House Committee and indeed the entire members of the House had already adjudged him as having committed wastage of public fund by the procurement of the buses in question and had also already determined that the procurement was done by him as opposed to the state government.
He said it was obvious that the lawmakers were totally biased against him, having regard to their pronouncements on the floor of the House by reason of which he believed that his right to fair hearing as guaranteed by the Constitution had been seriously compromised by the defendants.
He is, therefore, seeking, among others, the court’s declaration that the power of the House to pass a resolution under Section 128 (1) of the Constitution to cause an inquiry into his conduct as governor is subject to right to fair hearing as guaranteed by Section 36(1) of the Constitution.
Ambode also wants a declaration that the resolution of the House setting up a nine-man Committee comprising of the 4th to 12th defendants to investigate all transactions in respect of the 820 buses said by the defendants to have been procured by him, derogates from his right as guaranteed by section.
But Ambode’s lawyer, who appeared for the sitting of the joint committee of the state House of Assembly probing his client’s expenditures while in office, was not allowed into the committee room.
The lawyer, Mr. Olaniran Obele from the chambers of Mr. Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), counsel to Ambode, protested that they were not allowed into the committee’s meeting.
Obele told journalists at the Assembly complex: “We came to represent Ambode, but the officials of the House of Assembly, in a military manner, prevented us from entering the committee room.
“The former governor respects the House; he has sent his lawyer to inform the committee set up by the House that this is what transpired in court. It is out of courtesy that we have come.”
Also addressing journalists after adjourning till further notice, Chairman of the Committee, Hon. Fatai Mojeed, said the former governor’s lawyer was not allowed into the committee room, because it was against the business rule of the House.
“We invited the former governor, not his representative. We want him to come and clear himself; that is why they were not allowed in and it is even against our business rule,” he said.
Leave a Reply