A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled judgment for March 25 in a suit by the 36 state governments against the plan by the Federal Government to deduct from their funds to settle the debts owed consultants the states and local governments engaged on $418 million Paris Club refunds.
Justice Inyang Ekwo chose the date yesterday after lawyers to parties in the suit adopted their written addresses and made final submissions.
The plaintiffs are, by the suit, seeking to restrain President Muhammadu Buhari and others from deducting from states’ funds to settle the debt owed consultants engaged by states and local governments.
Lead plaintiffs’ lawyer, Sunday Ameh (SAN), in his final submission, argued that the defendants misconstrued the kernel of his clients’ suit.
Ameh faulted argument by the defendants that the suit was challenging existing judgments given by the court in favour of some of the consultants.
The lawyer averred that since the Federal Government agreed that the contractors were owed for the services they rendered, it should settle the indebtedness without deploying funds belonging to the states and the local government areas.
He prayed the court to allow the case and grant his client’s prayers.
Defendants’ lawyers, including Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Maimuna Lami Shiru (acting Director of Civil Litigation in the Federal Ministry of Justice) and Olusola Oke (SAN), faulted the competence of the suit and urged the court to dismiss it.
Olanipekun, who represented one of the consultants – Dr. Ted Iseghohi-Edwards (14th defendant) – described the plaintiffs as meddlesome interlopers.
The lawyer averred that the state governments claimed to be fighting for the local governments, a distinct tier of government, without the consent of the third tier of government.
He prayed the court to dismiss the suit for wasting time and constituting an abuse of court process.
Mrs. Shiru argued that not only was the suit statute-barred, the plaintiffs are seeking the impossible by asking the court to sit on appeal over judgments earlier delivered by it and other courts of coordinate jurisdiction.
The lawyer also argued that Federal Government’s decision to issue promissory notes to the consultants as a way of settling the debt owed them was legitimate.
She added that the plaintiffs cannot distance themselves from the decision taken by the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) in engaging some consultants.
Mrs. Shiru represented the President, Federal Republic of Nigeria; the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), the Accountant General of the Federation (AGoF), the Ministry of Finance Incorporated and the Debt Management Office (DMO), sued as the first, second, third, fourth and sixth defendants in the suit.
Oke, who represented Riok Nigeria Limited and Prince Nicholas Ukachukwu, argued that the suit was without merit and should be dismissed.