The lawsuit filed by the suspended CBN Governor Lamido Sanusi
against President Goodluck Jonathan over his suspension from office was
today dismissed by the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja.
The
Federal High Court ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the
suit, explaining that, since it is essentially a dispute between an
employer and their employee, the matter should be heard by the National
Industrial Court.
It would be recalled that Sanusi had in February
challenged his controversial suspension from fulfilling his duties as a
Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria. President Goodluck Jonathan,
Attorney General of the Federation Mohammed Adoke, Inspector General of
Nigeria Police Force Mohammed Abubakar were named the first, second and
third defendants respectively.
In the lawsuit, Sanusi, whose tenure ends in June, demanded that the defendants be restrained from
"obstructing,
disturbing, stopping or preventing him in any manner whatsoever from
performing the functions as Governor of the CBN". He also sought to
be allowed to fully enjoy the statutory powers and privileges attached
to the office, arguing that any delay might cause him irreparable and
serious damages.
Sanusi had previously obtained two separate
judgments from the Federal High Court in Lagos, against the Federal
Government since his suspension.
The first was the one awarding
N50m against the AGF and the State Security Service for seizing his
passport on the day he was suspended.
The second judgment restrained the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria from investigating Sanusi on the grounds of bias.
Counsel
to the President Mr. Fabian Ajogwu (SAN) had in his preliminary
objection, challenged the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the
suit. He argued that by virtue of Section 254C (1) (a) of the 1999
Constitution, as amended, the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to
entertain the suit. The plaintiff's suit, he said, fell under the
purview of the National Industrial Court which had exclusive
jurisdiction to entertain matters relating to employer-employee issues
like in the instant case.
Mike Ozekhome and Solomon Umoh, counsel
to the Attorney-General and Inspector-General of Police, respectively,
had also aligned with Mr. Ajogwu's arguments on jurisdiction.
“The
dispute between the plaintiff and the president pertain to issues
bordering on the plaintiff’s employment, which is a matter for the
National Industrial Court.
“I urge my lord to wash his hands off the case, like Pontius Pilate did, and dismiss the suit,’’ Mr. Ozekhome said.
However,
Kola Awodein, Mr. Sanusi’s counsel, while arguing on point of law, said
that the defendant’s counsel got it wrong by assuming that the case was
about his client’s employment.
“Our suit as formulated is not
about employment as the plaintiff is not an employee of the president,
especially looking at the issues for determination and the relief
sought.
“It is clear that the court is invited to interpretative
duty to declare what the law is within the purview of Section 251 of the
constitution,’’ Mr. Awodein said.
The plaintiff’s lawyer, Kola
Awodein (SAN), had during the hearing of the suit challenging Sanusi’s
suspension, argued that the President lacked the powers to unilaterally
suspend the CBN governor.
On the main suit, they argued that the
suspension of the plaintiff by the President was within his powers. They
contended that the CBN was an agency of the Executive arm of the
Federal Government, whose powers as contained in Section 5 of the
Constitution is vested in the President.
READ MORE: http://news.naij.com/66699.html
Social Plugin