President Goodluck Jonathan yesterday asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to strike out the suit instituted against him by 11 human rights activists over the continued suspension of President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Isa Ayo Salami.
A motion filed by Mr. Matthew Echo on behalf of the president and Attorney General of the Federation(AGF) and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN), who are 1st and 2nd defendants in the suit, urged the court to strike out the suit on four grounds.
According to the objection, the human rights activists who filed the suit for themselves and the Registered Trustees of the Centre for the Promotion of Arbitration do not have the locus standi to institute the action and to seek the reliefs sought, as they do not have sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates.
President Jonathan and Adoke stated that the plaintiffs have not shown to be under the authority of the Trustees of the Centre for the Promotion of Arbitration to maintain the action on their behalf in a representative capacity.
The defendants asked the court to dismiss or strike out the suit on other grounds, such as the indeterminacy of the plaintiffs’ reliefs in their application, as they are merely academic and as such should be expunged, and the fact that there is no cause of action against the 1st and 2nd defendants, as they have always acted in accordance with the constitution in relation with the subject matter in the suit.
On Tuesday, the court struck out the names of Justice Dalhatu Adamu (the 5th defendants) from the suit on the ground that he has ceased to be the Acting President of the Court of Appeal.
Presiding judge, Justice Adamu Bello granted the application withdrawing Justice Dalhatu Adamu from the list of defendants and adjourned further hearing to January 17, 2013 for adoption of written addresses.
The plaintiffs had asked the court to determine whether Jonathan had the powers to recall Salami, and also, whether he (Jonathan) could reappoint Adamu as Acting President of the Court of Appeal (PCA) after the expiration of three months without the recommendation of the NJC.
The National Judicial Council (NJC), 3rd defendant in the suit agreed with the plaintiffs on both issues, maintaining that Jonathan had no powers under the law to recall Salami, and that Adamu’s continued stay in office as acting PCA was illegal.
“By virtue of the combined provisions of sections 153, 158 (1), of the Constitution, and the NJC’s power to exercise disciplinary control over judicial officers contained in paragraph 21 (1) of the part 1, third schedule of the Constitution, the NJC is clothed with the power to suspend and recall the 4th defendant (Salami) without any recourse to the president (the 1st defendant),” the NJC argued.
“We submit that by virtue of section 238 (5) of the Constitution, the 5th defendant (Acting PCA) cannot be reappointed after the expiration of three months without the recommendation of the 3rd defendant, NJC, and as such, the continued stay in office by the 5th defendant is unconstitutional and illegal.”
