A KOGI HIGH Court in Lokoja on Friday ordered the Chairman of the EFCC, Mr Ola Olukoyede, to appear before it on May 13 to show why he should not be committed for allegedly disobeying its order.
Justice I.A. Jamil of High Court IV gave the order while ruling in Suit No: HCL/68M/2024 and Motion No: HCL/190M/2024, brought before him by ex-Gov. Yahaya Bello of Kogi in Lokoja.
“The said act was carried out by the Respondent (EFCC) in violation of the order, which was valid and subsisting when they carried out the act.
“That same act of the respondent amounts to contempt, ” the judge said.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the EFCC boss is facing a contempt charge for allegedly carrying out “some acts upon which they (the EFCC) have been restrained” by the court on Feb. 9, pending the determination of the substantive originating motion.
ALSO READ:
Alia Blasts TUC President Over Wage Award, Palliative Funds Alleged Misappropriation
Senior Lawyer Sues NERC, AEDC Over Alleged Unlawful Hike In Electricity Tariff
Court To Rule On Suspended UNICAL Professor’s Plea To Quash Charge Against Him
Outgoing VC Advocates Drug Test For Lecturers
EFCC operatives had on April 17 laid siege on the residence of the former governor, Alhaji Yahaya Bello, in a bid to arrest him, in spite a court order restraining them from taking such action, pending the determination of the originating motion.
Justice Jamil’s order was based on a motion ex-parte filed by Yahaya Bello through his lawyer, M.S. Yusuf.
Bello prayed the court for an order to issue and serve the respondent (EFCC Chairman) with Form 49 Notice to show cause why Order of Committal should not be made on Olukoyede.
“The Judge, after listening to the arguments of the applicant’s counsel, the submission and exhibits attached in the written address, granted Bello’s prayers and ordered Olukoyede to be summoned to appear before the court to answer the contempt charge.
“The applicant’s application before me is to the effect that the respondent has carried out some acts upon which they have been restrained by this court on Feb. 9, pending the determination of the substantive motion on notice before this court.
“That the said act was carried out by the respondent in violation of the order which was valid and subsisting when they carried out those acts. That same act of the respondent amounts to act of contempt.
“It’s against the above facts that this Court hereby grants the prayers sought in line with the principle of “Audi Ultra Patem” (listen to the other side).
“This matter is adjourned to May 13 for the respondent’s chairman to appear before this court in answer to form 49 ordered to be served on him,” the Judge said. (NAN)
