THE National Chairman of the Labour Party, Barrister Julius Abure, has described as fake news media reports that he and the National Secretary of the party, Alhaji Umar Farouk Ibrahim, have been removed from their positions by a Federal High Court last Friday in Abuja.
Abure, who spoke with National Record on Sunday in a telephone conversation, said the reports were manipulated by vested interests in the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) to give the impression that the national leadership of the party under him was removed by the ruling of the Federal High Court presided over by the Honourable Justice Inyang E. Ekwo.
Although he admitted that the report by National Record did not mention “removal,” Abure insisted that the phrase; “step aside,” on the publication’s headline and body of the report, was also a wrong and misleading interpretation of the ruling by Justice Ekwo.
Abure accused Comrade Ayuba Wabba, President of the NLC, of making the Labour Party matter “a razzmatazz” and in the process making jest of himself and the NLC.
“Honestly, I am surprised that Ayuba has turned this Labour Party issue into a razzmatazz. Unfortunately, he has also turned himself, and the NLC, into a jester because of this Labour Party issue,” Abure said.
According to Abure, contrary to the reports in the media, the judgement is more in favour of his leadership than Wabba and the NLC.
RELATED STORIES
- Labour Party Crisis: Federal High Court Orders Abure, Farouq to Step Aside
- Labour Party Accuses NLC of Blackmail; Says Wabba Not Member
- Fresh Crisis in Labour Party As NLC Disclaims National Chairman, Secretary
He said: “The court said to NLC, you have brought application; you should serve the defendants; go and serve them within seven days; that was one.
“Two, the Judge now said the defendant should note; that is we now; should come and show cause why I should not grant the request of the applicants. What does that mean? That means that the court has not granted any of their requests.
“The judge now said let the status quo remain. Who is the status quo? I am the status quo; the status quo means me; the state of affairs as at when you come to court is the status quo. It is not the state of affairs before the NEC. Is it not the NEC they are challenging? If you are going to challenge the NEC and you now said the status quo is before the NEC, you have already made judgement because one of their [plaintiffs] requests is that they should set the NEC aside. So if that is your request and the court now grants it, you have achieved what you want to achieve by that pronouncement; I don’t know if you understand the argument?
“Essentially, status quo means the state of affairs before you came to court; I am the status quo. So the court pronouncement is against Wabba and the NLC.
“What happened is that Wabba went behind us to the court to obtain judgement from the court and the court in its wisdom said no; you can’t come here without putting those people on notice; go and put them on notice within seven days. The court did this to enable us to show cause why the court should not grant their requests.
“And number three, maintain the status quo. So, if the court said it is not granting any of their requests, on what basis where they saying that the court removed our leadership. They are only being mischievous and making mockery of themselves.”
The Courts Orders
Justice Ekwo, in his ruling, which was obtained by National Record, gave three orders before he adjourned the matter to Monday, October 4, 2021 for hearing. The orders include:
One, that “Applicants are hereby ordered to put the Defendants on notice of the ex-parte Motion within 7-days of this Order.” Two, that “Defendants are hereby ordered to show cause why the prayers of the Plaintiffs ought not to be granted on the next date of hearing,” and three, “An Order is hereby made for Parties to maintain status quo ante bellum in other not to disturb the res of the matter pending further order of this court.”
Copy of the Ruling: Federal High Court Order – NLC and Others Vs Barr Julius Abure and Others
