|
Judgment Against
Governor Ngige
by Justice S.C. Nnaji
of, High Court
of Enugu Judicial Division
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ENUGU STATE OF NIGERIA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ENUGU JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT ENUGU ON FRIDAY THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY 2004
SUIT NO. E/503M/2003
BETWEEN
HON. NELSON ACHUKWU.............. APPLICANT
AND
1. INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE
2. MR. UDUAKO MMIRI
3. DR. CHRIS NGIGE (Sued as Governor of Anambra State)
4. ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND COMMISSIONER For JUSTICE,
ANAMBRA STATE. ...................RESPONDENTS
JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY HONOURABLE JUSTICE S.C. NNAJI
"In this case, the respondents were duly served with
all the processes together with the order for
accelerate hearing of the matter by the court. The
respondents have refused or neglected to respond to or
refuse the case made against them by the applicant. No
reason was advanced to the court for this inclination.
It is not the duty of the court to speculate whether
or not the respondents have a defence to the action
aside from disdain or disrespect, it is difficult to
conceive any reason, which may have implied the
respondents after service upon them of all the
processes to stay away from court in the absence of
any reason deduced by the respondents for keeping away
from the proceedings after they were duly served with
the processes, I am not bound to further adjourn the
case after I have ordered accelerated hearing.
The service upon the respondent of all the processes
has properly activated the jurisdiction of this
court." So held his Lordship, Honourable Justice S.C.
Nnaji in this case.
It was an application on notice pursuant to
Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules to
which the applicant prayed the court for:
A declaration that the bodily injuries inflicted on
the applicant by the 2nd respondent and two other
henchmen and a mobile policeman on the orders of the
3rd respondent constitute an infraction of the
applicants rights to dignity of his person as
guaranteed under section 3 of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999.
A declaration that the 3rd respondent was not entitled
to meet with or assemble with delegates of South-East
Zonal Congress of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) under
the constitution of the party having ceased to be
Governor of Anambra State vide his letter of
resignation of July 19, 2003 and with the combined
operation of sections 180(1)(c) and 306(1)(2) and (5)
of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria, 1999.
An order directing the 1st respondent to remove the
3rd respondent from office in the same manner he put
him in office on July 10, 2003 after having resigned
as Governor of Anambra State and left therefrom.
N10 million payable by the 1st-4th respondents jointly
and severally as being compensation and damages for
infraction of applicants fundamental rights.
These were among the seven reliefs sought by applicant
in the suit. This was supported by an affidavit to
which six documents A-F were annexed as exhibits.
Counsel for the applicant Tagbo Ike said that pursuant
to the leave granted the applicant on December 24,
2003 he timeously caused the order of the court made
of that date together with the motion on notice to be
served on all the respondents and that the proof of
service were before the court.
Applicant's counsel argued that the applicant being a
paraplegic from childhood had his walking stick taken
away and given the beating of his life by the 2nd
respondent on the orders of the 3rd respondent.
Counsel copiously advised evidence along with exhibits
and cited a plethoria of cases.
The learned Judge observed that it was clear from the
summoning of the facts given that events that led to
the action took place in Enugu state and that it was
therefore undoubted that his court had jurisdiction to
entertain the application relying on the provisions of
Section 46 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria, 1999. His Lordship also cited a number of
decided cases in arriving at this conclusion.
In consequence thereof, his Lordship found that the
respondents having failed to appear in court and
having failed to file any counter affidavit suits
under the prerogative writs and therefore held "it is
settled that unchallenged and uncontroverted affidavit
evidence ought to be accepted as true" the learned
judge in conclusion therefore made the following
consequential order.
JUDGMENT ORDER
Upon a motion on notice brought pursuance Order 2 Rule
1, Order 6 Rule 1(1) of Fundamental Rights
(Enforcement Procedure) Rules 1979 and Sections 6 (6),
34, 35 and 46 Constitution of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria, 1999 praying the Honourable Court from an
Order enforcing or securing the enforcement of
Fundamental Rights of the Applicant.
The application is supported by a statement, setting
out the reliefs, the grounds upon which the reliefs
are sought; affidavit verifying facts in support of
the application and exhibits.
And after hearing the submissions of G. Tagbo Ike Esq
of Counsel for the Applicant with Elder Oyibo Chukwu
Esq and the Court being satisfied that the Respondents
were duly served with the ex parte Order and motion
papers but did not put up appearance.
That the 1st Respondent shall remove the 3rd
Respondent forthwith from office in the same manner he
put him in office on July 10, 2003 after having
resigned as Governor of Anambra State and left
therefrom.
Issued at Enugu under the seal of Court and hand of
presiding judge this 2nd day of January, 2004.
G. Tagbo Ike Esq, with Elder Oyibo Chukwu Esq for the
Applicant.
Respondents, unrepresented.
|
