Shaibu opts out of panel as his counsel takes his exit.
The seven-man panel set up by the Chief Judge (CJ) of Edo State, Justice Daniel Okungbowa, to investigate the allegation of misconduct levelled against the embattled deputy governor of the state, Comrade Philip Shaibu, on Wednesday as the deputy governor raised objections to the continued proceedings by the panel.
The panel, headed by retired Justice Stephen A. Omonuwa, was set up by Justice Okungbowa following the resolution by the Edo State House of Assembly which initiated the impeachment process against Shaibu, who was accused of gross misconduct by the Assembly
At the panel on Wednesday morning, the House of Assembly was represented by Mr Ohiafi Joe, Deputy Clerk, Legal, just as Shaibu was represented by Professor Oladoyin Awoyale (SAN).
Immediately after Ohiafi announced his appearance for the Assembly and stated the reason for the panel, Shaibu’s counsel, Awoyale (SAN), rose to raise objection to the sitting of the panel on the ground that a Federal High Court had earlier ruled that all parties should maintain status quo and appear before it on Monday, April 8, 2024, to show cause why the court should grant or refuse the reliefs sought by the plaintiff (Shaibu) in the matter before it.
Professor Awoyale said that the order of the Abuja High Court dated March 28, 2024, in suit N0.FHC/ABJ/CS/405 2024 between the Deputy Governor of Edo State, Inspector General of Police, and 7 others was an interlocutory order that held that the respondents, their assigns, agents, and whomever called to show cause on the return date why the reliefs of the motion should not be granted to the applicant. He further stated that the order and the originating processes had been served on all the parties in the suit, adding that the matter had been adjourned to April 8, 2024, for the parties to show cause.
“My Lord, in view of this position, our client would not be able to further take part in the proceedings of this panel until the Federal High Court determines this issue one way or another. My Lord, I respectfully submit that further taking part in this proceeding would foist a faith accomplice on the court in Abuja—a situation of helplessness. My Lord, we submit further that parties are bound to obey court orders; we submit further that taking part in the proceeding would violate the order of court”.
Arguing the case of the deputy governor further, the SAN cited several cases and informed the panel that he could not supply the references immediately because they were electronic citations derived from the Law Pavilion Electronic Law Reports. The cases the senior lawyer cited included Balarabe Musa against Kaduna State House of Assembly and the Supreme Court decision in Inakoju, which Adeleke reported in 2007 (All Nigeria Weekly Law Report Part 1025 and 423), adding that a panel would not close its eyes to issues surrounding subsections 1–9 of Section 188 of the Constitution.
The senior lawyer submitted that it is the position of the law that all parties must obey the order of the court, adding that to continue with the investigation would amount to fait accompli, and his client would not want to participate further if the panel would not obey the order of the court.
The counsel to the House of Assembly and Deputy Clerk, Legal Department, Ohiafi, said that the panel’s sitting was supported by the provision of the constitution, which forecloses any court from preventing the House of Assembly and the panel from discharging their constitutional responsibilities.
Ohiafi said that by virtue of the provisions of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Section 188 (10), as amended, no court had the right to prevent the House of Assembly, or the panel so set up, from performing its constitutional responsibilities. He further contended that Awoyale (SAN) must convince the panel that the provision of the constitution has been altered for the panel to sustain his argument. “This panel is sui generis on its own plane. The panel is protected by the Constitution to carry on its proceedings”. Ohiafi submitted
A member of the panel, Professor Theresa Akpoghome, asked the SAN if it was proper to make verbal citations without availing the court of physical copies. The deputy governor’s counsel fired back that the practice allowed that and he went ahead to provide the references from his phone.
At that point, another member of the court drew the attention of the SAN to the fact that he was misleading the panel, as there was no ruling by the Abuja Federal High Court restraining the panel from sitting on the investigation. The member of the panel asked the SAN to read the order of the Abuja federal high court, to which the senior lawyer admitted that he made a mistake by reading the prayer of the plaintiff before the court and not the ruling, which asked parties in the matter before the court to appear at the adjourned date to “show cause.”. He, however, insisted on his stance that he would not continue with the panel if it decided to disobey the order of the court, asking all parties to appear before it on the case of enforcement of fundamental human rights filed by the deputy governor.
After a brief adjournment to rule on the objection, the Chairman of the Panel, Justice Omonuwa, when the panel reconvened, ruled that the panel would continue its investigation as there was no court order foreclosing it.
In his ruling, the chairman of the panel, known in political parlance as “Seven Wise Men,” Justice Omonuwa (Rtd), said that the panel would continue, upholding the submission of the House of Assembly that “no court can stop the panel, especially as there was a court stopping the panel from sitting.” He subsequently asked the House of Assembly to state its case.
Responding to the ruling, Awoyale told the panel that his client would not be able to continue to participate in the investigation and sought the panel’s permission to be excused.
When asked whether he was waving his right to defend his client, the SAN answered in the negative, stressing that parties must obey the court decision and that they should appear before it to show cause. This was just a further probe as to whether he was “arresting the ruling of the panel,” which was answered in the negative by the SAN, who reiterated the need to obey the court, which would be sitting on Monday, April 8, 2024.
The panel therefore asked the House of Assembly to open its case.
In his immediate reaction to the ruling again, Awoyale (SAN) informed the panel of his earlier stance to discontinue participation and sought the nod of the panel to exit the courtroom. He subsequently left with his team. “As we said earlier, we would be unable to continue the proceeding. We seek your Lordship’s indulgence to excuse us. If we continue, that means we are sitting on an appeal over the Abuja High Court,” Awoyale told the panel.
Reacting to the development, Justice Omonuwa (Rtd) said that the exit of the deputy governor’s legal team would not stop the proceeding and reordered the counsel to continue with his case.
Arguing the Assembly’s case, Ohiafi said that the deputy governor breached his oath of office of not to divulge, directly or indirectly, any information brought to his knowledge by virtue of his office when he filed a case against the state government before an Abuja Federal High Court and attached some documents relating to government activities.
Ohiafi argued that by virtue of the case instituted by Shaibu before an Abuja Federal High Court and his depositions herein, where he rendered documents relating to the State Executive Council’s meeting, the deputy governor had violated the Oath of Office he took by Schedule 7 of the constitution.
Such an act, the Assembly counsel submitted, amounted to gross misconduct and was unbecoming of a man in the status of deputy governor. He urged the panel to take cognizance of Section 118 (10) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended, which provides that only the State House of Assembly could determine what constitutes “gross misconduct.”.
The Assembly counsel therefore closed his case by asking the panel to uphold the provisions of the constitution that only the House of Assembly could determine “what constitutes gross misconduct.”
There was no objection as the counsel to Comrade Shaibu, Professor Oladoyin Awoyale (SAN), had earlier taken his leave of the panel on the ground that he could not continue if the parties would not obey the court by appearing before the Abuja Federal High Court, which asked them to appear before it on Monday, April 8, 2024, an argument the panel ruled against.
Delivering his ruling, the Chairman of the panel, Justice Omonuwa (Rtd), adjourned to Thursday, April 4, on the ground that the panel would give the deputy governor and his counsel time to reconsider their stance of not participating in the proceedings of the panel.
TRIBUNE
