Jibrin’s quest to set aside suspension suffers hitches as case is adjourned indefinitely

A suit by the suspended House of Representative whistle-blower, Abdulmumin Jibrin, suffered hitches on Wednesday as the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice John Tsoho, adjourned hearing on the case indefinitely.

Jibrin, a former chairman of the House Committee on Appropriation, in the suit marked 

FHC/ABJ/CS/Bl2/2015 is praying the court to give an order setting aside his suspension and reinstating him to the House of Representatives, following his suspension on September 28, 2016, for 180 legislative days.

He is also seeking for N1billion as damages for his alleged wrongful suspension.

However, Justice Tsoho adjourned hearing on the matter indefinitely, citing appeals filed at the Appeal Court by two members of the House of Representatives, Nicholas Ossai and Orker-Jev Yisa, challenging the judge’s ruling which earlier dismissed their applications to be joined as defendants to Jibrin’s suit.

While Ossai was the chairman of House Committee on Ethics, which recommended Jibrin’s suspension, Yisa was the House member who moved the motion for the suspension of the lawmaker from Kano State.

Reacting to the ruling, Jibrin’s lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), told the judge that the plan by the interested parties was to render the suit “spent and nurgatory” as the suspension which his client sought to challenge would lapse on June 28.

Earlier, Ossai and Yisa had in a stay of proceedings, asked the court to suspend hearing in the suit until the Court of Appeal decided their appeal against the ruling denying them opportunity to be joined in the suit.

When the case came up on Wednesday, the duo’s lawyer, Mr. Hakeem Kareem, informed Justice Tsoho that since the last court session, his clients’ appeal before the Court of Appeal in Abuja had been entered.

He further said that he had also filed a fresh motion for stay of the court’s proceedings before the Court of Appeal and that going by numerous judicial authorities, that Justice Tsoho’s court had been robbed of jurisdiction to continue to conduct proceedings in the case until the Court of Appeal determined the fresh motion for stay before it.

The House of Representatives, and Speaker, Yakubu Dogara’s counsel, Kalu Onuoha, aligned with Kareem’s position.

However, Jibrin’s lawyer, Falana, contended that the judicial authorities cited by the interested parties’ lawyer would only be applicable if the parties pursuing the appeal before the Court of Appeal were parties on record.

He insisted that the court, having in its ruling on April 13, 2017 dismissed their joinder application and described them as “strangers” with no interest to protect in the proceedings, they lacked right to “oust the court of its jurisdiction”.

In spite of other arguments, Justice Tsoho in his ruling, held that Falana’s argument had not shifted the court’s earlier position in its ruling delivered on April 28, to the effect that the constitutional rights of the interested parties to be heard by the Appeal Court outweighed the procedural requirements the SAN was relying on.

Justice Tsoho then struck out the interested parties’ motion for stay of proceedings filed before him to give room for the appeal court to decide on the similar one before it.

Tsoho then ruled, that “This suit is adjourned pending the decision of the Court of Appeal on the motion for stay of proceedings.”

Gsent Talks.....Taking You Further