NewsCrimeJudicial OpinionJudiciary

CHIEF JUDGE OF FEDERAL HIGH COURT BOWS TO TRANSPORTATION MINISTER, RE-ASSIGNS CONTRACT DISPUTE SUIT AGAINST AMAECHI TO ANOTHER JUDGE.

CHIEF JUDGE OF FEDERAL HIGH COURT BOWS TO TRANSPORTATION MINISTER, RE-ASSIGNS CONTRACT DISPUTE SUIT AGAINST AMAECHI TO ANOTHER JUDGE.

There are strong indications, that the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho has reversed himself in his earlier rejection of the request of  the Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi for the transfer of a case pending against him to a new judge for hearing during Easter vacation.

In a letter dated April 7, 2022, written by his Special Assistant to the Chief Judge, Ambrose Unaeze rejected Amaechi’s request for a suit transfer which he made in a March 31, 2022 letter through his lawyer, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN).

However, in a fresh letter dated April 14, 2022 Justice Tsoho overruled himself and agreed to transfer part of the case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1587/2021 to a new Judge.

In the case a civil society organization  is challenging Amaechi’s handling of the process for the award of contract for operators of Nigeria’s International Cargo Tracking Note (ICTN) to a new judge.

In the suit, a  group, the Citizens Advocacy for Social and Economic Rights (CASER) instituted the suit against Amaechi, accusing him of manipulating the contract process in favour of two local and inexperienced firms – Medtech Scientific Limited and Rozi International Nigeria Limited.

A report says on December 17, 2021, following an ex parte application by CASER, the court restrained parties in the matter  from taking any further steps in relation to the appointment of operators of the ICTN (an electronic cargo verification system that monitors the shipments of seaborne cargoes and enables a real-time generation of vital data on ships and cargo traffic in and out of Nigeria).

However,  on March 23, 2022 the plaintiff his  lawyer, Abdulhakeem Mustapha (SAN) reported to the court presided over by Justice Donatus Okorowo that Amaechi had allegedly violated the court’s order of December 17,  prompting the judge to endorse filing of contempt charge against the Transportation  Minister.

Justice Okorowo also directed the suspension of proceedings in the substantive suit for hearing of contempt charge against Amaechi and fixed May 9 for ruling in a joinder application and commencement of contempt proceeding.

Rather than wait till the May 9, Amaechi, through his lawyer, wrote the March 31 letter, claiming utmost urgency, among others and requested that the case against him be reassigned to the court’s vacation judge for urgent hearing.

Responding, Justice Tsoho in the April 7 letter, declined the request, stating: “I am to inform you that there have been counter posturing regarding the re-assignment or otherwise of this matter.

“It is discerned that arguments were heard by Justice D.U Okorowo on 23rd March, 2022 in respect of alleged contempt and ruling scheduled for 9th May, 2022. It will hence be disruptive to contemplate a re-assignment of this matter.

“Besides, the Easter vacation is for two weeks and there is no guarantee that the vacation Judge can gain any appreciable ground as to convey an advantage over the regular Court in terms of hearing of the suit.

In the light of this, the Chief Judge declined the application.”

In another development,  following another letter by Ameachi’s lawyer, dated April 13, 2022, Justice Tsoho changed his mind and agreed that a portion of the suit be reassigned to the court’s vacation judge.

Justice Tsoho’s fresh letter, dated: April 14, written by his SA (Unaeze) in response to Amaechi’s new letter, reads: “I am directed by the Hon. Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to refer to your letter of 13th April, 2022 in respect of the above subject matter.

“Having considered the responses as per your letters dated 13th April 2022, 1st April, 2022 respectively, it is noted as follows: that there is presently no indication of any proper or formal application for contempt proceedings.

“The filing of Form 48 per se does not amount to a contempt application or committal proceedings, in the absence of Form 49 with evidence of the alleged contemnor’s disobedience obtained after service of Form 48.

“Therefore, in view of the extreme urgency emphasised with regard to the matter, there is good basis for referring the pending applications to be heard during the Easter vacation.

The letter maintained that “consequently, our letter dated 7 April, 2022 is cancelled. The pending notice of preliminary objection and the application for joinder in the suit (but not the suit itself) are reassigned to the vacation court for determination.

In a swift reaction, CASER, the plaintiff in the suit has expressed reservation about Justice Tsoho’s latest decision to have the case partially transferred to a new judge.

In a statement in Abuja, Executive Director of CASER, Frank Tietie, argued that it was impossible for Justice Tsoho’s decision to ensure justice in the case.

It said: “Thus, the directive that only the preliminary objection be heard by a  vacation court leaving the main suit is aimed, in our opinion, at terminating the suit without the court adjudicating on the real issues of corruption and incompetence of the companies, as it should be.

According to him, “We strongly believe that the latest directive of the Chief Judge to transfer the suit as impressed on him by counsel to the Minister of Transportation,  when there is no real urgency, is but just a self-serving one that is not in any way in the interest of Nigeria’s national security, thereby endangering the peace and welfare of Nigerians.

He stated further that “We believe that the course of the administration of justice should run smoothly without any undue pressure and influence.

CASER concluded that “To this end, we are very uncomfortable with the latest directive of the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court that a suit that is due to be heard in less than one month be transferred to a vacation judge for reasons which he had earlier considered to be highly untenable.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Back to top button