Impeachment: Aiyedatiwa appeals as court strikes out case

A High Court sitting in Akure, the Ondo State capital, on Tuesday, dismissed a suit filed by the embattled Deputy Governor of the state, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, which challenged his impeachment by the State’s House of Assembly.

Aiyedatiwa had approached the court, with suit number AK/348/2023 filed on September 25, 2023, to stop the House of Assembly from impeaching him.

The deputy governor, who has been at loggerheads with his principal, Governor Rotimi Akeredolu, also sought a declaration that “the House of Assembly is not competent to proceed on his impeachment in breach of his constitutional and fundamental rights to fair hearing and that the sacking of his media aides and subjecting him to the Ministry of Information headed by a Commissioner amounts to a breach of his rights and privileges as a deputy governor.”

He equally sought a declaration that the “office, tenure, status, rights and privileges are protected, guaranteed and secured by the Constitution, and the declaration that in the determination of his civil rights and obligations as a Deputy Governor of Ondo State by the House of Assembly, he is entitled to a fair hearing and that given the utterances and conduct of the House of Assembly so far, there is likelihood of bias against him in the impeachment process.”

Aiyedatiwa decried the media trials against him without serving him with a notice of gross misconduct.

He alleged that the House of Assembly had constituted itself into an accuser, investigator, prosecutor and judge.

Hence, he sought orders of injunction to stop the Assembly from initiating, continuing or proceeding with the process of his removal from office.

However, Justice O. Akintan-Osadebay, in his ruling declined jurisdiction to avoid conflicting verdicts between an Ondo High Court and Abuja Federal High Court.

He ruled that it was a gross abuse of the court process to engage in “forum shopping, by instituting the same case in Akure and Abuja High Court.”

READ ALSO:Ondo Assembly reports judge to NJC for stopping deputy governor Aiyedatiwa’s impeachment

In reaction to the ruling of the Akure High Court, Aiyedatiwa in a Notice of Appeal filed at the registry of the Akure High Court, raised five grounds of appeal against the decision of the judge.

In the appeal, he noted, among others, that the Judge made a mistake in law in combining the hearing of his application for an amendment together with the application of the House of Assembly challenging the jurisdiction of the court, which amounts to a denial of his right to a fair hearing.

He added that the Judge was wrong in holding that the case constitutes an abuse of the process of the court as the parties and the subject matter of the case in Akure are different from those of the case in Abuja.

The Deputy Governor, therefore, requested that the Court of Appeal set aside the ruling of the Judge.

Nonetheless, the Counsel to Aiyedatiwa, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, in a statement, claimed that the order of the Federal High Court Abuja remained in force.

Adegboruwa said: “It has become necessary to emphasize the fact that the order of the Federal High Court, Abuja made on September 26, 2023, remains in force, valid and subsisting.

“The various orders of injunction were made pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice. The motion on notice is still pending.

“It is not correct that an order of the federal high court automatically expires after 14 days.

“This may be the case if the judge that granted the order did not direct otherwise.

“In this case, the judge directed otherwise by stating that the order will be in force until the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

“Furthermore, there are two applications filed by the defendants in the suit against the orders of the court. One is by the Governor of Ondo State to set aside the orders, while the other is by the Ondo House of Assembly to stay the execution of the orders.

“In law, an ex-parte order made pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice remains in force, valid, binding and subsisting until the said motion on notice is heard and determined.”

Join the conversation

Opinions

Support Ripples Nigeria, hold up solutions journalism

Balanced, fearless journalism driven by data comes at huge financial costs.

As a media platform, we hold leadership accountable and will not trade the right to press freedom and free speech for a piece of cake.

If you like what we do, and are ready to uphold solutions journalism, kindly donate to the Ripples Nigeria cause.

Your support would help to ensure that citizens and institutions continue to have free access to credible and reliable information for societal development.

Donate Now