Alleged right breach: Your suit is incompetent, Tinubu, Fagbemi tell lawyer 

 President Bola Tinubu on Monday prayed a Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a suit seeking his removal for being incompetent.

President Tinubu and Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Attorney-General of the Federation, in a joint preliminary objection, also argued that the plaintiff, Olukoya Ogungbeje, had failed to disclose any cause of action against them.

They told the court to alternatively strike out the suit as Ogungbeje, a legal practitioner, lacked the locus standi (legal right)!to institute the suit.

The president and the AGF, in the application filed by Sanusi Musa, SAN, also prayed the court for “an order striking out this suit in limine on the ground that this honourable court lacks jurisdiction to entertain same, 

“An order striking out this suit for being incompetent as this suit is not initiated by due process of law having been initiated under a wrong procedure.”

• Much Huffing without puffing, who will get Seyi Makinde’s tourism template off the doldrums? by Ola Emmanuel
• Alleged right breach: Your suit is incompetent, Tinubu, Fagbemi tell lawyer 
• Edo election tribunal: INEC tenders additional BVAS machines as PDP closes case
• Edo election tribunal: Our case against APC is documentary based, PDP chair 
• Routine to join ruling party, by Eric Teniola

Giving 18-ground of arguments, the duo submitted that the plaintiff’s question one for determination is in respect of alleged breach of fundamental right of non-disclosed Nigerians. 

They said that by the provision of Section 46 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), only the person whose right is breached has the locus to file an action before the court for redress. 

“Pursuant to the provision of Section 46 (3), the Chief Justice of Nigeria has {brought into being the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 which makes ample provision of the procedure to follow in filing an action with respect to breach of the Fundamental Rights of any Nigerian.” 

They said the plaintiff’s questions two and three for determination are in respect of the alleged breach of the 1999 Constitution by the 1st defendant (president) vis-a-vis Section 143 of the said constitution. 

According to them, in the instant case, the plaintiff has not disclosed any breach of his fundamental right by the defendants, among other arguments.

They, therefore, urged the court to discountenance the suit. 

Also in a counter affidavit deposed to by Gbenga Oladimeji, a Principal State Counsel, Federal Ministry of Justice, he averred that contrary to Ogungbeje’s depositions, the present government under President Tinubu had been a promoter of democratic tenets.

Besides, he said the president had been allowing people to air their grievances and conduct peaceful protest. 

“I know as a fact that the protest conducted between 1st August, 2024 and 10th August, 2024 was peaceful, as there was a Court Order limiting the protesters to demonstrate within a confined location,” he said.

Oladimeji said during the period of the protest, the security agents under the control of the president were present to protect the protesters from any acts of hijack by hoodlums and to achieve a peaceful protest.

“I know as a fact that the 1st defendant (the president) has always ensured that law and order are adhered to strictly by the security agencies and institutions of the arm of government,” he said 

“Contrary to the deposition in paragraph 26 of the Affidavit in support of the Originating Summons, I know as a fact that the 1st defendant has not violated any provision of his oath of office and allegiance. 

“There has been no breach on his part that would warrant his impeachment from office as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” he said.

 Ogungbeje had, in the originating summons marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1334/2024, sued the President, Federal Republic of Nigeria and AGF as 1st and 2nd defendants.

In the suit dated August 28, 2024 and filed on September 4, 2024, the lawyer sought six reliefs.

The plaintiff prayed the court for an order compelling the National Assembly to initiate impeachment proceedings against President Bola over alleged fundamental rights violation.

He said the National Assembly is guaranteed by Section 143 of the Constitution to immediately initiate and set machinery in motion for impeachment proceedings.

He sought a declaration that the alleged persistent suppression of peaceful protests organised by Nigerian citizens from the 1st of August, 2024 to the 10th of August, 2024 constituted a gross misconduct to ground impeachment proceedings against the 1st defendant.

When the matter was called on Monday, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Stanley Okonmah, said he was served with the defendants’ preliminary objection and a counter affidavit on January 30. 

Okonmah, therefore, sought an adjournment to enable him respond to the applications appropriately.

Musa, who represented the defendants, did not object and Justice Omotosho adjourned the matter until March 4 for hearing.