A High Court sitting in Doma Local Government Area of Nasarawa State has extended its order restraining the Peoples Democratic Party from conducting its congresses in the state.
The News Agency of Nigeria recalls the court on September 27, 2024 gave the restraining order following a motion filed by 16 plaintiffs.
The 16 plaintiffs are members of the PDP led by Senator Mohammed Ogoshi-Onawo (PDP-Nasarawa South).
The plaintiffs filed a case against PDP (first respondent), Francis Orogu, PDP Chairman (second respondent) and the State Working Committee of the party (third respondent).
Justice Abdullahi Shams-Shammah extended the order in his ruling on Thursday after listening to arguments from the counsels to the plaintiffs and respondents.
Also Read:
- Lagos seals church, others over noise pollution
- Lagos Women Run: Turnout excites organisers as more foreign runners arrive today
- Dangote, a pillar of strength for Nigeria’s industrial growth -LCCI
- Import licence: Oil marketers ask court to dismiss Dangote Refinery’s suit
- Oyebanji mourns death of COAS, General Lagbaja
He extended the order and adjourned the case to October 8 for continuation of hearing.
Earlier, Counsel to the plaintiffs, Ishaka Mudi-Diko (SAN), urged the court to extend the restraining order.
The counsel to the plaintiffs had also informed the court that the respondents had gone ahead to conduct ward congresses in the state in violation of the subsisting restraining order.
Mudi-Diko argued that the court should nullify the ward congresses conducted by the respondents for violating its order.
On his part, Jacob Nzamanah, Counsel to the first respondent, acknowledged that four notices regarding the ex-parte order were affixed to the walls of the office of his client.
The counsel argued that his client had not been served with the originating processes, hence the court lacked jurisdiction to continue with the matter.
On the other hand, Daniel Obande, Counsel to the second and third respondents, said that his inability to file a memorandum for appearance was due to lack of service of court documents on his clients.
He requested that the court should adjourn the case to allow them adequate time to respond.