…Imo, Bauchi, Osun, Taraba in, as Anambra, Adamawa, Ebonyi Withdraw
By Uche Onyeali
Supreme Court yesterday reserved judgement in the suit filed by 19 states challenging the constitutionality of the laws establishing the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and two others, to a date to be communicated to the parties.
Plaintiffs in the suit marked SC/CV/178/2023 had argued that the Supreme Court, in Dr Joseph Nwobike Vs Federal Republic of Nigeria, held that it was a UN Convention against corruption that was reduced into the EFCC Establishment Act and that in enacting this law in 2004, the provisions of Section 12 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, was not followed.
They argued that in bringing a convention into the Nigerian law, the provisions of Section 12 must be complied with.
The argument of the states in their present suit is that the law, as enacted, could not be applied to states that never approved of it, in accordance with the provisions of the constitution.
They argued that any institution so formed should be regarded as illegal.
At the resumed hearing yesterday, Imo, Bauchi and Osun States joined the suit as co-plaintiffs, while Anambra, Ebonyi and Adamawa States announced the withdrawal of their suits.
Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), who was present in court as the defendant, had craved the court’s indulgence to take the process they filed yesterday morning.
Justice Uwani Abba-Aji granted leave to the defendant to use the reply on point of law filed yesterday.
Mohammed Abdulwahab (SAN), who appeared for the first plaintiff, pointed out that the amended processes filed by the AGF were different from what had initially been filed, noting that he had to refile his processes to answer to the fresh issues and facts.
The old processes were therefore struck out.
“I seek Your Lordship’s indulgence to adopt the processes. We urge you to grant all the reliefs sought.
“The crux of our suit is the decision of this court. The counsel that represented the appellant in that suit by the rules of Court Order 4, will be called to address this court. He participated in the bill that birthed the EFCC and ICPC,” he said.
The judge asked who the counsel was and Wahab replied, “Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN).
“Chief Agabi told this court that it was the Convention of the UN that reduced this into law. Section 12 was never followed.
“This fact was not an issue with the case of AG Ondo Vs AG Federation. So there is a specific provision for bringing a convention in. You cannot just be talking about Items 7 of 8.
“We are also challenging the foundation of those laws that created NIFU, EFCC, etc in order not to create a constitutional crisis.
“We urge you to allow our appeal and award heavy cost in favour of the plaintiff on record,” the counsel said.
Responding, Fagbemi contended that the case of AG Ondo v. AG Federation and other decisions had already settled all the issues raised in the plaintiffs’ case and that the Supreme Court could not depart from those decisions. He therefore prayed that the suit be dismissed.
On AG Ekiti State Vs AGF, counsel for the defendant, T. A Gazali (SAN) pointed out that the state was not represented at the last sitting and was not represented yesterday.
The Attorney-General of Osun State, Oluwole Jimi-Bada (SAN) informed the court of their application for consolidation of the suit with Kogi State.
The judge, however, said the interesting thing about the case was that they were already part of the matter.
Justice Abba-Aji reserved judgement for a date to be communicated to the parties.
Yesterday, the number of states challenging the constitutionality of the EFCC and others rose to 19, including Kogi, despite the withdrawal of three states.
The court ruled that the judgment on Kogi would be applied to Ogun, Nasarawa and Osun States that had earlier applied for consolidation.
