Ebonyi lawmakers challenge court’s jurisdiction to hear defection suit

The Speaker of the Ebonyi House of Assembly, Francis Nwifuru and 16 other lawmakers have challenged the hearing of their defection suit before the Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reported that Justice Inyang Ekwo had fixed March 8 for judgment in a suit, praying the court to sack Governor David Umahi and lawmakers who defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the state.

Mr Nwifuru and his colleagues, in November 2020, defected from the PDP, alongside the governor, for the APC.

The PDP had filed a suit before Justice Ekwo, urging the court to declare the lawmakers’ seats vacant on account of an alleged violation of Nigeria’s constitutional provision that forbids defection without justifiable reasons.

The party also filed a separate suit to challenge Mr Umahi’s defection.

Governor Umahi had attributed his defection to the “injustice” done by the PDP to the South-east region of the country.

NAN reported that the PDP is praying the court to make a declaration that by defecting from the party on which the speaker and his colleagues were sponsored and elected as members of the Ebonyi House of Assembly, they have resigned or deemed to have resigned from office.

But, in their preliminary objection, the lawmakers, through their lawyer, Chukwuma-Machukwu Ume, SAN, contested the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter.

Mr Ume argued that the defendants, comprising the lawmakers and the APC, as well as the Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) “are desirous of this suit being transferred to the Federal High Court” in Abakaliki, Ebonyi State, on the ground that “all the parties either work or reside” in the state.

He said the hearing of the suit in Abuja would cause great inconvenience as well as occasion great financial loss to the defendants.

Citing civil procedure rules in the application filed on January 26, the lawyer said, “By virtue of Section 22(1) of the Federal High Court Act, this court has the power to transfer a suit to any other judge of the court.”

He further contended that, “By virtue of Order 2 Rule 1(3) of the Federal High Court (civil procedure) Rules 2019, a suit should be commenced and determined in the judicial division in which the defendant resides or carries on substantial part of his business or in which the cause of action arose.”

A commissioner in Ebonyi, Joseph Ekumankama, in an affidavit in support of a motion on notice, questioning the court’s jurisdiction in Abuja to hear and determine the suit, said the defendants had filed several requests, seeking the transfer of the suit to the Federal High Court, Abakaliki.

Mr Ekumankama referred to the January 19 proceedings of the court, where Justice Ekwo “lumped the hearing and determination of the applicants’ motion on notice and all their other applications questioning the various aspects of the jurisdiction of the court.

He argued further that the defendants’ applications touched on both the “territorial, cause of action and constitutional jurisdiction of the court.”

The deponent recalled the filing of a similar suit by the PDP and Fred Udeogu on July 26, 2021, in which they challenged the defendants’ defection to the APC.

Mr Ekumankama said the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, John Tsoho, in September 2021, transferred the said suit to the Abakaliki division of the court.

According to him, the cumulative effect of the refusal and failure to have transferred this suit as was done in the plaintiff’s earlier suit no: FHC/ABJ/CS/729/2021, is an act of discrimination.

In the affidavit dated January 25, the Ebonyi commissioner said, “These founded lack of confidence” by the defendants in “this proceeding is certainly vitiating this Hon Court of its inherent and absolute authority jurisdiction over the 2nd to 20th defendants/applicants.”

He pointed out that it would “occasion a miscarriage of justice for the court to determine the issue of transfer of this suit as well as the judgment on the merit or otherwise of the suit simultaneously, instead, the ruling should be on a different day, well separated from the day for hearing in the main suit.”

Similarly, the defendants’ lead counsel argued that Mr Umahi was sworn-in by the Ebonyi chief judge and not by the chief judge of the Federal High Court. Therefore, his removal from office could only be pursued through the state House of Assembly and High Court.

NAN reported that the governor and his deputy had approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja, seeking interpretation of some constitutional issues arising from the suit filed by the PDP.

The applicants, in their motion urged the appellate court to restore the powers of the state high courts.

They argued that only courts clothed with the exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the question as to whether the term of office of a member of the house of assembly of a state, a governor or deputy governor has ceased or become vacant.

(NAN)