The defendants challenge the court’s jurisdiction and want the lawsuit dismissed

0
38

He Ekiti State Assembly has challenged the jurisdiction of the state high court to hear a lawsuit brought by its former president, Olugboyega Arbisogan, against his impeachment.

The Assembly urged the court to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that Mr. Arbisogan failed to join the relevant parties in the lawsuit.

Mr. Arbisogan was indicted on November 21 for allegedly blocking passage of the 2022 Supplemental Appropriation Bill, disparaging the House in the media, causing discontent among lawmakers, and compromising the security of the Assembly Complex, among other things. accusations.

However, he questioned the impeachment trial as offensive to the Constitution and current House rules.

The defendants in the lawsuit are the Assembly, its Secretary and the new Speaker, Olubunmi Adelugba (3rd).

In their response, they filed a Preliminary Notice of Objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the matter.

The defendants’ lawyer, Rafiu Balogun, filed the notice with the court clerk on Monday, anchored in 11 grounds and supported by a written address.

In the notice, the defendants said the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case because “there is no competent source summons that can be heard by the court.”

They said that Mr. Arbisogan’s failure to name the seven Assembly members who allegedly unlawfully accused him and join them as parties to the lawsuit rendered the case incompetent and also denied the court jurisdiction to hear the case. business.

They also mentioned that he did not join former Governor Kayode Fayemi, whom he accused of instigating lawmakers to impeach him; the police and their state commissioner, the Assembly Sergeant-at-Arms, and others the plaintiff described as “powers that be.”

READ ALSO:   Akeredolu assigns portfolios to new commissioners, redeploys three others

They also said that the Affidavit in Support of the Citation of Origin consisted of extraneous facts that are contrary to the provisions of Section 115 of the Evidence Act 2011 (as amended), adding that “once the offending paragraphs are removed , there is nothing to support the original call”.

According to the defendants, the case, as currently constituted, failed to disclose any cause of action or reasonable action, while the Affidavit in Support of the Initial Summons is “devoid of salient facts to support Plaintiff’s case.”

They also held that the claim was speculative at best, the documents lacking the necessary details to support the Claimant’s case against the provisions of Ekiti State High Court Rule 2021 Order 8 ( Civil Procedure).

Defendants further argued in Notice with motion number: HAD/74M/2023 that “there can be no valid source citation without a competent supporting affidavit, a fortiori, there is no valid source citation before this Honorable Court.”

“The criminal complaints and the damning complaints formed the core and substratum of Claimant’s case,” it said.

“The proper parties are not before the court, which robs this Honorable Court of the jurisdiction required to hear this matter as it is currently constituted.

“We urge the Court to determine whether the paragraphs of the Affidavit in Support of Origination that contain criminal/damaging allegations against some persons in authority who do not join as Defendants cannot be struck down or disapproved and whether this case can be resolved without them. becoming parties, in order not to violate their right to a fair hearing since the pronouncement of the Court will affect them in one way or another.

READ ALSO:   NAPTIP rescues 35 victims of human trafficking in Kano

“The Summons of Origin in the present case is not supported with sufficient particularities and outstanding facts and whose irregularity and non-compliance is fatal and will render the case null and void. We reiterate that there is no competent Citation of Origin capable of being known by this Honorable Court.

ALSO READ: Police blockade the Ekiti Assembly building a day after the election of the new president

“We submit that if the offending paragraphs are removed, there will be no factual requirements to support the Source Citation. In other words, the case unquestionably reveals no cause of action and the Source Citation without the Supporting Affidavit containing the required details is incompetent and liable to be struck out.

“We urge Your Honor to settle this issue against the Plaintiff and dismiss the lawsuit. We urge the Court to resolve all issues in favor of Defendants and to quash or dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction or jurisdiction over the matter.”

The court has scheduled a new hearing on the matter for Wednesday.

Read More Related News Here

Let here it in the comment below if you do have an opinion on this; The defendants challenge the court’s jurisdiction and want the lawsuit dismissed