|
By Dayo Johnson
Wednesday, August 25, 2004
AKURE — FORMER governor of Ondo state, Chief Adebayo Adefarati yesterday dragged the commission of inquiry set up by the state government to investigate contract worth N20b to court challenging its constitutionality. He declared that the commission set up by the state governor, Dr Olusegun Agagu contravenes section 128 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic Nigeria.
Chief Adefarati, through his counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, in a suit filed at the Akure High court said that the commission lacked the constitutional power to look into the spending of classified security votes of his administration. The immediate past governor is seeking the court to declare the constitution of the commission as illegal, null and void.
He pointed out that the commission has no jurisdiction to inquire into the award of contracts entered into between the state government and other parties with specific provision for reference to arbitration in case of any dispute or disagreement.
Arguing further, Chief Adefarati said that the law that empowered Dr Agagu to set up commission of inquiry had become obsolete considering the provision of section 315 of the 1999 constitution.
In the suit, Chief Adefarati argued that the powers purportedly vested in the defendant, Dr Agagu by the commission of inquiry law, cap 25, volume 1, laws of Ondo state 1978, were still relevant based on the clear and superior provision of section 128 and/or 129 of the 1999 constitution.
The commission of inquiry vested with wide coercive and compulsive power, he alleged, was in breach and violation of his fundamental right as enshrined under chapter 4 of the 1999 constitution and therefore null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
Joined as co-defendant in the suit, include, Dr Agagu as 1st defendant, the Attorney General and Justice Commissioner, Hon Isaac Kekemeke, the commission of enquiry, its chairman, Justice Williams Akintoroye, other members and the secretary.
Part of the relief sought by the plaintiff include the instrument issued by the 1st defendant on July 6, 2004 constituting a commission of inquiry comparing the defendants in invalid, incompetent, illegal and unconstitutional.
|
