Daily Independent Online.
*
Thursday, July 08, 2004.
Court declares Ngige’s resignation letter null, void
By Okey Maduforo
Correspondent,
Awka
Two
days to the first anniversary of the foiled attempt to unseat Anambra State
Governor Chris Ngige, the Abuja Federal High Court has ruled that his purported
letter of resignation of July 9 last year is a false document. It declared the letter null and void.
The
suit was brought by Emeka Okeke and four others seeking a declaration that the
letter of resignation made by and from the governor is effective, binding and
subsisting to confirm and validate the content.
But
Justice S.J. Adah ruled that with effect from July 9, 2003 Ngige had been and
still remains Governor.
He
ruled that the proceedings of the Anambra State Assembly, dated July 14, 2003,
whereby the Assembly vacated its proceedings of July 10, 2003 are valid and
constitutional.
A
declaration that the Assembly proceedings purporting to accept the alleged
letter of resignation “are invalid and protanto null and void and of no
effect whatsoever,” he said.
Earlier,
in an affidavit in support of the amended originating summons, the judge noted
that issues were joined by the parties and thereafter the 1st and 2nd and 3rd
defendants, through their counsel, U.N. Udechukwu. Attorney General of Anambra
State, in a motion on notice raised objection to the hearing of the matter
“on grounds that the suit is incompetent and that the court lacks
jurisdiction and secondly, that the suit is an abuse of court process”.
Also,
the judge added, “counsel for the 5th, 6th and 7th defendants associated
himself with this submission and urged the court to dismiss the suit. Counsel
for the 3rd defendant was also in support of the submission that the present
suit is all abuse of the process”.
But
in his reply, counsel for the plaintiffs/respondents, on the issue of abuse,
urged the court to dismiss the objection, insisting that there has be shown
clearly that there are two or more actions between the same parties in respect
of the subject matter in one or more courts at the same time.
He
argued that a judgment of a court only binds the parties involved and that the
decision of the court in Anambra State cannot bind this court. He urged the
court to dismiss the objection.
The judge explained that the other issue
canvassed in the objection is the issue of competence of the action, adding
that one of the angles canvassed by the parties is that of the immunity of the
1st defendant under the Constitution.
