|
Ibori: IG faces
contempt charge
By Tony Eluemunor
and Rotimi Fadeyi (Abuja)
Failure of the police
to produce vital documents, particularly the interim police report which cleared
Delta State Governor James Onanefe Ibori of the allegation of conviction by the
Bwari Upper Area Court on September 28, 1995, again stalled proceedings on
Tuesday at the Abuja High Court.
The Inspector General
of Police (IG) Tafa Balogun now faces contempt charges over the matter.
Justice Hussein
Mukhtar has ordered that the July 28 order asking the police to produce the
document and form 48 (notice of consequence of disobedience to court order) be
served on the IG through substituted service by publication in two national
newspapers.
Ibori’s lead
counsel Paul Milton Ohwovoriole has also filed a motion asking the court to
restrain Balogun from publishing in the newspapers documents relating to the
case, particularly the Police Final Report on the investigation carried out on
the case.
But the police,
through their counsel Wole Aina, have filed a counter affidavit challenging the
motion, saying there was a publication in newspapers by the IG denying that the
publication emanated from him or his office.
One of Ibori’s
lawyers who led the defence on Tuesday, Alex Izinyon said he would like to
reply to the counter affidavit and asked for an adjournment to enable him
prepare it.
Before the judge fixed
further hearing for October 4, he said although the parties are anxious for a
speedy dispensation of justice, he stressed that the process should not be rushed.
“In as much as
undue delay should be avoided, it would be better to grant an adjournment than
to rush and overspeed the wheel of justice. One more adjournment will be
granted”, he said.
Tuesday’s
proceedings began at 9 a.m. as usual. Aina was the first to address the court
after the case was called.
He said: “May I
crave the indulgence of the court that the motion dated September 13 be dealt
with, we are not parties to the case brought here. We were brought here to be
reprimanded. It is either the motion was withdrawn in view of our counter
affidavit or we deal with the matter now so that we can go”.
Izinyon countered:
“The fact is that we have fundamental issues to be trashed out, we have
just been served with the counter motion and we will need time to reply before
moving the main motion so that my learned friend can go. He (Aina) raised some
issues, documents and exhibits were attached, we intend to react”.
In his own
presentation, plaintiffs’ counsel Gani Fawehinmi, told the judge:
“My lord, this proceeding is being diverted by the 4th defendant because
we are no longer on the main issue before the court. The Supreme Court ordered
that we should identify who was convicted not the conviction at all.
“All the
documents asked by the 4th defendant do not point to identity. We are on an
expedition course. It is a fishing expedition. The court should take firm
control of the situation, we need to be on course”.
Izinyon did not take
this lightly. He told the court: “My learned friend has derailed and he
should be told”.
Before Izinyon could
finish his submission, Gani said: “There is no reason for the police
counsel to go, we want to clear irrelevances. They should be made to proceed.
The IG is not a party in the matter nor is he a witness. It is not a personal
matter to IG but official matter”.
In his reply, Izinyon
said it was sad that Gani was “playing the role of counsel to the police,
plaintiffs and the defendants. We file an innocuous application and the court
must not be carried away by sentiments”.
At this point, Mukhtar
ruled that court will like to see the relevant papers filed in respect of the
motion for injunction against the police and the counter affidavit which had
been filed and reply needed. “If it is relevant to the proceeding the
respondent is given right to file necessary papers so that fundamental rights
are not denied”.
Izinyon explained:
“I filed a motion dated September 13 because while proceeding was going
on, while order of court was still subsisting, which subpoena on IG was still
subsisting, there was a press release from police claiming that it has released
the final report, the court is bound by its records.
“The DCP who has
been appearing many times insist that what he has is final report and not
interim report. The ruling of the court is that the police should produce the
interim report dated February 14, 2003. Can there be a press release on the
matter?.
“This is not a
customary court or area court. If there are things that would derail the
administration of justice or colour proceedings it is our duty to bring before
the court such conduct. That is why we brought the application. One is in
respect of injunction to restrain him (IG) from publishing press releases while
suit was pending”.
At the court session
on Tuesday, Gani diverted from the
issue at hand and criticised the government of President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Gani who had teamed up
with the police against Ibori later disagreed with its counsel. By 10am
confusion hit the team as Gani began to disagree with Aina who was appearing
for the IG.
At issue was the next
date on which the hearing could be adjourned to. Was October 11 okay by Gani?
Aina, who was in a
hurry to leave the court, had no problem with the date but Gani interjected
that the country would be shut down that day by a strike threatened by the
Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC).
Aina: “There can
be no strike. I represent the inspector general of police. I can assure you
that nothing can happen on the 11th.
Fawehinmi: “It’s not government’s business
to tell the masses of this country what to do”. Certainly on the 11th,
Nigerian workers are going to resist this bad government. This stubborn,
obdurate, moribund, wicked government that is not ready to give the citizens of
this country water, light, food …. This is not the strike that can be
influenced by Ghana Must Go bag. That era is gone”.
|
