 |
| Cattle |
Human rights lawyer, Malcomn Omirhobo, has filed a suit at the Federal High Court, Abuja, against the Federal Government to stop it from disbursing the N100 billion promised the Myetti Allah by the Ministry of Interior.
Omirhobo, who sued in the name of the board of incorporated trustees of Malcom Omirhobo Foundation, in an ex-parte, urged the court to hold that the Federal Government or the Ministry of Interior has no constitutional right to release money without recourse to budgetary allocation.
In the suit, which came in form of originating summon, filed before Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, Omirhobo said that kind of money could go a long way in building schools, roads or even distributed among indigent Nigerians to start up small businesses.
The suit, which has the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), the Minister of Interior, the National Assembly, the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and Accountant-General of the Federation as the first to seventh respondents, was brought in pursuant to Order 3 rules 6, 7, and 9 of the High Court (Civil Procedure, Rules 2009.)
Also, in a similar case, Omirhobo, in an originating summon in suit No. 564/2019 (seeking to restrain the revocation of shot-gun licence), asked the court for an interlocutory injunction to halt the revocation of gun licence by President Muhammadu Buhari, submitting that the President has no such power under the Constitution.
He said it was in public interest that Nigerians should hold on to their guns to defend themselves.
Justice Ojukwu, in a short ruling at the hearing, held that the exhibits contained in the averments in both suits were weighty, hence the need to hear from the defendants.
The court ruled that due to the weighty nature of the averments, the defendants be put on notice to show cause why the reliefs sought should not be granted.
She held that the country’s resources could not be allotted unnecessarily, hence the need for the Federal Government to come to court and explain why the plaintiff’s application should not be granted.
On the revocation of gun licences, the judge said for the interest of justice, the law must be held.
Consequently, she adjourned the two suits to September 30, 2019 for hearing of the motion on notice and originating summons.
In this article:
Omirhobo, who sued in the name of the board of incorporated trustees of Malcom Omirhobo Foundation, in an ex-parte, urged the court to hold that the Federal Government or the Ministry of Interior has no constitutional right to release money without recourse to budgetary allocation.
In the suit, which came in form of originating summon, filed before Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, Omirhobo said that kind of money could go a long way in building schools, roads or even distributed among indigent Nigerians to start up small businesses.
The suit, which has the Federal Government of Nigeria, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), the Minister of Interior, the National Assembly, the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and Accountant-General of the Federation as the first to seventh respondents, was brought in pursuant to Order 3 rules 6, 7, and 9 of the High Court (Civil Procedure, Rules 2009.)
Also, in a similar case, Omirhobo, in an originating summon in suit No. 564/2019 (seeking to restrain the revocation of shot-gun licence), asked the court for an interlocutory injunction to halt the revocation of gun licence by President Muhammadu Buhari, submitting that the President has no such power under the Constitution.
He said it was in public interest that Nigerians should hold on to their guns to defend themselves.
Justice Ojukwu, in a short ruling at the hearing, held that the exhibits contained in the averments in both suits were weighty, hence the need to hear from the defendants.
The court ruled that due to the weighty nature of the averments, the defendants be put on notice to show cause why the reliefs sought should not be granted.
She held that the country’s resources could not be allotted unnecessarily, hence the need for the Federal Government to come to court and explain why the plaintiff’s application should not be granted.
On the revocation of gun licences, the judge said for the interest of justice, the law must be held.
Consequently, she adjourned the two suits to September 30, 2019 for hearing of the motion on notice and originating summons.
In this article: