Court to hear NNPCL staff cooperative society leadership dispute Nov 8

Justice Charles Agbaza of High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, sitting at Maitama, Abuja, on Thursday, adjourned further hearing in the case brought before the court on the leadership crisis rocking the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) Staff Multipurpose Cooperative Society to November 8.

Four aggrieved members of the cooperative society, Eze Onwuneme; Chamberlin Ajagba; Alhaji Ibrahim Yakubu and Bello Mohammed Garba, brought the case, marked: FCTHC/ABJ/CV/260/2024, before the court.

The four applicants joined Engineer Josiah Gbemi Omole; Udo Iboro; Ituah Aikhena; Osondu Ibeji; Farouk Achimugu; Prince Etuwewe; Nura Bello; Micheal Adejoh; Sambo Abdulaziz; Vincent Orji; Saint Kamvene; Braimoh Sunday Joseph and Galadima Immanuel as defendants/respondents.

Other defendants in the case are Engineer Iliya Yusuf; Musa Garba Abubakar and the NNPC Ltd Staff Multipurpose Cooperative Society.

When the matter was called, the counsel for the applicants, Ibrahim George SAN, had told the court that the day’s proceeding was slated for the determination of who is the actual counsel representing the 16th respondent, the NNPCL Staff Multipurpose Cooperative Society.

Two counsels, Ibrahim Idris SAN and Andrew Eche had earlier announced appearances for the cooperative society, with each claiming being briefed and mobilised to represent the 16th defendant in the matter.

There were arguments and counterargument from both counsels on who is the authentic counsel for the society.

However, the day’s proceeding could not go on further as the counsel for the Director in charge of Human Resources Department of the NNPCL, Mrs Fatima Yakubu, Kehinde Ogunwumiju SAN, informed the court that he was only served the contempt process against his client on Wednesday and by law he has to reply within seven days and therefore asked for an adjournment.

Counsel for the 14th respondent, Oladele Gbadeyan, also told the court that he was only served with the process on Wednesday.

Following this, Justice Agbaza adjourned to Friday, November 8 and held that on that day, the court would hear all the motions filed, including the one by the first to 15th defendants, asking him to recuse himself from the matter.

The defendants, through their team of lawyers led by Ibrahim Idris SAN, is asking the judge to recuse himself, insisting they were not comfortable in his ability to resolve the leadership dispute objectively.

They alleged that some of the interim orders the judge made in the matter reflected his bias against them.

According to their application, “The defendants, on whose behalf the instant application is brought, have lost total and complete faith and confidence in the ability of the presiding judge in this matter to continue to entertain this suit and serve justice without bias.

“The conduct of the presiding judge during the hearing of this suit, and particularly judging from the nature of the orders of the presiding judge so far in the suit, it only points to one impeachable conclusion that the defendants are not likely to access justice in this honourable court hence the request that the presiding judge recuse himself from further presiding over this suit.”

The defendants, who hinged their motion on Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), submitted that on October 3, when there was a contention between two lawyers over who was validly briefed to represent the 16th defendant, the court ordered one Mr Lekan Ogunbayo to appear to clarify who he had instructed as the President of the Management Committee of the Cooperative, to defend it in the matter.

According to the defendants, the court’s decision to order Ogunbayo to appear before it had prejudged the suit at the interlocutory stage.

“The fulcrum of the substantive suit principally revolves around whether the tenure of the management committee led by Mr Ogunbayo (which had been removed by the Congress of the Association as at then) was subsisting.

“The status quo ante bellum was that an interim management committee led by the 2nd and 3rd defendants as the President and Secretary, respectively, had been appointed by the Congress of the 16th defendant and indeed, had been performing the functions of their offices, hence the challenge of the said decision by claimants before this honourable court.

“The decision of the court ordering the appearance of the said Mr Ogunbayo in the circumstance, had prejudged the suit at the interlocutory stage.

“Furthermore, the order made by the court on 10th October, 2024, directing that the interim order of injunction made on the 30th of May, 2024, shall abide pending the hearing of the consolidated applications and substantive suit without hearing the defendants on whether or not it is suitable to grant an injunction in the circumstance, amounts to a denial of fair hearing of the defendants.

“The decision of the honourable court to extend the interim order of injunction in the circumstance without hearing the other side, amounts to a perversion of justice,” they averred.

Meanwhile, Justice Agbaza acknowledged receipt of the motion.

READ MORE FROM: NIGERIAN TRIBUNE