Kogi CJ alleged removal: Bello, Assembly seek out of court settlement

THE Kogi State Governor, Alhaji Yahaya Bello, and the State House of Assembly on Tuesday pleaded for out of court settlement over the suit challenging their alleged attempt to interfere in judiciary matters in the state.

The Chief Judge of the state, Justice Nasir Ajana and the Chief Registrar, Yahaya Adamu, had dragged the governor and the assembly before a Kogi State High Court, sitting in Konmton-karfe, over alleged move to remove the Chief Judge.

The suit was filed following a petition written to the assembly by the Secretary to the State Government (SSG), Mrs Folasade Ayoade, asking the lawmakers to investigate the state judiciary and its leadership.

The petition was a fallout of the refusal of the judiciary to partake in the table payment arrangement put in place by the executive for the workers on its payroll.

However, when the suit came up for hearing on Tuesday, counsel to the defendants, Mr Rotimi Oguneso, SAN, said he was convinced personally that the nature of the matter was such that ought to be resolved out of court.

He, therefore, applied for an adjournment to allow him explore the possibility of settlement out of court.

The counsel to the plaintiffs, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, leading four other senior advocates, did not oppose the application.

ALSO READ: Ambode launches Lagos health insurance scheme

He, however, applied for an extension of time of the lifespan of the earlier orders of the court, to avoid embarrassment to the parties and preserve the res.

In his ruling, the presiding judge, Justice Alaba Omolaye-Ajileye, noted that it was part of the duties of a court to encourage amicable settlement of matters out of court.

He commended the initiative of Mr Oguneso, SAN, in seeking to get the matter resolved out of court.

The judge, however, held that the fears expressed by Chief Awomolo, SAN, over the need to preserve the rest of the matter were well-founded.

According to him, it was expedient that the lifespan of his earlier orders be extended in the interest of justice and in order to prevent the occurrence of any irreparable mischief.

He, accordingly, ordered that his earlier orders remained in force, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice of December 12, 2018.

While adjourning the case to February 4, 2019, the judge restrained the defendants from taking any step, under any guise, that will have the effect of frustrating the case.