Justice Jude Dagat of a Federal High Court, in Lagos, on Friday, fixed February 6, 2017 to deliver its judgment in a suit filed against the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC), over an alleged mobilisation fraud.
The suit was filed against the NYSC by the incorporated trustees of the Citizens Advocacy Initiative For Accountable Leadership (CAIFAL), challenging the alleged collection of a N3,000 mobilisation fee.
Joined as respondents in the legal action are, The Director General of NYSC, Sidmach technologies Ltd, Minister of Youths and Sports, and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).
At the resumed hearing of the case, on Friday, counsel representing the third respondent (Sidmach) Mr Emeka Ngige (SAN), informed the court of a preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction and an order dismissing the suit.
Ngige, argued that the plaintiff had not showed any cause of action, or that it had suffered any hardship in the mobilisation process for the NYSC scheme.
Arguing his counter-affidavit, he said that the plaintiff was unknown to law as it was not properly so-called with its incorporated name recognised by the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA).
He also submitted that the plaintiff failed to comply with the provisions of section 20 of the NYSC Act, which required such complaint to be forwarded in writing to the president, before a resort to litigation.
He, therefore, urged the court to strike out the suit as it failed to disclose sufficient cause of action.
The position of the learned silk was also adopted by other respondent counsels, who also prayed the court to strike out the suit.
In response, counsel to CAIFAL, Chief Dania Abdulahi, urged the court to dismiss the respondents’ preliminary objection to the suit, arguing that the plaintiff had sufficient cause of action.
Abdullahi argued that the provision of section 254 of the constitution gives constitutional validity to the federal high court, adding that the federal high court rules was a child of the constitution.
On the issue of suing in its name, Abdulahi referred the court to the provisions of sections 516 of the CAMA Act 1990, and stressed that the Act, did not specifically require the use of the words “incorporated trustees” in filing a court action.
Responding to jurisdictional issues raised by counsel from the office of the Attorney General, Mrs J.C Akah, Abdullahi argued that such objection was unwholesome.
According to him, as a law officer, the AGF must be concerned with such major issues especially as it exposes unfair practices in the NYSC scheme.
He, therefore, urged the court to dismiss all objections to the suit, award exemplary damages against the respondents, and to grant the reliefs sought by the plaintiff.
After listening to argument of counsels, Justice Dagat adjourned the case to Feb. 6 for judgment.
In the suit number FHC/L/CS/840/16, CAIFAL is seeking a declaration, that by virtue of the provisions of the NYSC Act, the first to third respondents have no statutory rights, to demand a pre-mobilisation fee from prospective corps members.
In its affidavit, the group avers that sometime in 2014, the NYSC introduced an electronic registration programme, where prospective corps members were required to register online with the sum of N3,000.
It said this was as a condition precedents for mobilisation.
It averred that the NYSC entered into a memorandum of understanding with a company, Sidmach Technologies, to collect the fees on behalf of the NYSC, through the issuance of scratch cards to corps members.
According to the plaintiff, under the memorandum, 70 percent of the monies collected, would be ceded to the company (Sidmach), while the balance of 30 percent was reserved for the NYSC.
It averred that the company had since 2014, collected over N1.3 billion on behalf of the NYSC, without remitting any of its proceeds to the Scheme or Federation’s account.
It averred that the applicant had petitioned the office of the Minister of Youths and Sports, but that the act had not been “called in”.