Justice Ahmed Mohammed of a Federal High Court sitting in
Abuja has set aside the letter of invitation sent by the House of
Representatives to the petroleum minister, Diezani Alison-Madueke and
the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) to appear before its
investigative panel over alleged N10billion charter jet.
Diezani and NNPC approached the court, seeking to stop the House of Representatives from probing allegations that they spent over N10billion on chartered aircraft.
In his judgement in the suit, Justice Mohammed held that the House of Representatives has the power to summon anybody irrespective of his or her position to appear before it to give explanation on how a public property entrusted to him is being managed.
The court, however, noted that this was contrary to the submission of the plaintiffs that the House of Representatives lacks power to summon them without the consent of the president.
It consequently held that the House of Representatives did not follow due process in inviting the plaintiffs.
The court further held that the House of Representatives ought to have presented before the court the resolution of the meeting where it agreed to invite Deziani and NNPC, published in a gazette or house journal.
“The National Assembly in the discharge of its duty does not need any consent to invite a public officer to come and defend how he managed a public property such as the aircraft in her care.
“What the House is asking for is not a confidential document that needed the consent of the President before it would be released, rather it a public property placed in care of a public servant”, the court held.
On the invitation of the plaintiffs, the court held that the National Assembly is given power to direct investigation but the burden of proof is on the House of Representatives to show that there is resolution that directed such invitation.
“None of the defendants have produced the published resolution where it was said that the the plaintiffs should be invited.
“The defendants ought to have brought before the court, resolution of its meeting wherein the plaintiffs are invited to appear before it, published in a gazette or house journal.
“There is no evidence before the court that there was a resolution to invite the plaintiffs. By this act, it renders the summons invalid.
“Therefore, the letter of invitation served on the plaintiffs is hereby set aside because of the failure of the House of Representatives to produce the resolution as duly published in the gazette or its house journal.
“Had it been the House of Representatives had published the resolution in a gazette or house journal and presented before this court, the plaintiffs would not have any business doing in court.
“This decision does not implies that House of Representatives does not have the power to summon anybody no matter how highly placed to investigate him.
“He added that if such power is properly utilized, the National Assembly can summon anybody.
“However in this instant case, the House of Representatives have not followed the due process of inviting the plaintiffs.
“It is on that note, that I advise the plaintiffs to submit themselves to any invitation to show their respect to constituted authorities”, the court held.
Diezani and NNPC approached the court, seeking to stop the House of Representatives from probing allegations that they spent over N10billion on chartered aircraft.
In his judgement in the suit, Justice Mohammed held that the House of Representatives has the power to summon anybody irrespective of his or her position to appear before it to give explanation on how a public property entrusted to him is being managed.
The court, however, noted that this was contrary to the submission of the plaintiffs that the House of Representatives lacks power to summon them without the consent of the president.
It consequently held that the House of Representatives did not follow due process in inviting the plaintiffs.
The court further held that the House of Representatives ought to have presented before the court the resolution of the meeting where it agreed to invite Deziani and NNPC, published in a gazette or house journal.
“The National Assembly in the discharge of its duty does not need any consent to invite a public officer to come and defend how he managed a public property such as the aircraft in her care.
“What the House is asking for is not a confidential document that needed the consent of the President before it would be released, rather it a public property placed in care of a public servant”, the court held.
On the invitation of the plaintiffs, the court held that the National Assembly is given power to direct investigation but the burden of proof is on the House of Representatives to show that there is resolution that directed such invitation.
“None of the defendants have produced the published resolution where it was said that the the plaintiffs should be invited.
“The defendants ought to have brought before the court, resolution of its meeting wherein the plaintiffs are invited to appear before it, published in a gazette or house journal.
“There is no evidence before the court that there was a resolution to invite the plaintiffs. By this act, it renders the summons invalid.
“Therefore, the letter of invitation served on the plaintiffs is hereby set aside because of the failure of the House of Representatives to produce the resolution as duly published in the gazette or its house journal.
“Had it been the House of Representatives had published the resolution in a gazette or house journal and presented before this court, the plaintiffs would not have any business doing in court.
“This decision does not implies that House of Representatives does not have the power to summon anybody no matter how highly placed to investigate him.
“He added that if such power is properly utilized, the National Assembly can summon anybody.
“However in this instant case, the House of Representatives have not followed the due process of inviting the plaintiffs.
“It is on that note, that I advise the plaintiffs to submit themselves to any invitation to show their respect to constituted authorities”, the court held.
No comments:
Post a Comment