Court asked to restrain Tinubu, NASS from removing CCT chair, Umar

A Federal High Court in Abuja has been asked to restrain President Bola Tinubu, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and others from using the police and the Department of State Services (DSS) to stop officials of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), including its chairman, Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar, from performing their official functions.

The police, DSS, and others taking instructions from Tinubu as Commander-in-Chief were requested to be barred from inviting, intimidating, investigating, or otherwise subjecting CCT officials, including Justice Umar, to their operations, pending the hearing and determination of a motion on notice.

The ex-parte application follows a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1796/2024, brought before the court by two groups and an Abuja-based lawyer, challenging the legality of the move to remove Justice Umar as CCT chairman without due process.

The applicants are Community Rescue Initiative, Toro Concerned Citizens & Relief Foundation, and Barrister Nasiru Bala.

The defendants include the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Senate President, the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the House of Representatives, the Clerk of the National Assembly, the National Judicial Council (NJC), the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC), Dr. Mainasara Umar Kogo, and Abdullahi Usman Bello as the 1st to 11th defendants, respectively.

In the ex-parte application filed on their behalf, the plaintiffs asked the Federal High Court for an order of interim injunction restraining the NJC and FJSC from swearing in Dr. Mainasara Umar Kogo as Chairman of the CCT, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

The applicants also sought an order restraining Mainasara Umar Kogo from parading himself or acting as the chairman of the CCT or otherwise obstructing or hindering the functions of the tribunal and its officials, including Justice Umar, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

Furthermore, they want the court to restrain the defendants from recognizing or engaging with Kogo as the chairman of the CCT, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

The ex-parte application is based on 14 grounds, including the claim that the substantive suit concerns the purported removal of Justice Umar, the current chairman of the CCT.

“Being a person substantively occupying the office of the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, the stake, interest, and concern of Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar are directly in issue in the substantive suit pending before this Honourable Court along with all interlocutory processes filed by the Plaintiffs/Applicants,” the plaintiffs stated.

The plaintiffs filed an originating summons on November 28, 2024, seeking a resolution on the validity of the proceedings conducted by the 4th and 6th defendants on November 20 and 26, 2024, which purportedly removed Justice Umar.

They argued that the 1st defendant announced the appointment of the 10th and 11th defendants as CCT chairman despite the office being occupied by Justice Umar.

The plaintiffs claim that Dr. Mainasara Umar Kogo, the 10th defendant, is parading himself as the chairman of the CCT, relying on a letter issued during the pendency of the action, and has been obstructing the smooth functioning of the tribunal.

The plaintiffs are also seeking seven declaratory reliefs against the president and 10 other defendants.

The suit, instituted on behalf of the plaintiffs by Mahmoud M. Maidoki Esq., A.G. Salisu Esq., Jibrin S. Jibrin Esq., and Abubakar S. Idris Esq., calls for the Federal High Court to determine whether the removal of Justice Umar by the 4th defendant is illegal, void, unconstitutional, and of no effect, given the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.

The plaintiffs also applied for orders restraining the Clerk of the National Assembly from transmitting the resolution of the Senate and House of Representatives to the President and stopping the President from giving effect to the resolution, claiming that due process was not followed in the purported removal of Justice Umar.