Counsel to the Ondo State House of Assembly, F E Emodamori, on Monday, told a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja that, he did not author the petition written against Justice Emeka Nwite to the National Judicial Council (NJC).
Emodamori, who appeared for the state’s House of Assembly and its Speaker, Olamide Oladiji, refuted the allegation levelled against him by Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, counsel to the embattled Deputy Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa.
Justice Nwite had, on September 26, restrained the Ondo State House of Assembly and its Speaker from impeaching Aiyedatiwa, over alleged gross misconduct pending the hearing and determination of the interlocutory application.
The judge gave the interim order in a ruling shortly after Kayode Adewusi, counsel who appeared for Aiyedatiwa, moved the ex-parte motion to the effect.
The judge also restrained Gov Rotimi Akeredolu from nominating a new deputy governor and forwarding the name of same to the lawmakers for an approval as the state’s new deputy governor based on a letter of resignation purportedly authored or signed by Aiyedatiwa.
The deputy governor had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023, listed the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, the Department of State Services (DSS), Gov. Akeredoku, Speaker of the House of Assembly, Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.
The judge, after granting the reliefs, in the application filed by Adelanke Akinrata on September 21, on behalf of Aiyedatiwa, the judge fixed October 9 for hearing of the motion on notice.
When the matter came up on Monday, Adegboruwa informed the court of the development in the matter, saying that, on October 6, the All Progressives Congress (APC) set up a reconciliation committee headed by former Katsina State governor to settle the issues.
“In line with extant practice and procedure of this honourable court to encourage parties to promote settlement, it is our humble view that the court allows and encourage the reconciliation effort as the continued prosecution of this suit may be hostile to those efforts,” he said.
Besides, Adegboruwa said on October 3, the speaker and the House of Assembly (4th and 6th defendants) submitted a petition to NJC, “accusing this very court of compromise and deploying all manners of unprintable epithets against the court.”
According to him, the consequence of that petition is to express lack of confidence in the court, adding that, “if the allegations are investigated and found to be correct, God forbid, the consequence will be that this court may not be in the position to proceed on the determination of this suit”.
The senior lawyer, therefore, prayed the court to direct the Speaker and the House of Assembly, through their counsel, Emodamori, to serve all parties in the suit with the said petition in order for them to respond too.
He also prayed the court to direct them to stop further attack on the judge and that, he watched on television news where the trial Judge was described as “a certain judge”
Adegboruwa said, the derogatory comment was also confirmed in a letter dated September 29 and authored by Emodamori to the state’s chief judge.
He then urged the court to adjourn the suit sine die (indefinitely) to await the outcomes of the APC reconciliatory effort and the petition filed to the NJC.
But Kassim Gbadamosi (SAN), counsel to Akeredolu, who objected to the application for indefinite adjournment of the matter, said Ondo State was not a one-party state.
He said the APC’s move was only to reconcile Akeredolu and Aiyedatiwa which did not affect other political parties which made up the state House of Assembly.
“They cannot impose their whims on the house which has APC, PDP, Labour Party and APGA,” he said and added that, whatever allegations Adegboruwa raised about media engagement were mere documentary hearsay, which he urged the court to discountenance.
He equally said he had not seen the petition against the judge, describing it as hearsay and added that, giving an indefinite adjournment in a matter of this nature is like giving judgment on the matter which had not been heard, going by the earlier interim order.
Gbadamosi said instead, the court should order parties to address it on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Making his submission, Emodamori denied calling Nwite “certain judge.
Speaking from the utmost duty of a counsel to speak the truth from the bar, I want to say with all categorical assertion that I never used and will never use or encourage any one to use such derogatory language or gutter language against your lordship either in the letter the learned silk referred to or in any media interaction on the subject matter”.
Emodamori admitted that the Speaker and the House of Assembly indeed wrote a petition against the judge, but denied being the author.
“It was authored by the 6th defendant (House of Assembly) and signed by the 4th defendant (Speaker) and not counsel. Regrettably my lord, it was in that petition that unacceptable language ‘certain judge’ was used.
It was used regrettably by the parties who authored the petition.
Justice Nwite, who condemned the act, said it was unfortunate that lawyers would allow themselves to be used by politicians to denigrate the court.
He said, “I know how I have managed my career, to build my carry as a judge.Why should somebody in his own opinion decide to dent my image which I have built for long.
“If you know that you are not comfortable with that interim order, you approach the court and apply that it should be varied.
“Anybody who has been following my adjudication will know that I am not the kind of judge who can compromise. It is quite regrettable,” he said and adjourned the matter till October 16 to rule on whether the matter be adjourned indefinitely or not.
He also ordered that hearing notices be served on the IGP and the DSS, who were not represented in court.
READ ALSO FROM NIGERIAN TRIBUNE
