Lucky Obukohwo, Reporting
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has turned down an application filed by David Ukpo, seeking an order setting aside the 1 and 6 July 2022 orders for the release of his biodata to Senator Ike Ekweremadu in a UK court.
In his ruling, Justice Inyang Ekwo held that the applicant, the Edo Civil Society Organisations (EDOSCO), which filed the motion on Ukpo’s behalf, lacked the legal right to institute the case.
The judge ruled that Article 3(e) of the preamble to the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 (FREPR 2009), under which EDOSCO filed the suit, does not grant any entity without legal personality the right to sue or be sued in court.
It is the argument of the applicant’s counsel, Bamidele Uche Igbinedion, Esq., that he is one of the lawyers in the law firm of Dele Igbinedion Chambers.
“This application is to protect the applicant’s human rights upon being instructed by Edo Civil Society Organisations (EDOSCO) on behalf of the applicant (Ukpo).
“Going by this averment, it is clear that the applicant in this case is Edo Civil Society Organisations (EDOSCO).
“The counsel for the applicant knows this but cleverly avoided stating so on the face of the application and instead deposed to this fact in the affidavit in support,” he said.
EDOSCO, on behalf of Ukpo, filed the motion on notice pursuant to Orders 14 Rules 10, 26, Rules 1 and 2(1), and 34, Rules 4 and 7(2)(a) of the FHC (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 (FHCCPR 2019); Sections 36(1) and 37 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
The applicant sought an order setting aside the proceedings and the ruling delivered by the court on 1 July 2022 in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2022.
He also sought an order setting aside the proceedings and the order of the court made on 6 July 2022.
Additionally, he sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining Ekweremadu and his wife, Beatrice, along with the 1st to 5th respondents or any other persons acting on behalf of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), from executing or further executing the July 2022 rulings delivered on 1 and 6 July 2022.
Alternatively, the applicant prayed the court to bar them from further breaching Ukpo’s right to privacy, as guaranteed by Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.
However, Ekweremadu and Beatrice, through their counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the application.
They argued that Ukpo, who was taken to the UK sometime in 2022, could not have briefed anyone as his whereabouts were unknown.
Furthermore, they contended that there was nothing before the court to show that the said minor (Ukpo) had instructed EDOSCO.
Citing legal precedents to support their argument, they submitted that the cases referenced by the applicant did not involve situations where a third party purportedly instructed counsel to appear in a suit on their behalf.
“In this case, the applicant on record did not instruct anyone. Rather, it was EDOSCO, a third party, that instructed counsel, as revealed in their affidavit in support, which is an issue before the court,” they said