Breaking News

Pedro: Court to rule on Fashola’s application June 18

By Abdulwahab Abdulah
Justice Yetunde Idowu of an Ikeja High Court, Tuesday, fixed June 18, for ruling on an application by Governor Babatunde Fashola of Lagos State, asking the court to stay proceedings in a case instituted by Mr Femi Pedro, a former deputy governor of the state.

The adjournment was sequel to the argument canvassed by  Fashola’s counsel, Mr Yemi Okewole. He prayed the court to stay further proceedings pending the determination  of Fashola’s appeal against an earlier ruling of a Lagos High Court presided over by Justice Kazeem Alogba.

Justice Alogba, who heard the case before it was transferred to the present judge, had assumed jurisdiction in the suit, but Fashola said he had no power to entertain it.

Mr Clement Onwuenwunor, who represented Pedro opposed the application on the ground that there was no proof that an appeal had been filed. He subsequently asked the court to dismiss the application with substantial cost.

Pedro argued that he resigned voluntarily from office as deputy governor on May 8, 2007  and, therefore, entitled to pension and all the benefits of his office as a former deputy governor.

He submitted that his impeachment of May 10, 2007 by the Lagos State House of Assembly had no effect as he had already resigned two days earlier.

Pedro joined the Lagos State House of Assembly (LSHA), Gov. Fashola, and the state Attorney-General, Mr Olasupo Shasore (SAN) were joined as defendants in the suit.

Pedro’s lawyer while opposing the application argued: “We are vehemently opposing the application. They cannot say they have shown special circumstances to bring this application. It has no chance of succeeding at all. It violates Order 54 (2) of this court’s Rules.

There must be proof of record of appeal. They have not taken this step or made any move to do so. The application is a deliberate attempt to frustrate the claimant. We urge you to dismiss it with substantial cost.”


Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.