By Ikechukwu Nnochiri

ABUJA-EIGHT hundred and sixty aggrieved ex-security staff of Exxon Mobil Oil Limited, Tuesday, went before the Supreme Court, begging it to sanction the multinational company for allegedly violating their statutory rights.

The plaintiffs told the apex court that 13 years after they were arbitrarily laid off from work, the company refused to pay their entitlements despite a subsisting court order to that effect.

They made the request on a day two lawyers, who claimed they were from the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Sebastin Ozona and Miss Funke Oladosu, quarreled in court over who had the authentic fiat to represent the Federal Government in the matter.

Immediately Mr. Ozona announced his appearance, yesterday, Miss Oladosu sprang to her feet, brandishing a letter from the AGF, which she said authorised her to handle the case.

Sequel to the controversy, a five-man panel of justices, led by Justice Mahmud Muhammad, yesterday, ordered the duo to go back to the AGF for clarification even as hearing on the substantive suit was fixed for February 12, 2012.

The plaintiffs are specifica-lly seeking enforcement of an Appeal Court judgment that earlier voided their dismissal from work on the grounds that it was arbitrary, illegal and in breach of their statutory rights.

Three Justices of the appellate court, Justice Ngolika Orji-Abadua, Justice Kuma Akaah and Justice Jean Omokri, unanimously held that the dismissed guards could not be regarded as officers of the Nigerian Police Force since the circumstances, nature, procedure and methods of their employment were not in harmony with Sections 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the Nigeria Police Act.

Consequently, the panel ordered that they should be compensated by Exxon Mobil, stressing that considering the contract of employment the workers entered into with the company, “the plaintiffs are not members of staff of the Nigeria Police, and the plaintiffs are therefore not entitled to be called supernumerary policemen nor to wear or use police uniform or any police kit or insignia calculated to show or portray the plaintiffs as policemen.”

However, while defending its action, the company insisted that the sacked officers were merely appointed as spy police and should therefore depend on the Nigerian Police authority for their entitlements.