Seinye, widow of the founder of Moni Pulo Limited, High Chief Olu Benson Lulu-Briggs on Friday said the January burial date for her husband is still achievable.
She made the statement in reaction to the alleged cancellation of her husband’s January 25, 2020 burial date which was announced by her stepson and the family Chiefs last month.
In a statement released by her spokesperson, Oraye St. Franklyn and made available to journalist, she said believes that the burial is still achievable because the pre-conditions, which the Ghana High Court ordered him to fulfil before by the release of his father’s body for burial by the Ghanaian police and the mortuary are not difficult.
She further clarified that she was not ordered to release the body of her husband. The order according to her and as contained in the judgement of the High Court of Ghana was directed at both the Ghanaian Police and the mortuary who have custody of the body.
The statement reads, “Dr Mrs Seinye O. B. Lulu-Briggs believes that her stepson’s hurried and unilateral cancellation of the burial of his father for the fourth time is indicative of his unwillingness to lay him to rest. She, however, maintains that the cancellation is unnecessary and that the excuse that her appeal of the High Court Judgement is responsible for the postponement is untrue and grossly misleading.
“Dr Mrs Seinye O. B. Lulu-Briggs repeats that her appeal was made because without fulfilling any of the three pre-conditions imposed on him by the Court Judgement had gone to the mortuary to pick up the body of her husband in the company of her supposed nominated representatives none of whom she knew, authorized or whose identities she could verify. She views that action as desperation taken too far and part of a sinister plot to obtain the body of her husband in order to wickedly tear it open yet again in the guise of conducting a private autopsy; a sinister autopsy that would fabricate false evidence supporting Dumo’s contrived allegation of her killing her 88-year-old husband whom she cared for and loved for more than 2 decades.
“He was ordered by the High Court of Ghana to give the following binding, unconditional undertakings: “That the delegation led by her stepson that will convey the body of the deceased to Nigeria, should include two representatives of the Plaintiff/Widow, who should be part of the delegation that will convey the body to Nigeria;
”That the family of the deceased, led by Chief Dumo Lulu-Briggs, will give a binding unconditional undertaking that, under no circumstance will the family allow or suffer the Plaintiff/Widow to undergo any cruel, inhumane or barbaric customary practices in Nigeria, when the body is conveyed;
“That the family, led by her stepson, will further undertake that the Plaintiff/Widow will be ably represented in the burial and funeral preparations, and will be allowed to play her role as a widow mourning her deceased husband.”
“The court went further to order the filing of the report of the autopsy done on the deceased, which has been complied with. But the release of the filed autopsy report is now being blocked by an appeal by the stepson. To what end, she asks. Possibly because Dumo does not wish the public to know that the filed autopsy report clearly stated that the High Chief Dr. O. B. Lulu-Briggs died of natural causes.
“Dr. Mrs Seinye Lulu-Briggs maintains her earlier assurance that should he fulfil the above-stated binding, unconditional undertakings imposed on him by the High Court of Ghana and allow the release of the report of the duly conducted autopsy on his father, which he instigated; she would withdraw her appeal against the judgment.
“Nevertheless, she questions the motive behind obtaining the body for burial without any clear burial plan. In her view, custody of the body is not necessary for planning the burial. She says that the blocking of the release of the report of the duly conducted autopsy, as well as the call for another autopsy by her stepson, confirms her position that he is desperate to obtain the body because of his sinister motives and not necessarily for burial.”