By Ikechukwu Nnochiri

ABUJA — The Federal Government, Monday, urged the Supreme Court to dismiss a suit filed before it by 16 Northern states of the Federation, challenging what they termed “lack of equity in the distribution of the nation’s resources.”

The Northern states had, among other things, prayed the apex court to compel the Federal Government to pay them N7 billion as outstanding value of the assets of the defunct Northern States Marketing Board, NSMB.

The states behind the consolidated suit are Adamawa, Bauchi, Borno, Gombe, Jigawa, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Kebbi, Kogi, Kwara, Sokoto, Taraba, Yobe and Zamfara.

The Attoney General of the Federation was joined  as defendant in the suit.

They told the apex court that in 1977, the then Federal Military Government forcefully took over the assets of NSMB by virtue of Decree No. 29 of 1977, adding that the then Supreme Military Council stated that the Federal Government would pay for the assets of the NSMB and the assets of any other commodity boards.

According to them, before the assets were transferred to the Federal Government, a valuation was carried out which put the total value of all the assets at N42 million.

They said: “Of the said N42 million, only N1.1 million was paid to the NSMB by the defendant leaving a balance of N40 million.” They put the cost of immovable assets and produce taken over at N11 million and N18 million respectively.

Bags, tarpaulin and twine as well as cotton stores complexes allegedly taken over were put at N2 million.

The Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Dahiru Musdapher, is presiding over a seven-man panel of justices of the apex court that has assumed jurisdiction over the matter.

Meanwhile, the Federal Government, yesterday, challenged the propriety of the suit, saying it ought to be dismissed as grossly lacking in merit.

According to a preliminary objection filed by counsel to the Federal Government, Mr Ade Okeaya-Inneh, SAN, by virtue of section 7(1)(e) of the Limitation Act, the suit was already statute barred.

The AGF who okayed the preliminary objection, said the cause of action upon which the plaintiffs’ suit was predicated, were letters dated July 27, 1983 and August 13, 1984 in their statement of claim dated February 17, 2011.

He said “since the plaintiffs instituted this action by way of civil summons on February 17, 2011 in consequence thereof, the said action is at variance with section 7 (1)( e) of the Limitation Act.

“Whenever a party’s action is statute barred, the party would lose his right of action and lose the right of enforcement.”