You lack power to order my removal — Tinubu tells court

President Bola Tinubu has urged a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja to strike out a lawsuit demanding his impeachment over alleged human rights violations, arguing that the National Assembly cannot be compelled to act on such claims.

The case, lodged by legal practitioner Olukoya Ogungbeje, is marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1334/2024 and names the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, as a co-defendant.

The plaintiff in the report published by The Vanguard on Monday alleged that the government had, between August 1 and 10, 2024, violently clamped down on peaceful protesters across the federation, an action he argued constituted misconduct and a ground for Tinubu’s impeachment from office.

The plaintiff maintained that section 143 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, empowered the NASS to set machinery in motion for President Tinubu’s impeachment.

However, in a joint preliminary objection they filed against the suit, both President Tinubu and the AGF queried the locus standi (legal right) of the plaintiff to institute the action.

Aside from praying the court to dismiss the suit for being incompetent, the defendants insisted that the action failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action to warrant an exercise of judicial discretion in his favour.

In the process, they filed through a team of lawyers led by Mr Sanusi Musa, SAN; President Tinubu; and AGF further challenged the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter.

The defendants applied for “an order striking out this suit for being incompetent as this suit is not initiated by due process of law having been initiated under a wrong procedure.

While giving 18 reasons why the case should be terminated, President Tinubu and the AGF argued that the plaintiff filed the action on behalf of faceless citizens, noting that he did not disclose the persons whose rights were allegedly violated.

The defendants argued that by the provision of Section 46 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, only the person whose right was breached has the right to file an action before the court to seek redress.

According to the defendants, “Pursuant to the provision of Section 46 (3), the Chief Justice of Nigeria has {brought into being the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009, which makes ample provision of the procedure to follow in filing an action with respect to a breach of the Fundamental Rights of any Nigerian.”

They argued that the plaintiff’s questions two and three for determination were in respect of the alleged breach of the 1999 Constitution by the 1st defendant (President Tinubu) vis-a-vis Section 143 of the said constitution.

The defendants maintained that the plaintiff failed to disclose any of his rights that were breached.

Likewise, in a counter affidavit that was deposed to one Gbemga Oladimeji, a principal state counsel in the Federal Ministry of Justice, he averred that contrary to the plaintiff’s claim, the President Tinubu-led government has been a promoter of democratic tenets.

He averred that the president had always allowed people to air their grievances and conduct peaceful protests.

Meanwhile, Justice James Omotosho, on Monday, adjourned the case till March 4 to enable the counsel representing the plaintiff, Mr. Stanley Okonmah, to respond to the preliminary objection by President Tinubu and the AGF.

For Diaspora Digital Media Updates click on Whatsapp, or Telegram. For eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to: citizenreports@diasporadigitalmedia.com. Follow us on X (Fomerly Twitter) or Facebook