The Ondo State House of Assembly has resumed its bid to remove the deputy governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, from office with a fresh request to the Chief Judge, Olusegun Odusola, to constitute an investigative panel.
The House had earlier suspended the process on the order of the Federal High Court in Abuja. The court granted the order in a suit filed by Mr Aiyedatiwa over the move to remove him from office for alleged misconduct.
Citing the order, the state’s chief judge, Mr Odusola, declined an earlier request by the House for him to constitute a seven-person panel to investigate the allegations against Mr Aiyedatiwa.
The national leadership of the All Progressives Congress (APC) had also waded into the matter by setting up a committee to reconcile Mr Aiyedatiwa and associates of Governor Rotimi Akeredolu, who are believed to be orchestrating the move to remove the deputy governor.
As a condition for accepting a political solution, the House had demanded that the deputy governor withdraw his cases in court.
However, Mr Aiyedatiwa and his lawyers rejected the condition.
So, in the fresh letter, copies of which were made available to journalists in Akure on Monday, the Assembly again directed the chief judge to set up the probe panel. It said the interim injunction of the Federal High Court restraining further actions in the process had expired.
The letter, which was signed by the Speaker of the House, Olamide Oladiji, reads:
“The Ondo State House of Assembly had on 3rd October, 2023 requested your lordship to constitute a Seven-man Panel to investigate the allegations of gross misconduct leveled by the House against the Deputy-Governor of Ondo State, His Excellency, Hon. Lucky Orimisan Ayedatiwa, in line with Section 188 (5) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).
“In a reply letter dated October 6, 2023, your lordship acknowledged and quoted Section 188 (10) of the Constitution which states that ‘No proceedings or determination of the House of Assembly or the Panel or any matter relating to such proceedings or determination shall be entertained or questioned in any court.’
“Your lordship however opined that until the ex parte Order made on September 26, 2023 by the Abuja Judicial Division of the Federal High Court restraining you from setting up the Panel was either vacated or set aside, your hands would continue to be tied.
“However, from the facts and legal advice at the disposal of the House, the said Order has now elapsed and/or become extinguished by the operation of the law, in view of the clear provisions of Order 26 Rule 10 (2) & (3) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019, which states as follows:
“(2) An application to vary or discharge an order ex parte may be made by the party or any person affected within 14 days after service and shall not last more than fourteen days after the application has been argued unless the Court otherwise directs.
“(3) Where a motion to vary or discharge an ex parte order is not taken within 14 days of its being filed, the ex parte order shall lapse unless the court otherwise directs in the interest of justice.’
“Your lordship would recall that the ex parte order was made on September 26, 2023 (a copy of which is attached hereto as Annexure ODHA1), after which the case was adjourned to October 9, 2023. The 3rd Defendant in the case filed a motion on October 4, 2023 to discharge the Order and/or strike out the case for want of jurisdiction.
“A copy of the motion is attached hereto as Annexure ODSH 2. Fourteen days from October 4, 2023 when the motion was filed, terminated on or about October 18, 2023. The Court has not taken the application or renewed the Order, as evident in the Certified True Copy of the Court’s record of proceedings for October 9, 2023 and October 16, 2023, copies of which are attached hereto as Annexures ODHA 3 and ODHA 3A respectively. In fact, in Exhibit ODHA3, it was recorded that the motion was served on the Plaintiff in Court on October 9, 2023, after which the matter was adjourned to October 16, 2023.
“In view of the above facts, your lordship would agree that the said Order has elapsed by the operation of the law, and no longer constitutes an encumbrance for your lordship to discharge the sacred constitutional obligation placed on your office by virtue of Section 188 (5) of the Constitution to set up the Seven-man Panel.
“Consequently, the 10th Ondo State House of Assembly hereby calls on your lordship to kindly constitute the Panel without any further delay.”
Rift
The rift in the Ondo State government has been linked to the next governorship election in the state coming up next year in which Mr Akeredolu, who is on his second and final term, will not be eligible to run.
Mr Aiyedatiwa has the ambition to succeed his boss but is being rebuffed by members of the family of the governor and their associates in the APC in the state.
Adversaries accused the deputy governor of showing disloyalty to the governor when Mr Akeredolu was on his sick bed between April and last month when he returned from a medical leave.
Mr Aiyedatiwa denied any wrongdoing and said he had never gone against the interest of Mr Akeredolu, who since returning to Nigeria in September has not set foot in Ondo State or been seen in public. (Premium Times)
