The Federal High Court in Awka, Anambra State, has overturned its order dismissing Inspector-General of Police Usman Alkali Baba.
The court affirmed Baba’s right to a fair hearing, which is granted by Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution but was not guaranteed by the plaintiff in his application.
It claimed that the Court Bailiff’s depositions convinced it that the originating summons was not served on the IGP.
Following an application by the IGP’s counsel, Abdullahi Abdulhakeem Ago, against a previous judgement in favor of the plaintiff, Okechukwu Nwafor, Justice Fatun Riman, reversed the court’s earlier order.
On May 19, 2023, the Federal High Court in Awka ruled that the Inspector-General of Police, Usman Alkali Baba, was an unauthorized tenant of the post of IGP.
The order was issued by Justice Riman, who stated that IGP Baba’s continuing tenure in office was “unlawful and unconstitutional” in light of the plain terms of the Police Act 2020.
The order was made in a judgment in a case dated FHC/AKW/CS/58/2023, which was submitted by Okechukwu Nwafor, who claimed to be a taxpayer.
However, the IGP requested that the verdict be set aside because the subject matter had already been decided by another Federal High Court presided over by Justice J.K. Omotosho in action FHC/ABJ/CS/31/2023.
The Police Chief further claimed that the court should vacate its decision because the originating processes were not served on him.
In a 17-page judgement issued on Thursday, June 15, 2023, the court upheld the Inspector-General of Police’s arguments.
According to Justice Riman, a court might overturn its decision if there was a fundamental error.
The judge held that: “The law is settled that any Court of record including the Supreme Court has the inherent jurisdiction to set aside its own Judgment given in any proceeding in which there must have been a fundamental defect such as one which goes to the issue of jurisdiction and competence of the Court.
“Such a judgment is a nullity. A person affected by it is therefore entitled ex-debito justicae to have it set aside. The court can set it aside suo motu and the person affected may apply by motion and not necessarily by way of appeal.
“A judgment or order which is a nullity owing to failure to comply with an essential provision such as service of process can be set aside by the court which gave it or made the order.
“The law is trite that the necessity for the requirement of service of originating processes, whether personal or by substituted means to bring to the notice of the defendant in action knowledge of the pending of a suit against him to enable such defendant prepare himself and defend the action appropriately.
- Squeezing the Poor: The Silent Struggle of Nigeria’s Starving Souls
- Plates of Despair: Nigerian Women Battle Against Deepening Hunger
- Shadows of Hunger: Struggles of Nigeria’s Displaced Children Begging to Eat, Survive on the Streets – Part 2
- Shadows of Hunger: Struggles of Nigeria’s Displaced Children Begging to Eat, Survive on the Streets – Part 1
- ‘This Is Messing Up My Performance’ —Angry Rema Walks Off Stage Over Poor Sound In Atlanta
“I find merit in this application. Accordingly, the judgment of this court delivered on 19th day of May 2023 is hereby set aside for non- service of the originating processes on the 2nd Defendant (the Inspector-General of Police). This is the ruling of this court.”
