A supposed plaintiff, Mr. Wilfred Okoli, on Tuesday told an Abuja Federal High Court that he had no knowledge of a suit filed in his name seeking to restrain President Goodluck Jonathan from reinstating the suspended President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami.
The suit is among several pending matters which the Federal Government cited as the reason for its refusal to reinstate Salami, as recommended by the NJC.
The case was listed for mention on Tuesday, but immediately it was called by the court clerk, and the presiding judge, Justice Abdul Kafarati, called the parties in the matter to enter appearances, Okoli got up and denied knowledge of the suit.
He said, ‘’My Lord, I am not aware of this suit; my consent was never sought before it was brought before you.
“I have no knowledge of it, my Lord’’.
The now controversial suit was filed by an Abuja-based lawyer, Mr. Amobi Nzelu, on behalf of Okoli.
Interestingly, Okoli is a counsel in Nzelu’s chamber.
The matter could no longer go on after Okoli’s statement.
Instead, Kafarati asked the supposed plaintiff and his counsel to go back home and put their houses in order before September 22, when the matter will once again come up before the court.
He also directed the defence counsel to ensure that Salami was served with the processes before that date.
Jonathan, the NJC, Salami and the Attorney General of the Federation were listed as co-defendants in the suit.
The suit was filed after the NJC voted to approve Salami’s reinstatement on May 10, 2012.
In the suit, the court was asked to hold that the NJC could not deliberate on an issue which is a subject of litigation.
The court was equally asked to declare that the President’s had the right to act, or refuse to act, upon any recommendation made to him by the NJC.
Furthermore, the court was asked to declare that it was only a court of law duly created by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (As Amended) that had the power to hear and determine matters between parties.
The supposed plaintiff also asked the court to issue an injunction restraining Jonathan, the 4th defendant, “whether by himself, agents, servants, assigns, privies, or whosoever purporting to act on his behalf” from acting on the recommendation of the NJC.