BEVERLY HILLS, November 19, (THEWILL) – Embattled former Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, has asked a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja to stop the Senate from going ahead with its planned probe on the alleged non- remittance of recovered funds running into a trillion naira.
George Uboh, a whistle blower, had petitioned the Senate alleging that the EFCC, under Lamorde, failed to remit to the Federal Government funds recovered from those who looted the public funds. Lamorde has however denied the allegation.
In an originating summons issued on his behalf by Mr. Festus Keyamo, Lamorde joined the Senate, the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Inspector General of Police and the Director General of the Depatment of State Security as 1st-4th Defendants.
Though the case has not been assigned to any judge, Lamorde is asking the court to declare that that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot “invite” him to appear before them as a person whose conduct of affairs is being investigated by them in relation to issues concerning office(s) he has already vacated.
He is also asking the court to hold that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot request him to appear before them by merely writing an invitation letter to him and not issuing a Summons.
Lamorde is therefore seeking a declaration that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 1st and 2nd Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot issue a warrant against him without first serving him a summons.
He is asking the court to protect him by issuing an injunction restraining the police and the SSS from executing any warrant of arrest issued by the Senate for his arrest.
Other reliefs sought by him are:
”A declaration that in view of the provisions of sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the 3rd and 4th Defendants, their officers, members, agents or privies cannot execute any warrant issued by the 1st and 2nd Defendants against the Plaintiff and which was issued without first issuing a Summons to the Plaintiff.
“A declaration that by virtue of section 36(1) of the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) it is unconstitutional for the 2nd Defendant to prevent counsel to the plaintiff from appearing on the Plaintiff’s behalf only for the purpose of raising objection to procedural defects in the invitation to the Plaintiff to appear before the 2nd Defendant.
“An order of injunction against the 3rd and 4th Defendants restraining them from executing any warrant issued by the 1st and 2nd Defendants against the Plaintiff and which was issued without first issuing a Summons to the Plaintiff.
“An order setting aside all letters of invitation issued against the Plaintiff by the 1st and 2nd Defendants to appear before them as a person being investigated by them in relation to issues concerning his stewardship of office(s) he has already vacated.”
