March 25, (THEWILL) – The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the suit filed by the 36 States against the decision of the Federal Government to deduct $418million from the funds standing to the credit of the States to pay debts owed consultants engaged in relation to the Paris Club refunds made to States.
The judgement followed a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1313/2021, filed on October 27, 2021, by the 36 states’ Attorneys-General, against the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), the Accountant General of the Federation, Ministry of Finance, and others, over the planned deduction.
Other defendants sued by the plaintiffs are the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Debt Management Office (DMO), Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), Incorporated Trustees of Association of Local Government of Nigeria (ALGON), among others.
There are a total of 43 defendants, including the judgement creditors.
Presiding judge, Justice Inyang Ekwo, had last November restrained the federal government from making any deduction from the federation account to settle the controversial judgement debts until his court’s resolution of the issues.
The debts had accrued from court judgements awarding the creditors, who claimed to be “consultants” and “contractors” to the states and local governments, various sums of money which currently stand at $418 million.
Some of the creditors claimed to have earned their shares of the money through ‘consultancy services’ of helping state and local governments to recover funds over-deducted by the federal government from their allocations between 1995 and 2002 to service the London Club and Paris Club loans.
But Justice Ekwo, in a judgement on Friday, upheld the objection by some of the defendants and held that the States’ Attorneys General, who filed the suit on behalf of the States lacked the locus standi (the right to initiate an action before a court) to filed the suit.
Ekwo noted that since the debt being challenged arose from the actions of the Governors, who are members of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF), the AGs, who are appointees of the Governors, cannot sue to challenge the actions of their appointors.
The judge also held that the suit amounted to an abuse of court process in that it was intended to seek a review of judgements already given in favour of the consultants.
Justice Ekwo held that his court lacked the powers to review judgements of courts of coordinate jurisdiction.
The judge proceeded to consider the suit on the merit and held that it was without merit and proceeded to dismiss it.
“The states Attorneys-General cannot on their own bring this suit, given the provisions of Section 211 of the 199 Constitution
“This is beyond the powers of the states Attorneys-General to initiate this suit on their own.
“No cause of action can flow when a plaintiff lacks the legal standing to institute a suit.
“This suit does not fall within the class of suits that can be initiated by the State Attorneys-General without the consent of the governors.
“I find no merit in this suit and it is, accordingly, dismissed”, Ekwo ruled.
About the Author
