The Department
of State Services, DSS, had served notice last night that it was appealing the
judgment of a High Court on former CBN Governor ,Sanusi Lamido.
Deputy Director,
Public Relations of DSS, Marilyn Ogar, confirmed the decision of the security
agency last night
“We are
appealing the judgment immediately,” Ogar said but did not give details.
Earlier, the
Police had said that they would not comment on it until it got the certified
true copy of the verdict.
Force PRO, Mr
Frank Mbah, said that the force was unaware of the judgment as at press time.
The court first
ruled on the preliminary objection by the Attorney-General of the Federation,
challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit, which it
dismissed.
The AGF had
argued that the suit was wrongly instituted before the Federal High Court since
the matter bordered on the employment of the applicant and so, should be within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court.
Dismissing the
objection, the court held that the provisions of Section 11 of the Labour Act,
cannot take away the jurisdiction bestowed on the Federal High Court by the
Constitution, noting that the provisions of Section 251 of the constitution
vest jurisdiction on the Federal High Court, to entertain matters touching on
enforcement of fundamental human rights.
The court said
the applicant had brought the suit under the provisions of Chapter 4 of the
Constitution, seeking an enforcement of his rights, and so, is not a dispute
relating to his terms of employment.
According to the
court, “the averment by respondent that the matter is labour related is far
from the truth. The first respondent is trying to set up another case for the
applicant. It is a case of ‘shifting the goal post’ and making a case for the
applicant.
“The fact
deposed in the applicant’s originating summons and his affidavit speaks for
itself. It is a suit for enforcement of his fundamental right which is
recognisable by the Federal High Court. The court allows any person who
perceives that his rights are likely to be infringed on to approach the court
for redress.”
The court
consequently dismissed the preliminary objection and held that it had the
jurisdiction to hear and determine the applicant’s suit.
Tags
Society