On Wednesday, the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court declined to grant an application by the Deputy Governor of Edo State, Philip Shaibu, directing Governor of the State, Godwin Obaseki, the House of Assembly and others, in the case he (Shaibu) instituted against his impeachment, to maintain the status quo pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
The development occurred after Justice James Omotosho refused to grant the oral application made by Mr Shaibu’s lawyer, Oladoyin Awoyale, to the effect.
In a motion ex parte marked FHC/ABJ/CS/321/2024, the embattled deputy governor had sued the Edo government, governor, House of Assembly, and Speaker as the first to fourth defendants.
The suit also named the Clerk of the House, Chief Judge, Inspector-General of Police, and Director-General of State Security Service as the fifth and eighth defendants.
In the motion dated and filed March 8, Mr Shaibu sought an interim injunction restraining the third to fifth defendants from interfering with the subject matter of the originating summons.
He also sought an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants jointly or severally from taking any adverse actions in relation to any attempt or process targeted at his removal from office as Deputy Governor of Edo State pending the hearing of the motion on notice.
He urged the court to make an order restraining the 1st to 8th defendants from preventing him from performing his official duties and discharging his responsibilities, including attending the State Executive Council meetings/functions and other duties.
On March 13, the judge refused to grant the ex-parte motion after Mr Awoyale moved it.
Instead, the judge ordered the lawyer to serve all the defendants with the processes and hearing notices and adjourned until March 18 for the hearing.
But on Tuesday, when the matter came up, Mr Awoyale told the court that he could not serve some of the defendants, and the judge adjourned the matter to Wednesday to hear another motion filed.
Upon resumed hearing on Wednesday, Mr Awoyale informed the court that he had a humble application dated March 8. He said the motion sought an order granting leave to them to effect service of the originating summons and other processes on the first and second defendants by substituted means, such as pasting the documents at the gate of the Edo government House or by courier service.
The senior lawyer said the motion also sought an order granting leave to effect service of the processes on the third and fourth defendants by substituted means, through pasting it on the parliament’s gate or by courier service.
He urged the court to grant their prayers.
He said the sixth, seventh and 8th defendants had been served.
Mr Awoyale then prayed the court for an order for parties to maintain a status quo pending the hearing and determination of the suit.
He cited previous cases to back his submission.
But the judge turned down Awoyale’s request for an order for parties to maintain status quo.
“Counsel, you know that it is not possible,” he said.
The judge held that the previous case cited by the lawyer was not applicable in the instant suit.
He said that according to the authority cited about the military administrator of Lagos, all the parties in the suit had been served, but in the present case, some parties had yet to be served.
“Today, we are just seeking leave to serve the parties by substituted means. So, can this court grant this? The answer is no,” the judge said.
The judge, however, advised the lawyer to apply for a fiat through the Federal High Court chief judge so that their case could be heard during vacation, as the court would commence its vacation on Friday.
The judge, who granted the leave for substituted service as prayed by the lawyer, adjourned the matter until April 15 for a hearing.