By Allen Sowore, Esq.
The Deputy Governor of Ondo State, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, sought to halt the impeachment process against him through an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1294/2023 at the Federal High Court, Abuja. The court granted an order to suspend the impeachment process, initiated by the Ondo State House of Assembly.
Expressing dissatisfaction with the ruling of Justice Emeka Nwite on September 26, 2023, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly and the House of Assembly (4th & 6th Defendants) appealed the decision. They also challenged the court’s jurisdiction to issue the order.
At the Court of Appeal, the appellants filed an application to expedite the compilation and transmission of appeal records. During the hearing, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, represented by counsel Ebun Olu Adegboruwa SAN, vehemently opposed the application, urging the Court to dismiss it for lack of merit.
The Court adjourned the matter to November 20, 2023, for a ruling on the application for accelerated hearing and the abridgement of time.
On November 20, Justice Binta Fatima Zubairu, while delivering the ruling, noted that the appellants needed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances as per the provisions of the Court of Appeal rules.
Reviewing the arguments presented by both parties, she emphasized that the Court holds the discretion to grant such requests in accordance with its rules. However, this discretion must be exercised judiciously and in the interest of justice. The Court concurred with the First Respondent’s argument that granting adequate time for the Respondent to prepare their case aligns more with the principles of justice and fair hearing as outlined in the Constitution. Additionally, the appellants failed to establish in their affidavit any exceptional circumstances warranting expedited hearing of the matter.
The Court further stated that seeking an abridgement of time without a proper record of appeal before the Court was inappropriate, as it lacked the necessary foundation for expedited proceedings.
Consequently, the Court ruled that no exceptional circumstances were presented to warrant the granting of the application. The parties were instructed to file their documents in compliance with the provisions of the Court of Appeal rules.
