Again, Alison-Madueke, NNPC Ask Court to Stop House Probe

Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke

Tobi Soniyi 

The Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke and the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) have again applied to the Federal High Court in Abuja for an interlocutory injunction to stop the Senate and the House of Representatives from summoning them  for the purposes of giving evidence or producing any papers, books, records or other documents which relate to the unpublished official records of the applicants pending the hearing and final determination of the substantive suit filed by them.

In the alternative, they asked the court to issue an order for the maintenance of the status quo pending the hearing and final determination of the substantive suit filed by them.

This is the fourth  application by the minister and the corporation to get the court to stop the lawmakers from inviting them to answer questions on the allegation that N10 billion was spent to hire aircraft for the minister.

Two of the applications were made in two separate substantive suits, while the remaining applications were made in the interim within the two suits.

They contended that the respondents (Senate and House of Representatives) cannot investigate criminal matters when it is not a court of law.

They accused the lawmakers of abusing their powers in carrying out their oversight functions by indiscriminately dishing out invitations to them to attend series and several meetings that had to do with the way and manner they exercise and discharge their daily statutory functions.

According to them, the invitations by the House were not connected with the purpose of making laws or correcting defects in existing laws.

They said: "Within the space of one calendar year, we have been inundated with several invitations, numbering well over 40, from the several committees set up by the respondents to allegedly carry out oversight functions on the applicants.

"These several invitations which are not remotely related to the exercise of the respondents’ functions are hindering the applicants from effectively carrying out their own constitutionally and statutorily assigned responsibilities as they are regularly and serially forced to commit time, materials, personnel, energy, and huge resources to attend these frequent invitations, thus leaving them with little or no time to do their main job."

A written address in support of the application for interlocutory injunction by their counsel, Mike Ozekhome (SAN), asked the court to, in the interim, restrain the lawmakers from further sending out invitations to the applicants for the purpose of appearing before them to answer to allegations of fraud, corruption or other criminal activities in the agencies under the applicants’ supervision or control, pending the hearing and final determination of the substantive suit filed by the applicants.

They also wanted  an order restraining the respondents  from further conducting direct personal or physical probe, inquiry and/or investigation into any alleged fraud, corruption, or other criminal activities said to have occurred in the applicants’ establishment or agencies under the applicant’s supervision or control, pending the hearing and final determination of the substantive suit.

Ozekhome argued that the lawmakers had been usurping the powers and functions of the executive arm of government by carrying out functions outside the scope and purview of Sections 4, 88 and 89 of the constitution.

According to him, the respondents and their committees cannot personally, or physically investigate the respondents, but are only constitutionally mandated to cause other security agencies such as the police, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC),  Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), among others, to carry out such investigations.

He said: "It is also the contention of the applicants that the respondents cannot investigate criminal matters not being courts of law, and that in purportedly carrying out their oversight functions, they have subjected same to abuse by indiscriminately dishing out invitations to the applicants to attend series and several meetings that have to do with the way and manner the applicants daily exercise and discharge their statutory functions, which are not connected with the purpose of making laws or correcting defects in existing laws.

"The applicants within the space of one calendar year have been inundated with several invitations, numbering well over 40, from the several committees set up by the respondents to allegedly carry out oversight functions on the applicants. These several invitations which are not remotely related to the exercise of the respondents’ functions are hindering the applicants from effectively carrying out their own constitutionally and statutorily assigned responsibilities as they are regularly and serially forced to commit time, materials, personnel, energy, and huge resources to attend these frequent invitations, thus leaving them with little or no time to do their main job."

Ozekhome explained that since the filing of this suit, the lawmakers had not shown any intention of allowing the court decide one way or the other as to the existing rights of both parties with respect to the subject matter before the court and in line with extant provisions guiding both Houses with regards to matters litigated before a court of competent jurisdiction where interpretation as to how the conduct of their constitutionally assigned role is the subject matter of litigation.

"They insist on carrying out the investigations on June 17  and compelling the applicants to pay their gross earnings into the Federation Account, notwithstanding the contention of the applicants that only the net proceeds of their earnings ought to be paid into the Federation Account," he added.