 |
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relate to the unpublished official records of the applicants pending the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.
