- A Kogi State High Court sitting in Koton-Karfe has nullified the April 2 resolution of the state House of Assembly calling for the removal of the state Chief Judge, Justice Nasir Ajanah, for gross misconduct.
A Kogi State High Court sitting in Koton-Karfe has nullified the April 2 resolution of the state House of Assembly calling for the removal of the state Chief Judge, Justice Nasir Ajanah, for gross misconduct.
The court also set aside the resolution of the House recommending Alhaji Yahaya Adamu, Chief Registrar of the state High Court, to the state Judicial Service Commission for disciplinary action for gross misconduct.
Justice Alaba Omolaye-Aiileye, the High Court judge quashed the resolution in his ruling on motion number HC/KK02M/201 in the suit number HC/KK/11CV/2018 brought by the Chief Judge, Ajanah, and Chief Registrar of the state High Court, Alhaji Yahaya Adamu.
Omolaye-Aiileye said he had come to the “irresistible conclusion” that the resolution of the House arising from its sitting of April 2nd, recommending removal or stepping aside of the Chief Judge for gross misconduct must not be allowed to stand.
He said the resolution having been reached in “clear violation of the orders of this court, it is, accordingly hereby set aside and declared a nullity.”
The judge further declared a nullity the recommendation of the Chief Registrar, Adamu, to the Judicial Service Commission for disciplinary action over alleged gross misconduct.
He said the Kogi State House of Assembly was subject to the rule of law and was required to obey and not break the law.
“With the positive orders of this court made on 13th of December, 2018 and reinforced on 18th December, 2018, Kogi State House of Assembly ought not to have done anything to give the impression that it was trying to pre-empt the decision of this court.
“It is tragic that the respondents whose primary responsibility is to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Kogi State would be the same institution to be associated with violation of court orders.”
The jurist said it was his considered view that the action of the House in sitting on the matter and issuing a resolution was “a blatant and an impudent act which ought not to be tolerated or encouraged in a democratic setting.
“It was an audacious and arbitrary display of naked power, an act that is contrary to all constitutional and democratic tenets.”
