Connect with us
Advertisement

Nigeria News

Court Insists IGP Must Arrest INEC Chairman, Yakubu Mahmood

Published

on

JUST IN: INEC Issues Official Statement On Adamawa Guber Election - [Full Details]
Advertisement

Judge Adjourned The Hearing Till August 16

The Federal High Court, Abuja, has called on the Inspector-General of Police, Idris Ibrahim, to see to it that he arrest and produce the Independent National Electoral Commission Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu in court on August 16.

The order was given by Justice Stephen Pam, following the absence of Yakubu’s team of lawyers in court as there was explanation given for the absence.

Pam said, “At the commencement of proceedings, counsel for the applicant, Kanayo Okafor, informed the court that the Court of Appeal on Monday asked the court to stay proceedings in the matter.

Advertisement

“The counsel for the respondent is not in court and no reason has been given for their absence.

“The contempt proceedings and the bench warrant issued for the arrest of Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, INEC chairman still subsists, the I-G is to carry out the order of the arrest of Yakubu.

“This court being a court of record has nothing to prove that there was an order for stay from the Court of Appeal.”

Advertisement

During the delivering of the ruling, a lawyer from the team of the INEC chairman was reported to have walked into the court and tried to get the attention of the Judge.

The effort of the lawyer was in vain as Justice Pam adjourned the case till August 16 for continuation.

Report from NAN has it that the counsel was late because he was at the Court of Appeal making efforts to get the ruling to present to the lower court, but the ruling was not yet ready.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The court had on August 1, issued a bench warrant for the arrest of Yakubu for “flagrant” disobedience of court orders.

Also, as earlier reported by Naija News, the Court of Appeal vacated the arrest order on Monday and ordered a stay of proceedings pending the determination of the substantive case.

The lower court, however, insisted that no such order had been communicated to it and being a court of record, it needed a document to show that there was such an order and not verbal information.