A Makurdi High Court has taken a decisive stance by dismissing the lawsuit initiated by former governor Samuel Ortom and his deputy, Benson Abounu.
The dismissed suit on Wednesday, intended to challenge the retrieval of vehicles and properties by the Hyacinth Alia-led Benue State government.
The court gave the basis for dismissal as being speculative and limiting the constitutional powers of the governor.
Background
Ortom and Abounu filed Suit No: MHC/199/2023 to contest the retrieval of vehicles and properties allegedly donated to them and their cabinet members by the Benue State Executive Council before their term ended on May 29, 2023.
They contended that the retrieval infringed upon their collective right to property ownership, which was legally and legitimately vested in them.
However, the counsel representing the Government of Benue State, the Governor of Benue State, and the Chairman of the Assets Recovery Committee, Mohammed Ndarani (SAN), submitted a preliminary objection.
This objection challenged the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the suit on the grounds that it lacked specificity concerning the identity of the vehicles and properties allegedly taken from the plaintiffs.
Ndarani argued that the suit attempted to limit the governor’s constitutional executive powers to appoint appropriate committees for state administration.
He also emphasized that the suit did not provide the committee’s terms of reference, making it unclear whether the committee had exceeded its authority.
Ndarani further clarified that there was no conclusive evidence to establish that the committee had permanently taken custody of any vehicles.
He highlighted that temporary custody of vehicles for investigative purposes is allowed under the Constitution.
In his submission, Douglas Pepe (SAN) contended that over 32 vehicles donated to Ortom and his deputy by the Benue State Executive Council had been taken into custody by the defendants, characterizing it as an infringement on their property ownership rights.
Court’s Decision
Justice Theresa Igoche in her judgment upheld the preliminary objection filed by the defendants.
Justice Igoche noted that the suit was speculative and failed to establish a legitimate cause of action.
The judge emphasized that the suit sought to curtail the constitutional powers of the defendants, as provided by Section 5(2) of the Constitution.
Consequently, she struck out the suit.
