FMC Abeokuta Crisis: Court has not vindicated Prof Olomu - Counsel - The People's Voice


Monday, March 21, 2022

FMC Abeokuta Crisis: Court has not vindicated Prof Olomu - Counsel

By Oluwayemisi Oloyede

The Federal high court sitting in Abeokuta on the suit filed by a non governmental organization, Youths Reoriented Initiative of Nigeria, (AYRION) against the Federal Ministry of Health and the Medical Director of Federal Medical Center Abeokuta challenging the reappointment of the Medical Director, Prof Adewale Musa-Olomu for second term.

Isaac Izunya, counsel to AYRION during a press conference held in Abeokuta, the Ogun state Capital cleared air on the Judgment delivered in the suit no FHC/AB/100/ 2021, filed by the organisation, saying it was not on the substantive matter but based on the Preliminary Objection, raised by the respondents in the suit.

Isaac Izunya of Izunya Izunya &Co, said contrary to the insunation, that the case, was dismissed in its entirety and that a sum of N1m was awarded against the organisation, the court only dealt with the preliminary objections raised by the respondents' counsel.

It could be recalled that Justice O. Oguntoyinbo of the Federal High Court, Abeokuta Division, had given judgment on the suit in favour of the Federal Ministry of Health as 1st Respondent and the Medical Director of the Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Abeokuta, Dr Adewale Olomu as 2nd Respondent.

Addressing journalists, Izunya said the judgment, did not address prayers sought by the applicant in the suit.

Listing the prayers of the NGO against the respondents, the counsel said, the organisation, sought three orders of the court.

He said, the NGO sought, "An order of this honorable court restraining the 1st respondent in the interest of the public including Nigerian youths and Civil Servants not to appoint or recommend the 2nd respondent for any appointment or approval of any appointment as the Medical Director of Federal Medical Centre, Abeokuta, Ogun state or any Public Appointment at all in the Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) of the Federal Republic Of Nigeria on the ground of abuse of office, he is above 60 years of age and irreconcilable different names on certificates presented for appointment as a Civil servant.

"An order declaring the 2nd respondent as person not qualified to be recommended tor appointment or appointed into any public office or remain in any public office by reason ot his age, abuse of public office and irreconcilable different names on his certificates presented for appointment as Civil Servant.

"An order directing the immediate retirement of the 2" respondent on the ground that he has attained the 60 years' retirement age in Federal Civil Service of Nigeria."

He said after appropriate service of the process by his office, "the 1st and 2nd respondents raised Preliminary Objection, urging the court not to hear and grant the substantive prayers we have before the court, on the ground that among others, we have no reasonable cause of action, that it is National Industrial Court and not the Federal high court that has jurisdiction and that we have no locus standi. 

"We filed our response to their Notices of preliminary objections and my lord decided the case on the basis of the preliminary objections and upheld their objections.

"The decision of the court given on Thursday, the 17h day of March, 2022, is not on the merit of the case as par our prayers, which means it does not decide whether or not the 2nd Respondent abused his office, has plenty names on s certificates or has attained retirement age in civil service."

He said the clarification, was to serve as a compass to guide members of the public who were not in court when the judgment was delivered and do not have access to the judgment to know the kind of comment to make about the judgment.

Izunya said while the court awarded the cost of N100,000 against the applicant each in favour of 1st and 2nd respondent, only for some people to report that the court awarded cost of N1m against the applicant.

The counsel stated that he and his client, is still studying the judgment and would decide the next line of action.

No comments:

Post a Comment