From Abel Leonard, Lafia
The High Court sitting in Doma, Nasarawa State, presided over by Justice Abdullahi Hassan Shams Shammah, has adjourned the case between Senator Mohammed Ogoshi Onawo and the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), along with other respondents, to December 11, 2024. The adjournment was granted to allow the respondents to respond to an affidavit filed by the plaintiff.
At the hearing on Monday, the court considered two motions filed by the plaintiff’s counsel during the November 20, 2024, sitting. The motions sought to nullify the PDP’s Ward and Local Government Congresses. However, the 3rd respondent’s counsel, J.J. Usman (SAN), informed the court that he had filed an appeal application on November 25, 2024, challenging the court’s proceedings and seeking a stay of further actions pending the determination of the appeal at the upper court.
Usman argued that the appeal application, in accordance with legal doctrine, takes precedence over other matters before the court. He stated, “The position of the law is clear. Once an appeal is filed, it has to be resolved before the lower court can proceed with any substantive matters. Proceeding otherwise would be an affront to jurisprudence.”
Counsels for the 1st and 2nd respondents, M.A. Jacob (SAN) and O.P. Ulegede, supported Usman’s submission, emphasizing that the application should be addressed before any ruling on the motions could proceed.
However, the plaintiff’s counsel, Isyaka Dikko (SAN), opposed the application, describing it as a delay tactic aimed at “arresting the ruling.” He argued that the application was not connected to the matter at hand and cited the case of Newswatch vs Attah (2006 NWLR Part 993 Page 1) to support his position. “The application should be dismissed as it seeks to obstruct the court’s processes unnecessarily,” Dikko said.
In response, Usman countered that Dikko’s citation was inapplicable, asserting that the case referenced dealt with situations where judgment was ready without ongoing proceedings. He added, “There is a clear distinction between arresting a ruling and applying for a stay of proceedings. As established in Regency Council of Olo Otta vs Sodeinde (2013) and Mohammed vs Olawumi (1993), the court must pause to consider an appeal filed in good faith to prevent rendering the appellate process futile.”
During the session, the plaintiff served Usman with a counter-affidavit in court and requested an immediate response. Usman objected, arguing that it was impractical to respond on the spot and insisted on being granted the legally stipulated seven days to address the affidavit. “The court cannot compel impossibility,” Usman remarked.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Shams Shammah ruled in favor of an adjournment, stating, “The court will give the respondents adequate time to respond to the affidavit and ensure fair hearing for all parties involved.”
The case has been adjourned to Wednesday, December 11, 2024, for the respondents to address the points of law raised in the affidavit and for the hearing of the appeal application.