Court Dismisses Ukpo’s Case Against Ekweremadu’s Biodata Order, Says Civil Group Lacks Legal Standing

A Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday, dismissed an application filed by David Ukpo, seeking an order setting aside the July 1 and 6, 2022 orders for the release of his biodata to Sen. Ike Ekweremadu in a UK court.

Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a ruling, held that the applicant, the Edo Civil Society Organisations (EDOSCO), that filed the motion on Ukpo’s behalf, lacked the legal right to institute the case.

Justice Ekwo held that the provision of Article 3 (e) of the preamble to the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009 (FREPR 2009), under which EDOSCO filed the suit, cannot be said to have granted any person without legal personality to sue or be sued in the court.

“It is the averment of the counsel representing the applicant, Bamidele Uche Igbinedion Esq., that he is one of the lawyers in the law firm of Dele Igbinedion Chambers.

“That this application is to protect the applicant’s human rights upon being instructed by Edo Civil Society Organisations (EDOSCO) on behalf of the applicant (Ukpo).

“Going by this averment, it is clear that the applicant in this case is Edo Civil Society Organisations (EDOSCO).

“The counsel for the applicant knows this but cleverly avoided to state so on the face of the application and rather depose, to this fact in the affidavit in support,” he said.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that EDOSCO, on behalf of Ukpo, had filed the motion on notice brought pursuant to Orders 14 Rules 10, 26, Rules 1, and 2 (1), and 34, Rules 4, and 7 (2) (a) of the FHC (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 (FHCCPR 2019); Sections 36 (1) and 37 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.

The applicant sought an order setting aside the proceedings and the ruling delivered by the court on July 1, 2022 In suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/984/2022.

He also sought an order setting aside the proceedings and the order of the court made on July 6, 2022.

He equally sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining Ekweremadu and his wife, Beatrice, and the 1st to 5th respondents, or any other person howsoever described, acting for the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), from executing of further executing the July 2022 rulings delivered July 1 and 6, 2022.

Alternatively, the applicant prayed the court to bar them from breaching of further breaching Ukpo’s rights to privacy guaranteed by Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.

But Ekweremadu and Beatrice, through their counsel, Chief Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the application.

They argued that Ukpo, who was taken to the UK sometime In 2022, could not have briefed anyone as his whereabouts was unknown.

Besides, they argued that there was nothing before the court to show that the said minor Ukpo) briefed EDOSCO.
Citing previous cases to back the arguement, they submitted that those cases cited did not deal with a situation where a third party purportedly instructs a counsel to appear for them in a suit.

“In this case, the applicant on record did not instruct anyone but rather it was EDOSCO, a third party, that instructed counsel, as has been revealed in their affidavit in support, which is an issue before the court,,” they said.

NAN reports that Justice Ekwo had, on July 1, 2022, ordered the National Identification Management Commission (NIMC), Comptroller General of Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS), Stanbic IBTC Bank, United Bank for African (UBA) and Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System Plc (1st to 5th respondents respectfully), to release Ukpo’s biodata to the Ekweremadus in UK court.

The judge ordered that all information, including his Bank Verification Number (BVN), should be released for Ekweremadus’ defence in the UK court over alleged organ harvesting.

Justice Ekwo had, on July 6, 2022, directed the NIMC to immediately release the biodata of Ukpo to the AGF for onward transmission to the UK court.

The court issued the order following a request to that effect by NIMC and in response to the request of the convicted couple to defend themselves in a London court.