Saraki’s Move Against Senate Forgery Suit Dismissed, Case Transfered To No-nonsense Judge

Saraki’s Move Against Senate Forgery Suit Dismissed, Case Transfered To No-nonsense Judge

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Wednesday rejected a complaint by Senate President, Bukola Saraki against a suit seeking to sack him and other principal officers of the Senate elected under the controversial Senate Standing Orders 2015.

His lawyer, Sikiru Oke told the court that he appeared for the Senate President “in protest” and has not filed “memorandum of appearance” which must be filed before a lawyer could enter appearance for a party.

But the judge, Justice Kolawole disqualified Mr Oke from appearing for Saraki during the proceedings. He directed that the case be transferred to another judge, Justice Adeniyi Ademola, who will take over as the vacation judge of the Federal High Court in Abuja on August 10.


The proceedings were in relation to a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/651/2015 filed by senators who are opposed to the emergence of Saraki as the Senate President.

They are Senators Abu Ibrahim, Kabir Marafa, Ajayi Boroffice, Olugbenga Ashafa and Suleiman Hunkuni. Defendants to the suit are Saraki, Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu; the National Assembly, the Clerks of the National Assembly and the Senate.

The plaintiffs seek among other prayers and order nullifying the Senate Standing Orders 2015 as well as the election of Saraki as the Senate President and that of Ike Ekweremadu as the Deputy Senate President, ‎for being products of the alleged illegal rules.

Justice Gabriel Kolawole had at the last hearing on July 28, 2015, adjourned the case to Wednesday for the hearing of the plaintiffs’ motion on notice seeking an order restraining Saraki and other defendants from going ahead to constitute the standing committees of the Senate pending when their suit challenging the validity of the Senate Standing Orders 2015 is determined.

Mr. Oke contended that court processes in the case were served on his office instead of being served personally on his client, as prescribed the Federal High Court Rules 2009.

But Plaintiffs’ lawyer, Dele Adesina (SAN), in a counter argument, contended that there are obligatory provisions of the same court rules which envisages and validates service on Saraki through his office.

Mr. Adesina also argued that Oke could not be heard since he had yet to file memorandum of appearance to appear for the first defendant (Saraki).