Justice Bolaji Olajuwon, of the Federal High Court, Abujam on Friday, insisted that Edison Ehie, the Chief of Staff (CoS) to Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara must answer to the allegations against him of complicity in the bomb explosion that took place at the Rivers State House of Assembly, which set part of it on fire.
In the thick of the crisis that engulfed the assembly, over the threat of his impeachment, the multi-billion naira edifice, was eventually pulled down by the governor on the excuse that it posed a threat to human life as a result, having failed the integrity test to which it was subjected by experts.
Olajuwon, in a ruling, on the application to strike out the matter for want of jurisdiction, held that Ehie, having not been joined as a defendant in the charge lacked the legal right to make such plea, while also striking out another prayer for an order striking out his name anywhere it might appear in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/25/2024.
Olajuwon, who observed that the name of Ehie, who resigned his position as Speaker in the camp of Fubara, who received and passed the state’s N800billion budget last year, was only mentioned as being at large, in agreeing with the police lawyer, Simon Lough (SAN), that having not been joined as a defendant in the charge, Ehie’s application cannot be heard, held that should he not be recognised as at large, he said he should make himself available to the police.
Ehie, who was recently appointed as Chief of Staff (CoS) to Fubara after his resignation was alleged to be among the suspects charged by the I-G for committing the offence, alongside five other suspects, who were arraigned on January 25, on seven-count charge bordering on alleged terrorism, among others.
Others standing trial, who are currently being detention in Kuje prison in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja, on the orders of the court, include: Chime Eguma Ezebalike, Prince Lukman Oladele, Kenneth Goodluck Kpasa, Osiga Donald and Ochueja Thankgod.
Ehie’s lawyer, Oluwole Aladedoye, (SAN), had informed the court that he had filed an application dated and filed on January 24, seeking for two orders, which he had already served on parties.
Informing that the sought orders, which were pursuant to Sections 6 and 36 of 1999 Constitution, he argued that it was incorrect that Ehie, whose name featured in the counts preferred by the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police had no right to make this application, adding that it would have been different if his name was not mentioned at all.
Arguing that the name of the former Speaker, was clearly stated in the affidavit contained in the charges before the court, the lawyer maintained that at no times was his client ever invited by the police, to warrant being dubbed at large.
But, Lough, who disagreed with the contention, maintained that though he was served with Ehie’s application, the motion was not ripe for hearing, adding that the application was therefore incompetent in view of Section 396(2) of Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.
Stressing that since Ehie was challenging the jurisdiction of the court, the provision of the law says until an applicant is joined and takes his plea before he can have the right to file such motion, he added: “His (Ehie’s) name is not in the charge and has not applied to be joined. So his application is incompetent.”
While acceding to his request that the prayer be struck out, Olajuwon, who agreed with Lough, asked: “Who is this person? The person is not a party in this charge and the order challenging the jurudiction of the court is refused. If that person is not at large, let him make himself available to the police,” she said.