Godwin Tsa, Abuja

The controversy trailing the Presidential Executive Order No. 6 of 2018 issued by President Muhammadu Buhari on the preservation of Assets connected with corruption and other relevant offences has taken a legal dimension with a suit asking the Abuja division of the Federal High Court to declare it illegal and unconstitutional.

The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/740/2018 was further seeking an order of the court setting aside or nullifying the said order as it encroached into the ownership of the assets or properties of any person without such persons been found guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction.

In addition, the suit which was brought against the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Attorney General of the Federation by Ikenga Ugochinyere and Kenneth Udeze asked for a Restraining Order against the Federal Government from enforcing or giving any effect to the Presidential Executive Order No.6, for being unlawful, unconstitutional, illegal, null and void.

The suit which was filed by Obed Agu on behalf of the Plaintiffs, was brought pursuant to sections 5, 36,43 and 251 (1)(q) of the 1999 Constitution and order 3 rule 7 of the Federal High Court (civil procedure) rules 2009.

The Plaintiffs, in their supporting affidavit, averred that the Presidential Executive Order No. 6 was a needless and unjustifiable interference into the rights of the citizens and portends grave danger to the democratic process.

“That the persons whose cases or names were listed as being affected are presently facing various criminal prosecutions in court and have not been found guilty as charged.

Abigal Audu, who deposed to the six- paragraph affidavit, averred that every citizen was entitled to be accorded fair hearing before he could be convinced or made to suffer any legal disability as a result of the criminal charges against them.

That the tenets of fair hearing also presupposes that every citizen must not be punished in advance, as in the case of the Presidential Executive Order No. 6 of 2018 even before their cases are concluded.

READ ALSO: Kwankwaso’s defection to PDP tears social media followers apart

They argued that the provisions of section 5 of the 1999 Constitution upon which President Buhari relied upon in issuing the Presidential Executive Order No. 6, on the preservation of assets connected with corruption and other relevant offences, extends only to the “execution and maintenance of the Constitution, all laws made by the National Assembly and to all matters with respect to which the National Assembly has, for the time being, power to make laws.”

The plaintiffs asked the court for the determination as to whether by the combined effect of sections 5, 36 and 43 of the 1999 constitution, the President lacked the constitutional powers to issue the Presidential Executive Order No. 6 on the preservation of assets connected with corruption and other relevant offences, on matters not connected with “execution and maintenance of the Constitution, all laws made by the National Assembly and to all matters with respect to which the National Assembly has, for the time being, power to make laws.”

The court was further called upon to determine whether having regard to the combined effect of sections 5, 36 and 43 of the 1999 constitution, the President lacked the constitutional powers to issue the Presidential Executive Order No. 6 on the preservation of assets connected with corruption and other relevant offences, which intends/ purports to interfere with, limit, inhibit, restrict dealings on or encroached into the ownership, enjoyment, disposition or otherwise of the assets or properties of the persons listed at the First Schedule thereto or any other person whatsoever without them or such persons being found guilty by a court of competent jurisdiction, is contrary to the provisions of sections 36 and 43 of the Nigerian Constitution and therefore unconstitutional, null and void.

Already, Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, sitting as a vacation Judge has adjourned the case to August 8, 2018, for hearing, after it was mentioned before her.