Bunmi Ogunyale

Frontline legal luminary, Barrister Festus Keyamo (SAN) has stated that there is no subsisting Supreme Court order restraining Amaju Pinnick from acting as President of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF).

This is contained in a statement issued by the Festus Keyamo Chambers on Sunday.

The statement reads; “We have read some reports in the mainstream and online media by some uninformed and/or deliberately mischievous persons to the effect that there is a subsisting Supreme Court Order restraining Amaju Pinnick from acting as President of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF).

“These reports were fuelled by an earlier Press Release by the office of the Hon. Minister for Sports dated July 2, 2018 as well as another Press Release from the same office dated August 21, 2018, regarding the current suit which portrays the current NFF leadership as irresponsible, as usurpers and as contemnors.

READ ALSO Lengthy contracting process killing oil & gas industry – Shell boss

Related News

“It is, therefore, imperative that we put the record straight: There is no Supreme Court order restraining Amaju Pinnick from acting as President of the NFF or installing Chris Giwa as President of the NFF.

“We hereby challenge anybody who disputes this to publish the Supreme Court Judgment or Order where the names of Amaju Pinnick or Chris Giwa were ever mentioned in any portion of the judgment or as even parties to the case.

The fact is that the court processes filed in the Supreme Court matter do not bear their names as parties to the suit whatsoever.”

Keyamo explained that the Supreme Court simply relist the case, remit it back to the Federal High Court for expeditious determination on its merits, just as it firmly declined the motion brought by the plaintiffs in the matter to invoke its general powers under section 22 of the Supreme Court Act to deal with the substantive suit.

“The CJN expressed the view that by restoring the suit to the Cause List it followed that all previous orders made in the proceedings in the suit are also restored, irrespective of the fact that the matter may be heard de novo (afresh) before another Judge.”