Alphonsus Nweze
The Anambra State High Court sitting in Atani, Ogbaru Judicial Division, has directed the State Commissioner for Trade, Commerce, and Industry, Dr.Obinna Ngonadi and the Attorney General of Anambra State to maintain the status quo in Ogbaru Main Market Traders Association (Relief Market).
Justice A.O. Okuma, who gave the order following motion exparte seeking an interim order of the court to restrain the respondents from removing the elected executive of the market adjourned the hearing to June 3, 2022.
Barrister B.C. Uzuegbu (SAN), had in a Suit No. AT/MISC43/2922 brought an application of motion exparte, seeking an interim order to restrain the respondents and their privies from removing the applicants and replacing them with a Caretaker Committee without being confronted with any allegation and being given the opportunity to be heard in line with section 36(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of NIgeria pending the determination of the substantive application.
However, inspite of the order the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Commerce, Chinedu Ike, in a letter dated May 19, 2022, insisted that the Ministry would constitue a Caretaker Committee to oversee the affairs of Ogbaru Main Market pending the determination of the petitions and counter-petitions received in respect of the election of January 25, 2022 and publish the findings.
But Chief Uzuegbu (SAN) in letter to the Commissioner for Commerce, copied to the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry, Chief Uzuegbu pointed out that the phantom petitions against the election that brought Chief Ndubuisi Ochiogu Executive on January 25, 2022 ,was the handiwork of “those who feel that their man is in power.Therefore they shall uproot a duly elected Executive by mere intrigues.”
He said the commissioner should be aware that if there was any petition, justice, decency and good faith demands that his client’s attention should be drawn to such petition, which will afford him opportunity to respond to the issues raised by the petitions.
That, he said, would have afforded the commissioner the vantage position to reach a just conclusion.
“The letter under reference shows that the petions have not been drawn to the attention of our clients. The government is yet to “investigate the allegations and series of petitions received as regard the election.”
The Senior Advocate said the intention was for Ochiogu and his executive to vacate office. The writers of phantom petitions would be constituted as Caretaker Committee.
“Whilst they take the offices of our clients, the government with its bureaucratic bottlenecks will then decide how and when to investigate the allegations. This procedure is bizare! It is the practice during the time of the cave man,” he said.
He expressed surprise that immediately the commissioner received the order of the court that status quo ante bellum should be maintained in respect of the issue, he “impudently and without regard to due process and the rule of law you caused the letter under reference to be authored. We are minded to respectfully remind you that the law does not respect institutions, authorities and powers if they are in disobedience to the orders made by them.”
In a separate response to the Ike’s letter dated May 19, 2022, the Board of Trustees (BOT) expressed shock that the same Permanent Secretary, Chinedu Ike, who signed the letter of suspension of Ogbaru election was the same person who joined in monitoring, supervising, and final confirmation of the election as flawless.
They urged the commissioner and his cohorts to put on hold the effort to suspend the elected executive and replace it with caretaker, warning “we had felt the pressure of the traders in the market. They are not prepared to allow any imposition of Caretaker Committee on the market for now.”
Competent sources quoted the Permanent Secretary as saying the Caretaker Committee would be announced by Monday or Tuesday.
He was also said to have boasted that they would go to court on June 3 and vacate the interim order since the court belong to them and they have not fulfilled the 180 days requirement for suing public officers.
