Former President Goodluck Jonathan and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), on Monday urged Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a lawyer’s motion seeking his withdrawal from a suit.
Jonathan and Fagbemi, through their lawyers, asked Justice Lifu to dismiss the motion with substantial costs.
The lawyer, Johnmary Jideobi, who is the plaintiff in the suit seeking to stop Jonathan from contesting the 2027 presidential election, filed the motion.
In the motion on notice, deposed to by his lawyer, Ndubuisi Ukpai, Jideobi asked the judge to recuse himself from the case over alleged bias.
Responding, counsel to the former president, Chris Uche (SAN), vehemently opposed the motion.
READ ALSO: Court Adjourns Suit Challenging Jonathan’s 2027 Presidential Eligibility
The senior lawyer described the application as frivolous, baseless, and founded on gross misrepresentation.
Uche urged the court to discountenance the application, describing it as a gross abuse of the court process, and prayed the court to dismiss it with substantial costs and proceed with the case.
Similarly, Fagbemi, who was represented by Maimuna Lami-Shiru, Director of Civil Litigation and Public Law at the Federal Ministry of Justice, also urged the judge to dismiss the motion.
Lami-Shiru submitted that a judge may recuse himself from a case if he believes that his continued involvement could affect the impartial determination of the matter.
However, she argued that the motion before the court constituted an abuse of court process.
She urged the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s motion as baseless, unmeritorious, and unsupported by the relevant provisions of the law.
According to the lawyer, “He who comes to equity must come with clean hands.”
Lami-Shiru also asked the court to award ₦2 million in costs in favour of the ministry.
In the substantive suit filed by the plaintiff, Jonathan and Fagbemi likewise urged the court to dismiss the case with substantial costs.
After hearing arguments from counsel to the plaintiff and the defendants, Justice Lifu adjourned the matter until May 26 for judgment.
