Court threatens Senator Izunaso with contempt…Halts hearing in Okorocha’s suit against INEC

But, for the timely intervention of Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN), lawyer to Governor. Rochas Okorocha of Imo State, Senator Osita Izunaso, representing Imo West Senatorial District would have been sentenced to prison on Wednesday for contempt.

Izunaso, who is the third respondent in the suit filed by Okorocha before the Federal High Court, Abuja over the alleged refusal of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to issue him with a certificate of return, drew the court’s anger by his conduct, which the court found to be disrespectful of the court.

When the case was called on Wednesday, Justice Okon Abang said he was in receipt of a document filed by Izunaso, an affidavit of facts, indicating that he (Izunaso) had filed an application at the Court of Appeal for a stay of proceedings in the case before the trial court.

Justice Abang subsequently sought the views of lawyers in the case. Defendants’ lawyers asked the judge to defer to the application before the appellate court and stay proceedings. But plaintiff’s lawyer, Ogunwumiju disagreed.

He prayed the court to dismiss the application, arguing that it was incompetent.

After listening to parties, Justice Abang, before delivering his ruling, instructed an official of the court to invite Izunaso, who had sat among the audience in court, to stand in front of the court, to enable him properly appreciate the court’s ruling.

Justice Abang noted that Izunaso’s decision to include his name as a party to be served a court process filed at the Court of Appeal was scandalous and embarrassing and showed that Izunaso had no respect for the court.

The judge said: The motion filed at the Court of Appeal where my name is recorded is before me, tagged as exhibit c, attached to the third defendant’s affidavit of facts.

“The third defendant is also before me so I have jurisdiction over him summarily if that was not sufficient, he deposed to an affidavit that the motion was duly served on me.

“This is only to ridicule the court and lower the esteem of the judge in the eye of the public as if the judge is a party in the matter.

“This shows the level of disregard Izunaso has for the court which is established by the constitution.”

Justice Abang added that Izunaso’s conduct before the court, as reflected in the application he filed, is contemptuous; it is contempt in the face of the court not outside the court.

The judge noted that in Izunaso’s case, which is contempt before the court, the judge is the complainant, the prosecutor and remained the judge.

He added: “I have jurisdiction to deal with him summarily because he is the contemnor and he is before the court.

“The senator ought to have been remanded in prison today for contempt of court, he is before me and the offensive affidavit is also before me.”

Justice Abang, who appeared livid, however, changed his mind when he considered the intervention by Ogunwumiju.

The judge said: “Having regards to the passionate plea from the learned senior counsel, (Ogunwumiju), I will let the distinguished senator go home today, not because the court is weak or cowardly.

“We have been trained to use our summary powers sparingly, I will leave the senator to his conscience, he is accordingly discharged even though I find his conduct before the court contemptuous,” the judge said.

The judge also agreed to adjourn the further proceedings in the case to a later date.

Meanwhile, besides his application for stay of proceedings, Izunaso also has before the Court of Appeal, a notice of appeal.

In the notice of appeal, with six grounds, Izunaso is challenging the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, Abuja to hear Okorocha’s suit and the court’s decision of the trial court to join the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as a defendant.

Izunaso is contending that the trial Judge erred in law by assuming jurisdiction to continue with the proceedings in court without first of all determining whether the court has jurisdiction to entertain the said suit.

He is contending that the court below misdirected itself on the law by assuming jurisdiction after the same court made a finding that a court cannot proceed in the face of a preliminary objection challenging its jurisdiction.

Izunaso argued that the trial court erred in law and misapplied the principles in the decision of Inakoju V Adeleke (2007) LPELR-1510 (SC) and order 29 (1)(a) of the Federal High Court Civil Procedure rules 2009, which dealt with a situation where a court is faced with the issue of determining a challenge of its jurisdiction and the hearing of the substantive suit.

Izunaso contended that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to continue with the hearing and determination of any matter relating to the suit including the application filed by the PDP without first hearing the applications challenging its jurisdiction.

He, therefore, urged the appellant court to hold that allowing the PDP to proceed to move its application for joinder by the trial court was against the weight of evidence.

Izunaso urged the Court of Appeal to allow his appeal and set aside the ruling of the trial court made on May 8, 2019.