The Ekiti State Government has filed a suit against the Attorney
General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar
Malami (SAN) over the constitutionality of his directive issued on
April 20, 2020, prescribing Virtual Court Sittings to the Head of
Courts at federal and state levels.
In the suit filed through the office of the Attorney General and
Commissioner for Justice, Wale Fapohunda, Ekiti is asking the apex
court to issue an order striking down the directive as it relates
to Virtual or Remote Court sittings.
It also wants the Supreme Court to nullify the directive to the
extent that same purports to be binding on state High Courts and
other subordinate courts in Ekiti State for being inconsistent with
Section 1(3), 4(6), 5(2), 6(2), 36(3) and (4), 272 and 274 of the
1999 Constitution.
Apart from the Attorney General of the Federation, the Attorneys
General of Lagos & Ogun States who have implemented virtual court
proceedings were also listed as second and third defendants.
Ekiti State further wants the Supreme Court to determine whether
the AGF’s guidelines are not a derogation from the legislative,
executive and judicial law-making, law execution and adjudicatory
rules making powers exclusively vested in states of the federation
in respect of states courts, by virtue of Sections 1(3), 4(6),
5(2), 6(2), 272 and 272 and 274 of the Constitution.
The plaintiff is also asking the apex court to decide whether
Lagos and Ogun state having adopted virtual court hearings pursuant
to the lockdown, the three arms of Government in Ekiti State are
bound to conduct their legislative, executive and judicial
functions pertaining to adjudication in state courts in compliance
with the directive upon which the National Judicial Council
formulated the provisions of Articles E(1) to E(13) of its
Guidelines (issued on May 7, 2020).
The Supreme Court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of the
matter.
The Ekiti State Government has filed a suit against the Attorney
General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar
Malami (SAN) over the constitutionality of his directive issued on
April 20, 2020, prescribing Virtual Court Sittings to the Head of
Courts at federal and state levels.
In the suit filed through the office of the Attorney General and
Commissioner for Justice, Wale Fapohunda, Ekiti is asking the apex
court to issue an order striking down the directive as it relates
to Virtual or Remote Court sittings.
It also wants the Supreme Court to nullify the directive to the
extent that same purports to be binding on state High Courts and
other subordinate courts in Ekiti State for being inconsistent with
Section 1(3), 4(6), 5(2), 6(2), 36(3) and (4), 272 and 274 of the
1999 Constitution.
Apart from the Attorney General of the Federation, the Attorneys
General of Lagos & Ogun States who have implemented virtual court
proceedings were also listed as second and third defendants.
Ekiti State further wants the Supreme Court to determine whether
the AGF’s guidelines are not a derogation from the legislative,
executive and judicial law-making, law execution and adjudicatory
rules making powers exclusively vested in states of the federation
in respect of states courts, by virtue of Sections 1(3), 4(6),
5(2), 6(2), 272 and 272 and 274 of the Constitution.
The plaintiff is also asking the apex court to decide whether
Lagos and Ogun state having adopted virtual court hearings pursuant
to the lockdown, the three arms of Government in Ekiti State are
bound to conduct their legislative, executive and judicial
functions pertaining to adjudication in state courts in compliance
with the directive upon which the National Judicial Council
formulated the provisions of Articles E(1) to E(13) of its
Guidelines (issued on May 7, 2020).
The Supreme Court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of the
matter.