Contempt: Police Fails To Arrest INEC Chairman Even As Court Insists
August 14, 2018
The Nigeria Police has failed to arrest the INEC chairman, Mahmood Yakubu, for court contempt despite the insistence of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
The Court reaffirmed his position today again and insisted that the Inspector-General of Police must arrest and produce the Chairman, Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu in court on August 16, 2018, unfailingly.
Justice Stephen Pam gave the order followin the absence of Yakubu’s team of lawyers in court and there was no explanation as to why they were absent.
The Judge said: “At the commencement of proceedings, counsel for the applicant, Kanayo Okafor, informed the court that the Court of Appeal on Monday asked the court to stay proceedings in the matter.
“The counsel for the respondent is not in court and no reason has been given for their absence.
“The contempt proceedings and the bench warrant issued for the arrest of Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, INEC chairman still subsists, the I-G is to carry out the order of the arrest of Yakubu.
“This court being a court of record has nothing to prove that there was an order for stay from the Court of Appeal.”
However, while the judge was delivering his ruling, a lawyer in the team of Yakubu’s counsel walked into the court and made attempts to call the judge’s attention to his presence.
This was, however, in vain as Justice Pam adjourned the matter until Aug. 16 for continuation.
The News Agency of Nigeria gathered that the counsel was late because he was at the Court of Appeal making efforts to get the ruling to present to the lower court, but the ruling was not yet ready.
The court had on August 1, issued a bench warrant for the arrest of Yakubu for “flagrant” disobedience of court orders.
Also, the Court of Appeal vacated the arrest order on Monday and ordered a stay of proceedings pending the determination of the substantive case.
The lower court, however, insisted that no such order had been communicated to it and being a court of record, it needed a document to show that there was such an order and not verbal information.