NEWS FLASH    G5 govs arrive Oyo for Makinde’s campaign
NewsPolitics

Apapa Not Relenting, Takes Labour Party’s Chairmanship Criss To Supreme Court

Emeka Kema

The leadership tussle rocking the opposition Labour Party (LP) has taken a new turn as a factional national chairman, Alhaji Lamidi Apapa, has filed an appeal at the Supreme Court against the appellate court’s verdict reinstating Julius Abure as the party’s National Chairman.

He said the LP had obtained a stay-of-execution motion on the judgment.

An appeal court sitting in Abuja had, on March 6, 2024, reinstated Abure as LP’s National Chairman.

The court held that the High Court erred by restraining him from parading himself as the party’s national chairman.

In a unanimous judgment, Justice Harmman Barka held that the High Court listened to a matter over which it lacked jurisdiction, in the first instance.

The appellate court described the matter as purely an internal party issue, dismissed it, and awarded a cost of N1 million against Apapa.

But Arabambi faulted the judgment, saying the LP had filed an appeal at the apex court and had obtained a stay of execution order.

“The Acting National Chairman of Labour Party, Alhaji Bashiru Lamidi Apapa, has successfully filed an appeal on March 6, 2024, and has stayed the execution of the judgment delivered in favour of Julius Abure by an Abuja Court of Appeal in the Supreme Court through a motion for stay of execution filed on Thursday, March 7, 2024,” he said.

Arabambi also alleged that “Julius Abure had, earlier before today, forged the seal of the judge of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), forged the Commissioner of Oath’s signatures, and generated his own TSA receipts without payment to the Federal Government, consequent upon which the police established a prima facie case against him for forgery, criminal conspiracies, and perjury.”

He added: “You would also recall that sometime on May 12, 2023, the FCT High Court, presided over by Justice Hamza Mua’zu, dismissed the notice of preliminary objection filed by Abure and others challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the originating summons filed by Martins Esikpali and others. This was basically on the ground that there was an allegation of crime and that it’s a contentious issue in the said summons. As such, (it’s) not suitable for originating summons, which inherently meant that the case ought to have been commenced by a writ of summons so that oral evidence can be taken.”

Related Articles

Close