Abuja Land Case: Shehu Malami Is Not Above The Law, Says Supreme Court

By Ekele peter
April 1

The Supreme Court has warned that it will not condone a breach of the rule of law by the powerful and the influential in the country.

The apex court served the notice on Tuesday March 28, 2017during hearing of a property suit involving Sokoto Prince, Elder Statesman and former Nigeria’s Ambassador to South Africa, Alhaji Shehu Malami and businessman Sir Emeka Offor as Appellants, and a Nigerian-American businessman in Diaspora, Mr Imokhuede Ohikhuare as First Respondent.
The property in dispute is Plot 1809 Asokoro, Abuja, which both Malami and Offor seized from Ohikhuare four years ago based on a judgment delivered by an Abuja High Court Judge, A.S. Umar, in a suit filed by Ambassador Malami. On the land is a N1 billion two-wing duplex built by Mr. Ohikhuare.
However, in a unanimous decision delivered on May 28, 2015, the Court of Appeal, Abuja restored the ownership of the property to Mr. Ohikhuare, a verdict which is now on appeal at the Supreme Court. The Appeal Court had ruled that the Abuja High Court judgment was legally deficient because Malami “no longer had the power to initiate proceedings at the lower court for himself because it is settled that an Irrevocable Power of Attorney given for valuable consideration robs the donor of power to exercise any of the powers conferred on the donee.”
Since Malami had divested his interest in the land, the Appeal Court reasoned, he cannot institute any legal case on it, as the Supreme Court had ruled in the precedent case of Edebiri vs Omotayo, which the current Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen delivered on February 11, 2014 in suit Number SC./440/2012 involving Mrs. Mojisola Edebiri (Appellant) and Prince Omotayo Daniel & ANOR (Respondents).
At this latest hearing, the Supreme Court resolved the lingering issue of Malami’s legal representation in the appeal bearing his name alongside Offor, which controversy had stalled the case at the apex court thrice in the past. When proceedings started, it immediately became clear to the panel of five Supreme Court Justices led by Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour (JSC) that Mr. Joe Agi (SAN) and Barrister Shaka Awaliene, who both claimed to represent Malami in suit, had failed to resolve their conflicting claims as sternly ordered by the apex court on November 15, 2016.
Taking Awaliene to task on the matter, the Supreme Court justices told him that they had nothing before them to prove conclusively that he had Malami’s brief to represent him in the matter. Awaliene’s argument that the apex court should accept a sworn affidavit deposed to by Malami, which was before the court, as conclusive evidence that he had Malami’s brief to represent him in the appeal, which the elder statesman wants to withdraw from the Supreme Court, failed to convince the justices of the Supreme Court.