Lagos State Government has moved to challenge the Federal Government of Nigeria on the Supreme Court ruling on the occupation of Magodo which has generated so much controversies.
The FGN had accused the state of delaying the enforcement of the February 10, 2012, judgement in suit no. SC/112/2002.
Africa Daily News, New York recalls that on January 5, Abubakar Malami, Attorney General and Justice Minister, decried the attack on President Muhammadu Buhari.
The AGF’s reaction followed South-West Governors’ condemnation after a Chief Superintendent of Police told Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu that officers deployed to Magodo would not leave.
Malami told them that his office ‘belongs to the Executive arm of the Government, while the Supreme Court belongs to the Judiciary.’
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) criticized their ‘unjustifiable insinuation of impunity’ over the execution of a judgment of the Supreme Court.
He recalled that the verdict was delivered in 2012, long before the start of the Buhari administration.
‘The judgment was a reaffirmation of the judgments of the Court of Appeal and High Court delivered on 31st December, 1993.’
The AGF advised the Governors to ‘unravel’ what’s preventing Lagos government from enforcing the order ‘despite attempts from 2012- 2015 and so-called settlement initiative started in 2016.’
Read Also: Niger Delta Oil Belongs To Nigeria, Obasanjo Hits Edwin Clark
Africa Daily News, New York gathered that on Friday, the state announced that it had returned to the Supreme Court. Gbenga Omotoso, Information Commissioner, issued an update on the settlement.
He said following Sanwo-Olu’s intervention, Lagos officials and representatives of the Shangisha Landlords Association (the judgment creditors) held a series of meetings.
‘At the said meetings two issues arose: There was a serious division among the judgment creditors as to who controlled or had the right to represent the Association; and
‘The demand by the judgment creditors that a single global Certificate of Occupancy should be issued in the name of the Association as opposed to the position of the State Government that each of the 549 members of the Association would be given allotment letters individually.
‘Given the sharp divide between the two factions of the judgment creditors on who has authority to represent the Association and the disagreement regarding whom the Certificate of Occupancy should be issued (collectively or individually), the State Government has approached the Supreme Court to seek further directives and clarifications on both issues.’
Omotoso also confirmed that Judgment Creditors have been served with the application.
AFRICA DAILY NEWS, NEW YORK
