The Supreme Court yesterday deferred rendering its decision until March 3 after the presidential election, crushing the hopes of many Nigerians for a fast resolution of the lawsuit brought by some State governments against the Federal Government’s naira redesign policy.
A seven-member panel of the court led by Justice John Okoro fixed judgment date after hearing arguments canvassed by counsel to both parties for an against the policy.
Before that, the apex court had consolidated the multiple suits filed by various states governments including the action brought the Abia and Rivers States.
At the last sitting on Wednesday February 15, two states – Edo and Bayelsa – joined the side of the federal government in the suit, while seven others joined the side of the original three plaintiffs.
f
The newly-joined co-plaintiffs are Cross River (South-south), Sokoto (North-west), Lagos (South-west), Ogun (South-west), Katsina (North-west), Ondo (South-west) and Ekiti (South-west) states.
Also, Jigawa and Nasarawa states joined the litigation as co-plaintiffs.
On the other hand, Rivers, Kano, Jigawa and Nasarawa states had maintained that their own case was different.
They maintained that their case was not only with the Naira swap policy, but also with the cash withdrawal limits allowed by the CBN for corporate bodies and individuals.
However in consolidating all the cases, the Supreme Court noted that the issue in dispute resolves around Section 20(3) of the CBN Act.
It held that there was no need for more states to apply for permission to join the litigation as others so interested lshould abide by its decision in the matter.
This came with a warning by the court that it would not allow the Federal and State governments to turn the judiciary to a scapegoat over the issue.
Justice John Okoro leading six other members of the panel issued the warning after consolidating the multiple suits filed by the various states over the subject matter.
Meanwhile, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami, urged the court to dismiss the case of the plaintiffs for want of competence.
In his preliminary objection that was moved by Mr. Tijjani Gazali, the AGF maintained that the Supreme Court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.
Listing his grounds for challenging power of the Supreme Court to intervene in the matter, Malami accused the plaintiffs of opposing FG’s power, through its agency, the CBN, to withdraw old banknotes and introduce new ones.
“The plaintiffs’ suit is about the power vested on the Central Bank of Nigeria by the Central Bank of Nigeria Act, 2007 to call in its banknotes and introduce new ones.
It is also the contention of the Federal Government that “The plaintiffs have no reasonable cause of action against the defendant,” he said.
Regardless, the plaintiffs, urged the court not to exercise any favourable discretion to Federal Government which they argued acted in contempt of a subsisting order of the court.
In its submission, Lagos State told the court that its case was different, lamenting that the new monetary policy constrained it from carrying out its statutory functions as a state.
Before standing down proceedings, the court allowed all the states it joined as interested parties in the matter to regularise their processes.
It bemoaned the fact that the dispute had placed the judiciary in the eye of the storm.
The Attorney-General of Lagos State, Mr. Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), had before the court went on 10 minutes break, drew attention to the fact that it had yet to receive any process from the Federal Government, in respect of the case.
Onigbanjo noted that with the development, the planned hearing of the consolidated suits of the states may be hampered.
However, before Onigbanjo could conclude his submission, the apex court panel restated its resolve to ensure that the matter was expeditiously heard and determined.
“We want to make it very clear that we are going to hear this matter today because we don’t want a situation where the judiciary will be made a scapegoat.
“With the way this matter is going, they want to make the judiciary a scapegoat but we can’t allow that.
“We are going to hear everything and take our decision. If you have a contempt proceeding, we will also hear it today,” leader of the panel, Justice Okoro stated.
Upon its resumed proceedings after the break, it okayed a joinder application that was filed by Abia State.
Meanwhile, Zamfara state, through its counsel, Mr. Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), urged the apex court to set aside the broadcast that President Muhammadu Buhari made on February 16, wherein he okayed only the old N200 banknote to remain a legal tender till April 10.
Owonikoko argued that the President’s directive was a direct affront on the interim order of the apex court that restrained the Federal Government from proceeding with the full implementation of the CBN’s monetary policy.
A seven-member panel of the court had ordered that the February 10 deadline set for the ending of the validity of the old banknotes be suspended.
The court also ordered that the old N200, N500, and N1000 banknotes should circulate alongside their newly redesigned versions pending a further hearing in the case.