The FIFA recognised chairman of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF), Amaju Pinnick, has asked a court to vacate its order that sacked him from office.
Following his request, the Jos Federal High Court on Wednesday fixed July 10 for hearing of the motions filed by Pinnick, challenging the ex parte order it granted Chris Giwa, who has assumed office as president of the federation.
Pinnick approached the court for the relief after the Nigerian government implemented the order of the high court.
Musa Kurya, the presiding judge in the case between Yahaya Adama and Aminu Maigari had, on June 5, made an exparte order asking Pinnick’s NFF leadership to vacate the Glass House for the Giwa-led executive.
Based on the order, the sports minister, Solomon Dalung, said he had been advised by the justice ministry to ensure the NFF complies with the order.
But Pinnick, through his counsel, Festus Keyamo, stormed the court yesterday with two motions demanding the vacation of the order granted Giwa and others, pending the determination of an application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case.
Though the case was heard in the chamber, the two counsels in the matter spoke to journalists shortly after.
Festus Ukpe, who stood in for Keyamo, explained: “We came to court to challenge the order which the court gave to Giwa led Exco. “Our aim or intention was to move our two motions, but the counsel to Adama and Ogba, Habila Ardzard, opposed it on the ground that they only got possession of the motions today (Wednesday).
“We told the judge that there was need for the court to hear these motions because of our fear of what Giwa will do in these few days that he claims he has power over Glass House.
“That is why we argued that there was the need for the judge to vacate his order since we were not given fair hearing in the matter, which we are not a party to but for our interest.”
Ukpe said that after both sides made their submissions, the judge ruled and fixed July 10 for the hearing of the motions because of the urgency.
Also, Ardzard said he had to oppose Pinnick from moving the motions “because by law, we are entitled to seven days within which we could study the motion and reply from the date of its receipt.