Godwin Tsa, Abuja
Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja, has ordered the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) to comply with judgement of the Supreme Court in respect of OML112 Offshore and to stop the deduction of N502, 298,943.03 or any sum whatsoever forming the proprietary rights of Rivers State Government.
In addition, Justice Taiwo Taiwo has ordered the defendants to make a full refund of the 13 percent derivation illegally denied the plaintiff from the crude oil and gas production within OML 112 offshore from September 2018 till the determination of the suit; and thereafter.
He equally ordered the attorney general of the federation, the accountant general of the federation and the RMAFC to pay interest at the various commercial rates not being less than 15 percent per annum with monthly rests, on the illegally deducted and denied 13 percent derivation due to the plaintiff from OML 112 offshore until satisfaction of the whole debt.
Justice Taiwo further restrained the defendants, their agents, assigns, representatives, privies or howsoever called from disregarding the finality of the Supreme Court judgement delivered on March 18, 2011 in Suit No: SC/27/2010, between: Attorney General of Rivers State and Attorney General of Akwa Ibom State and Anor as it relates to the proprietary rights of the plaintiff in respect of OML 112 offshore.
The suit was instituted by the attorney general of Rivers State to challenge the deduction of N502, 298,943.03 accruing from OML 112 from the statutory allocation of the state by the defendants.
Meanwhile, before the judgement, the court resisted attempts by counsel to RMAFC, Prof. Taiwo Osipitan (SAN) to arrest the judgement via an application for stay of proceedings.
Justice Taiwo, who dismissed the application for lacking in merit, held that it did not meet the condition precedent for it to be granted.
While describing the application as a veil attempt to arrest his judgement, Taiwo said the rules of the court did not donate to him the power to arrest his own judgement.
Taiwo after analysing the issues canvassed in the originating summons and the counter affidavit filed by the accountant general of the federation, resolved all the issues in favour of the plaintiff.
He noted that the non-filing of a counter affidavit by the first defendant to challenge the facts contained the affidavit in support of the originating summons was fatal to his case.
Justice Taiwo held that the consequence of an unchallenged affidavit is that the facts are uncontroverted and well established.