Godwin Tsa, Abuja

For the second time, Justice Inyang Ekwo of a Federal High Court has ordered the Inspector-General (IG), Muhammed Adamu and others parties in the suit over the recruitment of 10,000 officers to maintain status quo. 

Meanwhile, there was drama in court as counsel to the Police and the Attorney General of the Federation, Dr. Alex Izinyon threatened to withdraw his appearance in the matter.

The suit was brought by the Police Service Commission (PSC) challenging the powers of the  the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) to recruit over 10,000 constable.

A similar order was made on October 23 when the matter first  amendment came up for mention in court.

Specifically, Justice Ekwo ordered parties to stay any action in the interim. He held that this was necessary since parties have submitted themselves to court for settlement of the matter.

Related News

His decision followed a complainant by counsel to the plaintiff,  Barth Ogar, that the IGP had gone ahead with the recruitment in spite of the court’s order restraining him from doing so.

“My Lord, in fact, the police has gone ahead to carry out the recruitment exercise in spite of the court’s order. The recruited officers have been asked to report to various Police Training Schools in the country,’’ he said.

However, Mr Alex Izinyon, counsel to the IG, threatened to withdraw from the suit if he was not accorded the same opportunity as the plaintiff’s counsel, to explain the decision of his client. He informed the court that since the recruitment exercise had reached a certain stage, the court should not have maintained the status quo stand.

Justice Ekwo had adjourned the matter to November 11 for hearing, saying preliminary objection would be taken with substantive matter on the date.

“The process of any party that is absent from the court on the next day of the court shall be deemed to have been adopted and the order for status quo remains,” Ekwo had said.

But Izinyon reacted: “With great respect My Lord, the last part of your order, that was the issue before Your Lordship at the last adjournment. I am surprised, with great respect Your Lordship did not allow me to say a word before saying the order of status quo. There was no order my Lord with the greatest respect that Your Lordship had adjourned the matter.”