Supreme Court Ruling Settles Labour Party Leadership Crisis — Chairman Abure

The National Chairman of the Labour Party, Julius Abure has said issues bordering on factions in the party had been laid to rest by the judgement of the Supreme Court, which emphatically stated that a dissident group led by a former Deputy National Chairman, Lamidi Apapa, lacked the locus to act on behalf of the party, including to throw up candidates for election.

Abure also clarified that while a Federal High Court in Benin and the Court of Appeal had since delivered judgements, which recognised him as the substantive national chairman of the party, the interim order by an FCT High Court, which Apapa and his cohorts had been relying on, no longer had life after seven days based on Order 43, rule 3, sub rule 2 of the civil procedure rules.

Labour Party’s National Chairman, who spoke to journalists yesterday in response to some issues raised by a former member of the party, Abayomi Arabambi, in his recent interview with the Channels Television maintained that the interim order by the FCT High Court which has since expired was not and could not be superior to judgements delivered by both Appeal and High courts.

While making clarifications between the cases in Federal High Court Abuja and all the matters presided over in Benin High Court and the Court of Appeal, Abure said all the cases were one and the same, and that they were the same subject matter and that his purported suspension by Ward 3 in Uromi was the root of both cases.

Abure said while the FCT High Court was an interim order, the case in Benin had been decided and had gone to the Court of Appeal in Benin, where the court decided that all purported suspension and actions taken therefrom, actions being on such suspension, had been declared null and void and the suspension nullified.

The national chairman of the party said this was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Benin which stated that all those who purportedly suspended him and any subsequent action taken thereto are all meddlesome interloper.

He cited Order 43, rule 3, sub rule 2 of the civil procedure rules, which provided that, “An order of injunction made upon an application exparte shall abate after 7 days. That Sub rule 3 also provides that such an interim order can be extended upon application by the parties.

“If we single out the case in FCT, the case in FCT was an interim order and based on the rules of the FCT High Court, that court order no longer has life after seven day. In the instance case, it has lapsed except it is extended or renewed and it is not to our knowledge that it is renewed.

“You must also note that FCT High Court itself by Justice Muazu has stayed the proceedings and the order since their appeal has been entered in the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal has equally also stayed the order and the proceedings in the FCT High Court pending the hearing and determination of a matter at the Court of Appeal.”