Monday 24 November 2014

2015: Robbers Visit Law Firm, Steal Court Documents On Jonathan’s Eligibility

Suspected armed robbers at the weekend stormed the law firm of one of the plaintiffs in the suit challenging the eligibility of President Goodluck Jonathan to re-contest in the 2015 general elections, Wahab Olatoye, and stole most of the files containing documents to be used in the eligibility suit filed at a Federal High Court in Abuja.

Olatoye alongside one Adejumo Ajagbe, approached the court seeking an order restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Attorney-General of Federation (AGF) from allowing Jonathan and Sambo to seek re-election for their respective offices in 2015.

While talking to newsmen, Olatoye said his office burgled on Friday night and vital documents he is using to pursue his case against the President and other vital documents were taken away.

He added that the crime had since been reported to the Garki Police station.

“It is really a great surprise to me, when I was called on Saturday morning that my office had been burgled by yet to be identified persons. It was my office alone that was burgled out of all the offices in the plaza. The thieves came in through the ceiling and ransacked all the files in my office.

“Although, they made away with some amount of money I left in the office, they also took away some documents, especially the ones I am using in pursuing my case against the eligibilty of President Goodluck Jonathan.

“As a plaintiff in the matter and a legal practitioner, there are some documents I need to hand over to my lawyers which I kept in the office. All my computer systems in the office were also destroyed, the office safe was also destroyed.

“The matter have been reported to the FCDA police station in Garki, and the police have promised to come around on Monday morning for further investigation”, Olatoye stated.

Olatoye and Ajagbe had anchored their suit against Jonathan on the provisions of sections 132(1), 135(2)(a) and (b), 137(1)(b), 142(1) and (2) of the Constitution and the Supreme Court decisions.

The plaintiffs argued that by the virtue of constitutional provisions, the President and the Vice President elected in the same election and sworn into office on the same date and ceremony were taken to have been elected for one single term of four years.

No comments:

Post a Comment