Ex-presidential candidate fined N5m as S’Court dismisses suit against Tinubu

Ex-presidential candidate fined N5m as S’Court dismisses suit against Tinubu

The Supreme Court on Monday imposed a fine of N5m on a former presidential candidate, Ambrose Owuru, for filing what it described as a frivolous and vexatious suit against President Bola Tinubu.

Owuru had approached the apex court, seeking Tinubu’s removal from office under Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution.

In the suit, marked SC/CV/667/2023, Owuru  alleged that the President was under the control of foreign authorities.

He contended that Tinubu should be disqualified from office for alleged non-qualification to hold the office of President and alleged usurpation of the Presidency in violation of the law.

He further alleged that Tinubu was an “active agent of the CIA,” which he claimed automatically disqualified him from leading Nigeria.

Owuru also referenced Tinubu’s forfeiture of $460,000 to U.S. authorities over an alleged drug trafficking-related offence as grounds for disqualification.

The former presidential candidate, who contested the 2019 election on the platform of the Hope Democratic Party, sought a declaration from the court proclaiming him as Nigeria’s legitimate President and called for his immediate inauguration to reclaim what he described as his “usurped mandate.”

He claimed that he won the 2019 presidential election but his tenure was allegedly usurped by former President Muhammadu Buhari for eight years.

Owuru further alleged that his earlier suit to remove Buhari from office was derailed by the Supreme Court due to a scheduling error.

But a five-member panel of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Uwani Aba-Aji, unanimously dismissed Owuru’s suit, labelling it a gross abuse of court processes and a waste of judicial resources.

The court warned Owuru against further frivolous filings and directed the Supreme Court Registry to reject any similar originating summons from him.

Justice Aba-Aji remarked, “You are taking this court for a ride. This is a gross abuse of the judicial process.”

During the proceedings, Owuru, a British-trained lawyer called to the Nigerian Bar in 1984, attempted to argue his case while donning his legal wig and gown.

Read Also: Presidential election suit: ‘Why Supreme Court fined…

However, the court ordered him to remove them, citing improper conduct.

Upon compliance, the court questioned why he had returned with another case after previous dismissals.

Owuru’s explanations were deemed unconvincing, prompting the court to threaten a referral to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee for his conduct, which was described as unbecoming of a senior lawyer.

Tinubu’s counsel, Bode Olanipekun (SAN), noted that Owuru’s numerous cases had consistently been dismissed for their lack of merit.

Professor Taiwo Osipitan (SAN) also told the court that Owuru’s conduct would be referred to the Nigerian Bar Association for further action.

It was also recalled that the Court of Appeal had previously fined Owuru N40m, payable to Tinubu, the Independent National Electoral Commission , and other parties for filing frivolous suits.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court dismissed Owuru’s case and fined him N5m, payable to Tinubu.

The ruling All Progressives Congress hailed the judgment, saying President Tinubu had been vindicated.

In an interview with The PUNCH, the APC National Publicity Director, Bala Ibrahim, lambasted Owuru for filing the suit, saying the apex court was right to throw it out.

Ibrahim said, “It means the long wheel of justice will always roll to the side of the innocent, no matter how long it takes. There may be delay, but sometimes justice comes and it vindicates the innocent.

“Nigeria is a country that is filled with frivolities. People just engage in smear campaigns, slander and campaign of calumny against people just because of political differences. With the judgment today, the President has been vindicated and cleared.

“It is not about the fine. The magnitude of the money is insignificant and immaterial. What is material is that the court, in its wisdom, felt the President has been slandered and allotted to him something to cushion the effect and to serve as a deterrent to those who may want to do it again in future so they know the consequences.

“It is a shame on the person who made those allegations. He should bury his head in shame. One of the consequences is that it is his reputation that is now damaged and not the President’s as he planned.”