Ekweremadu asks court to dismiss application seeking to declare seat vacant

Senator Ekweremadu who hails from Mpu community in Aninri Local Government Area of Enugu State is representing Enugu West senatorial district at the upper legislative chamber of the National Assembly.
Former Deputy President Nigerian Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, has urged a Federal High Court sitting in Enugu State to dismiss the application seeking to declare his Senate Seat vacant.
Senator Ekweremadu who hails from Mpu community in Aninri Local Government Area of Enugu State is representing Enugu West senatorial district at the upper legislative chamber of the National Assembly.
However Ekweremadu and his wife are standing trial in the United Kingdom (UK) over alleged conspiracy to harvest organ, following their arrests by Specialist Crime Team of the Metropolitan Police in London in June 2022.
Sequel to his long absence in Nigeria to represent his constituency at the Senate, an Enugu based lawyer, OAO Onyema Esq filed an application before the Federal High Court, Enugu seeking to declare his seat vacant.
However, Ekweremadu through his lawyers, in a counter affidavit is challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the matter.
Led by Umoru Jubrin, the legal team asked the court to dismiss the matter with substantial cost against the plaintiff to discourage filing of frivolous applications.
In the counter affidavit, Ekweremadu’s counsels argued that all defendants in the suit reside in Abuja outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court.
They maintained that “the suit is speculative, academic and an abuse of court process,” adding that the plaintiff has no locus standi to approach the court to seek the declarative reliefs contained in his originating summons.”
In the case, which is coming up today, Wednesday, for argument, Ekweremadu’s counsels urged the court to consider the fact that Ekweremadu’s detention by the UK Government was totally against his wish, desire and control.
“That neither the first defendant as presiding officer nor the 2nd defendant has been presented with any evidence satisfactory as required under Section 68 (2) of the constitution to make the provisions of Section 68 (1) applicable as contemplated.
“That the suit as currently constituted is against the principles Separation of Powers in a Constitutional Democracy.
“That the Suit is an attempt to transfer the duties of the Legislature to the Judiciary. That there was no pre action Notice to the second defendant or the Clark of the National Assembly. That the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the suit as constituted.”