There was a mild drama in court on Monday during thee resumes hearing of the case instituted by erstwhile Director, Table Duties in the Senate, Dr. Christopoher Vershima Ashiekaa against the National Assembly Service Commission (NASC) and the National Assembly Management.
The case with suit No. NICN/ABJ/455/2024, is before the Honourable Justice Osatohanmwen Ayodele Obaseki-Osaghae and seeks judicial interpretation of Rule 020909 of the Public Service Rules, 2021 edition under which the Engr Ahmed Kadi Amshi-led NASC applied to prematurely terminate Dr. Ashiekaa’s appointment.
When the matter came up on Monday for final adoption of processes before the judgment, Counsel to the Commission (the first Defendant), Abdul Ibrahim, SAN, requested the presiding judge to recuse herself from the case and that the matter be directed to another court.
He argued that the two judgments which form the plank of the Ad. Ashiekaa’s case were passed by the President of the NICN, Honourable Justice B.B. Bakwaph Kanyip PhD who, in his view, was best suited to handle the claimant’s matter.
Justice Obaseki, who was taken aback, wondered why the defence counsel had not formally petitioned the President of the Court instead of raising the issue in open court at the last hour.
Just then, counsel to the 2nd defendant (National Assembly Management), Barrister Charlesa Yoila, also informed the court that he had received instructions from his client, the Clerk to the National Assembly (CAN), to seek transfer of the case from Justice Obaseki’s court.
According to him, from Justice Obaseki’s antecedent, he had concerns that justice could not be served in her court.
Barrister Yoila, who also challenged the jurisdiction of the court, further expressed the fear that several staff of the NASS were given notional appointments like Dr. Ashiekaa, pointing out that there would be a deluge of litigations from the affected staff should the Commission and the Management lose this case.
Responding, counsel to the Claimant, Barrister Daniel Penda, objected to all the submissions by the two defence counsels, whose complaints, he argued, should have come earlier by way of motions with the Claimant duly notified.
He also contended that if several National Assembly staff were waiting for the outcome of Dr. Ashiekaa’s case, it was enough reason to accelerate the case instead of stalling it.
Barrister Yoila therefore prayed the Honourable Judge to proceed with the case, pointing out that after all, discontented litigants always have the right of appeal.
In her ruling, Hon. Ju Obaseki noted that trust was an important element in the judicial process. Accordingly, she recused herself from the case since her impartiality and integrity were questioned by the defendants.
It would be recalled that Dr. Ashiekaa’s lawyer had during the last sitting on May 6, complained that the 1st defendant was using sleigh of hand tactics to delay the progress of the case. This followed defence counsel’s failure to appear in court under the pretext of “medical emergency.