The management of Moni Pulo Limited have pointed out the obvious abuse of power, court process, and bias of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC against it and its Chairman, Dr Seinye Lulu-Briggs. They made the allegation in reaction to an ex parte order of an Abuja High Court authorizing the EFCC, the police and other security agencies to arrest Dr. Seinye Lulu-Briggs anywhere sighted within or outside Nigeria.
The order is sequel to a suit: FHC/ABJ/C3/653/2022, between the EFCC and Dr Seinye Lulu-Briggs before Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo.
In the suit filed on May 12, 2022, the EFCC prayed the court to issue a warrant of arrest against Dr Seinye Lulu-Briggs on May 16, 2022 by Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo.
The management of Moni Pulo Limited said the court order is not only an illustration of gross abuse of power and court processes, harassment, intimidation, disregard to the rule of law but also a violation of Dr Lulu-Briggs’ fundamental human rights by the EFCC.
The bone of contention is an alleged claim of ownership of 30% shares in MPL by the estate of late Dan Obuekwe and his alleged removal as a shareholder in MPL.
The MPL management regretted that the court could grant such prayer of warrant of arrest by the EFCC when in the entire case by the anti-graft agency, no single case of crime was made against Dr Lulu-Briggs save for the fact that she is the current Chairman of the oil and gas company, which according to it has nothing to do with act of terrorism, banditry, embezzlement of public funds, money laundering or any act of official corruption for which the EFCC was created.
Alleging bias and complicity against Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo, the MPL management said their legal team had in February this year, authored a pending petition against Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria. Dr Seinye Lulu-Briggs had also made a formal application before justice Taiwo O. Taiwo to recuse himself from further handling any matter involving MPL and its shareholders because of obvious and manifest bias.
The petition by MPL to the chief Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria according to the MPL hinged but not limited to the following:
The obvious and manifest bias against Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders in the handling of Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1576/2019.
The consistency with which Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo failed to consider any argument made on behalf of Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders in coming to all the decisions he made in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1576/2019;
The consistency with which Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo sidestepped or brushed aside the provisions of the Rules of Court in his desperation to assist the Plaintiffs in the entire duration of Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1576/2019;
Failure to make a definitive pronouncement on the preliminary objection filed by Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders, thereby giving the Plaintiffs the unwarranted opportunity to correct the fundamental defect in the originating processes;
The waiver of the payment of filing fees for the Plaintiffs in respect of the originating process that the Judge found to be defective and incomplete;
Ignoring the record and processes of the court in giving decisions in favour of the Plaintiffs;
Acting as a tool in the hands of the Plaintiffs in handing down his decisions in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1576/2019.
Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo was also accused of having a predetermined outcome in dealing with the case and the overt and covert acts of frustrating the right of appeal of Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders by refusing to make the rulings and case file available for the timely compilation and transmission of record in respect of appeals emanating from his decisions.
The alleged issue of forfeiture of shares in MPL by Dan Obuekwe according to the petitioners took place between 1991 and 1996, long before Dr Lulu-Briggs became a shareholder and director of MPL.
“In the petition written by Dan Obuekwe to the EFCC in 2007, an allegation of forgery of Corporate Affairs Commission, (CAC) documents was made against Chief Dumo Lulu-Briggs who, at that time acted as Company Secretary of MPL.
“Upon a full-blown investigation, the EFCC concluded that the issues were purely commercial in nature and there was no crime-financial or economic offense made by MPL and the late High Chief O. B. Lulu-Briggs.
“Notwithstanding, EFCC prevailed on the late Kalabari High Chief and MPL to ‘settle’ Dan Obuekwe, leading to the execution of a Deed of Settlement dated 27th February 2008 between late High Chief O. B. Lulu-Briggs, Dan Obuekwe and MPL,” the petitioners further alleged.
“About four years after the execution of the Deed of Settlement and the ensuing receipt of monetary compensation to Dan Obuekwe from MPL, he resorted to Court by filing an action in 2012 before the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt repeating the same claim to shares in MPL. MPL defended this case with clear evidence.The Court delivered judgment in the case on 21st April 2015, holding that Dan Obuekwe did not prove that he held shares in MPL. The Court consequently declined his claim to the 30% stake in OML114. To date, there has been no appeal against the said judgment.”
“Despite the judgment of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt, the administrators of the estate of Dan Obuekwe filed a fresh action on 4th February 2021 before the Federal High Court, Calabar; claiming the same reliefs as were in Dan Obuekwe’s Federal High Court, Port Harcourt suit that was decided against him on21stApril 2015.
In the Calabar suit, the said administrators of Dan Obuekwe reeled out a litany of the same petitions. It is this information that the EFCC has relied upon in applying for the warrant of arrest against Dr. Lulu-Briggs. MPL and Dr. Lulu-Briggs who are listed as defendants to the Federal High Court, Calabar suit have made a counterclaim against the estate of Dan Obuekwe, relying on the judgment delivered on 21stApril 2015 by the Federal High Court Port Harcourt. Despite the fact that the suit is pending-which MPL has formally communicated to EFCC, EFCC has continued to subject Dr. Lulu-Briggs and MPL to unending investigations and harassment over a civil matter that is sub judice.
“Since 2016 till date, the EFCC is being engaged by faceless persons who claim to be the administrators of the estate of Dan Obuekwe to hound and intimidate MPL and Dr. Lulu-Briggs over issues that had been settled via a monetary payment based on the 27th February 2008 Deed of Settlement and in court by the judgment of the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt on 21st April 2015,” the MPL further claimed.
In 2018, upon the demise of her husband, High Chief O. B. Lulu-Briggs, the EFCC also allegedly placed Dr. Lulu-Briggs on the immigration watchlist.
Other Suits against Dr. Mrs Seinye Lulu-Briggs since then include Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1576/2019 between Mr Senibo Lulu-Briggs, Dumo Lulu-Briggs and Sofiri Lulu-Briggs V. Dr. Seinye Lulu-Briggs before Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo and Suit No: FHC/CS/1481/2021 between Mr Senibo Lulu-Briggs, Dumo Lulu-Briggs and 2 others V. Dr. Mrs Seinye Lulu-Briggs and 5 others which was also transferred to Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo for hearing.
In coming to conclusion of bias against Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo, the MPL alleged the following:
“Honourable Justice Taiwo completely turned a blind eye to the fact that the Defendants have a subsisting Counterclaim which was filed on 9th November, 2020 and deemed properly filed and served on 17th November, 2020, over seven (7) months before the filing of the Notice of Discontinuance by the Plaintiffs. It is therefore strange for Justice Taiwo to hold that issues have not been joined in a case where the Defendants had long filed a defence together with a counterclaim. Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo struck out the suit together with the counterclaim without a prayer to that effect, and thereby denying us the fundamental right to fair hearing regarding our counterclaim that remained unchallenged, and despite the argument by our Counsel that the withdrawal of the claims by the Plaintiffs has no effect on the counterclaim, a position the Judge deliberately refused to make a pronouncement on.
“Similarly, Honourable Justice Taiwo also deliberately ignored his own record and scheduling of the case on several dates for hearing in holding that the matter had not been fixed for hearing. Thus, we invite My Lord, the Honourable Chief Judge to note the proceedings of 26th February, 2020 when Justice Taiwo adjourned the case to 26th April, 2020 for hearing; on 29th May, 2020, the Court adjourned the matter to 24th June, 2020 for hearing, and on 24th June, 2020, the case was adjourned to 14th July, 2020 for hearing; on 3rd September, 2020, the Court again adjourned the hearing of the matter to 27th October, 2020. Furthermore, by the hearing notice dated 1st December, 2020, the matter was slated for 3rd December, 2020 for hearing. The proceedings and hearing notices are collectively attached as Annexures 10, On all these dates, it is on record that the matter was listed on the Cause List for hearing. Similarly on 22nd July, 2021, the matter was slated on the Cause List of the Honourable Court for hearing. Having kept the Defendants in court for closeto two years with huge cost, Honourable Justice Taiwo, upon striking out the matter, again shown his bias against the Defendants by refusing our Counsel’s application for cost as stipulated by Order 25 Rule of Court. In fact, turning a complete blind eye to the right of the Defendants was Justice Taiwo’s mission in this case and he carried out that mission to the pleasure and benefit of the Plaintiffs without any form of pretence.
“Dissatisfied with the ruling of the Court which has occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice against the Defendants, we again instructed our lawyers to file an appeal against same. See Annexure 11. Several months after the filing of the Notice of Appeal on 5th October, 2021, the court deliberately refused to make the ruling available for the compilation and transmission of record until late in December, 2021, thereby making it impossible for the record to be transmitted on time for a second time.
“We respectfully and unhesitatingly state that the various acts of Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo with respect to the First Suit as highlighted above constitute unfair, bias and prejudicial conduct against Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders and such exercise of judicial powers by the Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo has called the integrity and fairness of the Federal High Court to serious question. The brazen conduct of the Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo in the First Suit leaves very sour grapes in the mouth of the Defendants therein who have not gone outside the bounds of the law in seeking redress before the Court of Appeal in a manner enshrined in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. In view of the foregoing, we are convinced without doubt that Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo has become a willing tool in the hands of the Plaintiffs in respect of the subject matter of the suit.
“Given the facts as established above, we have reasonable cause to believe that Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo is highly and unapologetically prejudiced against Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders and the Judge is determined to assist the Plaintiffs in a certain pre-arranged manner, to achieve a vicious, dubious and fraudulent takeover of Moni Pulo limited not minding whatever defence put up by the Defendants in respect of the subject matter of the suits.
“My Lord, we are aware that justice is rooted in confidence. The judex must always act in such a way as to retain the confidence of the parties and the public in any judicial process. As admonished by the decisions of the Supreme Court, confidence is destroyed when right-minded people go away thinking that the Judge is biased or compromised in the discharge of his judicial functions. We are aware that the likelihood of bias is sufficient to activate the powers of My Lord, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, to reassign the case pursuant to Order 49 Rules 1 and 2 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules and Section 1 (2) of the Federal High Court Act.
“Going by the sequence of events as narrated above, we strongly believe that Honourable Taiwo O. Taiwo has predetermined to employ a compromised, biased and prejudiced legal process against Moni Pulo Limited and its shareholders and to handover the company and its business to the Plaintiffs notwithstanding the defence or any argument made by the Defendants”, the MPL further stressed.
The MPL therefore appealed to the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria to grant it the following prayers:
To intervene in this matter in order to protect and uphold the dignity, sanctity and integrity of the Federal High Court which your Lordship is privileged to head as the Chief Judge. We implore My Lord, the Honourable Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, in the interest of justice, fairness and the applicable Rules.
To retrieve the case file in Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1481/2021; Mr. Senibo Lulu-Briggs & Ors v. Dr. Seinye Peterba Lulu-Briggs & Ors, from the Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo sitting at the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court;
To transfer Suit No.: FHC/ABJ/CS/1481/2021; Mr. Senibo Lulu-Briggs & Ors v. Dr. Seinye Peterba Lulu-Briggs & Ors from the Abuja Division to Lagos Division of the Federal High Court given that most of the defendants and plaintiffs reside and/or have their places of business in Lagos; and
To re-assign the case to another Judge of the Lagos Division of this Honourable Court for hearing and determination.
MPL prayed that his Lordship will consider the grave travesty of justice in this case and the bias disposition of Honourable Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo in the First Suit in granting our humble and harmless supplication in this petition.
Recall that Dr. Seinye Lulu-Briggs’ petition for transfer of her case from Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo was allegedly made earlier and had been pending before the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court long before the issuance of the controversial warrant of arrest against Dr. Mrs. Lulu-Briggs at the instance of Hon. Justice Taiwo O. Taiwo.
