Authorities of Nigeria Prisons Service in Kuje Abuja say the former Governor of Abia State, Mr. Orji Uzor Kalu will remain in Kuje Prison because the judgment of the Supreme Court does not affect him.
The Prisons Service said the the Supreme Court did not issue any order for Kalu’s release because he did not file any application for such, adding that the judgment only covers the Appellant, Mr. Ude Jones Udeogu, who challenged the propriety of a Court of Appeal Judge, Justice Mohammed Idris to try him.
It has also been revealed that the Supreme Court clearly stated that the judgment relates only to the Appellant.
The lead judgment delivered by Justice Ejembi Eko reads in part: “I hereby allow this appeal. Section 386(7) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act ( ACJA), 2015 is in my view, an unnecessarily gratuitous legislative interference with, intrusion into or an outright usurpation of the appointing powers of the Executive arm consigned specifically to the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by the Constitution in Sections 250(1) and 238(2) thereof.
“The “FlAT/permission” issued on 2nd July, 2018, by the President, Court of Appeal to the Honourable, Justice M.. B. ldris, JCA to proceed to the Federal High Court, Lagos and conclude the part-heard .criminal matter: FHC/ABJ/CR/56/07-, notwithstanding the fact that the Honourable, Justice M. B. Idris, JCA, upon his elevation to the Court of Appeal had ceased, not only to be a judge of the Federal High Court but also to have and exercise the powers and jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, is ultra vires Sections 1(2)(a) and 19(3) and (4) of the Federal High Court Act, the same being an outright usurpation of the powers of the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court.
“The said FIAT/Permission, issued without any lawful or constitutional authority and being a nullity, is hereby set aside. AII steps, including actions, proceedings and decisions and orders issued, taken and/or conducted pursuant to the said FIAT/Permission dated 2nd July, 2018 as they pertain to and relate to the Appellant(Ude) herein are hereby set aside. The judgment of the Court of Appea\ No. ‘CA/L/1064C/2018, delivered on 24th April 2019, particularly in respect of the Appellant and as it affected him is hereby set aside.
“The case No. FHC/ABJ/CR/56/2007 as it pertains or relates to the Appellant as the 2nd Defendant at the trial court, is hereby remitted to the Chief Judge of Federal High Court for re-assignment to another judge if the Federal High Court for trial de novo. Appeal allowed,” the court stated.