The Court of Appeal in Abuja, Friday, affirmed April 27, 2023 decision of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), ordering Oyo State governor, Seyi Makinde, to pay the outstanding balance of N3,374,889,425.60 (N3.4b) from the N4,874,889,425.60 (N4.9b) debt, arising from a May 7, 2021 judgment of the Supreme Court.
The N4,874,889,425.60 debt arose from the judgment of the Supreme Court, given against Makinde, the state’s Attorney-General, Accountant-General and four others in an appeal by chairmen and councillors elected on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), but sacked on May 29, 2019 by Makinde, upon assuming office.
In a unanimous judgment, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal deplored Makinde’s conduct, which it described as disrespectful of the nation’s judicial system.
The appellate court, upheld that arguments by the lawyer to the ex-council chiefs, Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), resolved the two issues identified for determination against the appellants and dismissed the appeal filed by Makinde and six others for lacking in merit.
The court also awarded N50 million cost against Makinde and the other appellants, to be paid to the ex-council chiefs led by Bashorun Mojeed Bosun Ajuwon.
The judgment was on the appeal marked: CA/595/2023 filed by Makinde, the Oyo State’s Attorney General, the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Accountant General of Oyo State, Speaker of Oyo State House of Assembly, the House of Assembly and Oyo State Independent Electoral Commission (OYSIEC).
In the lead judgment, Justice Danlami Senchi, held that as against the contention by the appellants, there was no dispute in relation to the amount that constituted the judgment debt.
The judge referred to a letter written on December 13, 2021 by the Attorney General of Oyo State, where the state put the salaries and allowances due to the ex-council chiefs at N4,874,889,425.60 and pledged to pay everything within six months.
He said the court could not allow Oyo State Government and its officials to approbate and reprobate, blow hot and cold at the same time by claiming the amount constituting the debt was not ascertained despite the letter by the AG and the fact that the appellants took steps to settle the debt by making part payment.
Justice Senchi also faulted the appellants’ contention that the ex-council chiefs failed to first obtain the consent of the Oyo State Attorney General before initiating a garnishee proceeding to seize the state’s funds to settle the judgment debt.
The judge said asking the ex-council chiefs to first seek and obtain the consent of the Oyo AG, (he is one of the judgment debtors) amounts to making him to be a judge in his own case, which requirement is unfair to the judgment creditors.
