SANUSI ACCUSED FOR FINANCING TERRORISM

News heating the air waves says that Sanusi is been accused of funding terrorism in Nigeria. Every one has their respective views on this matter. Please read on for more details and share your views:



The Federal Government and The State Security Service (SSS) has accused the suspended CBN Governor, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi of financing terrorism.
This allegation was made in court via affidavits, following a suit filed by the ex-CBN Head, asking the court to issue an injunction preventing the police and SSS from arresting him.
Sanusi's Lawyer, Mr. Kola Awodein, told the Court on Monday that-
“The seizure of the applicant’s international passport by the third respondent is a violation of his freedom of movement.
“The first to third respondents give conflicting reasons as to the complaint made against the applicant: This conflict goes to show that they acted without due process of the law.
“The allegation against the applicant as to funding of terrorism is an afterthought by the respondents, which is not backed by facts, as there is no reasonable suspicion that the applicant committed any crime.
The Attorney General of the Federation, represented by Dr. Fabian Ajogwu (SAN), and Mr. David Abuo and Mr. Moses Idakwo, for the police and the SSS respectively, asked the court on Monday to dismiss Sanusi’s suit for lack of jurisdiction.
The AGF’s counsel, Ajogwu, argued that the applicant could not by his suit, seek to restrain the respondents from performing their constitutional and statutory duties.
Ajogwu said, “My Lord, this suit is speculative, hypocritical and an attempt to shield the applicant from the machinery of the administration of justice, which the Federal Government has started.
“My Lord, we respectfully submit that the applicant is not entitled to a grant of perpetual injunction, restraining the respondents from performing their constitutional duties.”
Ajogwu, while moving his preliminary objection to the suit, argued that the suit belies on employment and as such the provisions of Section 254 (c) 1 (d) of the 1999 Constitution had vested jurisdiction to entertain such suit in the National Industrial Court.
He said, “Section 254 (c) 1 (d) of the constitution vests exclusive jurisdiction in the NIC, with respect to civil cases or matters touching on employment, labour or industrial relations.
“We respectfully urge the court to hold that it has no jurisdiction to entertain the reliefs sought by the applicant, and strike out the suit.”
He also quoted Justice Niki Tobi, a retired Justice of the Supreme Court,  as saying,
“A court cannot grant perpetual injunction on a mere prima facie case; the applicant’s suit is basically an action to shield him from the machinery of administration of justice, which has been kick-started by the respondents.”
“I, therefore, urge your Lordship, like the Biblical Pontius Pilate, to wash your hands off this case, as it is not the affairs of this honourable court .”But Awodein said it was untrue that his client was trying to prevent the security agencies from performing their duties.
Awodein in a counter argument said his client isn't restraining the respondents from performing her duties.
He said, “It cannot be suggested that the applicant is restraining the respondents from performing their duties, but they must be restrained from doing so, without due process of the law.
“The seizure of the applicant’s passport by the third respondent is a violation of his freedom of movement.
“The first to third respondents give conflicting reasons as to the complaint made against the applicant: This conflict goes to show that they acted without the due process of the law.
“The allegations against the applicant as to funding of terrorism, is an afterthought by the respondent, which is not backed by facts, as there is no reasonable suspicion that the applicant committed any crime.
“The law clearly defines how such duties should be performed, and so, I invite your Lordship to hold that the applicant has a cause of action against the respondent.”
“The law clearly defines how such duties should be performed, and so, I invite your Lordship to hold that the applicant has a cause of action against the respondent.”

SOURCE: NIGERIA WE SERVE