A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ordered the Federal Government not to extradite Sen. Buruji Kashamu to the United States to answer allegation of drug trafficking.
The presiding judge, Justice Okon Abang who gave the restraining order on Thursday, held that the Federal Government or its agents could not validly initiate extradition proceedings against Kashamu.
Kashamu had sued the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), challenging the propriety of a letter by Shehu Bodinga of the Central Control Unit in the AGF’s office.
The letter requested the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria to forward a fresh extradition application after Justice Gabriel Kolawole has voided an earlier extradition proceedings.
Delivering judgment in the case, Justice Abang ruled that because of subsisting judgments and orders in favour of Kashamu, the Federal Government cannot extradite him to the U. S.
He referenced two unchallenged judgments in favour of Kashamu.
The first was delivered by the Federal High Court, Lagos on January 6, 2014 while the second was delivered on July 1, 2016, by the Federal High Court , Abuja.
Both judgements prohibited Kashamu’s extradition on account of the U.S. drug allegation.
Justice Abang further held that Justice Kolawole’s judgment, was based on the two earlier judgments of the Federal High Court.
The judgments declared as unlawful all attempts to extradite Kashamu in view of the judgements by two British courts which had held that Kashamu was not the person involved in the drug crime in the U.S.
Abang noted that the AGF successfully challenged the court’s decisions in suit 508/2015, which was set aside in the appeal marked: 1030 and 1030a on May 4, 2018.
However, he said the AGF failed to appeal the other judgment in the suit No: 49/2010.
Abang held therefore that, since the judgment was not challenged, it remained alive along with the restraining order.
He also held that since the subsequent judgment by Justice Kolawole was not appealed, it remained subsisting and binding on all parties.
Justice Abang equally set aside the letter written by Bodinga.
He ruled that neither the AGF nor his agent has the power to apply to a foreign country, to bring an extradition request for a Nigerian where that country has not made such an application.
He said the Court of Appeal’s decision of Sept. 20, 2018, dismissing the appeal marked: 479/2015, which was an appeal against the judgment in suit No: 49/2010 was the most recent decision, which he was bound to abide by.
The judgement read in part: “The effect of the Court of Appeal dismissing the appeal against the judgment in suit No: 49/2010 is that the said judgment has validated in all its ramifications, inclusive of the restraining order in that judgment.
READ ALSO: Court Fixes Dec. 6 For Sen. Buruji Kashamu’s Extradition Suit
“It is my humble view that the AGF has no discretion in this matter. With the greatest respect to the AGF, he has no choice in this matter.
“The fact that the restraining order in the judgment in suit 49/2010 dated Jan. 6, 2014 is still valid and subsisting, it is not a matter of sentiment.
“In fact, it is not a political issue. We don’t practice democracy in court, no matter how the politicians look at it. The politicians can look at it the way it favours them.
“But, sitting as a court of law, where there is no appeal against a judgment, that judgment subsists.
“This is an issue of law. Where there is no appeal against a judgment, there is nothing anybody can do in a democratic setting.
“If the restraining order ought not to have been made, the AGF ought to have appealed against it.
“The Attorney-General of the Federation, with the greatest respect to him, cannot pretend that the restraining order is no longer subsisting.
“The 1st defendant (AGF) cannot assume that the order was not made in good faith even when he participated in the proceedings.
“The 1st defendant appealed successfully and got judgment in suit No: 508/2015, that was set aside. Why did the AGF not appeal against the judgment in suit No:49/2010?
“Why did the AG not appeal that judgment even when the Court of Appeal recently dismissed an appeal against the judgment?”
The judge noted that the current AGF was not in office when the judgment was delivered on in 2014.
He continued: “I really sympathise with him.”
“In my respective view, he can not now seek to take steps against that judgment when his predecessor in office did not see any need to appeal against the judgment or did not even see anything wrong with the judgment.
“Except if the decision of the Court of Appeal on Sept. 20, 2018, dismissing the appeal against the judgement in suit 49/2010 is validly set aside on an appeal to the Supreme Court, the AGF cannot validly take steps that run contrary to the subsisting judgment of this court.
“That will be an invitation to anarchy.”
