The Supreme Court on Wednesday adjourned a case instituted by the state governments against the Federal Government challenging the implementation of the naira redesign.
The apex court adjourned the case to March 3 for judgement.
Earlier, the apex court consolidated the suits instituted by over 12 state governments.
At the last hearing on February 15, seven states joined the three initial states as co-plaintiffs, while Edo and Bayelsa states joined the Federal Government as co-defendants. The court, however, refused to join Abia State in the suit on the ground that it came late with its originating summons.
All efforts by Abia State Government to be joined in the suit, was turned down and was ordered to present its case at a later date.
A motion for the consolidation was also argued by the Counsel for Rivers State, Emmanuel Ukala.
Moving the motion on notice, Ukala premised the consolidation request on the need for the suit to be heard without any hinderance since the matter bothers on same issue.
The head of the 7-man panel, Justice John Okoro, granted the request and ordered consolidation of the ten suits into one.
Now, the plaintiffs in the suit are the Attorneys General (AGs) of Kaduna, Kogi, Zamfara, Ondo, Ekiti, Katsina, Ogun, Cross River, Sokoto, and Lagos states while the defendants are the Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), as well as the AGs of Bayelsa and Edo states.
Commencing arguments, counsel for the Federal Government, Kanu Agabi, said the Supreme Court held that all reliefs are rooted in section 20 of the CBN Act, therefore, the apex court has no jurisdiction to hear the suit as the action cannot commence with an Originating Summons.
He wondered why the plaintiffs did not bring the CBN governor to court as a respondent, after making reference to him 32 times in their Originating Summons.
He said the reliefs are against the CBN, yet they didn’t deem it fit to bring the CBN into the matter. He added that Nigerians had already began rejecting the old notes way before the President’s directive. He insisted that the President is not in violation of the Supreme Court order as under the constitution, the President is empowered to veto any legislation.
Counsels for Edo and Bayelsa States, also agree that the suit be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The counsel for Rivers urged the court to grant all the reliefs sought therein
Counsel to the AGF, also urges the court to dismiss the suit entirely.
Also, the Attorney General of Kano State, who is a co-plaintiff, argued that President Muhammadu Buhari sidelined members of the National Economic Council and only relied on the advice of the CBN governor in the implementation of the monetisation policy.
He added that the President decided to exercise his powers without consulting with the state governments as required by the law.
He further said that they have security report that there will be breach of law and order if nothing is done to address the issue of cash scarcity. He added that the Kano State Governor, Abdullahi Ganduje is a member of the council and he told him that the issue was never discussed at the NEC meeting.
Rather, the President relied only on one member of the council, and the CBN governor ignored the finance minister and the vice president who is the chairman of the council.
The Justice pointed out that the President can direct that the old 200 naira notes be brought back as a legal tender, then he is under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Also, the Attorney General of Jigawa stated that Section 148 of the constitution, compelled the President to seek the advice of the Jigawa State governor as a federating unit but the President did not do so in the Federal Government implementation of the redesign policy.