FG Vs Anambra govt N5bn suit: Ozekhome threatens to file contempt charge

Awka—THE N50 billion suit instituted by the Federal Government against Anambra State over alleged revocation of the 148.337 hectares of land acquired for Federal site and services scheme at Amansea in Awka has taken a new dimension with the lead counsel to the Federal Government, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) threatening to file contempt charge against the state Attorney General, AG.


In the letter addressed to the AG and copied to counsel to the state government, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) and the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, Abuja, Ozekhome warned that his client would not hesitate to commence contempt procedure against the state governor, Chief Willie Obiano, the Attorney General of the state and others involved in the land matter if the directives of the apex court were not immediately adhered to.

The Federal Government had dragged Anambra State government to the Supreme Court asking for N50 billion as exemplary and aggravated damages it allegedly suffered following the state government’s revocation of the said land.

Though a panel of the Supreme Court, presided over by Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammed had during a sitting, adjourned the case to February 13, 2017, for hearing of the motion on notice for Interlocutory Injunction filed by counsel to Federal Government and directed the parties to maintain status quo, Ozekhome in a letter to the Anambra State AG, alleged that Anambra State government had gone ahead to carry on further developmental works on the land.

Ozekhome’s letter read: “Our attention, has been drawn lately by our clients to the fact that notwithstanding the admonition of the apex court and the undertaking by your counsel, Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) to communicate to you the need to desist from further acts on or concerning the subject matter of dispute, before the apex court, the Anambra State Government has gone ahead with renewed vigour and zeal, to carry on further developmental works on the said land.

Your clients had moved to the site after it was served court processes on this matter and after you had responded to same.”