A suit by a former federal judge, Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia challenging her dismissal from service by the National Judicial Commission has been given greenlight to proceed by a federal High Court in Abuja.
Ofili-Ajumogobia was dismissed by the NJC from the service of the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) on the grounds of alleged judicial misconduct in 2018. However, she instituted a suit before Inyang Ekwo, judge of an Abuja federal high Court.
In the suit, she is challenging the process adopted by the fact-finding committee of the NJC that recommended her dismissal and prayed the court to declare her dismissal from service unconstitutional, null and void.
She also claimed that she was not accorded fair hearing while her fundamental rights were breached.
But the NJC and other defendants objected to the suit on the grounds that the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the case. According to the NJC, the plaintiff ought to have filed the suit before the national industrial court because it is a labour related matter involving her employment.
The NJC equally argued that the case was statute-barred as it was not instituted within the three months timeframe stipulated by the Public Officers Protection Act.
It further denied not giving her a fair hearing.
Also Read: Police officers raided my home in Oyigbo, stole property worth 6 million – Lawyer
Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia in a counter affidavit prayed Justice Ekwo to dismiss the objection to her suit on the ground that she was challenging constitutionality of her dismissal.
Justice Ekwo, while ruling on the matter on Tuesday, dismissed all objections raised by the defendants on the grounds that they were misplaced and that the claim of the plaintiff was misconstrued.
Justice Ekwo held that Ofili-Ajumogobia raised constitutional issues bothering on denial of fair hearing in the way and manner by which she was dismissed.
Ekwo said being a constitutional matter it can only be heard by a federal high court and not a national industrial court as argued by the NJC.
He further held that the case of the plaintiff did not fall under the provision of the Public Officers Protection Act and as such, is not statute-barred.
The case has been adjourned to April 5, 6, 7 for hearing of the substantive matter.
