Court adjourns Zakzaky’s N2bn suit against the army

A federal high court sitting in Kaduna on Thursday adjourned to June 30, a N2bn suit filed by by Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, leader, Islamic Movement in Nigeria (IMN), against the Nigerian army, chief of army staff and three others.

El-Zakzaky had filed the suit over alleged abuse of his human right, destruction of his house in Zaria and the murder of his three children.

The case was adjourned because the defence counsel was unable to identify and argue the motion he had filed, alleging abuse of court process.

Zakzaky is seeking N2 billion as damages over the killing of three of his children and destruction of his house in December 2015.

At the resumed hearing of the suit on Thursday, Femi Falana, counsel to Zakzaky, moved an application for the regularisation of the processes that he had filed out of time.

Hussein Oyebanji, counsel to the Nigerian army and the chief of army staff, who are the first and the second defendants, however told Saleh Shuaibu, the presiding judge, that he was not familiar with the case.

‎Subsequently, Shuaibu adjourned the case to June 30 to enable the defence identify and argue his motion.

Speaking in an interview with journalists after the adjournment, Falana warned against foot draggfoot-draggingse.

“We cannot challenge a violation of human right that occur in a particular state outside that state, because the destruction took place in Kaduna and it shall be determined in the state where the violation of human right took place” he said.

He said since the government had pledged to operate within the confines of rule of law, the government must uphold orders of a competent court, noting that “it is Zakzaky today, it might be another person from government official tomorrow.”

“This government has pledged to operate under the rule of law, so for that reason, by the virtue of section 387 of the constitution, all authorities and person are bind by judgement.

“So, a government that goes to court every day to ask for justice cannot go there to justify disobedience to court order, this is babaric and primitive. So, we are not going to allow that.”