A Supreme Court judge, Justice Clara Ogunbiyi, has said she did not at anytime contact Justice Okechukwu Okeke, who recently retired from of the Federal High Court in Lagos, either directly or indirectly on any matter.
In an explanation note she sent to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Aloma Mukhtar, Ogunbiyi accused Okeke of being economical with truth.
She stated that Justice Okeke misled the world into thinking that the National Judicial Council (NJC) issued him a warning letter based on the ex-parte order he gave which affected her (Justice Ogunbiyi's) daughter, Mrs Funke Amadi (nee Ogunbiyi).
She said: "It is extremely ridiculous, absurd and malicious for Justice Okeke to insinuate that it was the forgoing circumstances that formed the basis for the warning letter given to him on three petitions deliberated upon by the NJC, which I know nothing about.
"I wish also to state that the alleged petition by all the residents of No. 5A, George Street, Ikoyi to the NJC has nothing to do with me."
She also said she did not ask her daughter to see Justice Okeke and that she did not try to influence Justice Okeke on any matter.
However, Justice Ogunbiyi said she contacted the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta after her daughter had narrated her ordeal to her following the ex-parte order issued by Justice Okeke for the sealing off of her daughter's residence.
She said: "In view of the grey areas surrounding the case, I therefore contacted Justice Ibrahim Auta, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court and narrated my daughter's ordeal and therefore enquired about the laws governing Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON)'s case. He remarked that the laws are draconian in their application and he promised to send me a copy, which he did a few days later."
Justice Ogunbiyi said: "On the allegation of the encounter between Justice Okeke and my daughter, Funke in his chambers, I wish to state categorically that I never instructed her to see Justice Okeke for any reason whatsoever. If she had done so in company of the evicted residents of all the flats, she acted on her own volition. She is an adult, a married woman with a family and she has a right to protect the interest of her family.
No comments:
Post a Comment