Seplat Writes Petition To CJN, Accuses Justice Ekwo Of Bias

 

 

Indigenous energy company, Seplat Energy Plc, has written to the Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman of the National Judicial Council, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola to complain about a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Inyang Ekwo citing abuse of judicial powers.

In a six-page petition dated May 15,  and signed by its acting CEO/Chief Operating Officer, Samson Ezugworie, Seplat asked the NJC to dispassionately investigate its complaint and ensure appropriate disciplinary action against Justice Ekwo for granting exparte orders under what it called “very questionable circumstances which are designed to hinder the affected Directors and Secretary of Seplat in the performance of their contractual and statutory duties to Seplat.”

READ ALSO: Peter Mbah’s Lawyer Questions NYSC’s Denial Of Gov. Elect’s Certificate

The oil company says that it is unrealistic for the company and its officers including but not limited to the Senior Independent Non-Executive Directors of the Company to obtain a fair and unbiased hearing before Justice Ekwo.

The petitioner also called on the Chief Judge to urgently transfer or reassign the suit between Juliet Ebere Nwadi Gbaka & others Vs Seplat Energy Plc & 13 Others and all suits involving Seplat Energy Plc either as a plaintiff or defendant pending before Justice Ekwo on the ground of bias or likelihood of bias.

The petitioners stated that in the suit between Boniface Okezie & 3 Others V. Seplat Energy Plc & nine others filed on April 13 by some shareholders of Seplat whose shareholding is less than 0.0005% of Seplat’s entire share capital, the plaintiffs had cited alleged unfairly prejudicial conduct in the management of the affairs of Seplat.

Justice Ekwo was accused of granting an order to preserve the rest of the suit despite the fact that no such application was before him.

“It is noteworthy that the above order was made by His Lordship on 28th April 2023, notwithstanding the absence of any application by the Petitioners for the preservation of the res, and notwithstanding the fact that the Petitioners who are the beneficiaries of the order, did not give any undertaking as to damages,” the petition read.

Seplat noted that during the pendency of the April Petition, another suit was filed against the company, its Directors, Secretary, Corporate Affairs Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The objective of the Suit was to ensure the removal of directors and Company Secretaries from office and to utilize the machinery of the SEC to appoint new persons to replace them.

It says that by accident or design, this case was also assigned to Justice Ekwo. Seplat also noted that there was no indication that the case was administratively adjourned to May 11 when the court sat and made far-reaching orders and exparte against the company.

It said, “The far-reaching exparte orders were made by His Lordship notwithstanding the fact that Seplat and some of its directors who got wind of the proceedings have filed different processes challenging the competence of the suit and the jurisdiction of the court to commence the suit as a shareholders’ derivative action, without the prior approval of the court”.

Seplat says it finds it alarming that his Lordship made far-reaching orders on May 11 against her even though similar orders sought in the April petition have not been granted.

“We believe that this can only be possible because of prior direct communication between His Lordship and Counsel to the Plaintiffs in the above Suit. This, we believe, is highly unethical”. the company stated.

“Seplat also believes that it is an act of gross misconduct on the part of His Lordship to gloss over various applications filed by Seplat and some of its directors and Secretary, on 10th of May 2023, challenging the competence of the Suit and the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the Suit.

“As it were, the orders made by His Lordship on 11th May 2023 will compromise the fair hearing of these pending applications filed by Seplat and other Respondents.”

Seplat said it “has every reason to believe that all the steps taken by His Lordship in the above Suits are designed to favour the Plaintiffs and disfavour Seplat, its directors and secretary. Seplat, its directors and Secretary’s position is corroborated by other cases and events.”

Seplat also disclosed that the final judgement in the Suit BETWEEN AKINDURO ERIC AKINNIFESI & ANOR V SEPLAT ENERGY PLC was wrongly ignored by Hon Justice Ekwo.

Some shareholders of Seplat were said to have been genuinely worried about the likely stalling of the Company’s 2023 AGM scheduled for May 10th 2023 and had instituted the suit, asking for mandatory orders for the meeting to be held.

They also sought an order that the directors and company secretary should not be removed from office or hindered in the performance of their duties by any person or authority.

The final judgment was delivered by Hon. Justice A. R. Mohammed of the same Abuja Judicial Division of the Federal High Court. The Petitioners succeeded in the Suit and the court ordered that Seplat’s AGM be held as scheduled and that the directors and company secretary should neither be removed from office nor hindered in the performance of their duties.

It is noteworthy that the above judgment was brought to the attention of His Lordship, Hon. Justice I. E. Ekwo by some of the Counsel representing the Respondents in Suit No: FHCIABJ/CS/626/2023 Between Juliet Ebere Nwadi Gbaka & two Ors. V Seplat Energy Plc & 13 Ors, via various processes filed by them on 10th May 2023.

Notwithstanding His Lordship’s attention being directed to the subsisting judgment of a more senior Judge (Hon. Justice A. R. Mohammed) of the same Federal High Court, His Lordship made orders on 11th May 2023, which contradict and indeed have the capacity of overruling the judgment of Hon. Justice A. R. Mohammed

Seplat believes that it is improper for His Lordship, whose attention had been drawn to the existing final judgment of a Brother Judge, to sit as an appellate court over such judgment through the rendition of an interlocutory ruling which conflicts with the said final judgment.

“On the strength of the above, Seplat invites the NJC to dispassionately investigate his complaint and ensure appropriate disciplinary action against the Hon Justice Ekwo.”