Some group of Imo women, yesterday besieged the High Court demanding the appearance of former governor of the state,Sirl Ikedi Ohakim to answer alleged fraud charges and other matters level against him by Lagos based business woman, Chinyere Amuchinwa.
The women who were cladded in black sang anti Ohakim songs even as they matched along the roads around the court carrying placards which such inscriptions as “Ohakim is not above the law, Injustice to one woman is injustice to all, Ohakim, stop running away and face the court”, among others.
Leader of the women, Mrs Blessing Opara while speaking to newsmen said that they were in court to show solidarity to their fellow woman who they claimed was unjusrly treated by the former governor.
The women also appealed to the judge not to be biased in her judgement, maintaining that they believe absolutely in the judiciary.
“Ohakim is not above the law, he should show up in court and allow the law to take its course, we are not happy he dragged one of our own to court and has refused to show up himself, he should come out boldly like a man and face the charges.
Meanwhile, another drama ensued in the court as councel to Ohakim, Alloy Ejimakor and councel to the 3rd respondent, Ifeanyi Nwaeze who stood in for Chinyere Amuchinwa argued back and forth on the application of infringement of fundamental rights filled by the former governor.
While Nwaeze objected to a letter and investigative report on NAPTIP which counsel of the applicant, Ohakim brought to the court for adoption and presumed to have been served on Amuchinwa, Ejimakor instead urged the court to discontinue the matter.
“It is not served on the respondent and based on the section 36 sub section 1 of the Constitution. “For him to make any presentation according section 36, I should have been served and cannot respond to the letter. For this reason, I ask the court for a stand down for me to prepare myself.”
Quoting the section further, he submitted that “any document whatever that either emanating from court or anywhere I am entitled to have a copy of such document at all times in accordance to the rule of law.” He has however demanded a N5 million compensation from Ohakim for what he described as unwarranted expenses his client was made to spend.
In replying to his objection, the counsel to the applicant, Ohakim, said that the subpeanae was issued to a party other than the applicant therefore it is not the responsibility of the applicant to see that all parties to the suit are served with the investigative report.
“We have similarly served NAPTIP therefore the counsel should have presumed to be on constant contact with the respondent in this case, whether the respondent was served or not should not arise.
Ejimakor further urged the court to file the investigation to settle the veracity of the counsel’s claim that the court was not served , adding that the bailiff should be summoned to explain why the third respondent was not served.
The presiding judge, I G Chukwunyere who reserved ruling on the matter has adjourned to April 19, while asking that the respondent should be properly served .
