Travel Ban On 50 Nigerians: Buhari Usurping Function Of Court – Rights Lawyer

A rights lawyer, Dr. Kayode Ajulo, has faulted the recent travel ban on some top 50 Nigerians by the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari, describing as usurpation of the functions of the courts.

Buhari on Saturday placed a travel ban on 50 undisclosed Nigerians in line with the recently signed Executive Order 6.

“To this end, enforcement procedures are currently in place by which the NIS and other security agencies have placed no fewer than 50 high profile persons directly affected by EO6 on watch-list and restricted them from leaving the country pending the determination of their cases,” a statement from the Presidency read.

However, Ajulo noted that the “Buhari government is perpetrating a state of confusion and anomie by the recent statement to purportedly placing ban on some unknown and imaginary persons in Nigeria.”

According to the Abuja-based lawyer, “the Federal High Court in Abuja position by its judgment of Friday is clear when it held that although the Executive Order 0006 seems somewhat to be giving the AGF the power to summarily seize or confiscate property but that the discretion to be exercised must be to always seek permission or approval of the court before any property can be seized or confiscated.

“By implication the practicability of Executive Order 006 is tied to the procedure that must at all times, obtain a court order before seizing any asset or doing anything under the Order.

“It is the opinion of the court that such an application could if possible be made ex-parte.”

Ajulo stressed that by the reason of the judgment, any seizure must at all times seek the permission or approval of court and continue to be subjected to the test of validity depending on the merit of the individual case.

“By implication it rests the confusion over the fact that an Executive Order to seize property is not to be viewed or regarded as something giving direct power to the executive to confiscate property in the absence of court approval or sanction that ought to be sought and obtained at all times.

“This invariably raises the discretion for all litigants to subject Executive Order 006 to judicial review and based on the circumstances of the merit to be advanced on grounds of defence against seizure or confiscation.

“It is my opinion that the court has held and maintained the status quo and precedence of law over Executive Order 0006 that cannot by-pass the judicial authority of court before practicality clothing itself with the legality or constitutionality of gaining effect.

“The recent press release from the president is to circumvent the court judgment by deliberately placing ban on imaginary citizens of Nigeria and this is absurd and uncharitable.”