Connect with us

Breaking News

Deputy governor Shaibu absent as panel fixes today for final adjournment on his impeachment

Recall that during the panel’s first meeting on Wednesday, Shaibu’s attorney, Professor Oladoyin Awoyale (SAN), excused himself and the defendant from carrying out the panel’s proceedings on the grounds that they had allegedly disregarded an injunction issued by the Abuja High Court to halt the proceedings.

Published

on

Philip Shaibu, Edo State

Friday is the final adjournment date for the impeachment investigation panel, which is looking into allegations of serious misconduct against Rt. Hon. Philip Shaibu, the deputy governor of Edo State, so that Shaibu can make his defence.

The deputy governor and his attorney were not present when the seven-member panel led by Justice Stephen A. Omonuwa (Rtd), which was tasked with looking into the claims, made its verdict on Thursday when it reconvened.

Omonuwa (Rtd) called for the defendant, Shaibu, who was not there and was not represented, saying that the panel would wait to see if the defendant would submit his defence.

Advertisement

The impeachment procedure was started when Justice Omonuwa summoned the Edo State House of Assembly, the plaintiff.

N. U. Ibrahim, the Edo State House of Assembly’s legal officer, and two other people made the announcement of their arrival for the Assembly.

The panel’s chairman then decided to continue adjourning so that the defendant would have plenty of time to appear before it and submit his defence, saying: “The panel is adjourned for the last time to April 5, 2024, at 12 noon, to allow the defendant to present his defense”, Justice Omonuwa ruled.

Advertisement

Recall that during the panel’s first meeting on Wednesday, Shaibu’s attorney, Professor Oladoyin Awoyale (SAN), excused himself and the defendant from carrying out the panel’s proceedings on the grounds that they had allegedly disregarded an injunction issued by the Abuja High Court to halt the proceedings.

He declared that everyone involved in the case should abide by the ruling that required the parties to appear before it and provide justification for why it should or shouldn’t allow Shaibu to bring the plea for fundamental human rights before the court.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Comments

Facebook

Trending Articles