On Monday, a Federal High Court in Abuja issued a restraining order against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offenses Commission (ICPC), and the Department of State Services (DSS) preventing them from arresting or detaining Senator Abdul’aziz Yari. The order will remain in effect until the court hears and decides on the pending motion.
Justice Donatus Okorowo delivered the ruling in response to an ex-parte motion presented by Michael Aondoaaa on behalf of Senator Yari. The court also directed the respondents (EFCC, ICPC, DSS) to provide reasons why the prayers sought in the ex-parte motion should not be granted on the next adjourned date.
Justice Okorowo stated, “The respondents are however restrained from detaining the applicant until the return date for the order to show cause.”
The case has been adjourned until June 8 to allow the respondents an opportunity to present their case.
Senator Yari, the former Governor of Zamfara State, filed the ex-parte motion through his legal team, led by Mr. Aondoakaa, including Abdul Kohol. In the motion, Yari sought an order restraining the respondents from arresting, threatening to arrest, or detaining him, in order to enable him to participate in the Proclamation of the 10th Senate by the President of Nigeria on June 13.
In his application, Yari presented 15 grounds for the order, stating that he aspired to contest the position of Senate President in accordance with the constitution and Senate Standing Orders. He claimed to have received overwhelming support from the public and fellow senators-elect, regardless of party affiliations.
Yari further alleged that some members of his political party, the APC, had resorted to using the respondents and their agents to harass and threaten him with trumped-up charges. He emphasized that the respondents must operate within the confines of their establishment laws and respect his fundamental human rights as enshrined in the constitution.
Yari asserted that without the court’s intervention, his rights would be violated by the respondents.