A Federal High Court sitting in Port Harcourt was on Tuesday
thrown into a rowdy session after the presiding judge, Justice Stephen
Daylop-Pam insisted on hearing a motion to recuse himself from the suit alongside
the substantive matter.
The suit was filed by the Peoples Democratic Party seeking
to disqualify the National Assembly candidates in Rivers State over allegations
of violation of the electoral act.
When the court resumed for hearing of the suit, counsels to the 3rd, 5th,
7th, 12th and 16th defendants informed the court of their motion seeking for
the presiding judge to recuse himself from further hearing the matter while
counsel to the 8th defendant told the court that he was yet to receive any process
from the plaintiff.
One of the defendants, Ezemonye
Ezekiel-Amadi who is representing himself in the matter also reminded the court
of his pending petition against the judge and informed the court of the
response from the Administrative Judge
directing him to make an oral application for the judge to give his ruling.
The presiding judge in his response said he was going to hear the application of
Ezekiel-Amadi, alongside other motions and substantive matters together on the
next adjourned date on the 26th of September, 2022 but Counsels to APC national
Assembly candidates protested against his decision.
Counsels to APC, Tuduru Edeh and all the
counsels to the National Assembly
candidates noted that hearing the motion alongside the substantive matter will amount
to injustice and threatened to resist the move.
Speaking to journalists outside the
courtroom, Ezekiel-Amadi threatened to take further legal steps should the judge go ahead to hear
both the motions and substantive matter on the next adjourned date.
He said, “It is important that we call the
attention of the world to what is going on in that court because at this point
in time, I can tell you tension is beginning to build up.
“I want to be quoted if anything goes
wrong, Justice Pam must be held responsible.
“If this matter had been reassigned long
ago we would have gotten to the time of hearing the matter and by now maybe we
would have adjourned for judgment.
“I have the right to say I do not have
confidence in this court, there is a likelihood of bias in this matter.
“Justice Pam should hands off the matter
simple”.