Seyi Makinde, the governor of Oyo State, and other top state officials filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal in Abuja, questioning the appeal’s legal standing in response to a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) ruling ordering them to pay the remaining balance of N3,374,889,425.60 (N3.4b) from the N4,874,889,425.60 (N4.9b) debt, stemming from a May 7, 2021 Supreme Court decision.
A three-member panel of the court asked appellants’ attorney Ayodele Akintunde (SAN) if what he brought was appropriate for the Court of Appeal to sit and consider a case that had been determined by the Supreme Court at the beginning of proceedings in the appeal, marked: CA/ABJ/CV/595/2023.
The Oyo State Governor and other appellants were set a deadline by the Supreme Court within which to make full payment on the judgment debt, and the court questioned Akintunde about that deadline.
A plea by the appellants to be permitted to pay the debt in installments was also questioned by the appellate court, which noted that the appeal itself was against a similar installment payment plan mandated by the High Court of the FCT.
Akintunde responded by claiming that the Oyo State Government was actually required to pay within three months by the Supreme Court.
The judgment was now issued by the Oyo State High Court and thereafter registered in the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, he continued, noting that the appeal did not directly address the ruling by the Supreme Court.
Parties have since compromised the judgment by taking particular actions, Akintunde continued.
The judgment obtained against Makinde, the state’s Attorney General, Accountant General, and four other people by Chairmen and Councillors elected on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC) but dismissed on May 29, 2019 by Makinde, upon taking office, led to the N4,874,889,425.60 debt.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court ruled that the ex-council chiefs’ lawsuit, filed by 11 people under the leadership of Bashorun Majeed Ajuwon, was illegal and commanded the Oyo State Government to compute and pay the ex-council chiefs’ due salaries and allowances within three months of the ruling.
The ex-council chiefs who were the judgment creditors filed a garnishee action against Makinde and others before the High Court of the FCT after the Oyo State Government failed to abide by the ruling by paying only N1.5b.
Makinde and others were ordered to pay the remaining balance of the judgment debt in installments, starting with N1,374,889,425.60 to be paid immediately, by Justice A. O. Ebong of the High Court of the FCT on April 27.
Justice Ebong subsequently ordered them to pay the remaining N2 billion at a rate of N500 million every three months, with the first installment due on July 31, 2023. Makinde and other parties are currently contesting this ruling at the Court of Appeal.
Musibau Adetunbi (SAN), the attorney for the former council chiefs, argued at the hearing on Tuesday and expressed remorse that 26 of his clients had now passed away as a result of poverty and a lack of resources to care for their health because Makinde had disobeyed the several court decisions made in their favor.
The appellants’ argument that his client could not use garnishee actions to enforce the judgment because the judgment total was not reflected was refuted by Adetunbi.
He brought the court’s attention to a letter that the Attorney General of Oyo State had sent on December 13, 2021, in which the state estimated the wages and allowances owed to the former council heads to be N4,874,889,425.60 and promised to pay them all within six months.
Adetunbi also drew the court’s attention to a letter from First Bank, one of Oyo State’s bankers, dated May 8, 2023, and read a passage where the bank claimed that the N1,374,889,425.60 that was attached to the state by the garnishee order would have been paid if it weren’t for the appeal that is still pending.
He criticized the appellants’ argument that it was required for judgment creditors to first obtain the state’s AG’s consent when funds belonging to a state or its agencies were involved, contending that their actions, particularly those on December 13, 2021, suggested that the AG had given his or her consent to the debt’s liquidation.
Adetunbi urged the court not to tolerate the appellants’ flagrant disdain for the country’s judicial system by dismissing the appeal, claiming that Makinde and others’ inability to pay the money was intentional.
After listening to both attorneys’ arguments, the court declared that the judgment was postponed until a time that would be made known to the parties.