Extradition: Kashamu’s New Application Stalls Judgment
A Federal High Court in Lagos could not deliver judgment on Friday in the suit filed by the Senator representing Ogun East Senatorial District, Buruji Kashamu, seeking to stop the move by the federal government to extradite him to the United States over drug trafficking allegations due to a new application he filed.
Senator Kashamu in his new application is urging the court to allow him reopen argument in the case which had already been concluded and adjourned for judgment.
Senator Kashamu had dragged the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Commissioner of Police Lagos State Command, Director of State Security Service (DSS) NDLEA and the Attorney General of the Federal (AGF) to the court, seeking to restrain them from interfering with his right to personal liberty and freedom of movement.
Kashamu also asked the court for a declaration that the instructions given by the AGF to other respondents on May 25, 2018, in reaction to his letter dated May 23, 2018, wherein he protested the NDLEA’s invitation to the US government to send a request for his extradition to US, and the attempt and any further attempts by the first to fourth respondents to arrest him on the basis of the AGF’s said instructions are breach of his fundamental rights to personal liberty and freedom as guaranteed by Section 35 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended and Article 14 of the African Charter on Human and People Rights.
But the government agencies in their opposition to suit argued that the essence of the suit is to divert attention, as well as pre-empt or undermine the perceived extradition request to be made by the Government of the United States.
Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke had taken arguments in the suit from respective parties and had fixed his judgment for yesterday
At the resumed hearing of the matter on Friday, only the lawyer to the NDLEA appeared in court.
The court then asked him if he was aware of a letter written by applicant, and when he replied No, Justice Aneke asked the registrar to show him copy of the letter to the court.
After reading the letter, Oigoga informed the court that defence would file its counter affidavit in opposition to the move by the applicant to reopen argument.
The judge said that since a letter had already been written, the Court had a duty to hear every party.
Justice Aneke consequently, adjourned the case until May 23, for hearing.
In a supporting affidavit, the applicant averred that by a newspaper publication, the Attorney General of the Federation was reported to have said that the US Government had been told to make fresh request for his extradition after the former proceedings were dismissed.
He averred that, in a proceeding instituted in England by the US authorities between 2002 and 2003, it was established that he was not the one implicated in the alleged narcotics offence committed in the US in 1994.
He said that consequently, he was not the person sought after by the US authorities.
Kashamu, is therefore, urging the court to restrain the respondents and their agents from arresting or detaining him, in any manner whatsoever, or interfering with the applicant’s right to personal liberty and freedom of movement
Meanwhile, in a preliminary objection, deposed to by one Kareem Olayinka, the NDLEA averred that authorities of the United States are currently seeking to extradite the applicant to their country, to answer charges relating to heroine trafficking.
He said that the U.S. government then made a request to the Nigerian government, for the applicant to be extradited sometime in May 2015.
The Agency said that since Kashamu got wind of the extradition request, he has filed multiplicity of law suits relating to the issue.
He averred that in all the actions the basic relief sought, is a restraining order against the NDLEA, from arresting and extraditing him to the U.S.
According to the NDLEA, this suit does not disclose any cause of action against the respondent, adding that the multiplicity of the action by the applicant against the NDLEA, is intended to divert its energy and attention from discharging its mandate to the nation.
He, avers therefore, that the NDLEA needs the protection of the court to stop this trend, as the applicant is only engaged in shopping for a forum that will grant his desired reliefs.
The anti-graft agency, therefore, asked the court to dismiss the suit.
