By Taiye Agbaje
Abuja – Former Governor of Zamfara, Abdulaziz Yari, on Friday, prayed the Federal High Court Abuja, to direct the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to unseal his property located at Maitama, Abuja.
Yari, in an exparte motion brought by his Counsel, Mahmud Magaji, SAN, said the EFCC sealed the property contrary to the provision of the law.
News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the the Federal High Court Abuja had, earlier in the day, granted the ICPC leave to freeze some funds in Yari’s Zenith and Polaris Bank.
Magaji, who said that the application was to ensure each government agencies operates within the confines of the law, urged the judge ”to invoke his power to direct the EFCC to remove the red inscription pasted on the house.”
Citing a previous case in which a court delivered judgment in favour of an applicant, the lawyer said the commission cannot seal a property without a court order.
He said the application was supported by 11-paragraph affidavit and also supported by a written address dated Aug. 16.
”We adopt same in urging your Lordship to grant our application as prayed,” he said.
Magaji also told the court that he was with a motion exparte dated Aug. 15 and filed the same day, and brought in accordance with the provisions of the fundamental human rights.
“It is supported by a 17-paragraph affidavit. We also have affidavit of urgency with 9 paragraphs.
“We also have a further affidavit of five paragraphs and the same further affidavit has four exhibits marked Exhibits M (a) M (2), M (a) M (3), M (a) M(4) and M(a) M(5).
“It also has a written. address and we adopt same in urging your Lordship to grant our application as prayed,” he said.
The counsel argued that in as much as the applicant did not intend to prevent any government agency from performing its function, due process of the law must be followed in carrying out such duty.
”We urge your Lordship to direct parties to maintain status quo pending the determination of the suit,” Magaji said.
Justice Taiwo Taiwo, who ordered that the case be heard during the vacation period, however adjourned the matter till Aug. 19 for ruling.