21.1 C
Sierra Leone
Tuesday, May 24, 2022

Ali Bangura vs. SLPP

Defence objects to notice of motion

By Regina Pratt & Hassan G. Koroma 

Lead defense lawyer for the main opposition Sierra Leone Peoples Party, SLPP, Hon. Dr. Bu-Buakie Jabbie, yesterday objected to the originating notice of motion filled by applicants, Ali Bangura and others, in the Supreme Court of Sierra Leone, presided by Justice Valicious Thomas, Justice Adeliza Showers and Justice Patrick Hamilton, in respect of a petition by Ambassador Ali Bangura and team against the election of the Chief Somano Kapen-led national executive.

Dr. Jabbie based his objection on the fact that there was undue delay in filing the notice of motion, and that the matter suffered from irremediable irregularities in the form of non-compliance with the relevant mandates of the specified rules.

Dr. Jabbie said the originating irregularities already cited deprived the plaintiff from validly invoking the jurisdiction of the court in dealing with the originating notice of motion

He further stated that he was seeking an order that in view of those irremediable irregularities, the non-compliance and also deprivation of the jurisdiction, the originating notice of motion Ex. B.J. 2 (a) be set aside and dismissed since the court has no jurisdiction over it.

He also said that the originating notice of motion is part of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and submitted that Order 8 Rules 4(4) mandatorily apply to an originating notice of motion at the Supreme Court.

He also said that the originating notice of motion was not properly before the court, noting that the jurisdiction of the court has not been duly and properly invoked by the originating motion.

Dr. Jabbie urged the court to issue a declaration to the effect that it has not yet made to the jurisdiction the originating notice of motion, stating that he was applying relief item three that the whole originating notice of motion be set aside; that order 12 rule 16 (a) and (b) and rule 16 (g) are of relevance, that (a) is to set aside the whole process and (g) the court has no jurisdiction before them to sit on the matter.

Lawyers for the applicants are expected to reply to the first set of legal salvos sent by the meticulous defence counsel, before the senior justices will make a ruling.

Related Articles

Latest Articles