Presidency declines comment on Emefiele, says ‘matter in court’

The Presidency on Wednesday said it would not comment on the controversies surrounding the Central Bank Governor, Godwin Emefiele, as it is still sub judice.

“We are not commenting on this because the matter is in court. Thanks for contacting us,” read a reply to our correspondent’s inquiry by the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu.

The PUNCH reports that the Department of State Services had filed a suit seeking to arrest the Central Bank chief over terrorism charges.

However, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Justice John Tsoho, rejected the suit, describing it as an unlawful operation and ploy to deceive the court into granting a frivolous order to help them arrest and deprive an innocent man of his personal liberty.

Advertisement

Delivering his ruling on Tuesday on Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2255/2022 between State Security Service (applicant) and Godwin Emefiele (respondent), Tsoho said the affidavit depositions purports that preliminary investigation has revealed various acts of terrorism financing, fraudulent activities perpetrated by the respondent and his involvement in economic crimes of national security proportions.

However, the chief judge said if the DSS wishes to pursue the application, it must place the CBN governor on notice.

He said, “It is my respectful opinion that the ipse dixit of the applicant, standing on its own, is not sufficient evidence upon which to deprive a person of his liberty. The respondent in this application is named as ‘Godwin Emefiele’ without disclosure of his status or position anywhere, not even in the affidavit.

“It is left to speculation if the ‘Godwin Emefiele’ is the same person as the serving governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria. If it is, then he is unarguably a high-ranking public official in Nigeria and indeed occupies a sensitive position as one of the key drivers of the nation’s economy.

“Therefore, an application of this kind should have evidence of the approval of the respondent’s boss, that such measures are authorised to be taken.”

Asked about its stance on the issue, the presidency said it would not comment now as “the matter is in court.”