The Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, and Incorporated Trustees of New Kosol Welfare Initiative have disagreed over the implementation of the proposed expatriates’ taxation regime.
The position of the AGF is contained in a preliminary objection filed to challenge the suit instituted by the plaintiff.
Fagbemi specifically told Justice Inyang Ekwo of a Federal High Court in Abuja that the Incorporated Trustees of New Kosol Welfare Initiative, that instituted the case, lacked the locus standi.
The AGF, a 2nd defendant in the suit, also argued that there was no cause of action disclosed in the plaintiff’s suit.
Fagbemi, in the application filed by Maimuna Shiru, Director, Civil Litigation and Public Law, therefore, sought an order dismissing this suit for want of jurisdiction.
But in the plaintiff’s reply on points of law dated and filed March 4 by Paul Atayi, the lawyer cited reasons a court of law is vested with jurisdiction to hear a matter.
The lawyer argued that a court would assume jurisdiction when it is properly constituted as regards numbers and qualifications of members of the bench, and that no member is disqualified for one reason or another.
He also argued that the court would be vested with jurisdiction when the subject matter of the case is within its jurisdiction, and there is no feature in the case which prevents the court from exercising its jurisdiction.
He further argued that the court can assume jurisdiction when the case before the court is initiated by due process of law, and upon fulfilment of any condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction.
Atayi cited previous cases to back his argument, including the Saraki v. Federal Republic of Nigeria case, 2016.
“My Lord, Section 25(r) of the Constitution states that the Federal High Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any ‘action or proceedings for declaration or injunction affecting the validity of any executive or administrative action or decision of the Federal Government or any of its agencies,’” he said.
According to him, in other words, where an action touches on the executive or administrative action or decision of the Federal Government or any of its agencies, this court will be vested with the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
The lawyer also argued that, the case being a public interest litigation, the plaintiff had the locus standi (legal right) to file the suit.
He urged the court to dismiss the objection.
The plaintiff had, in an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1780/2024, sued the Interior Minister, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, and AGF as 1st and 2nd defendants.
The plaintiff filed the application through a team of lawyers led by Atayi.
The group sought an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants from implementing the new Expatriates’ Taxation Regime known as the ‘Expatriate Employment Levy (EEL)’ in Nigeria, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
When the matter was called on Wednesday, no lawyer appeared for the minister.
Atayi, who represented the plaintiff, then informed the court that the minister was represented on the last adjourned date.
He said though the matter was filed by writ of summons, the lawyer said the AGF filed a preliminary objection and that they had responded appropriately.