The Federal Government has said it is not in breach of the Supreme Court’s order restraining it from enforcing the February 10 deadline for old N1000, N500 and N200 notes.
The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, gave the Federal Government’s position while appearing as a guest on the weekly Ministerial Briefing organised by the Presidential Communication Team at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.
The President on Thursday, February 16, 2023, in a national broadcast, directed the CBN to re-circulate the old N200 note, declaring the old N500 and N1,000 notes were no more legal tender.
This was despite the Supreme Court’s order that the old N1,000, N500 and N200 notes remain legal tender until it delivers judgment in the case filed by some States against the Federal Government.
The President’s broadcast and expressed exclusion of the N1000 and N500 notes have subjected the Federal Government to harsh criticism by many who have mostly accused the administration of breaching the Supreme Court’s order.
However, reacting to questions on the allegations of breach of Supreme Court order by the President and his administration, Malami said: “Your question can best be answered within the context of what constitutes a rule of law in the Nigerian situation. Where an order is made by a court, you have multiple options but let me state before even addressing the issue of the options available at our disposal as a government.
“The fact, clearly, that we are not a breach of any order made by the court, inclusive of any order associated with the naira redesign. We are not in breach. I believe I’m not a banker but you have not gone to establish which bank is it that you have gone to present N1000 or N500 notes that have been rejected. So we are not in breach.
“But then, assuming we are in breach, the fact remains that this matter is sub-judice as you rightly know. It’s being contested before the Supreme Court and when an order is made, you have multiple options within the context of the rule of law.
“One, you are entitled as a matter of right, if the facts and evidence support your position, to apply for setting it aside. The position of the law, legal jurisprudence is clear. Once you are attacking “If the court is not an apex court, you equally have a right of appeal and support the right of appeal with an application of stay of execution order. So the bottom line of what I’m trying to state. If the matter is sub-judice and within the context of the rule of law, we are doing the needful as a government, in terms of ensuring that the right of the government, within the context of the naira redesign, is being protected. So we are not in breach.”and you seeking for setting aside of an existing order of the court, you cannot be said to be operating in breach when you presented your application for setting aside.
“If the court is not an apex court, you equally have a right of appeal and support the right of appeal with an application of stay of execution order. So the bottom line of what I’m trying to state. If the matter is sub-judice and within the context of the rule of law, we are doing the needful as a government, in terms of ensuring that the right of the government, within the context of the naira redesign, is being protected. So we are not in breach.”
Discussion about this post