The Lagos State Government has asked the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment of a Lagos High Court in Igbosere which faulted the demolition of illegal structures in Otodo Gbame Community and ordered the resettlement of displaced persons in the area.
The State
Government, in a Notice of Appeal dated June 22, 2017, filed before the Lagos
division of Appeal Court, said apart from violating Constitutional provisions,
the judgment of the lower court delivered by Justice Adeniyi Onigbanjo on June
21, was capable of encouraging illegality.
In the appeal which
was hinged on two grounds, the State Government argued that the lower court
erred in law and misdirected itself when it made far reaching decisions that
conflicted with the facts of the matter as placed before the court.
According to the
first ground, the government, through its lawyer, Mr Saheed Quadri, Director of
Civil Litigation, Lagos State Ministry of Justice, said Justice Onigbanjo erred
in law when he held that the demolition was illegal when in fact there was no
demolition carried out in Otodo Gbame prior to the institution of the suit.
Going into details,
the government said there was a fire outbreak in Otodo Gbame caused by violent
clash between two rival cult groups, and that the fire engulfed and destroyed
the entire community with no residents and property remaining, as the destroyed
shanties were built with corrugated iron sheets, woods and bamboos.
Pursuant to the
government’s constitutional duties ,particularly sections 13 and 20, Quadri
said the State Fire Service responded timeously to put out the fire and
excavated the debris, while the State Governor, Mr Akinwunmi Ambode
consequently visited the community to commiserate with the people.
The Governor also
gave directive barring re-construction of illegal shanties, and further
directed that all squatters living along the riverine/swampy areas or strips in
the State should vacate immediately as they pose security threat with the
increase in vices and crimes that include bunkering, kidnapping, armed robbery,
among others, especially when the criminal elements used the riverine areas as
escape route to the hinter land.
The directive of
the Governor, according to government, was pursuant to Chapter 2, Section 14
(2) (b) of the 1999 Constitution as amended.
After the directive
for all squatters habiting illegally in the riverine and swampy areas in the
State to vacate, residents of the riverine areas in the State instituted the
suit in which Otodo Gbame Community was also represented, while Justice
Onigbanjo on January 26, 2017 referred the matter for mediation but ordered
parties to maintain status quo pending the final resolution of the matter.
While parties were
still at Lagos MultiDoor Courthouse for mediation, the government said the
residents of Otodo Gbame used the period to rebuild the illegal structures
contrary to court order, adding that it was the action that prompted it to
carry out the demolition in line with orders for maintenance of status quo.
The government thus
argued that: “The declaration of the lower court that the demolition of March
17, 2017 is illegal and unconstitutional is misplaced and one-sided without
considering the violation of the same order of court by the respondents. The
demolition was to return both parties to status qou.”
Besides, the
government said the failure to effect service of the statutory notices on the
squatters of swampy areas within the State was because after the Governor
issued the directive, the suit at the lower court was instituted, and doing
such was no longer feasible until the determination of the suit, otherwise it
would offend the doctrine of lis pendens (case pending in court).
In ground two, the
government argued that the lower court erred when it held that the State
Government should hold consultations with the communities before any further
evictions, and also provide compensation for the destruction of their
properties, contending that in as much as Chapter 4 of the Constitution
provides for fundamental rights, some rights contained provisos that made such
rights not sacrosanct and absolute.
It said: “There are
abundance of uncontroverted evidence before the lower court that the structures
built along riverine/swampy areas of the State are without building permit as
required under the Urban and Regional Development Planning Law.
“The respondents
have constructed illegal shanties and structures without the requisite building
permit/approval and the rights under the Constitution does not permit breach of
a law or exempt anybody whosoever from building without first obtaining
requisite approval. The respondents are squatters and deliberately failed to
put the issue of title in contention.”
The government,
therefore, argued that the order as to consultation, resettlement and
compensation was without justification based on the evidence before the lower
court, adding that Justice Onigbanjo’s judgment was a violation of Chapter 4 of
the Constitution as it sought to encourage illegality.
Tags
Business