Supreme Court fixes March 3 to deliver judgment on naira policy suit

By Business AM

The Supreme Court of Nigeria has fixed 3rd of March for judgment in suits filed by some states against the CBN’s naira redesign and cash swap policy implemented by the Central Bank of Nigeria which halted the usage of the old N500 and N1,000 notes as legal tender.

The nine-member panel of the apex court  led by John Inyang Okoro communicated the decision on Wednesday after taking final arguments from lawyers to parties in the cases.

The states  in the legal battle against the federal government and CBN, had argued that the hasty cash swap deadline had resulted in a negative repercussion on business and socio-economic activities of Nigerians.

Kanu Agabi,counsel for the federal government, while taking arguments on Wednesday,said the apex court held that all reliefs are rooted in section 20 of the CBN Act.

Agabi argued that the apex court has no jurisdiction to hear the suit as the action cannot commence with an originating summons.

He also contended that the plaintiffs did not deem it fit to bring the CBN to court as a respondent despite making reference to the apex bank 32 times in their originating summons and despite the fact that seven of the reliefs sought relate to the CBN.

He asserted that Nigerians were already turning down the old notes because of the President’s directive.

The counsel for the federal government also  reasoned that by asking Nigerians to deposit their old naira at the CBN designated centres, the president was abiding by the court order. He added that President Buhari is empowered under the constitution to veto any legislation.

Prior to the recent announcement, Business A.M reported that Kaduna,Kogi,Zamfara,Lagos, Cross River, Ogun, Ekiti, Ondo and Sokoto  states had argued that the hasty cash swap deadline led to negative repercussion on business and socio-economic activities of Nigerians in their  respective states.

Meanwhile, River State  filed a separate suit against the federal government on the same issue.

Rivers through its counsel, Emmanuel Ukala maintained its stance not to team up with other states, adding that it would prefer to do its case separately.

On the other hand, Edo and Bayelsa filed a motion in support of the federal government. The counsels representing both states that they are in support of the cashless policy regime and sought to be joined as respondents.