 |
| Minister for Finance Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala |
For the hasty and arbitrary manner in which he was retired after 20
years of meritorious and unblemished career in the federal civil
service, Mr. Yushau Shuaib has dragged the Federal Civil Service
Commission (FCSC), Federal Ministry of Information and Minister of
Finance, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to the National Industrial Court for
redress.
The claimant who was former spokesperson of National Emergency
Management Agency (NEMA) also debunked a media statement made on behalf
of Okonjo-Iweala by her Special Adviser, Media, Paul Nwabuiku that he
(Shuaib) was retired after being taken to a disciplinary panel by his
home ministry and that his recent sack was on account of additional
actions.
Shuaib claims that the FCSC did not invite him at any time to defend
himself against any allegations as stipulated in the Rules before
disciplinary action was taken against him and that he had never been
warned or issued any query during his service years until after his
disagreement with Finance Minister, Okonjo-Iweala over his writing.
Shuaib is seeking four declarations and two orders. A declaration
that the letter dated June 26, 2013 but delivered on October 4, 2013
purporting to retire him from service has no force of law and is
therefore, illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect
whatsoever being in flagrant violation of Public Service Rules.
A declaration that the decision of FCSC to retire him from service at
its meeting held on June 26, 2013 with immediate effect “without giving
the claimant an opportunity to defend himself and without complying
with the conditions precedent for retirement is contrary to section 36
of the 1999 Constitution, Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Right s(Ratification and Enforcement) Act, cap A9 and Public
Service Rules 030305 and 030601 (2008 Edition) and is therefore,
illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect
whatsoever.”
He is also averring that Okonjo-Iweala unduly instigated FCSC to
unlawfully retire him in violation of his freedom of expression
guaranteed by the Constitution.
Shuaib is therefore seeking an order directing FCSC and Ministry of
Information to compute and pay him all his salaries, allowances and
other emoluments due to him from the month of July 2013 up to the date
of judgement; and interest at prevailing commercial banks’ rates on the
sum arrived at in the relief.
In a 50 paragraph Statement of Facts filed though Antony Itedjere of
Bamidele Aturu & Co Chambers, Shuaib said since he was employed in
1994, he had served in several ministries, departments and agencies and
written hundreds of articles and publications in newspapers about past
and serving public officers.
He averred that most of his postings to ministries, departments and
agencies were largely influenced by his writing skills and media
relations rather than age of years in service.
According to excerpts from the court document filed on Tuesday,
Shuaib alleged that sometimes in April this year, he received a phone
call from Okonjo-Iweala demanding apologies and a retraction over one of
his writings published by Premium Times on its online news website but
that he bluntly refused “as he had done similar writings on President
Goodluck Jonathan and other past leaders when they were in government,
especially President Olusegun Obasanjo, Atiku Abubakar, Nasir El Rufai,
Femi Fani-Kayode among others.”
Thereafter, he received a letter from the Ministry of Information,
recalling him from his post as Head of Public Relations at the National
Emergency Management Agency (NEMA).
He further averred that Public Service Rules 2008 entitled him to
write and publish matters relating to a subject of general interest,
which does not contain a criticism of any officer, minister, official
and ministerial statements or actions.
The Statement of Facts further showed that without notification of
suspension and contrary to extant Public Service Rules, his salary was
abruptly stopped based on “orders from above”.
Below is the Suit
FORM 1
GENERAL FORM OF COMPLAINT
(O.3, R.1)
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT
IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT ABUJA
SUIT NO: NICN/ABJ/…../2013
BETWEEN:
YUSHAU SHUAIB CLAIMANT
AND
1. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANTS
2. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
3. DR NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA
To The Defendants respectively at
i. No. 3 Abidjan Street Zone 3, F.C.T Abuja.
ii. Radio House Herbert Macaulay Way Garki , F.C.T Abuja.
iii. Federal Ministry of Finance, Ahmadu Bello Way, Central Business District , F.C.T Abuja.
You are hereby commanded that within fourteen days after the service
of this complaint on you, inclusive of the day of such service you do
cause an appearance to be entered for you in an action at the suit of Claimant and take notice that in default of your so doing the Claimant may proceed therein, and judgment may be given in your absence.
Dated this day of December, 2013
By Order of the Court
_______________
Registrar
Memorandum to be subscribed on the Complaint
N.B:
This complaint is to be served within six calendar months from the
date thereof, or, if renewed, within three calendar months from the date
of the last renewal, including the day of such date, and not
afterwards.
The defendant may enter appearance personally or by a legal
Practitioner either by handing in the appropriate Forms, duly completed,
at the Registry of the National Industrial Court of the Judicial
Division in which the action is brought or by sending them to the
Registry by registered post.
ENDORSEMENTS TO BE ON THE COMPLAINT BEFORE ISSUE THEREOF
(i) The claimant’s claim is for:
a. A DECLARATION that the Public Service Rules
(2008 edition) is applicable for the purposes of determining the
employment of the Claimant and other matters relating to his employment
in the Civil Service of the Federation.
b. A DECLARATION that the letter of the 1st
Defendant dated the 26th day of June 2013 with Reference No
FC/6138/S.1/ 69/220 received by the Claimant on the 4th of October 2013
which purports to retire the claimant, a statutory employee, from the
Civil Service of the Federation from the 26th of June 2013 has no force
of law and is therefore illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of
no effect whatsoever being in flagrant violation of Rules 030302,
030303, 030304, 030305, 030306 and 030601 of the Public Service Rules
(2008 Edition).
c. A DECLARATION that the
decision of the 1st Defendant to retire the Claimant at its meeting held
on the 26th of June 2013 with effect from the same date without
conducting any investigation, without giving the claimant an opportunity
to defend himself and without complying with the conditions precedent
for retirement is contrary to Section 36 of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, Article 7 of the African
Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act,
cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and the Public Service
Rules 030305 and 030601 (2008 Edition) and is therefore illegal,
unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
d. A DECLARATION that the 3rd Defendant
unduly instigated the 1st Defendant to unlawfully retire the Claimant
in violation of his freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and the African Charter on
Human and Peoples’ Rights, cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria,
2004.
e. AN ORDER directing the 1st
Defendant to reinstate the Claimant to the Civil Service of the
Federation and to his post as the Chief Information Officer in 2nd
Defendant forthwith without any loss as to seniority, salaries, position
and other emoluments.
f. AN ORDER directing the 1st
and 2nd Defendants to compute and pay to the Claimant all his salaries,
allowances and other emoluments due to him from the month of July
2013 up to the date of judgment.
g. INTEREST at the prevailing commercial banks’ rates on the sum arrived at in relief (e) above.
This Complaint was issued by Anthony Itedjere Esq of Bamidele Aturu & Co whose address for service is No 53 Mambolo Street Wuse Zone 2 Abuja, Legal Practitioner for the said CLAIMANT.
Endorsement to be made on copy of Complaint forthwith after service.
This complaint was served by me at………………………………. On the defendant by
(describe the mode of service)………………………………………. On the ………..day
of………………..2013
INDORSED the …………………… day of …………………..2013
Signed____________________
Address___________________
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT
IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT ABUJA
SUIT NO:
BETWEEN:
YUSHAU SHUAIB CLAIMANT
AND
1. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANTS
2. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
3. DR NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. The Claimant was employed by the 1st Defendant in 1994 and
has served in the Federal Ministries of Information, Finance, Health,
Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) and
National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). The Claimant hereby pleads
his letter of temporary appointment dated 23rd of February 1994 and
shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
2. The Claimant avers that by a letter dated 24th of April 1995
he was made the Personal Assistant/Press Secretary to the Honourable
Minister of Finance and placed on grade level 12 step 1. The Claimant
hereby pleads the letter dated 24th of April 1995 with Reference No
E14856/T2/20 and shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
3. The claimant avers also that by a letter dated 25th of August
1999 he was posted as a Resident Information Officer to the Federal
Ministry of Health. The Claimant hereby pleads the letter dated 25th of
August 1999 with Ref No: FM1/PIPD/ABJ/D/97 and shall rely on same at the
trial of this case.
4. The Claimant avers further that by a letter dated 4th of
October 1999 he was posted to the National Revenue Mobilisation and
Fiscal Commission Abuja as Resident Information Officer. The Claimant
hereby pleads the letter dated 4th of October 1999 with Ref No:
FMI/PIPD/ABJ/D/9 and shall rely on same at the trial of this suit.
5. The Claimant also avers that he was also promoted to the rank
of Information officer SGL 9 by the 1st Defendant by a letter dated 1st
December 2000. The Claimant hereby pleads the letter dated 1st of
December 2000 and shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
6. The Claimant until he was purportedly retired by the
Defendant on the 26th of June 2013 was the Chief Information Officer SGL
14 at the Federal Ministry of Information.
7. The 1st Defendant is a Federal executive body established by
Section 153(d) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
(1999) as amended.
8. The 2nd Defendant is a Federal Government Ministry.
9. The 3rd Defendant is the Honourable Minister of Finance of Nigeria.
10. The claimant avers that prior to his employment with the 1st
Defendant he has always been a passionate writer and has written and
published over 200 articles and issued and influenced over 2000 press
releases most on activities of the government.
11. The claimant avers that he has also in the course of his
service at the Federal Ministries of Information, Finance, Health,
Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) and
National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) which are under the
supervision of the 1st Defendant introduced various in-house
publications, Finance bulletin, RMAFC Media reviews, revenue Outlook
magazines, features and commentaries, NEMA newsletter among others.
12. The claimant avers that most of his postings to Ministries,
Departments and Agencies (MDAs) were largely influenced on the strength
of his writing skills and media relations rather than age of years in
service.
13. The Claimant avers that having taken writing as a hobby and
social responsibility to educate and inform the public as well as
mobilize the citizens towards good causes he dedicated websites and
blogs for this, namely,(http://www.prnigeria.com/ andhttp://www.prnigeria.net/)
which are geared towards encouraging and facilitating patriotism in
many Nigerians and especially Civil Servants and in order to improve
their skills in public relations.
BACKGROUND FACTS PRIOR TO THE RETIREMENT OF THE CLAIMANT BY THE DEFENDANT
14. The Claimant avers that sometime in April 2013, he received a
call from the 3rd Defendant who is the Honourable Minister of Finance
demanding apologies and a retraction over one of his writings published
by Premium Times on its online news website on the 6th of March 2013.
The claimant hereby pleads his article “still on Okonjo-Iweala over
Controversial Appointments” and shall rely on same at the trial of this
case.
15. The claimant avers further that he bluntly refused to
apologize to the 3rd Defendant as he has during his career at service
done similar writings on President Goodluck Jonathan and other past
leaders when they were in government, especially President Olusegun
Obasanjo, Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Nasir El-rufai, Femi Fani-
Kayode among others.
16. The claimant avers that many rejoinders and commentaries have
since been published in reaction to the write up concerning the 3rd
Defendant and he had in the past even written articles praising the 3rd
Defendant relating to some issues.
17. The Claimant avers that thereafter he received a letter dated
the 11th of April 2013 from the office of the 2nd Defendant notifying
him of his recall to the Headquarters based on an alleged reorganization
exercise. The Claimant hereby pleads and will rely at trial on the
letter dated 11th of April 2013 with reference No FMIC/PIPD/ABJ/D/165.
18. The claimant avers that he was surprised and shocked by the
sudden recall which was purportedly to the National Emergency Management
Agency ( NEMA) where he had earlier served as Head of Public Relations
as he was not forewarned in any manner but got a letter of immediate
recall.
19. The Claimant avers further that on the 17th of April 2013 he
received a letter dated the 16th of April 2013 from the 2nd Defendant
intimating him that he published political articles in the media capable
of creating disaffection in the country, publishing inciting and
inflammatory statement against a top public officer and also editing
published materials in the premium times magazine contrary to Public
Service Rules 030421. The claimant hereby pleads and will rely on the
letter dated 16th of April 2013 with Reference No FMI/PP.19463/C/9.
20. The claimant avers that by a letter dated 19th of April 2013
he replied the said letter dated 16th of April 2013 addressing and
responding to all the allegations raised in same. The Claimant hereby
pleads the said letter dated 19th of April 2013 and shall rely on same
at the trial of this suit.
21. The Claimant avers further that he stated in the said letter
that his write ups were mere personal opinions and none of them was ever
political and had no political inclinations at all and stated clearly
that he had no business with Premium Times magazine as he is not part of
their editorial board.
22. The Claimant avers that on the 27th of May 2013 he received
another letter with Reference No FM1/PP.196463/C/42 dated the 27th of
May 2013 from the 2nd Defendant stating that his reply to the one dated
the 16th of April 2013 was not satisfactory and informing him that he
had defamed the 3rdDefendant in an article written by him and published
on the 6th of March 2013. The claimant hereby pleads the letter dated
27th of May 2013 and shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
23. The Claimant avers that he replied the second letter by a
letter dated the 29th of May 2013 where he clearly stated that he was
merely exercising his constitutional right of expressing his views
freely as well as imparting ideas and information without interference
being a Chief Information Officer at the Federal Ministry of
Information. The claimant hereby pleads and will rely at trial on his
letter of 29th of May 2013.
24. The Claimant avers further that Rules 030421 (iii) of the
Public Service Rules 2008 entitles him to write or broadcast matters
relating to a subject of general interest.
25. The Claimant hereby pleads the Public Service Rules (2008 Edition) and shall rely on same at trial.
26. The Claimant hereby states that Rules 030421 (iii) states thus:
Nothing in this Rule shall be deemed to prevent an
officer from publishing in his own name, by writing, speech or
broadcast, matters relating to a subject of general interest which does
not contain a criticism of any officer. Minister, official and
Ministerial statements or actions, or which can be regarded as of a
political or administrative nature; provided that in so publishing any
matter compiled withGovernment sanction from official records, he/she
gives prominence to a disclaimer of Government responsibility for its
accuracy.
27. The Claimant avers that in the month of August 2013 he went
to the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation to complain
about his salary for the month of July 2013 which he did not receive
and was informed by the officer in charge of e-payments that there were
orders from above that his salaries should be stopped.
28. The Claimant avers that he was shocked as he was never
suspended from service and never received any information to the effect
that his salary will be stopped.
29. The Claimant avers that thereafter on the 4th of October 2013
he received a letter dated 26th of June 2013 from the 1st Defendant
informing him of his retirement from service with effect from the 26th
of June 2013. The Claimant hereby pleads the letter dated 26th of June
2013 with Reference No FC/6318/S.1/69/220 and shall rely on same at the
trial of this suit.
30. The Claimant avers that the 1st Defendant stated in its letter
purportedly retiring him from service that it decided at its meeting
held on the 26th of June 2013 that it considered the allegations against
him and approved his retirement for gross misconduct in line with
Public Service Rules 030401, 030402(f) and 030421.
31. The Claimant avers that he was never given a notice of the said
meeting of 26th June 2013 nor aware of the proceedings in the meeting
that led to his sudden retirement.
32. The Claimant avers that Rules 030403 of The Public Service
Rules 2008 edition clearly states that disciplinary procedure for
serious misconduct shall be in accordance with Rules 030302 to 030306.
33. The Claimant avers that the 1st Defendant had no basis for
retiring him from the service of the 2nd Defendant as it failed to
comply with the express provisions of 030302 to 030306.
34. The Claimant avers that Rules O30302 (a), (b) and (c) specifically provides thus.
030302 - As soon as a superior officer becomes
dissatisfied with any officer subordinate to him/her, it shall be
his/her duty so to inform the officer in writing giving details of
unsatisfactory behavior and to call upon him/her to submit within a
specific time such written representation as he/she may wish to make to
exculpate himself/herself from disciplinary action. After considering
such written representations as the officer may make within the
specified time the superior officer shall decide whether:
(a) the officer has
exculpated himself/herself in which case, he/she shall be so informed in
writing and no further action shall be necessary or
(b) the officer has not
exculpated himself/herself but it is considered that he/she should not
be punished in which case the appropriate formal letter of advice shall
be issued to him/her and he/she shall be required to acknowledge its
receipt in writing, or
(c) the officer has not exculpated himself/herself and deserves some punishment, in which case Rule 030304 shall apply.
35. The claimant avers that contrary to rules 030302 (b) after he
submitting his letter of 29th May 2013 he was not issued with any letter
from the 1st and 2nd Defendant informing him that he had not exculpated
himself nor was he informed that it was considered that he will not be
punished or any appropriate letter of advice given to him nor did he
acknowledge receipt of same in writing.
36. The Claimant avers further that Rule 030303 of the Public Service Rules provides thus
Where a Tribunal of Inquiry set up by the Government
makes recommendations of a disciplinary nature on an officer, the
Federal Civil Service Commission shall not act on such recommendations
until it has called upon the affected officer to reply to the
allegations made against him/her by the Tribunal of Inquiry. If the
officer refuses or neglects to reply to the allegations within a
reasonable time or at all, the Federal Civil Service Commission or its
agent shall proceed to accept and enforce the recommendations of the
Tribunal of Inquiry and take such disciplinary action against the
officer as it shall deem appropriate
37. The Claimant avers further that contrary to Rule 030303 no
tribunal of inquiry was set up by the government and no recommendations
of disciplinary nature pertaining to him was made for the 1st Defendant
to act on such recommendations. The Claimant avers further that he was
not called upon by any Tribunal of inquiry to answer allegations against
him.
38. The Claimant avers further that Rule 030304 provides thus
(a) It shall be the duty of every officer to report any
case of misconduct that comes to his/her notice to an officer superior
to the officer involved.
(b) When an officer's misconduct is brought to the notice
of his/her superior officer, it shall be the duty of that superior
officer to report it to the Permanent Secretary/Head of
Extra-Ministerial Office without delay. If he/she considers it necessary
that the officer should be interdicted,such recommendations shall be
made in the report.
(c ) On receiving the report, the Permanent
Secretary/Head of Extra-Ministerial Office shall take action in
accordance with Rule 030306 asappropriate and if necessary, shall
interdict the officer.
(d) At the appropriate point in the investigation, the officer may be suspended in accordance with Rule 030405
39. The Claimant avers that contrary to Rule 030304(b) he is not
aware of any report or recommendations of the Permanent Secretary that
he should be interdicted . The Claimant avers further that he was never
suspended in line with 030304 (d).
40. The Claimant states that Rule 030305 of the Public Service Rules (2008) edition provides thus
If it is represented to the
Federal Civil Service Commission that an officer has been guilty of
misconduct and the Commission does notconsider the alleged misconduct
serious enough to warrant proceedings under Rule 030306 with a view to
dismissal, it may cause an investigation to be made into the matter in
such a manner as it considers proper and the officer shall be entitled
to know the whole case made against him/her. And shall have adequate opportunity of
making his/her defence. If as a result the Commission decides that the
allegation isproved, it may inflict any other punishment upon the
officer such as reduction in rank, withholding or deferment of increment
or otherwise.
41. The Claimant avers that contrary to Rules 030305 he was never
dismissed by the 1st and the 1st Defendant never made an investigation
in relating to his conduct. The Claimant avers further that the 1st
Defendant did not inform him of any case made against him nor gave him
adequate opportunity of defending himself.
42. The Claimant avers that he is only aware of Retirement of an
officer in public interest by virtue of the provisions of Rule 030601 of
the Public Service Rules 2008 edition.
43. The Claimant avers that Rule 030601 specifically provides thus
030601 - Notwithstanding the provisions of this Chapter,
if the Federal Civil Service Commission considers that it is desirable
in the Publicinterest that an officer should be required to retire from
service on grounds which cannot suitably be dealt with by the procedures
laid down inrule 030305, it shall call for a full report from the
Permanent Secretary/Head of Extra-Ministerial Office in which the
Officer has served; and if,considering that report and giving the
Officer an opportunity of submitting a reply to the complaints by reason
of which his retirement iscontemplated, the Commission is satisfied,
having regard to the conditions of service, the usefulness of the
Officer thereto and all other circumstances of the case, that it is
desirable in the public interest to do so, it shall retire the Officer
and the Officer's service shall accordinglyterminate on such date as the
Commission may specify. In every such case, the question of pension and
gratuity will be dealt with under the Pensions Reform Act,2004.
44. The Claimant avers that contrary to Rule 030601, the 1st
Defendant did not call for a full report from the Permanent Secretary/
Head of Extra – Ministerial office of the 2nd Defendant where he served
and he was never called or given an opportunity of submitting a reply
to any complaint by reason of which his retirement was contemplated.
45. The Claimant avers further that the compulsorily retirement
age for all grades in Service is 60 years or 35 Years of pensionable
Service whichever is earlier by virtue of Rule 020810. The Claimant
avers further that he has not attained the age of 60 nor has he spent 35
years of Pensionable Service.
46. The Claimant avers that the 1st Defendant did not follow the
provisions of the Public Service Rules 2008 before retiring him from
service.
47. The Claimant avers further that the 1st Defendant had no basis
for retiring him from service and was only victimizing because of the
article he wrote concerning the 3rd Defendant.
48. The Claimant avers that he was surprised and shocked when the
3rd Defendant stated wrongly through her Special Adviser on media in the
person of Paul C. Nwabuiku that he was retired after being taken to a
disciplinary panel by his home ministry and that his recent sack is on
account of additional actions. The Claimant hereby pleads the Sunday
trust online publication of October 13 2013 and shall rely on same at
the trial of this case.
49. The Claimant avers that he never faced any disciplinary panel
before he was retired nor engaged any action to warrant disciplinary
action.
50. Wherefore the Claimants claim the following:
a. A DECLARATION that the Public Service Rules
(2008 edition) is applicable for the purposes of determining the
employment of the Claimant and other matters relating to his employment
in the Civil Service of the Federation.
b. A DECLARATION that the letter of the 1st
Defendant dated the 26th day of June 2013 with Reference No FC/6138/S.1/
69/220 received by the Claimant on the 4th of October 2013 which
purports to retire the claimant, a statutory employee, from the Civil
Service of the Federation from the 26th of June 2013 has no force of law
and is therefore illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of no
effect whatsoever being in flagrant violation of Rules 030302, 030303,
030304, 030305, 030306 and 030601 of the Public Service Rules (2008
Edition).
c. A DECLARATION that the
decision of the 1st Defendant to retire the Claimant at its meeting held
on the 26th of June 2013 with effect from the same date without
conducting any investigation, without giving the claimant an opportunity
to defend himself and without complying with the conditions precedent
for retirement is contrary to Section 36 of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, Article 7 of the African
Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act,
cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and the Public Service
Rules 030305 and 030601 (2008 Edition) and is therefore illegal,
unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
d. A DECLARATION that the 3rd Defendant
unduly instigated the 1st Defendant to unlawfully retire the Claimant
in violation of his freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and the African Charter on
Human and Peoples’ Rights, cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria,
2004.
e. AN ORDER directing the 1st
Defendant to reinstate the Claimant to the Civil Service of the
Federation and to his post as the Chief Information Officer in 2nd
Defendant forthwith without any loss as to seniority, salaries, position
and other emoluments.
f. AN ORDER directing the 1st
and 2nd Defendants to compute and pay to the Claimant all his salaries,
allowances and other emoluments due to him from the month of July 2013
up to the date of judgment.
g. INTEREST at the prevailing commercial banks’ rates on the sum arrived at in relief (e) above.
Dated this 9th day of December 2013
Anthony Itedjere Esq
Bamidele Aturu & Co
(Claimant’s Counsel)
53 Mambolo street, Wuse Zone 2
F.C.T Abuja .08069112151, 08055999888 aturulaw@yahoo.com
FOR SERVICE ON:
1. The 1st Defendant
No. 3 Abidjan Street
Zone 3
F.C.T Abuja.
2. 2nd Defendant
Radio House
Herbert Macaulay Way
Garki
F.C.T Abuja.
3. 3rd Defendant.
Federal Ministry of Finance,
Ahmadu Bello Way
Central Business District, F.C.T Abuja.
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT
IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT ABUJA
SUIT NO:
BETWEEN:
YUSHAU SHUAIB CLAIMANT
AND
1. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANTS
2. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
3. DR NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA
LIST OF WITNESS
1. Yushau Shuaib
Dated this 9th Day Of December 2013.
Anthony Itedjere Esq
Bamidele Aturu & Co
(Claimant’s Counsel)
53 Mambolo street
Wuse Zone 2
F.C.T Abuja .
08069112151, 08055999888 aturulaw@yahoo.com
FOR SERVICE ON:
1. The 1st Defendant
No. 3 Abidjan Street
Zone 3
F.C.T Abuja.
2. 2nd Defendant
Radio House
Herbert Macaulay Way
Garki
F.C.T Abuja.
3. 3rd Defendant.
Federal Ministry of Finance,
Ahmadu Bello Way
Central Business District
F.C.T Abuja.
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT
IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT ABUJA
SUIT NO:
BETWEEN:
YUSHAU SHUAIB CLAIMANT
AND
1. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANTS
2. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
3. DR NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
1. Claimant’s letter of temporary appointment dated 23rd of February 1994.
2. Letter dated 24th of April 1995 with Reference No E14856/T2/20.
3. Letter dated 25th of August 1999 with Ref No: FM1/PIPD/ABJ/D/97.
4. Letter dated 4th of October 1999 with Ref No: FMI/PIPD/ABJ/D/9.
5. Letter dated 1st of December 2000.
6. Copy of Premium Times Online publication of 6th of March
2013 of Article “still on Okonjo-Iweala over Controversial
Appointments”.
7. 2nd Defendant’s letter dated 11th of April 2013 with reference No FMIC/PIPD/ABJ/D/165.
8. 2nd Defendant’s letter dated 16th of April 2013 with Reference No FMI/PP.19463/C/9.
9. Claimant letter to the 2nd Defendant dated 19th of April 2013.
10. 2nd Defendant’s letter to the Claimant with Reference No FM1/PP.196463/C/42 dated the 27th of May 2013.
11. Claimant’s letter dated 29th of May 2013 to the 2nd Defendant.
12. The Public Service Rules (2008 Edition).
13. 1st Defendant letter dated 26th of June 2013 with Reference No FC/6318/S.1/69/220.
14. Copy of Sunday trust online publication of 13th of October 2013.
Dated This 9th Day of December 2013
Anthony Itedjere Esq
Bamidele Aturu & Co
(Claimant’s Counsel)
53 Mambolo street
Wuse Zone 2
F.C.T Abuja .
08069112151, 08055999888 aturulaw@yahoo.com
FOR SERVICE ON
1. The 1st Defendant
No. 3 Abidjan Street, Zone 3, F.C.T Abuja.
2. 2nd Defendant
Radio House, Herbert Macaulay Way, Garki, F.C.T Abuja.
3. 3rd Defendant.
Federal Ministry of Finance, Ahmadu Bello Way, Central Business District, F.C.T Abuja.
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT
IN THE ABUJA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT ABUJA
SUIT NO:
BETWEEN:
YUSHAU SHUAIB CLAIMANT
AND
1. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION DEFENDANTS
2. FEDERAL MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
3. DR NGOZI OKONJO-IWEALA
CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT ON OATH
1. I Yushau Shuaib , Nigerian Muslim Male of F3 Flat 4 Finance
Estate Wuye F.C.T Abuja do hereby make oath and state as follows.
2. I am the Claimant in the suit herein by Virtue of which I am conversant with the facts deposed to hereunder.
3. Except as otherwise stated herein, facts deposed to in this
affidavit are those within my knowledge, information and belief.
4. I was employed by the 1st Defendant in 1994 and I have served
in the Federal Ministries of Information, Finance, Health, Revenue
Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) and National
Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). I hereby plead my letter of
temporary appointment dated 23rd of February 1994 and shall rely on same
at the trial of this case.
5. That by a letter dated 24th of April 1995 I was made the
Personal Assistant/Press Secretary to the Honourable Minister of Finance
and placed on grade level 12 step 1. I hereby plead the letter dated
24th of April 1995 with Reference No E14856/T2/20 and shall rely on same
at the trial of this case.
6. That by a letter dated 25th of August 1999 I was posted as a
Resident Information Officer to the Federal Ministry of Health. I hereby
plead the letter dated 25th of August 1999 with Ref No:
FM1/PIPD/ABJ/D/97 and shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
7. That by a letter dated 4th of October 1999 I was posted to
the National Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission Abuja as
Resident Information Officer. I hereby plead the letter dated 4th of
October 1999 with Ref No: FMI/PIPD/ABJ/D/9 and shall rely on same at the
trial of this suit.
8. I was also promoted to the rank of Information officer SGL 9
by the 1st Defendant by a letter dated 1st December 2000. I hereby plead
the letter dated 1st of December 2000 and shall rely on same at the
trial of this case.
9. Until I was purportedly retired by the Defendant on the 26th
of June 2013 I was the Chief Information Officer SGL 13 at the Federal
Ministry of Information.
10. The 1st Defendant is a Federal executive body established by
Section 153(d) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria
(1999) as amended.
11. The 2nd Defendant is a Federal Government Ministry.
12. The 3rd Defendant is the Honourable Minister of Finance of Nigeria.
13. That prior to my employment with the 1st Defendant I have
always been a passionate writer and have written and published over 200
articles and issued and influenced over 2000 press releases most on
activities of the government.
14. That also in the course of my service at the Federal
Ministries of Information, Finance, Health, Revenue Mobilization
Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) and National Emergency
Management Agency (NEMA) which are under the supervision of the 1st
Defendant I introduced various in-house publications, Finance bulletin,
RMAFC Media reviews, revenue Outlook magazines, features and
commentaries, NEMA newsletter among others.
15. Most of my postings to Ministries, Departments and Agencies
(MDAs) were largely influenced on the strength of my writing skills and
media relations rather than my age of years in service.
16. That having taken writing as a hobby and social responsibility
to educate and inform the public as well as mobilize the citizens
towards good causes i dedicated websites and blogs for this, namely,(http://www.prnigeria.com/ andhttp://www.prnigeria.net/)
which are geared towards encouraging and facilitating patriotism in
many Nigerians and especially Civil Servants and in order to improve
their skills in public relations.
17. That sometime in April 2013, I received a call from the 3rd
Defendant who is the Honourable Minister of Finance demanding apologies
and a retraction over one of my writings published by Premium Times on
its online news website on the 6th of March 2013. I hereby plead my
article “still on Okonjo-Iweala over Controversial Appointments” and
shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
18. That I bluntly refused to apologize to the 3rd Defendant as
I have during my career at service done similar writings on President
Goodluck Jonathan and other past leaders when they were in government,
especially President Olusegun Obasanjo, Vice President Atiku Abubakar,
Nasir El-rufai, Femi Fani- Kayode among others.
19. That many rejoinders and commentaries have since been
published in reaction to the write up concerning the 3rd Defendant and I
have in the past even written articles praising the 3rd Defendant
relating to some issues.
20. That thereafter I received a letter dated the 11th of April
2013 from the office of the 2nd Defendant notifying me of my recall to
the Headquarters based on an alleged reorganization exercise. I hereby
plead and will rely at trial on the letter dated 11th of April 2013 with
reference No FMIC/PIPD/ABJ/D/165.
21. I was surprised and shocked by the sudden recall which was
purportedly to the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) where I
had earlier served as Head of Public Relations as I was not
forewarned in any manner but got a letter of immediate recall.
22. That on the 17th of April 2013 I received a letter dated the
16th of April 2013 from the 2nd Defendant intimating me that I published
political articles in the media capable of creating disaffection in the
country, publishing inciting and inflammatory statement against a top
public officer and also editing published materials in the premium times
magazine contrary to Public Service Rules 030421. I hereby plead and
will rely on the letter dated 16th of April 2013 with Reference No
FMI/PP.19463/C/9.
23. That by a letter dated 19th of April 2013, I replied the said
letter dated 16th of April 2013 addressing and responding to all the
allegations raised in same. I hereby plead the said letter dated 19th of
April 2013 and shall rely on same at the trial of this suit.
24. That I stated in the said letter that my write ups were mere
personal opinions and none of them was ever political and had no
political inclinations at all and stated clearly that I had no business
with Premium Times magazine as I am not part of their editorial board.
25. That on the 27th of May 2013 I received another letter with
Reference No FM1/PP.196463/C/42 dated the 27th of May 2013 from the
2ndDefendant stating that my reply to the one dated the 16th of April
2013 was not satisfactory and informing me that I had defamed the 3rd
Defendant in an article written by me and published on the 6th of March
2013. I hereby plead the letter dated 27th of May 2013 and shall rely on
same at the trial of this case.
26. That I replied the second letter by a letter dated the 29th of
May 2013 where I clearly stated that I was merely exercising my
constitutional right of expressing my views freely as well as imparting
ideas and information without interference being a Chief Information
Officer at the Federal Ministry of Information. I hereby plead and will
rely at trial on his letter of 29th of May 2013.
27. That Rules 030421 (iii) of the Public Service Rules 2008
entitles me to write or broadcast matters relating to a subject of
general interest.
28. I hereby plead the Public Service Rules (2008 Edition) and shall rely on same at trial.
29. I hereby state that Rules 030421 (iii) states thus:
Nothing in this Rule shall be deemed to prevent an
officer from publishing in his own name, by writing, speech or
broadcast, matters relating to a subject of general interest which does
not contain a criticism of any officer. Minister, official and
Ministerial statements or actions, or which can be regarded as of a
political or administrative nature; provided that in so publishing any
matter compiled withGovernment sanction from official records, he/she
gives prominence to a disclaimer of Government responsibility for its
accuracy.
30. That in the month of August 2013 I went to the Office of
the Accountant General of the Federation to complain about my salary
for the month of July 2013 which I did not receive and was informed
by the officer in charge of e-payments that there were orders from above
that my salaries should be stopped.
31. That I was shocked as I was never suspended from service and
never received any information to the effect that my salary will be
stopped.
32. That thereafter on the 4th of October 2013 I received a letter
dated 26th of June 2013 from the 1st Defendant informing me of my
retirement from service with effect from the 26th of June 2013. I hereby
plead the letter dated 26th of June 2013 with Reference No
FC/6318/S.1/69/220 and shall rely on same at the trial of this suit.
33. That the 1st Defendant stated in its letter purportedly
retiring me from service that it decided at its meeting held on the 26th
of June 2013 that it considered the allegations against me and approved
my retirement for gross misconduct in line with Public Service Rules
030401, 030402(f) and 030421.
34. That I was never given a notice of the said meeting of 26th
June 2013 nor aware of the proceedings in the meeting that led to my
sudden retirement.
35. That Rules 030403 of The Public Service Rules 2008 edition
clearly states that disciplinary procedure for serious misconduct shall
be in accordance with Rules 030302 to 030306.
36. The 1st Defendant had no basis for retiring me from the
service of the 2nd Defendant as it failed to comply with the express
provisions of 030302 to 030306.
37. That Rules O30302 (a), (b) and (c) specifically provides thus.
030302 - As soon as a superior officer becomes
dissatisfied with any officer subordinate to him/her, it shall be
his/her duty so to inform the officer in writing giving details of
unsatisfactory behavior and to call upon him/her to submit within a
specific time such written representation as he/she may wish to make to
exculpate himself/herself from disciplinary action. After considering
such written representations as the officer may make within the
specified time the superior officer shall decide whether:
(d) the officer has
exculpated himself/herself in which case, he/she shall be so informed in
writing and no further action shall be necessary or
(e) the officer has not
exculpated himself/herself but it is considered that he/she should not
be punished in which case the appropriate formal letter of advice shall
be issued to him/her and he/she shall be required to acknowledge its
receipt in writing, or
(f) the officer has not exculpated himself/herself and deserves some punishment, in which case Rule 030304 shall apply.
38. That contrary to rules 030302 (b) after submitting my letter of
29th May 2013 I was not issued with any letter from the 1st and 2nd
Defendant informing me that I had not exculpated myself nor was I
informed that it was considered that I will not be punished or any
appropriate letter of advice given to me nor did I acknowledge receipt
of same in writing.
39. That Rule 030303 of the Public Service Rules provides thus
Where a Tribunal of Inquiry set up by the Government
makes recommendations of a disciplinary nature on an officer, the
Federal Civil Service Commission shall not act on such recommendations
until it has called upon the affected officer to reply to the
allegations made against him/her by the Tribunal of Inquiry. If the
officer refuses or neglects to reply to the allegations within a
reasonable time or at all, the Federal Civil Service Commission or its
agent shall proceed to accept and enforce the recommendations of the
Tribunal of Inquiry and take such disciplinary action against the
officer as it shall deem appropriate
40. That contrary to Rule 030303 no tribunal of inquiry was set up
by the government and no recommendations of disciplinary nature
pertaining to me was made for the 1st Defendant to act on such
recommendations. I was not called upon by any Tribunal of inquiry to
answer allegations against me.
41. The Claimant avers further that Rule 030304 provides thus
(a) It shall be the duty of every officer to report any
case of misconduct that comes to his/her notice to an officer superior
to the officer involved.
(b) When an officer's misconduct is brought to the notice
of his/her superior officer, it shall be the duty of that superior
officer to report it to the Permanent Secretary/Head of
Extra-Ministerial Office without delay. If he/she considers it necessary
that the officer should be interdicted,such recommendations shall be
made in the report.
(c ) On receiving the report, the Permanent
Secretary/Head of Extra-Ministerial Office shall take action in
accordance with Rule 030306 asappropriate and. if necessary, shall
interdict the officer.
(d) At the appropriate point in the investigation, the officer may be suspended in accordance with Rule 030405
42. That contrary to Rule 030304(b) I am not aware of any report
or recommendations of the Permanent Secretary that I should be
interdicted. I was never suspended in line with 030304 (d).
43. That Rule 030305 of the Public Service Rules (2008) edition provides thus
If it is represented to the
Federal Civil Service Commission that an officer has been guilty of
misconduct and the Commission does notconsider the alleged misconduct
serious enough to warrant proceedings under Rule 030306 with a view to
dismissal, it may cause an investigation to be made into the matter in
such a manner as it considers proper and the officer shall be entitled
to know the whole case made against him/her. And shall have adequate opportunity of
making his/her defence. If as a result the Commission decides that the
allegation isproved, it may inflict any other punishment upon the
officer such as reduction in rank, withholding or deferment of increment
or otherwise.
44. That contrary to Rules 030305 I was never dismissed by the 1st
Defendant and the 1st Defendant never made an investigation in relating
to my conduct. The 1st Defendant did not inform me of any case made
against me nor gave me adequate opportunity of defending myself.
45. That I am only aware of Retirement of an officer in public
interest by virtue of the provisions of Rule 030601 of the Public
Service Rules 2008 edition.
46. That Rule 030601 specifically provides thus
030601 - Notwithstanding the provisions of this Chapter,
if the Federal Civil Service Commission considers that it is desirable
in the Publicinterest that an officer should be required to retire from
service on grounds which cannot suitably be dealt with by the procedures
laid down inrule 030305, it shall call for a full report from the
Permanent Secretary/Head of Extra-Ministerial Office in which the
Officer has served; and if,considering that report and giving the
Officer an opportunity of submitting a reply to the complaints by reason
of which his retirement iscontemplated, the Commission is satisfied,
having regard to the conditions of service, the usefulness of the
Officer thereto and all other circumstances of the case, that it is
desirable in the public interest to do so, it shall retire the Officer
and the Officer's service shall accordinglyterminate on such date as the
Commission may specify. In every such case, the question of pension and
gratuity will be dealt with under the Pensions Reform Act,2004.
47. That contrary to Rule 030601, the 1st Defendant did not call
for a full report from the Permanent Secretary/ Head of Extra –
Ministerial office of the 2nd Defendant where I served and I was
never called or given an opportunity of submitting a reply to any
complaint by reason of which my retirement was contemplated.
48. That the compulsorily retirement age for all grades in
Service is 60 years or 35 years of pensionable Service whichever is
earlier by virtue of Rule 020810. I have not attained the age of 60 nor
have I spent 35 years of Pensionable Service.
49. The 1st Defendant did not follow the provisions of the Public Service Rules 2008 before retiring me from service.
50. That the 1st Defendant had no basis for retiring me from
service and was only victimizing me because of the article I wrote
concerning the 3rdDefendant.
51. I was surprised and shocked when the 3rd Defendant stated
wrongly through her Special Adviser on media in the person of Paul C.
Nwabuiku that I was retired after being taken to a disciplinary panel
by my home ministry and that my recent sack is on account of additional
actions. I hereby plead the Sunday trust online publication of October
13 2013 and shall rely on same at the trial of this case.
52. I never faced any disciplinary panel before I was retired.
53. Wherefore the I claim against the Defendants as the follows:
a. A DECLARATION that the Public Service Rules
(2008 edition) is applicable for the purposes of determining the
employment of the Claimant and other matters relating to his employment
in the Civil Service of the Federation.
b. A DECLARATION that the letter of the 1st
Defendant dated the 26th day of June 2013 with Reference No FC/6138/S.1/
69/220 received by the Claimant on the 4th of October 2013 which
purports to retire the claimant, a statutory employee, from the Civil
Service of the Federation from the 26th of June 2013 has no force of law
and is therefore illegal, unconstitutional, null and void and of no
effect whatsoever being in flagrant violation of Rules 030302, 030303,
030304, 030305, 030306 and 030601 of the Public Service Rules (2008
Edition).
c. A DECLARATION that the
decision of the 1st Defendant to retire the Claimant at its meeting held
on the 26th of June 2013 with effect from the same date without
conducting any investigation, without giving the claimant an opportunity
to defend himself and without complying with the conditions precedent
for retirement is contrary to Section 36 of the Constitution of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, Article 7 of the African
Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act,
cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 and the Public Service
Rules 030305 and 030601 (2008 Edition) and is therefore illegal,
unlawful, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
d. A DECLARATION that the 3rd Defendant
unduly instigated the 1st Defendant to unlawfully retire the Claimant
in violation of his freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and the African Charter on
Human and Peoples’ Rights, cap A9, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria,
2004.
e. AN ORDER directing the 1st
Defendant to reinstate the Claimant to the Civil Service of the
Federation and to his post as the Chief Information Officer in 2nd
Defendant forthwith without any loss as to seniority, salaries, position
and other emoluments.
f. AN ORDER directing the 1st
and 2nd Defendants to compute and pay to the Claimant all his salaries,
allowances and other emoluments due to him from the month of July 2013
up to the date of judgment.
g. INTEREST at the prevailing commercial banks’ rates on the sum arrived at in relief (e) above.
I the said Yushau Shuaib conscientiously make this Oath in good faith in accordance with the Oath Act 2004.
DEPONENT
Sworn to at The National Industrial Court Registry F.C.T, Abuja
This day 10 of December 2013
BEFORE ME
COMMISSIONER FOR OATH
No comments :
Post a Comment