Court to hear delegates' suit against PENGASSAN, June 5

(Nigeria) A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos on Wednesday adjourned till June 5 for hearing in a case filed against the Petroleum and Natural Gas Senior Staff Association of Nigeria, PENGASSAN, over alleged denial of members’ rights.

John Nwanosike and Jonathan Omare, both members of the Chevron branch of the association, instituted the suit by an affidavit of urgency on May 26.

They are praying the court to restrain the defendants from holding any delegates conference, pending the hearing of the substantive suit before the court.

Other defendants in the suit are the Chevron branch of PENGASSAN, Mr Esanubi Frank and Mr Ayanate Kio.

When the case was called on Wednesday, counsel to PENGASSAN, informed the court of a pending motion of preliminary objection to the suit.

Counsel said that the motion was challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit and prayed the court to move it.

The counsel to the plaintiffs, however, raised objection to PENGASSAN’s application to move his motion on the ground that he had just been served with the processes.

Plaintiffs counsel said that despite of an interim order of the court restraining the defendants from conducting any election pending the determination of the suit, they went ahead to conduct the election.

Trial judge, Justice Okon Abang, in response, said it was the duty of the plaintiff’s counsel to do the needful where a defendant flouts an existing order of court.

 He, however, adjourned the case to June 5, for arguments.

The plaintiffs, in their affidavit, averred that they were duly elected as delegates to the conference and their tenure was valid for a term of three years.

 They contended that the defendants cancelled their names as delegates before the expiration of their tenure, thereby denying them the right to vote and be voted for at the conference.

The plaintiffs averred that the second and third defendants set up a disciplinary committee to try them after they expressed fear that their rights were being threatened.

According to them, the defendants took the action in a bid to prevent them from exercising their voting rights

They said the panel declared them guilty, even when there was no evidence of commission of any crime.

The plaintiffs are seeking a declaration that the removal of their names as delegates to the zonal conference and national conference respectively, was unconstitutional.

They also seek an order mandating the defendants to include their names as delegates.

The plaintiffs also want an order of perpetual injunction stopping the conference, until the illegality occasioned by their removal is addressed.

The trial judge had ordered that the ex-parte motion of the plaintiffs be converted to a motion on notice and served on defendants.