On Wednesday, a Federal High Court in Lagos ruled that the Labour Party and its followers might travel through the Lekki Toll Gate but not congregate there for the “#Obidatti23 Forward Ever Rally” set for October 1, 2022.
In addition, Justice Daniel Osiagor gave orders to Usman Baba, the Inspector General of Police, and Abiodun Alabi, the Commissioner of the Lagos State Police, to make sure the directive was followed.
However, the party has criticized the decision, attributing its plight to the opposition.Justice Osiagor made the order on Wednesday while ruling on a motion for injunction brought by 10 plaintiffs who are asking the court to, among others, restrain the LP, its presidential candidate, Peter Obi, his vice presidential candidate, Datti Baba-Ahmed, one Julius Abure and their loyalists from holding the rally.
The court further held that Obi’s supporters must not stop at the Lekki Toll Gate but they could pass through the venue to access Falomo Bridge and other areas that could lead to the venue of the rally.
A preliminary objection filed by the defendants seeking to stop the court from hearing the motion because it lacked jurisdiction could, however, not be heard as all parties to the suit had not been served.
The hearing for the substantive lawsuit was postponed by the court until November 4, 2022.
LP attributes opposition
Abayomi Arabambi, the party’s national publicity secretary, reacted to the court’s decision by charging the opposition with funding the legal battle to destabilize their movement.
Arabambi said that the EndSARS rally, which it claimed was afterwards hijacked, was upheld by the court as legal.
According to him, the opposition party is behind the lawsuit because they are concerned, and the majority of the plaintiffs in this particular case are lawyers who are members of an organization called the Lawyers Network for Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The court spelled out in crystal clear terms that, according to the judicial report on the EndSARS protest, the demonstration was largely peaceful until it was hijacked and that the plaintiffs’ attorney is unable to in any way connect the first to fourth respondent to EndSARS through their pleadings.