A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has adjourned ruling of joiner in the case involving coalition of lawyers seeking to stop the House of Representatives from holding public hearing on the denial of call to bar of Firdaus Amasa Abdulsalam based on her adorning Hijab.
The Presiding judge Chikere having listened to the counsel to the coalition of lawyers, Barr. Sunday Akanni in Abuja on Thursday, who insisted that the House of Representatives has no such powers to conduct public hearing on issue bordering on fundamental rights.
He argued that if breach of rights occurred, the court is the proper place to go to rather than conduct public hearing by the House of Representatives.
Akanni, who cited sections 33 to 45 of the 1999 constitution as well as section 88, averred that the matter before the court is not on Hijab, saying the Hijab Rights Advocacy Group has no right to join the case.
Leading other lawyers to argue in favour of the joiner, the duo of Barr. Ismail Alasa and Lukman Ahmad argued that consequent upon the initial ruling of the court, Firdaus had been denied presentation of her matter before the public hearing of the Joint committee on Justice and Judiciary of the House.
Alasa appealed to the Court to grant the application for joiner in line with relevant sections of the constitution which allows such.
Upon listening to both counsel, Justice Chikere deferred her ruling on joiner till Friday June 29.
She held that the counsel to the House of Representatives would not be heard until determination of whether the Hijab Rights Advocacy Initiative have the right to join in the case before the court.
It will be recalled that the Court had asked the House of Representatives to put on hold its intention to conduct a public hearing on the Hijab controversy involving a Nigerian Law School graduate, Firdaus Abdulsalam during the Dec. 13, 2017 call to bar.
Abdulsalam wore a cape Hijab to the call to bar ceremony and was refused entry into the ceremony.
The issue attracted the attention of the House of Representatives, which resolved to conduct a public hearing on the matter.
On two occasions, February 6 and March 14, the House postponed the public hearing based on the court ruling and vowed to vacate the order.
Study @ Achievers University
