By Francis H. Murray
Justice Adrian J. Fisher of the High Court in Freetown has ruled that the recent injunction he slammed on all political activities within the main opposition All Peoples Congress Party (APC) will continue “until otherwise determined by the court.”
Delivering his ruling on Wednesday 10th March 2021, Justice Fisher said he didn’t find the argument of the defendants convincing in relation to the lack of an emergency circumstance which warranted the plaintiff to approach the court by way of an ex-parte notice of motion, adding that the determination of that was left with the Plaintiff alone.
The ruling followed an application by the lawyer for the Plaintiff Jesse M. Jengo seeking an extension of the interim injunction following the expiry of the 7- day period provided for by law which was objected to by lawyers representing the APC party.
Following the ruling, lawyer Ibrahim Mansaray representing former President Koroma, the 1st defendant in the matter applied for security for cost in the sum of Le10 billion and for the Plaintiff’s application dated 26th February 2021 to be struck out.
He argued that the grant or refusal for cost rests within the discretion of the court in respect of the matter pursuant to the High Court Rules of 2007 which he said resonated with the matter before the court, adding that the Plaintiff must indicate that he has substantial asset or assets within the jurisdiction that the 1st defendant could fall on should costs be ordered in his favor at the end of the proceedings.
He said there was no evidence to suggest that the Plaintiff has substantial assets within the jurisdiction which he said was also not declared in the affidavit, adding that what is before the court seeks to not only “effectively nullify” the position of Mr. Koroma but also to ground the operations of the 3rd defendant – the APC.
Lawyer Mansaray said the Plaintiff was seeking for the 4th defendant, the Political Parties Registration Commission (PPRC) to run the affairs of the party which he said went far beyond the Commission’s mandate, stressing that the 1st defendant has incurred an still continues to incur huge costs to defend his actions.
The Application was supported by the 2nd and 3rd defendants.
Replying, lawyer Jengo said he objected to the said application made by lawyer Mansaray using the affidavit of Santigie Rasid Sesay dated 9th March 2021 in support.
He said that the affidavit in support of the application did not proffer reasons why cost should be ordered in favor of the 1st defendant even when his client was a paid-up member of the 6th region of the party.
He said the 3rd defendant - the party is owned, financed and supported by the plaintiff respondents together with the defendant respondents, adding that if the court were to uphold the argument of the 1st defendant, his client’s hands would almost have been fettered which he said conflicted with the reason why he came to court for redress.
The matter has been adjourned to the 17th March 2021 for determination as to whether costs would be ordered and whether the extended injunction would be struck out.
Copyright © 2021 Politico Online 12/03/21
