Supreme Court order on Naira irrelevant, non-binding, February 10 deadline stays – Legal Opinion

The Supreme Court ruling restraining the federal government from implementing the February 10, 2023 deadline phase out of the old N1000, N500, and N200 notes is irrelevant, non-binding and a distraction, according to a legal opinion on the matter reportedly seen by THEWILL newspaper.

“Neither the CBN nor deposit money banks were parties to the suit filed by three state governments (Kaduna, Kogi and Zamfara).

“The state governments simply took advantage of the fact that in matters purely between state and the FG, the Supreme Court can serve as the court of first and only instance.

“Joining the CBN in the matter would immediately rob the supreme court of jurisdiction,” the opinion said.

Advertisement

“Only the CBN is empowered by Law to determine what is termed legal tender, not the Supreme Court.

“The Attorney General of the Federation cannot issue a binding order on the apex bank governor or board as the CBN Act didn’t contemplate such and the interim order is simply an academic attempt at grandstanding,” the opinion added.

THEWILL can, however, report authoritatively that the CBN deadline of February 10, 2023, will not change, according to senior officials of the regulator.

“We are not a party to the suit”, one of the officials said.

THEWILL reports that the CBN Governor, the Attorney General of the Federation and some senior officials of the administration met with President Muhammadu Buhari after the Supreme Court ruling.

There was no official statement after their meeting.

But the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, had, after the meeting with the Presudent, on Wednesday, urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the suit filed by the three state governments challenging the naira redesign policy of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

In a preliminary objection filed by the AGF through his lawyers – Mahmud Magaji and Tijanni Gazali – the Federal Government argued that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

In court filings dated February 8, 2023, the AGF had contended that “the plaintiffs have equally not shown reasonable cause of action against the defendant.”

The FG counsel were asking the court to strike out the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

Citing grounds in support of the objection, they argued that the State Governments’ suit challenged the Federal Government through its agency, the CBN, to withdraw old banknotes from the financial system and introduce new ones.

With reference to Section 251 of the Constitution, the defence lawyers argued that the suit fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in matters of monetary policy of an agency of the Federal Government.

“The claims or reliefs are not against the federation, but the Federal Government and its Agency, the Central Bank of Nigeria.

“The Federal Government of Nigeria is distinct from the Federation or the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The Plaintiffs have no grievance whatsoever against the Federation of Nigeria.

“This suit has disclosed no dispute that invokes this (Supreme) Court’s original jurisdiction as constitutionally defined,” the AGF added.

Three state governments – Kaduna, Kogi and Zamfara – had sued the Federal Government over the naira redesign policy of the CBN.

In the suit filed on February 3, the states urged the Supreme Court to compel President Muhammadu Buhari, the CBN and commercial banks to rescind the February 10 deadline for the old N200, N500 and N1000 banknotes as Nigeria’s legal tender.

Ruling on an ex parte request by the plaintiffs, the Supreme Court, ordered the Federal Government to halt the implementation of the currency redesign policy pending the determination of the substantive suit.