By Victor Okoye
Abuja, Feb. 28, 2025 (NAN) Adeboro Adamson, SAN, Counsel to the Claimant, Serob Legends Resort Limited who is suing the Akwa Ibom State Government over allegations bordering on forceful takeover of a land measuring 1,805 hectares has called on the state government and other parties involved in the case to maintain the peace and respect court orders so as not to be in contempt of court.
The Claimant, Serob Legends Resort Limited by the suit marked: HU/243/2024, is demanding a whopping N31 billion as compensation for damages suffered as a result of the forceful takeover of its land.
Besides the state government, other defendants include the Governor of Akwa Ibom State, Ministry of Lands and Water Resources, and the Attorney General of Akwa Ibom State and Commissioner for Justice.
One Mrs. Nsidem Etuk, who claims to be the owner of the property, had last year raised the alarm, accusing the state government of forceful takeover of the property.
The said property measuring approximately 1,805 hectares is located at the demarcated portion of NITEL Property at Dominik Utuk Avenue, formerly known as Brooks Street, Uyo.
It would be recalled that Governor Umo Eno, had on February 1, 2025, performed the groundbreaking for the construction of a Security Command and Control Centre at the said portion of land.
The governor, during the ceremony also announced that the property would equally accommodate three other projects, including the Akwa Ibom Broadcasting Corporation (AKBC) House; the Headquarters of the Akwa Ibom Investment Corporation (AKICORP); and the Akwa Ibom Geographical Information System (AkwaGIS) head office.
The arrangement by the state government assumes full ownership of the property, especially as the government did not pay attention to pleas by Mrs. Etuk since last year.
However, the claimant tendered various exhibits including; “Deed of Conveyance” to prove how it acquired the said property from NITEL Trustees Ltd (In Liquidation) through its Liquidator, Otunba Olusola Adekanola.
With a 52-paragraph Statement of Claim, 59-paragraph Witness Statement on Oath, and 17 list of documents attached, claimant is seeking: “A Declaration that the Claimants are the rightful owners of All that property measuring approximately 1.805 Hectares (18,504.00 sqm) situates at the Demarcated Portion of NITEL PROPERTY as contained in the Survey Plans being along Dominic Utuk Avenue, formerly known as Brooks Street, Uyo, Uyo Local Government, Akwa Ibom State, partly comprised in the Certificate of Occupancy No. 2/2/71 dated July 2, 2001, granted by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
Adamson, while addressing newsmen in Uyo after a court session, said his client had earlier applied for an interlocutory injunction for the purpose of maintaining status quo ante in the matter.
He stressed that the interlocutory injunction became necessary to restrain all parties involved in the case from working or carrying out any construction activity on the land pending the matter before the court of law.
“In other words, the interlocutory injunction is an express order that every party should maintain the peace, pending the determination of the matter in court.
“Even though we’ve heard that some persons are already working on the land as we speak.
“However, that’s not my concern. My concern is that the matter is before a court of law and once you submit to the jurisdiction of the court, you have the duty and obligation to ensure that you don’t do anything that will prejudice the matter before the court of law.
“All the parties involved had filed their processes, so to this extent, nobody should have gone to that property by the operation of law. It is a straightforward matter.
“Well, to further cement this, is why we have approached the court for an interlocutory order so that if they go ahead to continue the work, then that will be a contempt of court.
“In a civilised society, once you have a lawyer representing you in court, it means you have given that lawyer consent to go and represent you, and that lawyer is duty bound to tell you the truth that once a matter is in court, you don’t do anything that will prejudice the matter before the court of law.
“It is indeed unfortunate that some of us are behaving that way. I expect the lawyers to advise their clients to maintain peace.
“Nobody has a monopoly of problem or anarchy. If so, our own client can also take matters into her hands and go ahead to ambush anybody she finds on her land.
“But as civilised people, we have chosen to follow the proper channel, and that’s why we are in court so as not to violate the sanctity of the judiciary.
“So, let me use this opportunity to once again call on all parties involved in this case to maintain the peace,” he said.
It is the statement of the claimant that the defendants do not have any legal capacity, authority, or power to forcibly enter, demolish, destroy, develop, or takeover the Claimant’s parcel of land.
Claimant also asked the court to declare that the “Defendants’ acts of forcibly entering, violently destroying, callously demolishing and warful takeover of the Claimants’ parcel of land is unlawful, illegal, and ultra vires to Section 49(1) & (2) and 50(2) of the Land Use Acts, (1978) and all other applicable laws.”
While praying the court to declare the defendants’ action as unlawful, which amounts to trespass, the claimant asked for an Order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, from committing any further act of trespass whatsoever, and pay the sum of N1,000,000,000 only as exemplary damages.Claimant also urged the court to award the sum of N30,120,050,000 as specific damages against the defendants in favour of the 2nd claimant for willful destruction and violent demolition of structures in the property.
*The matter which is pending before Honourable Justice Eme Ekong, at Court eight (8) of the State High Court, Uyo has been adjourned for ruling on April 29* (NAN)
