A Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Maitama District has urged parties involved in the Apo Resettlement Market dispute to obey an interlocutory injunction restraining further work on the site pending the determination of the substantive suit, warning that violators risk attracting the wrath of the court.
The court had earlier, on April 15, 2025, ordered all parties involved in the project, Dr. Shuaibu Musari, first defendant, Manillah Integrated Partners Ltd, first claimant and AMAC Investment Development Company, second defendant, to cease all construction activities pending the determination of the matter.
The order was subsequently served on the parties and enforced at the site by court bailiffs, who pasted the directive and marked the premises with a “Stop Work” notice on April 28, 2025.
However, reports before the court indicated that Manillah Integrated Partners Ltd and AMAC Investment Development Company allegedly continued construction activities despite the subsisting court order, prompting Dr Shuaibu Musari to initiate contempt proceedings against them.
At the resumed hearing on Thursday, May 7, 2026, counsel to the first defendant, Dr Shuaibu Musari, Barr. Realwan Okpanachi, while cross-examining Principal Witness 2, Hassan Ahmed Omale, drew the attention of the presiding judge, Justice Yusuf Halilu, to what he described as repeated disobedience of the court’s interlocutory injunction.
Justice Halilu, who frowned at the alleged violation of the court order, directed counsel in the matter to advise their clients to comply with the injunction or risk sanctions from the court.
Counsel to the first claimant, Idris Abubakar, SAN, however alleged that the second defendant resorted to self-help by allegedly pasting the court order at the site, marking buildings and hiring persons who attacked workers with machetes and other dangerous weapons.
He further argued that the second defendant should open its defence instead of delaying proceedings with what he described as unnecessary applications.
It was, however, gathered that although the first claimant filed a notice of appeal against the interlocutory injunction, no further steps had been taken in that regard.
Abubakar, SAN, also informed the court that the interlocutory injunction was already a subject of appeal and urged that any visit to the locus in quo should remain at the discretion of the court.
Justice Halilu, while responding, maintained that a court order remains binding whether appealed against or not, except it is vacated by a court of competent jurisdiction.
He appealed to all parties to uphold the sanctity of the court.
Speaking with journalists after the proceedings, counsel to the first defendant, Barr. Realwan Okpanachi, said:
“Today they brought in a subpoena witness. He testified at the last adjourned date and today is for cross examination of the witness and we have cross examined him.
“The matter has been adjourned to June 1 for defence and it will start from the first defendant.
“We also brought to the attention of the court conducts of the first claimants in this matter in disobeying the order of the court which is subsistent; which is valid, hinged on the failed excuse that they are on appeal.
“The fact that a party is on appeal is not a liberty to disobey, rape and ignore order of the court, that won’t augur well for the society.
“We brought this to the attention of the court and my Lord has advised all Counsels involved to advise their clients to stay clear and obey the court order and we hope that going forward, they will hearken to the admonition of the Court obey the extant order of this Honourable Court, which is subsistent; which is valid; which has not been set aside by any court.
“We also informed the court of the fact that as at the time the Suit was filed, there was an endorsement in the writ of summons that parties must maintain status quo.
“They filed the matter not us, they refused to obey that endorsement. We went further to file an application for interlocutory order, which the court graciously granted, yet they refused to obey the order of the court.
“Yes, we may file an application on the next adjourned date to ensure that everybody connected or related in this matter, that is acting in disobedience to this court order, including investors in the project, that such a person will be arrested and tried for contempt of the court.
“We have filed an application and we will be moving that application on the next adjourned date, for the court to order police and the law enforcement agencies to ensure that everybody seen on the site in disobedience to court order, whether you are an investor, or claimant, shall be arrested and tried for contempt of court.
“Contempt of court is not a light issue. It is an issue that is taken seriously because if an order of the court can be ignored, jettisoned and breached by a party, or anybody at will, it means there is no society. We must do everything to ensure that the integrity of the Court is not taken to disrepute.”
Reacting to the latest court proceedings on the matter, representative of Dr Shuaibu Musari (first defendant), Ameh Kennedy Gabriel, regretted that those who filed the suit are disobeying the order of the court.
“We are the defendant. They took us to court and the court gave an interlocutory order. We as law abiding citizens have respected the Court order. Unfortunately, that took us to Court Manilah, has decided not to obey the court order. That is why we are in court to prosecute them.
“We are ever ready for defence. We have nothing to hide and that is why we are confident and we have never miss Court one day.
“I will advice generally, those that are investing in the business should be very careful as the case is still very much pending in court until the judgment is delivered.”