Akeem Nafiu 
The planned arraignment of Afex Commodity Exchange and some of its principal officers before a Federal High Court in Lagos over alleged contempt was stalled on Thursday as the alleged contemnors challenged the jurisdiction of the court to proceed with the matter.
Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke had on May 31, 2024 granted a motion ex-parte in a suit marked FHC/L/CS/911/2024, and cited AFEX and its principal officers for contempt of court following their alleged disobedience to a court order authorising Guaranty Trust Bank (GTBank) to take over the funds and assets belonging to Afex Commodities Exchange following its inability to pay N17,808,452,467.107 loan facilities granted by the bank.
At the resumed hearing of the matter on June 20, 2024, Ade Adedeji (SAN), appeared for the plaintiff, while Prof. Wale Olawoyin (SAN) led a team of lawyers for the defendants.
Addressing the court, Prof. Olawoyin said a notice of preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the contempt proceedings initiated against Afex Commodity Exchange and its Directors for alleged non-compliance with the ex-parte interim order of injunction dated 27th May, 2024 has been filed.
He stated that the notice of preliminary objection was brought pursuant to Section 36 of the constitution (As Amended) and under the inherent jurisdiction of the court.
Prof. Olawoyin informed the court that the preliminary objection has been served on the plaintiff, and urged the court to give it priority in view of jurisdictional issues raised.
He submitted further that when the jurisdiction of the court is being challenged, parties in alleged contempt need not be physically present in court until the issue of jurisdiction is resolved by the court.
Olawoyin stated that the defendants have filed an Affidavit of Fact before the court on the whereabouts of the Directors of Afex Commodity Exchange, and why they were not in court.
However, in his reply, plaintiff’s lawyer, Ade Adedeji, argued that contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal, hence all the alleged contemnors must be physically present in court.
He submitted that until the people in contempt appear in court, they cannot be heard through their lawyer.
After taking arguments from both parties, Justice Aneke adjourned the matter to June 27 for continuation of hearing.
In their preliminary objection, the defendants are asking the court to either strike out the contempt proceedings or decline jurisdiction to entertain any contempt proceedings in relation to or connected with or arising from the Notice of Disobedience of Court Order (Form 48) dated 31st May, 2024 or any alleged non compliance with the ex parte order of the Court dated 27th May, 2024.
They argued that the alleged contemptuous act was done outside the precincts of the court making same, a contempt ‘ex facie curiae’ .
In an affidavit in support of notice of preliminary objection deposed to by one, Akala Ehigie Richard, an Associate in the Capital Market Sales Department of the Defendant/Objector, it was stated that the defendant was alerted to the enrolled orders of the court made on 27th May, 2024 and published in Thisday Newspaper on 29th May, 2024.
The deponent further averred that on the 10th of June, 2024, when the matter came up before this Honourable Court, the Plaintiff’s counsel informed the court that the plaintiff had procured and published a Notice of Disobedience of Order of Court (Form 48} in the Punch Newspaper.
He stated that the alleged contemptuous act, upon which the plaintiff is seeking to activate the quasi-criminal jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, occurred outside the precincts of this Honourable Court.
He added that the interest of justice would be better served by the striking out of the entire contempt proceedings initiated by the plaintiff in this suit.
