By joshua 
ASCAB advised the CBN to obey the order of the Supreme Court which temporarily restrained it from going ahead with its plan to phase out the old banknotes. According to the group, *the fact that the CBN was not made a party in the suit does not excuse it from obeying the orders of the apex court.
In a statement by its Interim Chairman, Mr. Femi Falana, ASCAB frowned on the alleged refusal of the CBN to obey the interim order, noting that *the CBN cannot choose orders of courts to obey or not to obey.
Falana said, “We have just read a report that the authorities of the CBN have decided not to comply with the ex parte order issued by the Supreme Court of Nigeria in respect of the avoidable currency swap crisis.“The reason adduced for the contemptuous disregard for the rule of law is that the CBN is not a party to the case of Attorney-General of Kaduna State & 2 Ors. v. Attorney-General of the Federation (Suit No: SC/CV/162/2023) pending at the Supreme Court.
“It is pertinent to remind the management of the CBN of the case of Nkwo Augustine Eddiego v. Board of Central Bank of Nigeria (Suit No: HCIK/38/2022), where the Delta State High Court granted an ex parte order, which restrained the Defendants from preventing the Governor of the CBN from seeking political offices pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice in the case.”
The group, in addition, cited the case of Incorporated Trustees of the Forum for Accountability and Good Leadership v. Attorney-General of the Federation & Ors. (Suit No: FCT/HC/GAR/CV/41/2022), where the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory granted an injunction restraining the State Security Service from arresting, investigating and prosecuting Emefiele for terrorism financing.
It observed that although the CBN governor was not a party to the suit, he was not arrested by the State Security Service on the basis of the court order.
The group said, “In view of the looming anarchy in the country, we are compelled to draw the attention of the CBN management to the rule of law, to the case of Attorney-General of Lagos State v. Attorney-General of the Federation (2005) 2 WRN 1 at 109 where Tobi JSC of blessed memory cautioned all authorities and persons in Nigeria thus:
“In a society where the rule of law prevails, self-help is not available to the executive or any arm of government. In view of the fact that such a conduct could breed anarchy and totalitarianism, and since anarchy and totalitarianism are antitheses to democracy, courts operating the rule of law, the life-blood of democracy, are under a constitutional duty to stand against such action.
“The courts are available to accommodate all sorts of grievances that are justiciable in law and Section 6 of the constitution gives the courts power to adjudicate on matters between two or more competing parties.
“In our democracy all the governments of this country as well as organisations and individuals must kowtow to the due process of the law and this they can vindicate by resorting to the courts for redress in the event of any grievance.
“It is public knowledge that the federal government has filed a preliminary objection challenging the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to hear and determine the case of the Attorney-General of Kaduna State & 2 Ors v Attorney-General of the Federation (supra).
*“In the interim, the Federal Government of Nigeria and its agencies, including the CBN, are bound by the valid and subsisting ex parte order of the Supreme Court of Nigeria until it is set aside by the same court.* The alternative is to compound the ongoing anarchy and chaos in the land.”