The Supreme Court of Nigeria has imposed a ₦5 million fine on former presidential candidate Ambrose Albert Owuru.
The penalty was levied for what the court described as a "frivolous and vexatious" lawsuit against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The ruling was delivered on Monday in Abuja by Justice Uwani Musa Aba-Aji, who dismissed Owuru's latest suit seeking the removal of Tinubu from office.
The court's decision marks the culmination of a series of legal challenges initiated by Owuru, who contested the 2019 presidential election under the Hope Democratic Party (HDP) banner. Owuru, a British-trained lawyer called to the Nigerian Bar in 1984, had previously faced a ₦40 million fine from the Court of Appeal for similar actions against Tinubu, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and others.
His recent suit, marked SC/CV/667/2023, alleged that Tinubu was unqualified to hold the presidency and accused him of usurping the office unlawfully.
During the proceedings, Owuru attempted to argue his case while donning his legal wig and gown, but was instructed to remove them before presenting his arguments.
Despite his efforts to persuade the court, Justice Aba-Aji found his explanations unconvincing and criticized his conduct as unbecoming of a lawyer with over four decades of experience.
The Supreme Court's ruling not only dismissed Owuru's claims but also barred its Registry from accepting any further frivolous originating summons from him.
Justice Aba-Aji emphasized the need for legal practitioners to uphold the integrity of the judicial process, stating, "The court will not entertain baseless suits that waste judicial time and resources."
Owuru's allegations included claims of Tinubu's forfeiture of $460,000 to the United States over an alleged drug trafficking-related offense and accusations of being an active agent of the CIA. He sought the invocation of Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution to disqualify Tinubu on grounds of foreign influence.
Despite these assertions, the court maintained that Owuru's repeated legal actions lacked merit.
Comments