ECOWAS COURT DECLARES INADMISSIBLE CASE BROUGHT BY THE ECOWAS COMMISSION SEEKING A REVISION OF JUDGMENT

The ECOWAS Court of justice, on Thursday 30^th May 2024, declared inadmissible the application brought by the ECOWAS Commission and its President, both applicants, seeking a revision of judgment no ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/22 delivered on 10 March 2022 in favour of the respondent, Suleiman Muhammad Hussaini, a former staff of the ECOWAS Commission.

In the judgment delivered by justice Dupe Atoki, the judge rapporteur, the Court declared that it has jurisdiction to entertain the matter. However, it declared that the application is inadmissible.

In the case, the Applicants sought a revision of judgment no ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/22 delivered on 10 March 2022, which ruled against them for the wrongful termination of the Respondent’s employment as a Controller by the 1^st Applicant, the ECOWAS Commission.

The Applicants claimed they discovered a new fact arguing that on March 2022, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) filed criminal charges against the Respondent at the High Court and Federal High Court, Abuja regarding financial irregularities at the ECOWAS Commission. They alleged that the Respondent was aware of these charges but did not report to the Head of Institution in accordance with the provision of Staff Regulation, causing their ignorance of this fact, which they discovered two months after the judgment was delivered.

They sought an order to suspend the earlier decision directing them to pay the respondent’s salaries and allowances pending the conclusion of the criminal cases.

The Respondent urged the Court to dismiss the application, arguing it is inadmissible as it does not comply with Articles 25 of the 1991 Protocol and Articles 92 and 93 of the Court’s Rules. He stated that the charges did not exist as of 27 February 2018 when his employment was terminated and thus cannot be considered new facts. Additionally, he argued that he had no obligation to report charges filed after the termination of his employment.

The Respondent also noted that on 27 September 2019, his name was removed from the charges, leaving Muhammad Dangana as the sole defendant. He sought an order dismissing the Application for review of judgment no ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/22. He also asked among others, $ 1,000,000 in damages for frivolous application.

In the judgment, the Court acknowledged that the Applicants met the requirements of presenting a new fact and applying within the timeline. However, it determined that their ignorance was due to negligence. Thus, the Court concluded that the application did not meet the cumulative requirements of Article 25 of the Protocol and Article 92 of the Rules of Court. Consequently, it said that further analysis as to whether the unknown facts are of a decisive factor is mute and declared the application  inadmissible.

Also on the panel were Honorable justices Gberi-bè Ouattara presiding and Ricardo Claúdio Monteiro Gonçalves, member.