Market Traders Threaten To Sue Tinubu’s Daughter, Iyaloja General Folasade Over Alleged Contempt Of Court

According to the traders, failure to comply will push them to pursue all available legal remedies against her, including seeking costs. The notice, signed by Taiwo E. Olawanle and Adebayo A. Oniyelu, emphasized the need for Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo to act in line with the court’s decision.

The Incorporated Trustees of Computer Village Market Traders and Stakeholders Joint Management in Lagos have issued a warning to Chief Mrs. Folasade Tinubu-Ojo to cease interfering in the market’s affairs, citing a valid judgment from the Lagos State High Court.

In a pre-action notice dated August 28, 2024, the traders, represented by Falana & Falana’s Chambers, reminded President Bola Tinubu’s daughter about the December 8, 2020, court ruling that permanently restrained her and her agents from imposing and collecting levies from market members.

The traders accused Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo of multiple breaches of rights and interference, including instigating thugs and unauthorized levy collection. They demanded that she comply with the court judgment and cease further interference.

The letter partly reads: “Our client is registered under Part “C” of the Company and Allied Matters Act. Our client is the conglomeration of the Phone and Allied Products Dealers Association of Nigeria (PAPDA), Computer and Allied Products Dealers of Nigeria, Computer Technician and Engineers Association of Nigeria (COMTEAN), Association of Computer Engineers and Technicians of Nigeria (ACETN) and Association of Computer Printers Engineering of Lagos (ACPEL),

“Others include the Association of Computers and Phones Accessories of Nigeria, the Laptop Batteries Dealers Association of Nigeria (LADAN), the Association of Mobile Communication Devices Engineers and Technicians (AMCODET), Security Gadget, Pre-Owned Phone Dealers Association of Nigeria (POP) and Ogunbiyi Community Development Association.

“It is our client’s brief that upon your several breaches of their rights, they approached an Ikeja High Court in Suit No.: ID/9039MFHR/19 to challenge your interference in their affairs. The Honourable Court, among others, restrained you and your agents from collecting any levy from our client as there is no legal basis for such.

“Despite the above final order made by a competent court, you continue to meddle in the internal affairs of our client by instigating thugs and contacting our client’s partners to obtain money from them thereby denying our client its revenue. You have also continued to use thugs to disrupt lawful gatherings of the various market associations without any justification.”

It added, “You may wish to know that Mrs Abisola Azeez, parading as the Iyaloja of Computer Village on your sanction has no shop or stake in the Village. Meanwhile, our client is not averse to a shop owner or trader obtaining the membership form if they are interested in joining the association as its membership is open to any interested person in our client’s line of business.

“However, such individuals must obtain the membership form and properly be enrolled. It is noteworthy that only the authorized members or members of the executive have the locus to interfere in our client’s affairs.

“Our client is not unaware that you have contacted our client’s several partners to make their commitments to you. We have instructions to warn against any further demand or communication to our client’s partners including but not limited to Oppo, Proview, Samsung, Big and Bold et al because the commodity association of the Women and Men Market Association which is the basis of your appointment by the Lagos State Government has no membership in Computer Village.

“A careful perusal of the Lagos State Market Advisory Council Law which you derive your power from, particularly under Section 8 does not include taking levies or interfering in the internal affairs of any market as the Council only plays an advisory role to the executive Governor of Lagos State and no more. Assuming without conceding that your office has the power to collect levies, Computer Village is not one of the markets contemplated under the law under reference.

“It is imperative to obey and act in line with the judgment of the High Court of Lagos State delivered on the 8th day of December 2020 wherein you and your agents were perpetually restrained from imposing and collecting levies under any guise from the members of our client in the Computer Village Market.

“Therefore, Take Notice that should you again continue on this subject matter, our client will pursue every legal and equitable remedy available to it against you and also claim the cost thereof from you.”

A certified true copy of the said judgement obtained by SaharaReporters on Monday, shows the judgement was delivered by Justice Y. R. Pinheiro of Court 53 General Civil Division Ikeja, in Suit No: ID/9039MFHR/19.

The court held, “…I find that the 2nd & 3rd respondents imposition of levies on the applicants is illegal, null and void and therefore amounts to a violation of their Fundamental Rights. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered as thus: ‘The 1st-5th respondents by themselves, agents, levy collectors howsoever called are restrained from imposing levies and/or fine and on the members of the 1st-5th applicants at the Ikeja Computer Village Market in the Ikeja Local Government Area of Lagos State.’”

The suit was between the “Registered Trustees of Computer and Allied Products Dealers Association of Nigeria (CAPDAN), registered Trustees of Phone and Allied Products Dealers Association of Nigeria (PAPDAN), registered Trustees of Phone Parts and Accessories Dealers Association of Nigeria, registered Trustees of Association of Caterers Food and Drinks Vendors of Ogunbiyi Computer Village Ikeja Lagos; registered Trustees of Ikeja Books Stationaries and Computer Association; and Azeez Olurin as the 1-6th Applicants and Chief (Mrs.) Folasade Tinubu-Ojo (Iyaloja General), Mrs. Bisola Azeez, Mr. Adeniyi Olasoji, Nofiu Akinsanya, Tony Ikani, and Commissioner of Police Lagos State as the 1st to 6th Respondents.”