Federal High Court in Abuja as at yesterday declined the Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike for an order stopping the police probe of complaints, allegations, petitions of crimes and acts of criminality during the December 10, 2016 re-run elections. Wike suffered a similar fate on January 16 when Justice Gabriel Kolawole refused his ex-parte motion for an interim injunction restraining the police from conducting the investigation, but instead, directed the defendants to show cause why Wike’s prayers in his motion ex-parte should not be granted. Defendants in the suit are the inspector general of Police (IGP), State Security Services (SSS) and Deputy Commissioner of Police, Damian Okoro. Wike is, in the substantive suit, challenging the powers of the IGP to set up a judicial commission of enquiry to investigate allegations of violent crimes in his state. He is, in the motion, seeking among others, an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants or their agents from enforcing or executing the matters contained in the letter written to him by the IGP on December 20, 2016. The IGP in the letter titled, “Investigation into allegations of crimes committed during the last rerun elections in Rivers State,” said the “purview of the investigation will cover allegations of bribes taken, several brazen murder incidents (including that of serving police officers), reports of gross human rights abuses, acts of sabotage/terrorism, kidnapping for ransom and ballot box snatching, all of which were perpetrated in connivance with several federal and state civil servants as well as highly placed politicians within and outside the state”. The letter requested the governor to furnish the police investigative team with necessary information and exhibits that might assist the team. Yesterday, rather than file affidavit to show cause, as ordered by the court, the 1st and 3rd defendants, who responded to the case filed objection, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case. The DSS did not file anything. Plaintiffs’ lawyer Mike Ozekhome (SAN) said he had been served with the 1st and 3rd defendants’ notice of objection and counter-affidavits to his client’s originating summons and motion for interlocutory injunction. Ozekhome, who prayed the court for a short time to respond to the defendants’ processes (documents), urged the court to grant an interim order directing parties to maintain the status quo pending the hearing of his motion for injunction. He noted that the defendants did not only admit conducting the investigation, which formed the thrust of his clients’ case, they confirmed they were proceeding with the investigation despite the pendency of the suit. Responding, lawyer to the 1st and 3rd defendants, Deji Morakinyo, objected to Ozekhome’s prayer on the grounds that his clients were challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case, which sought to question the exercise of the IGP’s statutory and constitutional powers to investigate crimes. Justice Kolawole refused Ozekhome’s prayer on the grounds that there was no irreparable damage that could occur to the plaintiffs should the defendants proceed with their investigation.