 A federal high court, Kanu, on Tuesday fixed September 22 for ruling on a fundamental right enforcement suit filed by the former governor, Abdulahi Ganduje. The court had on July 7 restrained the Kanu State Public Complaints and Anti-Corruption Commission, Nigeria Police and six others from inviting or arresting Ganduje or any of his appointees, pending the hearing and determination of substantive organizing, originating motion. This followed an expatriate motion on fundamental rights enforcement filed by the ex-governor through his lawyer, Matthew Burka. When the case came up for hearing, Ganduje's counsel filed a further affidavit in response to the respondents counter affidavit. He said the fundamental rights suit was to protect the ex-governor's right and also sought to protect his family members and political appointees. Every Nigerian, apart from those who are covered by immunity, is and can be arrested and investigated and prosecuted. If there is evidence, what happens so far cannot be said to be abuse of any process. The process has not even been begun. So you can say it's been abused. Do you understand me? The immunity of the governor expired on May 29. But he wants to continue to enjoy immunity in perpetuity. That's not allowed under our law. So you have to report yourself when invited and you must be prepared to defend your integrity. But you can't come to the federal court and say because you have a case where you are trying to protect your reputation. Therefore, you should not be arrested. All your commissioners should not be arrested. All your family members should not be arrested. All your political lieutenants will number hundreds. She's not been invited. She's not been investigated even when there are serious allegations of corruption against them. So that cannot be said to be abuse of person if you are invited to come and clear your name. The issue of the immunity ending is not a legal argument. That's a non-thing. But the fact is we're not in court to stop anybody from carrying out an investigation. We are just saying do it in accordance with the four walls of the law. What they are doing is not in accordance with the four walls of the law. And that's why we are in court to say look do it in accordance with the four walls of the law. I mean the applicant is not afraid to face the law. He's not afraid to state issue. He has nothing to hide. But it is just that as a leader of his family and the leader of his group, he must insist on the rule of law. And that is what he's insisting on. Let them do it right. He'll be there. He'll give them all the explanations that they need. And comment him for a job well done in Cano State. About fresh news updates.