“That the depositions in paragraph 4 sub 4(iv), 4(v), 4(vi), 4(vii), 4(viii), 4(ix), 4(x), 4(xi), 4(xii), 4(xiv), 4(xvi), 4(vii), 4(xviii), 4(xix), 4(xx), 4(xxi) ,4(xxii), 4(xxiv) and 4(xxv) of the plaintiff’s affidavit are unfounded, untrue and unknown to the defendant and are hereby denied,” Ezire said.

The official said the commission was not investigating the governor and had never invited him or threatened to arrest any member of his staff, domestic or otherwise.

“That I know as a fact that the defendant invites members of the public for interview, interrogation or any engagement vide a written invitation, phone calls or text messages by any of its officers who shall introduce himself or herself by name, rank, designation, and Section to enable the invitee trace the officer easily.

“That no officer of the defendant could have invited the plaintiff or his aides without furnishing them with such detailed particulars of himself.

“That contrary to the depositions in paragraphs 5 of the plaintiff affidavit, the defendant did not intimidate, harass or threatened the plaintiff or subjected him to any trauma,” he said.

He said the agency was unaware of any threat to arrest Sanwo-Olu’s “aides, accusation of maladministration or diversion of Lagos State’s funds nor is it aware of any likelihood of a breach of the applicant’s right to liberty or right to own movable and immovable properties in this case.

“That the action of the plaintiff in this case is mere conjecture and speculations as there is no petition or any intel gathered before the defendant to warrant the men and officers of same to invite, threaten to
arrest the plaintiff at the moment.

 “That the entirety of the dispositions contained in the plaintiffs’ affidavit are not true, as the application is misconceived and brought in bad faith to mislead this honourable court.

“That the defendant is not in a position to deny or confirm the depositions in paragraphs 4 and 4(iii) as the defendant is not a party to the conversation between deponent and the plaintiff.

“That it will be in the interest of justice to refuse the reliefs sought by the plaintiff,” Ezire said.

When the matter was called for mention on Oct. 29, Ozurumba, who appeared for the governor, informed the court that he had withdrawn the earlier originating summons filed and replaced it with a new one.

The lawyer said the anti-graft agency had been duly served with the latest court documents.

However, EFCC’s counsel, Hadiza Afegbua, said she was yet to see the latest documents.

Besides, the proof of service of the processes was not in the court file and Justice Abdulmalik had adjourned the matter until Nov. 26 for further mention.

NAN, however, gathered that though hearing notices had been served on the parties ahead of the Nov. 26 proceeding, the suit may be withdrawn by Ozurumba in the next adjourned date.