Traders at Lagos’s Computer Village have issued a strong warning to Chief Mrs. Folasade Tinubu-Ojo, urging her to stop meddling in the market’s affairs. This comes after a valid ruling by the Lagos State High Court, which barred her from imposing and collecting levies from market members. The traders, represented by Falana & Falana’s Chambers, reminded Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo of the December 8, 2020, court judgment, highlighting her continued interference despite the legal restrictions.
In a pre-action notice dated August 28, 2024, the traders accused Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo of several rights violations, including using thugs to enforce unauthorized levies and disrupt market activities. They demanded she immediately comply with the court’s decision to avoid further legal action. The notice, signed by legal representatives Taiwo E. Olawanle and Adebayo A. Oniyelu, emphasized that any further defiance could result in the traders seeking legal remedies, including the recovery of costs.
The traders’ letter also questioned the legitimacy of Mrs. Abisola Azeez, who, under Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo’s authority, has been parading as the Iyaloja of Computer Village. They pointed out that Mrs. Azeez has no shop or stake in the market, and only authorized members of the market’s associations should be involved in its affairs. The traders clarified that while their association is open to anyone in the related business sector, proper membership enrollment is mandatory.
The notice further argued that Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo’s role, as defined by the Lagos State Market Advisory Council Law, does not include the power to collect levies or interfere in the internal matters of Computer Village. The traders warned against any further demands or communications with their partners, stressing that the market is not under Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo’s jurisdiction according to the law.
The Lagos State High Court ruling, delivered by Justice Y. R. Pinheiro, supported the traders’ stance, declaring the imposition of levies by Mrs. Tinubu-Ojo and her agents as illegal and a violation of the traders’ fundamental rights. The court’s decision continues to serve as a critical legal backing for the traders as they push back against any further interference in their market operations.
