🌿 Ruzu Non-Alcoholic Herbal Bitters
Ruzu Non-Alcoholic Herbal Bitters is a natural health supplement specially formulated to:
- ✅ Promote general wellness
- ✅ Detoxify the body
- ✅ Support the treatment of various ailments
Made from a powerful blend of 100% organic and medicinal herbs, Ruzu is completely alcohol-free, making it ideal for:
- 👪 All age groups
- 🌱 Health-conscious individuals
- 🌿 Anyone seeking non-alcoholic herbal remedies
Whether you're looking to boost your vitality, cleanse your system, or support healing the natural way, Ruzu Bitters offers a trusted herbal solution.
The enforcement battle over a ₦19.4 billion arbitral award in favor of Hanson Dredging & Marine Services Ltd. has taken a new turn after the respondent, SANEF Creatives Ltd., appealed against the enforcement action and petitioned the Chief Judge of Lagos State to hear the case.
I
Hanson characterizes the action as a deliberate attempt to thwart justice. It coincides with allegations of forum shopping and procedural abuse in the high-stakes legal battle stemming from a dredging and reclamation contract that was terminated at the National Theatre in Lagos.
A legal battle is in the works between Hanson Dredging and SANEF, a company owned by the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) Bankers’ Committee, regarding the illegal termination of the dredging and reclamation contract.
Signed in November 2021, the contract was canceled in May 2022 when SANEF contended that the 36-week period had passed, ignoring COVID-19-related delays and administrative roadblocks.
After that, in 2023, Hanson Dredging, represented by Dr. Charles Mekwunye, SAN, filed for arbitration and claimed that the CBN, then led by former Governor Godwin Emefiele, had illegally taken ₦4.2 billion in advance payments out of their account.
The sole arbitrator, Ayo Fanimokun, ruled on December 30, 2024, that SANEF had broken the terms of the contract by ending it before Hanson had finished more than 60% of the work.
The company attempted to enforce the award through Suit No. LD/6707GCM/2023, which was recently transferred to Justice O. A. Sunmonu of the Lagos State High Court by the Chief Judge of Lagos State from Justice Olukolu, after the final arbitration proceedings awarded Hanson Dredging a judgment of ₦19.4 billion.
Suit No. LD/8056GCM/2024 and Suit No. LD/9221GCM/2025, which is presently before Justice Olukolu, are two further suits that SANEF, through its attorney Paul Usoro & Co., filed on the same topic.
The legal firm then filed a petition with Justice Kazeem Alogba, the Chief Judge of Lagos State, asking him to transfer the enforcement suit from Justice Sunmonu and combine all three cases before Justice Olukolu. A J
In a separate petition dated May 26, 2025, the firm accused Justice Sunmonu of judicial bias and procedural overreach.
Despite an ongoing application for consolidation, it asserted that the judge shown “unrestrained ambition” to hear all relevant matters.
In the petition, Mr. Paul Usoro, SAN, the former president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the attorney for SANEF, contended that Justice Sunmonu had violated Order 41 Rule 7(2) of the Lagos High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019, which gives the Chief Judge consolidation authority.
According to his petition, Justice Sunmonu also demanded that the case that was previously before Justice Olukolu be moved to his court.
Given the possibility of a miscarriage of justice, it urged the Chief Judge to redistribute all cases pertaining to the case to either Justice Olukolu or another judge, excluding Justice Sunmonu.
But in response to the petition, Hanson Dredging dismissed the allegations as abusive, deceptive, and a risky attempt to intimidate the legal system through its lead attorney, Dr. Charles Mekwunye, SAN.
No judge should have to endure such public humiliation for carrying out their legal duties, according to Dr. Mekwunye, who called the petition dated May 26, 2025, “unprofessional and scandalous.”
In an attempt to influence the judiciary, Mekwunye noted that on May 27, 2025, Paul Usoro SAN personally defended the petition in public.
Additionally, he pointed to the petition’s disparaging wording, describing terms like “judicial tyranny” and “naked ambition” as blatant insults to Justice Sunmonu and the Lagos judiciary as a whole.
In addition, Dr. Mekwunye expressed worry about what he called “abuse of court process” in the filing of three different lawsuits over the same transaction and an attempt to use the chief judge’s elevated position to get around the enforcement procedures.
He claimed that although SANEF is working to consolidate, its goal seems to be more forum shopping—finding a court that is more receptive—than judicial efficiency.
Using appellate precedents like Emperion v. Aflon and Ngere v. Okuruket, which maintain that consent from both parties is necessary for consolidation and that it should never be granted where it could cause procedural confusion or injustice, Dr. Mekwunye emphasized that consolidation cannot be imposed unilaterally.
He further criticized Mr. Usoro’s portrayal of the court’s procedures from April 17, 2025, claiming that the decision only allowed SANEF to reply to Hanson’s request to enforce the arbitral verdict.
Mekwunye stated that Hanson Dredging’s application to execute its Arbitral Award and SANEF’s preliminary objection were the two motions set for the hearing before Justice Sunmonu on April 17, 2025.
Read Also: Chaos in Lagos: One Killed in Park Dispute Involving Monarch’s Loyalists
According to him, Usoro asked for an adjournment while the Chief Judge considered his petitions and told the court that a fresh suit had been brought to overturn the award.
Mekwunye said he was against the action, calling the new suit an egregious abuse of the legal system and claiming that a letter to the Chief Judge does not serve as a stay of proceedings or provide an excuse for postponing a legitimate enforcement petition.
After that, he said, Usoro filed a flurry of petitions and applications, one of which even accused him of tampering with court documents, a serious accusation that should be handled independently and not used to halt ongoing procedures.
Mekwunye further charged that the SANEF’s attorney was making a deliberate effort to influence the court assignment system by attempting to mandate that Justice Olukolu hear all lawsuits.
In his letter of reply, Mekwunye stated that “no litigant has the right to choose which judge hears their case.” The guidelines are plain: the Chief Judge alone has the authority to appoint judges, and any attempt to interfere with that process would be an assault on the judiciary as a whole.
“We therefore appeal to his Lordship not to lend the weight of your exalted office to a law firm which is behaving as a law unto itself, grossly abusing the process of the court by filing several suits in respect of the said matter, nominating the particular judge to hear these various suits along the way insulting and humiliating judges and denigrating the judiciary under your watch,” Mekwunye said, urging the Chief Judge to disregard SANEF’s petition.
