The Court of Appeal in Ibadan has ordered parties in the appeal over the use of hijab by Muslim students of the University of Ibadan (UI) International School Ibadan (ISI) to maintain the status quo.
The court had on July 3 by a split decision of two to one overturned the judgment of the Oyo State High Court that favoured the wearing of hijab by Muslim students of the school.
However, the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) applied to the court seeking stay of execution of its judgment while appeal is filed at the Supreme Court.
Hearing the application for stay of execution, the three-man panel of justices led by Justice Kenneth Amadi, as well as Justice Fadawu Umar and Justice Binta Suberu, ordered that parties in the appeal the UI and ISI as well as MURIC should maintain the status quo.
Amadi ordered the parties to maintain status quo pending the hearing and determination of the application for stay of execution of the judgment.
“You don’t have the right to do anything until the stay of execution is heard and determined.
“Once the motion of stay of execution has been filed, you can’t have the right to do anything.
“I was told the school has started harassing the students on the use of hijab, I don’t know why the rush.
“Have you gotten the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment, the seven days stipulated by the law for the judgment to be released is still running,” he said.
Amadi ordered the parties in the matter to maintain status quo and adjourned the matter till Oct.7 for the hearing of the application on stay of execution.
Earlier, the Counsel to MURIC, Mr Yusuf Anikulapo represented by Mr Hassan Fajimite, had informed the court of his application seeking stay of execution of the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on July 3.
Fajimite, however, told the court of his intention to substitute the application on stay of execution, which he said was not ripe for hearing.
He urged the court to order the parties to maintain status quo and requested for an adjournment.
The counsel to ISI and UI, Mr Damilola Akinsanya, did not oppose the application for adjournment.
