Justice Sonia Akinbiyi has extended the interim order staying Muhammad Rene Schwarze’s deportation to October 21, 2026, for a definite hearing of the substantive Originating Summons.
The state has filed a Motion on Notice challenging the interim order, but the motion will be heard on the return date in October.
Justice Sonia Akinbiyi K.J.W. delivered the order today, setting the date for a full hearing on the merits of Muhammad Rene Schwarze’s challenge to his deportation.
When the case was called, both the applicant (Muhammad Rene) and the respondent (Minister of Justice and Director General of Immigration) were absent from the hearing. Counsel K. Jallow represented Muhammad Rene, while State Counsel A.R. Dambelly appeared for the respondents (Minister of Justice and Director General of Immigration).
Counsel Dambelly informed the court that they have filed a Memorandum of Appearance and requested an adjournment. “We have filed a Memorandum of Appearance; we are asking for time. We were served only on Friday, so we are within time,”.
Counsel Dambelly argued that the interim order should not have been granted without prior notice to the state.
“It should have been served with a motion on notice to enable us to file a reply on the order that was granted as an interim order. This accords with the principle of natural justice; we are asking this court to allow us to reply to the order that was granted ex parte.”
Counsel Dambelly’s position was that procedural fairness required it to have an opportunity to respond to the interim order before the order was made.
Counsel K. Jallow for the Applicant
objected. She noted the timing issue. “We just received a memo of appearance. Our constraint is that we have an interim order that will elapse today, so if they want an adjournment, the lifetime of our interim order should be extended.”
Counsel K. Jallow challenged the state’s legal argument: “It is unknown to law that a reply to an order granted ex parte is not to come today to ask that the order granted should be vacated.”
Counsel K. Jallow argued that the state’s remedy if it believed the interim order was wrongly granted was to challenge it on the return date, not to seek an adjournment that would effectively nullify the order’s protective effect.
In her ruling, Justice Sonia Akinbiyi rejected the state’s application for time, finding that Dambelly’s approach would undermine justice itself.
Justice Sonia Akinbiyi reasoned that the ex parte order was grounded in urgency rooted in the substantive case. “The motion ex parte is premised on a substantive originating summons challenging the deportation order of the defendants attempting to deport the Applicant; the facts in support of the ex parte application are the same as the facts deposed in support of the substantive Originating Summons,” she explained.
Justice Sonia Akinbiyi added that “The ex-parte Order being urgent to prevent the deportation until the hearing of the Substantive application brought by Originating Summons became urgent and the only way to hold the matter in the balance until the Substantive application by way of Originating Summons is determined, the interim in line with Substantial justice had to be granted and made time bound for seven days to clear the road for the hearing of the substantive application by Originating Summons on notice.”
Justice Akinbiyi then addressed the heart of the matter, that granting the state’s request would defeat the purpose of the interim order itself.
“The prayer of A. R. Dambelly seeking time to respond to the ex parte order leaves the interim order and the Applicant definitely exposed to deportation unheard, and would appear as a fait accompli to ensure the deportation of the Applicant unheard, and that will be a calamity for natural justice and the audi alteram partem arm of the doctrine of natural justice.”
Justice Sonia Akinbiyi concluded, “The application A. R. Dambelly praying for time to respond to the Originating Summons will be granted as prayed by K. Jallow Esq. at the expense of an extension of time, so as not to turn the principle of fair hearing upside down. The Application of A. R. Dambelly that the interim Order be Vacated lacks merit; it is hereby discountenanced.”
However, the state has filed a Motion on Notice dated July 15, 2026, signed by State Counsel Agie Ramatoulie Dambelly, seeking to vacate, discharge, and set aside the ex parte injunction granted on July 2. The motion is supported by an affidavit and exhibits. But the motion will not be heard until October 21.
The case challenges the deportation order issued against Muhammad Rene Schwarze on grounds of procedural fairness and natural justice. On July 2, Muhammad Rene Schwarze obtained an urgent ex parte order to prevent his immediate deportation pending the hearing of his substantive application challenging the deportation order.
The interim order has now been extended three times to allow both parties adequate time to prepare their arguments for the October hearing. The case is adjourned for a definite hearing on October 21, 2026, at 10:30 a.m. At that hearing, the court will address the Motion on Notice filed by the state as well as the substantive arguments concerning the lawfulness and procedural fairness of the deportation order.
