Only enforceable court orders are valid grounds for contempt proceedings.

(1) No application to a Court for an order of committal against any person may be made unless leave to make such an application has been granted In accordance with this rule.

(2) An application for such leave must be made ex parte to the Court by a notice of application supported by a statement setting out the name and description of the applicant, the name, description and address of the person sought to be committed and the grounds on which his committal is sought, and by an affidavit, to be filed before the application is made, verifying the facts relied on.

4. Application for order after leave to apply granted (O 52 r 4)

(1) When leave has been granted under r 3 to apply for an order of committal, the application for the order must be made by notice of application to the Court, and, unless the Court granting leave has otherwise directed, there must be at least eight clear days between the service of the notice of application and the day named therein for the hearing.

(2) Unless within fourteen days after such leave was granted the notice of application is filed, the leave shall lapse.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4), the notice, accompanied by a copy of the statement and affidavit in support of the application for leave under r 3 and the order granting such leave, must be served personally on the person sought to be committed.

(4) Without prejudice to the powers of the Court or Judge under O 62, r 5, the Court or Judge may dispense with service of the notice under this rule if it or he thinks it just to do so.

[26] Having regard to the above, since the present motion for contempt by the appellant was party-initiated, whether it be categorised as civil or criminal contempt, it was entirely correct for the learned High Court Judge to have held that the procedural requirements under O 52 of the Rules of 2012 must be strictly adhered to. This was also the finding of the Court of Appeal in CA NO 1, which was subsequently affirmed by the Federal Court. The appellant argued that O 52 of the Rules of 2012 has no application to his application for reasons discussed earlier. However, the fact that the appellant had applied for ex parte leave to commence committal proceedings is in itself an acknowledgment by the appellant that the applicable procedure is that which is stipulated in O 52 of the Rules of 2012. Further, when queried as to what other procedures were available in law to handle an application for contempt, otherthan that provided in O 52 of the Rules of 2012, learned counsel for the appellant was unable to show us any. Hence, the applicable procedure when the Court is moved for contempt by the Attorney General or an interested party is that which is found in O 52 of the Rules of 2012. The process has to start with a formal show cause notice under O 52 r 2B of the Rules of 2012 and continue therefrom.

The Absence Of Statement Under Order 52 Rule 3(2) Of ROC

[27] When applying for leave to commence committal proceedings, the appellant had failed to file the statement in support of the leave application as is mandatorily required under O 52 r 3(2) of the Rules of 2012. It has been established by high authority that the failure to file the statement under 0 52 r 3(3) of the Rules of 2012 is fatal. The Court of Appeal in CA NO 1 had alluded to this failure and made the following observation:

[30] Let us be reminded that under O 52 r 3(2) of the Rules of 2012 a leave application for committal must be supported by a statement setting out the name and description of the applicant, the name, description and address of the person sought to be committed and the grounds on which his committal is found, and also by an affidavit verifying the facts stated in the statement. Rule 6(3) of O 52 of the Rules of 2012 provides that except with leave of the Court hearing an application for an order of committal, no g