Headlines
Supreme Court Affirms Makinde, Sanwo-Olu, El-Rufai, Five Others’ Elections
The Supreme Court on Wednesday validated the election of Governor Oluseyi Makinde of Oyo State and the victories of the governors of seven other states at the March 9, 2019 governorship elections held in their various states.
A seven-man panel of the apex court led by Justice Mary Peter-Odili, in separate judgments, affirmed the elections of Governors Babajide Sanwo-Olu of Lagos State, Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State, Udom Emmanuel of Akwa Ibom State, David Umahi of Ebonyi State, Aminu Masari of Katsina State, Dapo Abiodun of Ogun State and Abdullahi Sule of Nasarawa State.
While Makinde, Emmanuel and Umahi were of the Peoples Democratic Party, Sanwo-Olu, El-Rufai, Masari, Abiodun and Sule contested on the platform of the All Progressives Congress.
The panel heard the appeals on the governorship tussles from the eight states in two batches on Wednesday.
After each lap of hearing, the members of the panel retired to their chambers to prepare their judgment and returned about an hour after to give the summary of their verdicts on the appeals.
The Oyo State governorship dispute turned out to be the most contentious among the appeals decided by the apex court on Wednesday, as all the parties to the case filed separate appeals against the November 11, 2019 judgment of the Ibadan Division of the Court of Appeal.
Although, the Court of Appeal, had in its split judgment of four-to-one substantially upheld the case of the APC and its candidate in the governorship poll, Adebayo Adelabu, it refused to make any order nullifying Makinde’s election.
Therefore, the APC and Adelabu, through their lawyer, Aliyu Umar (SAN), had filed an appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgment, urging the apex court to make a specific order nullifying Makinde’s victory at the poll.
Makinde, had also through his lawyer, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), filed an appeal praying the apex court to set aside the majority judgment of the Court of Appeal and affirm the judgment of the election petition tribunal, which affirmed him as the duly elected governor of the state.
The PDP, through its lawyer, Nathaniel Oke (SAN), and the Independent National Electoral Commission, through its counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde (SAN), had also filed separate appeals against the majority judgment of the Court of Appeal.
At the hearing earlier on Wednesday, the apex court decided that its decision on the appeal filed by Makinde would be binding on the rest of the appeals on the governorship election in the state.
Justice Ejembi Eko, who delivered the lead judgment, overturned the November 11, 2019 judgment of the Ibadan Division of the Court of Appeal and restored the judgment of the Oyo State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which had declared Makinde and his party, the winner of the election.
Justice Eko said, “After going through the briefs of arguments, I find merit in this appeal.
“The judgment of the lower court is mainly based on perversity.
“The majority judgment is hereby set aside.
“The minority judgment/decision of the lower court represents a more sober reflection on the issues.”
In upholding El-Rufai’s election as Kaduna State governor, Justice Centus Nweze, who delivered the lead judgment, dismissed the appeal by Isah Ashiru of the PDP.
Justice Nweze noted that the concurrent judgments of both the tribunal and the Court of Appeal dismissing Ashiru’s appeal could only be set aside if found to be perverse and consistent in error.
But he noted that the appellants (Ashiru and the PDP) “failed to show the perversity in the concurrent judgments.”
“The issue in this appeal having been resolved against the appellant, I find no merit in the appeal and I hereby enter judgment dismissing the appeal,” he ruled.
Upholding the election of the APC’s Abdullahi Sule as the governor of Nasarawa State, Justice Mary Peter-Odili, who read the lead judgment, dismissed the appeal filed by the PDP and its candidate, David Ombugadu.
Justice Peter-Odili noted that the APC won in 13 local government areas, while the PDP won in only one.
She ruled that the appellants failed to prove their alleged case of “non-compliance affected the election.”
“This appeal fails, and it is hereby dismissed,” she added.
Concerning the Lagos State governorship dispute, Justice Paul Galinje delivered the lead judgments in two appeals challenging Sanwo-Olu’s election.
In the two judgments, Justice Galinje held that the appeal by the Labour Party and its candidate, Prof Ifagbemi Awamaridi, and the other by the Alliance for Democracy and its candidate, Chief Owolabi Salis, lacked merit.
He noted that he had no reason to interfere with the concurrent judgments of the tribunal and the Court of Appeal, which had both dismissed the appellants’ cases.
He added that their petitions instituted at the tribunal were not based on the grounds recognised by either the Constitution or the Electoral Act.
Justice Peter-Odili similarly dismissed the appeal by Adekunle Akinlade and his Allied Peoples Movement challenging the victory of Governor Dapo Abiodun of Ogun State.
She held that the appellants failed to prove the alleged non-compliance of the conduct of the March 9, 2011 poll in the state.
In respect of the Akwa Ibom State governorship tussle, Justice Dattijo Muhammad, who read the lead judgment, upheld Emmanuel’s election after dismissing the appeal by Nsima Ekere and his party, the APC, for lacking in merit.
Justice Amina Augie, who delivered the lead judgments in respect of the Ebonyi and Katsina governorship tussles, upheld the elections of the governors of the two states.
She dismissed the petition filed by the People’s Democratic Movement and his candidate, Chief Ajah Arua, as he held that they failed to prove that they were validly nominated to participate in the election, not to talk of proving that they were unlawfully excluded from the poll.
Upholding Masari’s election as Katsina State governor, Justice Augie dismissed the petition filed by the PDP and its candidate, Garba Lado.
The Punch
The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, gave the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, until November 5 to defend the terrorism charges filed against him or risk waiving his right to do so.
The trial judge, Justice James Omotoso, advised Kanu to consult legal practitioners experienced in criminal law to assist with his defence or to formally appoint a lawyer to represent him in court.
Justice Omotosho’s decision followed Kanu’s continued refusal to open his defence, insisting that there was no valid charge pending against him.
Kanu, who represented himself during Tuesday’s proceedings, told the court that he would not return to detention unless the charges against him were properly presented.
He argued that his continued detention by the Department of State Services was unlawful, maintaining that he had not breached any known law.
He also accused the court of disregarding the Supreme Court’s judgment which, according to him, condemned his extraordinary rendition from Kenya.
He demanded that the trial judge immediately discharge him from custody.
When reminded that the Supreme Court had ordered a fresh trial, Kanu maintained his position that the terrorism charge was invalid and incompetent.
Citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, he argued that there was no existing law creating a terrorism offence in Nigeria.
“In Nigeria today, the Constitution is the supreme law. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to detention today. The Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot defend myself under a repealed law,” Kanu said.
He further challenged any lawyer to show him a valid charge, urging the court to “take judicial notice” of what he claimed was the repeal of the terrorism law.
“I cannot be tried under a law that has been repealed. Prosecuting me under such a law is a violation of my fundamental rights,” he insisted.
After several attempts to persuade him to enter his defence, Justice Omotosho adjourned proceedings until November 5, 2025, giving Kanu the final opportunity to either defend the charge or forfeit his right to do so.
During the session, counsel for the Federal Government, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), informed the court that some documents served on him by Kanu were unsigned and not endorsed by the court, arguing that they held no evidential value.
There was drama in the Senate on Tuesday following the recent threat by Donald Trump, the President of the United States to take military action against Nigeria over alleged persecution of Christians.
It started when Godswill Akpabio, the Senate President, was addressing reports by an online platform alleging that he had publicly rebuffed Trump over his recent comments and had said Nigerians were “not complaining” about their condition.
The visibly displeased Senate President denied ever making such statements, describing them as “false and malicious.”
He condemned the publication, saying it was an attempt to create diplomatic tension and discredit the National Assembly.
“The fake report claimed I said Nigerians are not complaining that we like the way we are living. That is completely false. I have petitioned the police and the DSS,” he said.
Akpabio said, “Somebody will sit in the comfort of his room and fabricate a report, attaching fake pictures from 2023 when I visited Port Harcourt with senators for a completely different event, and then claim that the Senate President replied President Trump.
“Who am I to answer Trump?” Akpabio asked jokingly.
The issue, however, sparked heated reactions on the floor of the Senate as Akpabio, and his deputy, Barau Jibrin, openly differed on how the Nigerian legislature should respond.
While Akpabio dismissed reports that he had already reacted to Trump’s comments, declaring, “Who am I to answer Trump?”, Barau quickly interjected, insisting that he was not afraid of the American leader.
“I’m not scared of Trump. I will say my mind. I’m a Nigerian. Nigeria is a sovereign nation,” Barau said passionately.
The Deputy Senate President added, “I’m a parliamentarian, the Deputy Senate President, I can speak. Don’t be scared of Trump. You can say your mind about Trump. We are a sovereign nation.”
The exchange, which briefly lightened the mood in the chamber, underscored a divide in tone between both presiding officers on how Nigeria’s parliament should handle the diplomatic row.
“It is the Presidency that will respond to President Trump, not the Senate President. But who is that person that would ascribe a comment to me when I was never contacted?”
Akpabio urged security agencies to investigate and prosecute those behind the viral story, describing it as an effort to “cause friction and bring the Nigerian Senate into disrepute.”
“I believe the Cybercrimes Unit of the police, the DSS, and others should find that character out. This is meant to sow division. Social media should not be allowed to break Nigeria,” he added.
The Senate President, however, noted that the Red chamber would take an official position on Trump’s remarks once the federal government had clarified its stance.
He said, “When the executive responds, we will take a position as a Senate. Until then, no one should speak for this institution.”
Over the weekend, Trump declared via social-media that Nigeria faces “an existential threat” to its Christian population and warned that the U.S. may deploy troops or conduct air-strikes if the Nigerian government fails to halt the killings.
He instructed the Pentagon to prepare for possible action and threatened to cut all U.S. aid to Nigeria.
In tandem, the U.S. re-added Nigeria to its “Country of Particular Concern” list for religious freedom violations.
The Nigerian government rejected the designation and the characterisation of persecuting Christians, insisting that Nigeria protects religious freedom for all.
Source: businessday.ng
China, on Tuesday, opposed US President Donald Trump’s threat to carry out military action against Nigeria over the alleged persecution of Christians, as it backed the Nigerian government in leading its people to follow a development path in line with its national conditions.
Trump Saturday said if the Nigerian government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the US will immediately stop all aid and assistance to the West African country, and may go for military action to wipe out the Islamic terrorists.
Asked for her comments on Trump’s threat, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told the media that the Nigerian Foreign Ministry issued a statement, stating that the US’s claims did not reflect the current realities in Nigeria, and the government had remained committed to fighting terrorism, strengthening interfaith harmony, and protecting the lives and rights of all its people.
As a comprehensive strategic partner, China firmly supports the Nigerian government in leading its people to follow a development path in line with its national conditions, Mao said.
“China opposes interference by any country in the internal affairs of other nations under the pretext of religion or human rights and opposes the arbitrary use of sanctions and threats of force,” she said.
On the reports that Venezuela is seeking missiles and drones following a dozen US strikes on the boats in the region on the suspicion that they carried drugs, Mao said China is opposed to the use of force in the name of fighting drug cartels.
China supports enhanced international cooperation in combating transnational crimes, but opposes the use of threats of using force in international relations, and actions that undermine peace and stability in Latin America and the Caribbean, she said.
China is against unilateral so-called law enforcement operations against vessels of other countries that exceed reasonable and necessary limits, she added.
“We hope the US will carry out normal law enforcement and judicial activities within bilateral and multilateral legal frameworks,” Mao said, without mentioning whether China will support military equipment to Venezuela.
“China’s normal exchanges and cooperation with Venezuela are conducted between sovereign states, without targeting any third party, nor are they subject to interference or influence by any third party,” she said.
Source: orissapost
