Flowerbud News

Tag: Court

  • Court extends interim order against INEC, PDP over 26 defected Rivers lawmakers

    Court extends interim order against INEC, PDP over 26 defected Rivers lawmakers

    Abuja: A Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday, extended the Dec. 15 interim order stopping the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) from taking any action step against the 26 Rivers House of Assembly members who defected to All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Justice Donatus Okorowo extended the order following an application by counsel for the embattled lawmakers, Steve Adehi, SAN, and supported by Ken Njemanze, SAN, who appeared for the Rivers House of Assembly.

    Although PDP’s lawyer, Adeyemi Ajibade, SAN, opposed the application, Justice Okorowo agreed that based on Order 26, Rule 10 of the FHC, the court had the discretionary power to grant the plea in the interest of justice

    The judge held that he was persuaded by the reasons given by Adehi and Njemanze that granting the order would be better in the interest of justice.

    Okorowo, who adjourned the matter until Jan 24 for hearing of the applications, said: “application for the extension of the order of the lifespan of the ex-parte order pending the hearing and determination of motion on notice is hereby granted.”

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Okorowo had, on Dec. 15, granted the ex-parte motion filed by the 26 lawmakers who dumped PDP for APC.

    The court restrained INEC from conducting fresh election to fill the seats of the 26 assembly members.

    It also restrained INEC, PDP and the house of assembly from declaring their seats vacant and withdrawing their respective Certificate of Returns pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.

    The plaintiffs had, in the motion ex-parte marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1681/2023/ dated and filed Dec 13, sued INEC, PDP, the assembly, clerk of the assembly, Inspector-General (I-G) of Police and Department of State Service (DSS) as 1st to 6th defendants respectively.
    Upon resumed hearing on Thursday, plaintiffs’ counsel, Steve Adehi, SAN, informed the court that he had a motion on notice which originally was meant for hearing today.
    Adehi, however, sought an adjournment in view of the fact that Mr Lukman Fagbemi, SAN, had withdrawn appearance and a new counsel had entered appearance in the matter for the 3rd defendant (assembly) and in view of the fact that the 2nd defendant (PDP) had just served on them their response this morning.
    “In any case, I ask that the matter be further adjourned to enable us serve the 3rd and 4th defendants (assembly and clerk) and to also enable us to reply on points of law to the process served on us by the counsel to the 2nd defendant,” he said.

    Then K.C.O. Njemanze, SAN, told the court that he had the instruction of the 3rd defendant (assembly) to take over the brief with the original letter of instruction backing this after the withdrawal of the earlier counsel, Fagbemi.
    He equally informed that a memorandum of appearance had already been filed.

    A lawyer from Fagbemi’s chamber confirmed to the court that the learner silk had withdrawn from the suit.
    The PDP’s lawyer, Adeyemi Ajibade, SAN, who is also the National Legal Adviser of the party, said he had an application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to handle the suit and the competence of the suit itself.

    He, therefore, prayed the court for an order discharging the Dec. 15 interim order granted by the court.

    Ajibade said the plaintiffs had responded to their preliminary objection but yet to respond to their second application, which was a motion seeking the court’s order to discharge the interim order.

    He, however, aligned himself with the application for adjournment by Adehi and Njemanze in view of Fagbemi’s withdrawal from the suit.

    He said this would also enable him sort out their processes which had earlier been served on Fagbemi.

    Njemanze told the court that he was yet to be served with the processes filed by the PDP to enable them respond to same.
    Besides, he said he intends to react to the processes filed by the plaintiffs also.
    He said though there had been moves to resolve the dispute politically with the involvement of President Bola Tinubu, he would need to get the disposition of his client to the development.

    “Without prejudice to the information by my learned friend this morning about a political solution brokered by Mr President, I need to get my client’s reaction to this and then report back to this honourable court.

    “In the circumstance, we pray for an adjournment to enable me file my processes,” he said.

    The 4th defendant (clerk of the assembly)’s counsel, Ferdinand Orbih, SAN, notified the court that his client was yet to be served with any process in the matter.

    “But as obedient servant and minister in the temple of justice, we appeared this morning with firm instruction from the 4th defendant,” he said.

    Orbih said he would consult with the 4th defendant to know which path to tow.
    He said if he agreed with the plaintiffs’ application but the PDP insisted on going on with the matter, the case would still be alive before the court.

    “However, we are not opposed to the plaintiffs’ call for adjournment as the consultation continues,” he said.
    Adehi, who said should the court consider all the applications for adjournment, prayed the court for an order extending the lifespan of the Dec. 15 interim order pending when the matter is resolved.
    But Ajibade opposed Adehi’s application, reminding the court of their motion seeking to vacate the order.

    He argued that issues had already been joined in the case by responding to the plaintiffs’ interlocutory injunction and that their counter affidavit had also been served.
    Responding, Njemanze, who appeared for the assembly, disagreed with Ajibade.
    “The issue of 2nd defendant filing processes no longer arise at this stage because those processes are highly defective because we have not been served and so, there cannot be issues at this stage,” he said.
    He argued that it is the law that issue of service is fundamental in adjudication and that without service, there cannot be adjudication on matters.
    He, therefore, backed Adehi’s application for the extension of the lifespan of interim order.
    “We are not opposing the aplkication because if that order is discharged without going into the merit of the matter, this court will automatically lose control of the proceedings and create a situation where the main suit, if it succeeds, the order will be rendered nugatory.
    “With all respect for the 3rd respondent, I submit that the parties before you, including the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants, have submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of this court and are therefore bound not to resort to self help or do any act that will render the judgment in this matter which ever way it goes nugatory.
    “Secondly, the plaintiffs’ motion for interlocutory injunction had been served on the 2nd defendant.
    “Therefore, the extension of the lifespan of the interim order will not be prejudicial to any of the party in view of the pendency of that motion.
    “In the circumstance, the defendants will lose nothing if the status quo is maintained and the res in this matter is preserved pending when the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction is determined.
    “For this reason, I am not opposing the application for the extension of the lifespan of the order,” he said.
    Corroborating Njemanze’s submission, Adehi insisted that the circumstance leading to the grant of the ex-parte order had not changed.
    The lawyer argued that the PDP’s body language “is such that leaves us in doubt because they are still calling for the declaration of the seats of the plaintiffs vacant and conduct of fresh election.
    “So, those circumstances have not changed,” he said.
    Besides, he said the lawyers in court had also sought an adjournment in order to go and verify the claim that the matter is being settled amicably.
    Adehi also argued that PDP was not ready for the sitting because it had just responded to their application at about 8:50am today.
    “And we are still entitled to file a reply on points of law. So there is no neglect on our part,” he said.
    He also argued that the 1st plaintiff (factional speaker) had complied with the order of the court to undertake damages in the sum of N250 million.
    “As a matter of fact, this court in granting that application has ordered for a damages for the sum of 250 million which the first plaintiff has complied with,” he said.
    Adehi said by Order 26, Rule 10 of the rule of the court, the court had the discretion to grant his plea, especially weighing all the circumstances and seeing that he was willing to go on with his motion, but for the development in the morning.
    He urged the court to grant their request.
    Responding to Njemanze’s position that the PDP’s processes were incompetent, Ajibade corrected that all their processes filed were competent, even though there had been a change of counsel.
    He also stated that neither the house of the assembly nor the clerk of the house had served them with their memorandum of appearance.
    He urged the court to discountenance that position and hold that all their processes were in order before the court.
    NAN observes that INEC, I-G and DSS were not represented in court.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)/ Flowerbudnews

     

     

  • Court grants ex-terrorist negotiator Tukur Mamu access to personal physician

    Court grants ex-terrorist negotiator Tukur Mamu access to personal physician

     

    Abuja:  A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, granted Tukur Mamu’s plea to have access to his own personal physician over alleged deteriorating health condition.

    Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a ruling, ordered that Mamu’s medical doctor should be allowed to treat him subject to the supervision of the Department of State Service (DSS)’s team of physicians.

    Justice Ekwo, who agreed with the argument of Mamu’s counsel, Johnson Usman, SAN, asked the Federal Government’s lawyer, David Kaswe, if the defendant was entitled to his own personal physician and he responded in affirmative.

    “Yes my lord , he is as long as it is within the supervision of our team (of physicians),” Kaswe, the Chief State Counsel from the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF)’s office, said.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mamu, who is standing trial over his alleged relationship with terrorists that were involved in the March 28, 2022 attack on a Kaduna-bound train, was arrested on Sept. 6, 2022, by Interpol in Cairo, Egypt, on behalf of the Nigerian government.

    The DSS, on March 21, arraigned him on 10 counts of terrorism financing, among others, but pleaded not guilty to the counts.

    The judge, on April 27, declined to admit him to bail on the grounds of ill-health, after the DSS opposed the bail application.
    But in a motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/96/2023, Mamu, through his lawyer, Usman, sought an order of court to have access to his personal doctor.
    When the matter was called, Usman informed the court of the motion dated and filed on Oct. 31.
    Kaswe acknowledged the receipt of the application and said he filed a counter affidavit on Nov. 14 to oppose it.
    He said the simple ground of their opposition was that the DSS had functional medical facility and team of medical doctors that could handle his case.
    He said that the treatment being administered to Mamu was still in progress “and that the procedure suffices for a particular period.”
    Besides, he urged the court not to grant the application looking at the circumstance of the charge against him.
    “Have you read prayer two of the motion?,” the judge asked Kaswe and he said, “yes.”
    NAN observes that Mamu’s second prayer in the motion sought an order directing the DSS to take him to “the hospital to perform surgical procedure as recommended by both Egyptian and Nigerian doctors.”
    The judge then asked the lawyer if the defendant was entitled to his own personal physician and he responded in the positive.
    “I am going to allow the defendant to have access to his own physicians and whatever they do will be in the supervision of the prosecution,” he said.

    “We thank your lordship for this wisdom of this court,” Usman said.
    Justice Ekwo, consequently, granted Mamu’s request.

    “Therefore, I made an order that the medical physician shall be allowed to give him medical treatment subject to the supervision of the physician of the prosecution .

    “This is the order of this court,” he said.
    He adjourned the matter untill Feb. 26, Feb. 27 and Feb. 28, 2024 for continuation of trial.
    Speaking shortly after the court sitting, Usman, who appeared for Mamu, said they sought two reliefs.

    “We sought for two reliefs; either to grant him bail on health condition or direct the DSS to take him to a hospital to be treated by his own medical personnel.

    “The court granted the second prayer, directed the DSS to allow him to be treated by his own medical doctors,” he said.

    On how he felt with the outcome of the proceedings, he said: “It is a success by step in the sense that before now, there was no order directing the DSS to take him to hospital to be attended by his own personal doctors.

    “But today, the court has directed that he should be allowed to be treated by medical doctors of his choice. That is a step forward.”
    Also speaking, Kaswe said the court had given Mamu access to his own doctor.

    “You are aware that the defendant is standing trial for terrorism-related charges especially because of the role he played in the negotiation of the Kaduna train attack that took place sometimes last year.

    “So today, he came with another application for his bail and we have filed a counter and the court has heard us and considered and gave bench ruling on the application allowing his medical doctor to have access to the defendant under the supervision of the security agency’s medical team.

    On why they opposed Mamu’s application, he said his ailment was not life-threatening.

    “We opposed the application because the detention facility where the defendant is has all the cutting edge medical services that are being rendered to the defendant.

    “And the particular ailment of the defendant is not life-threatening and there is a medical team that has consistently, continuously examined the defendant and formed the opinion that the procedure that is being administered to him now is okay to take care of his ailment,” he said.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng) /Flowerbudnews

  • Court to hear report of settlement in ex-workers’ suit against ABU Jan. 30

    Court to hear report of settlement in ex-workers’ suit against ABU Jan. 30

    Abuja:  The National Industrial Court, Abuja, on Monday, fixed Jan. 30, 2024, for further report of settlement in a suit filed by 110 former staff members of Ahmadu Bello University (ABU) against the institution.

    Justice Rakiya Haastrup adjourned the matter after counsel for the claimants, Adegboyega Kolade, and defendants’ lawyer, Abubakar Is’haq, agreed to await the computation format of the two federal government agencies involved.
    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that while the 110 ex-staff members are the claimants, ABU is the sole defendant in the suit
    Upon resumed hearing on Monday, Kolade informed the court that the claimants joined the defendant at a meeting as National Pension Commission (PENCOM) as instructed.
    He craved the indulgence of the court for his colleague, Femi Adedeji, who was at the meeting, to brief the court on what transoired.
    Adedeji notified the court that during the meeting, both parties were properly guided on the position of the law regarding the pension and gratuity of the judgment creditors (110 former workers).
    He said the parties also had meeting with the Pension Transitional Arrangement Directorate (PTAD) on how their clients would be settled amicably.
    The lawyer said he met with learner friend to the judgment debtor (ABU) on how to implement the information gotten from these government agencies.
    “I equally hinted my learner friend on the need to submit to a third party like an arbitrator or referee because there may be information we may not be able to resolve for them to find a balance for the two of us,” he said.
    Adedeji prayed the court for an order for the parties to submit themselves to arbitrators or a referees who were experts in the field in accordance with Order 29 of the rules of the court, or alternative dispute resolution (ADR) of the court.
    Corroborating Adedeji’s submission, Kolade said by virtue of Section 31 (a), (b) and (c) of National Industrial Court Act, 2006 and order 29 of the rules of the court, the judge had the power to appoint a referee or an arbitrator in agreement with parties.

    “This is a situation where we need pension consultant to come in,” he said, insisting that there were grey areas the employer (ABU) was yet to comply with on contributory pension scheme since 2007 in accordance with pension act.
    Kolade, who alleged that the ABU had not given them the format of its computation despite their request, said the institution planned to enforce its calculation on their clients but Is’haq denied the allegation.

    Is’haq, said though parties met at PENCOM on Dec. 11 with representatives of the agency, he said the agency made it clear that it was its responsibility to calculate and compute all the entitlements of all those ex-workers who had crossed to Pension Reformed Act (PRA) 2004 with a definite day of June 2007.

    He said they were told it was the duty of the employer to submit their records of service and they would take care of whatever they are duly entitled to while those who are under old pension act, PTAD would takes care of them.
    Is’haq said though a letter requesting for a written clarification on this was submitted to PENCOM in order to tender it in court, unfortunately, they were yet to get it.

    He, however, disagreed on appointment of an arbitrator saying it was not possible under the law because an appeal on the computation of the entitlement by the university and another appeal by CBN on the order absolute attaching the judgment sum had been entered.

    Besides, the lawyer said the Court of Appeal also had arbitration process which parties could submit themselves to, and above all, that parties could sit together and resolve the issues in good faith.

    Justice Haastrup, who said there must be a compromise and the principle of give and take should be adopted in the resolution, urged counsel to be ready to lose and win in the approach.

    She said the court would not go outside the scope of PENCOM and PTAD.

    The judge directed the parties to get the documents regarding PENCOM and PTAD’s computation with a view to resolving the matte

    She adjourned the matter until Jan. 30 for further report of settlement.

    NAN reports that the claimants’ appointments were terminated in 1996.

    However, as part of the order of the court, the institution converted the termination letters to reinstatement or retirement letters as applicable to each staff members.

    The parties as part of terms of settlement had agreed on arrears of salary computations, but have failed to reach an agreement on the pension and gratuity computations.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng) / Flowerbudnews

  • N3.5bn debt: Court freezes Oyo State govt.’s accounts in 10 banks

    N3.5bn debt: Court freezes Oyo State govt.’s accounts in 10 banks

     

    Abuja:  A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja has issued an order attaching the accounts of the Oyo State Government in ten commercial banks in the country.
    The order was issued by Justice A. O. Ebong, in a ruling on a garnishee proceeding initiated by ex-council chiefs in Oyo State, who were sacked on May 29, 2019 by Gov. Seyi Makinde.
    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the sacked local government chairmen and councillors had, in 2021, got a N4,874,889,425.60 judgment against Makinde and other officials/agencies of the state.
    The other officials/agencies listed with Makinde as judgment debtors, by virtue of the May 7, 2021 judgment of the Supreme Court, are the Attorney-General, Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Accountant-General of Oyo State, Speaker of the House of Assembly, the House of Assembly and the Oyo State Independent Electoral Commission (OYSIEC).
    The garnishee proceeding was intended by the ex-council chiefs, led by Bashorun Majeed Ajuwon, to recover the balance of N3,424,889,425.60 (N3.5 billion) which is outstanding from the actual judgment sum, from which Makinde paid only N1.5 billion in 2022.
    What was outstanding in respect of the Supreme Court judgment was N3,374,889,425.60, but the Court of Appeal in Abuja added N50 million, which it awarded as cost against Makinde and others in a judgment on Dec. 8, dismissing their appeal.
    The banks in which the state government’s accounts were blocked are Zenith Bank, United Bank of Africa (UBA), Wema Bank, First Bank of Nigeria, Ecobank, Guaranty Trust Bank, Access Bank, Polaris Bank, Jaiz Bank and Union Bank.
    Justice Ebong delivered the ruling on Dec. 15 on a motion marked: BW/M/85/2023 but its certified true copy (CTC) was gotten on Monday.
    He ordered the garnishees (the banks) to file affidavits and attend the court on the next adjourned date to show cause why the garnishee orders nisi hereby granted should not be made absolute.
    The judge awarded N300,000.00 as cost against the judgment debtors; ordered that a copy of the order be served on Makinde and others and adjourned till Jan. 5, 2024 for hearing.
    NAN recalls that on May 7, 2021 when the Supreme Court gave judgment, voiding Makinde’s sack of elected local government chairmen and councillors in Oyo State, the apex court gave similar judgment in respect of Katsina State and ordered both states to pay the salaries and allowances of the effected ex-council chiefs.

    Justice Ejembi Eko, who delivered the lead judgment in the Oyo State case, condemned the decision by Makinde to unlawfully sack the elected council chiefs before the end of their tenure.

    But, while the Katsina State Government had since paid its ex-council chiefs, who were unlawfully sacked, the Oyo State Government had failed to pay the ex-council chiefs in the appeal marked: SC/CV/556/2020.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng) / Flowerbudnews

  • Kano State Govt agrees to pay demolished shop owners N3bn compensation

    Kano State Govt agrees to pay demolished shop owners N3bn compensation

     

    Abuja: The Kano State Government, on Thursday, agreed to pay N3 billion ias compensation to the Incorporated Trustees of Masallacin Eid Shop Owners and Traders Association for the unlawful demolition of their property.

    The agreement was reached through an application on terms of settlement dated Dec. 12 and filed Dec. 13 by counsel to parties before Justice Inyang Ekwo of a Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that following the demolition of the shops on Gov. Abba Yusuf’s order, 56 applicants, on behalf of the association, had filed the suit marked: FHC/KN/CS/208/2023 in Kano division.

    The applicants sued the state government Kano State, the Kano State Urban Planning and Development Authority ( KNUPDA); state’s Attorney-General (A-G), Nigeria Police; Assistant Inspector General of Police Zone 1, Kano; Commissioner of Police, Kano; Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corpse (NSCDC) Commandant; and NSCDC, Kano State Command.

    Justice Samuel Amobeda had, on Sept. 29 in a judgment, ordered the state government to pay the traders N30 billion as compensation against the traders’ N250 billion demand, for the illegal demolition of their property.

    But following the refusal of the state government to obey the Kano court order, the traders filed an ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1382/2023 before Justice Ekwo, seeking an oder for Garnishee Order Nisi attaching the funds (present and future) of KSG, KNUPDA, state’s A-G, including but limited to Kano State Federal Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) Account.

    They also attached the UBA account number: 1019716320, Polaris account number:: 1790249410 and other accounts in the custody of the respective garnishees to the tune of N30 billion in satisfaction of the Sept. 29 judgement, among other reliefs, and Justice Ekwo granted the application on Nov. 28.

    Some of the garnishees joined in the suit include the CBN, Account-General of the Federation, Federal Ministry of Finance, FAAC, UBA, Zenith Bank, Unity Bank, Polaris Bank, among others.
    However, upon resumed hearing on Thursday, counsel to the judgment creditors (traders), Dr N. A. Ayagi, who read the garnishee proceeding initiated against the judgement debtors (state government and others) and the garnishees, informed the court that the parties had reached an agreement.

    “We are glad to inform the court that the judgement creditors and the judgement debtors have reached settlement.
    “We have accordingly filed our terms of settlement,” he said.
    Ayagi then adopted the terms of settlement and urged the court to enter it as consent judgement.

    Also, lawyer to the judgment debtors, Affis Matanmi, did not object to the application and Justice Ekwo consequently delivered the judgment as consented to by parties.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

  • Medical director prays Appeal Court to quash his rape conviction

    Medical director prays Appeal Court to quash his rape conviction

     

    Abuja: The Medical Director of Optimal Cancer Care Foundation, Dr Olufemi Olaleye, has asked the Court of Appeal to set aside his conviction by the lower court over alleged rape of minor.

    Olaleye, in a notice of appeal filed by his lawyer, Dr Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, said that the Ikeja Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Court was wrong to have relied on the evidence presented by the prosecution against him.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the court, presided over by Justice Rahman Oshodi in the charge number: ID/20289C/2022 had, on Oct. 24, sentenced Olaleye to life imprisonment for alleged defilement of his wife’s niece claimed to be a 16-year old.

    However, in the appeal dated and filed on Nov. 24 at the Appeal Court sitting in Lagos State, the appellant, through his lawyer, gave 35 grounds why his appeal should be allowed.

    In a copy of the notice of appeal made available to newsmen in Abuja on Wednesday, Pinheiro argued that “the lower court erred in law when, in the absence of any direct evidence, it held that the alleged victim of the crime was a child of 16 at the time of the offence.”

    He said that the prosecution did not tender any documentary evidence in support of its case that the alleged victim of the crime was 16 years.

    In proving this fact, the lawyer argued that the prosecution had the onerous duty of presenting the birth certificate of the complainant which would have served as conclusive proof of her age.

    But throughout the trial, he said neither the prosecution nor the complainant put forward any documentary proof of the alleged survivor’s age, other than the oral evidence of the witnesses.

    The lawyer also argued that contrary to the submission that the alleged victim was consistent in her evidence that Olaleye raped her, her evidence was riddled with inconsistences.

    Pinheiro said the alleged survivor never accused the appellant of rape before the police who interviewed her when the alleged events were still very fresh in her mind.

    He said it was only four months after the alleged incident occurred that she turned around and alleged that the appellant raped her.

    According to him, the court ought to have been suspicious of the time frame between her statements to the police and the Gender Department of the police.

    He further argued that the lower court ought not to have relied on the evidence of PW5, Dr Akinbunmi Oyebimpe of MIRABEL, in convicting and sentencing the appellant.

    He argued that contrary to Oyebimpe’s finding, the examination carried out on the alleged survivor by PW5 was done months after the alleged offence was committed.

    “Even though the offences were alleged to have occurred between 2020 and 2021, the medical certificate issued by PW5 clearly showed that the alleged survivor was being examined in respect of a sexual assault that occurred in March, 2022.

    “In the face of this material contradiction, it was wrong of the court to have held that the evidence of PW5 corroborated that of the alleged survivor.

    “Since the outcome of PW5’s examination did not indict the appellant, the finding of the court is erroneous and ought not to be sustained,” the lawyer said.

    He equally faulted the court to have relied on the testimony of the 1st prosecution witness (PW1), who was Olaleye’s wife and also a complainant, which he said was tainted with malice on the events that occurred in the presence of CSP Patricia Amadi and Aunty Tessy without hearing from these vital witnesses.

    According to him, the honourable lower court erred in law when it held that it did not “…believe that Aunty Tessy was a vital witness,” while believing the testimony of PW1 and PW2 (prosecutrix).

    He said Aunty Tessy was an independent witness who had received the allegations leveled against PW1 and PW2.

    He contended that Olaleye’s wife, Aderemi (PW1), had demonstrated to be holding a grudge against the appellant.

    “As a result, the court ought to have been cautious in relying on her evidence which had a high probability of being tainted,” he added.
    He also challenged the finding of the trial court on two fronts.

    “Firstly, PW1 not being present when the appellant allegedly had sexual intercourse with the alleged survivor could not have corroborated the evidence of the alleged survivor because corroborative evidence ought to come from a person who directly witnessed the events as they occurred.

    “Secondly, any corroborative evidence ought to come from an independent source.

    “Having demonstrated during trial that PW1 stood to benefit from the appellant’s conviction, it was wrong of the court to have relied on her tainted testimony in finding that her evidence corroborated that of the complainant,” the lawyer argued, among others.

    He insisted that Aderemi (PW1) was demonstrably a tainted and interested witness and as such, her evidence was manifestly unreliable.

    Pinheiro, who sought four reliefs, urged the appellate court to make an order setting aside the decision of the lower court.

    He also sought an order setting aside the conviction of and quashing the sentence against the appellant by the lower court.

    The lawyer equally sought an order discharging and acquitting Olaleye of the offences preferred against him.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng) /Flowerbudnews

  • Alleged underage voters: Court gives INEC 90 days to handover officials responsible for prosecution

    Alleged underage voters: Court gives INEC 90 days to handover officials responsible for prosecution

     

    Abuja:  A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to identity, within 90 days, its officials involved in the registration of the underaged during the continuous voters’ registration (CVR) exercise in polling units across the country.

    Justice Obiora Egwuatu, in a judgment, also directed the culprits to be produced and handed over to the appropriate law enforcement agency for investigation and possible prosecution.

    Justice Egwuatu equally made a mandatory order, compelling INEC to expunge forthwith from its national voters’ register the names of all the underage voters from each of the polling unit across the federation published on her website as identified and compiled by the plaintiff in “Exhibit A” attached to the affidavit in support of the originating summons.

    The judge further made a mandatory order,compelling the commission to furnish the plaintiff with a certified true copy (CTC) of the cleaned up national voters’ register of all the persons eligible to vote in Nigeria within 90 days.

    Alternatively, he ordered the electoral umpire to publish the cleaned up national voters’ register of all the persons eligible to vote in the country in its website within 90 days from the date of the judgment.
    He also answered the six questions posed by the plaintiff in the positive
    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the plaintiff, Rev. Mike Agbon, in the originating summons marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/367/2023 filed on Match 17 through his lawyer, Desmond Yamah, had sued INEC as sole defendant.
    In the suit, the plaintiff posited six questions for determination including “whether the defendant is constitutionally, legally ard duty bound to conduct credible CVR in tre Federal Republic of Nigeria
    “Whether the defendant is bound by the constitution and its enabling statute, the Electoral Act, 2022, to act in strict compliance with the provisions of the constitution and its enabling act.
    “Whether by virtue of Section 23 of the Electoral Act, 2022, it is illegal and unlawful for the defendant to have registered underaged i.e, infants and toddlers, during the CVR.
    “Whether the admission by the defendant that it has a substantial number of the underaged, illegal and illegible voters published in its voters’ register, exonerates the defendant from any sanction within the ambit of the law for registering underaged as contained in Sections 12 & 23 of the Electoral Act, 2022,” among others.
    Agbon, therefore, sought “a mandatory order, compelling and directing the defendant to forthwith within a period of one month to identify, produce and handover its officials that are involved in the registration of the underaged in each polling unit across the federation for investigation and prosecution by the appropriate law enforcement agency,” etc.
    The plaintiff submitted that for many years now, particularly since the return of the country to democratic governance in May 1999, the regrettable issue of lack of credibility of the electoral processes had been a recurring challenge which had greatly distressed the political space.
    He said INEC by virtue of the provisions of the Electoral Act, maintains and updates the national voters’ register.
    Agbon said prior to the 2023 general elections, the electoral umpire conducted CVR nationwide and displayed the national register of voters on its website between the Nov. 12, 2022 and Nov. 25, 2022.
    He alleged that upon perusal of the national register of voters, he discovered that the commission registered underaged contrary to the provisions of the Electoral Act, (supra) which clearly described the qualification for registration.
    The plaintiff backed his argument with compiled copies from the INEC website of the underage registered and marked it as “Exhibit A.”
    He told the court that on Nov. 23, 2022, INEC’s Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, at a national stakeholders’ forum on elections organised by the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room (NCSSR), assured Nigerians that based on the observations of Nigerians, the commission would dutifully clean up the register ahead of the elections.
    Agbon said through his lawyer, he made a formal request for the commission to furnish him with the list and names of the underage and ineligible voters but it vehemently refused and ignored the said application.
    However, despite being served with court processes and hearing notices in the matter, INEC was neither represented in court nor file any defence.
    Delivering the judgment on Nov. 28 but a certified true copy sighted on Monday by NAN, Justice Egwuatu held that the conditions for qualification to be registered as a voter were stipulated in Sections 77 (2), and 117 (2) of the Constitution and Section 12 of the Electoral Act.
    According to him, the common features of these sections are that the voter must be a citizen of and residing in Nigeria and has attained the age of 18 years.
    “As I have found earlier in this judgment, the voters registered by the defendant in Exhibit ‘A’ are underage, that is, they have not attained the age of 18 years.
    “What this translates into is that the registration officers and an update officers of the defendant failed in their duties to carry out the registration of voters in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution and the Electoral Act,” he said.

    Citing provisions of Section 120(1) of the Electoral Act, 2022, he said any officer who acted in breach of his or her official duty committed an offence and would be liable on conviction for a maximum fine of N500, 000 or imprisonment for a term of 12 months or both.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)/ Flowerbudnews

  • Court voids Gov. Yusuf’s order against Doguwa, awards N25m damages

    Court voids Gov. Yusuf’s order against Doguwa, awards N25m damages

     

    Abuja: A Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja, on Friday, nullified the directive of Gov. Abba Yusuf of Kano State to review the state Attorney-General (A-G)’s legal advice on the alleged murder case earlier preferred against Rep Alhassan Doguwa (APC-Kano).

    Justice Donatus Okorowo, in a judgment, also awarded a N25 million damages against Gov. Yusuf for causing psychological pain and damage to Doguwa.

    Justice Okorowo also gave “an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the respondents from further interfering with the fundamental rights of the applicant whatsoever.”

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Doguwa, who represents Doguwa/Tundun Wada Federal Constituency of Kano State, was, on Feb. 28, arrested at the Mallam Aminu Kano International Airport, while boarding a flight to Abuja.

    The police had said they received a report that he led thugs to set ablaze the secretariat of the New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) in Kano.
    Two persons were said to have died in the incident.

    Although the legislator denied any wrongdoing, he was arraigned in March at a magistrate court in Kano and was later remanded in prison.
    He was granted bail in the sum of N500 million by a FHC, Kano after a few days in prison.

    However, the charges were withdrawn after the prosecution said it could not “find sufficient evidence to link Doguwa with the said offences.”

    But the lawmaker, through his lawyer, Afam Osigwe, SAN, filed a fresh suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/831/23 to seek for an order enforcing his fundamental rights before the Abuja court, following a hint about an attempt to re-arrest him.

    In the suit, the lawmaker, sued the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, the Executive Governor of Kano State and the A-G as 1st to 4th defendants respectively.

    Doguwa had sought the protection of the court against alleged plan by the state government to rearrest and detain him in connection with the electoral violence that ensued during the presidential and national assembly elections leading to the death of some people in the state.

    Justice Okorowo had, on June 20, ordered the parties in the suit to maintain status pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter. The order followed a motion ex-parte moved by Osigwe.

    But the governor and the A-G, in their counter affidavit argued by their lawyer, M. K. Umar, said that Doguwa was not being invited because of the violence that erupted during the Feb. 25 presidential and national assembly elections in Kano or on the firearm issue.

    Umar said contrary Osigwe’s argument, Doguwa was wanted in Kano to answer to the allegation of homicide preferred against him by the state government.

    The lawyer said there were emerging new facts which needed to be investigated and that the A-G had the power to review the case in the wake of the emerging facts.
    But Osigwe disagreed with Umar, stating that the police report on the incident, attached as Exhibit 10, exonerated his client of any wrong doing.
    The senior lawyer, who alleged political witch-hunt against Doguwa, said his fundamental right as enshrined in the law was threatened by the 3rd and 4th respondents.
    Delivering the judgement, Justice Okorowo agreed with the plaintiff that it was the same offence which the lawmaker was exonerated that the governor and the A-G planned to review.
    Quoting from the exhibit, the judge said the police (2nd resoobdent in the suit) stated that they “cannot not find sufficient evidence to link Doguwa with those offences and that the allegation that he killed the victims cannot be substantiated.”
    He said while the court did not doubt the powers of the A-G to review a case, the court would not allow using a constitutional means to achieve an unconstitutional purpose.

    According to the judge, the attempt to re-arrest him contravenes Section 46 of the constitution.
    “It is hereby declared that the purported action of the 3rd and 4th respondents to review the legal advice dated 23rd May, 2023, and indeed the actual review of the legal advice dated May 23, 2023, with a view to arrest, detain, and prosecute the applicant on a fathom charge and without regards to the report of the 2nd respondent (I-G) is illegal, unlawful, wrongful, unconstitutional and void.

    ”It amounts to an infraction of the applicant’s constitutional right to human dignity, personal liberty and freedom of movement.

    “An order of perpetual injunction is hereby granted restraining the respondents, themselves, and by agents, howsoever described from further inviting, arresting or detaining the applicant with a view to review the 4th respondent legal advice dated 23 May, 2023, in so far as the respondents do proffer fresh evidence against the applicant.

    “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from further interfering with the fundamental rights of the applicant whatsoever.
    “An order of this honourable court is hereby granted nullifying the purported 3rd respondent directive to review the fourth respondent legal advice dated May 23, 2023, with a view to arrest the applicant.
    “General damages of 25 million only against the 3rd respondent only for causing the psychological pain and damage to the applicant,” the judge declared.(NAN)(www.nannnews.ng) / Flowerbudnews

  • Alleged P&ID fraud: EFCC withdraws charge against ex-Lagos AG, Shasore

    Alleged P&ID fraud: EFCC withdraws charge against ex-Lagos AG, Shasore

     

    Abuja: The Economic Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), on Thursday, withdrew the money laundering charge preferred against Mr Olasupo Shasore, SAN, following a directive by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minster of Justice, Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN.
    EFCC’s Counsel, Bala Sanga, informed Justice Inyang Ekwo of a Federal High Court, Abuja, upon resumed hearing that his office notified him as prosecuting lawyer that there was a letter from the AGF requesting the anti-graft agency to withdraw the charge.

    Sanga, who said the letter would be brought to court, prayed the court to stand down the matter to await its delivery and the judge granted the request.

    When the court reconvened, the prosecution presented copies of the letter to the judge and the defence counsel, Chief Olawale Akoni, SAN.
    “Based on the AGF’s directive, we apply to withdraw the case,” Sanga told the court.

    Akoni, who did not object to the oral application, said: “We will humbly be asking the defendant to be discharged.”

    Justice Ekwo, consequently, ordered the withdrawal of the charge and discharged Shasore, who was former Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lagos State.
    He said: “Upon being shown a letter from the AGF dated 23rd of November and the application by the prosecution counsel that the matter be withdrawn, the charge is hereby withdrawn and the defendant discharged.”
    The AGF’s letter sighted by the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) and personally signed by Mr Fagbemi, which was addressed to the Executive Chairman of EFCC, was captioned: “RE: Review of All Civil and Criminal Proceedings Between Process and Industrial Developments Ltd (P&ID) and Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN).”
    The cases were listed as: charge number: FHC/L/447C/2022 – FRN Vs. Olasupo Shasore, SAN; charge number: FHC/ABJ/CR/386/2022 – FRN Vs. Middlesex Investments Ltd and charge number: ID/19657C/2022 – FRN Vs. Olasupo Shasore, SAN.
    The letter with reference number: DPPA/OLASUPO/345/23 informed the EFCC “that the above charges were being reviewed in the light of recent developments in Process & Industrial Developments Limited vs. The Federal Republic of Nigeria (CL-2018-000182) and The Federal Republic of Nigeria vs. Process & Industrial Developments Limited (CL-2019-000752).
    “Consequently, you are hereby directed, pursuant to the provisions of Sections 105(1) & 108(1) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, to withdraw the said charges with immediate effect and revert on compliance promptly.”
    NAN reports that Shasore was standing trial in Abuja and Lagos State on alleged money laundering offences.
    The ex-Lagos A-G was, on November 4, 2022, arraigned on a 14-count money laundering charge before Justice Ekwo of Abuja court.
    In the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/386/22 filed on Aug. 17, 2022, Middlesex Investments Ltd and Shasore were 1st and 2nd defendants respectively.
    Shasore was alleged to be a director and a signatory to the company’s Guaranty Trust Bank account number: 0005659394.
    The former commissioner, however, pleaded not guilty to the offences alleged to have been committed along with the company and was granted bail in terms of the administrative bail earlier granted him by the EFCC.
    On Oct. 20, 2022, Shasore was arraigned before Chukwujekwu Aneke, judge of an Ikeja Special Offences Court, on a two-count charge bordering on alleged money laundering.
    Hours later, the former A-G was arraigned before Mojisola Dada, judge of a Federal High Court in Lagos on a four-count charge of alleged money laundering.
    NAN had, on Oct. 23, reported that a Business and Property Court in London presided over by Justice Robin Knowles of the Commercial Courts of England and Wales had quashed the 11 billion dollars awarded against Nigeria in a case filed by P&ID.
    Judge Knowles held that the award was obtained by fraud and that what had happened in the case was contrary to public policy.
    The court also declared that it did not find any merit in the charges of bribery levelled against Shasore, who represented Nigeria in the arbitration.

    The Federal Government had, in the case marked: CL-2019-000752, sought to overturn $6.6 billion arbitration awarded in favour of P&ID in 2017.

    The award had continued to accrue interest since then, rising to approximately $11 billion before the judgment.(NAN)(www.nannnews.ng) / Flowerbudnews