Yoruba rights Activist, Sunday Adeyemo is popularly known as Sunday Igboho, has said he is not intimidated by the threat of arrest.

Igboho had asked herdsmen in Igangan, Ibarapa North Local Government Area of Oyo to leave within seven days following reports of the killing of some indigenes.

He had blamed herders and Fulanis, especially the Seriki Fulani, Saliu Kadri, for rising insecurity in the area.

In a viral video, which surfaced Sunday afternoon, Igboho expressed appreciation to prominent Yoruba leaders, especially traditional leaders for speaking up at this critical moment.

He said: “They (herders) cannot chase us away from our land. Our eyes are opened it unless they want to kill us.”

He admonished his supporters not to insult or ridicule Yoruba elders.

“Don’t ridicule or abuse our leaders in the southwest, I swear with the gods of our land, they are also angry with the current situation and they are now speaking up

“You can see the way all the Yorubas and other prominent southwest leaders rose up in unison to say that you must not arrest Igboho.

“It is quite sad that we are being maltreated, killed and our sisters/daughters get raped by killer herdsmen, we can’t go to farm or stream to carry out different activities. Enough is enough.” (thenigerialawyer)

Femi Falana, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), says the federal government is portraying itself as the “defender of herders” in the country.

Falana stated this on Sunday while featuring on “The Platform”, a Television Continental (TVC) programme.

The human rights lawyer, who lamented the state of insecurity in the country, called on the federal government to defend the rights of all Nigerians, irrespective of tribe or class.

His comments followed the directive issued by Rotimi Akeredolu, governor of Ondo, that herders should vacate the state’s forest reserves as part of efforts to tackle kidnapping and banditry.

Akeredolu, however, added that those who wish to continue with their cattle-rearing business in the forest reserves should register with the appropriate authorities.

But in a swift response, Garba Shehu, presidential spokesman, said the governor cannot order herders out of Ondo, adding that the action could set off a chain of events “which the makers of our constitution foresaw and tried to guard against”.

Reacting, Falana said the forestry reserve law in the state requires compulsory registration for those who want to carry out operations there.

According to the lawyer, the federal government has not showed enough commitment to protecting all Nigerians.

“There is nothing strange whether you are talking of Benue or Ekiti state or whatever. The federal government has come in to defend herders, whether anti-grazing law or whatever. At the same time, the federal government does not defend the poor, the beggars, the destitute and others who are forcefully arrested and deported to their states of origin,” he said.

“The federal government does not bother because they belong to the flotsam and jetsam of the society. So, that is why people are wondering.

“The federal government is portraying itself as the defender of herders and it is not very good.”

The human rights lawyer, however, noted that Akeredolu’s directive should not have generated controversy in the country, adding that the Miyetti Allah association in the state should have met with the governor and registered its members so that they can continue with their cattle rearing business in the state.

“That shouldn’t have attracted any controversy. What one would have expected the Miyetti Allah group in Ondo state to do is to ensure that all their members are registered; no more no less,” he said.

Falana also urged the presidency and the Ondo government to ensure that the conflict between herders and farmers does not get out of hand.

“While the federal government portraying itself as the defender of herders is not very good, the federal government must defend all Nigerians, and at the same time also ensure that the laws of the country are complied with.”

thenigerialawyer

FOLLOWING the crisis that erupted in Igangan area of Oyo State on Friday, January 22, the state police command has assured citizens and residents of the state of adequate protection of lives and property.

In a statement made available to newsmen on Sunday, the state Police Public Relations Officer (PPRO), CSP Olugbenga Fadeyi, said the situation in Igangan had been brought under control, just as he urged that all should be calm.

The police spokesperson said investigation into the arson and breach of peace in Igangan was already ongoing.

He said: “Following the fear of threats to public peace, occasioned by the inciting pronouncement of Chief Sunday Adeniyi, a.k.a Sunday Igboho, the Oyo State Police Command, jointly with the Operation Burst, had embarked on visibility/confidence building patrol of the areas concerned.

“Sadly, the relative peace and calmness being enjoyed due to the visibility patrols of the security agencies were truncated by the visit of Sunday Igboho to Igangan, at about 4:30 p.m. on 22nd January 2021.

“The visit had culminated in a mob action by some youths in the town, who, armed with different types of weapons, embarked on arson and a breach of peace. In the process, grievous hurt was committed against a police officer, while discharging his statutory duties.

“It is necessary to state that, in handling the situation, security operatives applied extreme caution to avoid casualty and to avoid the situation from degenerating to a complete breakdown of law and order.

“Be that as it may, the Commissioner of Police, Oyo State Police Command would like to appeal for calm. Well meaning and peace loving elders in the community are enjoined to caution and advise restive youths to sheath their swords and shun violence in addressing the complex situation at hand.

“The youths should avoid being used as pawns to ignite ethnic war. At no time has violence been used as weapon to address security challenges.

“It is also necessary to mention that substantial numbers of suspects (of different ethnic backgrounds) were arrested in connection with virtually all the cases of kidnapping or assassination, which had occurred in the state. Some have been arraigned in the court of law and being remanded in correctional facilities, while investigations are still ongoing in some of the cases.

“The Commissioner of Police would like to reiterate that the security agencies will not watch while some criminal elements take laws into their hands.

“Investigation into the arson and the breach of the peace, which occurred at Igangan will be investigated to logical conclusion and culprits shall be brought to justice.”

Thenigerialawyer

…If Buhari loves the herders, he would have created the grazing reserves for them — Saleh Alhassan.

Idowu Bankole

The herdsmen group, Miyetti Allah has said, President Muhammadu Buhari has no relationship with the herdsmen, saying Fulani herders are worse under President Buhari By Clever Advertising The National Secretary of the group, Saleh Alhassan, said that herdsmen were being marginalised in the country under the leadership of President Buhari and that it was best if they were on their own where they would be protected.

Recall that VANGUARD had reported how the Ondo state government gave a 7-day ultimatum to herdsmen to leave Ondo forests accusing some herders of perpetrating the killings of farmers, raping of women and banditry in the state.

But, Alhassan, in an interview with Sunday PUNC, said that it was wrong to link herders to President Buhari saying herders have been more marginalised under the administration of President Buhari.

He said, “We don’t support crime. So, I’m not saying there are no Fulani that is criminals, there are, like other tribes, but don’t destroy their profession. It’s not good for the country. If everything busts, it’s to the advantage of the herders because we are not even enjoying the federation.

“We are even bidding for the restructuring of the country; let every part go, so we can say this is where we are. As it is now, there is no form of marginalisation we are not seeing in this country. Everywhere we are being marginalised. You think we will accept Nigeria where we don’t have access to land to feed our animals and you think there will be peace?”

On whether restructuring would solve the herders/farmers crisis, he said, “Quite fundamentally. If we leave today now and if there is no oil revenue, won’t they pay attention to animal rearing? If we restructure the country and the South-West region says they won’t accept cattle unless they are brought to the market or supermarket, it’s okay by us.

“The mistake people make is that they think when they put pressure on herders they are getting at President (Muhammadu) Buhari. Buhari has no relationship with the herders. That is the truth. When people say he is our grand patron, was Jonathan from the South-South, not our grand patron? “If the President is a Fulani, it doesn’t in any way affect the life of a herder. In fact, they are worse off under Buhari.

What are they benefitting? They don’t access any government facility or social amenity, yet they are responsible for the bulk of animal protein we produce in this country. I think it’s deliberate for people to think otherwise. He maintained that “Buhari has not done anything for us other than creating enemies for us. Herders are being chased around. Let us look at the larger picture and not allow enemies to penetrate us. If Buhari loves the herders, he would have created the grazing reserves for them.” Vanguard News Nigeria .

vanguardngr

By Festus Ogun

The seven-day ultimatum given to Fulani herdsmen to vacate forest reserves within Ondo State by Governor Rotimi Akeredolu, SAN has since generated heated controversies. While the Federal Government declared that the Governor lacks the constitutional power to issue quit notice to anyone in the State, the Governor and some other socio-cultural groups like Afenifere insisted that the vacation order remains valid. The purpose of this intervention, therefore, is to attempt a legal dissection of the constitutional validity of the vacation order vis-à-vis the public interest concerns arising from the policy.

First, the right to freedom of movement without hindrance anywhere within Nigeria is guaranteed under our constitutional jurisprudence. Thus, Section 41(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (amended 2011) provides that “every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or refused entry thereby or exit therefrom”. Indeed, all citizens of Nigeria are constitutionally entitled to settle, live and move freely anywhere and everywhere in Nigeria without any fear of rejection, ostracisation or discrimination.

However, the rights to freedom of movement and personal liberty enshrined in the Constitution are not absolute. Section 45 of the Constitution provides that there could be a legal instrument providing for the derogation to these rights in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health or for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons. The Court of Appeal in KALU v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA & ORS (2012) LPELR-9287(CA) succinctly held that “the rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement, guaranteed respectively by Sections 35 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution, are not absolute”. The court further explained that Section 41(2)(a) of the Constitution says that the right to freedom of movement may be deprived under a law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society imposing restrictions. Therefore, no argument of constitutional or human rights breach can be maintained “when it is apparent that the right has been deprived of in accordance with the procedure permitted by law.”

So, does the Ondo State Government have any law reasonably justifiable in a democratic society that provides for the derogation of the right to freedom of movement? The answer is a “Yes”.

By virtue of Section 1 of the Land Use Act, 1978 all lands within the geographical territory of a state in Nigeria is vested in the Governor. The section provides thus: “all land comprised in the territory of each State in the Federation are hereby vested in the Governor of that State and such land shall be held in trust and administered for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians in accordance with the provisions of this Act”. On the usage of the land, Section 12(1) of the Act empowers the Governor to grant licence or permits to anyone entering or using a land. Interestingly, Section 12(5) the Act vests upon the Governor the power to cancel any such licence if it fails to comply with the conditions of the licence. Instructively, Section 28 of the Act provides that “it shall be lawful for the Governor to revoke a right of occupancy for overriding public interest”.

Second, by virtue of Section 2 of the Trade Cattle Tax Law of Ondo State, 1969 (amended 2006), the imposition of “movement permit” of cattle traders is established. In fact, Section 9 of the Law empowers the State Executive Council to make regulations for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the law. It is also important to note that Section 9 of the Law criminalizes failure to pay the trade cattle tax or failure to take such trade cattle to the appropriate control post for inspection purposes.

Furthermore, under the Ondo State Forestry Law regime (Forestry Law of Western State and National Forestry Policy, 2006), it is a criminal trespass for an individual to occupy a forest reserve without obtaining permit from the State Government through the State Forestry Department. When an individual, whether an indigene or otherwise, enters into the forest reserve without permission consequent upon which such a person is capable of tampering with the forest produce and ecosystem, it is an act of trespass punishable under the law. In fact, in cases of forests and open lands that are not “reserved”, no individual can invade such a land without lawful permit from the private owner, communal authorities or the government as the case may be. Anything short of a lawful permit before occupying a land that does not belong to you is a criminal trespass.

From the foregoing, it can be safely deduced that the Governor of Ondo State was right in law to have issued a vacation order to illegal occupiers of the State’s forest reserve. Does this mean the right to freedom of movement is breached? Absolutely not: the derogation to the enjoyment of the right is backed up by law. It must be emphasised that the rights to freedom of movement and personal liberty of the herdsmen have not in any way been breached as those who wish to continue occupying the forest reserve are entitled to make an application to the Forestry Department under the Ministry of Agriculture in order to obtain the lawful permits. Disobedience to the lawful order by the Governor exposes one to arrest and prosecution.

Governor Akeredolu took an Oath of Office under the Seventh Schedule of the 1999 Constitution to protect, preserve and defend the people through unalloyed submission to the spirit of our laws. If indeed Section 14(2)(b) of the Constitution makes it a duty of the government to provide adequate security for the people, exploring the relevant provisions of the law to protect the people from the clutches of kidnappers, bandits, murderers and terrorists should not only be regarded as a courageous move but equally a rare display of patriotism.

It is a common knowledge that the forest of Ondo State is the hiding place of those terrorising the peace of our people. It is not expected that the Governor folds his hands and watch till his State gets completely destroyed by an inferno. Thus, the eviction policy is only a commendable move to beef up the security situation of the State. Anyone opposed to the vacation order is either in love with the terrorists or simply an enemy of the Nigerian people.

In the final analysis, the Governor must be told that the power to impose a vacation order in this regard does not extend to outrightly evicting anyone from the geographical territory of the State bearing in mind the fact that all Nigerians have the right to move freely everywhere and anywhere in Nigeria. As laid down by Supreme Court in the popular case of MINISTER OF INTERNAL AFFAIRS V. SHUGABA ABDURRAHAMAN DARMAN (1982) 3 N.C.L.R., 915 at 1009, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu lacks the constitutional power to outrightly and totally evict anyone from the four walls of Ondo State as that would amount to an unpardonable infraction on the Constitution which shakes the peaceful coexistence of Nigeria. But, his legal might to enforce obtaining of permits before occupying forest reserves is unimpeachable.

Festus Ogun is a lawyer-in-equity and human rights activist. [email protected]. 

Thenigerialawyer

The 344 female students and staff of Providence High School, Independence layout, Enugu who were locked up in the school’s premises by officials of Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria, AMCON, are yet to get help

According to Everyday News Nigeria reports that as at January 24, help is yet to come the way of the students

TheNigeriaLawyer recalls that no fewer than three hundred students of the school were on Thursday afternoon locked up inside their school premises as officials of the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) took possession of the institution on order of the court.

The students who were writing their school certificate examinations had retired to their hostels after school hours when officials of the Corporation arrived the premises with heavily armed policemen to enforce the court order said to have been obtained since 2016.

It was gathered that the school facility was used to obtain some loans by the original owner.

The management of the school acquired the property from one Ferdinald Anaghara in 1997 and had been paying rent since then. Anaghara was said to have died several years ago.

It was further gathered that when they acquired the property which then housed only two buildings, they were not told that there was a loan which was tied to it as collateral.They only got wind of the development in 2016 when AMCON officials had come to execute an interlucotory court order empowering it to take possession of the school facility. Several interventions were made then that prevented the execution of the order.

Proprietress of the school, Chief Mrs Elizabeth Onwuagha, has however raised an alarm over the safety and security of her over 300 students who are still taking their school certificate exams.

She said that her greatest fear was that the “over 30 heavily armed security men who stormed the premises could turn out to be kidnappers”, stressing that she would not want a repeat of what happened in Katsina state.

According to Onwuagha, she was not aware that the original owner of the property who died in 2007 used it to obtain a loan.

”The original owner gave us photocopies of the documents of this place. As at that time, there were two uncompleted buildings and he gave it to us on the condition that we will complete them and use this place specifically for education. We have been paying rent. Since we took over this place, we have built six more buildings and expanded this place which was a bush when we occupied it.

“My greatest headache is that some of the students came from outside Enugu state and their parents are not here”, the Proprietress said.

She appealed to the Enugu state government to intervene and ensure safety and security of the students, stressing that the school had produced notable personalities including former Miss Nigeria.

Thenigerialawyer

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged Ms Sadia Umar-Farouk, Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Disasters Management and Social Development to “publish details of proposed payments of N729bn to 24.3 million poor Nigerians for six months, including the mechanisms and logistics for the payments, list of beneficiaries, and how they have been selected, projected payments per state, and whether the payments will be made in cash or through Bank Verification Numbers or other means.”

SERAP also urged her to “explain the rationale for paying N5,000 to 24.3 million poor Nigerians, which translates to five-percent of the country’s budget of N13.6 trillion for 2021, and to clarify if this proposed spending is part of the N5.6 trillion budget deficit.”

Ms Sadia Umar-Farouk had last week disclosed that the Federal Government would pay about 24.3 million poor Nigerians N5,000 each for a period of six months to “provide help to those impoverished by the COVID-19 pandemic.”

In the Freedom of Information request dated 23 January 2021 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organization said: “Publishing the details of beneficiaries and selection criteria, as well as the payment plan for six months would promote transparency and accountability, and remove the risks of mismanagement and diversion of public funds.”

SERAP said: “Transparency and accountability in the programme would improve public trust, and allow Nigerians to track and monitor its implementation, and to assess if the programme is justified, as well as to hold authorities to account in cases of diversion, mismanagement and corruption.”

SERAP also urged Ms Umar-Farouk to: “invite the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) to jointly track and monitor the payments.”

The FoI request, read in part: “We would be grateful if the requested information is provided to us within seven days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter. If we have not heard from you by then, SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions under the Freedom of Information Act to compel you to comply with our request.”

“Providing support and assistance to socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians is a human rights obligation but the programme to spend five-percent of the 2021 budget, which is mostly based on deficit and borrowing, requires anti-corruption safeguards to ensure the payments go directly to the intended beneficiaries, and that public funds are not mismanaged or diverted.”

“SERAP notes that the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 [as amended], UN Convention against Corruption, and African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party require the government to set the highest standards of transparency, accountability and probity in programmes that it oversees.”

“The government has a responsibility to ensure that these requirements and other anti-corruption controls are fully implemented and monitored, and that the payments are justified in light of the huge budget deficit and borrowing, and whether there are better ways to spend N729bn to support poor Nigerians.”

“Several questions remain as to the implementation and monitoring mechanisms for the payments, and whether this is the best and most effective way to spend N729bn to support socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians.”

“Our requests are brought in the public interest, and in keeping with the requirements of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], the Freedom of Information Act, and UN Convention against Corruption, African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption, and African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to which Nigeria is a state party.”

“By Section 1 (1) of the Freedom of Information (FoI) Act 2011, and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, SERAP is entitled as of right to request for or gain access to information, including information on details of beneficiaries of the direct payments of N729bn.”

“By Section 4 (a) of the FoI Act, when a person makes a request for information from a public official, institution or agency, the public official, institution or urgency to whom the application is directed is under a binding legal obligation to provide the applicant with the information requested for, except as otherwise provided by the Act, within seven days after the application is received.”

“By Sections 2(3)(d)(V) & (4) of the FoI Act, there is a binding legal duty to ensure that documents containing information including information on details of payments of N729bn to N24.3 million poor and vulnerable Nigerians are widely disseminated and made readily available to members of the public through various means.”

“The information being requested does not come within the purview of the types of information exempted from disclosure by the provisions of the FoI Act. The information requested for as indicated above, apart from not being exempted from disclosure under the FoI Act, bothers on an issue of national interest, public concern, interest of human rights, social justice, good governance, transparency and accountability.”

Thenigerialawyer

*Calls For Restructuring
*2023: Competence & Merit Should Determine Who Succeeds Buhari
*ASUU’s Strike Needs To Be Tackled Head Horn

The immediate past chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega, has taken a swipe at the Buhari administration, describing its performance as disappointing.

Speaking in an exclusive interview with Daily Trust on Sunday, Jega, who conducted the election that ushered in President Muhmmadu Buhari in 2015, said the high expectations on the government by Nigerians was largely dashed, with many people worried about the future of the country.

“Unfortunately, he has disappointed so many people. He still has time to correct things if he has the capacity to do that. But frankly, his government has been very disappointing. Many people wish him well but are worried about the direction the country is taking,” he said.

Jega, a onetime vice-chancellor of the Bayero University, Kano (BUK), said the Buhari administration had been very inept in managing peaceful coexistence in the country.

“Governance has been very poor at the federal level and many of the states, that is why we are seeing challenges everywhere; whether it is insurgency, banditry, armed robbery or other things,” he added.

He said the accumulated misgivings by sections of the citizens led to frustrations, which “find expression in these demands for restructuring.”

The Presidency last night declined to react to Jega’s comments.

When contacted separately by our reporter, the two presidential spokespersons, Femi Adesina and Garba Shehu, said they would not want to join issues with the former INEC chairman.

The professor of Political Science also described Nigerian politicians as the most reckless, most selfish and most self-serving in the world.

“We have a lot to do; and the first thing to do is to get it right by securing the mindset of our politicians from selfishness, greed and reckless banditry. Actually, many of them are also bandits, not just those who stand by the roadside with AK 47.

To steal recklessly from government’s coffers and turn hundreds, if not millions of people into poverty, deny children the opportunity to go to school because they have stolen the money that would have gone into education or was supposed to buy arms and ammunition for the military, to the extent that they can no longer fight banditry, that is banditry itself,” he said.

Calls for restructuring
Jega also joined the call for President Buhari to restructure the country before the end of his administration.

His call for restructuring rhymed with increasing national calls to revisit Nigeria’s current political structure, which was re-echoed at this year’s annual Daily Trust Dialogue held on January 21, with Jega among the speakers.

The former INEC chairman, however, said the inability of the present administration to placate the various segments of the country was responsible for the growing uproar in the polity.

“We should define an agenda between now and 2023. What do we want to achieve in regard to restructuring? I will say that it is a priority to de-concentrate power and resources from the federal to the state government. This is achievable,” he said.

Competence to determine who succeeds Buhari
On the agitation for power shift in 2023, Jega said competence and merit should determine who takes over from President Buhari to accelerate the development of the country.

He said he would not contest for the presidency in 2023, adding that the country was not ripe for e-voting. He advised that it should be done in phases, starting with urban centres.

Jega, a former president of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), also proffered solutions to the lingering strikes by the union.

“Nigeria needs to get out of that cycle of strikes, but the government has an obligation to be proactive in ensuring that these challenges are put behind us,” he said.

Editors Note; Written By By Faruk Shuaibu, Muideen Olaniyi And Ismail Mudashir and originally published in Ddailytrust

…Military absent for third time in a row

The Lagos State Judicial Panel probing the Lekki Toll Gate incident of last October 20, Saturday warned the army of the consequences of its continued failure to honour summons compelling its appearance.

Panel chairman Justice Doris Okuwobi said the army would not be able to complain of fair hearing denial after the panel submits its findings to the government.

The judge emeritus gave the advice following the third time in a row that the army’s 81 Division would fail to make an appearance through its officers or through a counsel that once represented it, Mr Akinlolu Kehinde SAN.

At the last two sittings on December 12 and January 8, further hearing in the case involving the army’s role at the Lekki shootings was stalled following the absence of two key military officers.

Justice Okuwobi issued fresh summons to the concerned officers on January 12, copied the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Tukur Buratai, and adjourned further proceedings till yesterday.

The officers are a Lieutenant Colonel of the 81 Division, S.O Bello, who led the battalion involved in the Lekki shooting, and Godwin Umelo, the General Officer Commanding (GOC) of 81 Division.

Their invitation followed the testimony of the Commander of 81 Division, Brigadier-General Ibrahim Taiwo, debunking claims that soldiers shot #EndSARS protesters with live bullets during the operation.

Bello was the Commanding Officer of the 65 Batallion, which was at the toll gate on the evening of October 20.

Petitioners at the tribunal have alleged that soldiers fired live bullets at peaceful protesters, killing and injuring several, contrary to the army and the federal government’s claim that only blanks were fired in the air to disperse stone throwers.

At the commencement of Saturday’s proceedings, the army’s case was first on the cause list, but neither the summoned officers nor their counsel were available.

The panel’s counsel, Jonathan Ogunsanya, gave an update on the status of the summons to the officers. He said Bello and Omelo had been served via courier.

He said: “We sent it to Godwin Umelo, at the General Office, 81 Division, Lagos and Ogun State of the Nigerian Army, Victoria Island. it was sent by way of DHL.

“We also spoke to the lead counsel on record for the Nigerian Army, A.T. Kehinde SAN, informing the learned Silk of the proceedings and he said we should serve the Army directly which we did,” he said.

Counsel to some of the alleged victims of Lekki, Adeshina Ogunlana, urged the panel to invite the army’s counsel to explain the military’s absence.

“It behoves on counsel (Mr Kehinde) to come and explain before this honourable court or give explanation of the situation of the failure of his clients to responding to the summons of the panel.

“If the Military is dodging, the gentleman lawyer must not be allowed to dodge. He should come back before this panel and give explanation,” Ogunlana said.

Another counsel, Olumide Fusika, SAN, aligned himself with Mr Ogunlana that a summons should be served on Mr Kehinde. He further observed that apart from the Lekki Toll Gate petition, Kehinde was also counsel in other petitions.

He advised that all petitions against the Army should be compiled and served on the military and when the petitions come up, the officers are expected to appear.

Olumide-Fusika said: “Mr Kehinde already filed witness statement before the panel, maybe three or four. When Colonel Taiwo gave his evidence, he then decided that he was not going to call the other persons he filed for. Apparently because he feels this is a court.

He is entitled to say he doesn’t want to call them, but the tribunal is entitled to. We need this person to come, even though you are not interested, we need them to come to the tribunal.

Olukayode Enitan, the counsel holding brief for the Lagos State Government also aligned himself with the positions of Olumide-Fusika and Adesina.

Ruling on their submissions, Mrs Okuwobi lamented that the army’s non-appearance was delaying for the panel’s proceeding.

She said: “The difficulties the panel now experiences is having Mr Kehinde explain to the panel why those summoned by the panel are not attending proceeding; this is creating undue delay in the investigation of the Lekki event of October 20, 2020.

“In that respect, it is hereby ordered that the counsel for the panel shall issue a letter to learned Silk, Mr A.T Kehinde, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, to appear before the panel at the next adjourned date to explain why he would not conclude the case of the Nigerian Army.

“I must reiterate and state that this is a fact-finding panel and not a regular court where counsels can decide the choice of witnesses they want to present in their case.”

Mrs Okuwobi said it behoved on Kehinde to assist the panel in achieving the task of investigating the Lekki Shooting incident to avoid issues of denial of fair hearing that might arise when the panel’s report is submitted to the government.

“The Nigerian Army has been magnanimous in appearing before the panel, they should be encouraged to fulfill all righteousness by presenting their version of the incident of October 20 to refute the claims now made against them,” she said.

She warned that if the Army does not present its defence, the cases of the petitioners will be uncontested.

The judge adjourned till January 30 for the appearance of the Army and their legal counsel.

ISTANBUL (Reuters) – Turkey sought on Sunday to rescue surviving members of a container ship after pirates attacked it off the coast of Nigeria, killing one person and kidnapping 15, according to the Turkish and Azeri governments and state media.

Three crew members remained aboard the Turkish vessel, called Mozart, after the attack on Saturday morning in the Gulf of Guinea.

One crew member, an Azeri, was killed during the incident and 15 were kidnapped by the pirates, Turkey’s state-run Anadolu agency said. The ship, abandoned by the pirates and now headed toward Gabon’s coast, initially had a full crew of 19.

Turkish media cited Istanbul-based ship owner Boden company as saying the owners and operators of the vessel were abducted at gunpoint. It had been headed to Cape Town from Lagos. Boden was not immediately available.

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan spoke twice by phone with one of the captains who remained on the ship, Furkan Yaren, his office said, adding he directed officials on the rescue mission for the other kidnapped personnel.

Anadolu cited Yaren as saying he was “cruising blindly” toward Gabon with only the ship’s radar working. It was to arrive Sunday morning.

Yaren was also cited as saying the pirates beat crew members, and left him with an injured leg while another still aboard the ship had shrapnel wounds.

Azerbaijan’s foreign minister, Jeyhun Bayramov, confirmed on Twitter the death of the Azeri crew member in the “pirate attack” on the Turkish ship.

The vessel last reported its location about 200 kilometres (125 miles) south of Lagos, according to MarineTraffic website. It was to have arrived in South Africa a week later.