Home Blog Page 313

Armed bandits kill soldiers during attacks on bases in Kaduna, Niger

Armed bandits, on Tuesday, attacked military bases in Niger and Kaduna, killing an undisclosed number of soldiers.

At least four soldiers were reported wounded.

In a post on X on Wednesday, the army said its troops, in response, launched counterattacks, killing many bandits.

“On 24 June 2025, forward operating bases in the general areas of  Kwanar Dutse Mairiga and Boka Niger State, and Aungwan Turai Chikun LGA of Kaduna State, were attacked by bandits in a three-pronged attack,” the army said in a post on X on Wednesday.

It added, “In response, land and air component troops launched several counter-attacks that eliminated scores of bandits in the encounters.

“Sadly, some gallant warriors paid the supreme price in the day-long battles while four wounded in action troops are currently receiving treatment for their gunshot wounds.”

The military said clearance operations are underway in surrounding areas to pursue those who fled the scene.

They also added that additional updates about the bandits’ attacks would be provided later.

In the meantime, no fewer than 48 security operatives have been reportedly killed by rampaging bandits led by the notorious Bello Turji following an ambush near Shinkafi LGA in Zamfara.

Days ago, the Sokoto State government expressed readiness to negotiate with bandits, adding that the decision is not a show of weakness.

Breaking!!! Peter Obi laments as brother’s property is unlawfully demolished in Lagos

  • Aisha Yesufu speaks [Video]

Peter Obi, , the flagbearer of the Labour Party (LP) during the 2023 presidential election, has lamented the unlawful demolition of his brother’s property in Lagos.

Obi poured out his pain over the issue on Tuesday via a statement on his official X account, saying that lawlessness must stop for Nigeria to thrive.

“This morning, my youngest brother called me frantically, informing me that a group of people had invaded his company property in Ikeja, Lagos, and were demolishing the building,” Obi explained.

“He had just come in from Port Harcourt and was denied entry to the property by security men who told him the building was being pulled down. They even informed him that this demolition had started over the weekend.

“As a peace-loving Nigerian, he quickly started processing to go to court immediately, not knowing what must have resulted in this, as they moved fast to destroy his home without any restraint.”

He also shared this in a post on his Facebook page on Wednesday, June 25.

Obi said any society where lawlessness overrode the rule of law would not be a haven for investors adding that recent reports showing Nigeria’s human rights indicators had worsened merely highlighted severe shortfalls in government protection for civil liberties, personal security, and basic living standards.

Asserting that he was among the victims of human rights abuses in the country, Obi said:

“I know what I have been going through as a person in abuse of my human rights just because I contested a presidential election, which I have legitimate rights to do.

“So I imagine what small business owners, regular citizens, and vulnerable communities face every day,” he stated.

Reacting to how his brother’s property was being pulled down in the heart of Lagos without legal justification, he wondered, “If this level of lawlessness could happen to someone with a registered company and legitimate means, what hope would the ordinary Nigerian have?”

Narrating his brother’s ordeal, Obi said he got a call from him Tuesday morning that a group of people had invaded his property in Ikeja and were demolishing the building.

Obi said he rushed to Lagos from Abuja after the call on Tuesday morning and headed straight to the property and on his arrival, he was met by security people who tried to bar him from entering the property.

He stated that he humbly pleaded with them that the property belonged to his brother’s company, and from the records, the company had owned the property for over a decade but they told him they had a court judgement, which he immediately requested for.

“You would not believe that the court judgment they claim was issued against an unknown person, and squatters. I went further to ask about a demolition order or permit, and there was none,” Obi said.

“How do you sue an unknown person? How does a court issue a judgment in such a farce of a case? No one was served. No name was written. Yet they showed up with excavators and began destroying a structure that had stood for over 15 years.

“I immediately asked the excavators for the person who had sent them, and they said they didn’t know anyone, but they were only informed to come and demolish the house. I immediately told them to tell whoever it is that I would like to speak with them, if they can call my number, which I shared with the excavators, so that I can speak with whomever gave them the order to demolish the property.”

British man charged over ‘wedding’ a 9-year-old at Disneyland Paris was a convicted sexual offender

It turns out that the British man charged in connection with organising the “mock wedding” of a nine-year-old Ukrainian girl in Disneyland Paris was a convicted sexual offender.

French prosecutors said the 39-year-old man was a convicted sexual offender who is wanted in the UK. His name has not been made public.

He was arrested when police were called to the amusement park on Saturday morning at dawn by a “guest” who said he had been hired by the man to play the father of the bride.

The man said he had been paid €12,000 to play the role and that he only realised at the last minute that the “bride” was a child, according to a statement by Meaux prosecutor Jean-Baptiste Bladier.

The statement also said the Ukrainian girl – who arrived in France two days earlier – had not been a victim of either physical or sexual violence and had not been “forced to play the role” of bride.

A woman who says she was hired to play the role of a guest told BFMTV that when she arrived at Disneyland Paris she saw a “little girl dressed in white with her hair all done up and I saw a woman who picked her up in her arms… and I was shocked, I burst into tears”.

“When I saw [it was a] child – it was horrific.”

Around 100 French extras had been recruited to take part in the fake ceremony, which was to be filmed in a private capacity.

The British man had reportedly hired Disneyland Paris for several hours for the stunt, in which he was to play the role of the groom.

Preliminary findings also stated he had allegedly been “made-up professionally so that his face appeared totally different from his own”, according to the prosecutor.

Three other people – including the 41-year-old mother of the girl, a 24-year-old Latvian woman who was to play the bride’s sister and a 55-year-old Latvian man – were also arrested.

By Tuesday, only the British man was still being held by police.

The British man and the Latvian woman appeared in front of a judge in Meaux on 23 June, and the man was charged with fraud, breach of trust, money laundering, and identity theft and placed in pretrial detention.

The Latvian remains a witness in the investigation.

The prosecutor’s statement also said that Disneyland Paris had been “deceived” and that the organiser had used a fake Latvian ID to hire the venue. Disneyland Paris can be rented by members of the public outside opening hours.

BFMTV reported that the “mock wedding” may have cost organiser more than €130,000 (£110,000).

Mr Bladier’s statement said that the British man “was reportedly convicted in the past, including for offences of a sexual nature against minors.

“He is, as such, listed in the British database of sexual offenders and is currently wanted nationally by the judicial authorities of his country of origin due to a breach of the requirements deriving from said order.”

It is unclear, at this stage, what the point of the “stunt” was.

The investigation continues.

BBC

‘Diddy’ Combs’ Criminal Trial: Prosecution and defense teams rest

Sean “Diddy” Combs’ defense team rested after presenting a roughly 30-minute case and calling zero witnesses in the music mogul’s federal criminal trial. Earlier today, the prosecution rested its case, which took just over six weeks.

Prosecutors said they do not intend to present a rebuttal case. 

Click here to continue reading.

Ndokwa locals arrested for protesting blackout allege that police collected N400,000 for bail

Although the police in Delta State insist that the allegation is untrue, members of the Ndokwa ethnic nationality who were arrested and detained by the police while they were protesting the perennial blackout in their area maintain that they paid N400,000 for bail.

Last Monday, security operatives in the State apprehended 15 residents over their protest to alert the Federal Government that the people have lived in darkness for 20 years, notwithstanding that the government-owned Okpai Independent Power Plant, which supplies electricity to the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja and eight other states, is in their homeland.

The security officials also wounded some protesters and set ablaze several motorcycles belonging to residents who participated in the demonstration.

Sources told NDV that the police released some protesters after they paid various sums of money for bail.

Police didn’t collect money to release anybody — Edafe, PPRO

The Police Public Relations Officer (PPRO), Delta State Police Command, SP Bright Edafe, strongly debunked the claim that the police collected money to release any protester.

His words: “Nobody was released for money, please. Those arrested are to be charged in court. That is the directive of the Commissioner of Police.”

He also dismissed an allegation that the police set some protesters’ motorcycles ablaze, saying, “Firstly, the police did not burn motorcycles; the protesters had factions, and they attacked themselves.”

They collected N400,000 for bail — Ndokwa youth leader

An Ndokwa youth leader, who preferred anonymity, said, “Adoh Stanley, P. Venture, Adimali Endurance, Osuya Chukwunwike, Nzete Division, and Chineu are among those the police arrested.

“They were arrested in various locations, including one of the leaders named Stanley Adoh, who was arrested the next day at the Umuseti town hall.

“Our lawyer is making an effort to bail them out. However, some were released after they paid between N300,000 and N400,000 for bail. Mr. Stanley Adoh has been denied bail because of the non-payment of the N3 million demanded by the police. We hope that he will be arraigned in court on Monday (yesterday),” he said.

When asked why the peaceful demonstration descended into violence and led to the arrest of protesters and the use of tear gas, the youth leader replied, 

“The police started shooting tear gas at protesters to disperse them, but they left the spot and moved to another location before the anti-riot policemen arrived from Asaba and started shooting at random, destroying people’s motorcycles with armored vehicles and setting one on fire.”

A victim, who slept in a police cell for two days, last Wednesday, Peter, told NDV:

“I did not participate in the protest but drove to a newly opened hotel in Kwale, the headquarters of Ndokwa West Local Government Area, to collect money from the owner on June 16 (the day of the protest) when policemen savagely confronted and pounced on me.

“I deal in electronics; the owner of the hotel bought some electronics from me and owes me some money. On that day, I went there to see if he would give me part of the money because there was no market on that day.

“I drove my car to the hotel, and I met some soldiers with an army vehicle parked in front of the hotel. I greeted them, and they even asked me, ‘Anything for us? I said nothing, but I am coming. After parking my car inside the hotel, I emerged to greet the soldiers as the police team pulled up with their Hilux and Sienna cars.

“Many people fled when the police started chasing them, but I chose to stand with the soldiers because I did no wrong. However, one of them approached me, took hold of my waist, and claimed that I was among the demonstrators. Before I knew it, more people joined him, and they began beating me up after I said that I had only come out this evening.

“They used everything on me, including tear gas, a cutlass, and a battle axe. I’m not sure what I did to them, and I questioned whether someone had paid them to murder me because what they’re doing to me goes beyond the protest over the power outage. 

“A bystander who inquired as to why they were striking me with a battle axe was taken into custody.

“They pushed me into the Sienna vehicle after the beating. Inside the car, I noticed a lot of other people. After being carried to a junction, they motioned for us to descend, and we did. Before you know it, they asked us to return, so we did. They then transported us to the Ibusa Police Station.

“They transported us from Ibusa to the Rapid Response Squad before transferring us to the Asaba Police Headquarters.

“After two days in the cell, they collected N300,000 before releasing me on Wednesday.”

 Locals call on 

Oborevwori to step in

Residents said it was their right to protest and draw the government’s attention to the Ndokwa nation’s ongoing lack of electricity for roughly 20 years, and they urged Governor Oborevwori to step in.

“On June 16, 2025, Ndokwa sons and daughters came out to express our displeasure over the continued darkness in the land for more than 16 years, and I want to draw Governor Oborevwori’s attention to the inhumane treatment meted out,” stated Enete, an indigenous person.

“It is depressing to realize that, despite having a security force in Delta State that can use such weapons against peaceful demonstrators claiming their rights, kidnappings and herdsmen threats occur throughout the entire state.

“Why don’t these troops fight the criminals and return Delta State to its original purpose of being a land of milk and honey with immense peace and security?” 

“We urge His Excellency to stop the security forces in Delta State from using live ammunition against nonviolent demonstrators.

“You promised to protect us and promote development because we are your people. We look forward to your honoring this commitment, sir.

“Once more, we anticipate the unconditional release of those detained in Ndokwa land over the nonviolent demonstration, the cessation of ongoing arrests, and the acceleration of necessary measures to illuminate all communities in the Ndokwa nation, not just a portion of them. 

“Regardless of the provocations and inciting statements from the security forces under your command, the good people of the Ndokwa nation are awake and will not be deterred by any form of intimidation from continuing to demand their rights and privileges peacefully,” he declared.

The Bone of contention

The federal government, since 2005, inaugurated the Okpai-Oluchi IPP in Ndokwa land, which generates 480 megawatts of electricity to serve Abuja and other states. It excluded the host communities.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo assured the people, who expressed their grievances, that they would not be left out.

The IPP was later upgraded to provide a functional 930 megawatts of electricity, with an understanding to increase the power supply to host communities from 50 megawatts to 100 megawatts. This extension would include host community beneficiaries from the entire Delta North Senatorial District of Delta State.”

Twenty years later, the government has not completed the Okpai IPP step-down electricity project. The Ndokwa communities remain in darkness, and apparently, the government placed no urgency on the execution of the step-down.

However, former President Muhammadu Buhari approved the extension of electricity to the communities, and the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) awarded a N4.2 billion contract in 2022 for the construction of a 132KV double circuit transmission line to improve electricity supply to the area.

 To date, there have been unexplained delays in executing the contract project.

The people are angry about the abandonment, and the reality that their leaders allegedly show little or no concern for the suffering of the masses incenses them even more.

That triggered the June 16 protest, which some Ndokwa leaders attempted to stop, but the youths resisted their overtures and went ahead.

Senator Nwoko, Ezechi’s involvement

Senator Ned Nwoko (Delta North senatorial district) and  Nnamdi Ezechi (Ndokwa/Ukwuani federal constituency) have separately advocated an investigation into the abandoned Okpai-Oluchi IPP expansion project since last year.

Ezechi disclosed that the contractor, Saipem Contracting Nigeria Limited, and Agip Oil Company abandoned the expansion project, which commenced in 2017, resulting in the dilapidation of the infrastructure.

The House of Representatives heard that there was ambiguity surrounding the project’s contract amount, casting doubt on accountability and transparency in its execution.

This, coupled with the reluctance of plant operators to push aggressively for the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) because of the instability and fluctuations associated with the national grid, led the House to initiate an investigation early in 2024.

In response to Ezechi’s motion, the House of Representatives also decided to look into the $38.7 million NNPC–NAOC Joint Venture Okpai Independent Power Plant project Phase II’s abandonment. It directed its Committee on Power to examine the project’s termination by its two contractors, Saipem Contracting Nigeria Limited (SCNL) and Nigerian Agip Oil Company (NAOC).

The Ndokwa people have been marginalized for far too long, Senator Nwoko yelled in the Senate. He stated that the unexplained delays in Okpai IPP’s electricity step-down, which the people demanded during the June 16 protest, needed to be addressed.

 “Even though the Okpai Plant hosts several oil companies in its vicinity, including Nigeria Agip Oil Company, Sterling Exploration and Energy Production Company, Energia Limited, Midwestern Oil and Gas Limited, Pillar Oil Limited, Chorus Energy Limited, and more,” the senator claimed the residents of Ndokwa and the Delta North senatorial district have continued to lag significantly behind in terms of electricity supply.

 He went to see the Managing Director of Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) and the Minister of Power to ask them to help expedite the project’s completion, which could provide light to the entire Delta North.

 Findings

There appear to be discrepancies in the contract awards, as the contractors reportedly demanded contract variations, which prompted a petition to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) regarding the project.

 The slowed-down step-down of electricity from the Okpai IPP to the Ndokwa communities is because of price variations and the contractors’ request for additional funding. 

This has led to significant delays in completing the project and its subsequent failure to step down power to the host communities. There is currently no funding to execute the step-down project.

Residents of the Ndokwa East, West, and Ukwuani local government areas have been protesting, demanding the promised electricity supply from the Okpai-Oluchi power plant. The local communities have not benefited from the Okpai IPP for almost 20 years it has operated.

It was unacceptable, according to Senator Nwoko, that the Okpai Power Plant, which has increased its capacity to 980 megawatts, was not providing its host communities with electricity.

 While in the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), he had stated that certain foreign investors were prepared to carry out the projects, but they needed certain assurances from the government of Delta State.

His words: “There are financiers who have expressed willingness to fund these projects. They only require guarantees to recover their investments over a 20- to 24-year period. Once those guarantees are in place, the projects will proceed.”

Nwoko’s approach and intention that the Delta State government should finance the step-down, since the federal government had failed, did not go well with the governor, Rt. Hon. Oborevwori. He claimed the senator did not discuss the matter with him before making it public.

 What ought to be done by Tinubu and Oborevwori

Governor Oborevwori, who joined the All Progressives Congress (APC) like Nwoko, ought to have realized by now that Senator Nwoko was pressured to speak in this manner because the Okpai step-down demands a sense of urgency in the Ndokwa communities and other towns in the Delta North senatorial district.

For a comprehensive briefing and comprehension of the complexities surrounding the expansion project and the Okpai IPP step-down, the governor should extend an invitation to Senator Nwoko and Rt. Hon. Ezechi, who represents Ndokwa/Ukwuani in the House of Representatives, his deputy, and the leaders of the protesters.

 Although Oborevwori had already instructed Sir Monday Onyeme, his deputy, to deal with the situation, and the deputy governor had met with representatives of the Benin City Distribution Electricity Company (BEDC), it didn’t seem like the issue was yet distribution.

The transmission component is at issue. The governor can then schedule a meeting with President Tinubu, along with Senator Nwoko and Rt. Hon. Ezechi, to fully familiarize Mr. President with the specifics after gaining a thorough grasp of the problems and what needs to be done.

 Given the significance of the step-down project, President Tinubu should conduct a thorough analysis of the problems and guarantee the prompt restart and completion of the electricity step-down to the host communities by directing the EFCC to promptly submit its findings for the required action and allocating the funds required to finish the project.

For too long, the Ndokwa nation has been deprived of electricity on their territory. It is an embarrassment to the federal government that they must protest on June 16, nearly two decades later, in order to get the government to notice the anomaly. 

President Tinubu should prioritize the completion of the transmission double circuit line from the Okpa IPP to distribute electricity to the host communities.

 Governor Oborevwori must instruct the police in his state to drop the charges against the protesters who were arrested for demanding their rights. Both the injured citizens and those whose motorcycles and other property were damaged during the protest should receive compensation from the state government.

Source: Vanguard

Report reveals DSS in a secret memo alerted DHQ about Benue attacks, a month before incident

A leaked memo has revealed that the Department of State Services (DSS) wrote to Moses Gara, the Commander of Operation Whirl Stroke (OPWS), concerning planned attacks on communities in Benue and Nasarawa states in May.

The Defence Headquarters (DHQ) launched Operation Whirlwind Stroke in Benue in 2018.

The operation comprises the military, police, and DSS. On June 13, gunmen attacked Yelewata and Daudu communities in Guma LGA of Benue, killing over 200 people, including internally displaced persons (IDPs) and farmers.

According to a report by TheCable, in a leaked memo dated May 13, secret police said intelligence disclosed that suspected “Fulani militias” were planning to attack settlements in Awe LGA, Nasarawa state, and other communities “anytime soon”.

In the memo, DSS said its checks showed that the planned attack was to avenge an alleged seizure of some cows by the state government.

The communication identified the communities marked for attack as Mararaba, Jangargari, Wurgi, Gidan Antonny, Akon, Usende, Gaar, Vandikya, Chiata, Dooga, Gidan Baban Yara, Apelle, Pantaki, Kaambe and the Stadium area.

The memo also disclosed that there were plans to attack Tiv settlements and border communities between Nasarawa and Benue states by “suspected armed Fulani mercenaries”.

Yelweta, which later fell under an attack that claimed over 100 lives, was one of the communities identified in the memo.

“Reports indicate that they have been holding a series of meetings in Akpanaja, Rukuhi and Andori settlements in Doma LGA and have stationed their men at designated forests for a coordinated offensive against the Tiv communities,” the memo reads.

“The militias are currently hibernating [sic] at Amako and Igbabo forest located between Mkoma and Doka villages in Doma LGA and Ikom forest, located few kilometers away from Yelweta-Udei-Ukohol and Kadarko Railway in Keana LGA and are planning to attack Agatu, Gwer West/Gwer East/part of Makurdi LGA, as well as Guma and Loko Communities, all in Benue State.”

ARMY HELD HIGH LEVEL MEETING OVER BENUE ATTACKS — DAYS AFTER MEMO

In May, Moses Gara, commander of the OPWS, held a “high-level meeting” with leaders of the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders’ Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) in Makurdi, Benue capital, over the constant attacks in the state.

Lawal Osabo, acting assistant director of army public relations, 401 special forces brigade/sector 1 OPWS, in a statement issued on May 28, said the engagement brought together critical stakeholders, including security agencies and local government authorities.

Osabo said the meeting addressed persistent security threats such as farmer-herder conflicts, retaliatory attacks, kidnappings, and cattle rustling in Benue State.

He added that the concerns raised during the engagement would be tabled before the state government and relevant security agencies.

The Cable

US Supreme Court clears way for Trump to resume deportations of migrants

The United States Supreme Court has ruled in favour of the Donald Trump administration, allowing immigration authorities to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own, a controversial policy that had previously been blocked by a lower court, Al Jazeera reported.

In a brief order issued on Monday, the court’s conservative majority lifted a restriction requiring that migrants be allowed to challenge such deportations in court.

The ruling came without a detailed explanation, in line with the court’s typical handling of emergency docket cases. All three liberal justices dissented.

The decision came as Trump intensified his administration’s crackdown on undocumented immigration, vowing to remove millions of people living unlawfully in the US.

Among those affected are migrants from countries such as Myanmar, Vietnam, and Cuba, who have been convicted of violent crimes and could not be repatriated directly to their countries of origin.

In May, eight individuals were placed on a deportation flight intended for South Sudan.

The flight was diverted to a U.S. naval base in Djibouti after US District Judge Brian Murphy intervened.

He had previously ruled that individuals facing deportation must have the chance to present evidence that they could face torture or death if removed to a third country.

In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the court’s action could place “thousands” at risk.

“The government has made clear in word and deed that it feels itself unconstrained by law, free to deport anyone anywhere without notice or an opportunity to be heard,” she wrote.

Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined her dissent.

Legal advocates also condemned the ruling. Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, described the consequences as “horrifying,” vowing to continue legal challenges on behalf of affected migrants.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security hailed the court’s decision as a “major win for the safety and security of the American people” but did not provide further comment.

The Trump administration has entered into agreements with countries such as Panama and Costa Rica to accept deported migrants, citing difficulties in returning individuals to their home countries.

South Sudan, the intended destination for the May flight, has faced persistent conflict and instability since its independence in 2011.

Judge Murphy, appointed by President Joe Biden, emphasised in his earlier ruling that while deportations to third countries are not prohibited, individuals must be given a fair chance to argue that such transfers could subject them to serious harm.

The ruling is the latest in a series of legal disputes over immigration policy during Trump’s second term.

In another case presided over by Murphy, a gay Guatemalan man who was deported to Mexico despite fearing violence there was later returned to the US after it was determined his removal violated federal protections.

PUNCH

Recommending Oba Erediauwa to President Tinubu

By Suyi Ayodele

Everyone has someone he adores. I have many such people; men and women who made or are making meaningful impacts. One of such men was Omo N’Oba N’Edo Uku Akpolokpolo, Oba Erediauwa, Oba of Benin (22 June 1923 – April 2016). May his soul continue to rest peacefully in the midst of his ancestors. Isee! The Oba was an epitome of what a good leader should be. Diplomatic, humane with a deep milk of kindness running in his veins, Oba Erediauwa was the people’s Oba. He was close to his subjects and drew strangers to himself, too.

People, from time immemorial, do funny things to get closer to their leaders. In some extreme cases, some do weird things to get noticed by their rulers or leaders alike. A woman and a man did something weird and funny to get the attention of Oba Erediauwa a few years ago.

Some years into the reign of Oba Erediauwa (1979-2016), a woman used to come into the palace chanting two sentences to wit: Emwenoba romwonu (I have something to say to the Oba), and Edohia gha hena humwenhe (Benin must hear what they are doing to me). She would target whenever the Oba was within earshot to utter the statements and would leave.

Initially, Oba Erediauwa pretended not to hear. But like the story of the persistent widow in the Bible as recorded in Luke 18:1-8, the woman kept coming to the palace until the Omo N’Oba could no longer resist her. So, one day, Oba Erediauwa asked her to be brought forward and asked her what she wanted to tell the king and what she wanted Benin to hear.

The woman, who hailed from Kwale, Delta State, narrated how her husband, also a Kwale man, died and was buried in accordance with Kwale tradition and Benin custom of Igiogbe. Despite those rites of passage fulfilled by the eldest son of the man, the extended family of the deceased wanted to chase her and her children out of the house which the deceased husband built and where he lived, died and was buried. Then she asked Oba Erediauwa if that was right.

Omo N’Oba Erediauwa wasted no time. He settled the matter and assigned some senior palace chiefs to follow the woman home and restore her rights and those of her children to their late father’s estate. Till date, nobody has ever gone to trouble the woman in her matrimonial home. The Oba’s pronouncements, especially on land matters, are final. It is not for fun that the Benin people say: Aiguobasimwin-otor (You don’t drag land with the Oba). But what if that woman had no access to Oba Erediauwa? Think about that while I share the second short story.

Again, a man was brought before Oba Erediauwa by some palace functionaries. The crime the man committed was that he inscribed a chieftaincy title on his car and was in the habit of driving the car frequently around the King’s Square otherwise known as Ring Road. After repeated warnings to the culprit to remove the inscription failed, he was ‘arrested’ and brought before the Omo N’Oba.

After listening to the complaint against the man, Oba Erediauwa asked those who ‘arrested’ him to state which offence the accused had committed. The palace functionaries explained that the title the man claimed did not exist in the Benin Kingdom. But more importantly, he must give the name of the Omo N’Oba who conferred the chieftaincy title on him.

Turning to the accused, Oba Erediauwa asked him to respond to the issues raised by the palace chiefs. The man, paying obeisance to the Oba simply said in Benin Language: “Ima yegbemwen-yunu vbiayasekenuye sir. “ The simple interpretation is: “If I had not fooled myself, how could I have ever reached your presence sir?”

Omo N’Oba Erediauwa looked at his chiefs and looked back at the man. He asked his chiefs if they heard what the accused man said, and they answered in the affirmative. The Oba asked again if there was still anything the chiefs wanted to know, and they chorused “No”.

Turning to the man again, Oba Erediauwa prayed for him that now that he (the accused) had fulfilled his life ambition of standing in the presence of the Omo N’Oba, may he prosper and live long. The king rose. The man simply went outside and removed the sticker on his car and drove off.

To see his king, the man conferred on himself a non-existent chieftaincy title. Thank God for the wisdom with which Oba Erediauwa handled the message. The monarch was sensitive enough to know that there were many of his subjects out there who longed to see him, but protocols, traditions and custom would not allow them.

The Omo N’Oba was knowledgeable enough to realise that a lot of commoners would do anything from the funny to the weird and the absurd, just to catch a glimpse of him. These two occasions were just a few of how many times the monarch descended from his high throne to meet with those at the bottom of the ladder in his kingdom. Oba Erediauwa knew that without the people, there is no kingdom. He was a monarch with the mantra: the people first!

An incident close to these happened in Kaduna last week when Citizen Mohammed Umar, whom the Kaduna Police called a ‘madman’, attempted to get close to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on the podium where the President was addressing the dignitaries that were present in the event, the number one man had with Kaduna people.

The narratives that followed the short video of that incident are not complimentary ones for the President. The commentaries show the feelings in the land. The police responded by saying that the narratives were by the enemies of the President. Honestly, I believe the police. President Tinubu himself must believe the police, too. With the way Tinubu has handled the lives of Nigerians in the last two years, he has successfully acquired a horde of enemies!

But if I were President Tinubu, I would be wary of those who call themselves my friends. The President is no doubt surrounded by too many friends who don’t tell him the truth. Those are men and women who are members of the Hallelujah orchestra; the máa jó lo mò ún wo èhìn e (keep dancing, I am watching your back) gang. Those are the ones who tell the president how much Nigerians love him and his non-existent or pain-inflicting reforms and how Nigerians wished they had had a Tinubu long before now!

The President’s friends he should be wary of are the ones who hailed him when he announced, to the embarrassment of the entire nation, that he could not travel to Yelwata, where over 200 Nigerians were slaughtered and roasted last week by bandits because of “the rain, flood and bad road!”

I listened to President Tinubu utter those words; those flimsy excuses from the Commander-in-Chief, and all I could say was sè e ùngbó òrò burúkú lénu eye (hope you can hear terrible chirp from the mouth of the bird)? What did Tinubu go to do in Benue State if he could not get to Yelwata? Who did he go to ‘sympathise’ with? What happened to the road? What is the duty of a government if it cannot fix roads and control erosion? If the President needed to go to Yelwata to canvass for votes, would “the rain, erosion and bad road” be hindrances?

Was it not the same rain that the Benue State Government pushed school children to, to welcome Tinubu? What is the value of a president that could not defy the rain, brace the erosion and suffer bumpy rides to reach Yelwata where those God has put under his watch were slaughtered? How much was spent on the reception for the President in Makurdi, and how much would it have cost to do emergency palliative work on the Yelwata Road? Did the government not clear the bushes on the roads the president would use within Makurdi?

And come to think of it. Are the choppers in the Presidential Air Fleet (PAF) bad? Not a single of the five helicopters “tailored for VIP transport” is functional enough to convey the President to Yelwata and back?

What President Tinubu did in Benue State is a bad example of how a leader should not treat the dead or demean the living. It is also a negative testimony of how distant our leaders are from the people they pretend to lead. This is why we will continue to have the likes of Mohammed Umar of Kaduna who are ready to do anything to catch a glimpse of the president.

Incidentally, President Tinubu is not alone in this malady of distant rulership. Check your neighbourhood and ask how many times you get to see your councillors. How many local government chairmen are accessible to their constituents? Once they have the prefix, “Honourable”, do we get to see our legislators? How many so-called “ Distinguished “ senators walk the same paths with the commoners once they ascend those lofty heights? Here in Nigeria, the convoy of a governor is as long as the entire length of the Niger Bridge in Onitsha!

That is why our leaders don’t feel what we feel. They don’t go to the marketplaces; they don’t attend the shambolic death houses they call hospitals for us commoners. Protocol men and women are there to screen us when we approach them. Overzealous security agents are handy to rough handle the common men that try to get close to ‘His Excellency.

I saw how startled President Tinubu was when Umar made that weird attempt in Kaduna. Nothing wrong in that; the President is a human being. But his gesture sent a strong message to me. I don’t know who shares the same feeling. President Tinubu was momentarily rattled in that video! He was scared; he was fazed! It was written all over him! So, the rich also get scared? Can someone help tell the President that that is the common food of poor Nigerians; we live perpetually in fear!

Seriously, President Tinubu has something to learn from that incident. A good leader needs not fear by the appearance of a mere ‘madman’, especially when he is in the midst of his people. Thank God, Umar, as we were told, was just a fanatical supporter of Tinubu. And he was not armed. So, if the President was that scared seeing one of his own approaching him, what would he do if he were to be in a hostile environment?

The lesson here is not for President Tinubu alone. Our leaders should learn how to lead well and make life more abundant for the people. The streets are not smiling, as we say in our usual street lingo. Things are not adding up for the common man. The next few months are going to be tough. This is not my prediction; Lasisi Olagunju said so in his Monday Line Column of yesterday (Monday, June 23, 2025)

While concluding the column: “Let Tehran, Tel Aviv bleed, Abuja will pay the price,” the columnist wrote: “They pull the trigger, the mugus of the world pay the price.” Olagunju said this with the valid projections that the war in the Middle East would gravely affect the African continent. I could not agree less.

When the pangs of the ongoing madness in the Middle East begin to take its toll on us, our leaders will witness more weird behaviours from the citizens. The poor will get more desperate. And in gatherings like we had in Kaduna last week, more’ mad’ fanatics of our leaders will show up. The security aides will have more work to do. and, who knows, the number of the ‘mad fanatics’ may one day become too large for the security aides to rein in!

But we can avert that. Our leaders can drink water and drop the cups peacefully if only they will do the right thing. What I prescribe here is that the leaders should get close to the people. Feel their pains, share in their agony and stop giving excuses of “the rain, flood and bad road.” It is not an honour for the chief hunter to announce that he was chased out of the forest by a wild animal! Bad road is too cheap an excuse for the President not to visit the victims of a genocide as we had in Yelwata.

It is not too late. Let the President begin to ameliorate the pain in the land. Let Tinubu begin to give human face to his governance. Should the prices of crude go up with the war in the Middle East without corresponding measures to cushion the effects on hapless Nigerians who will be made to buy petrol at higher prices, many ‘mad’ men and women; those who adore and those who hate, will approach presidential and gubernatorial podiums with the vociferous lunacy birthed exclusively by either anger or hunger!

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

Aribisala V Amcon and Sowemimo V Amcon: The many faces of technical justice

By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa

There are many sides to justice, as we have all come to understand the term today and unless you are intrinsically involved in some of the cases, you may wonder how the wheels of justice roll. In these two court cases involving very Senior members of the Bar, we see justice playing out in its different forms.

In one of the cases, a lawyer worked tirelessly to recover money for AMCON but he was not satisfied with what he was paid as his legal fees. In court, however, technical justice robbed him of his claims purely on the basis of the mode of exercise of the constitutional right of appeal. In the second case, AMCON desired to have the Senior Counsel give account of his stewardship as receiver/manager, but the issue of the mode of signing the writ of summons to commence the case delayed AMCON’s claims, moving from the trial court in 2015 when it was filed ultimately to the Supreme Court in 2025 when judgment was eventually delivered, spanning a period of ten years.

These two cases, both involving AMCON, were not determined on their merits as they dwelt on technical points of law regarding the jurisdiction of the court. This is the situation with many cases that are pending in the courts, where technical issues of law have dwarfed the merits of the cases, with the resultant effect of robbing people of justice. This has in turn led to the call for all our courts to adopt the procedure of Election Tribunals, whereby all objections are incorporated into the substantive case to be determined at the end of the trial. The facts of these two cases are stated here as reported in the law reports.

ARIBISALA V AMCON (NO.1)

The respondent sued the appellant at the Federal High Court, Lagos in relation to his receivership/managership of Delta Steel Company Plc. The respondent sought inter alia an order that the appellant give account of all the funds and properties that came into his possession by virtue of his being receiver/manager of the company. After the respondent served its writ of summons, statement of claim and accompanying documents, the appellant entered a conditional appearance and filed a motion on notice seeking extension of time to bring an application under Order 29 rule 1 of the Rules of the court; a deeming order; an order striking out the writ of summons; and an order dismissing or striking out the suit on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.

The application was premised on the ground that the writ of summons was not properly issued which rendered the suit incompetent and deprived the trial court of jurisdiction. The appellant averred and contended that the writ of summons was incompetent because it was not signed by the respondent or its counsel; and that the signature of the respondent’s counsel was not on the reverse side of the writ but on a loose sheet of paper attached thereto. In opposition, the respondent filed a counter-affidavit and a written address and in response, the appellant filed a reply on points of law.

After taking arguments of counsel, the trial court in its ruling held that the writ was prepared as prescribed by its Rules and that the same was signed by the respondent’s counsel. Consequently, it dismissed the application. Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal, which dismissed the appeal. The Court of Appeal held in its judgment that there was nothing in the Rules of the trial court that mandated the name and signature of counsel to be on the reverse side of the writ; and that the writ of summons complied with the provisions of the Rules. Still dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the appeal.

Form of writ of summons –

By virtue of Order 3 rules 4, 11(1), 12 (3) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2009, except in cases in which different forms are provided for in the Rules, writ of summons shall be in Form 1 with such modifications or variations as circumstances may require. An originating process shall be prepared by a plaintiff or the plaintiff’s legal practitioner and shall be clearly printed in black ink on white opaque A4 paper of high quality. Each copy shall be signed by the legal practitioner or by a plaintiff where the plaintiff sues in person and shall be certified after verification by the registrar as being a true copy of the original process filed.

The provisions provide that a writ of summons shall be in Form 1 with such modifications or variations as circumstances may require and also set out the endorsements that a writ of summons must contain. There is nothing in the provisions that forbids a writ of summons from exceeding two pages and there is nothing therein that states that the signature of counsel or other endorsement must be on the reverse side of the writ. Neither counsel nor court is permitted to read or import into the provisions of a law or enactment what it does not contain, in order to suit his or its own desires. In the instant case, the appellant’s counsel attempted to import or read into the provisions what is not contained therein. The Supreme Court will not endorse such an aberration.

When previous decision can be distinguished-

Where relevant laws have changed since a previous decision, the same can be distinguished from the latter case. A previous decision is not to be departed from or followed where the facts or the law applicable in that previous case are or is distinguishable from the facts or law in the latter case. The doctrine of stare decisis is based on the relevant likeness between two cases – the previous case and the one before the court. In this case, the case of Alatede v. Falode which the appellant placed heavy reliance on was distinguishable from the instant case as the facts of both cases were worlds apart and the provisions interpreted in the said case are different from the provisions of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2009, the rules of court in force at all time material to the application that led to the appeal.

Per JAURO, J.S.C. at page 36, para. A-G:

“The decision in Alatede’s case relied on by the appellant was rendered in 1966, more than half a century ago or one could say almost six decades ago. A reasonable legal practitioner should ordinarily realise that the Rules of court upon which the case was decided would contain markedly distinct provisions from the Rules in force at the time the action before the trial Federal High Court was initiated. One would have expected counsel to have studied the case he so heavily relied on to see if the facts are similar to the facts of this case. The law is not static, it is dynamic. As society develops, so does the law. In order to ensure substantial justice, the courts continue to do away with restrictive rules of procedure in favour of doing substantial justice. This is what is reflected in the difference between the Rules in Alatede’s case and the 2009 Rules of the Federal High Court. It is alarmingly absurd to attempt to import the provisions of Rules applicable to proceedings conducted more than half a century or almost more than six decades ago, to Rules of court made in 2009.”

SOWEMIMO V AMCON

The appellants instituted an action against the respondent seeking a declaration that they are entitled to their full professional fees of 5 per cent of judgment debt which amounted to N5,350,000,000 as at May 2014 being the amount recovered; an order entering judgment against the respondent in the sum of N191 million being the balance of the professional fees due to them; and the costs of the litigation. The appellants’ case was that they were appointed joint solicitors by Fidelity Bank Plc in December 2010 and instructed to recover a debt arising from a loan facility of US$7,500,000 granted to a company and its personal guarantees. The appellants initiated a recovery action against them and after a two-year trial, judgment was entered in favour of the bank in the sum of US$12,926,931 or N1,977,820,556.22 with interest at the rate of 21% per annum. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgment. However, the respondent bought the debt from Fidelity Bank Plc without the appellants’ knowledge.

The judgment debtors filed a notice of appeal at the Supreme Court and the appellants began making moves to prosecute the appeal. Subsequently, the appellants heard that the judgment debtors commenced settlement with the respondent and every effort was made to ascertain the veracity of the information but no response was received. The appellants were later notified by Fidelity Bank Plc that the debt had been settled and that the respondent had taken over the responsibility for counsel’s fees. The appellants averred that they were paid the sum of N61,961,380 which was 25% of what they should be paid as professional fees. They also claimed that all efforts to confirm the money recovered by the respondent from the judgment debtors so that they can adequately calculate their professional fees proved futile as they (the appellants) had agreed to take 5% of the recovered sum. The appellants contended that they are entitled to take 5 per cent of N5.35 billion as of May 2014.

The respondent, on the other hand, averred in their statement of defence that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the suit in which a declaration and an order were sought challenging the validity of the respondent’s executive and administrative action and decision and also, that the appellants had no reasonable cause of action. The respondent asserted that it owed no duty to the appellants to notify them of its transaction with the judgment debtors and it paid the appellants 5% of the sum recovered from the judgment debtors and not 5% of the judgment debt which the judgment debtors were still disputing as at the time the matter was negotiated out of court. The respondent stated that they had the full authority under law to negotiate with judgment debtors and arrive at an agreement without having to notify the appellants.

At the conclusion of hearing, the trial court entered judgment in favour of the appellants. It declared that the appellants were entitled to 5% of N5,350,000,000 which was the judgment debt as at May 2014 and it awarded the sum of N191,000,000 in favour of the appellants. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court, the respondent appealed to the Court of Appeal. In its judgment, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial court. Aggrieved, the appellants appealed to the Supreme Court. The respondent filed a notice of preliminary objection seeking the striking out of the appellants’ notice of appeal for being defective. It contended that grounds 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 of the notice were of mixed law and facts and thus the Supreme Court had no jurisdiction to entertain it by virtue of section 233 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended); and that grounds 3.6 did not flow from the judgment being appealed against and thus it was incompetent.

When appeal from decision of Court of Appeal to Supreme Court lies with leave:

The right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of the Court of Appeal as of right is provided under section 233(2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). Other than as provided therein, the National Assembly has not made any law enlarging the scope of the right of appeal as of right. In all other cases, the appeal must be with either the leave of the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, as provided in section 233 (3) of the 1999 Constitution. Where the grounds of appeal are either of facts alone or of mixed law and facts, they can only be countenanced if filed with the leave of court first sought and obtained.

The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court on questions of fact only exists where there has been leave of the Court of Appeal or of the Supreme Court. No appeal on questions of fact lies to the court without such leave. In other words, where a question of fact has been brought before this court without leave, the court has no jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine an appeal premised on grounds of fact or mixed law and fact unless the leave of court has been sought and obtained. In the instant case, the grounds of appeal raised questions of mixed law and facts. Therefore, the appeal was incompetent and liable to be struck out.

Per IDRIS, J.S.C. at page 614, paras. A-D:

“There is no gain saying that this preliminary objection was properly grounded on the constitutional provisions on what makes a valid appeal upon which the jurisdiction of the court can be predicated upon. Having gone into the objection in relation to the complaints proffered, there is no hope in sight upon which this appeal can survive, being an appeal with grounds of mixed law and or facts the mandate of the Constitution cannot be circumvented without the leave of the Court of Appeal or this court. The absence of that leave has rendered this appeal incompetent as such leave is a condition precedent for a valid appeal, thereby robbing this court of the jurisdiction to entertain this matter.”

25-year-old man gets 3 years for breaking into university female hostel and attempting to rape student

A 25-year-old man, Raji Ridwan has been sentenced to three years of imprisonment with hard labour for attempted rape by an Osun State Chief Magistrate Court sitting in Ila-Orangun.

The court on Friday, June 20, passed its judgment following Ridwan’s arrest by operatives of the Osun Amotekun Corps.

The Operatives had investigated his unlawful entry into a female hostel at the Federal University of Science, Ila-Orangun, where he attempted to sexually attack a female student.

Ridwan, according to court proceedings, sneaked into the hostel at night and tried to assault one of the residents. However, the victim fought back and raised the alarm, which alerted neighbours and fellow students, prompting them to come to her aid.

He fled the scene but was apprehended shortly after, during a coordinated manhunt organised by the Osun Amotekun Corps. The suspect reportedly confessed to the crime upon his arrest and was arraigned before Magistrate Ibukun Adeniran on a single count of attempted rape. He pleaded guilty to the charge.

During the trial, the prosecution presented Ridwan’s confessional statement through the investigating officer from the Osun Amotekun Corps, along with the testimony of a key witness. Magistrate Adeniran ruled that Ridwan’s actions violated Section 359 of the Criminal Code, Cap 34, Volume 2, Laws of Osun State of Nigeria, 2002. She subsequently convicted him and sentenced him to three years of imprisonment with hard labour, without the option of a fine.

In response to the court’s decision, the Osun Amotekun Corps reaffirmed its commitment to ensuring the safety of lives and property, particularly in addressing sexual and gender-based violence throughout the state. The corps praised the victim’s bravery and the vigilance of residents, whose swift intervention led to the arrest and successful prosecution of the offender.

TIPS