The Chairperson of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Abuja (Unity Bar) Law Week Committee, Dr. Princess Chukwuani, has announced that the 2025 edition will take place from 18th June- 22nd June 2025.

According to Chukwuani, “This year’s Law Week promises to be an exciting and enriching experience for all participants.

“The theme for this year’s Law Week is ‘UNLOCKING OPPORTUNITIES: NEW FRONTIERS.”

“This theme is carefully chosen to focus on exploring new avenues and opportunities in the legal profession.

“We look forward to seeing you at the NBA Abuja Branch Law Week 2025! “

#Nbaabujalawweek2025

#Lawweek2025

#Nbaabuja2025

#Dontmissthemasterpiece2025.

Ondo State is grappling with a surge in crime, particularly kidnapping, which has been linked to the proliferation of arms ahead of the November 2024 governorship election and the critical shortage of police patrol vehicles, SaharaReporters has learned.

Security sources revealed that as much as 80 percent of police stations in the state lack patrol vehicles, leaving large parts of Ondo without an active security presence. This absence of mobility has left several communities vulnerable to criminals, especially kidnappers, who now operate with impunity.

“Ondo State has come under the heavy crime of kidnapping because 80 per cent of police stations don’t have patrol vehicles, and the governor doesn’t seem to care,” a senior police source told SaharaReporters.

Election-Related Proliferation Of Arms

Security sources cited the last governorship election, held on November 16, 2024, as a key factor in the rise in crime. According to insiders, a large cache of arms was smuggled into the state ahead of the polls to arm political thugs.

“The election Ondo State had on November 16, 2024, is a major contributor to the security challenges facing the state now,” a security source said.

“Prior to the election, a lot of arms were brought in for political thugs. There was a proliferation of arms all over. That is the major factor.”

The source added that, unlike other states facing similar security issues, Ondo lacks basic security infrastructure such as surveillance drones and tracking devices.

“Other states where they have security challenges make provisions for drones, trackers and certain equipment to tackle security — but in Ondo State, the police don’t have such facilities,” one of the sources noted.

Porous Borders Fuel Arms Smuggling

Concerns have also been raised over Nigeria’s porous borders, which have made it easy for weapons and other contraband to enter the country illegally.

“I don’t think there is anything that anybody wants to bring into this country that they cannot bring in. Most times, the borders are very porous,” a security official disclosed.

The ease with which arms are smuggled across the borders, especially during political seasons, has emboldened criminal networks and deepened the state’s security crisis.

Governor’s Efforts ‘Inadequate’

In 2024, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa procured seven Toyota Hilux vehicles for the police and other security agencies. However, police sources have described the effort as grossly inadequate, given the size of the state and the number of police divisions.

“Last year, the state government bought seven Toyota Hilux which were given to the police and other security agencies, but it is not enough when the police alone have almost 55 divisions,” a police source explained.

Covering rural areas, where most kidnapping cases have been reported, remains a challenge due to the shortage of patrol vehicles.

“Toyota Hilux vehicles are very expensive now because one unit should be close to N70 million to N80 million. The police alone will need at least 30 Hilux vehicles to help solve the problem, let alone other security agencies,” another source noted.

Amotekun Blamed For Reduced Attention To Police

Some security sources believe that the creation of the Western Nigeria Security Network, also known as Amotekun, has diverted state resources and attention away from the police.

“I believe that when Amotekun was established, the government diverted too much attention to Amotekun at the neglect of the Nigeria Police Force,” a senior police officer said.

While Amotekun has been instrumental in tackling local security issues, its limited resources have prevented it from adequately filling the gaps left by the underfunded police force.

Ondo Lagging Behind Neighbouring States

Sources noted that neighbouring Ogun and Ekiti states have strengthened their security infrastructure more effectively. Nearly all police divisions in Ekiti reportedly have new patrol vehicles, enabling them to respond swiftly to criminal activities.

In contrast, the shortage of vehicles in Ondo has left many communities without adequate security coverage, particularly in remote areas where criminal gangs have established strongholds.

Security Experts Call For Urgent Intervention

Security analysts have warned that without urgent action to address the shortage of patrol vehicles and curb the flow of illegal arms, the state’s security situation will deteriorate further.

“There is an urgent need to provide at least 30 new patrol vehicles for the police force to ensure proper coverage of the state,” a security expert advised.

Calls have also been made for the state government to invest in modern security infrastructure, including surveillance drones, tracking devices, and intelligence-gathering equipment.

“Other states where they have security challenges have adopted modern strategies, but Ondo is yet to take such steps,” a source said.

With kidnapping and other violent crimes on the rise, the people of Ondo are looking to the state government and security agencies for swift and decisive action to restore peace and security.

Ondo State has recently experienced a series of violent incidents and security challenges that have raised concerns among residents and authorities alike.

Communal Clashes And Land Disputes

In January 2025, a violent clash erupted between the Owake and Ebo communities in Akoko South West Local Government Area, resulting in the deaths of two individuals and injuries to many others.

The conflict, rooted in unresolved land and boundary disputes, led to the destruction of several properties, including the palace of the Asin of Oka-Odo and an event hall.

In November 2024, ahead of the state’s governorship election, political tensions escalated in Idanre community. Members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) were reportedly attacked by suspected political thugs, leading to injuries and heightened fears of election-related violence.

Kidnapping And Criminal Activities

The state has also witnessed a resurgence in kidnapping and other criminal activities. In response, the state government engaged a private security firm to address the growing concerns of farmers threatened by hoodlums on their farmlands.

These incidents underscore the multifaceted security challenges confronting Ondo State, ranging from communal disputes and political violence to kidnapping and general criminal activities.

In recent days, Akure, the capital of Ondo State, witnessed significant unrest following the tragic killing of five farmers by suspected herdsmen in the Aba Oyinbo community of Akure North Local Government Area.

This incident, which occurred in the early hours of Wednesday, March 19, 2025, sparked widespread protests among local farmers and residents.

According to reports, armed assailants invaded the Aba Oyinbo community, opening fire and resulting in the deaths of five individuals.

This attack came on the heels of a similar incident just two weeks prior, where gunmen reportedly killed at least 14 people in four neighbouring communities—Ademekun, Aba Pastor, Aba Sunday, and Alajido—all within the same local government area.

Protests And Public Outcry

In response to the killings, a large number of aggrieved farmers and community members marched to the Governor’s Office in Akure, chanting solidarity songs and demanding immediate action from the state government to address the escalating violence.

The protesters expressed frustration over the increasing insecurity and the perceived lack of adequate response from authorities.

The recent killings are part of a troubling pattern of violence in Ondo State, particularly targeting farming communities. The persistent attacks have not only led to loss of lives but have also instilled fear among residents, disrupting agricultural activities and threatening the livelihoods of many. 

• As judge recuses self from her suit after Akpabio’s petition

The suspended Kogi Central’s representative at Nigeria’s Senate, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, has formally lodged a petition with the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee, seeking the disbarment of Senator Nedamwen Bernards Imasuen from the Nigerian Bar. 

This is even as a judge of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday recused himself from hearing a suit filed her suspension by the Senate.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu’s decision followed a petition from Senate President Godswill Akpabio, who questioned his impartiality in the case.

The case was originally scheduled for a hearing, but when the court clerk called it, Hie Lordship announced his withdrawal.

Senato Natasha’s petition against Imasuen highlighted allegations of professional misconduct, claims that Senator Imasuen was previously disbarred from the New York Bar for fraud, misappropriation of client funds, and failure to respond to disciplinary authorities.

According to the petition, Senator Imasuen was permanently disbarred by the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, on May 10, 2010, following a complaint by Daphne Slyfield, a client who accused him of misappropriating legal fees. 

The court found him guilty of multiple breaches of professional conduct, leading to the revocation of his legal license in the United States.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan alleged that, despite his disbarment, Senator Imasuen relocated to Nigeria and continued presenting himself as a legal practitioner while venturing into politics. 

He was eventually elected as the Senator representing Edo South Senatorial District and appointed Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, a role requiring unimpeachable integrity.

The petition further stated that Senator Imasuen failed to disclose his disbarment in his FORM EC-9 – Particulars of Personal Information submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) before contesting for public office. 

According to Sahara Reporters, the legal action comes in the wake of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s six-month suspension from the Senate, which she claims was orchestrated by Senator Imasuen in defiance of a court order.

On March 4, 2025, the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Obiora Atuegwu Egwatu, issued an interim order restraining the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions from proceeding with an investigation against her regarding alleged misconduct during a Senate plenary session on February 20, 2025. 

Despite being served the court order on March 5, 2025, Senator Imasuen and his committee proceeded with the investigation, leading to her suspension on March 6, 2025.

In her petition, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan described Senator Imasuen’s actions as contempt of court, citing Rule 31 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners (2023), which mandates that lawyers must always treat the court with respect, dignity, and honour. 

She further accused him of procedural bias, stating that he dismissed her petition alleging sexual harassment against Senate President Godswill Akpabio on procedural grounds, while actively pursuing disciplinary action against her.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan argued that Senator Imasuen’s defiance of a subsisting court order and his unethical conduct violate Rule 1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct (2023), which mandates lawyers to uphold the rule of law and maintain high professional standards. 

She contended that under Rule 74(1) of the RPC, 2023, Senator Imasuen’s actions constitute professional misconduct, warranting his removal from the Roll of Barristers and Solicitors of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

As the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee commences its review of the petition, the case is expected to spark significant legal and political debate, particularly regarding the ethical obligations of public officials who are also members of the legal profession.

During hearing at the Federal High Court on Tuesday, Justice Egwuatu said that the case file would be returned to the Chief Judge for reassignment to another judge.

The development puts another spanner in the works of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suit, which she hoped would be promptly resolved to possibly cut short the six months suspension imposed on her by the Senate.

It is the latest in the series of drawbacks the suit has suffered in within a week, including the judge’s 19 March ruling reversing his earlier 4 March order halting the Senate’s diaciplinary process against her.

The suit also faces the prospect of an indefinite adjournment even if it is promptly resigned to another judge, with the Court of Appeal set to hear Senator Akpabio’s application for stay of proceedings of the Federal High Court regarding the suspended senator’s case.

Background

Justice Egwuatu had previously issued an interim order on 4 March, halting the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions from proceeding with disciplinary action against Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan for allegedly violating Senate rules.

The judge gave the restraining injunction before the disciplinary process reached a decision.

The judge ordered the Senate committee to suspend the disciplinary process until the substantive suit was determined.

Furthermore, he gave the defendants 72 hours to show cause why an interlocutory injunction should not be granted to stop the Senate from probing Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan without affording her due process, as outlined in the Nigerian Constitution, the Senate Standing Orders 2023, and the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act.

Egwuatu also permitted substituted service of court processes on the defendants.

He ordered that court documents be delivered to the Clerk of the National Assembly, pasted within the National Assembly premises, and published in two national newspapers.

His 4 March rulings were based on an ex parte application and an affidavit of urgency filed by Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Akpabio’s appeal

Meanwhile, Senate President Akpabio has been challenging the legal proceedings.

PREMIUM TIMES earlier reported that Mr Akpabio filed an application at the Court of Appeal in Abuja on 20 March, seeking to halt the Federal High Court’s hearing of Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case.

He also sought permission to appeal an interlocutory ruling delivered by Mr Egwuatu on 10 March.

Mr Akpabio’s legal team, led by Kehinde Ogunwumiju, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), argued that the lower court’s decision to hear all pending applications together contradicted established legal principles.

Sahara Reporters/Premium Times

• Alleges that the Court of Appeal plans to make an order today to ensure Aminu Ado Bayero holds a hitch-free Durbar

I am reliably informed by sources within the Court of Appeal of plans by some people to procure an order of the same Court of Appeal on Tuesday, 25 March 2025 to enjoin the security authorities in Kano to ensure co-operation with and protection for the Durbar proposed by Aminu Ado Bayero.

Professor Chidi Odinkalu has discredited a statement issued by Dr. Festus Akande, the Supreme Court’s Head of Communication which defended Justice Emmanuel Agim’s attendance at the University of Calabar’s 50 anniversary.

Odinkaku in a statement made available to Law & Society Magazine remarked that: “The fact that Festus Akande considered it essential to issue the statement itself shows that something was wrong with that event in Calabar.”

Citing Rule 2.8 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers in Nigeria (2016) which provides that: “A Judge shall avoid developing excessively close relationship with frequent litigants – such as government ministers or their officials, municipal officials, police prosecutors in any Court where the Judge often sits, if such relationship could reasonably create an appearance of partiality,” Odinkalu noted that: “Neither Festus Akande nor, indeed, Justice Emmanuel Agim as a Justice of the Supreme Court can pretend to be unaware that Nyesom Wike is the most prolific current political litigator in Nigeria.”

According to the law professor and rights advocate: “Aminu Ado Bayero, the Chancellor who conferred the honorary degree on the Minister of the FCT, is seeking to claim benefit of a curious, incongruous and improbable order of the Court of Appeal panel which included the wife of the Minister. As I write, the panel has yet to release the text of the reasoning on which it issued its orders.

“Justice Emmanuel Agim is the author of a curious, incongruous, and inexplicably unprecedented decision of the Supreme Court in favour of satraps of the same Minister in the political contest in Rivers State.

“This context makes the optics of that particular occasion in Calabar an awful advertisement for high subversion of the values of judicial independence and democracy, around whose flags Festus Akande sought to wrap his defense of the indefensible. Even worse, these facts create a credible perception of network transaction in judicial orders.”

Read the full text of the statement below.

As part of its golden jubilee, the University of Calabar is said to have held a special convocation ceremony on Saturday, 22 March, 2025 where it handed out honours to all manner of persons. The Chancellor of the University is Aminu Ado Bayero, the deposed Emir of Kano. Present at that event also were Nyesom Wike, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory and Nigeria’s most prolific political litigant; as well as Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim, a senior Justice of the Supreme Court who delivered the leading decision in the recent judgment of that court concerning the withholding of the federal allocations of the Rivers State Government.

Images of the events in Calabar putting these major actors in contemporary politics of the Nigerian judiciary in close propinquity with one another have gone viral. In response, Festus Akande, Director of Information and Public Relations at the Supreme Court issued a public statement on Monday, 24 March, 2025, in which he felt compelled to claim that Emmanuel Agim attended the convocation “as an esteemed honouree and an alumnus of the institution, whom the Governing Council had found worthy to be conferred with an Honorary Doctorate Degree in Law (Doctor Honoris Causa). He was recognized for his significant contributions to the legal profession; which is a reflection of his commitment to justice, integrity, and the rule of law, serving as a model for aspiring legal professionals and students alike.”

Mr. Akande’s statement further claimed that “Emmanuel Agim’s participation at the ceremony was independent and not as an official representative of any government ministry or department, let alone accompanying any serving or retired government official”, before asserting that “any insinuation to the contrary is not only inaccurate but undermines the judicial independence that is crucial to our democracy.”

These claims are made in the name of the Supreme Court and in pursuit of high-sounding goals of judicial independence and democracy.

The Supreme Court is a public institution embodying the highest judicial authority in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Judicial independence is a high constitutional principle ordained for the protection of judicial authority as a public trust. It is not a self-serving shibboleth.

In terms of Nigeria’s constitution, the source of democratic legitimacy resides in the people alone.

To leave Festus Akande’s claims uncontested or without a response, therefore, is to diminish the high authority of the Supreme Court, the service of the distinguished men and women who have laboured to give it its historically high standing in the public imagination until recently, and the high principles of judicial independence and democracy instituted for the protection of the peoples of Nigeria.

This statement is issued out of concern to stem the heedless haemorrhaging of the rarefied authority of the Supreme Court of Nigeria. In this spirit, it is essential to set the records straight, even if ever so briefly.

The Applicable Standards

The fact that Festus Akande considered it essential to issue the statement itself shows that something was wrong with that event in Calabar. In case he needs reminding, Lord Chief Justice Hewart laid down the applicable standard for judging judicial impartiality and independence in 1923 in R. v Sussex Justices, Ex Parte McCarthy, (1923) All ER 233, to the effect that: “Nothing is to be done which creates even a suspicion that there has been an improper interference with the course of justice.”

That event in Calabar was rich with pictures to support suspicions of improper interference with the cause of justice.

 Rule 2.8 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers in Nigeria (2016) is very clear: “A Judge shall avoid developing excessively close relationship with frequent litigants – such as government ministers or their officials, municipal officials, police prosecutors in any Court where the Judge often sits, if such relationship could reasonably create an appearance of partiality.”

In Buhari vs. Independent National Electoral Commission & Ors (2008) LPELR-814(SC) at PP.145-146, Justice Niki Tobi of the Supreme Court admonished judges to “maintain a very big distance from politics and politicians” warning that:

“….the two professions do not meet and will never meet at all in our democracy in the discharge of their functions…. Their waters never meet in the same way Rivers Niger and Benue meet at the confluence near Lokoja. If they meet, the victim will be democracy most of the time, and that will be bad for sovereign Nigeria.”

 In his memoirs, Faces, Cases and Places, published in 1983,(p.78), former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Atanda Fatayi Williams, said:

“In Nigeria, familiarity does not breed contempt. It breeds obligation. As a result, people with whom you are friendly expect you to bend the rules to suit their requirements. It pays in the end for a judge, even at the risk of being accused of being a snob or of haughtiness, to be somewhat aloof, not only from members of the Executive but also from political powerbrokers.”

Neither Festus Akande nor, indeed, Justice Emmanuel Agim as a Justice of the Supreme Court can pretend to be unaware that Nyesom Wike is the most prolific current political litigator in Nigeria. To justify public fraternizing with him by a Supreme Court Justice is to licensing the accessorizing of judicial officers for political purposes.

The Context: Nyesom Wike & Emmanuel Akomaye Agim

On the last day of February 2025, the Supreme Court delivered judgment in the consolidated appeals in SC/CV/1174A/2024 et al, Rivers State House of Assembly & Anor vs. The Government of Rivers State & 9 Ors. The case sought orders of the court to, among other things, require the Central Bank of Nigeria to withhold the federal allocations of the Government of Rivers State until the passage of a budget by a faction of the State House of Assembly. At the time, the question of the right of that faction of the State House of Assembly to function as such was the subject of litigation before lower courts in FHC/PHC/CS/2024 Oko-Jumbo & 2 Ors vs. Martin Amaewhule & Ors (pending in the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt since April 2024).

The case seeking to withhold the federal allocations of Rivers State was unrelated to this appeal. Delivering the judgment of the Supreme Court on 28 February, Emmanuel Akomaye Agim framed two issues for determination neither of which had anything to do with the issues pending before the Federal High Court. Yet, without an appeal from that case before it, the court purported to determine the issues then pending before the Federal High Court on the question of the defection of the 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly from the platform on which they were elected (the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to the All Progressives Congress, APC). Even though the issue of the defection of the 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly did not arise in the appeal, the Supreme Court raised it by itself and shockingly decided a case that was still pending at the High Court.

 This course of action has no precedent in Nigeria’s judicial history. It is the  first in the history of Nigeria that the Supreme Court will take over a case that is pending in the Federal High Court. Unsurprisingly, counsel to the 27 legislators promptly applied to the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt asking it to dismiss the case on the ground that it has become academic on the basis that the Supreme Court has decided the matter while it was still at the Federal High Court. The Port Harcourt judicial division of the Federal High Court will render its judgment on this application on 20 April, 2025.

The Context: Nyesom Wike and Aminu Ado Bayero

 On 14 March, 2025, a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja in Appeal No., CA/KN/27/M/2025, Alhaji Aliyu Babba Dan Sarki Dawaki Babba vs. Kano State House of Assembly & 7 Ors, granted a “Mandatory Injunction” (not a stay of execution) arresting the enforcement of the judgment of the same Court of Appeal on 10 January 2025 in Appeal No. CA/KN/126/2024, Kano State House of Assembly & Anor vs. Alhaji Aminu Babba Dan Agundi & Ors. The earlier judgment of the Court was delivered by a panel led by Justice Gabriel Kolawole, a Justice of Appeal since 22 June, 2018. The latter decision arresting that judgment was given by a panel led by Justice Okon Abang, a Justice of the Court of Appeal since 20 September 2023. Other members of the latter panel were Justice Eberechi Suzette Nyesom-Wike (Justice of the Court of Appeal since 10 July 2024) and Justice Oyejoju Oyewumi (Justice of the Court of Appeal since 10 July 2024). This panel of the Court of Appeal included the wife of the Minister of the FCT, Nyesom Wike.

In terms of seniority in the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal, Justice Okon Abang is no. 6 out of 10; Justice Nyesom-Wike is No. 9; and Justice Oyewumi is the last. It is unprecedented for a panel this junior to be constituted to sit upon a decision of a much more senior panel of the Court of Appeal. It is equally notable that the President of the Court of Appeal has unilaterally moved this case to Abuja from Kano.

 The subject matter of this appeal is a fundamental rights claim by a disaffected king-maker in respect of the stool of the Kano Emirate from which  Aminu Ado Bayero was deposed. The Court of Appeal in Kano had denied that claim, holding that the Federal High Court had no jurisdiction over essentially chieftaincy matters.

Following this decision, Aminu Ado Bayero, who is not a named party in the case, notified the security services in Kano of his intention to hold an Eid-El-Fitr Durbar at the end of the holy month of Ramadhan. I am reliably informed by sources within the Court of Appeal of plans by some people to procure an order of the same Court of Appeal on Tuesday, 25 March 2025 to enjoin the security authorities in Kano to ensure co-operation with and protection for the Durbar proposed by Aminu Ado Bayero.

Meanwhile, on Monday, 24 March 2025, the Supreme Court entered an appeal against the ruling of the Okon Abang-led Court of Appeal panel as Appeal No SC/CV/279/2025. This should ordinarily preclude the Court of Appeal from further engagement with the subject matter but these are no ordinary times and no one can say what could happen

The Optics

Aminu Ado Bayero, the Chancellor who conferred the honorary degree on the Minister of the FCT, is seeking to claim benefit of a curious, incongruous and improbable order of the Court of Appeal panel which included the wife of the Minister. As I write, the panel has yet to release the text of the reasoning on which it issued its orders.

Justice Emmanuel Agim is the author of a curious, incongruous, and inexplicably unprecedented decision of the Supreme Court in favour of satraps of the same Minister in the political contest in Rivers State.

This context makes the optics of that particular occasion in Calabar an awful advertisement for high subversion of the values of judicial independence and democracy, around whose flags Festus Akande sought to wrap his defense of the indefensible. Even worse, these facts create a credible perception of network transaction in judicial orders.

The 50^th anniversary convocation of a university is not an emergency event. The parties who met in Calabar had to have had notice of that event long before the dates of the judgments or rulings in the cases in which their interests interlocked. There was ample time, if they desired, to make alternative arrangements. Their decision to proceed in the manner they did without any regard to the optics or possible damage to the standing of the judicial institutions serves neither judicial independence nor democracy. Instead, it showcases a peculiar brand of hubris and impunity at the desecration of those high constitutional values.//ENDS

• Odinkalu is a lawyer and a teacher. He can be reached at [email protected]

• Lawmaker says ‘It was Sallah gift’

Law teacher and an ex-chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Prof. Chidi Odinkalu has expressed his disapproval over the release of Rivers State’s withheld allocation, alleging that National assembly members were paid to grant a smooth passage to the Emergency Rule in Rivers State.

Odinkalu in a statement through his official X asserted this allegation and connected the disbursement of the monies to the designation of a single administrator.

Legal experts have deemed the suspension to violate the constitution.

Meanwhile, Mukhtar Betara, the chairman of the House Committee on the Federal Capital Territory has denied reports that lawmakers of the Nigerian Senate and the House of Representatives received $15,000 and $10,000 respectively to approve the declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State.

Jafaar Jafaar, an investigative journalists in a post on X said the lawmaker denied that any member of the National Assembly was given money – in foreign currency – to support the State of Emergency proclamation made by President Bola Tinubu.

Betara, however, said lawmakers of the House of Representatives only received $5,000 as Sallah gifts and not as bribes or inducement to support the president’s decision over the political crisis that rocked Rivers State.

Although there was no mention of where the $5,000 as Sallah gift came from, Betara said the gesture was a long-standing tradition within the National Assembly and had no connection with the State of Emergency proclamation in Rivers.

Jafaar wrote on X, “The chairman of the House Committee on FCT, Mukhtar Aliyu Betara, has clarified to me that he only shared $5,000 to each member of his committee as a ‘Sallah Gesture’ not an inducement to support emergency rule in Rivers State.

” According to him, he maintains the tradition – like Santa Claus – every year. As we say in Hausa, not thigh but hind leg,” the journalist posted.

Odinkalu raised the additional point that the allocation was abruptly made available despite a Supreme Court order that stated state allocations should only be provided when democratic administration is in place.

“What if the withheld @riversstategov allocation was unlocked in order to use it to finance the purchase the votes of @nassnigeria behind the State of Emergency, sir?” Odinkalu wrote.

His remarks follow claims that legislators in Rivers State got $10,000 to back President Bola Tinubu’s proclamation of a state of emergency.

According to many, the decision was decided by voice vote rather than the physical vote required by the constitution, which would have required a two-thirds majority.

Responding to Odinkalu’s statement, many Nigerians took to social media to voice their disapproval of the National Assembly’s decision to approve the emergency declaration without following proper procedures and to demand an investigation into Odinkalu’s allegations.

A Federal High Court in Abuja has slammed stringent bail conditions on two Abuja-based business agents, Nsor Nyami and Iranloye Olusegun, who were put on trial by the Inspector General of Police, for allegedly defrauding their employer of N10.6 million.

Justice Musa Suleiman Liman, while admitting the two business agents to bail on Monday, ordered them to produce one surety each who must deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy of their landed property in Abuja to the court throughout the trial of the criminal charge against them.

The sureties to the two business agents are also to produce a three-year tax certificate that would be verified by the Federal Inland Revenue Service in addition to signing an N20M bail bond for the defendants to be released on bail.

Delivering a ruling in their fresh bail application, Justice Liman ordered the two defendants to deposit their international passports and their passport photograph with the court, while their sureties must swear to an affidavit of means and submit to the court their National Identification Certificate for the purpose of ascertaining their true identities.

Justice Suleiman, who said that he admitted them to bail on special circumstances of ill health grounds, had vacated his earlier order of January 2025, before admitting them to bail.

Nsor Nyami and Iranloye Olusegun were arraigned before the court for allegedly defrauding their employer of N10.6 million entrusted into their care.

They were also accused of selling unregistered products to unsuspecting customers across the country before the National Agency for Food Drug and Adminiu(NAFDA), sealed up their factory in Abuja.

The Inspector General of Police, who acted on the petition against them and after a thorough investigation slammed on them, a 10-count charge bordering on felony, conspiracy and criminal breach of trust contrary to Section 3 of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, 2007.

Although the defendants denied the charges, the IGP however alleged that the two accused persons, sometime in 2022 in Abuja, conspired amongst themselves to commit felony by dishonestly disposing of the Soya Plus product entrusted to them in violation of directives and guidelines prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged.

The offence is said to be contrary to Section 3 of the Miscellaneous Offences Act 2007 and punishable under Section 3 of the same Act.

The IGP also alleged that the two accused persons in the same year dishonestly converted the sum of N10.6M to their own use, being money given to them by various customers in the distribution of Peace Foundation International Soya Plus, and refused to remit the money to their employer.

The offence is said to be contrary to Section 308 and punishable under Section 309 of the Penal Code Act.

Also, the IGP alleged that the accused persons in 2022 in Abuja carried out the distribution of an unregistered product named Brika Soya Beans Milk without registration with the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control, NAFDAC.

The offence is said to be contrary to Section 1 of the Food Product Registration Regulations of NAFDAC and punishable under Section 7 of the same Act.

In the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/321/24, the second accused person, Olusegun Iranloye, was alleged to have criminally converted, for stealing, the aggregate sum of N2.5m paid to him by various customers, the money being the property of his employer, contrary to Section 286 of the Penal Code Act and punishable under Section 287 of the same Act.

However, shortly after Monday’s ruling, the lead counsel to the accused persons, Ekanem Kanu Agabi, SAN informed Justice Suleiman that the two defendants would prefer to settle the dispute with the nominal complainant while thanking the judge for admitting them to bail on health grounds.

Meanwhile, pending perfection of their bail conditions, the judge ordered that they be remanded in Kuje prison and fixed June 17, for trial of the defendants.