Home Blog Page 444

Kudisprudence

By Chidi Anselm Odinkalu

“The partiality that inevitably affects judges has been noted in cases with a political flavour.”

David Pannick, KC, Judges, p. 44 (1987)

The state as we know it enjoys three notional monopolies. One is a monopoly of legitimate taxation. The second is a monopoly of the legitimate instrumentality of violence; and the third is a monopoly of legitimate dispute resolution. In Nigeria, all three monopolies are now contested by non-state entities.

Of these three monopolies, many focus on the legitimate instrumentality of violence but it is the capacity of a state to resolve disputes lawfully and peacefully among those who live in it that makes the other two monopolies worthwhile. That is why courts, administrative and even traditional institutions exist.

David Pannick, KC reminds us that “as part of the function of deciding disputes, the courts provide a public service, at almost no charge to customers (who pay for their lawyers but not for the judge and the courtroom).” This is the ideal. Nigeria’s judicial system is in a profound crisis of legitimacy today because of ample evidence suggesting strongly that the requirement that litigants should not pay for the judge or the courtroom may not apply to certain categories, especially among political litigants.

To be clear, the most important reasons for which people sometimes end up in court often are not things to which it is possible to assign any value – dignity, equity, justice, memory, safety or human life. These are all invaluable. Without them, organized society fails. Jurisprudence is the system for organising knowledge about judicial decisions that ultimately deliver and govern these invaluable public goods.

However, judicial business is not confined to these. Many disputes that end up in court involve property or things of material value, such as land, inheritance, shares, stocks, or chattels. Some others may extend to intangibles of value, such as status or reputation. There could also be cases concerning access to political power from which perch the people involved hope to reap benefits that are material in consequence.

These are all things for which the currency of transaction or exchange is money. In Nigerian parlance, that is called “Kudi”. When a court system prioritises disputes affecting things measured in the currency of money over things that are entirely invaluable, it replaces a system of jurisprudence in favour of a preoccupation with “Kudisprudence”.

By way of full disclosure, I did not invent this expression, “Kudisprudence”. I was introduced to it by a friend and school mate of long standing who also happens to be a diligent Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). He has not licensed me to disclose his identity, and I am obliged to respect his anonymity.

Two cases occurred this past week to illustrate how this distinction between jurisprudence and Kudisprudence affects judicial decision making in Nigeria. On 30 October, the police arraigned a member of the House of Representatives, Mascot Ikwechegh, on charges of assault against a gig-economy driver working with Bolt. A now viral video clip showed Mr. Ikwechegh had assaulted the driver in words and deed. He called the driver vermin in different forms and threatened to “disappear” him without consequences, before proceeding to satiate on the driver his thirst for physical violence.

For those conversant with that Nigerian rat-killer, the material on the video clip portrayed Mr. Ikwechegh as the member representing “Otapiapia” Federal Constituency in the Rat Killers Assembly. On his arraignment, the court granted him bail on an oral application in the sum of N500,000 with sureties who only had to show evidence of utility bills for proof of their residence. The case was adjourned for one week.

Two days later, on 1 November, another court in the same Abuja was host to proceedings charging at least 114 children according to the British Broadcasting Corporation, BBC, with treasonable felony. These charges arose in connection with the #EndBadGovernment protests which occurred last August around the country. Arrested in different locations in northern Nigeria reportedly, these children were transferred to Abuja where they had been detained en masse for 93 days.

On arraignment, they all looked “visibly unwell and malnourished.” In their short spell in  court, at least four of them suffered fainting feats. Having beheld all of this, the presiding judge promptly rewarded the children with bail in the sum of N10 million Naira each or a total of N1.14 billion Naira, with two sureties each of whom must be a senior federal civil servant of at least Grade Level 15. He adjourned the case to 24 January 2025. These terms were manifestly such that none of these children can hope to comply with.

This is a court system in which material things, such as status, make all the difference between receiving justice or being on the end of the administration of law even when it is manifestly unjust. The parliamentarian received jurisprudence from a court system that was happy to serve malnourished children with anything but that.

There is an even more worrying scenario to which the expression “Kudisprudence” may be applied. That can be the case where a judicial decision follows upon a bargain – implicit or explicit – between a judge or magistrate on the one hand and a party (disclosed or undisclosed) on the other. This was the sense in which Stanislav Andrzejewski, the former Polish soldier and prisoner-of-war who founded the Sociology Department at the University of Reading in England coined the word “kleptocracy” in 1968, which he defined as “a system of government [that] consists precisely of the practice of selling what the law forbids to sell.” Among the things a kleptocracy can buy and sell in its political open market, Professor Andrzejewski included “even judges.”

The fact that Kudisprudence in the second sense occurs in certain courts in Nigeria is not in question. Many disciplinary cases concluded by the National Judicial Council (NJC), no less, testify to this fact. The only issue left to be determined is how pervasive this is. One thing seems clear: political cases increasingly appear to suggest – very much as David Pannick writes – a higher predisposition to what look like outcomes of Kudisprudence.

For evidence of how this system of Kudisprudence can work, a recent report by the advocacy group, Citizen Gavel, names a notorious former governor and current minister who has a long track record of “building judicial infrastructure and offering other forms of support” to the judiciary in acts of generosity that “often coincide with periods when he has faced significant legal challenges. This raises the possibility that these actions may have indirectly influenced judicial decisions.” Law professor, Fidelis Oditah, SAN adds that in the courts in the Rivers State disputes may have been “corruptly procured” and that the decision have more than a whiff of “a rat” about them.

In its nature, judicial quid pro quo does not necessarily occur on social media or with receipts. Verified cases are more likely than not to be fewer in fact than the number of actual incidents. Many more followers of the recent goings on in Nigeria’s judicial system may themselves have evidence to conclude that it has evolved from a system of jurisprudence to one preoccupied with Kudisprudence.

On its own, that would be sufficient cause for worry; but the reason the system now suffers an overwhelming sense of crisis of credibility is because it cannot be ruled out that this preoccupation with Kudisprudence in the first sense is not the result (in a significant number particularly of political cases), of Kudisprudence in the second – transactional – sense.

David Pannick concludes that courts offer to “those who are greedy, vexatious, exhibitionist, aspiring to canonisation, or just plain impossible a platform to perform.” Every one of them has a right to a court system that regards the public interest in justice as something that money cannot buy.

A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu may be reached at [email protected]

FIDA Nigeria says arraignment of #EndBadGovernance minors contradicts Child Rights Act/Law, demands immediate release

The International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) Nigeria and human rights group, Amnesty International, have asked the Federal Government to release the minors who were arrested over the #EndBadGovernance protest in August.

Asserting that, “The prolonged detention of these minors raises critical questions about the ethical standards of our correctional facilities and judicial system”, FIDA in a statement signed by its Country Vice/National President, Amina Suzanah Agbaje pointed out that “it not only violates their fundamental human rights but also directly contradicts the provisions of the Child Rights Act/Law, which establishes a separate justice pathway for minors.”

The full text of the press release reads:

“The International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) Nigeria, condemns in its entirety the recent reports of children who participated in the #EndBadGovernance protests from various states, being held in correctional facilities for a period exceeding Ninety (90) days. Their visibly malnourished appearance in court in addition to viral news reports of six (6) of these minors fainting in court has cast serious doubts on the adequacy of our legal system to handle juvenile cases.

“These minors were arraigned at the Federal High Court in Abuja on charges of treason, rather than being brought to Family Court within their jurisdiction in their respective states, as mandated by Nigerian law.

“This inhumane treatment not only violates their fundamental human rights but also directly contradicts the provisions of the Child Rights Act/Law, which establishes a separate justice pathway for minors. Such treatment is deeply alarming and highlights the serious flaws in our juvenile justice system, it casts a shadow on Nigeria’s commitment to safeguarding the welfare of its young citizens.

The prolonged detention of these minors raise critical questions about the ethical standards of our correctional facilities and judicial system badly damaging Nigeria’s international image and reputation. Detaining and prosecuting minors in this manner signifies a clear disregard of their rights to legal protection and family support thereby increasing their risk of physical, psychological and emotional harm.

“It is trite that arraigning children in adult courts, especially when they appear visibly malnourished, reflects poorly on our Judicial system and exposes systemic failures in handling juvenile cases.

FIDA Nigeria urgently calls upon all relevant authorities to release these minors immediately as they have been incarcerated for a long time, or ensure their transfer to family court as appropriate for juveniles for fair hearing. We earnestly urge Government agencies to ensure that these children receive immediate medical attention, proper care and nourishment in addition to every legal protection they are entitled to under the law.

“The welfare of Nigerian children should be a priority for us all and not an afterthought! Our justice system must uphold its duty to treat all minors with compassion, dignity and respect.

“FIDA Nigeria remains committed to its mandate of protecting, preserving and promoting the rights of women and children and shall continue to doggedly advocate for the enforcement of these rights. Most importantly, we unequivocally demand for urgent reforms in justice pathways with respect to minors to forestall future violations of the rights of Nigerian children.”

On its part, Amnesty International described their arrest and detention as illegal.

“Amnesty International condemns President Bola Tinubu’s government for the continues detention of minors for participating in the August #EndBadGovernanceInNigeria protests. The attempts to put the minors through a sham trial over alleged ‘treason’ shows the government’s utter disregard for the rule of law. The authorities must release them immediately and unconditionally.”

“Putting minors through these horrifying detentions for participating in protests against hunger and corruption is — so far — one of the deadliest attempts to suppress freedom of assembly. President Bola Tinubu must unconditionally release minors detailed since August:

“In Katsina, at least 12 children under 16-years-old were detained. The children ended up in detention for just being on the streets during the #EndBadGovernance protests. Children with their whole lives ahead of them are now at the risk of being tried on trumped up charges.

“Right now charges of treasonable felony are being read to another group of 43 protesters in the same Federal High Court #Abuja. The Nigerian authorities are only escalating attempts to deprive people the right to peaceful protests, through horrifying detentions and sham trials.

“The government of President Bola Tinubu must uphold the constitutionally and internationally guaranteed human rights of everyone in the country — including the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. All protesters currently on trial or detained must be released.

“The Nigerian authorities detained these minors unlawfully — putting them through horrifying experiences — for exercising their right to peaceful protest. Government must release them all — immediately and unconditionally.”

Between August 1 and August 10, 2024, protesters trooped out to the streets across Nigeria over the nationwide hardship.

However, some of the protesters were seen waving Russian flag, an action the Federal Government condemned, ordering arrests.

Subsequently, the protesters were arrested in Abuja, Kaduna, Kano, Katsina, Sokoto, Gombe, among others.

Some of those arrested were arraigned at a Federal High Court in Abuja, on Friday.

At least, four of them, including two minors – Yahaya (14 years), Muktar Ishak Alhassan (16 years) – slumped in the court.

However, when the matter was called, Audu Garba counsel of the Inspector-General of Police, informed the court that the matter was slated for arraignment of the 76 defendants, who had been in detention.

Shortly after they were called into the dock to take their plea, four of them slumped in the open court.

Videos and pictures of the incident have triggered anger among Nigerians, particularly on social media

Read Also: [Updated]Despite troubling videos showing malnourished minors arraigned in Fed. High Court Abuja, judge grants N10m bail

The Oyingbo human parts shop

By Tribune Editorial Board

There must be something that the occult manipulators called money ritualists see in this country that the rest of the society does not see. This is why cases of money ritualism and the sale of human parts continue to be reported almost on a daily basis even as security operatives keep arresting and prosecuting suspects. Last week, personnel of the Rapid Response Squad (RRS) of the Lagos State Police command  arrested three suspects for alleged possession of suspected human tongues.

According to the command’s spokesman, SP Benjamin Hundeyin, two of the suspects were apprehended on October 15 with human parts in a taxi during a routine stop-and-search on Otedola Bridge. He said: “Further investigations led the operatives to the apprehension of the third suspect from whom the parts were bought in Oyingbo Market, Lagos.” According to Hundeyin, an investigation is ongoing at the command’s headquarters, and the suspects will soon be arraigned in court if found culpable.

Such cases are legion. In February, the Ogun State Commissioner of Police, Abiodun Alamutu, revealed how his command arrested a certain prophet and a native doctor and their clients for involvement in a case of money ritual that led to the murder of a lady, Adijat Sulaimon. Before their arrest, some of the suspects had been demanding a refund of the sum they had paid to the native doctor, one Oluwo Mandela, since the concoction he prepared for them had been ineffective.

In April, officers of the Kaduna State Police command swooped on a cemetery located in Dutsen-Abba ward, along the Zaria-Kaduna expressway, where they rounded up a gang of nine suspected ritualists who described themselves as members of the Neo Black Movement (NBM). A search of the vehicle the suspects had brought to the cemetery showed two locally made pistols, one Beretta pistol, two jack knives, two calabashes and a jerrycan filled with human blood. Questioned as to the source of the human blood in the jerrycan, the suspects confessed that it was the blood they had drawn from an aged man whom they had earlier butchered and whose body they had dismembered along the Jaji military cantonment in neighbouring Igabi Local Government Area (LGA). The victim’s vital body parts had been taken away by another gang which came from Kaduna, Kaduna State. 

In May, personnel of the Niger State command of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) arrested a syndicate which specialised in genital mutilation for rituals, gang-raping of minors, assault and other criminal activities in Pandogari town of Rafi Local Government Area of the state.

In August, a  14-year-old boy, Malik Kareem, was allegedly beheaded by his three friends in the Olorisaoko community located in the Akinyele Local Government Area of Ibadan, Oyo State. Malik and his friends had approached a cleric, seeking wealth through ritualistic means. However, these friends had actually conspired with the cleric to offer him as “sacrifice” instead. When they arrived at the cleric’s place, Malik was strangled, then beheaded. Said a witness: “We found Malik’s lifeless body, decapitated and lying in a pool of blood.”

Of course, the preoccupation with occult manipulations is not peculiarly Nigerian. In May this year, a Lusaka-based woman, Inness Banda, stunned the Matero Local Court in Zambia when she produced her red underwear which her husband had allegedly buried in their yard to bewitch her.

It is distressing that somewhere in Oyingbo market, Lagos, some people allegedly trade in human parts. Such people are not buying foodstuff or clothing, but vital organs taken from the bodies of victims who may or may not have been dead before such parts were harvested. Just who are the sellers and how do they get their supplies? Although many suspects have been arrested for digging up corpses with a view to collecting “needed” body parts, it is not unreasonable to assume that the major source of supply for those involved in this dark trade are innocent Nigerians abducted and murdered in the most brutal fashion and then cut up like animals.

It is terribly agonising to imagine the spectre of innocent people on their way to work, school, market or a place of religious worship being abducted and murdered in cold blood by a band of bloodthirsty criminals intent or trading in their body parts. That is an extremely gory spectacle that ought to be forestalled with every resource available to the Nigerian State. Those involved in that dark trade ought to be apprehended and sentenced to death without further ado. They do not deserve a space in any society.

 As we have said countless times already, there are no ritualists on the Forbes’ rich list. If anyone wishes to know what people like Elon Musk, Jeff Besos, Larry Ellison or Mark Zuckerberg sell, all they need is a simple internet search. The world’s wealthiest individuals are in the positions they occupy because they saw certain critical human needs and designed ways of meeting them.

If people are buying and driving Musk’s cybertrucks, for instance, it is because they feel they need them, and get a certain thrill riding them. If someone comes along and offers something better, people will simply abandon those trucks and go after the new thing on offer. That is how life works. Over the years, Nigerians are yet to see a moneybag whose self-confessed trade is money ritualism or the trade in human parts, yet innocent people keep getting killed in the country because certain people believe that the human body can be a certain kind of mint.

To tackle this deadly trade, the Federal Government, which in February 2020 promised to launch a national sensitisation campaign against the growing scourge of money rituals, must work with the state governments to stamp out the scourge. The then Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, said there was “great concern across the country over the rising cases of ritual murders by unscrupulous people, most of them very young, who are seeking to get rich at all costs.” He added: “For those who may still be in doubt, ritual killings have assumed a worrisome dimension in recent years. According to an NGO, Foundation for Partnership Initiatives in the Niger Delta (PIND), 150 women and girls were killed for ritual purposes between January 2018 and December 2021.” It is time for action.

Regarding the present case, the police must get to the root of the matter. They must unravel the brains behind the bloody business, which is apparently not listed on the Nigerian Stock Exchange. 

Culled from Tribune online.ng published 31 October 2024
 

Rivers State House of Assembly and the fallacy of “authentic legislature” (A Legal Opinion)

By Sylvester Udemezue

Part 1 of this “I am an Authentic legal Luminary” law discussion series has been published under the titled, ‘THE “I AM AN AUTHENTIC LEGAL LUMINARY” SPEECH: A MISSED OPPORTUNITY TO RENDER AN ALL-INCLUSIVE LEGAL OPINION ON BURNING LEGAL QUESTIONS AFFECTING RIVERS STATE (PART 1) was published on 21 October 2024. Please, help me and read it. Thank you.

In that piece, I reproduced the declaration made by respected learned Chief OCJ Okocha, OFR, SAN, JP, DSSRS, ex President of NBA, ex Attorney-General of Rivers State, ex Chairman of the Body of Benchers, ex Chairman of the Council of Legal Education, etc, and a notable legal giant who has put in over 46 years into active law practice in Nigeria, at a luncheon organised “in honour of the 10th Legislative Assembly of Rivers State” in Port Harcourt on 19 October 2024 by His Excellency, Nyesom Wike, Life Bencher, former Governor of Rivers State, and current Minister of the FCT, Abuja:

“…. Look at the authentic legislators of Rivers State, led by Hon Martins Amaewhule…. All of us, the good people of Rivers State, patriotic citizens of Rivers State, stand in solidarity with you, the authentic legislature of Rivers State…. I assure you, my brother Martin that God is on your side…. I also assure you that the law is on your side….. Thank you all, and may we all continue to pray for our authentic legislature.”  (See: “OCJ Okocha Replies Fubara – Asks Fubara To Stop Deceiving Himself; Says Wike and Amaewhule are Ahead”<https://youtu.be/nNGrqHYZuQ4?si=NRk2thubMxzbE7hG> Accessed 20 October 2024

QUESTIONS ARISING FROM THE LEARNED SILK’S REFERENCE TO THE 27 DEFECTED LAWMAKERS AS THE “AUTHENTIC LEGISLATORS” OF THE RIVERS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY?

(1). SOME AVAILABLE EVIDENCE OF THE DEFECTION OF 27 MEMBERS OF THE RIVERS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY LED BY HON MARTINS AMAEWHULE?

(a).  About a fortnight ago, I had circulated on the social media, a Certified True Copy of the Affidavit duly deposed to by Hon Martins Amaewhule on behalf of himself and 26 other members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, and filed at the Federal High Court of Nigeria on 13 December 2023 in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CD/1783/2023 (Rt Hon Martins Amaewhule & 26 Ors v INEC & 5 Ors), and particularly paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 15 of the said Affidavit which read as follows:

(1). That I am the 1st Plaintiff, Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly and was duly elected Speaker of the 5th day of June 2023 by virtue of which I am seized of the facts of this case deposed herein.

(2). That I have the consent and authority of all the other Plaintiffs to depose to this Affidavit.

(3). That all the facts deposed to herein are within my personal knowledge except otherwise stated.

4). That I was duly elected as a member representing  Obio-Akpor State Constituency in the Rivers State House of Assembly in May 2023 on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party and the 5th day of June, 2023, I was elected Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

(5). That the 2nd Plaintiff is the Deputy Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly and was duly elected Deputy Speaker on the 5th day of June, 2023. The 2nd Plaintiff also represents Gokana State Constituency in the Rivers State House of Assembly having been duly elected by his Constituents in the May 2023 General Election on the Platform of the Peoples Democratic Party.

(6).  That the 3rd — 27th Plaintiffs are also members of theRivers State House of Assembly duly elected to represent their respective constituencies in the Rivers State House of Assembly on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party.

(8). That the Plaintiffs contested the aforesaid elections on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party and had remained members of the Peoples Democratic Party until 11/12/2023 when they (Plaintiffs) left Peoples Democratic party and joined the All Progressives Congress as a result of a division in the Peoples Democratic Party.

(15). That faced with the state of uncertainty and confusion in the 2nd Defendant [People’s Democratic Party (PDP)] caused by the division in the Political Party, the Plaintiffs [Hon Martins Amaewhule & 26 others] were forced by the state of affairs within the 2nd Defendant [PDP] to defect and join the All Progressives Congress (APC).

(b).  Below is a YouTube video clip I have found online, showing Honorable Martins Amaewhule leading (as he said) 26 other members of the Rivers House of Assembly to defect to another political party on 11 December 2023. This as seen in the video, happened on the floor of the House. Please watch it: <https://youtu.be/5uX-E3yxvs0?si=tzawr3xv8aN9ncy5> Accessed 20 October 2024

(c).  Below is a YouTube video clip showing of Honorable Martins Amaewhule and 25/26 other members of the Rivers House of Assembly after the 11 December 2023 defection, being warmly received/welcomed by the leadership of their new political party: <https://youtu.be/8LS_VTc7YBo?si=RiBPcSGsuCXVit44> Accessed 20 October 2024.

(d).  I have found also several Press Releases, each and all reportedly issued after 11 December 2023, by Hon Martins Amaewhule affirming the reported defection, defending their defection, and even openly bragging about the defection, while giving reasons therefor:

(i). Eagleonline: “Speaking after reading the letters signed by the defected lawmakers, Amaewhule directed the Clerk of the House to convey their resolution to Fubara and other relevant authorities. ” (See: “Rivers: Why we defected from PDP to APC — 27 lawmakers”; Eagleonline; 11 December 2023).

(ii).  Platforms Africa: ‘The 26 lawmakers of the Rivers State House of Assembly have said that their defection from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress was tied to President Bola Tinubu’s “Renewed Hope Agenda”. The factional Speaker, Martins Amaewhule, who led the mass defection, adduced the reason.’ (“Why We Dumped PDP For APC — 26 Rivers Lawmakers”; Platforms Africa; 19 December 2023).

(iii).  Sahara Reporters: “Video Confirms Defection Of Rivers Former Speaker, Amaewhule, Colleagues From PDP To APC Despite Court Case” (24 May 2024).

(iv).  Vanguard Newspapers: “The factional Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon Martins Chike Amaewhule said the twenty seven lawmakers decided to defect from the People’s Democratic Party, PDP to the All Progressives Congress, APC because of the crisis rocking the state chapter of the PDP. Amaewhule also said that they left their former party because President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is doing very well with the appointments of Rivers indigenes into various key positions in his government.” (See: “Rivers Factional Assembly Speaker, Amaewhule Lists Reasons for Defection”; VanguardNgr; 17 December 2023).

(v).  There are several other reports which have not been denied, in the Punch, the Guardian, ChannelsTv, ARiseTv, etc about the defection.

(2).  POSITION OF THE NIGERIAN LAW ON DEFECTION OF A LEGISLATOR?

(a).  Section 109(1)(g), of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 provides: “A member of a House of Assembly shall vacate his seat in the House if –being a person whose election to the House of Assembly was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of any other political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected: Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored;”

(b).  The judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in the case ofA.G. FEDERATION v. ABUBAKAR (2007) 10 NWLR (PT.1041) 1 AT 178, the Supreme Court of Nigeria (per Aderemi, JSC at page 178) stated as follows: “Members of the Senate and House of Representatives were elected by the people…. I have no doubt in my mind that the legislators have made it manifest that if any of these elective members after winning an election on the platform of a political party, later, on being a member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives, defects to another political party, he is deemed, in law, to have automatically vacated his seat in the House of which he is a member. No other interpretation can be given to the above provision. A similar provision was fashioned out for members of the State House of Assembly, Section 109(1)(g) of the Constitution which is the relevant provision…. It is manifest from the above quoted constitutional provisions that the lawmakers intended to and indeed made punishable the defection of an elected member, from the political party that sponsored him, to another political party before the expiration of the period for which the House was elected by declaring his seat vacant.”

(c).   The Nigerian Court of Appeal judgment in the case of ABEGUNDE V. ONDO STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY & ORS (2014)LPELR-23683(CA) (pp. 78-79 paras. B)(CA), where the Court of Appeal (Per MSHELIA, J.C.A) held as follows: “Appellant has violated the provisions of Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution. The consequence is that appellant has to mandatorily vacate his seat as a member in the House of Representatives. The case of A.G. FEDERATION v. ABUBAKAR (2007) 10 NWLR (PT.1041) 1 AT 178 is relevant and instructive on this issue. The Apex Court per Aderemi, JSC at page 178 stated thus: “Members of the Senate and House of Representatives were elected by the people as were the President. Applying the well known principles of interpretation to the above provision of the Constitution, I have no doubt in my mind that the legislators have made it manifest that if any of these elective members after winning an election on the platform of a political party, later, on being a member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives, defects to another political party, he is deemed, in law, to have automatically vacated his seat in the House of which he is a member. No other interpretation can be given to the above provision. A similar provision was fashioned out for members of the State House of Assembly, Section 109(1)(g) of the Constitution which is the relevant provision. His Lordship further stated: -“It is manifest from the above quoted constitutional provisions that the lawmakers intended to and indeed made punishable the defection of an elected member, from the political party that sponsored him, to another political party before the expiration of the period for which the House was elected by declaring his seat vacant. No similar provision was made for the Vice-President or even for the President.”

(d).  The Supreme Court of Nigeria case of HON. MICHAEL DAPIANLONG and 5 OTHERS v CHIEF (DR) JOSHUA CHIBI DARIYE [2007] NGSC 181), the Supreme Court (per Onnoghen, while delivering the lead judgment): “There is no doubt that there existed in the Plateau State House of Assembly 14 vacant seats as a result of cross-carpeting.”

3).     WAS THERE ANY DIVISION AS OF 11 DECEMBER 2023 IN THE POLITICAL PARTY ON WHOSE PLATFORM THE DEFECTING 27 LAWMAKERS WERE ELECTED?

(a).  Evidence Of Factionailsation In The PDP As Of 11 December 2023? I am yet to find any report or evidence showing that there was factionalisation or merger arrangements in/by the Peoples Democratic Party as of 11 December 2023 when the 27 lawmakers defected/cross-carpeted to another political party. I would appreciate if anyone who has found, can graciously avail me of such via my email address: lawmentorNGgmail.com. I would really appreciate.

(b).  Types Of Defection In  a Legislative House In Nigeria (My Opinion): Under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, defection by a member of a legislative house (the National Assembly or the House of Assembly of a State) may be constitutional or unconstitutional. A constitutional defection is one that happens “as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored”. An unconstitutional defection occurs when the defection is not “as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored”. A major different between a constitutional defection and an unconstitutional defection, in effect, is that in the case of the former, the defecting lawmaker does not lose his seat in the House, unlike in the latter case which results in automatic loss of his seat, meaning that his seat automatically becomes vacant. See Section 109(1)(g) of the Constitution. (See: “Rivers State (Part 2): Can The Remaining Members Of A House Of Assembly Validly Conduct The Business Of The House After An Unconstitutional Defection By The Majority” By Sylvester Udemezue; 13 may 2024; thenigerialawyer; lawandsocietymagazine; barristerng; thenigerianvoice, etc)

(c).  Definition of “Division” or “Merger” That Can Justify Defection In A Legislative House In Nigeria:

(i).  The case of SPEAKER, CROSS RIVER HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY & ANOR V. EKOM & ORS (2021) LPELR-55738(CA) Per MUHAMMED LAWAL SHUAIBU ,JCA (P. 21, paras. C-F) appears to have explained the type or nature of the DIVISION or FACTIONALIZATION in, or merger by, a political party, which could validly excuse/justify a defection/cross-carpeting by a legislator in Nigeria and save the defecting legislator from losing his seat in the legislative House. The facts of the case are: “The 1st respondent was elected to represent Obubra II State Constituency in the Cross-River State House of Assembly under the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). In the course of being a member of the State Assembly, his party under which he was elected became enmeshed in intractable crisis and leadership tussle at the centre that led to the polarization of the party into two factions known as Modu Sheriff and Ahmed Makarfi factions and both factions were therefore engaged in multiple Court cases. As a result of this crisis, the 1st respondent took a decision to defect to the All Progressive Party (APC) which decision he communicated to the Speaker of the Cross-River State House of Assembly. However, the Speaker and the entire members of the House of Assembly took a decision and declared the 1st respondent’s seat vacant citing Section 109 (1) (g) of the Constitution.”

(ii). Still on Definition of “Division” or “Merger”: The Court of Appeal in its lead/leading judgment in that same case, SPEAKER, CROSS RIVER HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY & ANOR V. EKOM & ORS (Per Muhammed Lawal Shuaibu, JCA (pp. 21-22, paras. C-F, F-A) had this to say on meaning of division or faction in a political party: “I have stated that the proviso to Sections 68 (1) (g) and 109 (1) (g) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) creates an exception to the punishment imposed on a member defecting from the political party under the platform of which he was elected into the legislative house to another party. The exceptions envisaged are that there must have been division in the previous political party, a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which the defector was previously sponsored…. A political faction is a grouping of individuals, especially within a political organization, such as political party, a trade union, or other group with a political purpose. A political faction could be described as “a party within a party”. It is thus an internal conflict within an organization and or a small section of a group that has broken off from or separated itself from a larger one.”

(iii).  From the above, it appears clear beyond doubt that the political division/faction that would be considered to be in conformity with the extant provisions of the Constitution must be “a party within a party” or “a group that has broken off from or separated itself from a larger one”. This throws up the question as to whether there was a group or faction that had broken off/away or separated itself from PDP as of 11 December 2023 when the 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly defected from their own political party to another. Was there another political party or association within the PDP? Was there, as of 11 December 2023, a break-away faction within the PDP, having its own separate/distinct national chairman or leader and claiming independence from the main PDP?  Alternatively, was PDP in any merger arrangements with another or other political parties as of 11 December 2023?

(4). Can The Remaining (Minority) Members Of The House Continue With Businesses Of The House Of Assembly After The Majority Has Defected: In Plateau State, 14 members of a 24-member House of Assembly had defected from PDP leaving 10 members. In his lead or leading judgment in that case, DAPIANLONG V. DARIYE (2007) 3 PLR/1983/22(SC); [2007]NGSC 181 (27 APRIL 2007); (2007) LPELR-928(SC) @61, His Lordship, Hon Justice Walter Onnoghen, JSC, while delivering the lead judgment, has this to say, which is self-explanatory: “In the instant case, it is not disputed that 8 out of 10 members in a House of 24 membership initiated and carried out the impeachment of the 1st respondent. There is no doubt that there existed in the Plateau State House of Assembly 14 vacant seats as a result of cross-carpeting. It is my view that until the vacancies created by the carpet crossing members are filled by the process of by-election, the Plateau State House of Assembly can only transact such legislative duties that require the participation of less than 2/3 majority of ALL the members of that House, which duties definitely excludes impeachment proceedings”. See also: “Rivers State (Part 2): Can The Remaining Members Of A House Of Assembly Validly Conduct The Business Of The House After An Unconstitutional Defection By The Majority”, By Sylvester Udemezue;  published On 14 May 2024.

(5). THE “AUTHENTIC LEGISLATURE” OF RIVERS STATE?

Withthe greatest respect to Chief OCJ OKOCHA, SAN, it’s humbly submitted that all members of the group of 27 led by Hon Martins AMAEWHULE ceased to be members of the Rivers State House of Assembly on 11 December 2023 when they defected to a different political party. It’ is fallacious (that is, misleading) and amounts to a gross misstatement of the extant law, for anyone to  refer to members of this G-27 group as the “authentic legislators” or as constituting the “authentic legislature” of the Rivers State. Not only are they no longer members of the Rivers State House of Assembly, it’s a criminal offence for them to continue to parade themselves as members of the House of Assembly of Rivers State or for them to purport to sit or to transact businesses as members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. Further, they do not have any locus standi to represent the Rivers State House of Assembly anywhere, in anything or in any lawsuit. See SECTION 99 OF THE CONSTITUION OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA, 1999 which provides: “Any person who sits or votes in a House of Assembly of a State knowing or having reasonable grounds for knowing that he is not entitled to do so commits an offence and is liable on conviction to such punishment as shall be prescribed by a Law of the House of Assembly”

(6).  FURTHER READING; Personal/private opinion on the legal aspects of the imbroglio in the Rivers State house of Assembly (— these are published on several media platforms; all you need to do ro read is search the internet).  My opinions do not lay any claim to infallibility. I write to provoke further discussions in the interest of the rule of law and constitutional democracy, and especially in exercise of my rights as guaranteed under Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, and in Rule 42 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners in Nigeria, 2023. Finally, as I wrote earlier in a piece titled, “The Place for “KICK-BACKS” & “BRIBES” in our Efforts to Kick Back Corruption & Kick-Start responsible Governance in Nigeria” By Sylvester Udemezue (24 October 2018; BarristerNG), “A major duty legal researchers and rule of law campaigners owe society in the practice of constitutional democracy for promotion and sustenance of responsible and responsive governance is to constantly offer legal opinions on issues of law to guide our leaders and institutions in the discharge of leadership responsibilities”. Enjoy reading me while I eagerly look forward to hearing from you with your ripostes, comments, observations. Some will even begin on the path of ad hominem, more often than not, to divert attention from the real issues. All are welcome. I assure you of one thing: we shall continue to write, until Nigeria goes from rotten to bad and quickly out into good, then better and until the best:

(a). ‘Rivers State: Analysing the just-ended Wike-Fubara war in light of Governor Sim’s “no price is too much for peace to reign” declaration’, By Sylvester Udemezue;  published On 20 December 2023.

(b).  “Rivers State: Court Pronouncement Not Necessary in Vacation of Seat of A Defecting Lawmaker in Nigeria” By Sylvester Udemezue;  published On 13 May 2024.

(c).  “Rivers State (Part 2): Can The Remaining Members Of A House Of Assembly Validly Conduct The Business Of The House After An Unconstitutional Defection By The Majority”, By Sylvester Udemezue;  published On 14 May 2024.

(d). “Two Legal Questions About Rivers State House Of Assembly; Answers From The Appellate Courts ” By Sylvester Udemezue;  published On 07 July 2024.

(e).  Re: “Court Of Appeal Nullifies Expulsion Of 25 Rivers State Lawmakers, Cites Lack Of Jurisdiction By High Court”’ By Sylvester Udemezue; published On 19 July 2024.

(f).   “A Fair Summary Of The 04/July/2024 Judgement Of The Court Of Appeal In Martins Amaewhule V. Victor Oko-Jumbo (Appeal No: Ca/Ph/198/2024)” By Sylvester Udemezue; published On 08 July 2024.

(g).  “Rivers State, Court Of Appeal and Status of the ‘Status Quo’ Order in Amaewhule v. Oko-Jumbo (2024) ” By Sylvester Udemezue; published On 14 July 2024.

(h).  “The Rivers State Assembly Imɓroglio and Duty of Lawyers to Defend Rule of Law and Constitutional Democracy in Nigeria “ By Sylvester Udemezue; Published on 08 July 2024.

(i) .  “The “I Am An Authentic Legal Luminary” Speech And Legal Issues Arising: How a Legal Giant Missed a Golden Opportunity To Render An All-Inclusive Legal Opinion On Burning Legal Questions Affecting His Rivers State (Part 1).  By Sylvester Udemezue; Published on 21 October 2024.

Respectfully,

Sylvester Udemezue  (Udems),

Proctor of The Reality Ministry of Law and Justice

08109024556.

t[email protected]

(22/10/2024)

On the Sorry State of the Judiciary: When a bunch of miscreants are granted bail on stiff terms when a dishonourable legislator gets a slap on the wrist

By Nkereuwem Udofia Akpan

Where is the “justice” when a bunch of miscreants are granted bail on such stiff terms when a Dishonourable member of the House of Representatives gets a mere slap on the Wrist?

When did peaceful assembly guaranteed under Chapter IV of the Constitution transmute and summersault into “treason”? Who drafted that charge? Did the fellow attend the same Law School that we all attended? Why can’t people see that the Wild Wild West of the early 1960s is replaying all over again?

If he thinks he’s not without honour, whoever knows him should tell him to sue me for defamation.

A judge will deliver a Ruling and you as a lawyer will siit down and look stupid before your clients, because everything you were taught in Law School has been turned upside down.

All the authorities and statutes on the point seem not to matter. Now the most annoying, worrisome and disgraceful part of it all is that, lawyers, including Senior Advocates who should be the ones we look up to are the ones making these applications and obtaining these “Orders” and conflicting “judgments”.

I understand the CJN has waded into the Rivers State matter to review the conflicting judgments and ExParte orders flying left right and centre.

I think NBA should start sanctioning lawyers engaged in these disturbing trend

I’m calling on the President of the NBA to use this opportunity to clean up the Aegean Stable and sanction lawyers found culpable no matter whose ox is gored and no matter how highly placed.

There is nothing like second term in NBA so Mazi Afam Osigwe should act and etch his footprints on the sands of time.

Chief Nkereuwem Udofia Akpan Constitutional Lawyer Author and Human Rights Activist writes from Abuja

Prosecution and detention of minors for treason shameful—Kunle Edun, SAN

By Kunle Edun, SAN

In better climes, the prosecuting counsel involved in this aberration would be facing professional disciplinary hearing and directed to provide evidence of the young boys charged to Court who are fathers and university graduates.

Very shameful indeed. We do not need shameless liars in the legal profession. In spite of clear evidence to even the blind, a lawyer will be embarrassing the legal profession on television should call for serious concern by the NBA.

I completely agree with the erudite submission of my emeritus President @⁨Joseph Daudu SAN⁩ and advise that the AGF enters a nolle in the matter. Let the children go back to their parents, having been unlawfully detained for more than 3 months.

The Police officers involved in this global show of shame should be issued a query by the Police Service Commission. They are not fit and proper persons to be in the Force. Police ought to be a civil and humane institution and not a law-breaking institution. They should go after the arrogant and spoilt politicians who can make hardworking Nigerians disappear from the face of the earth.

Tinubu’s tragic trial of Nigeria’s malnourished minors

By Farooq Kperogi

Nigeria is doddering on the edge of never-before-seen economic desolation, but President Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration’s major preoccupation is not to bring ministration to a badly hurting nation but to prosecute harmless, impoverished, malnourished, and undernourished minors of northern Nigerian origin who, months ago, joined millions of Nigerians to protest for their right to a life without crippling poverty and fear, for which the only reply from the state has been detention and starvation.

Yesterday, social media platforms were suffused with piteous, nerve-wracking videos and photos of four malnourished minors—kids in their early teens whose bones bear witness to weeks in captivity—who collapsed in a courtroom in Abuja. Their fragile, pity-inducing bodies provide evidence of the brutal conditions they’ve endured in jail. It was an unmitigated scandal, a total embarrassment, a tear-jerking spectacle.

What intolerably rank insanity is this? What halfway sensible government would arrest, imprison, and then publicly try its underage children just because they stood against the unendurable economic tyranny that has pushed millions of Nigerians into incalculable torment?

These children didn’t rise up in protest because they were troublemakers. They rose because they were hungry. They saw, in their communities, a growing tide of desperation and despair brought about by a series of misguided neoliberal policies that have squeezed every last drop of dignity from their lives.

The #EndBadGovernance protest was not an act of rebellion for the sake of anarchy or for the overthrow of the Tinubu administration. It was a scream for survival in a country that has turned a deaf ear to its poorest, youngest, most vulnerable citizens. The children joined the protest, not because they were instigators, but because they are the victims of policies that have crushed them and their parents.

Now, Tinubu is prosecuting these poor children’s audacity to feel hunger, their nerve to protest against it, and their courage to ask for a better future.

Yes, young Nigerians, weakened by malnutrition, denuded of hope by unceasingly mounting prices, and drained by the unyielding fear that Nigeria’s streets are now safer than its government, are being hauled into court as though they were hard-boiled criminals. There is no parallel for this that I can recall in Nigeria in my lifetime.

How hollow must we be, as a society, to accept that the government’s solution to rising dissent and desperation is to prosecute the youth it has left to wither? This is not governance; this is a callous persecution masquerading as law and order.

The logic is Kafkaesque: punish the hungry, hush up the desperate, and maybe, just maybe, the problem will go away. But hunger and despair don’t disappear when you throw a child in jail. Poverty doesn’t vanish when you suppress a protest. The anger and frustration simmer, unaddressed, until they spill over.

I couldn’t hold back tears at the sight of five minors, weak from hunger, fainting as they were called to stand trial. It’s a sight that would shame even the most despotic regimes.

Here were young Nigerians, handcuffed by a state that refuses to feed, clothe, or educate them, collapsing before their accusers as if in silent protest, their very bodies speaking louder than any courtroom defense ever could.

Even lawyers and court officials, perhaps briefly awakened from the stupor of compliance, rushed to assist them. But as the immediate shock subsided, what remained was an undeniable truth: Nigeria’s youth are being starved, punished, and brought to the brink, not for crimes, but for demanding their right to survive in a country that fails them at every turn.

At the heart of this blot on Nigeria’s escutcheon is a government that seems more beholden to the dictates of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank than to the needs of its own people. President Bola Tinubu’s administration has followed the familiar playbook of austerity and subsidy removal, but without the slightest regard for the human cost.

Inflation is climbing, prices are soaring, the naira is plunging, hope is walking away, and the nation is dying. Families cannot afford basic sustenance, the middle class is disappearing, the poor are being crushed beyond the bounds of tolerance, and the nation’s youth, who see no future in the darkening landscape, are told to keep silent or face untoward consequences.

These poor, hapless children are not the problem. The government’s own policies are the problem. As I have pointed out repeatedly in multiple columns, the unbending loyalty to IMF austerity measures and “economic reforms” that do nothing but deepen poverty and widen the gulf between the haves and have-nots are the problem.

So why are these policies, and those who enforce them, not on trial instead? Why are the architects of this economic catastrophe not being called to account for the collapse of hope and opportunity?

The prosecution’s temporary suspension of trial of the four, after the children slumped in the courtroom, is not mercy; it is an insult. A government that detains minors for protesting unexampled economic adversity has already lost the moral high ground.

The temporary reprieve is nothing more than a bureaucratic sleight of hand, a way to postpone the embarrassment without addressing the real atrocity: the inhumane treatment of minors for daring to stand up against systemic injustice.

In a twist of poetic irony, the administration’s heavy-handed tactics reveal a fearful truth: the voices of Nigeria’s youth are a threat to the powerful. It is their courage, their unyielding desire for a better future, that sends tremors through the halls of power.

Instead of seeing these children as a spark of hope, a chance for renewal, the government has chosen to crush that spirit. These young people are Nigeria’s conscience, and by silencing them, the state only exposes the depths of its own desperation and degeneration.

Where is the humanity, the leadership, the understanding that a nation’s youth are its most precious resource? The Tinubu government must immediately end this untenably appalling charade of prosecuting minors who have the misfortune of being born in desperately poor homes.

It should release these children to their families forthwith. What the kids need is food, opportunity, and security, not prosecution. They are the voices of a generation calling out for empathy, action, and understanding, not retribution. Their cries are not a threat; they are a call to conscience, a summons to a government that has seemingly lost its way in the maze of worthless economic jargon and self-created fiscal constraints.

Let the children heal and live free of the fear that their hunger and hardship will be met with chains. The government must prioritize people over inhuman policies dictated by distant, no-good, vampiric financial institutions in Washington. It must recognize that these policies have consequences, consequences borne not by politicians and their cronies but by millions of Nigerians who struggle daily to survive.

For every child in that courtroom, for every young voice silenced by detention, Nigeria loses a part of its soul. Let this be a warning to those in power: the future is watching, and history will remember which leaders chose compassion over cruelty, justice over vengeance.

Because if a nation’s children cannot protest peacefully without fear of reprisal if their hunger is not a call to action but an excuse for punishment, then the government itself stands on trial—and it is failing spectacularly.

Odinkalu has a penchant for attacking judges and judiciary —Okocha, SAN

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria and ex-president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Onueze C.J Okocha, has described Chidi Odinkalu, law teacher and rights crusader as ” a man that has a penchant for attacking judges and the judiciary.”

Weighing in on the furore around the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun’s decision to attend the foundation laying ceremony for the construction of 40 housing units (owners-occupiers) for different categories of judicial officers in the Federal Capital Territory, Okocha said: “From time immemorial, court facilities that involve contracting are provided by the executives.

Reacting to a report written by Ise-Oluwa Ige in Vanguard newspapers Okocha countered the argument that the CJN should not have attended the event. “I totally disagree. I have read an article, I think by Chidi Odinkalu on this issue. That is a man that has the penchant for attacking judges and the judiciary,” he said.

According to OKocha: “I heard the critics are saying the judiciary should not have attended the event. That the CJN, the President of the Court of Appeal should not have attended that ceremony. That they should not be there because of their suspicion that Wike can be in court. You can’t stop a man from doing his job. Judiciary should not be awarding contract for the building of court. There is nothing wrong in the executive providing such facilities including motor vehicles for the judiciary— judges, magistrate and other judicial officers. I do not agree with him.”

He then sresed that throughout history, court facilities involving contracting have been provided by the executive branch. “From time immemorial, court facilities that involve contracting are provided by the executives. It is just that our National Assembly has taken it upon themselves to be awarding contracts for their own benefit and building of their own structure. The judiciary should be insulated from anything that can bring them into conflict between their duty and interest. So, there is nothing wrong with what has happened here,” he explained.

The former Bar President further added, “I have served as the Attorney-General of a state. We built courts for the Rivers State judiciary. Others have served as attorneys general too and did similar thing. The Supreme Court Complex, for instance, was not awarded by the Supreme Court.”

He equally spoke about the role of the National Judicial Council (NJC), pointing out: “Of course, now they have the National Judicial Council that awards contracts that have to do with staff of the judiciary but the NJC is a separate body. Of course, you have to be careful. You don’t want to put a Council like that in a position of conflict of interest. I do not see the basis of that criticism.”

Okocha summed up the matter by emphasizing that the judiciary should not be involved in awarding contracts to avoid potential conflicts of interest. “Judiciary should not be awarding contracts. If they are parties to a contract and if a litigation arises with regards to such contract, they will go to court. And it is the same judiciary that will now preside because judges are part of the judiciary. And you know the principle of law—nemo judex in casua sua meaning: No man should be a judge in his own case,” he added.

Taraba governor seals deal with China on hydropower project

Governor Agbu Kefas of Taraba State has expressed optimism for investment in energy distribution and a new hydropower project in the State.

He also highlighted the collaborative spirit necessary to realize the ambitious Taraba Development Master Plan 2024.

Kefas stated these during a business meeting with stakeholders and the China Civil Engineering Construction Corporation (CCECC) which took place at the esteemed T. Y Danjuma House in Asokoro District, Abuja.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was also signed between the Taraba State Government and CCECC, marking the beginning of a new era of development and partnership that promises to propel Taraba State forward.

According to him, the plan for investment in energy and hydropower will be in collaboration with CCECC.

Also in attendance at the meeting were key figures, including the Deputy Governor of Taraba State, members of the National Assembly, Minister of State for Regional Development, esteemed traditional rulers, and members of the State Executive Council.

Their collective presence underscored the commitment to transforming Taraba into a thriving hub of opportunity.

During the meeting, Governor Kefas expressed his enthusiasm for partnering with CCECC, emphasizing how the collaboration can unlock the vast potential of the state.

The discussions centered around three critical pillars essential for the growth of Taraba State: energy development, infrastructural enhancements, and initiatives aimed at securing food and economic stability.

He passionately articulated that the initiatives spearheaded by his administration are designed not only for immediate benefit but also to lay a strong foundation for future generations.

The governor highlighted significant projects already in progress, such as the ongoing rehabilitation and reconstruction of the Danbaba Suntai Airport in Jalingo, which serves as a vital gateway to the state.

He said the development reflects his administration’s pledge to foster transformation and open Taraba State to a wealth of new global opportunities.

Kefas also outlined strategies to expand road networks, enhance transportation systems, manage natural resources effectively, and invigorate the state’s economy.

On the agricultural front, the governor emphasized the importance of mechanized farming and improved storage and processing facilities for achieving food security.

Representing CCECC, President Chan Sichang, through Chief Executive Director, Zhou Dongping, expressed enthusiasm for partnering with Taraba State.

He recognized the pivotal role infrastructure plays in the progress of the State and expressed readiness to support its development journey, highlighting CCECC’s longstanding commitment to providing exceptional service in Nigeria.

Engr. Alex Oniegbu provided an insightful update on the Taraba Development Master Plan, revealing that the vision extends beyond Jalingo to encompass all Local Government Areas and senatorial zones of the State.

He said that their firm previously completed the Abuja Phase Two Master Plan, giving confidence that Taraba State will soon emerge as a significant force in regional development.

Nigerian judiciary must take judicial notice of affidavit deposed by 26 defected Rivers lawmakers – Okutepa

By Jibrin Okutepa, SAN

I have always found it extremely nauseating and insulting to my knowledge of law why those who desecrated and violated our constitution are always granted remedies by our courts.

Section 1 of the 1999 Nigerian constitution says the constitution is supreme, and everything must be done according to the constitution. The same constitution says in section 109(1)(g) that any member of the House of Assembly shall vacate his seat in the House if “being a person whose election to the House of Assembly was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration that House was elected”.

There is no dispute that in the case of Rt Hon. Martin Chike Amaewhule and 26 others vs INEC and Ors in suit No FHC/Abj/Cs/4631/2023, Hon Amaewhule deposed to affidavit on oath in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 15 of the Affidavit in support of the case filed on 13 December 2023 in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CD/1783/2023 for himself and the others that:

1. That I am the 1st Plaintiff, Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly and was duly elected Speaker of the 5th day of June 2023 by virtue of which I am seized of the facts of this case deposed herein.

2. That I have the consent and authority of all the other Plaintiffs to depose to this Affidavit.

3. That all the facts deposed to herein are within my personal knowledge except otherwise stated.

4. That I was duly elected as a member representing Obio-Akpor State Constituency in the Rivers State House of Assembly in May 2023 on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party and on the 5th day of June 2023, I was elected Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly.

5. That the 2nd Plaintiff is the Deputy Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly and was duly elected Deputy Speaker on the 5th day of June 2023. The 2nd Plaintiff also represents Gokana State Constituency in the Rivers State House of Assembly, having been duly elected by his Constituents in the May 2023 General Election on the Platform of the Peoples Democratic Party.

6. That the 3rd – 27th Plaintiffs are also members of the Rivers State House of Assembly duly elected to represent their respective constituencies in the Rivers State House of Assembly on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party.

8. That the Plaintiffs contested the aforesaid elections on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party and had remained members of the Peoples Democratic Party until 11/12/2023 when they (Plaintiffs) left Peoples Democratic Party and joined the All Progressives Congress as a result of a division in the Peoples Democratic Party.

15. That faced with the state of uncertainty and confusion in the 2nd Defendant [People’s Democratic Party (PDP)] caused by the division in the Political Party, the Plaintiffs [Hon Martins Amaewhule & 26 others] were forced by the state of affairs within the 2nd Defendant [PDP] to defect and join the All Progressives Congress (APC)”

There is no doubt that from the paragraphs of the Affidavit referred to above which paragraphs are on oath, it can not be seriously contended by any reasonable person that they did not defect. They did. Can these lawmakers be accorded the right of still being members of Rivers State House of Assembly? I do not think so.

They lost their seats. We must hold them accountable to their oaths. They knew the consequences of their actions. It is unconscionable to accord them any constitutional rights to still claim to be members of Rivers State House of Assembly.

The duty they owe is to vacate their seats. That they failed to vacate is constitutional iniquity. They should not be assisted by any institution of justice to remain in constitutional iniquities. Nigerian judiciary must take judicial notice of the Affidavit they deposed. It is an admission against interests.

That is my stand. No one should be allowed to profit from his own wrong. That is a principle of law of considerable antiquity. It is good law rooted in good conscience.

1...443444445...1,401Page 444 of 1,401

TIPS

Load more