In one of the most scandalous certificate scam of the year 2023, a Daily Nigeria reporter, Umar Audu went undercover and investigated the booming business fake degrees, bagged Cotonou varsity degree in 6 weeks, participated in NYSC scheme. All these he achieved without setting a foot in Cotonou or writing any examination!

In December 2022, the reporter reached out to a racketeering syndicate that specialises in selling the infamous degree certificates from the neighboring countries to willing buyers at an ‘affordable rate’.

The agent however told the reporter the option of “studying” for a year or month, but he opted for the month option.
“That’s not a problem; we can help. If the money is ready, we can help you out. We have done it for a lot of people. If you make the payment now, the results will be ready next month,” he assured.

The choice of mass communication from any “university” in Cotonou was premised on the fact he could easily scale through the screening as he had knowledge of the course.

The agent gave the reporter the breakdown of the amount to pay, which included tuition fees, an evaluation letter, a resident permit, immigration stamps at the border post and transportation.

On December 27, 2022, the reporter made the payment and was issued a payment receipt.
True to the agent’s words, the certificate and transcript of Ecole Superieure de Gestion et de Technologies, ESGT, Cotonou, Benin Republic, were delivered to his office on February 17, 2023.

The transcript indicated that this reporter commenced the institution in 2018 and graduated on September 5, 2022.

Unfortunately, there was a slight mistake on the transcript, so it had to be transported back to Cotonou for correction, and one month later, the corrected version was received on March 29.

Prior to that, the reporter was never issued an admission letter or knew about the school the agent was processing for him.

All the agenct said was, “don’t worry, everything will be sorted out.”
Like miracle, our reporter “finished” the four-year degree programme in less than two months without application, registration, studying, writing exams or crossing Nigerian border.

But despite having the certificate and transcript in his possession, the reporter had fears they could be fake, until he discovered a scan code placed on the left bottom of the transcript. And when the reporter scanned through, it directed him to the website of ESGT University, indicating that he is a genuine product of the institution.

On its website, ESGT, established in 2009, said, “It is an institution built upon a vision that enables individuals from a mix of different nationalities and cultures to get the best in undergraduate and postgraduate international education.”.

The institution is fully accredited by both the governments of the Benin Republic and Nigeria. It offers over 30 courses in management sciences, social sciences, applied and natural sciences as well as technology.

It was gathered that the racketeering agents in Nigeria work hand-in-hand with the top management of the university campus in Cotonou, whose registrar and English section coordinator are Nigerians.

After payment of additional money through the agent, the evaluation letter was eventually released. The letter is a mandatory requirement for NYSC mobilisation.

In separate letters dated May 25 and 26, addressed to the director general of the National Youth Service Scheme, NYSC, the Federal Ministry of Education confirmed that the ESGT is on the ministry’s list of accredited institutions.

The letter, which was signed on behalf of the minister by the deputy director of Evaluation and Accreditation, Koli Salihu-Mongodiba, also cleared 51 ESGT graduates to participate in the NYSC, “having met all the requirements set by the ministry”.

“The institution is on the ministry’s list of accredited institutions in Benin, and the bachelor degrees awarded to the students as indicated on the attached list are equivalent to bachelor degrees awarded by any Nigerian university in a similar field of study,” the letter read in part.

By Akintayo Balogun Esq.

Since the restoration of democratic structures in May 1999, there have been cases of serving legislators defecting to another party other than the party under whose umbrella they contested and won elections. This act is known as Cross-Carpeting. In the Nigerian political space, it is popularly known as decamping or defection. The issue of the defection of serving legislators had become a stigma, an embarrassment, and a form of dishonour to parties that sponsor candidates to victory in an election. To reduce the rate of defection of serving legislators, the Nigerian Constitution was further amended to checkmate how serving legislators jump from one party to another, particularly after being elected into office under a particular party. Following the general elections held in February and March 2023, there have been cases of defection. Under review in this article are the cases of Senator Ifeanyi Ubah, representing Anambra South Senatorial constituency, who crossed from the Young Progressives Party (YPP) to the All Progressives Party (APC), and recently, the case of 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly who moved from the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressive Congress (APC). In Nigeria, cross carpeting had been a regular practice by serving legislators and governors and even a vice president at some points. Despite the amendment to the Constitution however, legislators still flout the express provision with reckless abandon, based majorly on the political advantage they get once they defect to another party. The Constitution of Nigeria is very clear on the issue of serving legislators moving from one political party to another. Section 68(1)(g) of the Constitution provides thus:

“(1) A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if – . . . “

 “(g) being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by a political party, he becomes a member of another 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;”

Section 109 of the Constitution provides thus: 

(1) A member of a House of Assembly shall vacate his seat in the House if –

g) 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;

It is the duty of a serving legislator who defects from one party to states/to show explicitly that there is serious division in the political party where he is decamping from or a merger of two or more political parties or a faction by which he was previously sponsored. Where the legislator fails to provide these decisive constitutional issues, his defection to another political party is tantamount to vacating his seat. 

Sections 68(2) and 109(2) of the Constitution provides thus: 

“2) The President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, as the case may be, shall give effect to the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, so however that the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives or a member shall first present evidence satisfactory to the House concerned that any of the provisions of that subsection has become applicable in respect of that member.”

“The Speaker of the House of Assembly shall give effect to subsection (1) of this section, so however that the Speaker or a member shall first present evidence satisfactory to the House that any of the provisions of that subsection has become applicable in respect of the member.”

The burden now is on the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives or any of the Speakers of the various houses of Assembly to ensure that a defector fulfills the constitutional requirement before defecting to another party. In the Nigerian contest, the legislators under reference failed to provide any of the conditions stated in the Constitution as a ground for their defection to another political party. In the case of Senator Ifeanyi Ubah, in his letter to the Senate President, he stated amongst others that  “I am willing to formally notify and inform the Distinguished Senate President and our colleagues of irreconcilable differences between me and the leadership of my party… “I, therefore, resolved to move from the Young Progressive Party (YPP) to the most important party in Africa, the All Progressives Congress….

These grounds for moving from one political party to another by a serving legislator, as stated in his letter to the Senate President, fall short of the constitutional requirement for a change of political party. He failed woefully to show that there is serious division in the political party where he is decamping from or a merger of two or more political parties or a faction by which he was previously sponsored.

In the case of Rivers State House of Assembly, there are so many controversies and power plays in that case. Furthermore, there are factional speakers in the Rivers State House of Assembly which makes the determining factor more difficult. However, the defecting members stated in their letter that their defection to the APC was a result of division in the PDP, without stating more. This I must say falls short of the requirement of the Constitution as provided for in Section 109(1)(g). The members failed woefully to provide that there is serious division in the political party where they are decamping from or a merger of two or more political parties or a faction by which they were previously sponsored.

If the factional speaker who did not defect to PDP is the person recognized by law, then having declared the seats of the defectors vacant, that is the correct position of the law. This is without prejudice to the entire political brouhaha going on in the State and the leadership of the State House of Assembly. The position of the Constitution is that the entire seats of the 27 members of the Rivers House of Assembly that defected from the PDP to the APC, by law is vacant particularly as declared by the speaker of the house and INEC ought to act immediately in conducting an election to fill the empty seats. 

This constitutional position of declaring the seat of a defector vacant was given live in the case of  HON. IFEDAYO ABEGUNDE V. ONDO STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (2015) 8 NWLR 314, where the court held thus:

“…is to the effect that only such FACTIONALIZATION, FRAGMENTATION, SPLINTERING or “DIVISION” that makes it impossible or impracticable for a political party to function as such will, by virtue of the proviso to section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution, justify a person’s defection to another party and the retention of his seat for the unexpired term in the house in spite of the defection. The division must affect the entire structure of the political party at the centre, that is to say, National Leadership. Otherwise, as rightly held by the trial court and the Court of Appeal, in this case, the defector automatically loses his seat…”

Ordinarily, it is the duty of the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, or any of the Speakers of the various 36 houses of Assembly to declare the seats of such defectors vacant, and ordinarily, the Independent Electoral Commission ought to act immediately upon being notified by the Speaker, by conducting a fresh election into the seat. However, this takes a lot of political will for such to happen in Nigeria particularly when the defector is joining the speaker or Senate President in his political party. In some quarters, it was argued though erroneously, that a court order is needed to determine the vacation of the seats by the serving members of a legislative house. This is absolute incorrect. Nowhere in the Constitution was it stated that an order of the court would be required to declare a seat vacant or to prove that the defector has fulfilled grounds for defection. This is nowhere found in the Constitution. Analysts/pundits should not read additional meanings into the clear provision of the Constitution. The burden lies on the speaker or Senate President. The court only comes into play when an aggrieved political party goes to court by itself and in its name, to seek an Order of the court, mandating the Speaker or President of the Senate to declare the seat of the defector vacant as well as ordering the Independent Electoral Commission to conduct a fresh election. This is where the court comes in. Putting the court ahead of this would be delegating unconstitutional powers to the court. 

Analysts and pundits have further argued that there should be freedom of association, as guaranteed under section 40 of the Nigerian Constitution. Yes, while I agree that no legislator in Nigeria should be forced to stay in a political party against his will, however, a legislator, who has been elected on the platform of a political party cannot just wake up one day, due to political interest, political bias, the order of a godfather, or the future of his political interest, decide to defect to another political party that did not sponsor his election, particularly without providing the grounds for the defection to another political party. The vote belongs to the party. It was the party logo and name that was on the ballot boxes and not the name of the contestant. 

The seat of Senator Ifeanyi Ubah, ordinarily by law, ought to be declared vacant by the President of the Senate, and INEC ought to be mandated to act immediately in conducting an election to fill the empty seat, pursuant to section 68(1) and (2) of the Constitution of Nigeria but for political will and interest and particularly as the Senator is defecting to the party of the Senate President, He would not want to take actions detrimental to the interest of his party. The seats of the 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly who defected from the PDP to the APC, remain vacant, having failed to fulfill the constitutional requirements allowing elected persons to cross into other parties. The legislators in amending the Constitution were also careless (whether deliberately or not) in limiting the provision of the Constitution on cross carpeting to legislators. The provisions should have also included the President, his vice, the Governors, and their deputies because all these are also elected on the platforms of political parties. Particular reference is made to the cases of former Governor David Umahi of Ebonyi State, Mattawalle of Zamfara State, and Ben Ayade of Cross Rivers State, who all defected from the PDP to the APC, while serving as Governors of their various States. Unfortunately, in their cases, the Court of Appeal, particularly in the case of Governor David Umahi, stated that the Constitution only referred to legislators and nothing more. 

In conclusion, in the words of Honourable Justice Taiwo Taiwo (now retired), while delivering judgment in the case of the legislators in Cross Rivers State House of Assembly that defected from the PDP to the APC, he held that it was disheartening that politicians in the country treat citizens as if they do not matter once they get into office. According to him, we cannot continue in sin and expect grace to abound. 

It is obvious that jumping from one political party to another, particularly for serving legislators is in bad faith, having been sponsored by one political party. The courts have consistently held that the votes of a party cannot be transferred to another. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, the game of politics and political interest has taken precedence over constitutional provisions. We can only hope to get it right in Nigeria. 

Akintayo Balogun Esq., LL.B (Hons), BL, LL.M, is a legal practitioner in private practice and based in Abuja, FCT. A prolific writer, public affairs analyst, and commentator on national issues. 

[email protected].

By Chidi Anselm Odinkalu

In the last week of August 2002, Ibadan, the capital of Oyo State in south-west Nigeria, hosted the annual general conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). At the conference, the Association inaugurated Chief Wole Olanipekun, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), as its 20^th president.

One of the participants in that conference was Barnabas Igwe, then Chair of the Branch of the NBA in Onitsha, a popular commercial city in Anambra State. Mr. Igwe attended the conference with his wife, Abigail. At the time, Onitsha and much of Anambra State was in thrall at the exploits of the “Bakassi Boys”, a murderous militia which, according to Human Rights Watch, “legitimized murder and terror.”

Following the end of military rule and the onset of elected civilian government, much of south-east Nigeria was overrun by crime and insecurity. The trading communities of Aba and Onitsha initially welcomed the intervention of what was touted as a crime-busting militia.

Quickly, in Anambra, the state government adopted a law to legalize the militia, provided it with money and then turned it into a violent machine “to intimidate and kill opponents”, whether real or imagined. Ironically, the governor of Anambra State at the time was Chinwoke Mbadinuju, himself a senior lawyer.

One of these perceived opponents of the governor was Barnabas Igwe. His crime was that as chairman of the leading branch of the NBA in the state, he had, shortly before traveling for the conference in Ibadan, criticized the resort of the state government to lawlessness in the form of the Bakassi Boys and also called for “the governor’s resignation due to the failure to pay government workers for several months.” For these crimes, known agents of the state government called to threaten Barnabas Igwe that he was a marked man.

The day after returning from the conference in Ibadan, on 1 September 2002, members of the militia dragged Barnabas and Abigail Igwe out of their car on Oraifite Street in Onitsha, “attacked them with machetes and shot them several times, then ran them over with their vehicle.” The assailants took nothing from their victims, all but ruling out the possibility that this was an armed robbery incident gone awry. Abigail reportedly died at the location from her injuries.

Passers-by rushed Barnabas to the hospital where doctors battled unsuccessfully for over six hours to save his life. Before he died, however, Barnabas did speak with his elder and only surviving brother about what transpired.

This kind of murder was a state crime but the real culprits in this case were themselves in charge of the machinery of the State which should have ensured accountability. Instead, they turned that machinery into one for granting themselves impunity. The case stood no chance.

Abigail and Barnabas Igwe were young parents. At the time of their tragic assassination, they had three young children. The youngest, Somadina, was barely six years old, born in 1996. His elder brother, Chijindu, and elder sister, Nnenna, were not yet through primary school.

This assassination was naturally the first major crisis of the tenure of Wole Olanipekun as president of the NBA but this was not the first high profile assassination of a figure in the legal profession that the NBA had to deal with. The previous December, his predecessor confronted the assassination of the then Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, Bola Ige, himself also a SAN.

Following the assassination of Abigail and Barnabas Igwe, the Association issued the obligatory and practised statement denouncing the killings and calling for the perpetrators to be brought to book. As president of the NBA, Chief Olanipekun went further to announce the establishment of a N25 million trust fund to support the education of the three children that Abigail and Barnabas Igwe left behind. So credulous were the family that when the then governor of neighbouring Imo State, Achike Udenwa, gave them the sum of four hundred thousand Naira, they transferred the money to the NBA in the belief that it would be administered as part of the announced trust fund for the children.

Although he had established his practice and then made good in Onitsha, Barnabas Igwe actually came from Atta, a community in Oru East Local Government Area of Imo State. He was one of only two brothers from their father. His elder brother, Vincent, was a trader in Onitsha whose values easily proved to be more cultured and more durable than those of the Nigerian Bar Association.

Vincent Igwe was a first son brought up with an ingrained sense of duty and service. When his father feared that the burdens of educating his two sons were too much for his limited finances, Vincent gave up on his own educational aspirations in favour of his younger brother, Barnabas, opting instead for the famous Igbo venture apprenticeship system of Igba Boy.

As the administration of Shehu Shagari was about to declare austerity in 1980, Vincent ventured into trading as his own principal in Onitsha. His first duty as his own boss was to put his younger brother, Barnabas, through university. By 1984, Barnabas had graduated from university and in 1985, Vincent saw him through the Nigerian Law School, taking pride in the enrolment of his brother as a lawyer.

In those days, long before the All Progressives Congress (APC) came to power and chose to retrench it, the National Youth Service Scheme (NYSC) was compulsory for university graduates. Barnabas did his NYSC in Jos, Plateau State and desired to start his professional life there but his elder brother invited him down to Onitsha where he eventually established his practice and prospered.

When Barnabas was assassinated, an inconsolable Vincent Igwe and his wife, Juliana, inherited the care of his two young nephews and niece without complaint, doubling the size of their children instantly from three to six. Besides raising these children, they also had to take responsibility for funding the investigation into and prosecution of the suspects in the killing of Barnabas and Abigail, fielding lots of death threats of their own in the process. The NBA had vanished from the scene without courtesy or notice and the state government outsourced the prosecution in order not to finance it.

Where was the N25 million NBA Trust Fund, the reader would ask? Well, the answer is it mostly existed in the imagination of the Association. In the end, the family even had to recover as a debt the N400,000 from the Imo State Government which it had handed over to the Association. More than a decade after the killing, an embarrassed Okey Wali, SAN, as the 26^th president of the NBA at the beginning of 2013 refunded the money to the family.

This couple, Juliana and Vincent Igwe, the former a trader and the latter a teacher, raised Chijindu, Nnenna, and Somadina as their own. Providence rewarded their steadfastness and the memory of Barnabas and Abigail.

In 2023, Somadina was called to the Nigerian Bar. He is presently undertaking his NYSC somewhere in north-central Nigeria. A young man of extraordinary poise, he proposes to resume the family vocation of legal practice in the city where the assassination of his parents tragically punctuated it 21 years ago. His elder brother, Chijindu, already preceded him to the legal profession and is making a quiet name for himself around south-east Nigeria. Nnenna has also graduated with a first degree and is building her career and family too.

Orphaned in circumstances that would have destroyed most and abandoned by the professional association in the service of which of their parents were killed, the trajectory of these three children of Abigail and Barnabas Igwe was made possible by the selflessness of Juliana and Vincent Igwe. Justifiably, the children look upon the couple as Mum and Dad.

The story of what Juliana and Vincent have accomplished with these children with neither noise nor ceremony and despite their modest circumstances is a reminder of the most positive aspects of being African. They represent the best example of what it means to make a real difference in the lives of others. And for their unyielding examples of duty, service, and sacrifice, Juliana and Vincent Igwe are my Persons of the Year (POTY) for 2023.

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

Distinguished Senior Advocate Wilcox Abereton in the above piece set out in clinical summary the issue of the defection of 27 members of the Rivers. State House of Assembly from the opposition PDP to the ruling APC to which I agree in principle if we were in a country where the Rule of Law is supreme and where the various arms of government had any semblance of independence or where the institutions were strong.

Let me say from the onset that ours is an imperial presidency with enormous powers and we are a constitutional democracy only on paper.

Having said that let me express my regret for the point of divergence with Wilcox Abereton SAN because his piece might push HE Simi Fubara into Political suicide with ignominy and into the oblivion.

Now this is not about a matter pending in court but a political crisis that requires a political solution besides legal exposition and adumbrations notwithstanding.

Even it were a legal question for the courts strictly speaking, I’m unable to see how HE Simi Fubara will defeat the APC led Federal Government if he goes against a peace initiative signed by Mallam Nuhu Ribadu who is the National Security Adviser.

With the greatest respect to Abereton SAN, he has spent quality time on what the law is, citing judicial authorities to back it up as if Nigeria is a true democracy or as if the country has any viable, strong and trusted institution or arm of government as we speak.

That beautiful essay by Wilcox Abereton, SAN would have made sense in fairer clines where the Rule of Law holds sway and with strong and independent legislative and judicial institutions, definitely not in Nigeria. As we speak there’s a committee set up by the CJN just to review conflicting Judgments across the country

Simi Fubara knows that he cannot flout Presidential directives brokered by President Bola Tinubu and endorsed by the National Security Adviser Mallam Nuhu Ribadu to end the crises because he has nobody or authority to turn to. Let’s cut the rhetorics and be real to ourselves by asking a simple question: which judicial or legislative arm will assist come to the aid of Governor Simi Fubara? Is it the APC controlled National Assembly that will within 5 minutes assent to any Declaration of a State of Emergency in Rivers State? Is it the Military of Police who is under the control of Aso Rock?

Where will Governor Simi Fubara turn to? Is it the Courts ? Which Court ? He will lose in every court up to the Supreme Court. All the precedents the learned Silk is citing or any other precedents or judicial authority has no meaning in this country anymore, going by the recent decisions from the various courts in this country .

Finally since Governor Simi Fubara has only 4 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly to work with out of 32, the learned Silk knows that the issue of whether or not there is a faction or division in the PDP is a question of fact to be proved in court.

From where I’m standing no court in this country today will declare those 27 seats the Rivers State House of Assembly vacant. If it happens at trial then it will quashed on Appeal and Simi Fubara will be impeached the very next day Governor Simi Fubara will lose at some point in the appeal process and is thrown out.

The odds are against Governor Fubara and if he insists on the path suggested by the learned Silk then the ensuing violence or crisis will present a cover to the FGN to declare a State of Emergency and appoint a close Nyesom Wike nomineee as Sole Administrator.

Fubara will lose at the National Assembly. Fubara will lose in the courts. Fubara will lose if a State of Emergency is declared. The only win for Simi Fubara is a political solution which I acknowledge is skewed in favour of Nyesom Wike and like a smart soldier who knows when to beat a retreat and re-strategize, Simi Fubara has done the needful rather than be disgraced out. The odds are against him and this is politics which requires a political solution. He should ignore any fantastic legal arguments and pride fueled grandstanding and rather focus of delivering qualitative leadership to the people of Rivers State at the moment.

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

By Chuks Iloegbunam 

I don’t want to be uncharitable to this Moses Oludele Idowu. But he was the fellow I called “a conceited and disreputable ignoramus” when I dealt with his provocative nonsense on Professor Ben Nwabueze.

Please consider this from his write-up: “Some well- dressed men gatecrashed to a christening ceremony of a child and begged the woman in charge of food to just give them soup, out of the leftovers. She should not even bother with meat but just only soup which they would take home to make garri. This is not in Hausa or Igboland, it happens here in Yorubaland, and they are Yorubas – land of culture and honour, now under siege of poverty, extreme poverty as a result of gross misrule by pseudo- progressives of APC.”

This means that, to him, Ndigbo are an uncultured and dishonourable lot reeling through time from the interminable punches of starvation. I do not know where he learnt that the Yoruba fed better than the Hausa or the Igbo or any other ethnic group through the ages. I do not know if he understands the relativity of culture.

Now, to the seed of the matter. This fellow is wailing that the house is flooded with water. But he did not bother to address what led to the leaking roof that created the waterlogged reality.

This fellow never questioned his president and his baggage of lies, corruption, and dwindling health during the electoral campaigns. This fellow was among the certificate forger’s cheerleaders. He was a factor in the crowds shouting Awa Lo Kan – It is our turn!

Now, he expects his president to perform miracles, including economic miracles, when the man cannot even sustain attention for ten straight minutes.

Doesn’t it warn everyone that this Idowu guy is burdened with inherent confusion? Shouldn’t he first take a position on whether his man won the presidential election?

What is new in his warning that extreme conditions begat intolerable repercussions? Any secondary school boy knows that!

Idowu should face realities and desist from chasing shadows. He should stop living a life of Let’s Pretend!