The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, on Wednesday, expressed his willingness to testify before the Justice Ayo Salami-led Presidential investigating the alleged financial infractions against the suspended Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu.

Malami was directly reacting to a letter by Magu requesting the probe panel to summon him to appear and give evidence on some of the allegations.

The Minister disclosed this during an interview on Arise TV on Wednesday which was monitored by our correspondent.

Malami, who stated that he has nothing to hide from the public, expressed his willingness and readiness to appear before the Justice Salami led investigative panel if a summon is served on him.

While responding to a question put across to him, Malami said: ‘So, if indeed the Ayo Salami panel invites Abubakar Malami as a person or the AGF in the person of Abubakar Malami for any testimony, for any clarification, for examination or cross-examination for that matter, Abubakar Malami will wholeheartedly, gladly within the spirit and context of the rule of law be there to testify, be there to be cross-examined, be there to be examined within the context of the rule of law.

‘Our position as a government is to be submissive to the rule of law and the rule of law component of it requires that when we are called upon to clarify issues, when we are called upon to be examined, when we are called upon to be cross-examined, Abubakar Malami will be there and will gladly cooperate with the inquiry institution and that indeed was an attribute of the government that translated to the victory we are seeing today arising from P&ID.

‘Abubakar Malami has along the line, within the chain of the arbitral process, submitted to uncountable invitations, responded to uncountable requests for clarification of issues and indeed executed uncountable witness statements for the purpose of putting the record straight and the case of Salami will certainly not be an exception.’

Magu has asked the Justice Ayo Salami -led Presidential panel probing him to summon the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice (AGF), Mr Abubakar Malami to appear before it.

Magu anchored his request on the constitutional principles of fair hearing as provided under section 36 of the amended document.

Osaro Eghobamien, SAN, has rejected his appointment as a member of the Committee set up by the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) to audit the 2018 and July 2020 national elections of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)

Eghobamien, in a statement made available to TheNigeriaLawyer (TNL), said he was not informed of the appointment but rather read about it in the media. He, therefore, described the such as “discourteous”.

The learned silk also faulted BOSAN for constituting the committee without involving the NBA adding that the committee is “without defined expectations”

Read the full statement below:

COMMUNIQUE ON MY APPOINTMENT AS A MEMBER OF AN ELECTORAL AUDIT COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE BODY OF SENIOR ADVOCATES OF NIGERIA (BOSAN)

My attention has, today, September 8, 2020, been drawn to several publications in the dailies and law blogs, stating that I have been appointed a member of a Committee to audit the past elections of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), the said Committee having been constituted by the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN), and led by Chief JoeKyari Gadzama, SAN, with Chief Yomi Aliu SAN, Prof. Offornze Amucheazi, SAN, Mr. Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN, and myself as members.

But for the said publications, I would not have been aware of that appointment. I have, in the past couple of months, been in and out of Benin City, preparing for the burial of my late father, Sir Chief (Dr.) Alfred Eghobamien, SAN, who passed on to glory on June 4, 2020. As a result of being immersed in the preparations for my late father’s burial, I was not in attendance at the virtual meeting held by BOSAN on September 5, 2020.

Being absent at the meeting where I was appointed a member of the Committee, it behooves of BOSAN to inform me of the fact of my appointment privately, and not leave me to find out as I have. That way I would have had the opportunity to quietly express my views to BOSAN.

The Communique issued by BOSAN, as regards the constitution of a Committee to audit the past elections of the NBA states that BOSAN is “…determined to achieve the installation of a flawless electoral system for the NBA and conscious of the need not to take a decision on the said elections without the benefit of detailed facts based on proper investigation and the experience with previous elections, further resolved to set up a five-man Committee for the audit of the 2018 and 2020 NBA elections, in partnership with the Nigerian Bar Association…”

I am not necessarily against BOSAN setting up a Committee for the audit of past NBA elections, nor do I think BOSAN’s setting up an Audit Committee derogates from the powers of the NBA. Anybody with sufficient interest can set up a Committee. I am however concerned that the process through which BOSAN has set up this Committee is totally flawed for the following reasons:

1. The NBA (through one or more representatives) was not invited by BOSAN to participate in the formation and modus operandi of the Committee. This would ordinarily have been proof of collaboration. While BOSAN states that it intends to collaborate with the NBA, this would have been shown if BOSAN had invited the NBA prior to setting up the Committee. I believe that dictating to the NBA is totally unacceptable.

2. BOSAN did not (at least with me) ascertain the readiness of the members of the Committee to work in the Audit Committee, and to extract representations/assurances from the said members as to any conflict of interest they may have in that capacity. It was discourteous of BOSAN to appoint any member of the Committee without prior confirmation of that member’s willingness to work in the Committee.

3. BOSAN should have set up a platform that infuses some level of independence in the Committee, which also ensures that every member of the Committee is independent.

4. BOSAN did not set out clearly the mandate of the Committee, and the outcomes expected of the Committee’s audit exercise. It would therefore be of no use to set up a Committee without defined expectations. It is for the sake of the unity of the Bar, and my concerns expressed above, that I humbly decline the appointment to be a member of the aforesaid Committee. I sincerely apologize for publishing my decision. This would have been done privately had I been afforded the same courtesy.

Osaro Eghobamien SAN

A few says after he rejected electricity tariff hike, former Vice President and presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the last election, Atiku Abubakar, has frowned at the sudden increment in the pump price of petrol by the Nigerian government.

Atiku in a tweet on Tuesday said the hike in fuel price did not in any way support certain claims regarding deregulation in Nigeria.

Atiku said his view on the matter stemmed from his experience as a businessman “who is seeing things from an economic perspective.”

He argued that in the US and Europe, fuel prices were far lower than they were in 2019, adding that if Nigeria truly deregulated, then fuel prices should have dropped.

Petrol stations across the country increased the price of Premium Motor Spirit, popularly known as petrol, on Thursday, September 3.

The prices ranged from N155 to N162 per litre across the country observed.

The Federal Government’s removal of petrol subsidy and the increase in electricity tariff are in line with reforms being sought by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, economic experts have said.

The IMF had on April 28 approved Nigeria’s request for emergency financial assistance of $3.4bn to support the country’s efforts in addressing the severe economic impact of the COVID-19 shock and the sharp fall in oil prices.

The Washington-based fund also published the country’s letter of intent in a detailed report released on April 29.

In the letter, the Minister of Finance, Budget and National Planning, Mrs Zainab Ahmed, and the Central Bank of Nigeria Governor, Mr Godwin Emefiele, pledged that fuel subsidy would not return.

The sharp drop in crude oil prices on the back of the spread of coronavirus saw the landing cost of petrol hit a record low in March, wiping off subsidy on the product. The Federal Government, on March 18, reduced the pump price of petrol to N125 per litre from N145.

“The recent introduction and implementation of an automatic fuel price formula will ensure fuel subsidies, which we have eliminated, do not reemerge,” the Federal Government told the IMF in the letter dated April 21, 2020.

In a report on August 17, Reuters quoted sources as saying that the World Bank was unlikely to approve a much-needed $1.5bn for Nigeria in August as planned due to concerns over desired reforms.

It said the World Bank, which had said Nigeria could be heading towards its greatest fiscal crisis in 40 years, had aimed to bring the loan to its board for approval last month, but the sources said negotiations over what Nigeria would do to secure it were incomplete.

According to the report, World Bank loans are often contingent upon reforms, and it has not outlined any demands, but said previously that it was ‘recommending’ a more unified, flexible exchange rate.

Reuters said fuel subsidies and electricity tariffs were also being discussed, adding that a banking source said the loan could now not be approved until October.

An economist and Chairman of the Foundation for Economic Research and Training, Prof. Akpan Ekpo, said, “Once a country does not run its economy well and it wants to borrow from the IMF, it will be given conditions. If the economy is well-run, the country may be given soft conditions.

“But if the economy is not well-run, the country will be given tough conditions. At times, the reforms the World Bank or IMF wants the country to implement may not augur well with the common man. Some reforms are in our interest.”

The Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, Cowry Asset Management Limited, Mr Johnson Chukwu, told our correspondent that apart from the World Bank and the IMF, some Nigerians had been advocating the removal of fuel subsidy.

He said, “With or without external pressures, there was an absolute need for Nigeria to remove subsidies on consumption and channel the resources to more critical sectors of the economy that will stimulate the economy.

“What the IMF and the World Bank were emphasising was that Nigeria had some inefficiencies in resource allocation and that if the country wanted them to give it support, the inefficiencies should be eliminated.

“They were urging the government to plug the wastages in the system.”

Chukwu said to optimise the use of the loans, the government should provide critical infrastructure that would help to create jobs and help the economy to grow.

An economist and Senior Lecturer, Lagos Business School, Dr Bongo Adi, said, “We know what the Bretton Woods institutions stand for. They are pro-market, liberal economic institutions. Before you access their loans, you have to be ready to meet certain conditions.

“Surely, you can see that there is a linkage between the loans we are trying to get and the conditionalities they have always traditionally required of any country seeking loans.”

Adi described the removal of fuel subsidy and the move towards cost-reflective electricity tariff as right policies but said they were being implemented at the wrong time.

THE PUNCH

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has condemned “the patently unfair and arbitrary hike in electricity tariff and fuel price by the government of President Muhammadu Buhari.

”The group said , “This is unjust to many people living in extreme poverty, and entirely incompatible with the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 [as amended] and the country’s international human rights obligations.

”Kolawole Oluwadare, SERAP deputy director said in a statement that: “The hike will endanger lives and increase inequality and poverty exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.“SERAP will challen

ge this travesty in court if the Federal Government does not immediately drop these retrogressive measures against the Nigerian people.

“Specifically, the increase in electricity tariff and fuel price clearly violates Nigeria’s obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to which the country is a state party, not to take ‘deliberately retrogressive measures’ unless there are no alternative options and full consideration has been given to ensure that the measures are necessary and proportionate.

“SERAP urges President Muhammadu Buhari to immediately drop the misguided hike, and to establish independent impact assessment of the increases on the poorest segments of society, and to identify alternative measures, such as cutting the bogus allowances of people in the Presidency and members of the National Assembly.“The hike is lacking in compassion, as it will hit the poorest and most vulnerable Nigerians the hardest, increase inequality levels in an already very unequal Nigeria. It definitively signals that socio-economic rights are a very low priority for this government.“President Buhari should reconsider these arbitrary measures and put human rights at the centre of his government’s policies.”

By Richard Akintade, Osogbo

The National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) on Tuesday gave the Federal Government a three-week ultimatum to reverse the increment in petrol pump price, electricity tariff among others, stating that the students would stage another protest on October 1st, 2020 if the government failed to grant their request.

According to our Correspondent in Osogbo, the protest was organised by NANS in collaboration with Joint Action Front (JAF) and Amica Ideological School Movement ( ACIS-M).

Some members of NANS and other human rights groups in Osun during the peaceful demonstration expressed their grievances through protest against incessant bank charges as well as hike in PMS pump price, cable network, and electricity tariff in Nigeria.

The protesters who held placards bearing inscriptions such as “We condemn the insensitivity of Buhari-led government to take current hardship faced by Nigerians. Palliatives, not inflation!” “Reverse PMS price. Reverse electricity tariff. Don’t ruin our democracy.” were seen along Olaiya road, Osogbo on Tuesday morning.

One of the stakeholders, Kola Ibrahim, who is the Secretary of JAF, said, “Our aim is to resist all anti-people policy of the Buhari government and its surrogates across the states.

“All of us are aware of the devilish policy being doled out by the Buhari government vis-a-vis the increment in electricity tariff and increment in fuel price. Everybody knows the impact of this, but they don’t care. They don’t pay for fuel. They don’t pay for electricity. They are subsidised from our collective purses, and that is why they don’t care.

“If we allow these policies to be implemented, we are going to lay a basis for the ruling class to continue to attack our economic rights and democratic rights. It is for this basis that the Nigerian students have risen to say no to all anti-people policies, no to capitalist policies.”

Mr Ibrahim maintained that the government did not care for its citizens and the only way Nigerians could protect their interest was by destroying the political corrupt structure that the government had built.

While noting that Nigeria had no functional refinery despite being the eight largest oil-producing country, Mr Kola lamented the government’s passivity in building refineries or revamping the existing ones.

He said, “You can imagine that in Nigeria, a country that has crude oil, the eighth biggest oil producer in the world does not have one functional refinery. In June 2020, Nigerian government spent up to hundred billion naira on NNPC but NNPC did not produce just single petrol. South Africa does not have crude oil, but they have refineries.

“Buhari’s government has been in government for more than six years, it takes less than two years to establish a refinery Even the existing ones have refused to revamp them.

“They are solidarising Dangote to build his own private refinery. They want to destroy the public refinery and bring in private refineries the same way they destroyed public education for private education. They are doing the same thing in the health sector. They don’t care about us.

“We can only care about ourselves by mobilising ourselves and building and destroying that political corrupt structure that they have built, and it is on this basis that I wanted to commend the Nigerian students. We must know that number is important, but number is not the only important factor. The quality of number is also another important factor. We are the seed of the revolution now.”

Also speaking, the convener of JAF, Comrade Alfred Adegoke, who supported the cause of the students, said, “This struggle has just started. We must stop it. The president has said that petroleum is going to N300, are you prepared to pay that? If we accept that today, education will be more commercialised. Electricity, you can’t buy. House, you can’t buy. Food, you can’t
buy. Government cannot provide water, houses or job. That is the mess we have been seeing. Irresponsible government all the time. We say no that this must end.

“We say no to all oppressive and exploitative government. This struggle has just started. Power for the people. Power for the workers. Power for the students.”

Echoing a similar view, the Coordinator of ACIS-M, Comrade Akin Asifat ,noted that Nigerian students are prepared to take the future in their own hands, adding that it was time to let the government realise that Nigeria belonged to all Nigerians.

He also called upon other bodies to support the move to resist the anti-people policies of the Buhari-led government while maintaining that the government had failed in its promises to provide social welfare for all the citizens.

In his words, “Nigerian people, the poor working masses with Nigerian students are ready to take the future in their hands and say enough is enough. There is no aspect of the economy in Nigeria that the poor can hang their head. Electricity in Nigeria hike, fuel price hike, stamp duty.

“Everything in Nigeria is poor. It is time for us to say it loud and clear even when you are enjoying crumbs from the table of those at the statehouse over there. We have to let everybody know that nobody is safe in this kind of noxious, wicked, anti-people policy of the most corrupted capitalist government of Buhari.

“Nigeria belongs to all Nigerians. It does not belong to Buhari alone. It does not belong to Osinbanjo alone. It does not belong to Aregbesola alone. It does not belong to Oyetola alone. The government has failed. They are being sworn in with a constitution of which under the state principle they promised to provide social welfare for all the citizens.

“This is just a prelude, an introduction to the big show. We shall decide on the streets. We are resuming back to the barricade. We would show the government that this country belongs to every one of us. You can’t kill us before our death comes. We will resist the anti-people policies.

“We can’t do this in isolation. TUC, NLC, they have not said anything. And we know the meaning of that silence. Silence has a meaning. If they don’t want their people to stamp them to death on the street, they have to come out now and issue a statement.

“Join the champ, join action fronts for Nigerians to mount well-compressive and coordinated programmes that will give a fightback to this government of the looters and bodyguards of Buhari-led APC.”

By Sylvester Udemezue

I will find time next week to offer what I humbly believe to be a disinterested opinion on the MERIT of the Committee recently set up by BOSAN (the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria) to audit some of NBA’s past elections.

In the meantime, is the BOSAN Committee not dead on arrival? Chief Joe K. Gadzama, SAN, heading a Committee to audit NBA‘s past elections? Do not get me wrong; I have nothing against the person of the distinguished legal giant, Chief Gadzama. He is a very well respected silk. I personally hold him very high. He is a complete, renowned bar man. But, in respect of the present BOSAN Committee on audit of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Elections, I respectfully ask, What has become of nemo judex in causa sua? Recall that learned silk Gadzama is himself an aggrieved, interested party, being an NBA presidential candidate in 2016. How on earth did the respected BOSAN arrive at the decision to appoint him to head such a Committee? With the greatest respect to BOSAN (I mean no harm ooo) this is a gross breach of nemo judex in causa sua.

This position holds true even if the terms of reference of the BOSAN audit committee exclude the 2016 NBA national elections; this is because Sir Joe Gadzama, SAN, is one who is already known to be NOT HAPPY about the way NBA elections have been conducted within the past five years, and about the persistent complaints and crises regarding credibility of the entire NBA electoral process, especially since the introduction of the universal suffrage and the regime of electronic voting. Don’t forget that Mr Gadzama had contested the NBA 2016 presidential elections in court and “lost.” With due respect, the learned silk is obviously an aggrieved party/person as far as the NBA electoral process is concerned. Let us consider what a reasonable, fair-minded onlooker would think. “Reasonable likelihood of bias” is the primary consideration here; it’s not “actual bias.”

 Permit me now to humbly refer to my comment in the 40-page “Personal Memorandum Submitted To Nigerian House Of Representatives On February 02, 2018 On The Planned Joint-Committee Public Hearing On The Firdaus’ Hijab Controversy by Sylvester Udemezue:”

”In the case of Metropolitan Properties Co. (F.G.C.) Ltd. vs. Lennon (1969) 1 Q.B. 577, 598, Lord Denning, M.R., after reviewing the facts in the case before him, stated, in respect of the law regarding nemo judex in causa sua, as follows:“A man may be disqualified from sitting in a judicial capacity on one or two grounds. First, a “direct pecuniary interest” in the subject matter. Second, “bias” in favour of one side or against the other. Regarding likelihood of bias, the same Lord Denning, MR, in R. v. Amber Valley DC, ex parte Jackson [1985] 1 WLR 298, [1984] 3 All ER 50, gave an insight into the determining factor, as follows: ‘The court looks at the impression which would be given to other people. Even if he was as impartial as could be, nevertheless if right-minded persons would think that, in the circumstances, there was a real likelihood of bias on his part, then he should not sit. and if he does sit, his decision cannot stand”. It is irrelevant whether he was in fact biased, because “justice is rooted in [public] confidence.’ This rule has been applied in several cases, in Nigerian and elsewhere, to strike down decisions reached in such circumstances of reasonable likelihood of bias. The cases of R. v. Bow Street Magistrate ex parte Pinochet (No. 2) [2000] 1 AC 119 , [1999] 1 All ER 577 and R. v. Secretary of State ex parte Kirkstall [1996] 3 All ER 304 easily come to mind. See also the Nigerian case of ZAMAN v. STATE (2015) LPELR-24595(CA) where the Nigerian Court of Appeal stated as follows: ‘In considering whether there was a real likelihood of bias, the Court does not look at the mind of the Chairman of the tribunal, or whoever it may be, who sits in a judicial capacity. It does not look to see if there was a real likelihood that he would, or did, in fact he would, or did, favour one side at the expense of the other. The Court looks at the impression which would be given to other people. Even if he was as impartial as could be, nevertheless, if right-minded persons would think that, in the circumstances, there was a real likelihood of bias on his part, then he should not sit. And if he does sit, his decision cannot stand; see R. vs. Huggins (1895) 1 Q.B. 563 and R. vs. Sunderland Justices (1901) 2 K.B. 357 at C.A. per Vaughan Williams, L.J. Nevertheless, there must appear to be a real likelihood of bias. Surmise or conjecture is not enough: see R. vs. Camborne Justices, ex p. Pearce (1955) 1 Q.B. 41 and R. vs. Nailsworth Licensing Justices, ex p. Bird (1953) 2 All E.R. 652, D.C. There must be circumstances from which a reasonable man would think it likely or probable that the justice or chairman, as the case may be, would, or did, favour one side unfairly at the expense of the other. The Court will not inquire whether he did, in fact, favour one side unfairly. Suffice it that reasonable people might think he did. The reason is plain enough. Justice must be rooted in confidence; and confidence is destroyed when right-minded people go away thinking: ‘the judge was biased.’…. As Lush, J., said in Serjeant vs. Dale (1877) 2 Q.B.D. 558, 567: ‘The law, in laying down this strict rule, has regard not so much perhaps to the motive which might be supposed to bias the Judge as to the susceptibilities of the litigant parties. One important object, at all events, is to clear away everything which might engender suspicion and distrust of tribunal, and so to promote the feeling of confidence in the administration of justice which is so essential to social order and security.’’ In the case of Olve & Ors. vs. Enenwali & Ors. (1976) 1 NMLR the Supreme Court of Nigeria (quoting the dictum of Brett, Ag. C.J.N, in the case of Obadara and Ors. vs. The President, Ibadan West District Grade “B” Court (1964) 1 All NLR 336) has held at page 49 to 50 (per Nasir, JSC, as he then was), as follows: ‘The principle that a judge must be impartial is accepted in the jurisprudence of any civilized country and there are no grounds for holding that in this respect the law of Nigeria differs from the law of England or for hesitating to follow the English decisions.”
(See: https://thenigerialawyer.com/personal-memorandum-submitted-to-nigerian-house-of-representatives-on-february-02-2018-on-the-planned-joint-committee-public-hearing-on-the-firdaus-hijab-controversy-by-sylvester-udemezue/).

Permit me to humbly also refer to another comment of mine:
“Issues relating to whether or not a court of law [or tribunal, Panel or Committee] has jurisdiction are fundamental and lack of jurisdiction is fatal. See OTUKPO v. JOHN (2000) 8 NWLR (669) 507; BRONIK MOTORS v. WEMA BANK (1983)6 S.C. 158; see also OMOKHAFE v. Military Administrator (2005) 2 MJSC 173. In the Supreme Court case of MADUKOLU v. NKEMDILIM (1962) 1 ALL NLR 589, the Supreme Court had provided the following guide as to determining whether a court has jurisdiction. Hon Justice Vahe Bairamian (FJ) while delivering the lead judgment in that case stated as follows: ‘Put briefly, a court is competent when: (1) it Is properly constituted as regards numbers and qualifications of the members of the bench, and no member is disqualified for one reason or another; and (2)
the subject matter of the case is within its jurisdiction, and there is no feature in the case which prevents the court from exercising its jurisdiction: and (3) the case comes before the court initiated by due process of law, and upon fulfilment of any condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction.

Any defect in competence is fatal, for the proceedings are a nullity however well conducted and decided: the defect is extrinsic to the adjudication.” (See: “Does Nigeria’s Supreme Court Have Original Jurisdiction to Entertain the Case Filed by the Senate Over CJN Onoghen (A Legal Opinion by Sylvester Udemezue)” published on https://thenigerialawyer.com/rule-of-law-alert-does-nigerias-supreme-court-have-original-jurisdiction-to-entertain-the-case-filed-by-the-senate-over-cjn-onoghen-a-legal-opinion-by-sylvester-udemezue/). I think Point Number 1 above is relevant to the present circumstance regarding the BOSAN Committee.

Respectfully,
Sylvester Udemezue
(Udems)
08/09/2020)

thenigerialawyer

The Nigerian Army has confirmed the killing of Mr Terwase Akwaza, alias “Gana,” the ‘most wanted criminal’ in Benue state.

The Commander, 4 Special Forces Command, Doma, Nasarawa state,  Maj.-Gen. Moundhey Ali, told newsmen on Tuesday that Gana was killed at a roadblock mounted by the Army along Gbese-Gboko-Makurdi road following exchange of gunfire.

The Benue State Government had in 2015 granted amnesty to over 500 persons including Gana, who were terrorising parts of Benue and Taraba states, but most of them  relapsed into criminality.

Gana was later in 2017, declared wanted by the Police while the Benue State Government placed a N10 million bounty on him.

According to Ali, the army has recorded another breakthrough in their efforts to rid the country of the activities of bandits, terrorists and other criminal elements.

He said: “At about 12:00 hours today (Tuesday), we received strategic information on the movement of the dreaded bandit Terwase Akwaza Agbadu AKA Gana along Gbese-Gboko-Makurdi road.

“Troops of Operation ‘Ayem Akpatuma III’ moved swiftly and mounted snap roadblocks along the routes.

“At about 13:00 hours, there was an engagement with the convoy of Gana, a shoot out ensued and the bandit was killed.”

The Commander also said that 40 armed members of Gana’s gang were captured during the operation.

He said the captured gang members were in Army custody and would be handed over to the appropriate authority for prosecution.

Ali also disclosed that several rifles, pump action guns, ammunition, charms and explosives among other items were recovered from the gang.

He said Gana’s corpse had been deposited in an undisclosed hospital mortuary. (NAN)