Home Blog Page 912

Banyankole: The tribe in Uganda that allows bride’s aunt to sleep with groom before marriage

Law & Society Magazine
-
15
Banyankole: The tribe in Uganda that allows bride’s aunt to sleep with groom before marriage

Mildred Europa Taylor

How much influence should aunties have on their nieces? In many African cultures, aunties provide counselling to their young nieces as they age from adolescence to adulthood. When it comes to marriage, these aunties prepare their nieces for the challenges that lie ahead.

But for the Banyankole people in Southwestern Uganda, the aunt had more than the above, especially during the marriage.

The primary responsibility of the aunt was to confirm that the groom is potent and that the bride has defended her virginity before the marriage is consummated. As a potency test for the groom, the aunt was sometimes required to have sex with the groom for confirmation of his potency and virility.

She also had to “test” if the bride is still a virgin before they are allowed to consummate their marriage.

In other traditions, the aunt is said to go as far as listening in or watching as the bride and groom have sex in order to prove the couple’s potency.

A marriage ceremony in Uganda — UGPulse.com

Inasmuch as this outdated practice may sound weird, it shows how the people of Banyankole, particularly the Bahima tribe hold virginity in high esteem.

As soon as a Banyankole girl is eight, she goes through a lot of restrictions to prepare her for marriage.

When other children her age in other cultures are out having fun and playing, a girl in this part of Uganda is mostly kept indoors, where she is fed beef and millet porridge and forced to drink milk in large quantities so that she becomes fat.

Being fat is synonymous with beauty among the Banyankoles.

When she starts developing breasts, she is also asked by her parents to abstain from sexual activities.

It is the duty of a Banyankole father to find a wife for his son as he pays the bridewealth as well. This consists of some cows, goats and pots of beer, depending on how rich a person is.

Once the bride price is paid, the marriage preparations begin. On the wedding day, there is a lot of feasting at the bride’s home, where the father is expected to slaughter a bull.

At the bridegroom’s home, there is another feast where the marriage is consummated. This is after the bride’s aunt has “tested” her niece’s purity and slept with the groom to also check his potency.

face2faceafrica

Uzodinma vs. Ihedioha: Supreme Court's findings that changed the tempo of the game

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Uzodinma vs. Ihedioha: Supreme Court's findings that changed the tempo of the game

Imo State of Nigeria and the whole country was thrown into shock when the news broke out that on 14 January 2020, the Supreme Court sacked Mr Emeka Ihedioha as the Governor of the State. Mr Ihedioha became the first Governor among the set of Governors elected in 2019 to be removed from office through judicial means. The Supreme Court came under heavy attack by those who found it difficult to contain the shock. We shall present a highlight of the Court’s decision and discuss same with a view to determining whether the apex Court went out of line.

Imo Governorship Election and INEC’s Results

Recall that Governorship Election was conducted in Imo State on 9th March 2019. Senator Hope Uzodinma contested under the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Mr Ihedioha contested under the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Other contestants were Mr Uche Nwosu of Action Alliance, Mr Ifeanyi Ararume of All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) and 66 others. Mr Ihedioha was returned as the winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Mr Nwosu came second while Mr Ararume and Mr Uzodinma came third and fourth respectively.

Mr Uzodinma’s Petition

Mr Uzodinma and his Party, APC, challenged the outcome of the election at the Election Petition Tribunal on two grounds – That Mr Ihedioha was not validly elected by majority of lawful votes cast; and that the declaration and return of Mr Ihedioha was invalid by reason of non-compliance with the Electoral Act. Mr Uzodinma sought several reliefs including the nullification of Mr Ihedioha’s return and declaration that he (Mr Uzodinma) was the winner of the election.

It was alleged that election held in 27 Local Government Areas, 305 Electoral Wards and 3,523 polling units – that INEC cancelled election in 252 polling units, collated results from 2,883 polling units and excluded results from 388 polling units.  (This alleged exclusion of some lawful votes is the crux of the case of Mr Uzodinma). Mr Uzodinma and APC contended that they scored overwhelming majority in the 388 polling units – they argued that they were entitled to 213,695 votes from the 388 polling units while Mr Ihedioha was entitled to 1,903 votes from the same 388 polling units – that Mr Ihedioha was returned based on wrong computation of votes from the 2,883 polling units.

The Tribunal dismissed the petition. Mr Uzodinma and APC appealed to the Court of Appeal. On 19/11/2019, the Court of Appeal, in a majority of 4 to 1, dismissed the appeal filed (Oho, JCA dissented).

Appeal to the Supreme Court

Mr Uzodinma and APC appealed to the Supreme Court as 1st and 2nd Appellants while Mr Ihedioha, PDP and INEC were the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents.

Challenge of Mr Uzodinma’s Nomination by APC

At the Supreme Court, the 1st Respondent (Mr Ihedioha) challenged the validity of the nomination of the 1st Appellant (Mr Uzodinma) by the 2nd Appellant (APC). This issue (a pre-election issue) was raised for the first time at the Supreme Court without seeking and obtaining leave (permission) of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held, in line with established principles, that a fresh issue cannot be raised for the first time at the Supreme Court without the Court’s permission. More so, the Supreme Court lacks the jurisdiction to hear a matter bordering on pre-election issue as the court of first instance – meaning that it is only the High Court of a State (Imo State in this regard) that has the jurisdiction to hear the same as the Supreme Court can only hear an appeal (from the Court of Appeal) resulting from any emanating decision. The Court, per Kekere-Ekun, JSC, in dismissing the application rightly concluded as follows (at page 10 of the Judgment):

It is for these reasons that I agree with learned Counsel for the Appellants that the validity of the 1st Appellant’s nomination as a candidate of the 2nd Appellant for the Governorship Election in Imo State is a fresh issue raised for the first time in this Court without leave. Furthermore, it is a pre-election matter, in respect of which this Court lacks original jurisdiction to determine same in a post-election appeal.

It may be a point of confusion (especially to non-lawyers) why the highest Court in the land would hold that it lacks the power to hear and determine any case, whether pre-election or post-election matter. The answer is that jurisdiction (power) to hear a case is not about whether a court is high or low in status. The jurisdiction to entertain any case is prescribed by statute. Thus, if a statute donates the power to hear a case to the High Court, the Supreme Court cannot hijack same based on its status as the highest Court. The statute in this instance is the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended). Section 87 (9) gave power to the Federal High Court or the High Court of a State or High Court of the Federal Capital Territory to deal with pre-election matters. Therefore, the Supreme Court was right in its holding.

Respondents’ Contention

The gist of the Respondents’ contention was that the Appellants’ pleadings (that is the statement of facts relied on by the Appellants) were contradictory and unreliable in terms of the calculation of scores allegedly excluded. Also, that the Appellants failed to call the makers of the documents (result sheets and other documents) relied upon and the relevant polling unit agents who claimed to be witnesses. The Respondents also challenged the signatures on the results from 388 polling units presented by the Appellants on the basis that the results were allegedly fake or forged.

Supreme Court’s Findings that Changed the Tempo of the Game

Failure of Election to Hold and Exclusion of Votes

An allegation that an election did not hold in certain polling units is clearly different from an allegation that lawful votes were excluded from a polling unit. Parties in this case were only at crossroads regarding the issue as to whether or not the Respondents excluded votes due to the Appellants from 388 polling units and not on whether election took place in those units.

The Tribunal and the Court of Appeal had held that in order to prove unlawful exclusion of results in the 388 polling units, the Appellants must call the polling unit agents to testify to the fact that elections took place in their respective units. This is notwithstanding the fact that parties were not at dispute as to whether election held in those units.

The Supreme Court however found that the Appellants did not at any stage challenge the holding of elections in any polling unit and that their position was simply that elections held, they scored votes but that their votes from 388 polling units were excluded at collation stage. The apex Court also found that INEC did not deny that elections held at the 388 polling units. Rather, INEC’s contention was that the results relied upon by the Appellants were false. They undertook to produce the genuine results. The allegation of the falsity of the results tendered by the Appellants are of a criminal nature that needs to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. But INEC and the other Respondents woefully failed. The Supreme Court held (at pages 36-37 of the Judgment):

Although they relied heavily on the assertion that Exhibits PPP1 – PPP366 were fake, no evidence was adduced to prove the assertion at all, let alone beyond reasonable doubt. The Respondent failed to produce the “genuine” results as pleaded.

Duplicate copies of results require no certification

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal had held that Exhibits PPP1 – PPP366 required certification and based on same not being certified, the documents were ignored. The Supreme Court had no difficulty in upturning this holding on the basis that the said documents were merely counter-part/duplicate of an original and therefore required no certification in line with Section 86(2) of the Evidence Act, 2011.

Results Tendered by Police Officers are reliable

Exhibits PPP1 – PPP366 were tendered by a Deputy Commissioner of Police (PW54) based on subpoena issued on him by the Court. The Supreme Court held that the exhibits tendered by the Police Officer was reliable. The law has since recognised that election results from police officers are reliable in that election result forms given to police officers at the polling booths constitute an internal and inbuilt control mechanism or measures designed to unravel unlawful cancellations, alterations, mutilations, and juggling of figures. This was the position as stated in the case of Nnadi v. Ezike [1999] 10 NWLR (Pt. 622) 228 at 238 relied on by the Supreme Court (at page 39 of the Judgment). The apex Court also upheld the dissenting views of Oho, JCA of the Court of Appeal in this regard.

Although the Nigeria Police do not enjoy so much of public trust per se and are no leading examples on issues of integrity, yet it was the Respondents’ undoing in that they failed to disprove the allegation that the votes were excluded from the 388 polling units and that the results tendered by the respected senior Police officer on behalf of the Appellants were fake, as required by Paragraph 12(2) and 15 of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2010 (as amended). INEC failed to produce the results it considered genuine. The implication of the failure of the Respondents to discharge their burden of proof was that the 388 polling units’ results tendered by the Appellants were deemed unchallenged.

Court of Appeal Failed to Consider Credible Evidence

The Supreme Court also held that the Court of Appeal failed to give any consideration to the evidence of the witnesses (collation agents) who testified that they witnessed the exclusion of the results.

Court of Appeal Misconstrued Appellants’ Case

Above all, the Supreme Court held that the crux of the Appellants’ case was misconstrued by the Court of Appeal (and of course, the Tribunal) and that the Court misplaced the burden of proof, leading to the erroneous decision arrived at. This was in line with the holding of Oho, JCA where his Lordship took the position that “In the instant Appeal, having been so clearly demonstrated that the trial Tribunal misconstrued the issues thrown up by the Appellants’ Petition, what then becomes of the position where a Court or tribunal is said to have misconstrued the nature of what it is called upon to decide? The inescapable answer is that it will in all probability arrive at a wrong conclusion.” (Page 39 of the Dissenting Judgment).

Conclusion

Flowing from the foregoing, we are unable to fault the decision of the Supreme Court on any strong ground. The dissenting Judgment of Oho, JCA at the Court of Appeal is commended too.

We must note that the public sentiment that Mr Uzodinma came 4th in the election is not material on the face of the allegation of exclusion of some lawful votes. The implication is that if such unlawfully excluded votes were added, Mr Uzodinma’s scores will naturally topple that of everyone else including Mr Ihedioha and other contestants.

Perhaps the Respondents took it for granted that any person who loses an election has a battle of a lifetime to unseat the person declared as the winner. This accounts for the reason the Respondents took the posture that the Appellants have it all to prove, thereby neglecting their own burden of proof. This case will certainly go down in history as one of the most remarkable election petition cases in Nigeria.

Credit: https://stephenlegal.ng/uzodinma-vs-ihedioha-supreme-courts-findings-that-changed-the-tempo-of-the-game/

Image credit: Vanguard

When the Regions Were Autonomous and Free

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
When the Regions Were Autonomous and Free

By Eric Teniola 

I find the press release by the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Abubakar Malami (SAN), of January 14 on the Security outfit of South Western states very interesting. The Minister could not find it dignifying to personally sign the press release on a weighty issue like that.

He merely asked his media aide, Dr. Umar Gwandu to sign the press release on his behalf. That has become the pattern of some top government officials particularly those in the central government these days. We have just marked the fifty years anniversary of the end of the civil war in Nigeria. A tragic war indeed.

The anniversary should remind all of us especially top government officials on the need for caution in treating national issues. Less arrogance must be applied. At the time we finished the civil fifty years ago, Mr. Abubakar Malami was two years old, so in effect he did not witness what led to the civil war. He is not alone. I leant he is very comfortable now and that his next ambition is to be the governor of Kebbi state, a land of equity, when the term of the incumbent, Senator Abubakar Atiku Bagudu expires. The desired National Unity in Nigeria, which has been fragile all these years, cannot achieved through legal interpretation.

The unity cannot be strengthened when there is master to slave relationship. If the idea of National unity in this country is still a dream, top officials of the central government past and present should share a greater part of the blame. By their actions and pronouncements they are polarizing the entire country.

What I find strange is how an appointed official could talk down to elected governors doing the wishes of their people. The situation leave no one in doubt that something is wrong with this type of Democracy forced on us by the military since May 1999. Those calling on the restructuring of the democratic process have valid points. It is the operation of an imbalanced system of government that could create chaos.Every Nigerian is a stakeholder in the Nigeria project.

There is insecurity everywhere—a failure on the part of the central government—elected state governors want to ameliorate the situation in their states, the central Attorney-General of the federation and Minister of Justice says the action is illegal. I find it very difficult to understand.Mr. Malami needs to be reminded like all others like him that there was a time in this country, in 1966 to be precise when there were four regions in Nigeria and the four regions had their separate constitutions.

The regions were Northern region, Western region, Eastern region and Mid-Western region.In the wisdom of the military and thanks to General Yakubu Gowon, General Murtala Mohammed, General Ibrahim Babangida and General Sani Abacha, the old Northern region now constitutes nineteen states including Abuja.

The nineteen states are Adamawa (Land of Beauty, Sunshine & Hospitality), Bauchi (Pearl of Tourism), Benue (The Nigeria Foods Basket), Borno (Home of Peace), Gombe (The Jewel in the Savannah), Jigawa (The New World), Kaduna (Centre of Education), Kano (Centre of Commerce), Katsina (Home of Hospitality), Kebbi (Land of Equity), Kogi (The Confluence state, Kwara (State of Harmony), Nasarawa (Home of Solid Minerals), Niger(The Power State), Plateau (Home of Peace &Tourism), Sokoto (The Seat of the Caliphate), Taraba (Nature’s Gift to the Nation, Yobe (Pride of the Sahel and Zamfara (Farming is Our Pride). 

The old Western region now is made up of six states—Lagos (inclusive) (Centre of Excellence), Ogun(The Gateway State), Oyo (Pace Setter State), Osun (Land of Virtue), Ondo(The Sunshine State) and Ekiti (Land of Honour and Integrity) states.

In the wisdom of the military also, the old Mid-Western region now constitutes Edo (The Heart Beat of the Nation) and Delta (The Big Heart) states while the old Eastern region now constitutes nine states namely—Anambra (The Light of the Nation), Ebonyi (The Salt of the Nation), Abia (God’s Own State), Imo (The Eastern Heartland), Enugu (The Coal City State), Akwa-Ibom (Promised Land), Rivers (Rivers of Possibilities), Bayelsa (The Glory of All Lands) and Cross Rivers (The People’s Paradise) states.

The region were separate and autonomous on their own and they had Agents General in the United Kingdom who were like ambassadors.Section 64 of the Constitution of Mid-Western region affirms that  Power to appoint persons to hold or act in the office of the Agent-General of the Region in the United Kingdom (including power to make appointments on promotion and transfer) and to remove persons so appointed from that office shall vest in the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier; Before tendering any advice for the purposes of this section in relation to any person who holds any office in the public service of the Region other than an office to which this section applies, the Premier shall consult the Public Service Commission of the Region.

Section 65 of the Western Nigeria Constitution states that Power to appoint person to hold or act in the office of the Agent-General of the Region in the United Kingdom (including power to make appointments on promotion and transfer) and to remove persons so appointed from that office shall vest in the Governor acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier; Before tendering any advice for the purposes of this section in relation to any person who holds any office in the public service of the Region rather than an office to which this section applies, the Premier shall consult the Public Service Commission of the Region.

Section 66 (1) of the Constitution of Eastern Nigeria states that Power to appoint persons to hold or act in the office of the Agent-General of the Region in the United Kingdom (including power to make appointments on promotion and transfer) and to remove persons so appointed from that office shall vest on the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the premier. (2) Before tendering any advice for the payment for the purposes of this section in relation to any person who holds any office in the public service of the Region other than an office to which this section applies the Premier shall consult the Public Service Commission of the Region.

Section 68 of the Constitution of Northern Nigeria states that (1) Power to appoint persons to hold or act in the office of the Agent-General of the Regions in the United Kingdom (including power to make appointments on promotion and transfer) and to remove persons so appointed from the office shall vest in the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier. (2) Before tendering any advice for the purposes of this section in relation to any person who holds any office in the public service of the Region other than an office to which this section applies, the Premier shall consult the Public Service Commission of the Region.

You don’t have the power to appoint an Agent-General unless you are a Sovereign state.The constitutions of the four regions had differences, which made them sovereign and unique. For example, the Western Region created a Court of Appeal which was the first of its type in the Federation.

Section 52 of the Constitution of Western Nigeria states that there shall be a Court of Appeal for the Region; the Judges of the Court of Appeal of the Region shall be—the President of the Court of Appeal; and such a number of Justice of Appeal (not being less than three) as may be described by the Legislature of the Region.; the Court of Appeal of the Region shall be a superior court of record and, save as otherwise provided by any law in force in the Region, shall have all the powers of such a court.; the President of the Court of Appeal of the Region and the Justices of Appeal shall be appointed  by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier; A person shall not be qualified to hold the Office of President of the Court of Appeal of the Region or of Justice of Appeal unless—(a) he is or has been a judge of a court having unlimited jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters in some part of the Commonwealth or a court having jurisdiction in appeals from any such court; or he is qualified for admission as an advocate of Nigeria and he has been so qualified for not less than ten years; If the office of President of the Court of Appeal of the Region is vacant or if the person holding the office is for any reason unable to perform the functions of the office, then, until a person has been appointed to and has assumed the function of that office or until the person holding the office has resumed those functions, as the case may be, those functions shall be performed by such one of the Justices of Appeal as may from time to time be designated in that behalf by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier; If the office of any Justice of Appeal is vacant or if the person holding the office is acting as President of the Court of Appeal of the Region or is for any reason unable to perform the functions of his office, the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier, may appoint a person qualified to hold the office of Justice of Appeal to act in the office of a Justice of Appeal and any person so appointed shall continue to act for the period of his appointment or if no period is specified until his appointment is revoked by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier.

In the Constitution of Northern Nigeria, Section 6—1and 2 states that the Adviser on Moslem law shall be appointed by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier; (2) A person holding the office of adviser on Moslem law may be removed from office by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier.

Section 23 of the same constitution states that the business of the Legislative Houses of the Region shall be conducted in English and Hausa: provided that all bills introduced in either House and all laws made by the Legislature of the Region shall be printed in English and, if any such bill or law is also printed in Hausa, the English text shall prevail in the case of a conflict between the two texts.

Section 35 (1) of the Constitution of Eastern Nigeria states that the Governor acting on the advice of the Premier may appoint Provincial Commissioners from among the members of the Legislative Houses of the Region while Section 80 further states that notwithstanding any other provisions of this Constitution including in particular section 16 of this Constitution, no chieftaincy question shall be entertained by any court in the Region.Section 2(5) of the Constitution of the Mid-Western Nigeria states that (1) without prejudice to the provisions of section 9 of this Constitution, the House of Chiefs shall consist of — (a) the Oba of Benin, the Olu of Warri and the persons for the time being holding such other chieftaincies as may be prescribed by the Governor, who shall be ex-officio members of the House (b) fifty-one Chiefs having such qualifications and selected in such manner as may be prescribed by the Governor, who shall be ex-officio members of the House; (b) fifty-one Chiefs having such qualification and selected in such manner as may be prescribed by the legislature of the Region; (c) such Special Members, being Chiefs, as may be selected by the Governor, acting in accordance with advice of the Premier and (d) four members selected by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier, to represent the interests of groups of persons resident in the special area within the meaning of sub section (4) of section 14 of the Constitution, being groups whose interests, in the opinion of the Governor acting as aforesaid, are not represented by members of the House of Assembly for constituencies in those areas. (2) A person shall not be a member of the House of Chief by virtue of paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section during any period when he holds office as Governor: and the number of persons who are for the time being members of that House by virtue of that paragraph or paragraph (c) of that subsection shall not in the aggregate exceed ten. (3) The seat of a member of the House of Chiefs shall become vacant —- (a) in the case of a member other than the Oba of Benin, the Olu of Warri or a Special Member, in such circumstances as may be prescribed by the Legislature of the Region; and in the case of a Special Member, if he is removed from office as such a member by the Governor, acting in accordance with the advice of the Premier. (4) In this section “Chief” means any person who is for the time being recognized as a Chief under any law in force in the Region.

All these goes to confirm that although the regions were within the same country but their constitutions were not the same. The various constitutions reflected at that time their different challenges.But above all Section 123 of the Constitution of the federal Republic of Nigeria states that the Constitution shall have the force of law throughout Nigeria, and, subject to the provisions of section 4 of this Constitution, if any other law (including the constitution of a region) is inconsistent with this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail and the other law shall, to the extent of the ‘inconsistency, be void. 2. Nigeria shall be a Federation comprising Regions and a Federal territory, and shall be a Republic by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. 3—(1) There shall be four Regions, that is to say, Northern Nigeria, Eastern Nigeria, Western Nigeria and Mid-Western Nigeria. (2)The Regions and the Federal territory shall consist of the areas comprised in those territories respectively on the thirtieth day of September, 1963.

In his book titled “NATION BUILDING”, Professor Andreas Wimmer, the Lieber Professor of Sociology and Political Philosophy at Columbia University asked a pertinent question “Why do some countries fall apart, often along their ethnic fault lines, while others have held together over decades and centuries, despite governing a diverse population as well? Why is it, in other words, that nation-building succeeded in some places while it failed in others?

The current tragedy in Syria illustrates the possibly murderous consequences of failed nation-building. Outside of the media spotlight, South Sudan and the Central African Republic went through similar experiences in recent years. In some rich and democratic countries in Western Europe, such as Spain, Belgium and the United Kingdom, longstanding secessionist movements have regained momentum.

Within our lifetimes, they might well succeed in breaking apart these states. On the other hand, there is no secessionist movement among the Cantonese speakers of southern China or among the Tamils of India. And why has no serious politician ever questioned national unity in such diverse countries as Switzerland or Burkina Faso?Before answering these questions, it is necessary to define nation-building more precisely. It goes beyond the mere existence of an independent country with a flag, an anthem and an army.

Some old countries (such as Belgium) haven’t come together as a nation, while other more recently founded states (such as India) have done so. There are two sides to the nation-building coin: the extension of political alliances across the terrain of a country, and the identification with and loyalty to the institutions of the state, independent of who currently governs.

The former is the political-integration aspect, the latter the political-identity aspect of nation-building. To foster both, political ties between citizens and the state should reach across ethnic divides.Such ties of alliance connect national governments with individual citizens, sometimes through intermediary political organisations such as voluntary associations, parties, professional groups, etc.

Ideally, these ties link all citizens into networks of alliances centred on the state. In such countries, all citizens see themselves represented at the centre of power, even if their preferred party or political patron is not currently occupying one of the seats of government. Intellectuals, political elites, as well as the average individual will eventually see all citizens, irrespective of their racial or ethnic background, as equal members of the national community.”

I need not remind Mr. Malami that national identity is a collective phenomenon irrespective of tribe and region.

Why is Buhari Still Keeping the ‘Failed’ Service Chiefs?

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Why is Buhari Still Keeping the ‘Failed’ Service Chiefs?

By Fredrick Nwabufo

In December 2018, Boko Haram insurgents pulled a blitzkrieg on military formations in Baga, Borno state, sacking the headquarters of the multinational joint task force and taking over the place (briefly).

The group steadied its onslaughts on military formations, killing many soldiers, weeks after. At least, 18 soldiers were killed in an ambush on Maiduguri road on December 26, 2018, in one of Boko Haram’s mortal offensives.

The group also persisted in inflicting attritive damages on the civilian population in the north-east. The killings and destruction never let up; in fact, they had taken an upward trajectory since the current service chiefs were appointed.But what did President Muhammadu Buhari say and do in the heat of the killing of soldiers, civilians and attack on military barracks and equipment?

This is what he said in an interview on Arise TV in January, 2019 – a few days after the attacks:  “The head [him] has to be very careful on removal of the service chiefs because you don’t know [the] ambition of the ones coming up. I didn’t know them on [a] personal basis, I followed records and thought I picked the best then, of course, their performance may be disappointing but I accept responsibility for not changing them.

My reason is based on my own experience.”Now, compare Buhari’s complacent remarks to the action of President Issoufou Mahamadou of Niger Republic, who sacked his security chiefs after 89 soldiers were killed by terrorists in January, 2020.My theory is, Buhari is keeping the service chiefs, who have failed in their duty, out of self-preservation. He is prioritising loyalty over competence because he still sees the wraith of the 1985 coup in which he was deposed.

Boko Haram can sack the entire north-east, but the president will still keep the security chiefs. He considers any threat to his office of far greater concern than any threat to the lives of Nigerians. In its resolution of January 16, 2020, the European parliament, legislative branch of the European Union, affirmed what many Nigerians know.

It said there has not been any progress in the fight against Boko Haram insurgents. Commenting on Boko Haram’s abominations, the parliament said the security situation in Nigeria has deteriorated significantly.

“Condemns in particular the recent increase in violence against ethnic and religious communities, including the targeting of religious institutions and worshippers. Deplores that progress has stalled in the fight against Boko Haram, ISWAP and the increased occurrence and severity of suicide attacks and direct attacks against military positions; recalls that Nigeria’s President Buhari was re-elected in 2019 on the promise of defeating the violent extremism promoted by Boko Haram and other terror groups, and urges the President to implement his campaign promises,’’ it said.

In these few weeks, the insurgents have executed a series of attacks on civilians and the military.On Christmas eve, a faction of Boko Haram affiliated to the Islamic State, killed 11 Christian captives in Borno, saying the action was taken to avenge the deaths of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the late IS leader and Abul-Hasan Al-Muhajir, its spokesman, who were killed in Syria in October.On Monday, Lawan Andimi, chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) in Michika local government area in Adamawa, was tragically dispatched by Boko Haram.

Also, Daciya Dalep, a student of the University of Maiduguri, was killed in the most infernal manner.But how did Nigeria’s army chief respond to these tragedies? He described the attacks as the ‘’last kick of a dying horse’’.

But I wonder why this horse is not yet dead – even as the military claims the insurgents have been technically defeated.Really, Boko Haram appears vitalised by every daring attack. On January 7, a driver attached to Olusegun Adeniyi, commander of operation Lafiya Dole (the war campaign), was killed in a derring-do attack by Boko Haram insurgents on the commander’s convoy.

The insurgents attacked Adeniyi, a major-general, who was on his way back to Maiduguri after a visit to Jakana in Borno state, where they had struck earlier.What is derisory is that two of the service chiefs and the national security adviser are from the north-east – the theatre of the war. But rather than extirpate the menaces to the peace in the zone, two of the security chiefs are fixated on establishing military universities in their hometowns.

To me, it is clear the security chiefs have failed in the one task for which they were appointed. And I think, it is time they take a bow. In Old Japan, generals who fail in war take themselves out by hara-kiri. 

Not that our own generals should, but the president must prioritise the security of Nigerians over himself and let these men go.

Fredrick Nwabufo is a writer and journalist.

@FredrickNwabufo.

Forming Amotekun is a very smart move

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Forming Amotekun is a very smart move

By Benjamin Obiajulu Aduba

The first duty of ALL governments is the protection of lives and property of its residents and citizens. That is job (numero uno) number one. Can anyone say that the lives of SW Nigerians or any other section of the country has been effectively protected? The federal government is charged to do this task and has been provided with the security apparatus needed to do this number one job. But the federal government of Nigeria led by Mr. Muhammadu Buhari has failed woefully in this very important task.

Wetin man go do?

Man go do what man go do.

This is the reason why the governors of SW Nigeria stepped up to the plate with Amotekun. They took the lives and property of their electors to heart and are trying to do the onerous work of protecting the lives of their people. They acted while their counterparts in other parts of Nigeria were sitting down to a good wine and sleeping with gorgeous young women in the zones.

There cannot be anything but praise for the daring governors. They are bold, faithful to the oath of office they swore, even while realizing that they may have to postpone or delay some of the pressing infrastructure needs of their constituencies. Live is much more valuable than good roads.

Compare this action to that of Governor Ugwuanyi of Enugu State when 60 Nsukka residents were killed in Nsukka by the alleged Fulani Herdsmen. The governor wearing a well starched and ironed Yoruba Agbada went to Abuja to shake hands with PMB and after a good wine and hand shaking PMB promised that the perpetrators will be found and punished. It has been three years and nothing has happened or is happening. Since then there has been the Awgu massacre including those alleged to be hiding in Awgu caves.

These kinds of incidents are recorded from Jos to Port Harcourt and beyond.

If the FG cannot or will not do their job, it is the duty and responsibility of the next in command (the governors) to step up and help. I have written that all the SS, SE and NC zones MUST form their own kind of Amotekunsand sign a mutual defense document. Then if the FG wants to help the FG may negotiate the terms of cooperation.

Some have argued that Amotekun is not armed. This argument is peddled because some people want to appease the government of PMB. It is useless forming an Amotekun if it will not be armed. How will they fight against the-armed-to-the-teeth murderers who invade SW or the other parts of Nigeria? Are we trying to provide the herders with shooting targets? Force must be met with force. Force is the only language that miscreants understand.

Remember that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Amotekun is the equal and opposite reaction to our current insecurity.

Let’s praise the governors of SW but above all let’s copy them.

Benjamin Obiajulu Aduba, Boston, Massachusetts, January 24, 2020

‘Nigeria Must End Violent Forced-evictions in Lagos’, Amnesty International

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
‘Nigeria Must End Violent Forced-evictions in Lagos’, Amnesty International

The Nigerian authorities must immediately halt the violent and unlawful evictions that rendered thousands of residents of Tarkwa Bay, a waterfront community in Lagos homeless, said Amnesty International Nigeria today (Thursday).

On 21 January at about 8 am, personnel of the Nigerian Navy resorted to assault and shooting during the evictions at Tarkwa Bay. The authorities are continuing with the forced evictions in what appears to be a brazen disregard for the safety and security of the affected people as well as their right to housing among other human rights. There is chaos in Tarkwa Bay, with some residents reporting that many children are missing.

“What is happening at Tarkwa Bay, Lagos is a violation of human rights. It is unacceptable that the Nigerian government are evicting people in the most violent manner and destroying their homes without genuine consultations, adequate notice, alternative accommodation or access to remedies,” said Osai Ojigho Director Amnesty International Nigeria.

“The attacks on poor communities of Lagos must end. Throwing many families into endless misery is not the best way of addressing allegations of crime and urban planning failures of the authorities. We call for a halt to ongoing forced evictions.

”Spate of unlawful evictions have been going on in Lagos since last year. In November 2019, nearly 1500 residents of Second Badagry community in Lagos were forcibly evicted. Similarly, on 4 January 2020, about 3000 residents of Okun Glass Village, Ilaase were violently evicted by personnel of the Nigerian Navy.  In defense, the government sited pipeline vandalization as justification for the forced evictions.Several other informal communities in Lagos State live with perpetual threats of forced evictions.

Many residents lament how forced evictions throw them and their families into destitution.“Nigeria’s international human rights obligations require the government to respect the right to adequate housing including by refraining from forced evictions. Both the Lagos State and federal governments have a duty to respect, protect, fulfil and promote the right to adequate housing of everyone,” said Osai Ojigho.

“The Lagos State and federal governments must immediately halt the attacks on the waterfront communities and establish a moratorium on mass evictions until there are regulations in place to ensure that evictions comply with international human rights standards.”Amnesty International is urging the Lagos State authorities and the federal government to urgently set up an independent and impartial inquiry into all cases of mass evictions in Lagos State and prosecute all those, including government agents, found to be responsible for human rights violations and crimes committed during the evictions; and the excessive use of force.

“Authorities must stop hiding behind concerns around pipeline vandalization or other crimes to deprive poor people of housing in Lagos. Governments must ensure that no one is rendered homeless or vulnerable to the violation of other human rights as a consequence of evictions. Also, relevant government agencies must be mandated to consider all feasible alternatives to evictions in genuine consultation with all people affected.”

Obahiagbon denies alleged statement on Imo Guber Supreme Court Verdict

Law & Society Magazine
-
248
Obahiagbon denies alleged statement on Imo Guber Supreme Court Verdict

… I have been quagmired with various calls the world over to confirm the veracity or mendacity of my aforesaid authorship

Former Chief of Staff to immediate past Governor Adams Oshiomhole of Edo State, Honourable Patrick Obahiagbon, has disclaimed  a widely circulated reaction, purportedly issued by him, in the social media.The concocted reaction had portrayed Obahiagbon to have disparaged the Supreme Court verdict that handed Imo governorship seat to Hope Uzodinma of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

The disclaimer was via a press statement titled:“RE:PRESS RELEASE ON THE SUPREME COURT PRONOUNCEMENT ON THE IMO STATE GOVERNORSHIP ELECTIONS.” Obahiagbon said the reaction did not come from him and should be discountenanced.

According to him, “The press statement currently circulating in the social media as purportedly emanating from my stable has been brought to my piazza.“It has become a notorious platitudinous fact that some Nigerians have become inured and inebriated with the fecund and Goebbelian practice of stringing together, phrases from my archived public asseverations and representing them to emanate from me, especially on the heels of de-die-in-diem historic national events.

“I wouldn’t have reacted to this like a vaudeville of others before it but for the fact that I have been quagmired with various calls the world over to confirm the veracity or mendacity of my aforesaid authorship, especially when the said statement dripped with amphibolous crinkum crankum.

“Let me urge members of the public to discountenance the said statement purported to have emanated from my stable.  It was not from the son of Igodomigido.

“May I also take this opportunity to appeal to Nigerians who are always desirous of hearing from me on national issues to always “COOLI COOLI, COOLI TEMPER, until anytime I am always cornucopiously aroused to publicly take a position on extant national matters.

“I felicitate again (even though that had been done privately) with the elected Governor of Imo State, His Excellency, Governor Hope Uzodinma, and I wish him well as he strives to cleanse the Augean stables in Imo state.

I'm scared! Shakira says about marriage to Barcelona star

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
I'm scared! Shakira says about marriage to Barcelona star

Popular pop singer, Shakira has given reason she is yet to marry Barcelona defender Gerard Piqué.

The 42-years-old Colombia singer has been in a relationship with former Spain international over a decade and both celebrities are yet to exchange marital vows despite sharing two kids, Milan and Sasha together.

Shakira said in a recent interview that they were not married because ‘Marriage scares her and she does not want to be seen as the wife.’

“To tell you the truth marriage scares the sh–t out of me. I don’t want him to see me as the wife

“I want him to see me as the lover, the girlfriend. I want to keep him on his toes. I want him to think that anything’s possible depending on behavior,” she said.

Ganduje’s Supreme Court victory and collapse of Kwankwassiyya structure

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
Ganduje’s Supreme Court victory and collapse of Kwankwassiyya structure

By Muhammad Garba

It was a jubilant jiffy for millions of Kano residents on Monday morning when the news of the avowal of the election of Governor Abdullahi Umar Ganduje by the wise Justices of the Supreme Court sieved into the ancient commercial city. Though the victory was very much expected, the treacherous flimflam launched by the opposition few days to the Supreme Court judgment almost created tautness and fright in the minds of many residents.

The news of how Kano residents broke into desolate euphoria over the affirmation of Governor Ganduje’s re-election was everywhere. People were exultant and they did not hide their ecstasy. To them, Ganduje’s victory is a victory for the people. It is a foundation for the accomplishment of the vision to make Kano a Mega City. Indeed, it is a victory for the free education of the Kano children, obliteration of poverty, youth and women empowerment, infrastructural development and human development.

Right from the first stage of the legal scrimmage at the Kano state Governorship Election Petition Tribunal led by Justice Halima Shamaki, ardent observers of the tribunal proceedings were already envisaging the consequence of the case even within the court premises. At the close of its sitting which lasted for 174 days, the three-member tribunal, upheld the re-election of Kano state governor, Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, declaring that his victory in the March 23 supplementary election was lawful and valid.

Analysts and even legal practitioners who affianced in discussions over the tribunal’s translucent proceedings already knew where the plumb would swing. This explained why the verdict of tribunal did not come to most people as a surprise. In the article I wrote instantaneously after the Tribunal verdict entitled, “Kano Guber Tribunal Verdict: A Case Of No Appeal,” I had also advised the PDP and its gubernatorial candidate, Abba Kabir Yusuf to accept the verdict of the Tribunal in good faith because it was crystal clear that they have no case to appeal.

In fact, before I set out for Kaduna to witness the verdict, I was fully convinced that victory would come our way, having witnessed all the tribunal proceedings in Kano as well as the persnickety manner which the chairperson of the Tribunal and her team delivered justice.

However, the PDP did not heed to my advice and rushed to the Court of Appeal in Kaduna, where the court, at its sitting on Friday, November 22, affirmed the verdict of Kano state Governorship Election Tribunal and validated the re-election of Governor Ganduje.

While reviewing the case, the Court held that the PDP and its candidate could not produce direct evidence to substantiate and prove to the tribunal that they were not defeated in the March 23 supplementary election. The Appellate Court, therefore, dismissed the 24 grounds of appeal filed by the PDP and its candidate. Expectedly, in an undivided judgment, the chairman of the Appeal Panel, Justice Tijjani Abubakar, espoused the judgment of the tribunal, averring that Governor Ganduje was validly elected.

At the conclusion of the case, I had again advised the PDP and its gubernatorial candidate, Engr. Abba Kabir Yusuf to resist the crackpot advice of approaching the Supreme Court, knowing full well that they have no case to present.

In a unanimous judgment delivered at the court, on Monday, January 20, the seven-man panel headed by Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Tanko Muhammad, dismissed the appeal by candidate of the PDP since the facts presented did not support the appeal, which was predicated on a single ground. The judgement, which was read by Justice Nwali Ngwuta also held that the petitioner failed to substantively prove and provide evidence that there was any irregularity in the election held on March 9 and the supplementary election on March 23, 2019.

Ominously, the Supreme Court verdict confirmed the total downfall of the Kwnakwasiyya structure in Kano politics. Less than 24 hours after the judgment, we have begun to receive emissaries from staunch members of the group who have declared their intention to openly deprecate their membership and join the Next Level government. Fortunately for them, Governor Ganduje has extended a hand of fellowship to them. They are welcome because the primary aim of his administration is to ensure development in the state and unfetter the people from poverty.

This is why we should begin to commend the altruism of Governor Ganduje who has vowed to run an all-inclusive government. The leadership of our great party, the All Progressive Congress (APC) has also promised to welcome anybody who decided to join the Next Level train. There are vacancies in the train of victory and we will be willing to welcome them to join hands with Governor Ganduje to rebuild Kano and give our dear state its seemly status of a Mega-City.

The Ganduje’s administration is built on the canons of democracy and rule of law. We view the opposition as no threats. We welcome constructive criticisms of those who decided to stay on the other side, but it is apposite to note that our resolve in the Next Level government is to take Kano to greater heights.

For the good people of Kano state, they should expect nothing less than good governance built on the principles of prudent management of tax payers’ money, transparency and open door policy. We are, indeed, set to put Kano on the front pew of the most economic vibrant cities in Africa.

The next four years of this administration will surely be characterized with the execution of people-oriented projects and implementation of human development policies. With the prayers and cooperation of the people, we will not fail. The electorate will have no cause to regret giving us their mandate.

Garba is the commissioner, Information, Kano state

How Femi Adesina sold his soul to Satan – Fani Kayode

Law & Society Magazine
-
0
How Femi Adesina sold his soul to Satan – Fani Kayode

Nigeria’s former Minister of Aviation, Femi Fani-Kayode, has criticized the Special Adviser to President Muhammadu Buhari on Media and Publicity, Femi Adesina, for attacking the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), following its reaction to the murder of Reverend Lawan Andimi by Boko Haram.

Andimi, the Chairman of CAN in Michika Local government area of Adamawa state was beheaded by the insurgents.

CAN on Thursday rejected the reaction of President Buhari to the killing.

Buhari, who described the murder as cruel, inhuman and deliberately provocative, expressed sorrow that the terrorists went on to kill the religious leader while giving signals at the same time of a willingness to set him free by releasing him to third parties.

But CAN stated that Christians were tired of the usual press releases and condemnations which have failed to make any meaningful impact.

And Adesina in a post on his Facebook page on Friday accused the Christian leaders of labeling Buhari an “anti-christian”.

He was quoted as saying, “Rather than cast the government as omnipotent, it is God that has all powers. And some things are never resolved spiritually except through prayer and fasting. It is not me that said so. Jesus did. So, let the Church be fully involved in supplication for divine intervention in the country, rather than playing subtle politics and unwittingly generating hate in the land.

“CAN says kidnappings and killings are shameful to a government that boasts that it has conquered insurgency. Boasts. So that is all that matters to CAN as if it was an opposition political party? Boasts. No. This would not augur for unity and cohesion in a country. We are not asking the Christian body to be in bed with government, that would not help anybody, but the organization has been sounding too long like a political party. We daily learn to walk with Jesus. His spirit is not an unduly critical one. And He left us an example “that ye should follow in his steps.”

Reacting, Fani-Kayode on his Twitter page, said Femi Adesina has sold his soul to Satan, adding that the blood of the slain CAN Chairman is on his head and President Muhammadu Buhari’s hands.

He said, “Femi Adesina is morally bankrupt. Worse still he has sold his soul to Satan.

“ How can a man who claims to be a Christian attempt to defend the indefensible & insult CAN?

“The blood of Rev. Andimi & every Christian killed by BH & the Fulani are on his hands & the hands of his boss.”

1...911912913...940Page 912 of 940

Law & Society Magazine is a general interest magazine with a bias for law and its effects on the society

Contact us: [email protected]

© 2024 Copyright - Law & Society Magazine