Urhobo News

Email editor: ebirerihenry52@gmail.com

Call editor: 08036977194

…………………………………………………………………..

 

Nigeria Opposes Move to Split AU’s Department of Political Affairs, Peace and Security

The Nigerian government has backed the move to reform the African Union, making the continental body more vibrant, viable, and relevant to the needs of member states in the face of rapidly changing global political and economic realities.

 

President Bola Tinubu, whose statement was delivered by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Yusuf Tuggar, during the consideration and deliberation on the AU reforms report, commended his Rwanda and Kenya counterparts, Paul Kagame and Williams Ruto, for the reform proposals.

 

President Tinubu acknowledged the recommendations outlined in the draft decision on the AU reform and said the Nigerian government supports the proposal to establish a Heads of State and Government oversight Committee for the AU Reforms under President Ruto’s leadership.

 

The Nigerian government also endorsed the proposal that the agenda of the AU Summit feature no more than three strategic items.

 

In the intervention delivered by Ambassador Tuggar, President Tinubu rejected the proposal to create a new department out of the existing Department of Political Affairs, Peace and Security. Nigerian diplomat, Ambassador Bankole Adeoye, heads the department. He was re-elected to another term at the 38th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the Heads of State and Government, which ended Sunday.

 

“We do not support the proposal to reconfigure the Department of Political Affairs Peace and Security (PAPS) as the reconfiguration of the PAPS Department in the way currently suggested will only lead us to incur more expenditure needlessly.

 

“We already have a SOD under the Directorate of PAPS. We cannot have a Peace Support Operations Directorate independent of the Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security. We believe any attempt to create another department from the existing one will destabilise the AU political affairs and peace and security process. It is also important that issues that were never brought to the attention of Member States are not part of the reform,” President Tinubu said.

 

On the need for inclusiveness and transparency as an integral part of the reform of the AU system, President Tinubu noted that the continental organisation should instead focus on implementing adopted policies and programmes.

 

“It is in this connection that Nigeria wishes to reiterate that instead of seeking to reach consensus on all fronts of our reform at one sweep, we should concentrate on areas where we have already reached consensus. There is no harm in carrying out reform in phases. It would be an error to continue seeking consultation on all fronts in perpetuity,” President Tinubu emphasised.

 

He said Nigeria would continue to support the reform process as long as it remained transparent and inclusive and did not needlessly destabilise the status quo.

 

Bayo Onanuga

Special Adviser to the President

(Information & Strategy)

February 16, 2025

 

EFCC Arrests 47 Suspected Internet Fraudsters in Ekpoma, Edo State

Operatives of the Benin Zonal Directorate of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, on Saturday, February 15, 2025 arrested 47suspected internet fraudsters at different locations in Ekpoma, Edo State.

 

The suspects were arrested based on credible intelligence that linked them to fraudulent internet activities.

 

 

 

Items recovered from them include 14 exotic cars, laptops and phones

 

They have made useful statements and would be charged to court as soon as investigations are concluded.

 

Dele Oyewale

 

Head, Media & Publicity

 

February 17, 2025

 

Alleged $340,000 Fraud: Mercy Chinwo’s Ex Manager must Appear in Court-Judge

Justice A.O. Owoeye of Federal High Court, sitting in Ikoyi, on Monday, February 17, 2025 held that Mr. Ezekiel Thankgod must appear in court to take his plea and adjourned till March 6, 2025 for his arraignment.

 

Mr. Thankgod, ex-manager of gospel artiste, Mercy Chinwo has consistently evaded arraignment by the Lagos Zonal Directorate of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, prompting a warrant of arrest to be issued on him by the court during January 16, 2025 proceedings.

 

Thankgod is to be arraigned on a three-count charge, bordering on money laundering and dishonest conversion to the tune of $340,000.

 

One of the charges reads: “That EZEKIEL ONYEDIKACHUKWU THANKGOD and EEZEE GLOBAL CONCEPTS LIMITED sometime in 2023, directly retained the sum of $260,494 (Two Hundred and Sixty Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety-Four USD) in EEZEE GLOBAL MINISTRY Zenith Bank Plc account number, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful activity, the dishonest conversion of the said sum, property of Mercy Chinwo and Judith Kanayo.”

 

The offence is contrary to Section 18(2)(d) and punishable under Section 18 (3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

 

The bench warrant of January 16, 2025 for his arrest followed an application by the prosecuting counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, who informed the court that the prosecution has been unable to effect service of the charges on him as he had been unreachable.

 

On January 24, 2025, defence counsel, Dr. Monday Ubani, SAN had to accept service on behalf of the defendant, but pointed to a preliminary objection challenging the charges.

 

Justice Owoeye subsequently adjourned till today, Monday, February 17, 2025 for the defendant’s arraignment. Yet, he remained absent and was again, represented by his counsel.

 

While conceding that the day’s business on the matter was for the arraignment of the defendant, the defence counsel cited a notice of preliminary objection before the court, challenging the trial.

 

He further sought to move an objection, which the court shot down on the ground that he cannot be heard, until his client appears in court.

 

Responding to Justice Owoeye’s inquiry on the whereabouts of the defendant, the defence counsel told the court that he received a call from him that he was involved in a terrible accident today’s morning, but that he promised to be available in court at the next adjourned date.

 

The prosecution, led by Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, described the procedure adopted by the defence in the case as “strange.”

 

Citing provisions of sections 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, as well as Judicial Authorities of State vs Achara and Federal Republic of Nigeria vs Yahaya Bello, Oyedepo, urged the court not to hear the application of the defence.

 

“It is a show of shame and outright disrespect for this court, for the defendant to be absent on three different occasions in a criminal trial,” he said.

 

He further informed the court that shortly after the court rose at the last adjourned date, the defendant was seen within the court’s premises, granting media interviews.

 

He further argued that if actually the defendant was indisposed as stated by his counsel, he ought to depose to an affidavit as proof before the court.

 

After listening to the arguments, Justice Owoeye declined to grant the request of the defence until the defendant appeared in court.

 

“The court has not assumed jurisdiction over the case, since the plea of the defendant has not been taken,” Justice Owoeye said. He further held that the bench warrant issued against the defendant by the court had not been withdrawn and therefore, subsisted.

 

He also held that the defendant should appear in court on March 6, 2025 next adjourned date, either by the subsisting bench warrant or production by his counsel for his arraignment.

 

Dele Oyewale

 

Head, Media & Publicity

 

February 17, 2025

 

Witness narrates how Chinese Employer lured her into Alleged Cyber-terrorism, Internet Fraud in Lagos

The First Prosecution Witness, PW1, Jacob Lilian, in the trial of Ling Yang (a.k.a Shoa Ming), a Chinese, and part of the alleged 792-member syndicate of cryptocurrency investment and romance fraud suspects has narrated before Justice D.I. Dipeolu of Federal High Court, sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos how her job search at Genting International Co. Limited ended in being lured into dating scam by the defendant.

 

Yang alongside Genting International Co. Limited is being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC on a four-count charge, bordering on cybercrime and advance fee fraud, having been arrested in Lagos by officers of the Commission in a surprise operation tagged “Eagle Flush Operation” on December 10, 2024. 

 

One of the charges reads: “That you, LING YANG A.K.A. SHAO MING, sometime in December 2024 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with the intent to gain a financial advantage for your employer fraudulently impersonated one Amity by holding yourself out as such, and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 22 (2) (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Act, 2015.” He pleaded guilty to all the charges, prompting his trial.

 

Led in evidence by prosecution counsel, Hanatu U. KofarNaisa, the witness, a Nigerian identified the defendant as one of the Chinese that work on the Seventh Floor of the company’s building.

 

“As at November 2024, I was in search of a job and so I joined a WhatsApp group called job update, which was where I got to know about the job that stated customer service and only an address written as No 7 Oyin Jolayemi Street, Lagos. On getting there I was not asked to present any CV or documentations, and when I got in, I was required to sit in front of a computer. I thought I was about to have an online test, but rather I did a speed limit test that was set to be 30 and I got 28,” she said.

 

She added that she was encouraged to improve her speed, and subsequently given a job with the company.

 

“No credentials were required or asked for and I was not given any offer letter,” she said.

 

According to her, the company provided accommodation for her on the Island and she moved in.

 

She further testified that she was later given a script to read, adding that she was told that was her job.

 

“On the script there was a name, Alani Thomas, and I was asked to read the script further and to get familiar with any customer assigned to me and chat with them,” she said.

 

Testifying further, she stated that Europeans were the main targets and that she was usually introduced as Alani Thomas.

 

“The WhatsApp group is being monitored by the employers, and once names are exchanged, and I start to get to know the customer, by the third day of chatting with the customer, once they are at ease with me, I will be asked to stop chatting with the customer and then the employers will take over the chatting,” she said.

 

She disclosed that her monthly salary was N250,000 (Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira) and that the Nigerian employees had seat numbers and computers allocated to them.

 

She disclosed that she wanted to resign from the job, but the company had a way of caging them and monitoring their activities.

 

“We were always escorted by security officials from the office to the accommodation and we were never allowed to leave the office premises. Before we start working for the day, we have to submit our phones.

 

The EFCC arrest was a saving grace for me,” she said.

 

Prosecution counsel applied for an adjournment to enable it to tender the computer with the scripts in evidence.

 

Justice Dipeolu adjourned the case till April 11, 2025 for continuation of trial.

 

Dele Oyewale

 

Head, Media & Publicity

 

February 17, 2025

 

LAGOS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY ATTACK, A LANDMARK OF INDIGNITY TO THE NIGERIAN ELECTORATE, ESPECIALLY THE PEOPLE OF LAGOS, SAYS ATIKU

 

The viral video of armed security operatives invading the Lagos State House of Assembly is utterly reprehensible and stands condemned. It must be subjected to a full and thorough investigation.

It is bewildering that the invading operatives reportedly have a mandate to enforce a leadership change in the House.

It is appalling that it is those who claimed to have fought for democracy that decided to sanction this crass desecration of the state’s foremost legislative body, and by so doing, putting our hard-earned democracy in jeopardy.

This act is an attack on the sanctity of democracy and a landmark of indignity to the Nigerian electorate, especially the people of Lagos.

Whatever may have caused the leadership crisis in the Lagos State House of Assembly is an undercurrent that is not abnormal in a system of democracy.

The purported invitation of armed security operatives for a conflict resolution in a parliament is an anathema that should be frowned upon and interrogated with all sense of urgency.

Tinubu should focus on bringing Nigeria out of the mess he plunged the country into rather than interfering in the state matters. -AA

 

February 17, 2025

 

Press Statement

 

You Can’t Return to Office- PDP Tells Sacked Osun State LG Chairmen, Councilors

 

…Asserts Appeal Court Judgment Sealed Their Fate

…Asks IGP to Hold Osun APC Responsible for Violence, Killings

 

The national leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) cautions the sacked Osun State Local Government Chairmen and Councilors to perish the thought of forcing themselves back into office as such will amount to a futile venture with dire consequences.

 

The PDP also charges the All Progressives Congress (APC) to accept the reality and end its resort to self-help, misrepresentations, vituperations, violence and killing with the aim to trigger crisis and destabilize the State, having realized that it has irredeemably lost.

 

The PDP asserts that the fate of the ousted Local Government Chairmen and Councilors was sealed by the Judgment of the Court to Appeal which nullified the unconstitutional attempt by the then Governor Gboyega Oyetola to illegally plant them as Local Government officers in the guise of an election.

 

Having been roundly rejected by the people of Osun State in the Saturday, July 16, 2022, governorship election, the then Governor Oyetola and the APC ought to have known that attempting to side-step the laws and manipulate the process to illegally foist APC members and apologists as Local Government Chairmen and Counselors was an exercise in futility which was bound to fail ultimately.

 

The APC is the architect of its misfortune. It should have known that disregarding and refusing to comply with the provisions of the Constitution and the Osun State Local Government Election Laws with respect to the requirement on notices, processes and procedures of conducting local government election is destined to be fatal and irreparable.

 

We counsel the Osun State APC to stop playing to the gallery by trying to bring in the exulted office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria into disrepute by hopelessly dropping the President’s name at public spaces in their desperate but pathetic and unrealizable attempt to garner undeserved sympathy.

 

The APC should note that our nation operates a federal system of government with clearly entrenched devolution of powers among the federating units as well as the various sub-national tiers of government. It should therefore desist from the fruitless attempt to drag President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the Federal Government into the issue of local government election which, under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), is within the purview of the State and has no connection whatsoever with the Federal Government.

 

If the APC believes that it is truly popular in Osun State as it claims, it should rather get ready for election as already scheduled by the Osun State Independent Electoral Commission (OSSIEC) instead of holding unto an imaginary strand of straw and instigating violence and killings in the State.

 

Our Party strongly condemns the violence and killing of some youths today by APC thugs and calls on the Inspector General of Police to hold APC leaders in Osun State responsible and bring them to book for this heinous crime.

 

The PDP calls on the people of Osun State to remain calm, law-abiding and get ready for the Local Government Election as they continue to support Governor Ademola Adeleke in his outstanding delivery of monumental life-enhancing projects and programs in the State.

 

Signed:

 

Hon. Debo Ologunagba

National Publicity Secretary

 

Delta govt approves urban renewal plans for Asaba, Warri

 

Delta State Government, yesterday, approved major infrastructure development projects targeted at urban renewal of the Asaba capital territory and Warri, the commercial nerve centre of the state.

 

The approvals were part of the decisions reached at the maiden 2025 State Executive Council (EXCO) meeting presided over by Governor Sheriff Oborevwori.

 

Briefing journalists at the end the meeting, the Director General of the Delta State Capital Territory Development Agency (DSCTDA), Chief Patrick Ukah, expressed excitement at the recent approvals for road infrastructure projects in the territory.

 

He described the development as a significant step towards enhancing urban renewal, improving connectivity and boosting economic growth.

 

Chief Ukah emphasized the government’s commitment to transforming the capital territory through strategic infrastructure upgrades, assuring residents that the approved projects would bring lasting benefits to the capital territory.

 

According to Ukah, “I must tell you that the Capital Territory in this administration has received a lot of attention, especially in the area of road infrastructure.

 

“I am happy to report that the Umejei Road in Ibusa, is being given a complete facelift, and the Okpanam Township Road, from the City Gate to the church and extending into Amaichai down to the Post Office, has also been approved for reconstruction.

 

“We are also making significant progress across BONSAC. A 2.6-kilometer road from the Road Safety office is being constructed into BONSAC, along with a network of roads that will connect to Achalla Ibusa Road.”

 

He explained that some projects were delayed due to upward reviews but disclosed that approximately eight of them had now been approved, with contractors already mobilized to the respective sites.

 

“Before now, some of our projects were stalled due to upward reviews. However, in this administration, about eight of them have now been approved, and the contractors are returning to the sites.

 

“Four of these are major projects that many of us were concerned about due to delays. For instance, the one crossing Ogbeogonogo Market has been approved, and Odilison has also received approval. Once the official release is issued, you will see the full details of these roads.

 

“Most importantly, in line with the governor’s MORE agenda, the transformation of the capital city has officially begun. The entire capital territory is set to receive a facelift, and the development, under the MORE agenda, is being accelerated,” he added.

 

On his part, the Director-General, Warri, Uvwie, and Environs,  Prince Godwin Ejinyere said Governor Oborevwori had directed that all major roads in Warri and environs should be given a face-lift.

 

“I want to sincerely inform Deltans that Warri truly will be great again as promised by the governor who has given the go ahead for us to reconstruct bad roads, to maintain bad roads and reconstruct roads linking major places in Warri.

 

“All the roads we are doing are not for political patronage. The Governor has directed that we identify all bad roads in Warri and make sure Warri wears a new look.

 

“Outside that today, Exco graciously approved the additional works for the stormwater project taking place in Warri.

 

“Knowing the nature of Warri that it’s always flooded whenever it rains and anytime from now the rains will be here again, the Warri storm water project was awarded sometime in April 2024 and has now been reviewed upward to accommodate additional works and also considering the rising cost of building and construction materials.

 

“We had to look into a lot of things for the job not to stop and, as I said today, the governor has graciously approved the onward construction of the project and equally increased the scope of work.

 

“Rome was not built in a day but I want to tell us that the job has been increased from what it used to be, to cover many other areas in Warri and environs.

 

“It’s a wonderful one; I want to say, on behalf of all our Warri people, that we owe nothing but prayers for our governor.”

 

LAGOS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY SUSPENDS PLENARY INDEFINITELY

 

The Lagos State House of Assembly has suspended plenary indefinitely following the invasion of the assembly by operatives of the State Security Services on Monday.

 

Tensions escalated in the assembly on Monday as security personnel, reportedly from the SSS, entered the assembly premises and locked the Deputy Speaker’s office before the start of the plenary session.

 

This action led to a standoff between lawmakers and security officers, with the lawmakers eventually regaining access to the assembly.

 During the plenary session, the lawmakers addressed the security breach and passed a vote of confidence in the Speaker, Mojisola Meranda.

 They also resolved to investigate the incident and report their findings to President Bola Tinubu and the SSS Director General Oluwatosin Ajayi.

 

PSC approves appointment of Jimoh Moshood as Commissioner of Police, Lagos State command

The Police Service Commission (PSC) has approved the appointment of Olohundare Moshood Jimoh as the Commissioner of Police, Lagos State Command, effective Monday, February 17, 2025.

In a statement, the PSC spokesperson, Mr. Ikechukwu Ani, said, “CP Jimoh, before his appointment, was the Commissioner of Police, Ports Authority, Eastern Ports.”

CP Jimoh, a native of Kwara State, previously served as the Force Public Relations Officer and held several key positions, including Deputy Commissioner, Airport Police, Deputy Commissioner, Finance and Administration, and Deputy Commissioner, General Investigation.

He has undergone extensive professional training both locally and internationally, including: Combat Operations Course – Mobile Training College, Maiduguri, African Union Mission – Darfur, Sudan, Weapons of Mass Destruction Countermeasure Training – United States, Social Construction and Management Reform Training – China, Executive Leadership Academy – Pudong, China, Maritime Rescue and Salvage Training – China Maritime Academy, Ningbo, China, Anti-Hijacking Techniques and Tactics Training – Yunnan Police College, Kunming, China, Police Training Institute – Seoul, South Korea.

CP Jimoh is also a recipient of the Presidential Award for Public Relations Personality of the Year, presented by the Nigeria Institute of Public Relations in recognition of his outstanding contributions to public relations in Nigeria.

His confirmation followed his appearance before the PSC on Monday, where key officials, including the Commission’s Chairman, DIG Hashimu Argungu (rtd), Justice Adamu Paul Galmuje (rtd), and DIG Taiwo Lakanu (rtd), were present.

The appointment reflects the Commission’s commitment to strengthening leadership and ensuring effective policing in Lagos State.

 

Security operatives take over Lagos Assembly

The leadership tussle in the Lagos State House of Assembly took a new twist on Monday with heavy security presence at the premises during a plenary session.

Security vans and personnel were spotted in and outside the premises of the Lagos Assembly complex in the Alausa Area of the commercial city.

An official of the Lagos Assembly said that the speaker Meranda Mojisola and 32 members of the lawmaking body are present for Monday’s plenary.

While issues to be discussed at the plenary are unclear as of the time of this report, some members of the Lagos Assembly were spotted discussing in clusters inside the premises.

Although a source said that the leadership of the House is intact, reports claim that there might be a change in the speakership of the Lagos Assembly.

 

Last month, members of the Assembly removed the House’s long-term speaker Mudashiru Obasa over allegations of fraud and other sundry charges.

They thereafter elected Meranda Mojisola as Obasa’s replacement in a historic move that saw the member representing Apapa Constituency I become the first speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly.

“The Constitution makes it clear that the House has the powers to regulate its proceedings. So, the members of the House felt that they’ve had enough of the Rt Hon Mudashiru Obasa and today, we have unanimously agreed that Rt Hon Mojisola Meranda Lasbat becomes the new Speaker of the House,” a member of the Assembly representing Epe Constituency 1 Abiodun Tobun said in defence of Obasa’s impeachment.

Tobun argued that the lawmakers “owe Lagos State a duty of ensuring that the sanctity of the House and the integrity of this House are restored”.

Obasa has denied claims of corruption levelled against him.

Obasa insisted he was still the Lagos Assembly speaker.

The former speaker who represents the Agege constituency dismissed fraud allegations against him which he labelled as “fictitious and unsubstantiated”.

 

“I am still the speaker until the right thing has been done,” the lawmaker said in a press conference organised at his Ikeja home in Lagos.

“If you want to remove me, remove me the proper way and I will not contest it. “I’m a Muslim and I believe in fate. But let’s do it the way it should be done.”

The Lagos Assembly crisis has dragged on for weeks, leaving many wondering about the next step for the House.

Many claimed his governorship ambition fuelled his removal, Obasa said there was nothing wrong with nursing that goal.

Weeks after his removal, Obasa dragged the Assembly and Meranda before the Lagos State High Court challenging his sack as the speaker of the House.

He asked the court to declare that his removal by his colleagues was unlawful owing since the Assembly was on break.

 

Attempts to link Obasa’s impeachment to Seyi Tinubu’s ‘guber aspiration’ mischievous (3)

 

By Ehichioya Ezomon

 

Removed Speaker Mudashiru Obasa (Agege Constituency 1) of the Lagos State House of Assembly may fail to get back his exalted office, yet, he’s succeeded in forcing an unplanned shift of the House plenary indefinitely, thus sowing tension and confusion among the lawmakers, and splitting the close-knit Governance Advisory Council (GAC) of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in the state.

This comes after new Speaker Mojisola Meranda (Apapa Constituency 1) formally assumed office on Monday, January 27, 2025, amid majority of the lawmakers chanting: “Madam, continue your work; your work is appealing to us. You are the Speaker, you are the Speaker, you are the Speaker. Speak for Lagos. Continue with your work.”

With Obasa reportedly absent from the Assembly, the lawmakers posed for photographs with Meranda, and accompanied her to the Speaker’s office, “where intense prayers were offered as she settled into her new role.” The plenary was then postponed, “to douse tension in the state.”

The lawmakers’ public rallying for Meranda was a “kick in the groin” for Obasa, whose fate appears sealed since losing power on Monday, January 13, and returning from the United States of America to insist that he remains the Speaker until due process is observed in his removal, in line with the amended 1999 Constitution of Nigeria.

Welcomed back to town on Saturday, January 25, by hundreds of jubilant supporters at the official residence of the Lagos Speaker in the GRA, Ikeja, Obasa slammed his ouster, in absentia, as unconstitutional.

In an “A luta continua; vitória é certa” (“The struggle continues; victory is certain”)-like mood, Obasa told his supporters: “I’m still the Speaker until the right thing has been done,” and the crowd cheered.

“I am not afraid of being removed. After all, it is not my father’s chieftaincy title. I am representing my people and they have returned me six times. If you want to do anything (remove him), do it well.”

Obasa insinuated that were he present in the Assembly, the lawmakers wouldn’t succeed in removing him as Speaker. He queried: “They did the removal all because I was out of the country. Why did they have to break the chamber and use a fake mace to carry out the removal?

“If they say they don’t want me anymore, that’s fine, but let them follow due process. I still believe I am the Speaker until the right procedure is followed. Lagos is a special place, we cannot denigrate the state.”

Obasa held his ground, as he addressed his 2027 governorship ambition he tactically broached when Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu presented the 2025 Budget proposals to the House, thus sparking the instant flurry of activities in the Lagos polity.

Saying, “Having ambition to become a governor is not a sin,” Obasa declared: “However, I said on the floor of the House, when the budget was presented, that I had no thoughts of governorship. But that does not mean I am not qualified or that I lack experience; I still maintain that (stand).”

Citing a breach of fair hearing, Obasa claimed he wasn’t given a chance to respond to the charges the House leveled against him, and challenged his colleagues to substantiate the allegations, and afford him a chance to respond.

“They (lawmakers) should not discredit an innocent person (Obasa); they should prove their allegations against me. The Lagos State House of Assembly is above the common standard of excellence. I believe in the image of our institution; we must not destroy it and I will never partake in it’s destruction.”

Obasa also criticised the Police for “conniving with the lawmakers” to oust him from power, alleging that besides the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Olanrewaju Olawale Ishola, “leading police officers to invade the Assembly,” over 200 policemen allegedly invaded his private residence in Agege, blocked the gate, and prevented members of his family from going out of the house.

Obasa referenced other Presiding Officers of the Lagos Assembly removed without deployment of the police. “When former Speaker, Rt Hon. Jokotola Pelumi, was removed, he was in the Assembly and we did not invite policemen. When my sister, former Deputy Speaker of the House, Hon. Adefunmilayo Tejuosho, was removed, we did not invite the police,” Obasa said.

Even with his eyes red, Obasa appreciated members of the GAC and Governor Sanwo-Olu, “who is my brother,” and who “always calls me his younger brother,” and thanked President Tinubu, “who will always be my father.”

Obasa said he’d been with Tinubu from his days in the Social Democratic Party (SDP) under which Tinubu’s elected Senator in the Third Republic, noting that he never expected to be Speaker in 2015, but “Tinubu supported me even when everyone was against me.”

Tinubu’s the acclaimed head of the shadowy and powerful GAC of the Lagos APC, which acts as a clearing house for the party affairs, including elective and appointive positions. But there appears a split in the GAC, as two of its members have criticised Obasa’s ouster as illegal.

As reported by The Nation on January 30, a member, Chief M.A. Taiwo, faulted the process of Obasa’s removal, noting that, “The act of the lawmakers is illegal. It shows total disregard and clear disrespect for leadership. The GAC is split over the matter, but we will all defer to our leader, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to resolve the crisis.”

Another GAC member, former Senator Anthony Adefuye, described the removal as illegal, stating, “What he (Obasa) is saying is that he was illegally removed, and the procedure was faulty. I agree with him.”

Meanwhile, former Lagos Speaker and ex-Minister of State for Health, and Minister of Science and Technology, Dr Olorunnibe Mamora, faults Obasa’s claim that his removal flouts the 1999 Constitution, saying that only the removal of President, Vice President, Governor and Deputy Governor is specified therein, and the procedure to effect the removal.

In an interview with Vanguard on January 25, Mamora, who’s Speaker from 1999 to 2003, and Senator from 2003 to 2011, said Obasa’s removal was constitutional, clarifying that though impeachment and removal are used inter-changeably, the removal of Principal Officers of the Senate, House of Representatives, and State House of Assembly requires only the support of two-thirds of members to succeed.

Mamora’s words: “Let me correct the impression. I have heard people say this in media discourse. If you look at the Constitution, you would not find impeachment. What you find is removal. There is a difference between removal and impeachment.

“Impeachment connotes bringing allegations of wrong doing formally, and presenting (them) before an offending public officer. But allegation does not necessarily amount to guilt. It only says that these are the allegations that have been brought formally, which the officer has to respond to; that is impeachment.

Recalling how former United States President Bill Clinton was impeached by the House but the conviction was defeated in the Senate over his sex affair with Monica Lewinsky, Mamora explains that allegations brought through impeachment may not necessarily lead to removal, adding, “If you are now convicted on the basis of allegations and a kind of sentence is passed, then it may lead to removal.”

“It (Constitution) does not even say you should explain. It is just a simple process, because the Speaker is just first among equals. That is why the process for removal of the Speaker or Senate President is different from the removal of Mr. Governor, Deputy Governor or President, or Vice President,” Mamora says.

“Because, in the case of the Governor, it is the whole state that voted to put him in office; that is why the procedure for his or her removal is a complex process. The allegations must be supported by one-third to be brought and served notice on the holder of the office, wait for his or her response, set up a panel, report comes back to the House and the House comes with a two-third majority of the members. So, you see it’s a complex process.

“The removal of a Speaker in the House of Assembly or the National Assembly Speaker or Senate President is simple. Once members bring a motion that is supported by two-thirds of members, then the Speaker vacates the seat; that’s all.”

“The Constitution does not even say you should state the allegations. It only says if you have the support of not less than two-thirds majority of the members, in support of the motion for the removal of the Speaker, and the Speaker vacates. It does not even say you should confront him with the allegations.

“Obasa was impeached and removed because there was presentation of allegations against him. And it was on the basis of the allegations that the House decided to remove him.”

Mamora adds: “We need to get it clear. What we do here is that we use the words, impeachment and removal, inter-changeably, as (if) they are the same. I need to correct that.

“There could be impeachment without removal. The Constitution, under Section 92, sub- section two or thereabout, talks of removal; that the Speaker shall vacate if a motion is presented, supported by two-thirds of members. That’s all.

“So, allegations were presented against Obasa and on that basis, the members went ahead to remove him in consonance with the Section 92 of the Constitution. So, the removal of Obasa is constitutional.”

Presented with a seeming fait accompli, shouldn’t Obasa rethink and retool his strategy, and give peace a chance in the Assembly and entire Lagos State? This poser comes on the back of a statement by majority of the House members on January 27, decrying Obasa’s alleged sabre-rattling, capable of heating up the polity.

Vowing to stand by Meranda as the new Speaker, a statement by Ogundipe Olukayode (Oshodi-Isolo Constituency II), on behalf of members, urged Obasa to shelve his bellicose stance and toe the path of “Peace we want in Lagos and Peace we will achieve.”

The statement partly reads: “It is imperative to clarify that over 2/3 of the members of the Lagos State House of Assembly are solidly united behind the new Speaker, Rt Hon. Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, therefore we stood by the decision taken on the 13th of January where Rt Hon. Mudashiru Ajayi Obasa was impeached and we shall defend our positions to the latter.

“The position of the House remains the same and nothing has changed. The position being canvassed by former Speaker, Rt Hon. Obasa, is uncalled for and unparliamentary.

“The majority of members elected Rt. Hon. Mudashiru Obasa as Speaker for the 10th Assembly and we also, at the said Plenary, took the majority decision to remove him and stand by the new Speaker. So, nothing has changed.

“All members were elected from their various constituencies across the state and we all have the inalienable rights under the necessary Statutory orders to remove their Principal Officers, including the Speaker.

“I (we) therefore appeal to the former Speaker to toe the line of peace and harmony as being followed by others, as the current intransigent posture will heat up the polity and not augur well. Any attempt to heat up the polity will be resisted by the majority of distinguished members who unanimously elected Rt Hon. Meranda,” the statement said.

Will Obasa heed this timely warning, even if he wants to bid for Governor and square up against Seyi Tinubu, who remains taciturn about his alleged aspiration till date? Let Obasa’s political case not be like the dog’s which refused to listen to its master’s whistle! (END)

 

 

* _Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria.

 

 

 

 

Edo Guber Tribunal: All eyes on Okpebholo as PDP, Ighodalo, INEC unexpectedly close cases*

 

 

By *Ehichioya Ezomon*

 

 

Today, Monday, February 10, 2025, is first D-Day for Governor Monday Okpehbolo at the Election Petitions Tribunal (EPT) sitting in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) of Nigeria. The ex-Senator (APC, Edo Central) is expected to begin defence of his declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the winner of the September 21, 2024, governorship election in Edo State.

Members of the public, especially the people of Edo State, are watching and waiting with bated breath, to see whether Okpebholo will toe the INEC line and close his defence without calling any witnesses to testify for him.

The INEC – which declared Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the poll winner, having scored 291,667 votes (about 51.1%) – failed to call any of the five witnesses it slated to testify, despite persuading the three-man tribunal on January 5 to adjourn the case to January 6, as “the witnesses would come to Abuja from Benin,” Edo State capital city.

At the resumed proceeding on January 6, INEC’s lead counsel, Kanu Agabi (SAN), said his team had shelved the idea of bringing witnesses after it reviewed the case, adding, “My Lords, after we left you yesterday (Wednesday), we gave more thought to the matter and came to the conclusion that the sensible thing to do is to close the case of the 1st Respondent, which we hereby do,” Agabi told the tribunal.

Counsel for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Dr Asue Ighodalo, didn’t express surprise by the turn of events, with Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN) saying, matter-of-factly, that, “Frankly speaking, we are not surprised and it is well within the right of the 1st Respondent (INEC) to show such good discretion. We are not objecting.”

But in an undisguised elation, the PDP unsolicitedly offered expert’s opinion, pointing to the risk INEC’s failure to call witnesses poses for the Respondents. “This abrupt end to INEC’s defence leaves the electoral body relying solely on cross-examinations and arguments from APC and Okpebholo’s lawyers,” the party said.

The PDP, however, noted its pathway to claiming its “stolen mandate,” explaining that, “The tribunal has already admitted critical BVAS machines into evidence, devices that will expose over-voting and discrepancies in the declared results.”

The party added: “Testimonies from PDP witnesses, including local government agents and an expert witness (PW12), detailed systemic manipulation during result collation. Independent monitors, such as Athena Centre and TAP Initiative, have corroborated these claims, further denting INEC’s credibility.

“By opting not to call witnesses, INEC appears to be taking a gamble, leaving its defence in the hands of APC and Governor Okpebholo’s legal teams. Analysts suggest this approach could backfire, as INEC must now contend with its own certified records and the BVAS data, which clearly contradict the declared results,” the party added.

Yet, PDP/Ighodalo had similarly suddenly closed their case on Monday, February 3, after calling 19 witnesses to testify to their claim of winning the governorship poll, though Ighodalo, going by INEC’s declaration, scored 247,274 votes (about 43.3%) to place second to Okpebholo.

It’s uncertain how many of the 290 witnesses – earmarked to testify for the eight political parties appearing before the tribunal – belonged to PDP/Ighodalo. But as the main challengers of the poll, surely, hundreds were primed to testify for them!

Recall that the tribunal had adjourned in Benin City on Friday, January 24, after taking the testimonies of PW11 and PW12, and relocated sitting to Abuja on Tuesday, January 28, with the Plaintiffs expected to call more witnesses, some of who refused to show up to testify the previous week.

But alas on Monday, January 3, a counsel for the Plaintiffs, Robert Emukpoeruo (SAN), offering no rationale, told the tribunal that his clients had concluded their case (in just 10 days), having called 19 witnesses, thus dampening the proceedings that’d captured public attention since the hearing proper began on January 21.

Left to guess the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ of the Plaintiffs’ action, several questions then arose: If PDP/Ighodalo called only 19 witnesses, did they cover the 765 of the 4,519 polling units, whose votes they query in their petition? Did the 19 witnesses supply and adduce enough evidence that rendered calling more witnesses unnecessary?

We’re reminded, though, as per Muhammad JSC, in Olonade v Sowemimo (2014) LPELR-22914(SC), 27 – in explaining the meaning of the standard of proof in civil cases, (and) the balance of probabilities – that:

“The court decides which side’s evidence is heavier, not by the number of witnesses called by either party or on the basis of the one being oral and the other being documentary, but by the quality or probative value of the evidence be it oral and/or documentary.”

So, in deciding to close their case after calling 19 witnesses, did PDP/Ighodalo think they’d met the legal threshold set out above, to prove their allegations of manipulation of the election?

“No, they didn’t,” declared the Acting Chairman of the Edo chapter of the APC, Emperor Jarrett Tenebe, whose voice was muffled when PDP/Ighodalo held the tribunal spellbound with evidential claims of electoral heist by the INEC, APC and Police, telling the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on January 3 that PDP/Ighodalo “abandoned their case abruptly because they have no case ab initio.”

Boasting that “the whole country and the people of Edo in particular would know that the APC won the election” when the Respondents open their case, Tenebe said: “They (PDP/Ighodalo) were called to testify but couldn’t produce more witnesses, so closing their case at this point amounts to abandonment of the case.

“If you are challenging about seven hundred and something polling units and you call only 19 witnesses, does that not amount to abandonment? I think they do not have a case, that is why they hurriedly closed their case today (January 3), which is a good thing for the APC.”

But it appears that Tenebe (like the PDP) was too early to guess the outcome of the petition, as the INEC on January 6 closed its defence without calling any witness, leaving the tribunal chairman, Justice Wilfred Kpochi, to rule that: “The request (by INEC) is granted and the first Respondent’s case is hereby closed,” and adjourned the matter to today, Monday, January 10, for Okpebholo to open his defence.

The three-man panel of Justices Wilfred Kpochi (Chairman), A.B. Yusuf and A.A. Adewole considers mainly alleged irregularities in the total number of votes cast in many polling units, which reportedly exceeded accredited voter-count recorded by the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) that the INEC deployed for the ballot.

While six parties question the credibility of the election in which INEC returned Okpebholo as the winner; the focus is on Ighodalo, who came second with 247,274 votes (about 43.3%) at the poll, with the PDP claiming those figures were manipulated to disfavour Ighodalo.

As hearing commenced in Benin City, the tribunal’s proceedings had witnessed the expected legal fireworks, with PDP/Ighodalo striving to unmask alleged massive rigging of the process that threw up Okpebholo as Governor, who’s sworn-in on November 12, 2024.

The party avers that – but for disfranchisement of voters; suppression of votes; over-voting; vote-buying; and connivance of the APC, INEC and Police to “gift” victory to Okpebholo – Ighodalo won the election, and should be declared as Governor of Edo State.

Going by testimonies of the Plaintiffs’ witnesses, PDP/Ighodalo seemed to hold their ground: That they won the election and INEC should’ve so returned. The witnesses tried to demonstrate alleged suppression, inflation and alteration of votes by the APC, INEC and Police, to the detriment of Ighodalo, a Lagos-based Lawyer and business tycoon.

Exuding confidence – and taking a page from PDP/Ighodalo’s sweeping allegations against APC/Okpebholo – the witnesses were even judgmental, pointing out votes that should’ve been counted or cancelled, and claiming that INEC’s reported rigging of the process amounts to a brazen breach of the Electoral Act 2022 (as amended).

Thus, if election petitions – and elections – are won on social media, PDP/Ighodalo would’ve breasted the tape before they closed their petition marked: EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, as reports on the proceedings were salaciously-headlined, portraying PDP/Ighodalo to’ve rubbished and made mincemeat of INEC’s declaration of Okpebholo as the poll winner.

Hence, there’s fear and anxiety that Okpebholo may also fail to call witnesses, and rely on the alibi that PDP/Ighodalo’s documentary evidence, and oral testimonies by the witnesses didn’t prove the Plaintiffs’ case “beyond reasonable doubts,” and “in substantial compliance with the electoral laws.”

Prior to the start of hearing on January 21, the Respondents, via Ferdinand Orbih (SAN), had asked the tribunal to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ petition on grounds of “incompetence” and “not filed in accordance with the extant law,” and to hands-off the petition for “lack of jurisdiction?”

An inkling to such a possibility was the prayer by Okpebholo’s counsel, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), on Thursday, January 6, for the tribunal to grant him a date next week (this week), to enable him open defence, saying, “I never envisaged the first Respondent (INEC) would close its case today.”

“I have not arranged for witnesses to be moved from Benin. A date next week would be okay,” Ikpeazu said, even as he promised “not to use the entire 10 or five days” allotted to the second Respondent (Okpebholo) for his defence.

Reacting, Plaintiffs’ counsel argued that adjourning till Monday (today) would be too long, and urged the matter be adjourned to Saturday (January 8) for Okpebholo to open his defence. But the tribunal rejected the plea, and subsequently fixed February 10 for Okpebholo to open his defence.

So, will Okpebholo advance his defence today by limiting the number of witnesses to be called, and reducing the alloted number of days thereoff; relitigate the pre-hearing call for the tribunal to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ petition; or align with INEC’s counsel, Agabi’s claim, and aver that his (Okpebholo’s counsel, Ikpeazu) “did justice to the case during the cross-examination of the petitioners’ witnesses?”

Members of the public are anxiously waiting for Okpebholo’s moves on his first D-Day at the tribunal, which may be a harbinger of what to expect on his second D-Day during the tribunal’s judgment to close out the 180 days (six months) allotted by law to consider and decide the petitions!

 

 

* _Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos, Nigeria. Can be reached on X, Threads, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp @EhichioyaEzomon. Tel: 08033078357_ .

 

PRESS RELEASE

 

 

 

SANWO-OLU CELEBRATES EL-RUFAI AT 65

 

 

 

 

 

Lagos State Governor, Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu, has congratulated the immediate past Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir el-Rufai, on his 65th birthday.

 

 

 

Governor Sanwo-Olu, in a congratulatory message issued by his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Gboyega Akosile, described el-Rufai as a committed public servant who served his State, Kaduna, and Nigeria with dedication.

 

 

 

The Governor said el-Rufai, a former Minister of Federal Capital Territory, contributed immeasurably to governance and politics in Nigeria with honour in all the public offices he occupied.

 

 

 

He said: “On behalf of my family, the government, and good people of Lagos State, I congratulate former Governor of Kaduna State, Malam Nasir el-Rufai, on his 65th birthday.

 

 

 

“Malam el-Rufai is a committed public officer. He turned around Abuja during his tenure as Minister of FCT. Kaduna State also witnessed phenomenal growth and development in many sectors during his eight years as governor.

 

 

 

“I pray to God to grant former Governor Nasir el-Rufai a long life, good health, and renewed energy for more service to humanity, his State, Kaduna, Nigeria and mankind in years to come.”

 

 

 

SIGNED

 

GBOYEGA AKOSILE

 

SPECIAL ADVISER – MEDIA AND PUBLICITY

 

16 FEBRUARY 2025

SERAP gives CBN 48 hours to withdraw ‘unlawful, unfair hike in ATM transaction fees’

 

 

 

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Mr Olayemi Cardoso, to use his “leadership position to immediately withdraw the patently unlawful, unfair, unreasonable and unjust increase in Automated Teller Machine (ATM) transaction fees.”

 

 

 

SERAP urged him to “ensure that the exercise of CBN statutory powers and functions does not inflict misery on poor Nigerians and contribute to human rights abuses.”

 

 

 

The CBN recently announced that ATM withdrawals made at a machine owned by a bank but outside its branch premises will now attract a charge of N100 per N20,000 withdrawn. ATM withdrawals at shopping centres, airports or standalone cash points, will incur a N100 fee plus a surcharge of up to N500 per N20,000 withdrawal.

 

 

 

Banks ‘are advised to apply the increased ATM fees with effect from March 1, 2025.’

 

 

 

In the open letter dated 15 February 2025 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organisation said: “the manifestly unlawful, unfair, unreasonable, and unjust increase in ATM transaction fees will hit hardest those at the bottom of the economy and exacerbate the growing poverty in the country.”

 

 

 

SERAP said, “The increase in ATM transaction fees ought to have been shouldered by wealthy banks and their shareholders, not the general public. The increase only benefits the CBN and commercial banks at the expense of poor Nigerians.”

 

 

 

According to SERAP, “CBN policies should not be skewed against poor Nigerians and heavily in favour of banks that continue to declare trillions of naira in profits mostly at the expense of their customers. The increase in ATM transaction fees would inflict misery on poor Nigerians and contribute to human rights abuses.”

 

 

 

The letter, read in part: “The increase in ATM transaction fees is also entirely inconsistent with the oft-expressed commitment by the government of President Bola Tinubu to address the growing poverty across the country.”

 

 

 

“We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken within 48 hours of the receipt and/or publication of this letter. If we have not heard from you by then, SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions to compel you and the CBN to comply with our request in the public interest.”

 

 

 

“The exorbitant and unlawful increase in ATM transaction fees at a time the country is facing economic and financial crises would contribute further to the impoverishment of the population.”

 

 

 

“Imposing exorbitant ATM transaction fees on socially and economically vulnerable Nigerians at a time several Nigerian banks are declaring trillions of naira in profits yearly is manifestly unfair, unreasonable and unjust.”

 

 

 

“The increase cannot be justified under the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended], the CBN Act, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, and the country’s international human rights obligations.”

 

 

 

“The patently unlawful, unfair, unreasonable and unjust increase in ATM transaction fees also inherently contributes to violations of the human rights of socially and economically Nigerians.”

 

 

 

“The increase creates a two-tiered financial system that discriminates against poor Nigerians who may not be able to afford or pay the increased fees.”

 

 

 

“While the government of President Tinubu has primary responsibility for protecting the rights of Nigerians, the CBN also has the responsibilities to ensure that its practices and guidelines do not cause or contribute to human rights abuses.”

 

 

 

“The CBN could play an important role in promoting economic opportunities for Nigerians where the majority of the people live in poverty.”

 

 

 

“The CBN is failing to comply with the Nigerian Constitution, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act and the country’s international human rights obligations in the exercise of its statutory powers and functions.”

 

 

 

“The CBN is also compromising its stated mission to advance the management of the country’s economy, and ultimately, sustainable development.”

 

 

 

“According to our information, the CBN through a Circular to all banks and other financial institutions dated February 10 2025 stated that it has reviewed and increased the ATM transaction fees prescribed in section 10(7) of the CBN Guide to Charges by Bank, Other Financial and Non-Bank Financial Institutions 2020.”

 

 

 

“Section 42(1)(a) of the CBN Act 2007 provides that ‘The Bank shall wherever necessary seek the co-operation of and co-operate with other banks in Nigeria to – (a) promote and maintain adequate and reasonable financial service for the public.’ It also provides that any policy of the CBN ‘shall be in the national interest.’”

 

 

 

“Section 1(c)(d) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018 provides that the objectives of the Act are to ‘protect and promote the interests and welfare of consumers’ and ‘prohibit restrictive or unfair business practices’ such as the exorbitant and unreasonable increase in ATM transaction fees by the CBN.”

 

 

 

“Significantly, the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act are directly binding on the CBN, as the provisions constrain the exercise of the statutory powers and functions of the institution.”

 

 

 

“Specifically, section 2(1) the Act provides that its provisions ‘apply to all undertakings [such as the CBN] and scope of application to all commercial activities within, or having effect within, Nigeria.”

 

 

 

“Section 2(2) provides that, ‘This Act also applies to and is binding upon- (a) a body corporate or agency of the Government of the Federation; (b) a body corporate; (c) all commercial activities aimed at making profit and geared towards the satisfaction of demand from the public.’”

 

 

 

“According to section 70(1) of the Act, ‘For the purpose of this Act, an undertaking [such as the CBN] is considered to be in a dominant position if it is able to act without taking account of the reaction of its customers or consumers.’”

 

 

 

“The Act prohibits abuse of dominant position by the CBN including charging excessive ATM transaction fees to the detriment of consumers.”

 

 

 

“Section 104 of the of the Act asserts the supremacy of the Act over ‘the provisions of any other law’, such as the CBN Act. The only exception to the provision is the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended].”

 

 

 

“Section 127(1) of the Act also prohibits the CBN from making any policy or providing “any services at a price that is manifestly unfair, unreasonable or unjust.”

 

 

 

“The CBN has clear responsibilities under the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) to undertake human rights due diligence to identify and mitigate contributions to human rights violations of not only its own activities but also activities to which it is directly linked by its business relationships.”

 

 

 

“The CBN has responsibilities under the UNGPs to take effective steps to avoid or mitigate potential human rights harm and to consider ending any charges or transaction fees where severe negative human rights consequences cannot be avoided or mitigated.”

 

 

 

 

 

Kolawole Oluwadare

 

SERAP Deputy Director

 

16/02/2025

 

Lagos, Nigeria

 

Emails: info@serap-nigeria.org; news@serap-nigeria.org

 

Twitter: @SERAPNigeria

 

Website: www.serap-nigeria.org

 

For more information or to request an interview, please contact us on: +2348160537202