Headline

Catalogue of President Buhari’s Impeachable Offences

Published

8 years ago

July 28, 2018

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

Scholars of constitutional law have affirmed that by taking the Oath of Office, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria commits himself to specific goals of general nature to wit:(i) bear allegiance to the Republic;(ii) faithfully discharge his duties in accordance with the Constitution;(iii) strive to preserve the fundamental objectives and principles of state policy;(iv) avoid influence caused by personal interest;(v) abide by the code of conduct; and(vi) treat all people equally under the law”.

Overtly and covertly, through body language and coded speeches, the members of the National Assembly have at one time or another called for the impeachment of President Muhammadu Buhari. What they distinguished members have lacked the courage to do so far is to muster enough willpower to move a motion on the floor of the house, quoting relevant sections of the constitution, citing instances and then ask for the removal of the President. No one has done it. No one has enough liver to it though many of them have come close with their ‘tongue in cheek’ mode of speaking. But removing a President has nothing to do with speaking tongue in cheek.

The closest however the members of the House of Representatives came was in April of 2018 when as major online platforms put it, they “called for President Muhammadu Buhari’s impeachment for approving the withdrawal of sum of $496 million without their nod”.

On the said day, the ‘honourables’ were livid, saying the President had really overstepped his boundary.

The President had written to the house, defending his approval of the money used for the procurement of 12 Super Tucano aircraft from the US. The money was said to have been withdrawn from the excess crude account (ECA).

In the letter written, Buhari said he had anticipated the lawmakers would approve the withdrawal.

Citing sections 80 and 81 of 1999 constitution, Kingsley Chinda, from Rivers state, said the Nigerian law does not recognise “anticipatory approval”.

“There is nowhere in our law that talked about anticipatory approval. We cannot sit down and allow this to take place. It is an impeachable offence. There is no infraction that is worse than this. Let us not continue to sleep. I propose that we commence the impeachment of Mr President,” he said.

Nothing was heard of Hon Chinda’s proposition ever again.

Ever since the present administration assumed office in 2015, the country has basically been divided along many lines, creating two broad bases of core loyalists to the president irrespective of how right or wrong his actions are, and the agitators/critics no matter what is presented on the table.

But stakeholders are of the opinion that the President has consciously or otherwise fallen short of the dictates of the constitution he swore to defend, thereby creating spaces for the National Assembly to begin the process of removing him from office. They added that for reasons yet unknown, the National Assembly has failed to live up to expectation.

Constitutional Interpretation on ‘Impeachment’

Section 143 of the 1999 constitution (as amended) deals with the removal of the president and vice-president from office. It is a very long process, taking at least three months to complete.

(1) The President or Vice-President may be removed from office in accordance with the provisions of this section.

(2) Whenever a notice of any allegation in writing signed by not less than one-third of the members of the National Assembly:-

(a) is presented to the President of the Senate;

(b) stating that the holder of the office of President or Vice-President is guilty of gross misconduct in the performance of the functions of his office, detailed particulars of which shall be specified, the President of the Senate shall within seven days of the receipt of the notice cause a copy thereof to be served on the holder of the office and on each member of the National Assembly, and shall also cause any statement made in reply to the allegation by the holder of the office to be served on each member of the National Assembly.

(3) Within fourteen days of the presentation of the notice to the President of the Senate (whether or not any statement was made by the holder of the office in reply to the allegation contained in the notice) each House of the National Assembly shall resolve by motion without any debate whether or not the allegation shall be investigated.

(4) A motion of the National Assembly that the allegation be investigated shall not be declared as having been passed, unless it is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of each House of the National Assembly.

(5) Within seven days of the passing of a motion under the foregoing provisions, the Chief Justice of Nigeria shall at the request of the President of the Senate appoint a Panel of seven persons who in his opinion are of unquestionable integrity, not being members of any public service, legislative house or political party, to investigate the allegation as provide in this section.

(6) The holder of an office whose conduct is being investigated under this section shall have the right to defend himself in person and be represented before the Panel by legal practitioners of his own choice.

(7) A Panel appointed under this section shall –

(a) have such powers and exercise its functions in accordance with such procedure as may be prescribed by the National Assembly; and

(b) within three months of its appointment report its findings to each House of the National Assembly.

(8) Where the Panel reports to each House of the National Assembly that the allegation has not been proved, no further proceedings shall be taken in respect of the matter.

(9) Where the report of the Panel is that the allegation against the holder of the office has been proved, then within fourteen days of the receipt of the report at the House the National Assembly shall consider the report, and if by a resolution of each House of the National Assembly supported by not less than two-thirds majority of all its members, the report of the Panel is adopted, then the holder of the office shall stand removed from office as from the date of the adoption of the report.

(10) No proceedings or determination of the Panel or of the National Assembly or any matter relating thereto shall be entertained or questioned in any court.

(11) In this section –

“gross misconduct” means a grave violation or breach of the provisions of this Constitution or a misconduct of such nature as amounts in the opinion of the National Assembly to gross misconduct.

A legal luminary, who prefers anonymity told the Boss that the foot dragging of the National Assembly may be as a result of some factors namely: the long and cumbersome nature of the process of impeachment; the fact that majority of the members in both chambers are the president’s party men, and may not want to eat their own, and lastly, some members may have been monetarily induced to look the other way.

Whichever way the matter is looked, here are a retinue of impeachable offences the President may have committed:

In the first place, the Federal character arrangement, which the country holds dear in the appointment of key officers, is known to have been breached. In the words of one senator of the federal Republic of Nigeria and member of the Akwa-Ibom State Elders Forum, Senator Anietie Okon, that breach is unconstitutional, and whatever goes against the constitution is an impeachable offence.

Hear him: “Again; even in the attempt to people his administration, what we have had is a clear breach of the Constitution.

“The very foundations of this country are very clear. The foundations demand recognition of the differences that have ensured the emergence of a country and it is unacceptable where you fail to recognize the federal character of our make up as a country. This is not only condemnable but poses real danger for the future of this country.

“I have pointed out where there are fundamental breaches and failure in his approach to governance of this country. The cardinal points that ensure that this country remains one cohesive group, one cohesive nation are being threatened by the lopsidedness and cavalier approach to the appointments he is making into the federal system.”

Again, in 2017, it was condemned as an impeachable infraction by President Muhammadu Buhari purportedly directed the World Bank to focus all her developmental assistance to Northern Nigeria.

Recall that the President of the World Bank Group, Jim Yong Kim, said in Washington DC that the bank had concentrated on the northern region of Nigeria in line with President Muhammadu Buhari’s request.

Kim said, “You know, in my very first meeting with President Buhari he said specifically that he would like us to shift our focus to the northern region of Nigeria and we’ve done that. Now, it has been very difficult. The work there has been very difficult.”

“Despite that, there is so much turbulence in the northern part of the country, and there is the hit that was taken from the drop in the oil prices. Nigeria has to think ahead and invest in its people. Investing in the things that will allow Nigeria to be a thriving, rapidly growing economy in the future is what the country has to focus on right now.”

“Focusing on the northern part of Nigeria, we hope that as commodity prices stabilize and oil prices come back up, the economy will grow a bit more. But very, very much important is the need to focus on what the drivers of growth in the future will be.”

The President’s directive, which he however, later denied as being misquoted, is assumed as constitutionally going against his Oath of Allegiance which stipulates being treating everyone as equal before the law.

A group that took up the matter at the time, urged the National Assembly to begin an impeachment process because a breach of constitutional oaths of office as contained Under Sections 140(1) and 140(2) of the constitution, is extensively damaging.

Probably the most brazen of them all was the withdrawal of $496million for the purchase of aircraft from the United States from the excess crude account, a move made some senators and representatives to call for the President’s impeachment.

Section 143 of the Nigerian constitution provides for the removal of the president from office.

Making the call, Matthew Uroghide, Edo State, said President Buhari’s move was a violation of the constitution and thus, he should face the consequences. He was supported by Senator Chukwuka Utazi.

The catalogue is not exclusive of the President’s inability to call his security chiefs to account in the midst of the spate of religious and ethnic killings across the country, and taking into account the abandonment of statutory duties for accumulated 150 days

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe representing Abia once berated the President as incompetent, a fact which other senators such as Ben Murray-Bruce, Marafa, Shehu Sani among others have echoed.

The question remains when will the big stick be wield in the midst illegality which stakeholders have said the government of the day represents.

Headline

Parties’ Deregistration: ADC, Not NDC, is the Target

Published

3 days ago

June 29, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

As the 2027 presidential election draws closer, intrigues, manipulations and maneuvers have continued to be the order of the day as political parties engage in one gimmick or another to outdo and undo one another.

While some are playing politics of numbers and conviction, others are engaging tendencies that tend to question the status quo and established principles under which genuine democracy is formed. As a matter of fact, fingers have been pointed at the President Bola Tinubu-led Federal government as the brain behind all machinations that have attempted to derail multi-party democracy, and institute a one-party state, which is alien to the Nigerian democratic roots. This is as a result of the constant imbroglio that has consistently engulf almost all the major political parties in the country.

Fresh facts have however, emerged to prove that every act of frustration thrown at the opposition has been indirectly aimed at the main opposition party, the African Democratic Congress (ADC), and its presidential candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.

According to reliable sources, the recent deregistration of parties, especially the Nigerian Democratic Congress (NDC), was actually targeted at the ADC.

Recall that the Federal High Court in Lokoja, Kogi State, on June, 26, set aside its earlier judgement directing the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to register the NDC as a political party. A ruling that put a question mark on the eligibility of the party presenting candidates in the forthcoming 2027 elections

The presiding judge, Isah Dashen, held that all relevant parties must be heard before any substantive decision can be made in the matter.

The court upheld the application filed by a certain organization, the Peace Movement Party (PMP), ruling that the party was a necessary party to the suit.

According to the judge, the earlier judgement was constitutionally defective as it was delivered without hearing from all interested parties.

He declared that such an omission rendered the entire process null and void.

Mr Dashen further ruled that the status quo be restored to what it was before the December 10, 2025 judgement, pending the determination of the substantive suit.

He also observed that certain material facts were suppressed in the earlier proceedings, which justified the decision to set aside the judgment.

Consequently, the court ordered that the substantive suit should begin afresh, with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the PMP and the NDC as parties to the case.

According to NAN’s reports, the applicant’s lawyer, Chikezie Ekeocha, told journalists that the PMP approached the court after discovering that NDC’s registration was based on a logo it had previously submitted to INEC before the commencement of the suit.

According to Mr Ekeocha, the court agreed that the applicant’s rights had been affected and consequently vacated the earlier judgement.

“The court has ordered all parties to return to the position they occupied before the judgment of 10 December 2025, and directed the claimants to join all necessary parties to ensure the issues in dispute are effectually and completely determined,” he said.

He explained that the implication of the ruling is that every action taken by INEC in compliance with the now-vacated judgment stands reversed.

“The recognition of the NDC, the issuance of its certificate of registration, its inclusion in INEC’s records, and any appearance on ballot papers arising from that judgement must be withdrawn pending the final determination of the substantive suit,” Mr Ekeocha stated.

He, however, clarified that the substantive case remains before the court and has not been decided.

“The matter has not been concluded. The court merely set aside its previous judgment and directed that the party whose interests were affected be joined so that all sides can be heard before a fresh decision is reached.”

Mr Ekeocha also dismissed suggestions that the court merely ordered parties to maintain the status quo, insisting that the ruling specifically directed a restoration of the position that existed before the 10 December 2025 judgement.

The ruling effectively returns the dispute over the registration of the NDC to the Federal High Court for a fresh hearing, with all relevant parties expected to participate before a new determination is made.

It would also be recalled that a few weeks earlier, the Federal High Court in Abuja, had ordered the deregistration of five political parties including the African Democratic Congress (ADC). The others are Action People’s Party (APP), Action Alliance (AA), Zenith Labour Party (ZLP) and Accord Party.

However, on June 16, the Court of Appeal in Abuja halted the enforcement of the judgement, ruling that it violated its earlier ruling staying proceedings before the Federal High Court.

While INEC awaits the release of the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment to deregister the NDC, the NDC has reacted, rejecting the judgment as travesty of justice.

Lending credence to the notion that the President Tinubu-led administration is basically targeting the establishment of the ADC as a party, and the candidature of its presidential flagbearer, former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, who is also the presidential candidate of the ADC, has stated categorically that there are plots to prevent the party from participating in the 2027 general election.

Atiku’s position is stated in a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu on Monday, notifying the public that he had received credible information suggesting that political and legal manoeuvres were being deployed against the ADC, stressing that the persecution that has been thrown towards the NDC was a clear distraction as the main target is the ADC.

Atiku alleged that anti-democratic elements within the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) were working to ensure that the ADC is excluded from the ballot.

“We are fully aware of their plots. While they seek to sow confusion within the opposition, we know their real target is the ADC because it represents the most credible alternative,” he said.

Atiku called on Nigerians to reject any attempt to determine which opposition parties participate in the election.

“We therefore call on all Nigerians — not just ADC members and supporters — to rise in defense of democracy and reject any attempt by the ruling party to cherry-pick which opposition parties are permitted to participate in the next general election,” he said.

“Our message to the APC and the hooded men plotting in dark chambers is simple: you may conspire, but you will not succeed.

“If the APC is truly confident in its popularity, why is it so terrified of the ADC?”

He said he hoped the information available to him would not materialise but argued that recent political developments made such concerns difficult to dismiss.

“The pattern has become all too familiar. First, institutions that ought to be neutral are drawn into partisan contests,” he said.

“Then, frivolous litigations suddenly gain unusual momentum. Administrative powers are selectively deployed.

“Political pressure is mounted behind closed doors. Before long, democracy itself becomes the casualty.”

Atiku alleged that the ruling party has focused more on weakening the opposition than addressing the country’s economic and security challenges.

“The obsession with silencing the opposition has become so consuming that governance itself has taken a back seat,” he said.

“At a time when Nigerians are battling hunger, inflation, unemployment, insecurity, and collapsing purchasing power, those entrusted with public office appear preoccupied with political survival rather than national survival.”

Nigerians recall that ever since the official rejuvenation of the ADC in June/July of 2025, where the duo of Senator David Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola emerged as the party’s chairman and secretary respectively, the party has not known moments of peaceful coexistence as litigations from corners unknown have sprang up in a bid to destabilize the party and deprive it of the opportunity of featuring on the ballot paper come 2027.

ADC, as a child of circumstance emerged from the rumbles of the litigation-ridden former main opposition party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), where two factions have consistently remelained at loggerheads over leadership. While the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, who is working assiduously to ensure the reelection of Bola Tinubu, leads one faction, Oyo State Governor, Seyi Makinde, who became a defacto head, leads the other faction. In all, PDP appeared to have no direction, forcing many of its members to jump ship, thereby birthing the ADC, and to a large extent, the NDC, which is presenting Peter Obi as the presidential candidate, with former Kano governor, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, as his running mate.

Sources also informed The Boss that the hasty reading and passage of the Electoral Act 2026 by the Godswill Akpabio-led National Assembly, with many great areas left unattended to, were also part of the grand design to deprive the ADC the constitutional rights of presenting candidates for the 2027 elections.

But both the ADC and the NDC has vowed that they would follow every process to ensure that the crackdown on opposition parties by the Tinubu administration comes to an abrupt end.

But beyond the intrigues, Nigerians are gearing up to participate fully in the forthcoming election with cross sections of the population either hailing Tinubu for his policies or knocking him for the untold hardship in the land.

Headline

South Africa Nothing Without Africa – MTN Boss, Mcebisi Jonas

Published

5 days ago

June 27, 2026

Eric

The MTN Group Chairman, Mcebisi Jonas, has condemned the ongoing anti-foreigner sentiment in South Africa, describing it as a symptom of State failure being cynically exploited by politicians with no interest in genuine solutions.

The speech is seen as one of the most substantive interventions by a senior business figure into xenophobic crisis currently plaguing South Africa.

Delivered during the funeral service of Zimbabwean-born activist and public servant, Thokozani Damasane, Jonas’ words have sparked a wave of discussion across South African civil society.

“I was thinking, what is home to Damasane?” he said. “Because I understand, and I understood very early in life, that home is where humanity is. Home is about humanness. It is about the good of humanity and striving for the good of humanity.”

Thokozani Damasane was born and educated in Zimbabwe before relocating to South Africa during the post-apartheid transition period. Jonas described him as arriving “as an outcast” into a country still finding its post-liberation footing – and choosing, nonetheless, to commit himself entirely to its struggles and its people.

“He immersed himself deeply into the struggles, into the pains of South Africans, and he became one of us,” Jonas said.

“In Damasane’s strength, our strength as South Africa and South Africans is reflected. And in his weaknesses, our own weaknesses are reflected.”

Speaking further, Jonas blamed the state for the failure being witnessed, emphasising that if foreigners leave South Africa today, the country’s problems will still persist.

“Foreigners can leave tomorrow – inequality will be with us,” he told the congregation.

“Foreigners will leave tomorrow – unemployment will be with us. Foreigners will leave tomorrow – our police will remain corrupt. Foreigners will leave tomorrow – our politicians will still be concerned with one thing: being elected and re-elected.

“The problem is the failure of the state. The State doesn’t manage immigration. It doesn’t manage its borders. It doesn’t enforce
law enforcement. It doesn’t manage education. What are you expecting?”

Jonas argued that this failure created fertile ground for political manipulation. “When people feel the burn, they become vulnerable to politicians whose sole purpose is to be elected and re-elected. Some of them have no credibility whatsoever. But they lead marches and tell our people that the problem is not us – it is foreigners.”

Jonas recounted a conversation he had witnessed between Damasane and a young man who had challenged the right of foreigners to be in South Africa. Damasane’s response, Jonas said, had stayed with him ever since.

“Damasane said to this guy: Just wait fifteen or twenty years. You will also want to leave your country.”

Jonas told mourners those words now carry a weight Damasane may not have anticipated. “As I stand up today, I look at South Africa. The level of oppression and inequality, the level of exclusion of our people, the level of corruption, the betrayal of the dream of liberation – those words of Damasane ring very loud in my ears.”

South Africa is nothing without Africa

Jonas closed with a call for what he described as a return to “national consciousness” – one rooted in continental solidarity and economic interdependence rather than ethnic exclusion.

“We are a nation embedded in Africa,” he said. “And without Africa, our growth as a country – economically – our fortune is intertwined with the growth of Africa. South Africa is nothing without Africa. And Africa is nothing without South Africa.”

He also reframed the question of legacy and identity for Damasane’s children, who were present. “Sometimes this thing called meritocracy is measured in wealth. No. It is values, it is principles, it is integrity. And your father had all of that.”

“We cannot judge people by their origin,” he told mourners. “We cannot determine the legal status of people by their origin.”

Headline

NDC Rejects Court Ruling on Party’s Registration, Heads to Appeal Court

Published

5 days ago

June 27, 2026

Eric

The Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), on Friday, vowed to challenge the judgment nullifying its registration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), insisting that it would exercise its constitutional right of appeal.

Reacting to the ruling on Thursday, the party’s spokesman, Osa Director, said the NDC was still awaiting the certified copy of the judgment before making a comprehensive statement on the court’s decision.

He, however, confirmed that the party had resolved to head to the appellate court.

“We are still waiting to obtain a copy of the judgment. After reading the comprehensive judgment, we will make a detailed statement,” he said.

The spokesman added: “For now, what is certain is that we will exercise our right of appeal.”

Insisting that the party would challenge the ruling, he said: “It is our constitutional right to appeal, and we intend to exercise that right.”

When asked specifically whether the NDC would appeal the judgment voiding its registration, the spokesman replied: “Yes, the party will appeal the case.”

The party’s reaction came shortly after a Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja, Kogi State, in a judgement that nullified its registration by INEC, a development that could have significant implications for the NDC’s participation in the country’s political process ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The NDC, however, maintained that it would refrain from making further comments on the substance of the judgment until it had studied the full text of the court’s decision.

The party’s planned appeal is expected to set the stage for a fresh legal battle over its status and continued existence as a registered political party.