Featured

Court Dismisses Suit Challenging Oyetola as Osun APC Gov Candidate

Published

7 years ago

January 11, 2019

Eric

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday dismissed a suit challenging the nomination of Governor Gboyega Oyetola as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress in the last governorship election in Osun State.

The suit was instituted by an aggrieved aspirant on the platform of the party, Kunle Adegoke, who alleged that the July 20, 2018 primary election, in which he participated alongside Oyetola and others, was marred by irregularities and non-compliance with the relevant laws and regulations.

Oyetola, had after emerging as the party’s candidate, gone ahead to win the September 22 and 27, 2018 governorship election in the state.

Dismissing the suit challenging Oyetola’s nomination as APC’s candidate for the election, Justice Inyang Ekwo ruled in his judgment on Friday that nothing was illegal or unconstitutional in the conduct of the primary by the APC as alleged by Adegoke.

The judge ruled, “On the whole, I find no illegal or unconstitutional act on the part of the 1st defendant in the conduct of the governorship primaries in Osun State that would warrant this court to intervene in what can be considered as its internal affairs either before or on July 20, 2018 when the said primary election was held.”

Adegoke, had on July 27, 2018, filed the suit marked, FHC/ABJ/ CS/804/2018, to challenge the emergence of Oyetola as APC’s governorship candidate.

The defendants in the suit were originally, the APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission, but Oyetola and his deputy, Benedict Alabi, were later joined as co-defendants.

Adegoke contended, among others in the suit, that the conduct of the APC’s primary election in Osun State violated the Constitution, the Electoral Act, 2010 and relevant provisions of the APC constitution, including the Regulation for the Conduct of Political Party Primaries of the Independent National Electoral Commission.

He said, in a supporting affidavit, that the “direct method” adopted by the party allowing all general members of the party to vote in the primary election “was a departure from the extant 2014 guidelines of the party”.

The plaintiff stated that contrary to the development in Osun State, “the indirect method of primary election was used in Edo State in 2016, Ondo State in 2016, Anambra State in 2017 and Ekiti State in May 2018”.

He added that the APC failed to notify him as an aspirant or the INEC in writing not later than 21 days to the date of the primaries, the details including the specific location and venue, date and time for the conduct of its nomination of candidate before holding same on the July 20, 2018.

He also stated that APC also failed to notify INEC in writing “the rescheduling of the purported primary election from Wednesday, the 18th day of July 2018 to Friday, the 20th day of July 2018.”

The plaintiff also alleged that the party failed to maintain “a proper and duly certified membership register for the purpose of conducting direct method of primaries”.

He also said officers of INEC “did not monitor the primary election” which held in 332 wards of Osun State on July 20, 2018, “as no reports of such elections at the ward level were prepared and submitted to the 2nd defendant (INEC)”.

He noted that he had, in an open letter, challenged the National Chairman of the party, Mr. Adams Oshiomhole, informing him that there was no membership register of the party by which the party could conduct a credible direct primary election.

But dismissing the suit, Justice Ekwo ruled that contrary to Adegoke’s contention, the National Working Committee of the party reserved the right to adopt either direct or indirect primary for the nomination of its candidate for the governorship election in the state.

He ruled that there was evidence showing that all governorship aspirants on the platform of the party were duly notified about the NWC’s decision to adopt direct primary ahead of the Osun State election.

The judge also ruled that Adegoke lacked the right to complain that INEC was not notified of the rescheduling of the primary within seven days.

He added that there was evidence that INEC officials monitored the primary election implying that the commission had validly waived the right of being given the seven-day notice about the rescheduling of the primary.

The judge also held that there was evidence showing that Adegoke attended the July 18, 2018 meeting where all aspirants were notified of the rescheduling of the primary to July 20.

He added that there was evidence showing that voter registers were displayed by the acting Chairman of the Electoral Committee for the APC’s primary, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege, and the plaintiff was invited to apply for copies.

The judge ruled, “It is my opinion upon considering the evidence in this case that the 1st defendant (APC) acted within its power and authority vested in it in the conduct of the governorship primaries in Osun State in the circumstances of the evidence in this case.

“Far be it that primary election of a party political party would be nullified simply for the fun of doing so or in sympathy with an aspirant whose aim is just to have the primaries anulled.

“The evidence to warrant the exercise of the power of nullification by the court must be compelling and perhaps overwhelming”.

The Punch

Featured

El-Rufai to Remain in ICPC Custody Till June

Published

1 day ago

April 21, 2026

Eric

Justice Darius Khobo of the Kaduna State High Court has adjourned the bail hearing of former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, to the first week of June, 2026.

El-Rufai is being arraigned on multiple charges bordering on alleged financial crime and abuse of office by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

“Similarly, another charge, number KDH/KAD/ICPC/01/26, against Mallam Nasir El-Rufa’i and one Amadu Sule (LEDA) has also been filed before a Kaduna State High Court in the Kaduna Judicial Division,” the ICPC said last month.

“The charges in the State High Court case range from abuse of office, fraud, and intent to commit fraud to conferring undue advantage, among others. Both charges were filed by the ICPC on the 18th of March, 2026.”

Speaking after the court session, counsel to the former governor, Ukpon Akpan, kicked against the lingering adjournment of the bail hearing by one presiding judge as politically motivated.

The high-profile case has drawn significant public attention, with heightened security presence observed around the court premises.

The former governor had arrived at the court at about 9 am in a convoy accompanied by ICPC officials and operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS).

During the proceedings, supporters of the former governor gathered outside the courtroom, while security agencies maintained order and restricted movement within the vicinity.

Inside the courtroom, journalists, as usual, were not allowed, as proceedings are expected to focus on arguments presented by both the defence and prosecution regarding the bail request.

At the last sitting, the defence team had maintained that their client poses no flight risk and is willing to comply with all conditions set by the court.

Meanwhile, the prosecution has urged the court to carefully consider the gravity of the charges.

The 66-year-old former governor of Kaduna has been in ICPC custody since February 19 following his release by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

El-Rufai, a former minister of the FCT, was, however, released on March 27 based on compassionate grounds following his mother’s death.

Featured

Timi Frank Petitions US, Demands Gbajabiamila’s Resignation over ‘Anti-Democratic’ Remarks

Published

1 day ago

April 21, 2026

Eric

Political activist, Comrade Timi Frank, has called on the United States government to investigate and sanction the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, over alleged actions capable of undermining Nigeria’s democracy.

Frank’s demand followed a viral video in which Gbajabiamila was quoted as telling Hon Leke Abejide, during his wife’s 50th birthday that: “Don’t come to APC. Stay in ADC and scatter them. We like what you’re doing… stay in ADC and win your election… bring Bala Gombe, and we’ll support him. Good luck in court.”

Describing the remarks as “reckless” and dangerous, the former Deputy National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC), said they point to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition parties and erode democratic institutions.

“Your statement, as Chief of Staff, raises serious concerns about the determination by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s regime to truncate democracy,” he said, adding that “inference can be made that there is an infringement on the independence of the judiciary.”

He warned that any suggestion that courts could be influenced “undermines public confidence in democratic institutions,” citing references to political actors, including Leke Abejide, as requiring clarification to avoid “dangerous interpretations.”

Frank argued that Gbajabiamila’s comments effectively confirm the Presidency’s involvement in crises rocking opposition parties such as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Social Democratic Party (SDP), New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), and the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

“When a Chief of Staff speaks, it reflects the body language of the President. This points to a deliberate attempt to weaken opposition and consolidate power,” he said.

He further claimed that state influence, including the use of the judiciary, is being deployed against opposition parties. “The audacity of the statement suggests nothing will happen even if opposition parties are destabilised. That is dangerous,” he added.

Frank described Gbajabiamila as “an alter ego of the President” who had “displayed the arrogance of power,” insisting that public office holders must uphold restraint, respect for the rule of law and constitutional order.

He also urged U.S. authorities to probe Gbajabiamila’s activities and financial dealings.

“As an American citizen, he should be held accountable. We want to know if he is meeting his tax obligations in line with his earnings in Nigeria,” Frank said, describing him as “a bad ambassador of the United States.”

“We want to be sure that all earnings, including those from official and business engagements in Nigeria, are properly declared and taxed,” he added.

On accountability, Frank insisted resignation was the only honourable option.

“We call for your resignation with immediate effect. If such a statement were made in the United States, the official involved would have resigned forthwith,” he said.

He disclosed plans to petition the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, stressing that “those entrusted with leadership must reflect humility, constitutional awareness and respect for separation of powers.”

“Power is transient, but institutions must endure. Any comment that diminishes their independence must be corrected,” he added.

The call comes amid rising concerns over the stability of Nigeria’s multiparty system and allegations of increasing pressure on opposition parties.

Comrade Timi Frank is the ULMWP Ambassador (East Africa and Middle East) and Senior Advisor, Global Friendship City Association (GFCA), USA.

Featured

Alleged Coup Plotters Get April 22 Date for Trial, Slammed with 13-Count Charge

Published

1 day ago

April 21, 2026

Eric

The Federal Government has filed a 13-count charge before the Federal High Court in Abuja against a retired Major General, a retired Naval Captain, a serving police inspector, and three others over an alleged coup plot and acts of terrorism.

The alleged coup plotters, are scheduled to be arraigned tomorrow (Wednesday), April 22, before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Those named in the charge are Major General Mohammed Ibrahim Gana (rtd), Captain (NN) Erasmus Ochegobia Victor (rtd), Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim, Zekeri Umoru, Bukar Kashim Goni, and Abdulkadir Sani.

Also listed as a defendant, but said to be at large, is former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

The charge, filed by the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and signed by the Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN, accuses the defendants of offences ranging from treason and terrorism to failure to disclose security intelligence and money laundering linked to terrorism financing.

At the centre of the case is an allegation that the defendants conspired in 2025 to undermine the Nigerian state.

According to the charge, they “conspired with one another to levy war against the state to overawe the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” an offence punishable under Section 37(2) of the Criminal Code.

The prosecution further alleged that the defendants had prior knowledge of a planned treasonable act involving one Colonel Mohammed Alhassan Ma’aji and others but failed to alert authorities.

The charge stated that they, “knowing that and intended to commit treason, did not give the information thereof with all reasonable despatch to either the President or a Peace Officer.”

In another count, the defendants were accused of failing to take preventive steps, as they allegedly “did not use any reasonable endeavours to prevent the commission of the offence.”

Beyond treason, the Federal Government is prosecuting the defendants for terrorism-related offences under the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The charge alleged that they “conspired with one another to commit an act of terrorism in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Particularly, Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim and Zekeri Umoru are accused of participating in meetings linked to terrorist activities.

Prosecutors claim they acted “in a bid to further a political ideology which may seriously destabilise the constitutional structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The charge also accused the defendants of providing support for terrorism, alleging that they “knowingly and indirectly rendered support” to facilitate acts of terror.

In addition, the prosecution alleged a deliberate suppression of intelligence, stating that the defendants “had information which would be of material assistance in preventing the commission of the act of terrorism but failed to disclose the information to the relevant agency as soon as practicable.”

The case further traced financial transactions allegedly linked to terrorism financing, with multiple defendants accused of handling proceeds of unlawful activities.
Bukar Kashim Goni is alleged to have “indirectly retained the aggregate sum of N50,000,000, which forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful act, to wit: terrorism financing,” while Abdulkadir Sani allegedly retained N2 million from a similar source.

Zekeri Umoru, according to the charge, “without going through a financial institution accepted a cash payment of the sum of N10,000,000,” and also retained an additional N8.8 million suspected to be proceeds of terrorism financing.

Inspector Ahmed Ibrahim was also accused of taking possession of N1 million linked to the same alleged scheme.

All financial-related counts were brought under the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The 13-count charge presents what prosecutors describe as a coordinated network involving security personnel, civilians, and a politically exposed individual, allegedly connected to activities threatening national security.