Headline

Army 38: Injustice and The Nigerian Army

Published

7 years ago

February 19, 2019

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

Lt. Col. Ojebo Baba-Ochankpa had gone to bed that fateful night in January 2017 physically okay but psychologically full of worries. His heavy heart took the best of him as he slept, and on he slept even as the day dawned and activities ladened in loud noises surrounded his environment. He continued to sleep, and never woke. He had died in his sleep. The worries of injustice and hopelessness of the future forcefully placed on his military shoulders claimed his young life, leaving behind a young wife, Ruth Baba-Ochanpka, and three children; Joshua, Esther and Abigail. Ochankpa was one of the 38 senior army officers who were arbitrarily booted out of service by retirement by Gen. Buratai under the false narrative of partisanship in the 2015 General Elections and the Defence Contracts scam.

For the 38 senior army officers unceremoniously dismissed on June 10, 2016 for reasons bordering on ‘partisanship, indiscipline and corruption’, according to the Army, what transpired was just bare-faced injustice. The victims are not the only ones who believe that injustice took a greater part of the decision, but also a greater section of the public, who have gone through the nuances of the so-called dismissal.

The following is the statistics of the officers retired compulsorily; 9 Major Generals, 10 Brigadier Generals, 7 Colonels, 11 Lieutenant Colonels and a Major.

The 38 officers, who many described as the country’s brightest in internal and external security operations, were believed to have been forced out of service without recourse to the rules of disengagement in the Nigerian military, and even as legal battles have gone on in the last three years, the Army, under General Tukur Buratai, has remained adamant in considering a reinstatement, raising questions from many quarters as what could be the real reasons behind the disengagement.

Accusing fingers has however, been pointed at the Buhari administration for deliberately orchestrating an ethnic cleansing and lurching out a vendetta attack against the South notably the South East and South South regions. This is considering that seven officers out of the lot are from one state – Rivers, and none of them, not a single one of them was found guilty of an offence. Therein lies the crux of the matter, none of the Army 38 was found guilty of an offence. That is quite interesting. One question therefore, that needs answer is can Buratai dismiss seven officers from Katsina or Kano or any other states of the North in one fell swoop like he did to Rivers State? With none of them being charged, tried or found guilty of an offence.

Many have argued that the army clearly and blatantly refused to follow its own precedence as was observed in the case of the General Officer Commanding (GOC) of 7 Division in 2014, Major General Ahmadu Mohammed from Kano State, whose troops mutinied against and even fired at his vehicle. Mohammed was accused by the troops of dereliction of duty and sending them to the battlefield with minimal logistic supports thereby leading to many deaths. Those were grave offences that led to his retirement in January 2015. However, he was retired without fair hearing or due process. Similarly, he failed to appealed against his retirement within the stipulated 30 days by law, but waited a whole nine months after before appealing. His appeal was pampered, fast tracked and given smooth attention leading to his reinstatement in January 2016 and backed dated in such a way that he was never retired.

In defence, Buratai’s Army argued thus: “Although, it is not an aberration for the international human rights body to raise such an observation, however, it did not take into cognisance the circumstances leading to his illegal retirement and the legal procedure that was followed in his reinstatement. The compulsory and premature retirement of Major General Mohammed did not follow due process and was rather arbitrary.

“The senior officer was never charged, tried, let alone found guilty of any offence that justified his premature retirement. The action was therefore a clear violation of extant rules, regulations, as well as terms and conditions of service of the armed forces of Nigeria. This obvious violation prompted the senior officer to seek redress using the appropriate legal means.

“Consequently, the realisation of these omissions called for a review of the case by the Army Council and his subsequent reinstatement into the service.” This was a logical and reasonable explanation for the reinstatement.

Alas, but it is still the same army under Buratai, that proceeded to retiring 38 budding and intelligent officers without trying them nor following laid down military procedures. Why will he, Tukur Yusuf Buratai, falsely accuse and then illegally and wrongly retire young officers without finding anyone of them guilty of an offence in a competent court? This has given the impetus to many to believe that there are sacred cows in the army and there are sacrificial lambs.

More worrisome is that 18 of the senior army officers that were dismissed did not at any time appear before any one of the two panels that were set up to investigate the 2015 General Elections and the Defence Contracts scam or any other inquiry or investigation for that matter.

According to a petition made to the President by the aggrieved officers, “the 18 officers were never investigated for any infraction, they were never indicted, they were never tried and they were never convicted of any disciplinary or criminal breaches whatsoever.

“Additionally, many of these officers have no relationship whatsoever with election duties or procurement office as falsely alleged by army leadership. Most importantly, Your Excellency, none of the 38 senior officers that were compulsorily retired was at any time ever charged or tried by a court martial or found guilty of any offence in line with due process of the armed forces extant rules and regulations, before they respectively heard of their retirement in the media. Interestingly, none of these officers has been informed of the particulars of any alleged offence till date,” the petitioners explained.

In response however, the Minister of Defence and the Chief of Army Staff went to the media with the narrative that the 38 army officers were professionally corrupt and that these officers were punished after due process. This is however, totally false and untrue, according to evidence on ground.

Separately and collectively; at different times and different settings, the affected officers had taken their cases to various authorities seeking fair hearing and consequent reinstatement. Most of them have also described the reasons given for their compulsory retirement as untenable because the action clearly contravened the Armed Forces Act (AFA), CAP A20 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, which states that “all military officers are entitled to appear before a Court Martial to ascertain their guilt or otherwise when accused or alleged to have committed an offence”.

It is assumed that in taking such hasty decision which affected mostly officers of a particular region, the Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Buratai, actually had a hidden agenda that tends toward ethnic cleansing. It is even funny that some of them were out of the country at the time some of the infringements were allegedly committed, while others had neither been queried nor ever received any summons before a civil or military tribunal or inquiry.

Specifically, four of the officers: Brig. Gen. Aghachi, Brig. Gen. I.M Lawson, Col. M.A Suleiman and Lt. Col T.E Arigbe, were actually on assignment out of the country, but were also retired without fair hearing.

In all of the cases, Buratai and the Army Council, with impunity, ran foul of the Nigerian Constitution, which under Section 36 (2) (a): “Provides for an opportunity for the persons whose rights and obligations may be affected to make representations to the administering authority before that authority makes the decision affecting that person.”

It was alleged that the officers supposedly refused to cooperate with the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) strongholds. Consequently, they lost the states and tend to take their pound of flesh, having won at the centre. It was also alleged that a prominent minister from the South South, who is also close to the government of Buhari, highly instigated the dismissals.

Nigerians want to know the following: 1. Why the Buratai-led army will lie against the officers just to dismiss them; 2. Why were the officers not granted fair hearing and why was due process not followed? 3. Why has it been difficult for the army to reinstate Colonels Chidi Ukoha, Danladi Hassan and Osita Nwankwo, who were exonerated by the National Assembly and Industrial courts till date like they quickly reinstated Gen. Ahmadu Mohammed. 4. Could it be that Buratai/Army actually has some skeletons in its cupboard?

It is quite saddening and disheartening to note injustice has been meted out to these fine officers by the army leadership with flagrant disregard for the laws and Constitution of the land, military justice in addition to plain honesty and integrity. The burning question therefore, is for how long will we remain unjust as a nation?

In a budding democracy like ours, upholding truth, justice and the constitution are crucial for the growth of the nation. Simply put, why have the officers been denied the cardinal tenets of justice, fair hearing and due process as enshrined in the constitution. Anyone who has denied them these things must be reminded that he has breached our laws. Such a brazen act of injustice and illegality should not be allowed to stand as none of the Army 38 was charged, tried or found guilty of an offence.

It is imperative that the June 10 decision be reviewed in the interest of justice and fairness and let the young officers in their prime of nation building return to their chosen career.

Headline

Akpabio Lashes Out at Tinubu’s Critics, Says Nigeria Safe Despite Insecurity

Published

3 days ago

June 10, 2026

Eric

The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, has urged Nigerians to be careful of those trying to kidnap for ransom.

Akpabio argued on Tuesday that those behind kidnapping are perpetuating the activity to create an impression that Nigeria is not safe.

Speaking in Abuja during the commissioning of road projects to mark President Bola Tinubu’s third year anniversary, Akpabio said some of the president’s critics have resorted to paying youths to cause mayhem.

Akpabio accused Tinubu’s critics of focusing on insecurity instead of policy and infrastructure.

“Minister you said that people claimed that nothing is happening in Nigeria under the administration of President Tinubu. If they did not say that, how will they go for election? he asked rhetorically.

“If you realize what is happening recently, when they realized that they can’t talk about projects, performance, good laws, transformation in the Petroleum industry, subsidy removal that have been promised Nigerians for decades, they can no longer talk about the high-rise buildings in Abuja such as the NRS building, they resorted to paying young people and recruiting them to cause mayhem in the country.

“Be very vigilant and be careful about people trying to kidnap for ransom. They are kidnapping in order to give the impression that Nigeria is not safe.

“Our men and women in uniform have done tremendously well but many people will not know and that is why I keep saying that the devil you see today, you will soon see them no more.

“Elections will come and go; elections will never be our end; we will see the end of elections; it will never see our end,” he said.

Headline

The Search for Justice: ADC vs Tsoho

Published

5 days ago

June 8, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

From the first day the African Democratic Congress (ADC) took a new shape in July, 2025, in readiness to wrest power from the government of the day, crises, allegedly engineered by the President Bola Tinubu-led All Progressives Congress (APC), have remained its lot.

From the struggle for leadership positions to the fight to save itself from deregistration, the hitherto coalition and main opposition party, has remained in a battle for its life and existence. And has not relented in the search for lasting justice. This time, it has taken the law itself to court to ensure that justice is not only done, but seen to have been done.

It would be recalled that shortly after the the party ratified the election of Senator David Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as Chairman and Secretary of the party respectively, skirmishes were noticed among the rank and file of the party as a supposedly former deputy national chairman of the party, Nafiu Bala Gombe, claimed chairmanship of party, saying that since the founding chairman had resigned, it is constitutionally incumbent upon him to automatically assume the chairmanship role.

Gombe’s claims came on the heels of his ‘resignation’ from office, which paved the way for a new national executive of the party to be constituted. But his claims did not deter the party from carrying on with the formation and running of the party, including holding a keenly contested presidential primary election, which produced His Excellency, the former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. So Gombe went to court. Yet, Mark and Aregbesola carried on the running of the party.

As a result, Gombe had approached a court for an order restraining Mark leadership from parading themselves as leaders of the ADC pending the hearing and determination of his suit challenging their leadership.

He had also asked the court to issue another order against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), restraining it from recognizing the Mark leadership.

But in his ruling in the interlocutory application, Justice Emeka Nwite ordered Gombe to put the defendants on notice so that they appear before the court to show cause, why the application should not be granted.

Rather than appearing before the trial court to show cause, the defendant appealed to the Abuja division of the Court of Appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court to dabble into the matter they described as internal matters of the ADC.

The appellate court in dismissing the appeal for lacking in merit, ordered accelerated hearing in the suit and further ordered all parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

Dissatisfied, Mark had approached the appellate court but, his appeal was dismissed and the matter returned to the trial court.

With the to and from nature of the cases involving the ADC leadership crisis, the party has accused judges of bias in favoring party detractors and disobedience to court rules among other malice, the party has taken a new route to obtain the much eluded justice, and that involves charging the custodians of the law to court.

Consequently, the ADC has filed a lawsuit before a High Court in Abuja involving the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, over concerns arising from the ongoing leadership dispute within the party.

Also joined in the suit is the National Judicial Council (NJC), which the party said had not addressed issues it raised regarding the handling of a case challenging the leadership of former Senate President, Senator David Mark, within the ADC.

The lawsuit, dated June 4, 2026, was filed by the National Welfare Secretary of the ADC, Nkemakolam Ukandu, who is seeking to be joined in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025 instituted by Nafiu Bala Gombe against the Mark-led leadership of the party.

According to the suit, Ukandu expressed concerns about the handling of the matter and alleged that the actions of both Justice Tsoho and Justice Peter Lifu, the judge assigned to hear the case, could affect confidence in the proceedings.

The lawsuit further stated that the assignment of the case to Justice Lifu stirred concerns among some members of the party, who believe the process may not guarantee a fair hearing.

The legal action marks a fresh twist in the leadership dispute within the ADC, which has attracted significant political attention ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Aside Justice John Tsoho, other defendants are the National Judicial Council (NJC), and Justice Peter Lifu, a judge newly assigned to hear the suit challenging the Senator David Mark-led leadership of ADC.

The plaintiff, who was seeking to be joined in the Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025, brought by Nafiu Bala Gombe against the Mark-led leadership, accused the chief judge and Lifu of manifest bias, and willingness to do the biddings of persons against the interest of the party.

Ukandu, in the suit he personally filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja, faulted the chief judge for reassigning the suit to Lifu, in alleged disregard of the orders of the Supreme Court as well as Justice Emeka Nwite of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court, who initially heard the suit brought by Gombe against the party.

The plaintiff, in the suit marked FHC/ ABJ/ CS/ 1165/2026, recalled that an appeal from an interlocutory decision of Nwite rose to the Supreme Court, wherein the apex court on April 30, 2026, “made an order of remittance of Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1819/2025: Nafiu Bala Gombe VS. ADC & 4 ORS back to Justice Emeka Nwite for continuation of hearing of pending applications challenging the jurisdiction of the trial court.”

He stated that upon resumption of hearing before Nwite, the plaintiff wrote to the chief judge praying for a reassignment of the matter to another judge of the Honourable Court.

Ukandu stated, “All the defendants’ counsel, including counsel to the applicants seeking to be joined in this matter, opposed the said application by the plaintiff’s counsel and Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite thereafter adjourned the matter sine die pending the service of the said letter by the plaintiff’s on all the parties in the matter, outcome of the letter by the 2nd defendant and the furnishing of the CTC of the judgement of the Supreme Court to the court.

“Without complying with the orders of the Supreme Court and Hon. Justice Emeka Nwite, the 2nd Defendant in abuse of his judicial powers reassigned this matter,” to Lifu.

He added that the third defendant, on his part, pretending not to see the order of Nwite, went ahead and fixed the matter for hearing for June 3, 2026.

Ukandu further recalled that ADC had on May 7 informed the public through a press release that the chief judge had planned to reassign the case to another judge favourable to the plaintiff.

He said the party had “warned against such unethical practice but the 2nd Defendant despite the public outcry reassigned the suit to the 3rd Defendant who have been nick-named as ‘Wike Judges’.”

He stated that the third defendant had started presiding over the matter, despite taking judicial notice of the orders of the Supreme Court and Nwite, and that the matter came up for hearing before the third defendant.

Though neither the Federal High Court nor the National Judicial Council had publicly responded to the issues raised so far, it is imperative to to state that the ADC appears to have lost interest in both the judiciary, which it believe is kowtowing to the dictates of Gombe, and by extension the body language of the Federal Government.

The ADC appears to have managed to draw the sympathy of the public as a group known as the Grassroots Mobilization Network (GMN), has lent their voice to the supposed injustice leveled against the Mark-led ADC, raising concerns about the handling of the matter, and calling for transparency in the judicial process.

The group alleged that the judiciary was being used to target opposition parties.

The group expressed concern over what it described as growing public distrust in the judiciary and called on relevant authorities to ensure fairness and transparency in the handling of politically sensitive cases.

While Nigerians await the outcome of the litigation, and other resolution of other sundry issues arising from the ADC and the judiciary, the party is going ahead making last minute transparent efforts to nominate a suitable running mate to bear the presidential flag with the presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar.

Among the party’s shortlists are the first runner-up in the presidential primary, Rotimi Chibuike Amaechi, Mrs. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Akinwumi Adesina, Emeka Ihedioha, Emeka Nwajiuba and Chief Dele Momodu.

Headline

Gunmen Abduct Ex-Power Minister Adelabu’s Sister, Her Two Sons in Ibadan

Published

1 week ago

June 3, 2026

Eric

Suspected gunmen have abducted the sister of a former Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital.

The family of former minister and chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) confirmed the abduction, disclosing that Mrs. Olaide John-Paul and her 12-year-old twin sons were kidnapped by the gunmen on Wednesday, June 3, 2026.

According to a statement issued by Adelabu’s media aide, Femi Awogboro, the victims were kidnapped at about 7:30am while Mrs. John-Paul was taking her children to school.

Mrs. John-Paul, the youngest of five children of Mrs. Olufunmilayo Aduke Adegoke Adelabu, reportedly retired voluntarily from her career at First Bank Pension Custodian in 2025 before relocating to Ibadan with her children.

She was said to be making arrangements to join her husband, who had earlier relocated to the US.

The family expressed deep concern over the development but stated that security agencies had already commenced efforts to rescue the victims and apprehend those responsible.

“We are pleased to confirm that security operatives have swung into action and preliminary investigations have commenced in earnest,” the statement partly read.

While appealing for calm, the family urged members of the public to refrain from spreading unverified information that could undermine ongoing rescue operations.

“We are deeply distressed by this unfortunate incident, but remain hopeful that the victims will be rescued safely. We appeal to the public to remain calm, avoid speculation and support ongoing efforts with prayers,” the statement added.

The family also called on anyone with useful information that could aid the rescue operation to promptly share such intelligence with security agencies through the appropriate channels.

It assured that it would continue to cooperate fully with law enforcement authorities and provide updates as investigations and rescue efforts progress.