Headline

The Constitutionality or Otherwise of Governor Akeredolu’s 7-Day Quit Order on Herdsmen in Ondo

Published

4 years ago

January 25, 2021

Eric

By Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, FCIArb, OFR, Ph.D.

INTRODUCTION

As a well cultured Nigerian and Catholic Christian, I abhor criminality in all its ramifications. I have been a serial victim. But God has always delivered me from the snares of all evils (Psalm 23). As a constitutional lawyer and Human Rights Activist, I speak not just for today, but for tomorrow and posterity. I do not simply jump into the fray of issues and take the popular and most convenient route. Many do. Without weighing the possible negative effect of such populist positions. Such may be good music to the ears in the short measure. I prefer to look at, not just the short, but the medium and long term effects and consequences of such delicate matters. That is why over 98% of my postulations have always come to pass. Not a few Nigerians have wondered aloud whether I am a prophet, seer or Nostradamus. I am neither. Some Nigerians have, on the trending issue, been vociferously in support of the Ondo State’s blanket order given to herders, by my good friend, Governor Rotimi “Aketi” Akeredolu, to quit Ondo forest reserves within 7 days. Many have applauded it. Many endorsed; clapped. There is some sense in this, éclat though. But, have we stopped for a moment, to look at the possible manifold and ponderous effects of such a blanket order on other tribes and indigenes living in other parts of Nigeria other than their own? Have we analysed and interrogated the issues?

When my good friend, Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State ordered the demolition of a hotel for the owner’s violation of covid-19 rules, I intervened, arguing that he should have done it through a court order. I suggest that the owner of the hotel should go to court for redress. In the same measure, I argued that Governor Nasir-El-Rufai should not have rolled out bulldozers and caterpillars to demolish a hotel in Kaduna simply because it was alleged that the owner had desired to use it for a nude party, a matter never proved. It was simply political. But, I believed it should have been done through a court order; not through brute force.

We cannot use illegality to fight illegality; just as it is wrong to use corruption to fight corruption. Can we really stop Nigerians from plying their trade in any part of Nigeria, if done legitimately and in accordance with extant laws? I think not. I hope not. I pray not. We must learn, in a constitutional democracy, to be a country governed by laws, not men. We must build a country of strong institutions, not strong men.

This was why America only just recently defeated a strongman, performer president Donald Trump, with strong institution. It is in this context I will now proceed to critically analyse and interrogate, whether Governor Akeredolu’s 7 days Quit Notice for herders to quit Ondo State forest reserves is legal, constitutional and proper.

THE LEGAL REGIME

The Land Use Act of 1978 (LUA) has since laid the issue to rest as to who controls land in Nigeria. The provisions of Sections 1 and 2 of the Land Use Act, provides that “all land comprised in the territory of each state in the Federation are hereby vested in the Governor of that State such land shall be held in trust and administered for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians in accordance with the provisions of this Act”. The Act says “all Nigerians”, not only indigenes of a state. The case of NZENWATA & ORS V. NZENWATA (2016) LPELR-410 89(CA) gives a detailed explanation of the control and management of land under the Land Use Act, 1978, in the following words:

“By the provisions of Sections 1 and 2 of the Land Use Act, 1978, all land comprised in the territory of each State in the Federation were/are vested in the Governor of that state and such land shall be held in trust and administered for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians in accordance with the provisions of the Act (Section 1 of the Act).

Also as from the commencement of the Act, all land in the urban areas shall be under control and management of the Governor of each State and all other land shall, subject to the Act, be under the control and management of the Local Government within the area of jurisdiction of which the land is situated. (Section 2(a) and (b) of the Act). By the provisions of Sections 5 (1) and 6(1) of the Act which deal with the Principles of Tenure, Powers of the Governor and Local Governments and Rights of Occupiers: It shall be lawful for the Governor in respect of land, whether or not in an urban Area- (a) to grant statutory rights of occupancy to any person for all purposes.” Section 5(1) (a) Section 6 (1) of the Act on the other hand provides that: It shall be lawful for a Local Government in respect of land not in an urban area- (a) to grant customary rights of occupancy to any person or organization for the use of land in the Local Government Area for agricultural, residential and other purposes.” The combined effect of the provisions of all the Sections of the Act above quoted is that all lands in urban areas as well as the Rural Areas are either vested in the Governors or Local Government Chairmen and all citizens of this Country who hitherto owned land or not are mere beneficial occupiers or owners as the State Governor in cases of land in Urban areas hold such land in trust for them. See Savannah Bank of (Nig) Ltd. & Anor v. Ajilo & Anor (1989) LPELR-3019 (SC) Per Belgore, JSC (as he then was) at pages 84-85, Paragraphs A-C).” Per AGUBE, J.C.A. (Pp. 32-34, Paras. D-D).”

In accordance with Section 1 of the Land Use Act 1978, State Governors can exercise the power to grant statutory rights of occupancy in any part of the State, at which point a proof of the right of occupancy, which is known as a Certificate of Occupancy, is issued by the State Governor. From the above provisions, it is crystal clear that my good friend, the Ondo State government and its Governor, Arakunrin “Aketi” Rotimi Akeredolu has control over all lands within his State territory. It is also clear that “all citizens of this country who hitherto owned land or not are mere beneficial occupies or owners as the state Governor in cases of land in urban areas hold such in trust for them”.

Additionally, section 28 of the LUA, 1978, provides for the powers of the Governor to revoke a right of occupancy already granted for overriding public interest. Similarly, the instances in which these rights can be revoked are provided for in the same section (28). From the aforementioned, it is within the powers of the Ondo State Governor to exorcise and expel occupants of lands within its territories, if it is shown to be in the overriding interest of the public, such as security matters. Governor Akeredolu can therefore, in exercising the rights granted to him by virtue of his position as Governor of Ondo State, issue the order asking herders to vacate the forests reserves within seven days, simply on the ground that the reserve belongs to the Ondo State government. Indeed, the Governor can compulsorily acquire such lands as occupied by the ungovernable herdsmen, in accordance with section 44 of the 1999 Constitution. In such a lawful event, the Governor is expected to make prompt payment of compensation to the herdsmen, who have lawfully been in occupation without criminal records in accordance with section 44(1)(a) of the Constitution. See AIGORO V. COMMISSIONER OF LANDS AND HOUSING, KWARA STATE (2011) LPELR-9112(CA).

The Governor has duly exercised his powers under the Land Use Act by giving the 7 days quit notice to the herdsmen. This is constitutional and legal. It is also correct to state that something drastic needed to be done to tackle the increasing menace of crimes and violent acts faced in Ondo State forest reserves, which the Governor adduced as his reason for the order. Said Hippocrates (the father of Medicine), “desperate diseases require desperate remedies”. Akeredolu’s primary function as Governor of Ondo State is the security and welfare of his people (section 14(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution). However, it is trite law that the Governor’s powers are only effective up to the extent that they do not arbitrarily affect a citizen’s fundamental rights under the 1999 Constitution, without resort to due process of law. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (1999) as amended, supersedes the provisions of the Land Use Act. It is the highest law of the land, the grundnorm, the fontact origo, and supreme law. See ABACHA & ORS V. FAWEHINMI (2000) LPELR-14(SC). Thus, where any law or provisions of laws conflict with the Constitution, such a law is null and void to the extent of its inconsistency.

Inherently, Governors are bound by their oath of office to obey and uphold the Constitution and all other laws that uphold it. No Governor can therefore unilaterally, arbitrarily, whimsically and capriciously order a group of people, tribe or religion to vacate, by fiat and ultimatum, any part of a state which they govern, without resort to due process and the law courts, as this will amount to encroaching on the fundamental rights of citizens as guaranteed by the Constitution. These rights include right to freedom of movement (section 41); right to freedom from discrimination (section 42); and right to own movable and immovable property (section 44). How fair and equitable is a 7 day quit notice from a habit where people have lived all their lives, some for decade? I think it is not!

RIGHT TO OWN LAND

It is arguable that the herdsmen, who have been issued quit notice by Governor Akeredolu are actually being arbitrarily sent away from lands over which they have since legally acquired title and possession over. Where it is proven that some herdsmen have peacefully lived on their occupied lands for a significant time without committing crimes, then they are deemed to have a bonafide title to such lands occupied by them under the law. The case of IDUNDUN AND ORS V. IKUMAGBA AND ORS (1976) 9-10 S.C. 227, reflects this legal position, as it posits five ways in which title to land can be proven:

i. By traditional evidence in the form of traditional history.

ii. By production of documents of title

iii. By proving acts of ownership and possession over a sufficient length of time which are numerous and positive enough as to warrant the inference that the person is the true owner.

iv. By proving acts of long possession and enjoyment of land; and
By proof of possession of connected and adjacent land, in circumstances which make it probable that the owner of such adjacent or connected land is probably the owner of the land in dispute.

The above five ways to prove title to land are not mutually connected. Ergo, proving one of these ways is sufficient enough to prove title. See the case of BARTHOLOMEW ONWUBUARIRI & ORS V. ISAAC IGBOASOIYI & ORS (2011) LPELR. Where any of these are proved, the government’s order could be successfully challenged as constituting a breach of those herders’ title or possessory rights. However, section 28 of the Land Use act bestows title over all lands of a state on the Governor, to hold in trust for the people. Consequentially, Governor Akeredolu can lawfully give out lands in a state, just as he can also lawfully take them back. This is the dilemma – striking a delicate balance between Nigerians’ right to live and carry out business wherever they desire, and the need that they live peacefully, without criminal tendencies, in such places. Can the individual ownership or possessory rights of these herders override the need for the Governor to maintain law and order as the Chief Security Officer of his state (section 215(4) 1999 Constitution); and to give maximum security to his people (section 14(2)(b) 1999 Constitution)? I think not.

But, can he do so by fiat, without resort to due process through a court of competent jurisdiction? I think not.

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT

The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered) provides the citizen’s right to freedom of movement throughout Nigeria. He is also allowed to reside in any part thereof. Section 41 (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, in very clear and precise words, provides as follows:

“Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or refused entry thereto or exit therefrom”.

This fundamental right is widely applied, as citizens are thereby permitted to move about and across all corners, nooks and crannies within Nigeria, as was aptly held in the case of OKAFOR v. LAGOS STATE GOVT & ANOR (2016) LPELR-41066(CA). It is of no effect whether the citizens live where the land is located, or whether they are mere nomads. This position has been clearly reiterated by the apex court in IBRAHIM V. MOHAMMED (2003) FWLR (PT. 156) 902, where Lordship Kalgo, JSC, stated thus:

“The Land Use Act was promulgated as a whole with a view to making land available to all Nigerians irrespective of where they live”.

Do you hear that please?

See also the case of AROWOLO V. AKAPO & ORS (2002) LPELR-7063(CA).

The only exception/limitation to this is, where restrictions have been placed on the movement or residence of such a person, if he commits a crime, or is suspected to have committed a crime with a view to ‘preventing him from leaving Nigeria’. Thus, applying the literal rule, this limitation appears to apply in an instance such as the present case, where the crime is committed, or is expected, or foreseen, as was Governor’s Akeredolu’s reasons for tackle the increasing spate of violent crimes perpetrated by herders in the forest reserve of Ondo State.

The Governor is legally correct and competent to demand that herders should register for proper identification. Why will they not want to do this, when this will actually help the genuine herders to be separated from the violent and criminally-minded ones, such as kidnappers and armed bandits? This registration will determine how many herders are actually operating in the forest reserves and also separate the authentic herders from invading terrorists who spill in from neighbouring countries.

WHAT MUST AKEREDOLU DO TO QUIT THE HERDERS?

Legally speaking, the right channel available for Governor Akeredolu, in my humble legal opinion (if he must demand their exit within 7 days), is for the Governor to file an action at the Federal High Court, Akure, stating the reasons as to his request to oust and quit the herdsmen from the Ondo forest reserves. His reasons are strong and cogent enough, and courts would readily agree with him. This will enure his acts with legal and constitutional imprimatur; not resort to self-help. Freedom of movement, in any case, is not absolute; though courts of law in Nigeria rarely grant applications that breach the fundamental rights of citizens. In KALU V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA & ORS (2012) LPELR-9287(CA), the issue for determination was whether the rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, are absolute. There, EKO, J.C.A. (as he then was), in pages 44-45, paragraphs F-E, concisely and unambiguously stated:

“The courts, including the Federal High Court, know the law and would not do things to whimsically undermine the rights of parties guaranteed by the Constitution. The rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement, guaranteed respectively by sections 35 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution, are not absolute. Section 41 (2) (a) of the Constitution says that the right to freedom of movement may be deprived under a law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society that imposes restrictions on the “movement of any person who has committed or is reasonably suspected to have committed a criminal offence in order to prevent him from leaving Nigeria”. An application for enforcement of a party’s fundamental right presupposes the right has been, is being or is likely to be violated otherwise than in accordance with the procedure permitted by law. That argument will be defeated when it is apparent that the right has been deprived of in accordance with the procedure permitted by law.”

Consequently, once the Governor can demonstrate to the court that the peace and order of Ondo State have been serially breached by the herders, the constitutionality of Governor Akeredolu’s order will not be faulted by a court of law; and same will be held to be constitutional; and not unconscionable, arbitrary, oppressive, discriminatory, illegal or ultra vires his gubernatorial powers. This is the best route to follow.

FREEDOM FROM DISCRIMINATION

In discussing this fundamental right, I would refer to the Punch Newspaper publication of 19th January, 2021, in which the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, replied Governor Rotimi Akeredolu’s order thus:

“Governor Rotimi Akeredolu, a seasoned lawyer, Senior Advocate of Nigeria and indeed, a former President of the Nigerian Bar Association, has fought crime in his state with passion and commitment, greater sensitivity and compassion for the four years he has run its affairs and, in our view, will be the least expected to unilaterally oust thousands of herders who have lived all their lives in the state on account of the infiltration of the forests by criminals”.

I completely agree with this opinion. It is important to note that not every Fulani herder living in Ondo state is a criminal. Some, or many, who have lived there for decades, do not fall into the category of the rampant, blood-lusty “herdsmen” terrorizing citizens and states in Nigeria. Consequently, the categorization of every Fulani within the herdsmen bracket, or the categorization of every and all herdsmen in the blood-lusty herdsmen bracket will, in my humble view, appear to be blanketly discriminatory. This is contrary to freedom from discrimination as guaranteed by section 42 of the 1999 Constitution. It is a court of law that can sift the chaff from the seeds. I do not agree with the tarring of a whole race or occupation with the besmearing paintbrush of criminality. Let me give an example: if some Igbo or Edo or Yoruba indigenes (permit my example) living outside their states, are fond of committing crimes in the Sagon Gari area of Kano City, it will be wrong, unconstitutional and even immoral, will it not, to term Igbos, Edos and Yorubas living in Kano as criminals who must be evicted within seven (7) days. What about the majority of the innocent ones, many of whom are living in Kano in their third generation? My simple thesis is that criminals must be separated from the innocent ones. I therefore agree with the compulsory registration exercise introduced by Akeredolu, to sift the good from the bad; the beautiful from the ugly; the clean from the tainted, and the innocent from the guilty.

WAS THE PRESIDENCY RIGHT IN ITS REACTION TO AKEREDOLU QUIT NOTICE?

The Presidency in my view, is right to be gravely worried about the Governor’s 7 day quit notice, seeing that this would infringe on the fundamental rights of Nigerian citizens, without a valid court order to that effect. A court order, I repeat, is necessary. We must carefully guide against ethno-religious reprisals in a volatile, mutually suspicious country of major religions and ethnic fault-lines as we have. By the way, why will Governors abdicate their solemn duties of protecting their people through short cuts? What stops Governor Akeredolu and other South West Governors from deploying their local vigilante groups such as AMOTEKUN, to flush out the identified criminals and prosecute them? What are they paid for? Why use the crimes of some (whether in the minority or majority) to deal with every herdsman, including the innocent ones? I don’t agree with this, even if my view is unpopular. Afterall, I am not in any popularity contest with anyone.

HOW BEST STATES CAN TACKLE THIS ISSUE OF INSECURITY

SOME IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS

– Bad governance and poor leadership
Bad governance and poor leadership still remain Nigeria’s bane and fundamental cause of insecurity from the past till date. It is the duty of every government anywhere to see its primary function as providing basic services such as security, welfare, water, electricity, good road network, quality education, and general infrastructure. Our governments do not.

– Overpopulation
Nigeria’s population has grown from 33 million in 1950 to about 208 million today [UNO, mid-June, 2020]. This phenomenal increase of the population has put enormous pressure on land and water resources used by farmers and pastoralists. This pressure has led to the blockage of transhumance routes and loss of grazing land to agricultural expansion, while the increased southward movement of pastoralists has led to increased conflict with local communities, with the latter (e.g. Ondo State) being at the receiving end.

– Porous Borders
One major immediate factor which has enhanced insecurity in Nigeria is the porous borders of the country, where individual movements are largely untracked. Given the porous borders, as well as the weak security system, weapons easily find their way into Nigeria from other countries. Small arms and light weapons proliferation have enabled militant and criminal groups to have unhindered access to arms. Nigeria is estimated to host over 70 percent of about 8 million illegal weapons in West Africa. The porosity of Nigerian borders has also led to unceasing influx of migrants from neighbouring countries, such as Niger Republic, Chad and Republic of Benin. These migrants who are mostly young men constitute the perpetrators of major crimes in the country.

– Rural /Urban Drift
The migration of jobless youths from rural areas to urban centres is a major cause of insecurity in Nigeria. Nigeria is one of the countries in the world with very high rural/urban drift.

– Lack of social irresponsibility of companies
Companies engage in corporate social responsibility to enable them offset corporate social irresponsibility. The rise of terror groups in some parts of the country is directly related to the abysmal neglect of social responsibility by companies to the community where they operate. This has been the case of the Niger Delta, leading to crisis.

– Acts of Terrorism
Acts of terrorism have become the most fundamental source of insecurity in Nigeria. Its primary base and source have been squarely located in religious and ethnic fanaticism and intolerance. There is fear, destruction and death, especially against unarmed targets, property and infrastructure in states.

RECOMMENDED PANACEA

1. Establishment of Grazing Reserves – The establishment of permanent grazing reserves provides the opportunity for practising a more limited form of pastoralism and constitutes a pathway towards a better template of animal husbandry. Nigeria has a total of 417 grazing reserves out of which only about 113 have been gazetted. It is clear that pastoralism, at least in the short and medium term, may help to prevent seasonal migration of herders from dry to wet season grazing areas.

2. Law and Policy – There is an emerging conflict between the constitutionally guaranteed freedom of movement of persons and goods, and laws emerging in some States which restrict movement. Some States have, rightfully, enacted laws or are still processing bills to prevent open grazing on their territory. There are some initiatives so far in Benue, Ekiti, Taraba and Edo States. Could such laws be effective in prohibiting nomadic pastoralism, which is practised by millions of Nigerians, especially of the Fulani stock? We shall find out sooner than later.

3. Community policing should be immediately established within states of Nigeria for effective management of insecurity. Nigeria’s behemoth Police Force (sections 214 and 215 of the 1999 Constitution) should be dismantled in favour of states, LGAs and community policing.

4. There is an urgent need to create an enabling economic environment that allows for social, security, economic and physical infrastructure. This will allow for business and industrial growth.

5. Creation of job opportunities for the teeming youth is a sine qua non to prevent rising crime.

6. Adequate punishment e.g. barring for life, politicians who use thugs for politics, should be encouraged. This will help our electoral system.

7. There must be good governance, transparency and accountability.

8. Security systems must be strengthened – Our weak security system can be attributed to a number of factors which include corruption, inadequate funding of the Police (and other security agencies), lack of modern equipment, poor welfare of security personnel, and inadequate personnel. There is therefore the need to imrpove our security architecture through the training of security officers, sufficient training in modern security methodologies, provision of state-of-the-art equipment and appropriate remuneration, good service conditions, and a convenient pension scheme. Modern methods of intelligence gathering, and intelligence sharing, training, logistics, motivation, and deploying advanced technology in managing security challenge should be introduced immediately.

9. Poverty reduction is a must. A realistic social security programme must be vigorously pursued and implemented, to ensure that the teeming populace meet their basic needs.

10. There should be mutual trust, respect and accommodation by all ethnic and religious groups in Nigeria. No section should claim superiority over others whom they unfortunately regard as vassals.

Up Next

Opinion: The Constitutionality Or Otherwise of Gov. Akeredolu’s 7-Day Quit Order On Fulani Herdsmen- Mike Ozekhome, SAN

Don't Miss

Bella Disu Becomes Chairman, Abumet Nigeria Limited

Click to comment

Headline

Mike Adenuga is Alive, Hale and Hearty, I Just Spoke with Him – Dele Momodu

Published

1 day ago

November 20, 2024

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

Africa’s biggest philanthropist and Chairman, Globacom Group, Dr. Mike Adenuga is Alive, hale and hearty!

This has been confirmed by Chairman, Ovation Media Group, Chief Dele Momodu via his social media handles.

Following rumours, whose source is yet to be ascertained that the man, known for his quantum giving, passed away, Momodu wrote that he had just spoken with the billionaire businessman, who affirmed his health while thanking all for their concern.

“Ignore the fake news…DR MICHAEL ADENIYI AGBOLADE ISOLA ADENUGA is hale and hearty. He is right now at his desk working round the clock in support of the Nigerian economy…He just called me to thank everyone for their concern,” Dele Momodu wrote.

In addition, members of the top echelon of the group have separately confirmed that the one known as The Bull is alive and healthy.

Dr. Adenuga has remained in the forefront of many families happy with his direct financial and material gifts as well as consistent promo from his Glo brand.

Only last night, CNN celebrated 15 years of his sponsorship of the African Voices Changemakers, where he has foe a decade and half been supporting budding African entertainers to reach their professional zenith.

Headline

A Tale of Two Emirs of Kano: Who Blinks First?

Published

3 days ago

November 18, 2024

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

The uneasy calm that reared its ugly head in the ancient city of Kano since May 23, 2024, when Governor Yusuf Kabir sacked the sitting Emir, Aminu Ado Bayero, replacing him with Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, also known as Muhammadu Sanusi II, has yet to abate as the two prominent personalities have consistently laid claim to the emirship of the emirate, and operating from different palaces in the town.

The bitter rivalry between the two royalties has caused division not only in the emirate, but the entire Kano State, and spiraling into national politics, leaving the political parties, especially the New Nigerian Peoples Party, which is the governor’s party, the Presidency, alleged to be giving backing to the immediate past governor, Umar Ganduje, who is also the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), and the security agencies, who receive instructions from the Presidency, taking sides.

Sanusi Lamido Sanusi also known as Muhammadu Sanusi II and Aminu Ado Bayero are the parties embroiled in the bitter rivalry in a bid to outwit each other for the exalted Emir of Kano position. This was since Sanusi was reinstated as the 16th Emir, having been dethroned and exiled on March 9, 2020 by the former administration of Abdullahi Umar Ganduje.

Sources close the two notable figures, and the palace told The Boss that it is not unlikely that both men are being supported by powerful entities.

“While Sanusi has the backing of the Kano State government as visibly manifested in the reinstatement process, Ado Bayero is being backed by the Federal Government of Nigeria,” one of the sources said.

The furore has consequently attracted the wrong commentaries from stakeholders within and outside the Kano Emirate, resulting in heated arguments, threats and possibly outbreak of direct and indirect confrontations. But six months into the leadership quagmire, none of the two has shifted ground, or is willing to shift ground as more and more intrigues of power play and desire for recognition continue to be the order of the day.

The ‘two emirs’, who continue to claim legitimacy, have variously been trying to outdo each other in the quest to be relevant in the scheme of things.

The rivalry between the two emirs and their loyalists has resuscitated with weddings and counter weddings.

Just this weekend, a former governor of Kano State, Alhaji Rabiu Kwnakwaso hosted the wedding of his daughter, Dr. Aisha Rabiu Kwankwaso, and her husband, Fahad Dahiru Mangal, at the palace of Emir Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, which attracted prominent national citizens including former President Olusegun Obasanjo and Vice President Kashim Shettima, Waziri Adamawa Atiku Abubakar among others. Fahad is the son of Nigerian business magnate, Dahiru Mangal, founder of MaxAir, one of the country’s leading private airlines.

In what looked like a counter affair, the palace of Aminu Ado Bayero, in Nasarawa Local Government Area of the state, will on December 13, 2024 hosts a double wedding involving Jibrin Barau Jibrin and Aisha Barau Jibrin, the children of the Senate Deputy President, Barau I. Jibrin, to their spouses.

Some stakeholders told The Boss that the whole thing is a case of seeking relevance and originality.

Meanwhile, former Governor Kwankwaso has blamed President Bola Tinubu for the crises that have failed to abate in the state.

While speaking at the convocation ceremony of Skyline University in Kano on Sunday, Kwankwaso accused Tinubu and the political forces from Lagos of attempting to impose their influence on Kano’s leadership, particularly in the selection of the Emir.

“Today, we can see very clearly that there are significant efforts from the Lagos axis to colonise this part of the country. Lagos wouldn’t allow us to choose even our Emir; instead, they want to impose their own Emir on Kano,” he stated.

HOW IT ALL BEGAN…

The Kano State House of Assembly, as widely speculated, repealed the 2019 Law, which was instrumental in removing Sanusi from office, and balkanise the Kano emirate into five jurisdictions.

The Assembly, in the new emirate law stipulated the sack of all the Emirs in the jurisdictions and a restoration of the old order, where only one Emir will be overseeing all of Kano.

As a result, the Governor of Kano State, Abba Yusuf, appended his signature on the bill, giving it the backing of the law, in the presence of the deputy governor, Aminu Abdulsalam, Speaker, Isma’il Falgore, and the SSG, Abdullahi Bichi. and thereafter, proceeded to sacking the emirs with a 48 hours ultimatum to vacate their palaces.

While the Emirs of Bichi, Rano, Karaye, and Gaya complied with the directive, the Emir of Kano, Aminu Ado Bayero, had gone to court to stop the process.

Both by native ordinance and law, every dethroned Emir is banished or expected to leave Kano for good. Recall that in 1965 when Muhammadu I, Sanusi’s grandfather resigned, having got wind of his possible dethronement, he abdicated to Bauchi, and never returned to Kano.

It was therefore, a surprise that on Saturday, Bayero, who was dethroned, returned to the city of Kano, and moved into a palace in Nasarawa LGA of the state; a move that proved that he has not relinquished power. While Sanusi is operating in the main palace, Bayero is operating from the Nasarawa Palace, creating two full blown emirs for one throne.

The Boss learnt that a squad of soldiers that had been protecting Bayero before he was dethroned, rode with him from the airport to the palace. The same report has it that the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, has been behind Bayero’s moves, especially his flight and residency in the city. The NSA denied the allegation, threatening legal action againat the deputy governor, who made the claim.

Responding after the deposed monarch arrived in Kano to a hero’s welcome from a horde of his supporters, the Deputy Governor of the state, Aminu Gwarzo, blamed Ribadu, for allegedly facilitating the return of Bayero to the palace by providing him with two private jets.

Ribadu, in a letter by his legal team, Aliyu & Musa Chambers, said that Gwarzo should retract his claim, tender apology, or face legal action.

The letter reads: “The attention of our client was drawn to a video clip being shared on different social media platforms wherein you granted an interview at Emir’s Palace in Kano on Saturday, the 25th day of May 2024, in a very calm atmosphere, and without any provocation whatsoever, falsely accusing our client of using his office to kill the people of Kano State and maim their properties.

“In the clip, you were shown to be speaking in Hausa.

“Your false accusations against our client portraying his office as an appendage of a political party and a willing tool to cause chaos in Kano is false and done to damage the hard-earned reputation of our client in the eyes of the right-thinking members of the society and indeed it has succeeded in doing so.

“In all the places he has served, our client has never been accused of any wrongdoing.

“Given this illustrious background, it is inconceivable that someone would harbour the thought that our client would descend his exalted office so low as to interfere in the local tussle of the Kano Emirate.

“The wide coverage you gave your interview has caused serious embarrassment to our client and his family.

“Since the publication, our client has been receiving a barrage of telephone calls both within and outside Nigeria from friends and associates who felt disappointed in him because of the false allegation owing to the fact that it came from a person occupying the office of Deputy Governor of Kano State.

“Our client and his office take your allegations seriously and by this letter, our client is demanding that you provide irrefutable evidence to substantiate your claims.

The return of Bayero consequently prompted the governor to order his arrest.

In a counter, a federal high court in Kano ordered the state government not to enforce the Emirate Council Repeal Law 2024, and desist from from issuing Sanusi appointment letter.

STAND OF SECURITY OPERATIVES

The Kano State Police Command refused to arrest Bayero, saying he would only enforce the court order restraining the state government from dissolving five newly created Emirates in the state, and restatement of Sanusi.

The state Commissioner of Police, Muhammad Hussain Gumel, while making a broadcast, flanked by representatives of other security agencies, vowed to maintain law and order, assuring that security agencies won’t spare anyone trying to temper the peace across the state.

He said: “Let me also remind you that the position of the law is very clear as whoever, under whatever guise is found to be planning to disrupt the peace being enjoyed in the State or feel that he or she can jeopardize the existing security settings in the State will be arrested and made to face the full wrath of the law.

“Therefore, as the Police Command is leading other security agencies to sustain the peace and peaceful coexistence for overriding interests, miscreants should steer clear of violence in all its ramifications and should not take advantage or hijack the current situation to launch an unprovoked attack on people, property and infrastructure of the State. Any person found with such a tendency will be ruthlessly dealt with according to the law of the land

“The combined security agencies in the State have set out all machinery in place to ensure no breakdown of law and order as the safety and security of all the inhabitants in the State remain sacrosanct,” Gumel said.

NBA TAKES A STAND, URGES CAUTION

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has called for caution in the legal fireworks playing out in Kano, stressing that it is deeply “deeply concerned about these developments in many ways”.

In a statement, NBA chairman in Kano, Sagir Gezawa, said it is the constitutional duty of a state assembly to legislate and once passed, it remains the prerogative of a governor to assent to such law.

“Once assented to by the governor, it has become a Law and its implementation is to be done by state apparatus and of course enforced by a competent court of law,” Gezawa said.

“It’s further within the purview of courts to interpret such law to be in tandem with other existing laws or the constitution.

“In doing so, we urge our members to act responsibly in approaching courts with competent jurisdiction.

“A court order, once given, is sacrosanct and must be obeyed.

“However, it must be noted that while the court has its own mechanism of enforcing its order, it’s not within the powers of the Nigerian Army to deploy troops to enforce court order. This is a sad reminder of the military dictatorship and must be condemned.

“Anyone found wanting or in disobedience of a court order (which is declaratory in nature) must first be proved to have been notified of the existence of the said court order by issuance of Form 48 and subsequently Form 49 notifying such person of the consequences of his or her actions.

“This is in line with the Sheriff and Civil Processes Act and Laws of the various States for enforcing court judgments.

“Engaging security apparatus without the officers of the Deputy Sherriff’s Department of the relevant court that made the order may appear to be self-help which must also be condemned.

“As an association therefore, we call on all state actors, to be mindful of their oaths of office and for the security agencies, their scope of duties so as not to make mockery of our judicial system.”

The NBA said the actions of the state actors “may breach the security and peace” in Kano and “they shall be held accountable in this life or the next,” the statement said.

But some notable personalities including former Vice President, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has blamed the Bola Tinubu-led federal government for being behind the crisis in Kano.

Atiku made accusation via a statement by his spokesperson, Mr. Paul Ibe on Saturday.

“The action of the Federal Government in deploying soldiers in Kano in the tussle over the throne of the ancient city is an upset to the peace and security of the state, and also in breach of the 1999 Constitution as Amended.

“In performing their constitutional duties of law making, the Kano State House of Assembly (KSHA) passed the amended Kano State Emirate Council (Repeal) Bill 2024 in consonance with the provision of Section 4 of the Constitution 1999 as Amended whereas the Governor of Kano State, Engr. Abba Kabir Yusuf subsequently signed into law the said bill. The law therefore repealed the 2019 version which balkanized the ancient Kano Emirate into five.

“The foregoing circumstances happened within the confines of the law and in compliance with the powers conferred on the Governor as provided by Section 5(2) of the 1999 Constitution as amended; and also in consultation with the Kingmakers of Kano, reappointed Sanusi Lamido Sanusi (also known as Muhammadu Sanusi II) as the 16th Emir of Kano State and accordingly handed him a letter of appointment.
It is surprising that in the early hours of today, exactly at about 5:30 am the former Emir of Kano, His Majesty Aminu Ado Bayero backed by Federal might made their way into the Nasarawa Palace of the Kano Emirate while the reappointed Emir, Muhammadu Sanusi II was at the Gidan Dabo, which is the main residence of the Emir of Kano.

“In this wise, the former Emir could not have made his way into the Nasarawa Palace without the support of the Federal Government having done so with the support of the Army and other security personnel in his company. The deployment of soldiers in extra constitutional matters such as this undermines the integrity of the Nigerian military.

“We need to remind the Tinubu administration that Kano State is known for peace and harmony spanning thousands of years and any attempt to destablise the peace of the Land of Commerce shall be resisted. Recall that Muhammadu Sanusi II was dethroned on 9th March, 2020 dethroned, Kano forged on in peace without any fracas.

“We wish to state unequivocally that if for any reason, law and order breaks down in Kano State, particularly Kano Municipal, the Federal Government should be held responsible as the act of providing security cover to the former Emir, Aminu Ado Bayero to come back to Kano is an invitation to anarchy,” he said.

In the same vein, the Council of Ulamas, has President Bola Tinubu against plunging Kano into chaos. The group said, the crisis, if not well managed, could escalate and degenerate into chaos.

With the state backing the reinstatement of Sanusi, the path looks smooth for Muhammadu Sanusi II to repossess the emirship of Kano, but all will depend on how the politics of superiority is played in the coming days.

While Tinubu watches without lifting a finger of settlement, the ancient city of Kano, like Rivers State, is slowly burning down.

Headline

How FG Spent N19bn on Presidential Planes in 15 Months – Report

Published

1 week ago

November 12, 2024

Eric

At least N19.43 billion has reportedly been spent on the maintenance and operations of the Presidential Air Fleet from July 2023 to September 2024.

According to GovSpend, a civic tech platform that tracks and analyses the Federal government’s spending, showed that for 2024, the payouts amounted to N13.55billion, representing 66 per cent of the allocations for the fleet in the 2024 fiscal year.

Most disbursements were labeled ‘Forex Transit Funds,’ typically funds allocated for foreign exchange requirements to facilitate international transactions and engagements.

In the context of the Presidential Air Fleet, such funds are used to cover expenses related to operations outside the country, including fuel purchases, maintenance or services in foreign currencies.

“When aircraft on the fleet are abroad, payments are often made in U.S. dollars or another foreign currency to ensure uninterrupted operations,” a government official explained.

In July 2023, N1.52bn was disbursed in two tranches of N846m and N675m for ‘Presidential air fleet forex transit funds.’

The following month, N3.1bn was disbursed in three tranches of N388m, N2bn, and N713m for the same item.

In November of that year, N1.26bn was released to the Presidential Air Fleet Naira transit account.

The first overhead for 2024 came in March, where N1.27bn were disbursed twice, amounting to N2.54bn. The transit account received N6.35bn in April, N4.97bn in May and N210m in July.

August saw the highest frequency of transactions, with N5.60bn released in six separate disbursements.

Although these transactions were not clearly labeled, the monies were paid into the Presidential Air Fleet naira transit account, including the N35m transfer made in September.

In late April, the transit account received N5.08bn; this came around the same time the President was on a two-nation tour to the Netherlands and Saudi Arabia.

Although Tinubu arrived in the Netherlands in a state-owned Gulfstream AeroSpace 550 Jet, the aircraft could not proceed to Saudi Arabia due to unspecified technical problems. He reportedly continued his journey on a chartered private plane.

At the time, the President’s Boeing 737 business jet was undergoing maintenance. It was later replaced with an Airbus A330 purchased for $100m in August through service-wide votes.

The nearly 15-year-old plane, an ACJ330-200, VP-CAC (MSN 1053), is “spacious and furnished with state-of-the-art avionics, customised interior and communications system,” Tinubu’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Mr. Bayo Onanuga said, adding that it “will save Nigeria huge maintenance and fuel costs, running into millions of dollars yearly.”

The new Airbus A330 is just one of several aircraft currently on the Presidential Air Fleet, arguably one of Africa’s largest, with around 11 aircraft of various makes and models. Until August, it comprised the 19-year-old B737-700 and a 13-year-old Gulfstream Aerospace G550.

The BBJ was acquired during the tenure of former President Olusegun Obasanjo at $43m but became a money guzzler as it aged.

Onanuga, defending the purchase of Airbus A330, argued that the new Airbus 330 aircraft and the costs of maintaining the air fleet were not for the president but in the interest of Nigerians.

“It’s not President Tinubu’s plane; it belongs to the people of Nigeria, it is our property…the President did not buy a new jet; what he has is a refurbished jet – it has been used by somebody else before he got it, but it is a much newer model than the one President Buhari used.

“The one President Buhari used was bought by President Obasanjo some 20 years ago. There was a time when the President went to Saudi Arabia, and the plane developed some problems. The President had to leave the Netherlands with a chartered jet.

“Nigerians should try to prioritise the safety of the President. I’m not sure anybody wishes our president to go and crash in the air. We want his safety so that he can hand it over to whoever wants to take over from him,” Onanuga said.

The presidential aide said he discussed with the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, on the faulty plane [Boeing 737 jet] and he said the maintenance costs were excessive because of the age of the aircraft, hence the need for another plane.

The presidential fixed-wing fleet includes a Gulfstream G500, two Falcon 7Xs, a Hawker 4000, and a Challenger 605.

Three of the seven fixed-wings are reportedly unserviceable. Meanwhile, the rotor-wing fleet includes two Agusta 139s and two Agusta 101s, all operated by the Nigerian Air Force but supervised by the Office of the National Security Adviser.

Former President Buhari promised to reduce the number of aircraft in the PAF to the absolute necessary.

In April 2023, three jets were put up for sale, but there were no specifics on which.

However, efforts to sell one of the Dassault Falcon 7x and the Hawker 4000 in October 2016 stalled when a potential buyer reduced their initial offer from $24m to $11m.

Since 2017, budgetary allocations for the fleet have shown a growing trend, with one exception in 2020.

The allocation for the fleet increased from N4.37bn in 2017 to N20.52bn in 2024, showing a 370 per cent rise in running costs.

In 2018, the fleet’s budget rose significantly by 66.13 per cent to N7.26bn, driven by a substantial increase in capital project allocations while maintaining similar levels for recurrent costs. This upward trajectory continued into 2019, slightly increasing the total allocation to N7.30bn.

The exception came in 2020, when the budget dropped by nearly seven per cent to N6.79bn, primarily due to decreased overhead costs, a reflection of the global economic impacts of lockdowns and disruptions in operations.

By 2021, however, the budget surged dramatically to N12.55bn—a record increase of 84.83 per cent from the previous year.

In 2022, maintenance expenses for each aircraft ranged from $1.5m to $4.5m annually.

The 2022, 2023 and 2024 appropriation acts earmarked N12.48bn, N13.07bn and N20.52bn respectively.

On his way to the 2024 Commonwealth Heads of Government Summit in Samoa, a foreign object damaged the cockpit windscreen of Vice President Kashim Shettima’s GulfStream aircraft during a stopover at JFK Airport in New York.

According to Lee Aerospace, manufacturers of the Gulfstream, jet windshields consist of thick multilayered structures of varying layers of glass and transparent acrylic built to withstand collision with a 2kg object.

However, damage to the windshield must have affected its inner layers. While specific prices for replacement can vary based on supplier, labour rates and regional costs, estimates suggest that a single windshield replacement for a G550 can range from $50,000 to $70,000 for part and labour costs.

In an interview with our correspondent, the General Secretary of the Aviation Round Table, Olumide Ohunayo, blamed the meteoric rise in the allocations for the PAF on the age of some of the aircraft in the fleet and declining value of the naira as well as the “commercial use” of aircraft by the Nigerian Air Force.

Ohunayo said, “The cost will definitely increase over the years because for one, this issue of the naira against the dollar. As the naira keeps falling to the dollar, we will see a rise in cost because most of the costs of training crew and engineers and replacing aircraft parts are all in dollars.

“Also, some of these aircraft are not new. The older the aircraft, the higher the cost of maintenance and operation.

“Lastly, during these past years, terrorism and insecurity have increased in Nigeria, which has also affected the cost of insuring the aircraft.”

For his part, the Executive Chairman of the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership, Debo Adeniran, argued that the administration’s spending habits were opposite to Nigerians’ expectations of frugality.

“What we are getting from this administration is opposite to our expectation. We thought we would have an administration that would be frugal in spending and very meticulous at implementing its budget.

“But what we are getting is an administration that has fallen in love with profligacy; that doesn’t see anything wrong in living big amid a poverty-stricken nation.

“It is a reenactment of the Shagari administration, whereby they bought the biggest Mercedes Benz and made themselves as comfortable as possible without considering how much the masses are suffering.

“So when you look at a Vice President saying he’s not travelling [to Samoa] again because there was a splinter on the windscreen of his private aircraft. Why should that be the case?

“First and foremost, we need to be represented at such an international meeting, where we should be well represented by the first two citizens of this country.

“He abandoned that, which means we would have lost certain representation that we deserve at that forum. Two, money will have been spent on advance parties that went ahead of the Vice President. But he abandoned the journey altogether.”