Headline

Ignore Keyamo’s Petition, Atiku Tells CCB, Says Matter Subjudice

Published

3 years ago

April 12, 2023

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 presidential election and former Vice president, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, has written to the Code of Conduct Bureau, admonishing the body to ignore a petition filed before it by a spokesperson of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential Campaign Council, Mr Festus Keyamo, who is also the Minister of State for Labour and Productivity.

Atiku’s stand is contained in a letter addressed to the chairman of the CCB, dated April 7, 2023, and signed by his lead counsel, Chief Mike Ozekhome, maintaining that the matter is subjudice, as it is already before a Federal High Court, and therefore, cannot be attended to by the Bureau.

Atiku reasoned that “it is highly inappropriate for a party to a suit to take any extra-judicial steps, or to embark on any course of action that is either tantamount to, or calculated to undermine the authority and integrity of the court, which is dominus litis over the proceedings”, noting that such behaviour is condemnable, unacceptable and strongly frowned out.

Citing precedence to buttress his point including Ojukwu VS military governor of Lagos State and others, Atiku said any attempt to consider the petition by the CCB will be viewed as contempt, reminding the Bureau that the Supreme Court “has severally deprecated and condemned such actions in no certain terms.”

The letter in full:

ATTEMPT TO OVER-REACH SUIT NO. FHC/ABJ/CS/84/2023: FESTUS KEYAMO, SAN VS. ALH. ATIKU ABUBARKAR, ICPC AND EFCC

We are Counsel to the 1st Defendant, Alh. Atiku Abubakar (“our client”), in the above referenced suit presently pending at the Federal High Court, Abuja, at the instance of Mr Festus Keyamo, SAN, who, incidentally is a serving Minister of State in the present Administration of President Muhammadu Buhari – as well as being a spokesman of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the President-elect.

Upon being served with the originating process in the said suit, our client – through us – promptly responded by filing a Statement of Defence as well as a Preliminary Objection thereto. Copies of both processes are herewith attached for your perusal and guidance; In other words, issues have been duly joined in the matter between the Plaintiff and our client. Accordingly, the matter is now sub judice.

You will therefore appreciate our surprise to read in the media that Mr. Keyamo has reportedly responded to the invitation of your esteemed Bureau purportedly to shed more light on his complaints to the Bureau, which far preceded and formed the very basis of his pending suit, as aforesaid.

Our reasons are obvious: it is highly inappropriate for a party to a suit to take any extra-judicial steps, or to embark on any course of action that is either tantamount to, or calculated to undermine the authority and integrity of the court, which is dominus litis over the proceedings. Such behavior is as condemnable as it is unacceptable. It is strongly frowned upon, by courts of law, as it has the potential of over-reaching the court, the other party (our client) and foisting or the court, a fait accompli. In fact, it smacks of contempt of court, albeit ex facie curiae.
To that extent, the Supreme Court has severally deprecated and condemned such actions in no certain terms. A few of such instances will suffice.

In OJUKWU v. MILITARY GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE (1986) NGSC 8, the Apex Court held as follows:

“Once a dispute has arisen between a person and the government or authority and the dispute has been brought before the court, thereby invoking the judicial powers of the State, it is the duty of the government to allow the law to take its course or allow the legal and judicial process run its full course . . . The courts expect the utmost respect of the law from the government itself which rules by the law . . . In the area where the rule of the law operates, the rule of self-help by force is abandoned.”

See also REGISTERED TRUSTEES APOSTOLIC CHURCH V. OLOWOLENI (1990) 4 NWLR Pt. 158 Pg. 514 at 537, where the Supreme Court, per Nnaemeka-Agu, JSC, held thus:

“Once parties have turned their dispute over to the courts for determination, the right to resort to self-help ends. So it is not permissible for one of the parties to take any step during the pendency of the suit which may have the effect of fostering upon a Court a situation of complete helplessness or which may give the impression that the Court is being used as a mere subterfuge to tie the hands of one party while the party helps himself extra judicially. Both parties are to await the result of the litigation and the appropriate order of the court before acting further.”

Again, in OYEGBEMI & ANOR v. AROMIRE & ORS (2012) LPELR-7942 (CA), the Court of Appeal, per Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumiju, JCA (as she then was) held thus:

“Parties cannot present the court with a fait accompli to overreach the other party. The principle is settled that the court cannot be hamstrung by a party who changes the status quo during litigation”.

For the foregoing reasons, we urge the Bureau to refrain from interfering in the subject matter of Mr. Keyamo’s petition since he has himself voluntarily submitted it to a competent court of law for adjudication. Accordingly, kindly advise and direct him to pursue his pending litigation against our client to its logical conclusion. We assure you we are eagerly waiting for him there. Where however you persist in your enterprise of investigating this subjudice matter currently pending before a court of competent jurisdiction, we shall be left with no alternative than to activate the judicial process against your goodself.

Please, accept the assurances of our professional esteem and regards.

Yours faithfully,

Prof. Mike A. A. Ozekhome, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIArb, LL.M, Ph.D, LL.D.
Chief Counsel/Head of Chambers

Headline

Why Nigerians Must Reject INEC’s Revised Timetable – ADC

Published

2 days ago

February 28, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), during the week, released a fresh elections timetable, with major amendments to accommodate the just passed and signed Electoral Act 2026 by the National Assembly and President Bola Tinubu respectively.

Following the repeal of the Electoral Act, 2022 and the enactment of the Electoral Act, 2026, which introduced adjustments to statutory timelines governing pre-election and electoral activities, the Commission has reviewed and realigned the Schedule to ensure full compliance with the new legal framework.

Accordingly, the Commission has resolved as follows:

Presidential and National Assembly Elections will now hold on Saturday, 16th January 2027 as against the earlier stated February 20, 2027
Governorship and State Houses of Assembly Elections will now hold on Saturday, 6th February 2027 as against the former date of March 6, 2027

Also in accordance with the approved Schedule of Activities, the electoral bidy noted in the revised timetable that:

Conduct of Party Primaries, including resolution of disputes arising from primaries, will commence on 23rd April 2026 and end on 30th May 2026.

Presidential and National Assembly campaigns will commence on 19th August 2026.

Governorship and State Houses of Assembly campaigns will commence on 9th September 2026.

As provided by law, campaigns shall end 24 hours before Election Day. Political parties are strongly advised to adhere strictly to these timelines. The Commission will enforce compliance with the law.

But in a swift reaction, the opposition coalition, African Democratic Congress (ADC), rejected the revised 2026–2027 general election timetable, describing it as a politically biased schedule designed to favour the re-election agenda of President Bola Tinubu, and calling on all Nigerians to speak up enmasse to reject the revised timetable.

The ADC, in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, on Friday argued that the new deadlines and compliance requirements under the Electoral Act 2026 create near-impossible hurdles for opposition parties seeking to field candidates.

On February 13, INEC initially scheduled the 2027 Presidential and National Assembly elections for February 20, 2027, while the Governorship and State Houses of Assembly elections were fixed for March 6, 2027.

The timetable, however, faced objections from some Muslim stakeholders who noted that the dates coincided with the 2027 Ramadan period.

Following the concerns, the National Assembly amended Clause 28 of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, reducing the required election notice period from 360 to 300 days, allowing INEC to adjust the election dates.

Subsequently, INEC released a revised schedule on Thursday, signed by its Chairman, Joash Amupitan, moving the Presidential and National Assembly elections to January 16, 2027, and the Governorship and State Houses of Assembly elections to February 6, 2027.

Reacting, the ADC said the requirement that political parties submit a comprehensive digital membership register by April 2, 2026, effectively bars opposition parties from participating.

The party stated: “The African Democratic Congress rejects the updated 2026–2027 electoral timetable released by the Independent National Electoral Commission. What has been presented as a routine administrative schedule of the upcoming general elections is, in fact, a political instrument carefully structured to narrow democratic space and strengthen the incumbent administration ahead of the 2027 general elections.

“According to the timetable, party primaries are to be conducted between April 23 and May 30, 2026, just 55 to 92 days from today. However, more significant is that, pursuant to Section 77(4) of the Electoral Act 2026, political parties are required to submit their digital membership registers to INEC not later than April 2, 2026.

“That is only about 34 days away. Section 77(7) further provides that any party that fails to submit its membership register within the stipulated time shall not be eligible to field a candidate. These are not routine administrative rules but are deliberately constructed barriers designed to exclude the opposition from participating in the election.”

The party further noted that Section 77(2) of the Electoral Act 2026 requires the digital register of members to contain name, sex, date of birth, address, state, local government, ward, polling unit, National Identification Number (NIN) and photograph in both hard and soft copies, while Section 77(6) prohibits the use of any pre-existing register that does not contain the specified information. It warned that failure to meet these requirements would lead to disqualification.

The ADC questioned the fairness of the digital membership requirement, noting that the ruling All Progressives Congress began its registration process in February 2025, long before the requirement became mandatory.

“It is not a product of foresight but insider advantage. They knew what was coming. They therefore had one full year to carry out an exercise that other political parties are expected to complete in one month, during which they must collect, process, collate and transmit large volumes of digital data to INEC under the threat of exclusion. This is practically impossible.

“Democratic competition is based on a level playing field that does not give any contestant an undue advantage. A system where one party exploits incumbency to gain a one-year head start on a requirement that other parties only became aware of when it was nearly too late is a rigged system.”

The ADC said it has joined other opposition parties in rejecting the Electoral Act 2026, adding that the INEC timetable is equally rejected as it appears designed to serve what it described as a self-succession agenda.

“Let it be clear that ADC will not take any action that appears to confer legitimacy on a fraudulent system. We are reviewing our options and will make our position known in the coming days,” the party said.

The party also called on civil society organisations, democratic stakeholders and Nigerians to scrutinise the timetable and demand fairness, stressing that democracy cannot survive when electoral rules are structured to produce predetermined outcomes.

The party has consistently accused the Tinubu-led All Progressives Congress (APC) of scheming to silence the opposition as the 2027 General Elections draw closer, citing his manipulation of state governors and Assembly members from jumping ship, and settling with the ruling party.

Presently, the president’s party has a total of 31 out of 36 states governors, more than majority of the national and states Houses of Assembly.

A frontline publisher and chieftain of the ADC, Chief Dele Momodu, has warned that Tinubu is gradually transforming into full-blown dictatorship, stressing that his second term in office would turn state governors into ‘total slaves’.

Headline

Second Term for Tinubu Will Turn Governors into Total Slaves, Dele Momodu Warns

Published

3 days ago

February 28, 2026

Eric

Chairman, Ovation Media Group, and former presidential aspirant, Aare Dele Momodu, has expressed strong concern over what he described as growing political support for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu among state governors across the country.

Speaking during an interview on News Central TV, Momodu said he was shocked by the level of backing the president is reportedly receiving, warning that Nigeria’s democracy could face serious risks if the current political trend continues.

The media entrepreneur cautioned that allowing Tinubu to secure a second term in 2027 could, in his view, lead to excessive concentration of power. He particularly criticized what he described as a growing wave of opposition figures aligning with the ruling All Progressives Congress> (APC).

Momodu referenced reports of opposition governors, including Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri, allegedly moving closer to the ruling party, describing the development as politically troubling.

According to him, some governors are allegedly competing to demonstrate loyalty to the president ahead of future elections.

“The governors are fighting to ensure Tinubu wins a second term, fighting to be the biggest thug for him. If a man in his first term can capture the bodies and souls of Nigerians this way, imagine what he would do with a second term. It will be a full-blown dictatorship, and the governors will regret it as they become total slaves to him,” Momodu said.

He concluded by urging Nigerians to remain vigilant and actively protect democratic institutions, warning that unchecked consolidation of political power could threaten the nation’s democracy and future stability.

Gistmania

Headline

Court Validates PDP 2025 Convention in Ibadan, Affirms Turaki-led NWC

Published

3 days ago

February 27, 2026

Eric

The Oyo State High Court sitting in Ibadan has affirmed the validity of the 2025 Elective Convention of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), which produced Dr. Kabiru Turaki as the substantive National Chairman of the party.

Delivering judgment on Friday, Justice Ladiran Akintola upheld the convention in its entirety, ruling that it was conducted in full compliance with the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions governing party elections in Nigeria.

The decision marked a significant legal victory for the party’s leadership and brought clarity to the dispute surrounding the convention’s legitimacy.

The ruling followed an amended originating summons filed by Misibau Adetunmbi (SAN) on behalf of the claimant, Folahan Malomo Adelabi, in Suit No. I/1336/2025.

In a comprehensive judgment, the court granted all 13 reliefs sought by the claimant, effectively endorsing the processes and outcomes of the Ibadan convention.

Justice Akintola held that the convention, organised by the recognised leadership of the party, satisfied all laid-down legal requirements as stipulated in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Electoral Act 2022 (as amended), and the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.

The court found no breach of due process or statutory non-compliance in the conduct of the exercise.

In the same proceedings, the court dismissed the Motion on Notice seeking a stay of proceedings and suspension of the ruling, filed by Sunday Ibrahim (SAN) on behalf of Austin Nwachukwu and two others. The applications were described as lacking merit.

Earlier in the proceedings, the court had also rejected a bid by Ibrahim to have his clients joined in the suit.

Justice Akintola ruled at the time that the joinder application was unsubstantiated and consequently dismissed it.