Headline

Battle for Lagos Speakership: Embattled Obasa Seeks Legal Interpretation

Published

1 year ago

February 15, 2025

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

Following weeks of tussle and mourning over his removal as the Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, embattled Lagos lawmaker, Hon Mudashiru Obasa, has approached the court to challenge his removal, dragging the State House of Assembly and the Speaker, Mojisola Meranda.

The lawmaker dragged the duo before a State High Court in Ikeja on Friday, claiming that the lawmakers were wrong to have removed him when the Assembly was on recess. He subscribed to the opinion of a cross section of analysts that his removal was a coup as it happened in his absence.

Recall that Obasa, who has been a Lagos lawmaker for over 20 years, 10 of which he served as Speaker since 2015, was suddenly removed by 36 ouy of the 40 members of the House following a motion moved by the member representing Kosofe Constituency, Hon Femi Saheed under Matter of Urgent Public Importance. The former speaker was accused of financial misappropriation, poor administrative qualities and high handedness among other vices.

In the motion however, dated February 12, 2025, Obasa, through his counsels, led by Chief Afolabi Fashanu SAN, sought an order from the court for an accelerated hearing of the suit.

Obasa, who was out of the country, was removed as the Lagos Assembly speaker on January 13, 2025, by 36 lawmakers, a situation that has since generated unwarranted power play involving members of the Governance Advisory Council (GAC), the highest decision making body of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Lagos, and to an extent, the Presidency, where the names of President Bola Tinubu, and his wife, Remi, were mentioned as stakeholders in the matter. The members were also at one time invited by the Department of State Security (DSS) for questioning, a move that gave the impression that Tinubu was actually, and not happy with Obasa’s removal. The presidency had since denied Tinubu’s involvement.

Obasa had refused to accept his removal and challenged same upon return to the country, claiming that he remained the speaker while dismissing all allegations against as “fictitious and unsubstantiated”. He insisted that he who alleges must prove.

While addressing supporters on his return, the impeached Speaker maintained that he was not afraid of being impeached but emphasised that due process was not followed, accusing the state Commissioner of Police of aiding the process.

He claimed security agents, led by the police commissioner, invaded the assembly complex and his homes in Agege and Ikeja, locking his family indoors with over 200 officers present.

“I am not afraid of being removed, after all, it is not my father’s chieftaincy title. I am representing my people and they have returned me six times. If you want to do anything, do it well.

“They did the removal all because I was out of the country. Lagos is a special place, we cannot denigrate the state,” he said.

He cited cases of the former speaker, Rt. Hon Jokotola Pelumi, and one time deputy speaker, Hon. Adefunmilayo Tejuosho, who were once removed from office with the aide of the Police.

“When my sister, former deputy speaker of the House, Hon. Adefunmilayo Tejuosho was removed, we did not invite the police.

“The Lagos State House of Assembly is above common standard of excellence.

“I appreciate the members of the governance advisory council and Governor Babajide Olusola Aanwo-Olu of the state. He is my brother and he always calls me his younger brother,” Obasa concluded in what observers described as attempt to curry favour and arouse sympathy.

Among the relief sought by the lawmaker include an order of the court fixing a date for the expeditious hearing of the originating summons, and abridging the time within which the defendants may file their response by way of counter-affidavits/written addresses to seven days after the hearing and determination of the application.

In the motion filed at the court, Obasa also sought an order of the court abridging the time within which the plaintiff may file its reply of points of law to three days.

The embattled lawmaker’s application is predicated on nine grounds, among which is the interpretation of sections 36; 90; 92(2)(c); 101 and 311 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As amended) vis-à-vis Order V, Rule 18(2) and Order II, Rule 9(1)(ii)(iii)(iv)(v)(vi)(vii)(viii) of Rules and Standing Order of the Lagos State House of Assembly.

Part of the motion reads, “This action challenges the constitutionality of the sitting and proceedings of the Lagos State House of Assembly to sit during recess without the Speaker reconvening the House or giving any other person powers to reconvene the House.

“Public interest requires the case to be heard and determined speedily and expeditiously so that legislative activities in the state are not stalled.

“The legality of the continued sitting of the 1st defendant under the present leadership in violation of the aforementioned laws and rules calls for an urgent determination.

“This Honourable Court is imbued with inherent powers to grant accelerated hearing and abridgment of time.”

Obasa’s resort to the court of law stems from his inordinate ambition to remain perpetually the Speaker, set the records straight and the fact that Members of the Assembly have reaffirmed his removal as authentic just as the GAC has also rejected him as his removal, according to them, was conducted lawfully, in line with constitutional provisions.

In one their statements, e-signed by Hon. (Otunba) Ogundipe Stephen Olukayode, the lawmakers emphasized that the decision adhered strictly to the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Powers and Privileges Act. They referenced Sections 92 and 96, which outline the procedures for electing and removing a Speaker, stressing that due process was followed.

“The Lagos State House of Assembly, as an independent arm of government, exercised its constitutional duty in the best interest of the people of Lagos. Any attempt to challenge this lawful action undermines the authority granted to us by the Nigerian Constitution,” the lawmakers stated.

While reiterating their commitment to legislative duties, the Assembly called on all stakeholders, including the executive and the public, to respect the sanctity of legislative processes and avoid undue interference.

Collaborating the stand of the lawmakers, insider source told The Boss that “everything Obasa is doing the last attempt of a dying snake. Even him, himself knows he is a goner. He can either return to the House as a regular lawmaker if actually his claim of serving his people and Lagos is a fact, or tender his resignation and move on. But as far as the speakers hip is concerned, the Assembly has far behind the issue.”

THE SINS OF OBASA

Both stakeholders, observers and politicians alike agree that the erstwhile speaker relapsed into arrogance and haughtiness, resulting in his total disregard of the governor, party structure and party elders.

According to an AfricanReport.com, “this power bestowed on Obasa by Tinubu made him arrogant to the extent of publicly disrespecting Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu and other leaders.

“During the presentation of the 2025 budget proposal by Governor Sanwo-Olu back in December, Obasa arrived late. His speech at the event, wherein he stated that he was also qualified to be governor, was seen as an insult.”

Quoting a former commissioner in the state, and National Legal Adviser of the APC, Muiz Banire, who spoke on National Television, the paper said “Beyond the issue of the budget and the delay of the governor, Obasa took a position contrary to that of his governor and his party… For him to go against such an establishment, he had to face the consequences.”

It was also alleged that when Tinubu visited Lagos during the Christmas holidays, the political leadership, GAC, laid several complaints before Tinubu against Obasa.

Meanwhile, the new Speaker, Meranda has continued to received goodwill from all and sundry including the GAC, the Executive and the general public, at the eventual takeover, with many vowing their total support to her and the new look Lagos House of Assembly.

Everyone expects a new direction after 10 years of the Obasa leadership, and hopes it would point Lagos to the supposed promised land. But all will depend on the outcome of the lawsuit instituted by Obasa.

Headline

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

Published

1 day ago

June 29, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Headline

South Africa Nothing Without Africa – MTN Boss, Mcebisi Jonas

Published

3 days ago

June 27, 2026

Eric

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

South Africa is nothing without Africa

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

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

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

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

Headline

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

Published

3 days ago

June 27, 2026

Eric

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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