The National Assembly Election petition Tribunal sitting in Umuahia the Abia State capital on Monday sacked a Labour Party Member Representing Aba North and South Federal Constituency, Hon Emeka Nnamani, over falsification of academic certificate.

According to reports, Nnamani was disqualified by the Tribunal based on an existing appeal court judgement against him over forged documents.

The Tribunal, following the disqualification of Nnamani, subsequently declared Chief Mascot Ikwechege as the authentic winner of the February 25th National Assembly Election in Aba North/South Federal constituency.

The 2023 general election will go down in history as the most significant opportunity lost in the country’s electoral history. Going by the presidential tribunal judgement, the general election is just another disturbing illustration of the tactics utilised by the cabal in Nigeria that has been in control of the country’s state power for decades.

The fact is: this general election has the best preparations. All of the money was generously and on time released. The Electoral Act 2022, which Muhammadu Buhari kindly signed into law as president, also provided the legal framework and essential missing pieces, namely electronic components – electronic accreditation, voter identification, and real-time uploading of results from the polling units.

The leadership of INEC, especially its chairman Mahmood Yakubu, and director of information and voter education Festus Okoye, were assuring Nigerians every step of the way. The Electoral Act 2022 featured such measures that would ensure the best election in the country’s history. (By the way, Festus Okoye’s five-year term as INEC’s national commissioner for information and voter education, which began on July 25, 2018, as representative of the south-east geopolitical zone in the commission, came to an end with Sam Olumekun’s appointment as his replacement days ago).

The Electoral Act 2022 Sec 64( 4) unambiguously and copiously states that: “A collation officer or returning officer at an election shall collate and announce the result of an election, subject to his or her verification and confirmation that the— (a) number of accredited voters stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the number of accredited voters recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 47 (2) of this Act; and (b) the votes stated on the collated result are correct and consistent with the votes or results recorded and transmitted directly from polling units under section 60 (4) of this Act.” The supreme court needs to review these specific clauses as mandatory and compulsory, which is both the intendment and spirit of the Electoral Act.

To ensure real-time uploading of results from the polling units, the country invested over N100 billion in digital infrastructures. However, INEC abandoned the electronic process when it came to collating the results of the presidential election for very strange reasons.

It became evident after listening to a 12-hour perplexing ruling by the presidential election tribunal that Nigerians who were encouraged by the leadership of INEC had been duped. The INEC gave up on real-time results posting and switched to the laborious, rigging-prone manual collation process.

This ruling completely violates section 64(4) and is superfluous. The tribunal held that the IReV is a viewing portal, not a portal for collating results, and claimed that electronic results collation was not provided for in the act. This may be the case, but the tribunal spared no words for the commission notwithstanding the criminal violation and cognizance of the INEC guarantees to the Nigerian electorates. Instead, they chastised the petitioners for failing to obtain their results from the polling units as a mark of their seriousness.

Even though the duplicate results provided to party polling agents are legitimate, tenable, and admissible in court and have been used to return candidates(e.g. Uzodinma vs. Ihedioha), the tribunal should have required INEC to make the c            opies from their commission available. The tribunal continued to defend INEC’s nebulous actions and the defendants in the most clumsy terms read out to Nigerians in total disdain, which led the citizens to wonder if the PEPT was not partisan and descending into the arena.

While many of the tribunal’s opinions may be legally sound, one must also question why the tribunal accepted the evidence and witnesses in the first place and then waited until the judgement to point out what it afterwards deemed to be unsuitable and inadmissible. With this approach, the tribunal became the petitioners’ main adversary rather than the umpire, and one that was less concerned with delivering justice and discovering the truth.

One can appreciate the dread they felt as they considered the possibility of impeaching a sitting president, which is not the aim but telling Nigerians who won. Yes, yet another gap in our legislation that permits a president-elect to take the oath of office while the tribunal is still deliberating on the presidential election outcome. The tribunal will be sympathetic to the president without the president having to say a word, and his appointees—ministers and others—including an attorney-general could be working behind the scenes to keep their jobs. Nigeria has been the only nation in the world to permit such an unusual deviation and it has been the practice since 1999.

Even though the tribunal is constrained, one still expects it to avoid ambushing the petitioners who are in court to vent and seek redress. The tribunal determined that the witnesses and evidence were out of order for the petitioners missing the deadlines for submission. Election petitions are time-barred. But how on earth are the aggrieved candidates going to frontload the witnesses’ written depositions in a presidential race if they have to file within 21 days after the declaration? This is virtually unattainable. Yet, during the judgement, depositions of witnesses that were filed later were rejected. Why were they allowed in the first place if they weren’t relevant at the time of filing or throughout the examination and cross-examination of the witnesses?

The tribunal’s declaration that the judges did not even look through the boxes of documents submitted to it should be considered the most heartbreaking. The IReV downloads of INEC results were used by the petitioners and should be enough. The admission of these documents and the statistical analysis of the results of the 2023 presidential election should have taken place if the tribunal was indeed interested in justice and establishing who won the presidential election.

It should be emphasised that the tribunal purposefully withheld the results of the 2023 presidential election from Nigerians by stopping the IReV documentary evidence set before it. By putting the petitioners under legal pressure based solely on technicalities, the tribunal opted for the political verdict rather than determining where the mandate of the Nigerian electorates lies.

Although the court is not Father Christmas, the tribunal should be aware that, if the results provided by the petitioners were not sufficiently presented, they have to request that INEC make available the results that they used to declare Bola Tinubu president.

Therefore, the verdict was an ambush, nuanced for political correctness, and therefore a betrayal of the public’s legitimate expectations. By doing this, they shifted the responsibility for informing Nigerians of the outcome to the supreme court, just as INEC shifted the same to the tribunal.

What is more, if the ruling of the apex court on the matter is also time-barred, the supreme court might not be able to order a retrial for the petitions, in which case the effects on the nation’s eroding democracy will be fatal by putting the majority of Nigerians who voted back into apathy mode.

The core issues were deliberately sidestepped by the tribunal and buried in the hubris of banalities and technicalities. Even though one may agree that the concerns with the constitution and electoral act regarding the qualification of a presidential candidate may have flipsides – 25% in the FCT, double nomination, $460,000 forfeiture, etcetera – the core issues should not have been kicked aside as nonissues. No, it shouldn’t be like that. Let it be known that the judiciary abdicated responsibility as long as it does not reveal to Nigerians who won the 2023 presidential election.

The judiciary as an arm of government is muddling its role. Muddling through is a science that has its side effects, drawbacks, and repercussions. If the court is indeed the common man’s last resort, the country’s judicial system must live up to that fundamental expectation and this cannot be achieved by abdicating responsibility.

A few days ago, President Bola Tinubu crossed the symbolic 100 days in office but there was no fanfare because the day coincided with the delivery of judgement on the petition against his victory at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.

After 13 hours of judgement, the court ruled that Mr Tinubu, who is in far-away India, remains the president. The panel dismissed all the petitions against him and his vice, Kashim Shettima.

With the tribunal judgement settled and all ministers fully in place, DAILY POST reviews some of the promises contained in the Renewed Hope Manifesto. The attention will be on low-hanging fruit promises.

However, President Tinubu did not put a specific timeline to achieve some of the promises.

The President already removed the fuel subsidy regime which Nigerians are still waiting for measures that would cushion the effect of its removal. He has equally signed into law the student loan bill but students are yet to get the loans while some schools are increasing fees.

Ending Almajiri and out of school

Across some of the major cities in the North, children with bowls in their hands roam the street, begging for food and money. They are called Almajiri- students sent to live with Islamic teachers.

Former President Goodluck Jonathan tried to reform the Almajiri system by building schools for them, however, the schools have been abandoned due to the inaction of the Buhari administration. In all, there are over 13.5 million out-of-school children in Nigeria according to several reports.

In his manifesto, President Tinubu promised to set up a task force, to be headed by a special czar to address the problem of out-of-school children.

“A task force headed by a special czar will be created to address this problem,” the portion of his manifesto reads.

Schools are resuming in September, and Nigerians are still waiting for the special czar to address the problem of out-of-school children.

Setting up special anti-terror battalion

According to data from SBM Intelligence, over 600 persons have been killed within the first 45 days under Tinubu. Most were killed by bandits, Boko Haram insurgents, ethnic militias, armed robbers and other non-state actors.

President Tinubu had promised to set up an anti-terror special battalion to deal with terrorists. In the manifesto, the battalion will have special forces units.

“Highly trained and disciplined anti-terrorist battalions (ABATTS) with special forces units will be created,” the portion reads.

While Nigerians are waiting, different groups continue to kill across the country.

Freeing police from VIP services

Nigerians have experienced different Inspector Generals of Police making pronouncements of withdrawal of police as escorts to VIPs. All the pronouncements have failed to yield the desired outcome.

Again, in the manifesto, Tinubu promised that police will be freed from such duties, while such responsibilities will be for the men of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC).

Surprisingly in July, the Acting Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Olukayode Egbetokun ordered the withdrawal of the Police Mobile Force, popularly known as MOPOL from VIP guard duties.

The directive of the IGP seems not to tally with the promise of President Tinubu, who promised the withdrawal of all police personnel.

Nigerians are still waiting for the fulfilment of that promise by President Tinubu.

Ending oil theft

In the past couple of weeks, Nigerians have witnessed accusations and counter-accusations between the military and the men of Tantita Security Services Nigeria Limited, a company owned by ex-militant, Government Tompolo.

It would be recalled that the Federal government contracted the firm for oil pipeline surveillance.

However, President Tinubu had promised Nigerians that he would “establish a Special Enforcement and Monitoring Unit.”

Nigerians are yet to see that special monitoring unit; they are left with Tompolo and the Navy making accusations and counter-accusations.

[DailyPost]

NIGERIANS last week had no democratic choice but to have their ears on the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal verdict. It was not that they hoped the result would assuage their hunger or reduce banditry which has made a steady inroad in the most protected city, Abuja.

They could as well have switched off their television sets as all networks for over half a day covered the verdict live. But for many, it was the fear of the verdict. No matter where it swung, it was the beginning of wisdom; the spectre of violence was all over.

The judiciary itself was on trial. All eyes were on it. Whatever verdict it gave, would not discharge or acquit it. It was guilty as charged and no allocutus would reduce the harshness of the sentence by the losing parties. How can it hope to be innocent when each of the three main candidates in the elections, at least by faith, believes he won the election?

I must commend the efforts of the Justices who for over 12 hours, laboured through the verdict they had written, in a vain effort to plead innocent.

When the verdict was given, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar cried foul and headed to the Supreme Court which has the final human say. So did His Excellency Peter Obi who added he was on his way to the highest court to seek justice. In contrast, President Bola Tinubu in far away India, broke into dances that reminded me of Queen Salawa Abeni’s ‘India Waka’.

Elections in an orphaned Nigeria are so contentious and fractious because that is what democracy has been reduced to: a winner takes all high stake in which the winner has so much powers that he is virtually the state.

Dr Kayode Fayemi, immediate Past Chairman of the Nigeria Governors Forum had on the eve of the verdict, questioned whether the current electoral system where only one winner amongst contending parties, emerges, is democratic. Speaking on Tuesday, September 6 at the 60th birthday and presentation of 21 books by heavyweight intellectual pugilist, Professor Udenta. O. Udenta, the former Governor had made a case for proportional representation. Under this system, political parties in the elections get in government the percentage of electoral votes it secures.

At that forum, I posited that our system is basically the form rather than the content of democracy as it does not necessarily translate to dividends for the people nor development of the country. I said the democratisation of the country is far off because basically it lives on the lie that Nigeria is a federation while in practice it is a unitary system where whoever wins the election has control over the resources of the entire country. This is partly why the national elections are so contentious and highly fractious.

As what passes for debates and analysis of the election petition verdict went on, I reflected that in the First Republic when we ran a federal system, the leader of the majority party, Alhaji Ahmadu Bello, could elect to remain a regional premier rather than move to the centre to govern the country. This was partly because a lot of power and resources laid in the regions. In those days, the best brains could decide to stay in the regional service rather than being drained to the Federal Service.

As I write this, with the inauguration of President Bola Tinubu, some of the best brains in Lagos State and its environs are being drained to Abuja, a city with no major factories and whose major industry is resource-sharing.

Elections are not the issue, an unviable system is at the core. How can a huge country of 220 million people with hundreds of nationalities, cultures, languages and experiences have a single police “force”? How can such behemoth provide effective police services to the country? What effective police work can a policeman from Abeokuta carry out in Bulunkutu when he does not speak the local language, does not understand the people and their cultures and does not even know the names of streets in the area not to talk about finding his way? What kind of security can such a policeman provide or what assistance or information can he get from the populace when in the first place he cannot even communicate with them? Such a policeman finds his environment strange and the populace he is supposed to serve, regard him as a stranger.

What kind of democracy is it when a man can sit in Abuja and site a school in Ugep, a place he has never been and knows nothing about? In the first place, he does not even know whether a school is the major priority of the people or water sanitation. What kind of dividends can a democracy that does not consult the people deliver?

Elections cannot cure over-bloated bureaucracy such as having two chambers: a 109-member Senate and a 360-Member House of Representatives performing the same essential function of law making. Rather than scrap the House and let the treasury breathe, the country is multiplying or splitting ministries and agencies.

The issue is not that democracy is not working, it is that we are not running one; all we have is civilian rule based on who can corner the most formal votes by any means possible. So, we need to evolve a democratic process that delivers the basic needs to the people. Just as the Americans and British essentially run two-party system that builds strong structures, the Cubans run a democracy which guarantees the populace the best possible healthcare and qualitative, free education for all, and the Chinese run a democracy that unfailingly feeds 1.412 billion people daily and has abolished extreme poverty, so should we also have a democracy that delivers.

One way is to build an Afrocentric system that takes in our cultures and traditions and guarantees the sovereignty of the people. A way of ensuring such sovereignty and good governance, is to have a parliament in which professional politicians will constitute no more than 30-40 per cent, while the balance would be representatives of mass organisations like those of market people, youths, trade unions, community-based organisations, farmers associations, professional bodies like those of doctors, lawyers, accountants and builders.

The executive can also be tailored on a similar line of representation.

The judiciary can be democratised in such a way that almost all cases will be adjudicated at community, local and state government levels. For appeals, the states can be bunched into six or eight regions. These will be the highest courts except the Constitutional Court. In other words, the Federal High Courts, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can be scrapped. The Court of Peoples Democracy shall rise!

Novak Djokovic defeated Daniil Medvedev in straight sets on Sunday to win his fourth US Open and a record-equalling 24th Grand Slam singles title, cementing his claim as the greatest tennis player in history.

The 36-year-old Djokovic won 6-3, 7-6 (7/5), 6-3 to become the oldest men’s champion in New York in the Open era and match Margaret Court’s all-time mark for most Grand Slam victories.

“I don’t know where to start. It obviously means the world to me,” said Djokovic, wearing a white jacket with the number 24 on his chest during the trophy presentation.

“It’s hard to describe. I’m really living my childhood dream to compete at the highest level in this sport.

“I never imagined I would be standing talking about 24 Grand Slams but the last couple of years I’ve felt I have a chance and I have a shot at history and why not grab it.”

The Serbian is the first man to win three Grand Slam events in the same season four times, crowning his impending return to world number one in the most fitting of ways inside Arthur Ashe Stadium.

The victory added to his wins at the Australian and French Opens earlier this year, with the only blemish his five-set defeat to Carlos Alcaraz in the final of Wimbledon in July.

“You know, some people who are born, he’s a genius. He’s one of kind. Not too many people in this world like him in sport-wise,” said Djokovic’s coach, Goran Ivanisevic.

“This is one of the biggest achievement in the sport history.”

Medvedev suffered his fourth loss in five Grand Slam finals, all of which were against Djokovic or Rafael Nadal.

“First of all I want to ask Novak: What are you still doing here? Come on!” quipped Medvedev.

“I don’t know when you are planning to slow down a little bit.

“I mean, 24. I feel like I have not a bad career and I have 20 titles. You have 24 Grand Slams. Wow.”

Medvedev defeated Djokovic in straight sets in the 2021 final to prevent the Serbian from becoming the first man to win all four Grand Slams in the same year since Rod Laver in 1969.

Djokovic admitted to feeling overwhelmed on that occasion, but there was little evidence of nerves as he quickly took command of Sunday’s championship match.

The second seed — who missed last year’s US Open because of his refusal to be vaccinated against Covid-19 — burst out of the gate with a confident hold sealed by successive aces and struck at the first opportunity, punishing Medvedev for a double-fault to break for a 2-0 lead.

A third ace consolidated his advantage before Medvedev got on the board in the fourth game.

The pair traded holds largely untroubled until Djokovic again put pressure on Medvedev as the third seed served down 2-5.

Medvedev dug in to twice stave off set points, but Djokovic calmly made the set his the following game.

– Second set grind –

Medvedev dethroned last year’s champion Alcaraz with a “12 out of 10” performance in the semi-finals, but he struggled to replicate his very best consistently against an imperious Djokovic.

Attempting to be the first player to beat the top two seeds en route to the title since 1975, Medvedev once more repeatedly found himself under the pump early in the second set.

He was able to resist, hitting a sweeping volley to fight off break point as he secured a gutsy hold for 4-3 before finally asking questions of Djokovic, who was showing signs of fatigue.

A leaping overhead gave Medvedev his first break chance of the contest the very next game, but Djokovic responded with a brilliant scoop on the half-volley to save it.

Djokovic wobbled serving at 5-6, double-faulting twice as Medvedev brought up set point. But Djokovic was waiting as Medvedev went cross-court, and put away the volley to force a tie-break.

Medvedev seemed to have the momentum on his side after winning an astonishing rally to nose 5-4 ahead only for Djokovic to bag the next three points, snatching a marathon 104-minute second set and closing in on a historic triumph.

“Should have won it,” Medvedev said of the second set. “Should have won it, but sometimes tennis is not that easy.”

Djokovic sportingly offered to help Medvedev to his feet after the Russian took an awkward tumble early in the third set, but there was no such goodwill when two break points came about soon after.

Medvedev pumped a backhand long to hand Djokovic a 3-1 advantage. He gave the break straight back, but Medvedev faltered again and there was no mistake second time around as Djokovic wrapped up the title before the emotions streamed out.

Let’s begin with the golden words of Abraham Lincoln, an American lawyer, politician, and statesman who served as the 16th president of the United States from 1861 until his assassination in 1865. Lincoln profoundly posited: “Ballots are the rightful, and peaceful, successors of bullets, and that when ballots have fairly, and constitutionally, decided, there can be successful appeal, back to bullets; that there can be no successful appeal except to ballots themselves, at succeeding elections.” A case for introspection as all five Judges of the Appeal Court unanimously upheld the election of Asíwájú Bola Ahmed Tinubu as President C-in-C of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Blinded by self-inflating delusion – the preconceived idea about outcomes of the elections is casted in gross ignorance fueled by bitter envy, lies and unfounded prejudices. This is a case of irredeemable helplessness. Simply put, ‘IREV’ is just the most convenient excuse the losing parties have for their losses. The votes cast at the polling units were the true wishes of the voters. Instead of crying endlessly over ‘IREV’ His Excellencies Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi should have provided the form EC8s signed at contested polling units and demonstrate that what their agents signed were different from what INEC declared. This is what is expected of the litigants so as to deepen our democracy and the processes.

Painfully, what was noticed is the demonstration of emotional theatrics, whereby they started digging up irrelevant issues about a candidate’s academic records and a supposed drug forfeiture case. The fact is that political parties can hardly be deceived by election results, because they have their agents who give then real situation reports from the polling units. The party leaders are the ones trying to hoodwink their supporters and the general public about the election by crying rigging with no evidence to support their claims, only unending cries about how INEC manually collated the results they themselves already have. This is a clear case for introspection.

Admittedly, emotion is a fundamental aspect of human existence. In normal, healthy people, feelings about options exert a powerful influence on choice. Intuition and anecdote suggest that people react more positively toward others whom they like or for whom they feel sympathy than toward others whom they dislike or for whom they feel disgust. Whether Judges can make dispassionate decisions or not, politicians and the public expect and even demand that they do so. And, of course, this is another case for introspection and I hope to offer an account that makes sense of the precedents and a framework for making future decisions. Such will occupy a substantial part of one of my books in the near future.

It is instructive, that, this contribution takes a phenomenological approach to the landmark judgement of last Wednesday, September 6th, which was given by the five-man tribunal, made up of the judges of the Appeal Court of Nigeria. The judgment upheld the result as declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and also give a sobering admonitions to the two leading litigants His Excellencies Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party, PDP and Peter Obi of the Labour party (LP), and also the Allied Peoples Movement (APM), challenging the declaration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressive Party (APC) the winner of February 25, presidential election.

It is thus, imperative that, no court will base its judgment on emotions, lies and falsification. Therefore, I salute the courage of “Mi Lords” in the way they handled the legal process and the verdict delivery displayed high level of legal sagacity, professionalism, and responsibility on the part of jurists despite the media and social media attacks launch against each of them and members of their families. No doubt many judges are familiar with the quote from Socrates that two judges said they keep on their benches. The philosopher said, “Four things belong to a judge: To hear courteously; to answer wisely; to consider soberly; and to decide impartially.” I salute your lordships the five Judges of the Appeal court of Nigeria.

Let me be very clear, we need a different starting point – our problems are not the institutions, but our mind-sets as evidenced by the activities of many of our citizens, particularly the religionists misrepresenting God. Religion has descended to the abysmal levels of inanity, “belly face front” moronic stratosphere and unbridled brigandage. Regrettably, religion has been hijacked by mischief makers to enrich themselves. Millions of people have lost their lives in various religious riots in Nigeria. How do you explain “Men of God” turning their pulpits into an arena for partisanship. Sadly, the development of the recent past months confirmed the saying about “Religion was created to control the minds of adherents” using fake prophecies during elections in manipulating and misleading the people. I daresay that religious bigotry, intolerance, ethnic jingoism hypocrisy and extremism are the real problems.

Conclusively, I am optimistic that a better Nigeria is VISIBLE! In every nation-state or country from the ancient period to the present, it is imperative for a new beginning that we must embrace: Mind Restructuring Advocacy which was the focal point in the recent address of President Bola Ahmed Bola in the ongoing conference of G20 in India. God bless Nigeria and replicate the wisdom of king Solomon upon our leaders, particularly the President C-in-C of the Federal Republic Asíwájú Bola Ahmed Bola. Finally, one of the songs of King Sunny Ade (KSA), readily came to mind as I was penning down my thoughts: “Enito’luwa dalejo to’lohun o gba to’nfapa janu kawobi to maa gbejo lo…” Literally meaning that a sound judgment like the Wednesday September 6th is akin to appealing the judgment of God Almighty.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has secured major investment commitments and economic cooperation from three of world’s largest economies.

He got commitments from German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to expand their investment frontiers in Nigeria.

The pledge was in acknowledgment of the policies initiated by the Tinubu administration to reboot the economy.

Tinubu held business talks and stepped up bilateral engagements with key economic partners on the sidelines of the G-20 Summit which closed yesterday in New Delhi, India.

He shared ideas with the leaders, outlining key opportunities on investments and sustainable development.

Tinubu was building on the momentum of the $14 billion investment pipeline secured during his earlier Presidential roundtable with Indian investors.

Read Also; G20 leaders visit Mahatma Gandhi’s memorial
The President took advantage of the summit to create a deeper Euro-Asia connection for Africa’s largest economy, outlining Nigeria’s competitive advantages amid ongoing reforms.

Germany – Europe’s largest economy, South Korea – Asia’s fourth largest economy and India – Asia’s global giant formally endorsed the Tinubu reforms with initial promises of increased economic cooperation and investments.

The partners agreed to bilateral discussions on key areas of focus, which the President identified to include; agriculture, financial technology, education, manufacturing, defence, information and communication technology and oil and gas, among others.

During the talks with Chancellor Scholz, Tinubu discussed how to expand existing German investments and drive new deals across the sectors.

According to a statement by his spokesman Ajuri Ngelale, the President said: “It is not, for us, only a matter of designing the financial architecture for an expanded economic partnership.

“It is also about the practicality of aligning the perspectives of your large-scale manufacturers, such as Volkswagen and others, with the reality of the new incentives my government is putting in place for them to come and prosper across multiple value chains and sectors inside of our country.”

Scholz responded by acknowledging the mutually-beneficial nature of an increase in the scale of economic ties with Africa’s largest economy, especially in view of ongoing economic reforms.

He said: “Thank you for this important discussion, Mr. President. I can appreciate this opportunity to advance our economic relations. Your market is unique and our companies have history in Nigeria. We acknowledge the business friendly reforms you have put in place. I am happy to inform you of my desire to visit you in Nigeria in October, which will allow us to carry forward these initiatives.”

The statement said Tinubu gave his nod to the German Chancellor’s request to visit Nigeria to consolidate their talks.

President Suk Yeol praised Tinubu’s regional leadership in upholding democratic tenets and norms, with a promise to explore opportunities in many key sectors of the Nigerian economy.

He listed Nigeria’s education, technology and energy sectors as areas of utmost interest to South Korean investors, promising to mobilise the business community to take advantage of new Nigerian incentives for local industry.

“I wish to commend your strong leadership, following the peaceful transfer of power to you from your predecessor and we see a stable country in West Africa that is growing in stature,” Suk Yeol was quoted as saying.

Tinubu restated Nigeria’s readiness to increase the scale of economic relationship with South Korea by listing practical steps that could quicken deals in many sectors.

He said: “We will leave nothing hanging. We will finalise what we agree to and we will execute. We will work point by point with you to secure rapidly implementable MoUs across sectors of partnership that will involve the active presence of your biggest firms, not just in terms of Nigerian consumption, but in local Nigerian production, from telecommunications to technology, and oil and gas.”

The president offered an invitation to host Modi in Nigeria as the prime minister did to him during the G-20 Summit in India.

Tinubu said: “There are many lessons our nation can learn from the rapid progress that India has made under your leadership.

“We see fantastic opportunity between our nations across sectors, such as agricultural development, but specifically, there is more we can do to advance ICT innovation and the emergence of blue-chip fintech growth in Africa. Nigeria has the local players who can drive it from the front.”

Affirming India’s readiness to foster greater economic partnership with Nigeria, the Indian leader thanked Tinubu for inviting him.

Modi said: “Our teams must now stay close in touch to detail our priority areas of upscaled cooperation with respect to agriculture, defence industries capacity building, and even fintech growth.

“We believe there are immense prospects for Nigeria in the UPI-Unified Payments Interface and we will ensure that we come together and make progress on these fronts very rapidly.”

Ngelale stated that his boss also had substantive, informal exchanges of views with the United States (U.S.) President, Joe Biden; European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen and World Bank President, Ajay Banga, among others, on the sideline of the G-20 Summit.

“The struggle for the soul of Nigeria has moved to the Supreme Court. We wait for the final word from there. But should the courts continue to have the final say on who should be our leaders in Nigeria? The way to political sanity is an electoral process that obeys the law. Court judgements never bring closure to bitter contests. Even if the court does the right thing, because it is politics and a contest for power, the side that loses will always believe that factors other than law informed the court’s decision. In a trust-deficit, money-loving country like ours, nothing is believed fairly done by any operative of the state’s institutions. Quid pro quo is always inserted into discussions of piety – it means something for something or this for that. The courts and their judges are therefore the losers in election cases. No matter what decision they take and how they arrive at it, their garments of respect and reverence get rent.”

Opeyemi Bamidele was the candidate of the Labour Party in the June 21, 2014 governorship election in Ekiti State. He thought he had worked hard enough to earn a victory but on the D-Day, he learnt a lesson profound enough to last him a lifetime. At exactly 7a.m. on the day of the election, a bulk SMS bearing his name was released to every phone user in Ekiti State announcing that he had withdrawn from the election. “The message said I, Opeyemi Michael Bamidele, hereby wish to thank all my supporters and to let them know that due to persuasion by party leaders as well as a lot of my supporters home and abroad, I have decided to step down for Chief Ayo Fayose of the PDP. I apologise for the inconveniences this might cause and I want to assure you that all would be well with us and I mean well for you. A lot of people have talked to me, including the Ewi of Ado Ekiti and other paramount leaders to which I cannot say no.” (See Olagunju, L. 2017 Ph.D thesis on page 83). The candidate said he was shocked to receive that message ostensibly from himself. He scrambled to counter it with his own bulk SMS but at exactly 12 noon when accreditation ended and ballot casting was to start, another bulk SMS was out restating the fact of his withdrawal from the race: “At exactly 12 noon, another bulk SMS was circulated in my name telling everybody to disregard the counter-statement I had earlier issued saying it was not me that sent it….”(ibid, page 84). Bamidele said he wanted to take up the telecoms company “but they could not even trace the source of the message…”

That Ekiti election drama happened nine years ago. Between that time and now, a lot has happened in technology and to politics of electoral contests big enough to make Opeyemi’s 2014 experience mere child’s play. Those who staged the drama would laugh today at how ‘rustic’ technology was in 2014 and the bigger possibilities they can toy with today. If you are a victim of tech in 2023 and you whine, curse and complain, know that tomorrow promises greater challenges. Only those smart enough to hurry into the Noah’s Ark of technology shall be saved.

Which is why I laughed and shook my head at some justices of the Court of Appeal last week. They apparently had stayed too long on the social media to read all sorts of negative posts and therefore had very harsh words for petitioners whose cases they decided. They acted like a row of men taking turns to slap a row of pigs because of a splash of mud. One of the justices pointedly accused the petitioners of attempting to get the court “persuaded or intimidated by threats on social media.” That was an open accusation. I read the words and I wondered if they were necessary in a political judgement. I do not think any of the parties officially endorsed any of the negative social media vibes that preceded the delivery of last Wednesday’s judgement. Yes, he who acts through another does the act himself (qui facit per alium facit per se). But online supporters of candidates cannot be reasonably, legally labeled their agents. More importantly, in a contest in which both sides are vicious and destructively creative, you don’t pick a side to excoriate. It creates more problems.

Every era carries the child it sires (omo tí ayé bí ni ayé npòn). The technology that rules this age does not understand the idea of judges being Kabiyesi. With technology opening new doors of engagement, it is difficult to imagine how the judiciary will cope in four years time if it remains laboriously archaic and combative, and if we conduct our election affairs the way they were done this year. Many people voted for the first time in February because of the trust they had in the deployed technology and the official assurances over their inviolability. Last week, the court loosened the vital bolts. The Court of Appeal ruled that the Electoral Act and INEC’s Regulations recognise the popular iReV and its uploaded results as merely for viewers’ enjoyment. “INEC Results Viewing Portal (iReV) is not a collation system,” the court ruled (see page 687 of the judgement). We now know through the Court of Appeal that there is nothing like electronic transfer/transmission of election results for the purpose of vote collation in our laws. Unless the legislature quickly fixes the ‘glitch’ before the next elections, election results will suffer ambush on the way to collation centres and the polls will be tugged between street gangs at collation halls and hackers in cyberspace.

What is coming next? Nice Cheeseman and Brian Klaas, authors of ‘How to Rig an Election’ (published in 2019) ask that question in their interrogation of what they called ‘the future of election rigging.’ They say they have “more bad news” for the democratic world. They stress that “we’re about to enter a much more dangerous period: the era of ‘deep fakes'” when almost everything is faked and “nothing is real” (page xxii). They hinted at the capacity of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to very soon alter the course of politics and get leaders elected. They wrote all that four years ago. AI is already disrupting the universe of everything and politicians appear to have noticed it, their old dogs are in school learning the new tricks. So, for judges handling election cases, the fasten-seatbelt light will no longer flicker throughout the flight of their careers. Whatever pains their lordships bear today, courtesy of social media and its possibilities, will get worse going forward. Judges will be asked to account for every word they utter (or do not utter), and for every point they make (or do not make). They will be forced to learn of AI’s Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) by the time it makes them see videos of themselves delivering judgements they never did. So, instead of composing words of abuse for a generation that is light years ahead, people of privilege like judges should sit up, clean up, ensure they do the right thing, hold it up for reasonable people to see and then leave the rest to God and their conscience.

The presidential election was held on February 25, 2023, the winner was sworn in more than three months ago. Legal challenges to the legitimacy of his mandate have not stopped shadowing everything he does. The Court of Appeal finished its own bit last week; the Supreme Court is taking over now. It has 60 days to deal with the cases. By the time these dusts settle, even if Tinubu wins eventually, he would have been thoroughly battle-beaten to be useful (if he wants to be useful) to Nigeria. A madman sets out for the backyard but the front door is the route he takes. That is Nigeria’s judicial route to presidential election validation. Should we not ask why it was possible for Kenyans to dispense with their own presidential election litigation a week before President William Ruto was sworn in in September 2022? The reason is their constitution; it has no “job for the boys” at the lower court. Section 140 (1) of the Kenyan constitution says: “A person may file a petition in the Supreme Court to challenge the election of the president-elect within seven days after the date of the declaration of the results of the presidential election.” In Nigeria, you have 21 days to file a petition, not at the Supreme Court, but at a bus stop called the Court of Appeal. Kenya is not the only country with its Supreme Court having original jurisdiction in presidential election petitions. As it is in Kenya, so it is in Ghana. Article 64 (1) of the Ghanaian constitution says “The validity of the election of the President may be challenged only by a citizen of Ghana who may present a petition for the purpose to the Supreme Court within twenty-one days after the declaration of the result of the election in respect of which the petition is presented.”

Between now and the next election, we have enough time to beg our husbands in the parliament to copy Kenya and Ghana by amending the constitution. I do not think we will lose anything by asking the final court to do at the beginning what it will eventually do.

The Appeal Court has spoken and the dust won’t settle soon. I saw some university teachers dancing online because Tinubu won. They are the president’s men. University teachers are very rugged people; they are Fela’s Nigerians, suffering and smiling. But, let me appeal to the victorious president to please pay these university teachers their almost one-year salaries withheld by his friend and bedmate, Muhammadu Buhari. If he doesn’t pay them and they remain with him, their enemies will mock them. Enemies will not only ask them where their god/president is; they will be asked if they are well at all. There is a condition called Stockholm Syndrome – cooling off with your captor and abductor. How did Stockholm Syndrome get its name? One day in 1973, there was a bank robbery incident in Stockholm, Sweden. The robbers had a six-day standoff with the police and for those six days, many employees of the bank were held captive. Then the robbers set the captives free. But some of the victims had “fallen in love” with their captors so much that when the robbers were arrested and put to trial, the bank employees refused to testify against the suspects in court; the extreme ones among them even raised money for the defence of their tormentors.

The struggle for the soul of Nigeria has moved to the Supreme Court. We wait for the final word from there. But should the courts continue to have the final say on who should be our leaders in Nigeria? The way to political sanity is an electoral process that obeys the law. Court judgements never bring closure to bitter contests. Even if the court does the right thing, because it is politics and a contest for power, the side that loses will always believe that factors other than law informed the court’s decision. In a trust-deficit, money-loving country like ours, nothing is believed fairly done by any operative of the state’s institutions. Quid pro quo is always inserted into discussions of piety – it means something for something or this for that. The courts and their judges are therefore the losers in election cases. No matter what decision they take and how they arrive at it, their garments of respect and reverence get rent. Politicians are spirits of the night (òru ni wón, won ò mo eni òwò); they neither recognise nor respect the sacredness of any cassock when their vital interests are threatened. In 2017 when the Kenyan Supreme Court, in a 4-2 decision, annulled the presidential victory of sitting President Uhuru Kenyatta, his reaction was a regret that “six people have decided they will go against the will of the people.” To President Kenyatta, the Supreme Court was no longer his nation’s highest court; it had become just “six people” violating the democratic space of the country. In Nigeria, the full court is made of seven people. We wait to see how their final answer to a question which 25 million voters failed to crack on February 25 will bring peace to Nigeria – and to the court itself.

Popular Nollywood actress, Moyo Lawal has reacted to the leaked tape involving her and an undisclosed lover that went viral on Saturday.

Taking to her Instagram page on Sunday, Lawal stated that the video released was done without her consent, thereby violating her privacy and trust.

She disclosed that the video was recorded with her ex-lover, who she had planned to marry, and was never meant for public consumption.

The beautiful actress, however, threatened to take legal action for authorized distribution of the video.

Despite the unfortunate incident, Lawal stated that she would not allow it to break her spirit as she noted how she stayed celibate for years.

“A private video of mine from a while ago has been inappropriately shared without my consent, violating my privacy and trust,” Moyo Lawal said.

“I want to emphasize that this video done with my ex I was to marry at that time was never intended for public consumption and its unauthorized distribution is a branch of my personal boundaries. However, this criminal breach of privacy will be treated with legal action.

“It really hits me funny because I have always maintained a strict approach to my s3xuality, even going as far as being celibate for a few years, refusing to date often, and choosing to be alone most times.

However, I am determined to not let this unfortunate incident break my spirit.

“I appreciate the support and understanding of those who have reached out to me during this challenging time. Please know that your kindness and goodwill means the world to me”.

Forces Ondo Governor’s Hasty Return

The Ondo State Governor, Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), was forced to return to Nigeria following an alleged plot by his deputy, Lucky Aiyedatiwa, and members of the State House of Assembly to impeach him.

Despite being satisfied fit by doctors in Germany, plans by some political gladiators in the state to use the Ondo State House of Assembly to declare him medically unfit to continue to function as the chief executive of the state informed Akeredolu’s decision to terminate his medical leave in the European country to return home.

It was gathered that the state’s House of Assembly was being pressured to ease out the ailing governor from power and install the then-acting governor, Aiyedatiwa, as the substantive Chief Executive of the State.

Recall that Akeredolu had surprisingly returned to Nigeria from Germany last Thursday after three months on medical vacation in Germany. He left the country on June 7.

The Governor, since his return, has been holding consultative meetings with relevant stakeholders from the state and political associates in Ibadan, the Oyo State capital.

Family members and associates of Akeredolu have openly accused Aiyedatiwa and his associates of plotting to remove his boss from office and being disloyal to the governor, especially during his travails.

Some cabinet members, who have pitched tents with Aiyedatiwa in anticipation that Akeredolu would not return to office, are now gripped by fears of the possibility of losing their jobs.

One source told Leadership Newspaper that the cold war between Akeredolu and Aiyedatiwa became evident following the poor reception accorded the deputy governor when he visited his boss in Ibadan on Friday.

The embattled deputy governor was only allowed to attend the meeting the governor held with members of the cabinet and House of Assembly.

It was gathered that Aiyedatiwa was excused from the meetings his boss held with members of the National Assembly from the state, chairmen of boards and parastatals, as well as women and youth groups.

One of the sources who craved anonymity said, “The governor had to return home hurriedly on Thursday when he was faced with the possibility of his being impeached by the state’s House of Assembly. His family members and political associates mounted pressure on him to return home in the first instance, even if he would return to Germany at a later date.

“The way the handlers of the deputy governor were going, Governor would have been eased out on the ground that he is medically incapacitated to continue to perform the duties of office for which he was elected. The House of Assembly was being pounded to do the needful to impeach him (Akeredolu) and direct the state’s chief judge to immediately swear in the deputy governor as substantive governor.

“But the sudden and unexpected arrival of the governor on Thursday has truncated the plans. The deputy governor’s camp was jolted by the arrival of His Excellency.”

Painting the picture of how the deputy government was isolated before he left Ibadan on Friday, a reliable source told Leadership, “He (Aiyedatiwa) moved from one table to another trying to ease down the pressure as people were hesitant to associate and discuss with him.

“During the governor’s separate meetings with stakeholders, the deputy was outside loitering around. Even when the wife of the governor came in to greet people, she avoided him.

“Curiously, more than 70 percent of members had already pledged loyalty to him while the rumours of the governor’s incapacitation raged.

“He had initiated a regular weekly meeting with loyal cabinet members, who also recruited influential party leaders to wage the war against the pro-Akeredolu men in government.

“One of the high points of the meeting of the deputy governor’s group was to engage APC leaders in Abuja and pressurize the state Assembly to invoke the doctrine of necessity by declaring Akeredolu unfit.”