Some weeks back, the $18.5 billion Dangote Refinery and Petrochemical Company, which was commissioned on Monday, May 22, 2023, finally commenced production seven months after it was inaugurated with pomp and circumstance in Lagos.

The refinery, which is the biggest in Africa, is expected to earn Nigeria foreign exchange savings between $25bn and $30bn yearly.

At the moment, Nigeria has seven oil refineries, with only one of them working fully, and that is the Dangote refinery.

Below are the  seven refineries in Nigeria,

Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company (KPRC)

The Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company (KPRC) was commissioned in 1980 with the mandate to supply crude oil products to consumers in Northern Nigeria, and more than four decades after the refinery has not been utilised.

The refinery had a capacity of 50,000 bpd (barrels per day) at launch, but the capacity was extended to 100,000 bpd in 1983 and 110,000 in 1986.

Port Harcourt Refinery

Port Harcourt Refining Company (PHRC) is one of the four major oil refineries in Nigeria, however, it has failed to produce a single drop of petrol over the past ten years.

Port Harcourt Refining Company, is two oil refining companies in one, conveniently named the old and new refineries respectively.

The old refinery, which is the oldest in Nigeria, was established in 1965 as the Alesa-Eleme Refining Company, while, the new refinery began operations in 1988 with a mandate to produce petroleum products for export.

The old refinery has a capacity of 60,000 bpd, but the new one dwarfs that significantly with a quoted capacity of 150,000 bpd.

Dangote Refinery

The Dangote Refinery is Africa’s biggest refinery.

Dangote revealed plans for an oil refining operation back in 2013, with a proposed timeline that would see it begin operation in 2016.

Years after, the refinery finally started production in January 2024.

Warri Refinery

Warri Refining and Petrochemical Company Limited is the fourth of the four big oil refineries in Nigeria,

It was commissioned in 1978, and was launched with a capacity of 125,000 bpd, but now outputs exactly 0 barrels per year.

Azikel Refinery

Azikel Group, through its Azikel Refinery, aims to establish a refining plant in Nigeria to meet the country’s increasing oil demand. Its projected capacity is 12,000 barrels per day.

The project’s proposed location is Yenagoa in Bayelsa State.

Ogbele Refinery

Ogbele Refinery is a modular refinery in Rivers State, owned and operated by Aradel Holdings, with a capacity of 1,000 bpd.

Waltersmith Refinery

The Waltersmith refinery is located in Imo state.

The African refinery project is being developed in phases by Waltersmith Refining and Petrochemical Company, a subsidiary of Nigeria-based Waltersmith Petromen Oil.

The phase one refinery development with an initial capacity of 5,000 barrels of crude oil a day (bpd) started operations in November 2020.

[NaijaNews]

The protest over nationwide hardship hit the Correctional Center in Jos, Plateau State capital, on Friday as inmates staged a protest over plan to reduce their food ration.

Daily Trust learnt that immediately they got tipped off on downward review of food size, the inmates started to protest.

During the protest, the inmates refused to take orders from the custodial officials  and also shunned breakfast.

They converged on the center of the prison yard while shouting on top of their voices but the custodial officials used tear gas to force them back to their rooms.

Comptroller of the Jos Correctional Center, Raphael Ibinuhi, confirmed the protest of the inmates to Daily Trust.

He said, “The problem has to do with the high cost of goods in the market. The contractor in charge of the foods said they are being forced by the price of food items to reduce the size of the plate of foods.

“So, it is the food size that provoked the protest. I don’t think the protest is necessary because the food challenge and the cost of items is a national issues that the federal government is already addressing. And I want to believe that since it is a national issue, whatever step taken by the federal government to address it will be felt everywhere in the country including the Correctional centers.”

The rising cost of living in the country has triggered protest in different parts of the country.

On Monday, the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) mobilised a nationwide protest, which President Bola Tinubu described as unacceptable.

While commissioning the Lagos Red Line Train connecting Agbado to Oyingbo, the president had said, “Allow me to throw a jab here. The Labour Union should understand that no matter how much we cling to our freedom and rights, to call for strike within 9 months of an administration is unacceptable.”

[DailyTrust]

Jose Peseiro has confirmed he is no longer the head coach of the Super Eagles.

The Portuguese tactician revealed this in a terse post on social media app, X on Friday.

“Yesterday, we concluded our contract with the NFF.

“It was a pride and honor to coach the Super Eagles. It has been 22 months of immense dedication, sacrifice, emotion, and enormous enthusiasm. We feel a sense of fulfillment,” he wrote.

More to follow…

[DailyPost]

Babatunde Irukera, immediate-past chief executive officer (CEO) of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), says he will address his removal from office by President Bola Tinubu “in due course”.

Irukera said this in a post on X on Friday, while responding to a comment asking him to speak up on what transpired before his sack.

An X user had quoted a news link which read: “Why I sacked Irukera as FCCPC boss – Tinubu tells senate”.

“At this point, Mr. Irukera has to speak up,” the user with the X name Malachy Odo II, had written.

Error is becoming a norm in Nigeria. It has become our tradition. We have become a country of oddities; a country of one error per minute! We have become unshockable. Sadly, we spend the bulk of our time discussing inanities that ordinarily should not be heard in any serious forum. When some of us speak out boldly about these issues, some bootlickers, fawners and ego masseurs who seek favours from government of the day accuse us of partisanship; or of attacking national leadership; or Justices of the Court. Last year, in Kano State, for example, we read about a certified True Copy of a judgment of the Court of Appeal, affirming a judgment and simultaneously overruling it at the same time. The said judgment not only created great uncertainty, it also cast aspersions on the Judiciary and the legal profession, which are expected to set professional standards for others to follow. The earlier we addressed, boldly, these unfortunate anomalies emanating from our courts, the better for the legal profession and the entire Judiciary. Those who know or follow my works as a constitutional lawyer, human rights activist and Pan- Nigerian very well know that I defend the Nigerian judiciary passionately with every fiber in me. This is because the judiciary is the only and last hope of the common man and woman. But we must be careful not to allow sentiments becloud our true sense of judgement and thus get consumed by the ricocheting consequences. Some persons insist we are still learning. I thought learning leads to improvement? Like late legendary proverbsmith, Bashorun M.K.O. Abiola once metaphorically and laconically asked, if it takes a man 20 years to learn madness, how many years will he require to practise it? The focus of this write-up concerns not only about the serious implications of the recent Supreme Court judgement in Mutfwang & Anor v. Nentawe & Ors; SC/CV/1179/2023, (unreported), delivered on 12th January, 2024, to the effect that the nomination and sponsorship of a candidate are pre-election matters which constitute internal affairs of political parties, but also how the judgement highlights the grave injustice done to about 22 Legislators of Plateau State whose victories were snatched by the Election Tribunals and the Court of Appeal and handed over on a platter of gold to the APC losers. This is one judgement, aside the cases of Sen. Hope Uzodinma & Anor v. Rt. Hon. Emeka Ihedioha & Ors (2020) JELR 86967 (SC) and APC V. Sherriff & Ors (2023) LPELR – 59953 (SC), that have sparked national debates and which will never melt away in a hurry.

The article seeks to know how the said Supreme Court judgment in respect of the gubernatorial election in Plateau State re-iterating that the nomination and sponsorship of a candidate for any election is a pre-election matter and an internal affair of a political party, impinged on the earlier judgements of the intermediate court nullifying victories of 22 PDP Legislators and handing them over to APC Legislators.

THE BACKGROUND
Recall that the Court of Appeal had held that the failure of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to comply with the orders of the High Court of Plateau State, Jos, directing it to conduct valid ward, local government and state congress elections before nominating its candidate for the various elective posts in the state was an incurable fundamental flaw. Relying on this finding, the Election Tribunal, under a petition brought by the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its members sacked many lawmakers elected on the platform of the PDP. Under Section 246 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the Court of Appeal is the final Court of last resort on appeals emanating from the decisions of Election Petition Tribunals in disputes arising from the conduct, outcome and legality of National Assembly and States House of Assembly elections. The implication of this is that no appeal can be filed before the Supreme Court after the Court of Appeal had decided on the matter. However, as noted by the apex court in the recent judgment involving Governor Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau State, both the tribunal and the Court of Appeal were in grave error when they entertained the matter and the appeal respectively, as they lacked the requisite jurisdiction in the first instance.

GROUNDS FOR REMOVING LEGISLATORS
Can disobedience to a court order (which in any case was not correct, as found by the apex court in the Mutfwang Governorship appeal), be a ground to remove a legislator in the face of the clear provisions of sections 106 and 109 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), which respectively deal with qualification and disqualification for the office of members of the House of Representatives and Assembly? I think not. A long line of cases vindicates me. See for example, Onor & Anor v. INEC & Ors; SC/CV/1194/2023; (Unreported), delivered on 12th January, 2024. Thus, as found by the Supreme Court both in the Muftwang case and Onor & Anor v. INEC & Ors (Supra), disobedience to an earlier order made by a court (which was not even the case in the two matters) is not one of the qualifying or disqualifying factors of a Governor or Legislator. In the Onor & Anor v. INEC & Ors (Supra) which I handled, the apex court held that the punishment for a disobedient party is to take up contempt proceedings as provided for in the Sheriff and Civil Process Act, CAP 407; LFN 1990; not to use it to disqualify an elected person and take away his victory. Thus, brings us to the issue of jurisdiction.

WHAT IS JURISDICTION?
Jurisdiction is the authority of a court to proceed with the adjudication of a dispute. In Attorney General of Anambra State vs. Attorney General of the Federation (2005) FWLR (PT. 268) 1557, I.T Muhammad, JSC, held that:
“Jurisdiction to a court of law is equated to blood in a living animal. Jurisdiction is the blood that gives life to the survival of an action in a Court of law, without which the action will be like an animal that has been drained of its blood. It will cease to have life and any attempt to resuscitate it without infusing blood into it would be an exercise in futility.”

APC’S GROUSE BEFORE THE PLATEAU STATE ELECTION TRIBUNAL
The grouse of the APC and its members before the Plateau State Election Tribunal and the Court of Appeal was premised on what they alleged to be invalid primaries conducted by the PDP. They had argued that the PDP had no structure in Plateau State (whatever that meant). But the trite position of the law now is that the issue of membership, nomination, submission of forms and sponsorship of candidates for elections are internal affairs of a political party as clearly provided for in Section 84(1) & (14) of the Electoral Act, 2022. Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act makes provisions before whom and where any issue emanating from the conduct of the primaries can be determined. It is an Aspirant that participated in the primaries that can complain to the Federal High Court. No other party has the vires to. Thus, section 84(14) of the Electoral Act, 2022, provides:
“Notwithstanding the provisions of this Act or rules of a political party, an aspirant who complains that any of the provisions of this Act and the guidelines of a political have not been complied with in the selection or nomination of a candidate of a political party for election, may apply to the Federal High Court for redress.”
The appellate courts, in ringing tones, have upheld this trite position of the law in a plethora of cases: Enang v. Asuquo & Ors (2023) LPELR – 60042 (SC); Onubogu v. Anazonwu & Ors (2023) LPELR – 60288 (SC); Olabisi & Anor v. APC & Anor (2023) 59640 (CA); Odey v. APC & Ors (2023) LPELR – 59695 (CA); and Dickson v. LP & Ors (2023) LPELR – 60837 (CA). Indeed, the appellate courts have gone ahead to hold that a person or political party that attempts to peep through the fence to query the internal affairs of another political party wherein he /it was not a candidate in the primaries is nothing but a mere busy body and meddlesome interloper. See the cases of APC V. JEGA & Ors (2023) LPELR – 59866 (SC); Akpatason v. Adjoto & Ors (2019) LPELR – 48119 (SC); Daniel v. INEC & Ors (2015) LPELR – 24566 (SC); APGA & Ors V. APC & Anor (2023) LPELR – 59914 (CA); and PDP V. Edede & Anor (2022) LPELR-57480 (CA). Matters such as the Plateau Legislators cases where victories were snatched from the PDP winners and handed over to their opponents in the APC on a platter of gold were therefore carried out without the requisite jurisdiction of the Tribunals and the intermediate court. The Supreme Court said this much in the case of Mutfwang & Anor v. Nentawe & Ors (Supra).

CONSEQUENCES OF A COURT DETERMINING A MATTER WITHOUT JURISDICTION
It is trite law that any exercise carried out by a court of law without jurisdiction is a complete nullity. The tests for determining whether a court has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on a claim were laid down by the apex court in the causa celebre of Maduokolu vs. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 SCNLR 341. The apex court held in that case that a court is competent to adjudicate a claim when:
a. It is properly constituted concerning the number and qualification of its membership;
b. The subject matter of the action is within its jurisdiction;
c. The action is initiated by due process;
d. Any condition precedent to the exercise of its jurisdiction has been fulfilled.

ONLY A CO-ASPIRANT HAS THE LOCUS STANDI TO COMPLAIN
As clearly provided in Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act and Section 272 (3) of the 1999 Constitution, it is the Federal High Court and not an election tribunal that has the jurisdiction to adjudicate on pre-election issues and this must be carried out within 14 days. Also, it is only a co-aspirant in the primary being disputed that has the locus to challenge the conduct of the said primary; and not his opponent in another party. See the cases of Alahassan & Anor v. Ishaku & Ors (2016) LPELR – 40083 (SC); Otegbeye & Anor v. APC & Anor (2023) LPELR – 60030 (CA); Labour Party v. INEC & Ors (2023) LPELR – 60548 (CA); YPP V. APGA & Ors (2023) LPELR-59799 (CA); and Usman v. APC & Ors (2020) LPELR – 50308 (CA). Delivering his own judgement in the Mutfwang appeal (it was unanimous), Justice Emmanuel Agim held that the APC and its candidate who had challenged Mutfwang’s election were not members of the PDP and so could not competently challenge the primary elections held by the PDP. He also held that the tribunal and Court of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to have entertained the matter in the first place. He lectured further:
“The petition by the APC and its candidates is an abuse of the court process. I wonder why the matter came to court at all. This appeal is allowed. The legal profession should wake up or render itself irrelevant. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside. My only worry is that a lot of people have suffered as a result of the Court of Appeal’s decision. It was absolutely wrong. The appeal is allowed.”

CHALLENGE TO PRIMARY ELECTION IS A PRE-ELECTION MATTER
Section 285(14) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, particularly (a), (b) and (c), delineates the circumstances which come under pre-election matters and; which can be challenged within the electoral framework. It encompasses an Aspirant's grievance regarding non-compliance with the Electoral Act; or National Assembly regulations during political party primaries; disputes by Aspirants concerning their participation; and compliance issues with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). It also includes legal actions by political parties challenging INEC's decisions, including disqualification of candidates; and complaints related to non-compliance with electoral laws in selection or nomination of candidates; election timetable; voter registration; and other preparatory activities for an election. See the cases of Anyakorah v. PDP & Ors (2022) LPELR-56876 (SC); APM V. INEC & Ors (2021) LPELR – 58375 (SC); Akpamgbo-Okadigbo & Ors v. Chidi & Ors (2015) LPELR – 24564 (SC); Salim v. CPC & Ors (2013) LPELR – 19928 (SC); Akinremi & Anor v. Suleiman & Ors (2022) LPELR – 56903 (CA); and APC V. Suleiman & Ors (2023) LPELR – 59911 (CA).

COURT OF APPEAL AS FINAL COURT ON LEGISLATORS’ MATTERS
It appears that the Court of Appeal being the Court of last resort in respect of all appeals from the decisions of election petition tribunals in disputes arising from the conduct, outcome and legality of National Assembly and States House of Assembly elections becomes functus officio once it delivers its judgement and cannot reopen a matter it has pronounced upon with finality. In other words, a judgment once delivered by the intermediate court on National and State Houses of Assembly matters cannot be varied where it correctly represents what the Court decided. Nor shall the operative or substantive part of such judgement be varied or substituted. See the cases of Oyetibo & Anor v. Oyinloye (1987) LPELR-2883(SC) at 11-13. Dingyadi & Anor v. INEC & Ors (2011) LPELR 950 (SC); Udende v. Suswam & Ors (2023) LPELR-61304 (CA); and Owoo & Ors v. Edet & Anor (2013) LPELR – 22042 (CA).

THE COURT OF APPEAL’S RECENT DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR A REVIEW INSTITUTED BY THE SACKED PDP PLATEAU LAWMAKERS
The sacked Plateau Legislators in an attempt to reclaim their lost positions in the light of the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Caleb Mutfwang case and it's obiter pronouncement on the legislators' injustice, filed a fresh application before the same Court of Appeal that had dismissed their appeal from the Plateau State Election Tribunal, requesting a review of the said judgement that sacked them. The appellate court however, as expected, on 28th February, 2024, dismissed the suit, describing it as a waste of judicial time, frivolous and lacking in merit. It further slammed a fine of N128 Million Naira (N8 Million per Applicant) on the already beleaguered Applicants.

BUT CAN A COURT THAT ACTS WITHOUT JURISDICTION IN THE FIRST PLACE NOT VARY ITS OWN JUDGEMENT DELIVERED WITHOUT SUCH JURISDICTION BY WAY OF A REVIEW?
The apex court had observed (on the Plateau Legislators’ case, albeit obiter), while delivering the judgment in the Governor Caleb Mutfwang appeal, that the lower tribunal and Court of Appeal erred as they acted without jurisdiction to have entertained the petitions sacking the lawmakers from the PDP over a matter bothering on internal affairs of their party. Couldn't this issue of lack of jurisdiction as observed by the apex court have been further explored and subjected to the jurisdiction of the same Court of Appeal that delivered the judgement by way of review? Were the legislators wrong to have asked for a review? Let us have some guidance from earlier decisions of the Appellate courts. In Iteogu v. LPDC (2018) LPELR-43845(SC) 18-26, the Applicant had asked the apex court to revisit its decision concerning him which had been decided by the apex court in 2009. This application for revisitation stemmed from the fact that on the 12th July, 2013 and the 13th May, 2014, respectively, the Supreme Court had held in the cases of Aladejobi v. NBA (2013) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1376) 66, and Rotimi Williams Akintokun v. Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee that it had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal directly from the LPDC. The Applicant’s posture in his case was that in those cases, the apex court had held that it lacked the jurisdiction to entertain appeals directly from the LPDC. He had therefore urged that there was the need to revisit his own case and declare that the decision or judgment of the apex court delivered in 2009 pertaining to him was given without vires and so set it aside and have his status restored as a legal practitioner. The apex court, per Justice Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili, JSC, while dismissing the application for review, held at pages 18 -26, inter alia, that aside the exception of the “slip rule”, the Supreme Court may only depart from its earlier decision in subsequent cases and thereby overrule itself. She emphasized that this:
“does not however mean that the previous decisions in those earlier cases differently decided would be given a new lease of life on account of this new development. The reason for this is self-evident as Oputa JSC stated in Adegoke Motors Ltd v Adesanya & Anor. (1989) 5 SCN113: (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 109) 250 at 274 thus:"We are final not because we are infallible, rather we are infallible because we are final." …. In other words, the Supreme Court enjoys the finality of its decisions. Except for clerical mistakes, accidental slips, or omissions, it seldom re-visits its decisions by way of review, variation or setting aside. Once the Supreme Court has entered judgment in a case, that decision is final and will remain so forever. The law may in the future be amended to affect future matters on the same subject, but for cases decided, that is the end of the matter.” (Emphasis supplied)
See also Anyagham v. FBN PLC (2021) LPELR – 55905 (CA); Emezie & Ors v. Linus & Anor (2016) LPELR – 40514 (CA); and Onuh & Anor v. Ogbe (2019) LPELR-48361 (CA).

THE PLATEAU LEGISLATORS’ FIASCO
In the light of the above judgment of the Supreme Court, was there no remedy for those legislators who were wrongly sacked by the Court of Appeal? It is important to note that 22 PDP members in both chambers of the Nation’s and Plateau State Legislature were sacked by the Election Tribunals and the Court of Appeal, a development that left tongues wagging and ruckus generated across Nigeria. The legislators affected included two Senators - Simon Mwadkwon and Napoleon Bali; four members of the House of Representatives – Dachung Bagos, Beni Lar, Isaac Kwalu, and Peter Gyendeng Ibrahim; and 16 members of the Plateau State House of Assembly. They were all in PDP. Their constituents overwhelmingly voted for them. But the tribunal, supported by the Court of Appeal, felt otherwise. They took away the legislators’ victories and donated same on a platter of gold to the APC legislators who were roundedly trounced at the polls. The Plateau State people’s votes were rightly counted but the courts refused to make the votes count. This is what I have termed “Judocracy” in my OZEKPEDIA neologism, “as a genre of government practised only in Nigeria, where Presidents, Governors, Legislators and LG Chairmen are thrown up as having ‘won’ in an election. Their victory is immediately challenged. They get enmeshed in these legal calisthenics for the next 2 to 3 years of their corruption-ridden governance. Then, suddenly, they are conceived, incubated and delivered in the hallowed Chambers and precincts of our law courts, rather than through the ballot box. The will of the people is thereby subsumed in the decision and judgement of courts of law, the non-representatives of the people”. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg8ByKVWWj)

SHOULD THIS PLATEAU STATE LEGISLATORS’ DEBACLE HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO THRIVE UNREMEDIED?
Our case laws are decided based on precedents. Precedent is retrospective and ensures that a given posture is maintained even at the risk that harm may be caused by it.
The apex court in the Mutfwang’s case noted (albeit, by way of obiter), that the Court of Appeal was wrong when it sacked those legislators lawfully elected under the platform of the PDP, as it lacked jurisdiction to do so. However, precedent is saying, “Yes, we admit that there was an error. Nothing can be done about it.” I humbly disagree with this perpetuation of injustice under the thin guise of “my hands are tied”, or “that nothing can be done about it”. Surely, something can be done about it. I agree with Emmanuel Agim, JSC, when he noted in his judgement that, “it is high time the legal profession woke up before it became irrelevant”. This admonition is in tandem with the admonition of venerable Justice Chukwudifu Oputa (JSC), in Adegoke Motors Ltd v. Adesanya & Anor (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 109) 250 at 274, 275, to the effect that “When therefore it appears to learned counsel that any decision of this court has been given per incuriam, such counsel should have the boldness and courage to ask that such decision be overruled”. I also find solace in the complimentary and immortal words of Lord Denning in PARKER V. PARKER (1954) 2 All ER 22, where he illuminated thus:
“What is the argument on the other side? Only this, that no case has been found in which it has been done before. That argument does not appeal to me in the least. If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still while the rest of the world goes on, and that will be bad for both”.
Afterall, law is but a mere handmaid to deliver justice, which is why “ubi jus ibi remedium” (Bello v. AG Oyo State (1986) 5 NWLR 820).
Going by this, I humbly submit that when it comes to the critical issue of the court deciding a case in which it lacked jurisdiction in the first instance, then certainly, such a court has jurisdiction to revisit the said judgement and review it under certain laid down conditions. This is not a blanket or open-ended cheque for exhumation of buried cases. No.

A COURT CAN REVIEW ITS JUDGMENT
Thus, by reason of a long line of decided cases by the Supreme Court itself, a court has the constitutional power to enforce, review or set aside its own judgements under special circumstances as provided for by law. This is not tantamount to the court sitting on appeal over its own judgements. In Stanbic IBTC Bank Plc v. L.G. C. Ltd (2020) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1707), pp. 17-18, paras. D-C, the Supreme Court, per Abba Aji, JSC, held that the court has the power and leeway to set aside its own judgement and rehear a case, inter alia, under the following circumstances:
“…where any of the other parties obtained judgement by fraud or deceit…. When judgement was given without jurisdiction…”.

WHY THE PLATEAU STATE LEGISLATORS’ JUDGEMENT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
Surely, the judgement in the Plateau Legislators’ matter was dubiously obtained as there was no disobedience to any court order at all as rightly found by the Supreme Court in the sister Mutfwang case. All the cases had emanated from the same facts and circumstances. Secondly, both the Election Tribunal and the Court of Appeal lacked the requisite jurisdiction to have entertained the Legislators’ case the way they did in the first instance.
The reason or rationale behind this position in the above Stanbic IBTC case was graphically painted by Oputa, JSC, in Adegoke Motors Ltd v. Adesanya & Anor (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 109) 250 at 274, 275, inter alia, thus:
“We are final not because we are infallible, rather we are infallible because we are final. Justices of this court are human beings, capable of erring. It will certainly be shortsighted arrogance not to accept this obvious truth. It is true that this court can do inestimable good through its wise decisions, similarly, the court can do incalculable harm through its mistakes. When therefore it appears to learned counsel that any decision of this court has been given per incuriam, such counsel should have the boldness and courage to ask that such decision be overruled. This court has the power to overrule itself (and had done so in the past) for it gladly accepts that it is far better to admit an error than to persevere in error.” (Emphasis supplied).
Thus, where a judgment of a court was obtained without jurisdiction; or is tainted with illegality; or was obtained by fraud, the court surely has the vires, constitutional power and jurisdiction to revisit such judgement, even if time had since elapsed. This is because time cannot and does not run against illegality or fraud. A party cannot be allowed to benefit, or continue to benefit from the product of its own illegality and void conduct. This position was emphasized by the Supreme Court in Nwosu v. APP & Ors (2020) 16 NWLR (PT 1749) 28, where it held thus, through many of its justices as follows:
Per Eko, JSC:
“No person is allowed to benefit from illegality as illegality confers no right”
Per Peter-Odili, JSC:
“It is difficult in the light of the damming facts well pushed in this appeal wherein illegality was enthroned to be surveyed into endorsing of such acts and to allow the perpetrator of such profane acts to derive or profit from his own wrong”.
Per Amina Augie, JSC:
“The court cannot close its eyes to it (illegality) and allow itself to be used as a tool to perpetuate illegality, in whatever form or guise”
See also the cases of GTB V. Innoson (Nig.) Ltd (2022) LPELR-56657 (SC); Enterprise Bank Ltd v. Aroso & Ors (2015) LPELR – 24720 (SC); Oladosu & Anor v. Olaojoyetan & Anor (2012) LPELR – 8676 (CA) and Eco Bank v. Teak Naturale Investment Ltd & Ors (2017) LPELR – 42389 (CA).
The Court of Appeal which was approached by the grieving PDP Legislators sure had the power and jurisdiction to have calmly looked at and reviewed its judgements which have since been irretrievably punctured by the Nigerian people and the apex court itself (albeit, obiter). It should have meticulously reviewed its earlier judgements, all of which were delivered without following judicial precedents as laid down by the Supreme Court on the very issues dealt with in those appeals. Law is about justice. Being Siamese twins, one without the other is an orphan. The Plateau Legislators’ cases hallmarked a dangerous precedent where neither the law nor justice was followed or attained. The Court of Appeal ought to have seized the opportunity of the fresh application to correct itself. If for nothing else, at least for the sake of posterity, justice, fairplay, equity and good conscience. I so humbly submit.

A Saudi medical team of 38 specialists, including surgeons, technicians and nursing staff, has successfully separated the Nigerian conjoined twins, Hassana and Husaina Hassan lsa.

The surgical separation, which lasted 14 hours, was carried out at King Abdullah Specialist Children’s Hospital, King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

The conjoined twin girls survived, the Press Attache to Saudi embassy in Abuja, Mohammed Alsahabi, told The Nation on Friday.

Alsahabi in a statement, said the separation was carried out at the directives of the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud and His Royal Highness Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud, Crown Prince and Prime Minister.

The story of the conjoined twins touched the hearts of millions across the world, drawing attention for them to be urgently separated.

On Tuesday October 30, 2023, the Saudi Medeval plane, marked: HZ-MS4C, airlifted Hassana and Husaina with their mother and other family members through the Aminu Kano Airport.

Kano Governor, Abba Kabir Yusuf, was at the airport to bid them farewell.

On October 31, the conjoined twins, who were barely five days then, arrived in Riyadh.

From there, they underwent comprehensive examinations that revealed shared vital areas in the lower abdomen, pelvis, lower spine and lower spinal nerves.

According to Alsahabi, the successful separation which began on Thursday morning, “is a result of meticulous planning and execution by a dedicated team of medical professionals.”

“The surgical intervention unfolded in nine planned stages, lasting approximately 14 hours.

“A team comprising 38 consultants, specialists, technicians and nursing staff specialising in anaesthesia, pediatric surgery, urology, orthopaedics, plastic surgery and pediatric neurosurgery, collaborated seamlessly to ensure the success of this complex operation,” he said in a statement on Friday.

It was gathered the surgical milestone involving Hassana and Husaina is the 60th operation undertaken by the Saudi programme for separating Siamese twins.

“The programme has provided care for 135 conjoined twins from 25 countries over the past 34 years.

“The successful separation of Hassana and Husaina exemplifies the Kingdom’s commitment to advancing medical science and extending compassionate healthcare on a global scale,” Alsahabi said, describing the operation as a “medical landmark achievement,” he stressed.

He disclosed that prior to the commencement of the procedure, Dr. Abdullah Al Rabeeah, Adviser at the Royal Court, Supervisor General of the King Salman Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center (KSrelief), and head of the medical team, expressed confidence in the success of the procedure, assuring a 70% success rate.

Dr. Al Rabeeah has extended heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to the Saudi leadership for its unwavering support of the programme.

[TheNation]

The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, on Thursday, assured Nigerians that the narrative on the current hardships would be different within the next one year.

Idris spoke at the 50th anniversary lecture of PUNCH Nigeria Limited held at the Civic Centre, Ozumba Mbadiwe Road, Victoria Island, Lagos.

The minister, who represented President Bola Tinubu at the lecture by the Nobel laureate, Prof Wole Soyinka, assured Nigerians that Tinubu would deliver on his campaign promises while appealing for patience.

“Of course, the challenges are going to be there; no one is pretending that they do not exist, but we see a situation where the story would be quite different in another one year.”

The information minister urged Nigerians to take a cue from Soyinka, who said he usually waited a year before assessing a new government in power.

“Maybe go back to what Professor Wole Soyinka said when he visited President Bola Tinubu, I listened to the journalist who was asking him to comment on the current administration and what he said, ‘even in my character, I wouldn’t talk until whoever is in office stays for at least one year.’”

Speaking on the efforts being made by the government to take the country out of the woods, the minister said, “Only a few days ago, we invited captains of industries,  Dangote, the BUA, the Elumelu, and ministers, among others, and we all locked ourselves in a room for about three and a half hours discussing how Nigeria is going to get better, and everyone in that room, from the private sector, from the central governments and the sub-nationals, believe that this country is going to get better.

“So, I urge you to see this in line with what Professor Wole Soyinka has said, around what time? Of course, you can criticise, you can offer suggestions, but the country has to exist. Let us, please talk about all those good things happening; it’s not bad stories all the time.”

While stressing that economic challenges were not peculiar to Nigeria, the minister referenced the case of the United Kingdom, which recently slipped into a recession.

Idris said, “Nigeria is going through hard times, as we see, but this is not new and peculiar to this country. All the issues we are discussing now are issues that are also being discussed around the world.

“Only a few weeks ago, we heard that the United Kingdom had gone into recession. I am glad that it did not happen here. Otherwise, the story would be ‘Oh, Nigeria is in recession’ as if it is going to be the end of the world for the country.”

According to him, the incumbent administration started work on the first day in office, adding that the government believed that all the challenges plaguing the nation were for the country’s good.

He said, “The government of President Ahmed Tinubu, as you know, took bold steps from inception, the first one being that upon the resumption of office on day one, the President took away fuel subsidy; second, he also brought clarification to the foreign exchange regime. Now, these suggest that two major issues have been eating deep into the economy. As someone put it, the economy was a dead horse by the time the President came in, so whether the subsidy was removed or not, it would be very challenging. The President took it very boldly, ensuring that this subsidy goes away for the benefit of all, and he was prepared from day one that it was not going to be an easy thing.

“Of course, 10 months down the road, we are seeing the effects of some of these hard decisions, but I can tell you, the good story is that the government is taking bold, proactive decisions to ensure that Nigeria’s economy returns. Let me say this: The government believes that all these things are happening for the good of the country, and the economy is going to be good again.”

Recounting what the present administration had done so far, the minister urged the citizenry to focus on the positives.

“The National Bureau of Statistics recently said for the first time in a very long time that capital imports are improving by about 66 per cent. If we want to continue this movement, fuel subsidy had to go. One reason is that our consumption has decreased by over a billion litres; domestic refining capacity has increased.

“The insecurity inherited by the government; my house is in Kaduna and I drive frequently between Kaduna and Abuja. Months back, it was difficult for you to ply that road; it is either you are on a train, which is very challenging, as you know, going by some of the things that have happened, but now you can leave Abuja and go to Kaduna by 9 pm, and you can guarantee that you would get there.

“The Governor of Borno State has acknowledged that the insecurity that is there in terms of Boko Haram and banditry, among others, has been almost pushed to the back. We are not saying that insecurity has completely disappeared, but it has improved significantly in these 10 months.

“All the kidnappers that were around Abuja, making Abuja a little bit difficult, are either not with us anymore or are with the security agencies. So, these challenges will continue to be there, but the most important thing is that the government is being proactive and taking the right steps towards ensuring that all these challenges go away.”

Idris further disclosed that the petroleum sector should expect a major policy shift that would enhance the operations of the sector, adding that almost all the demands of the Nigeria Labour Congress had also been met.

“I want to tell you that very soon, you will hear a major policy shift within the petroleum industry that will enhance operations and increase investments in that sector.

“Also, the Nigerian Labour Congress has complained about the hardship in the land, which may be true, but we are happy that 24 hours after now, they also found it necessary to take action. Most of the 15-point demands that labour made in October of last year have been met; those still pending cannot easily be met. For example, in that agreement, there was the issue of the CNG buses that the government has committed over N100bn to.

“Of course, we know we cannot just buy CNG buses, processes are in place. The President said there would be a wage award of N25,000, and at the same time, labour complained, and the government said we should listen to them. He brought them in, and they had a thorough conversation. They agreed they needed nothing less than N35,000, which the president approved after doing the numbers.

“Two days ago, there was also a resumption of the suspended N25,000 monthly payment for three months that the government approved for 15 million households in this country.”

Discussing the ministerial panel established by the President, the minister mentioned that the panel had completed its work.

The information minister implored the media ‘to please report us well.’

“This is our country; we do not have any other country. If we run down businesses, and there is no other place for all of us to go to,” he added.

[Punch]

JUST 25. I mean Aaron Bushnell, a soldier of humanity. Inside his United States Air Force uniform, he wore the conscience of sacrifice for a people he may never have met. He was trained by the most powerful military in the world to obey the last order. But he was not going to obey the order of the US Commander-in-Chief, President Joe Biden, an elderly grandfather making excuses for the continuous massacre of Palestinian babies and children, even in hospitals where they seek medical care. As a principled soldier, the last order Bushnell was willing to obey, was that of his conscience.

He was not going to sit by, watching genocide visited on a people, not by aliens, but by their neighbours whose past knew genocide. He was not going to be part of an establishment which at every turn and corner, blocked the urgent ceasefire, necessary to save tens of thousands of lives. As a soldier, he knew that unless decisive steps are taken, these figures would easily climb to hundreds of thousands sent to avoidable early graves.

What greater love can a human have than to sacrifice his life for others? On Sunday, February 25, 2024, at approximately 12:58pm local time, the Development Operations engineer of the United States Air Force, donned the uniform of his service and walked smartly to the Israeli Embassy. As he did so, he said: “…Aaron Bushnell, I am an active duty member of the United States Air Force. And I will no longer be complicit in genocide. I am about to engage in an extreme act of protest but compared to what people have been experiencing in Palestine, in the hands of their colonisers, is not extreme at all. This is what our ruling class has decided will be normal.”

When he got to the embassy gates, he doused himself in inflammable liquid and set himself ablaze, shouting continuously: “Free Palestine! Free Palestine!! Free Palestine!!!”

As a first responder security man tried to put off the flames, rather than help, an obvious secret service agent, merely trained his gun at the burning Bushnell. This prompted the former to shout: “I don’t need guns, I need fire extinguisher!” In this brief moment, we see two species of human beings: a conscientious one, intent on saving life, and a conscienceless secret service agent ready to shoot a dying man engulfed in flames.

The flames that extinguished the life of young Bushnell were in the United States, but they were seen all over the world. They were flames of love for humanity. It was a symbolic act, but worth far more than the combined rhetoric of those sitting in the White House, Downing Street, Elysee Palace, Bellevue Palace or the comfortable chambers of the United Nations.

I will not put it past people who have lost their humanity, to claim that Bushnell was a psychiatric case. Such persons cannot understand how a person could sacrifice his life this way. Their Biblical progenitors would have blamed Jesus Christ for needlessly losing his life for the helpless and defenceless, and standing up against the Israeli establishment.

This explains why US Secret Service Spokesperson, Joe Routh, told the press that the security services responded to what appeared as “an individual that was experiencing a possible medical/mental health emergency”. But it was not Bushnell that was in a mental health emergency, it is the millions of human beings that stand by watching genocide perpetrated before their very eyes.

I had thought that after colonial Germany from 1904 to 1907 wiped out half of the Namibian people; the Turks between 1915 and 1923 exterminated 1.5 Armenians; Hitlerite Germany, exterminated six million Jews; Belgium under Leopold II massacred 15 million Congolese; and the 1994 Rwandan genocide, humanity would never again allow genocide. But with one going on today in the Palestine, I am convinced that a large section of humankind has lost its soul.

Amongst those who remain human, is Netherlands Deputy Ambassador, Angelique Eijpe. She, after 21 years in service, including in Gaza, resigned in protest against the Dutch government’s support for the genocide in the Palestine. She tried to dialogue with government officials under Prime Minister Mark Rutte, but failed. She participated in weekly sit-ins by civil servants of the Foreign Affairs Ministry, expressing dissent against the government’s policies in the Palestine. But little or nothing was achieved. So, Eijpe decided to resign.

She said of her resignation letter: “I wrote about the moral standing we have lost in the Netherlands. For example, the government has refused to define what’s going on as war crimes or potential war crimes. We have abstained twice in the UN General Assembly where it comes to voting for a cease-fire. We are here in The Hague, the capital of peace and justice, and our credibility has really suffered an extreme blow. Some civil servants in the US and Europe are taking a stand against their governments’ support for Israel’s war in Gaza. Several have resigned because they no longer feel able to implement government policies they disagree with.”

One of the most courageous steps taken by a country to stop this genocide was that by South Africa under President Cyril Ramaphosa. Where the Apartheid Zionists in Israel were being protected by the US and some European countries, South Africa dragged a yelling Israel to the International Court of Justice. The international court in January 2024 gave an interim ruling ordering Israel to stop its acts of genocide, including the wilful destruction of hospitals and homes, and allow humanitarian assistance to be provided the civil populace. But like an international outlaw protected by a powerful mafia, Israel has continued to ignore the ruling and common sense.

Bushnnel’s sacrifice reminds me of that by John Brown who on Sunday October 16, 1859, decided to strike a blow for enslaved Black peoples who were regarded as no higher than mules. Brown lost his two sons in that battle while he himself was captured.

The seriously injured Brown was brought to court in a stretcher and sentenced within one week. But he scored a moral victory over the lynch mob that tried him and the establishment that put them in place. On being sentenced to death, he told the court: “I see a book kissed here which is the Bible, and which teaches me all things; that I would have men do unto me, so must I do unto them. I endeavoured to act up to that instruction. I fought for the poor; and I say I was right.” History proved the saintly John Brown right. That same history, will prove Aaron Bushnnel right. 

May his soul rest in power.

Nigerian gospel singer, Moses Bliss and Marie Wiseborn, his wife, have held their traditional wedding in Ghana.

During the wedding, the couple demonstrated their diverse ethnic origins by wearing Ghanaian and Nigerian costumes.

In one of the clips. Marie Wiseborn’s family gifted the couple with a plaque in appreciation of the singer.

Some of the celebs who attended the ceremony included actress Juliet Ibrahim, content creator Enioluwa Adeoluwa, OAP Layole Oyatogun, and comedians Real Warri Pikin and Josh2Funny.

Moses Bliss and Marie also wowed the guests with coordinated dancing moves.

Gospel singer, Moses Bliss shares how he met his fiancée, Marie

After announcing his engagement in January, Moses Bliss shared how he met his fiancee, Marie.

The singer who announced his engagement on Friday said he met Marie on Instagram.

He said he was tagged in a video of her dancing to his popular song, ‘Miracle no Dey tire Jesus.

He added that they became friends and that the union was orchestrated by God.