“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor, it must be demanded by the oppressed” (Martin Luther King, Jnr). Justice Walter Onnoghen who was unfairly disgraced out of office presumably as a crook by former dictator President, General Muhammadu Buhari, has just demonstrated this apophthegum through three appeals, namely CA/A/375/2019; CA/A/37/SC/2019 and CA/373C/2019. He valiantly fought for his freedom through these three appeals against his April 18, 2019 outrageous conviction which was schemed by Buhari and his kitchen cabinet to humiliate Onnoghen out of the Bench so as to make CJN, his preferred candidate (Justice Tanko Mohammed), CJN (rtd.) on the eve of the 2019 presidential election. Buhari knew he had performed dismally and would be rejected at the polls by angry and hungry Nigerians. So he went Judge-shopping. The rest as they say is history.  The legal saga of Justice Walter Onnoghen is not just the story of one man’s acquittal, but a larger commentary on the poor state of Nigeria’s judiciary and the ever-present tensions between political power wielders and judicial independence. It is a story fit for a Grammy Award movie. His acquittal on 4th November, 2024, by the Court of Appeal in Abuja, marked a significant chapter in Nigeria’s legal history, casting a powerful shadow of doubt and curious spotlight on the principles of separation of power, due process, the sanctity of judicial independence and the perils inherent in political intervention. The appeal that restored Justice Onnoghen’s hard-earned reputation and returned his assets to him is also a profound testament to the importance of procedural integrity and jurisdictional boundaries in any democratic society.

I had the opportunity in the nineties to appear before the brilliant Judex while he was a High Court Judge of the Cross River State Judiciary, Calabar. I know he was a man of integrity and character. During the infamous Onnoghen’s trial by ordeal, I made many interventions. In one, I said:

“A strong judiciary is one of the irreducible fundamental platforms for any meaningful constitutional democracy. If you terrorise, intimidate, harass and humiliate the judiciary, using strong hand and brute force, it is a stage set for bidding democracy farewell”- Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailytrust.com/ozekhome-charges-judiciary-to-shut-down-courts-over-onnoghen/). (13th January, 2019).

In a world where the judiciary stands as the final arbiter of justice, Justice Onnoghen’s story is one of a victim who faced unprecedented tribulations, endured a long    agonising path to redemption. He ultimately emerged victorious. The appeal process that culminated in his acquittal is a reminder that justice may sometimes be delayed, but it can never be forever denied.

HOW THE APPEAL COURT ACQUITED ONNOGHEN

The verdict by the Court of Appeal represented a turning point in a legal drama that had captivated Nigerians and raised profound questions about the nature and quality of justice in the country. On the 4th of November, 2024, a three-member panel led by Justice Abba Mohammed ruled in favour of the ex-CJN, Walter Onnoghen, acquitting him of the charges initially levied in 2019 by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) in 2019. This decision not only vacated the earlier conviction but also ordered the unfreezing of all his bank accounts, thus restoring his financial freedom that had been denied him since the controversial trial began.

I have been overwhelmingly vindicated in all my angst and ventilations against the victimhood suffered by Onnoghen. Hear me:  

“The CJN can be removed from office either if he has been convicted or if under section 291 of the constitution, the Senate affirms a request by the President to remove him by two-third majority vote” - Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.pulse.ng/news/politics/mike-ozekhome-reacts-to-allegations-against-cjn-onnoghen/zdx9del). (12th January, 2019).

The acquittal judgement was predicated on a legal principle central to the Nigerian jurisprudence which articulates around jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal asserted that the CCT had no authority in the first instance to try and convict Justice Onnoghen having not passed through the National Judicial Council (NJC). This oversight, the appellate court argued, rendered the entire proceedings null and void. This requirement had been emphasized in Nigerian case law with decisions such as FRN v. NGANJIWA (2022) LPELR-58066(SC) and OPENE v. NJC & ORS (2011) LPELR-4795(CA), which clearly emphasise that judicial officers must first be vetted by the NJC before facing any criminal trial by a tribunal or court. This process is designed to protect the judiciary and its judexes from strong-hand politicians and political interference, thus ensuring that judges are treated with the respect, dignity and due process that their offices richly     deserve. I had angrily queried:

“...Our system of justice being Anglo-Saxon based, which is accusatorial, meaning that the innocence of a person is presumed. It is different from the criminal justice system of the French model which is inquisitorial, wherein the guilt of an accused person is presumed. This doctrine has been encapsulated in section 36 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, that the person’s innocence is presumed until he has been proven guilty. Assuming for example that Senator Bukola Saraki had been forced to resign his office when charges were brought against him before the same Code of Conduct Tribunal almost three years ago, what would have happened and what would have been his fate when the Supreme Court eventually discharged and acquitted him of the charge, following judgements and earlier order of the Court of Appeal and the Code of Conduct Tribunal itself? If you ask me, I sense serious political undertones oozing from this so-called imminent arraignment of the noble CJN. Question, when did they discover the alleged offence for which they now want to charge him on Monday? Was it just yesterday, was it last week, two weeks or six months ago? The CJN has been in office now for well over one year, how come that this misconduct or whatever offence that he is being alleged, was not seen up to now? How come, that it is just less than 40 days to the 2019 Presidential election, when the CJN is going to play the major role in constituting the Presidential election petition tribunal, that he is being moved against? Who is afraid of the Judiciary?  Who is afraid of Justice Onnoghen and his impartiality and straightforwardness?  How come we are reducing governance in Nigeria to one of impunity, one of despotism and one of absolutism. Don’t this people know that the world is laughing at us? Did we not see how Dino Melaye was yanked out from police hospital and taken to DSS quarters when he had no business or case with the DSS and DSS had no case against him. Did they not see Dino Melaye, a serving Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, sleeping in the open yesterday? Do they go on social media and do they watch international televisions? Do they know how the whole world is deriding us in this country? That governance has been reduced to mere witch-hunt, very opaque, very unaccountable, very un-transparent and very very fascist! Can’t they see that?”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.pulse.ng/news/politics/mike-ozekhome-reacts-to-allegations-against-cjn-onnoghen/zdx9del). (12th January, 2019).

My intervention as far back as 2019 served as a reality-check, pointing out that removing a Chief Justice can never be a whimsical decision; it is bound by the checks and balances that keep our justice system watered. My then reference to "impunity, despotism, and absolutism" hit like a huge hammer, evoking the imagery of a judiciary under siege of political transaintionists. By drawing parallels with then Senators Saraki and Dino Melaye’s own public tribulations, I attempted to paint a vivid picture of a prostrate justice system afflicted by power jackbootism. 

Justice Onnoghen’s acquittal is a clear victory for judicial integrity, independence and an affirmation that the judiciary cannot be used as a pawn on political chessboards. The ruling also reinforces the fact that procedural lapses, especially in matters bordering on citizens right and high-ranking judicial officers, are unacceptable and grossly violate the principle of fair trial. As the Bible counsels in Proverbs 31:9, “Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.” This verse captures the essence of due process, emphasizing that justice must be dispensed with fairness and respect for established procedures. I did not mince words then in condemning the executive lawlessness unleashed on Onnoghen:

"It must be pointed out that this latest step by the CCT... appears to be teleguided by the dictatorial Executive, especially the presidency" - Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailypost.ng/2019/02/13/ozekhome-gives-nine-reasons-cct-arrest-order-onnoghen-cannot-stand/). (14th February, 2019).

The ugly circumstances surrounding Justice Onnoghen’s initial trial and conviction by the CCT underscore the potential dangers when procedural norms are bypassed. My passionate critique of the dastardly role played by the Buhari-led administration from 2015 to 2023 as regards Onnoghen’s trial by ordeal revealed the high stakes which were at play. By overstepping the NJC, I had warned then that unchecked executive power could encroach upon the independence of the judiciary which will ultimately undermine the very foundation of democracy.

THE PRECEDENT OF JURISDICTION AND JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Justice Walter Onnoghen’s acquittal by the Court of Appeal is not just a victory for one individual, but a landmark affirmation of a fundamental principle of law, that jurisdiction is the bedrock of any valid legal proceeding. Without proper jurisdiction, any judgement rendered is, as many legal scholars have agreed on, will merely be an exercise in futility. This principle is enshrined in our legal jurisprudence to protect the sanctity of judicial offices and prevent arbitrary persecution. The Court of Appeal’s decision to vacate Justice Walter Onnoghen’s conviction reaffirmed this core legal tenet, sending a clear message that the judiciary is not a toothless bulldog and tool to be wielded by the executive or any other arm of government.

“Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” – Martin Luther King Jr. The Nigerian legal framework, supported by landmark cases such as FRN v. NGANJIWA (Supra) and OPENE v. NJC & ORS (Supra), outlines that the NJC must first investigate and make recommendations regarding any allegations against judicial officers before any trial can commence at the CCT. This process serves as a bulwark against arbitrary trials, ensuring that judges are not subjected to undue pressure or political intimidation. I had also then warned about the dangers posed whenever these procedural safeguards are disregarded: “The CCT was unrelenting: it discarded its earlier precedents; ignored court rulings barring it from trying Onnoghen. It was the case of the falcon not hearing the falconer”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.thecable.ng/ozekhome-onnoghen-resigned-because-the-cabal-had-sealed-his-fate/). (6th April, 2019).

Thus, five years ago (2019), I was nothing short of prophetic. I had foreseen the critical blunders and overreaches that would compromise the integrity of the judiciary in the Onnoghen saga. My warnings were very clear then about the dangerous precedent that was being set in bypassing due process and using the judiciary as a tool for political manoeuvring. As events have now unfolded, my observations then have proven me to be a visionary critic who critiques (not criticises) a justice system that was then on the brink. I had cautioned against the erosion of judicial independence in the face of executive influence. I had given nine reasons why the CCT’s arrest order on and trial of Justice Onnoghen could not stand. See: 

(https://dailypost.ng/2019/02/13/ozekhome-gives-nine-reasons-cct-arrest-order-onnoghen-cannot-stand/).

My list was not just a check-list of procedural irregularities; it was also an indictment of a system seemingly hijacked by political buccaneers. Each point landed like a blow, revealing layers of oversight that were by-passed; up to the requirement for humane treatment under the ACJA that was ignored. I meticulously built my case, demonstrating that Onnoghen’s trials were not just about one man, but about the sanctity of the judicial process itself. It was persecution, not prosecution.

My vivid metaphor of the then CJN being “mob-lynched,” painted a grotesque picture of a judiciary cornered by hidoues forces intent on humiliation rather than achieving justice. 

Justice Onnoghen’s acquittal by the Court of Appeal thus serves as a reaffirmation of judicial independence, reminding all branches of government that the rule of law cannot be compromised for political expediency. As the Bible says in Psalm 82:3, “Defend the weak and the fatherless; uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.” These words resonate deeply in the context of Onnoghen’s trial, encapsulating the judiciary’s duty to protect the innocent from unwarranted persecution and uphold the principles of justice.

POLITICAL UNDERTONES AND THE QUEST FOR JUDICIAL AUTONOMY

Justice Walter Onnoghen’s journey from indictment to acquittal reflects a deeper narrative about the political undertones that permeated his trial. His suspension by then President Muhammadu Buhari which took place only weeks before the 2019 presidential election, had raised significant concerns about the timing and motivations behind the charges. Many saw it as an attempt to influence the judiciary ahead of a critical election, a sentiment I shared and eloquently captured in "Onnoghen... knew that his fate had been pre-determined by the cabal, signed, sealed and delivered"- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://www.thecable.ng/ozekhome-onnoghen-resigned-because-the-cabal-had-sealed-his-fate/). (6th April, 2019)

The timing of the charges, as well as the swiftness with which Onnoghen was brought to trial, laid validation to public perception that Justice Onnoghen was merely targeted for his position and influence within the judiciary. Like I put it then, “Many facts bear this simple deduction out. The petitioner, an NGO, actually committed the Freudian slip by anchoring its petition on ‘bearing in mind the imminence of the 2019 general elections’" - Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailytrust.com/ozekhome-charges-judiciary-to-shut-down-courts-over-onnoghen/). (13th January, 2019).

The Bible, in Proverbs 21:15, declares, “When justice is done, it brings joy to the righteous but terror to evildoers.” The acquittal of Justice Onnoghen, in this light, is therefore not just a personal victory but a broader triumph for all who value justice and integrity. 

Like I noted then, “Justice Onnoghen’s removal was also an attempt by the executive arm of government to have a firm control of the nation’s judiciary”- Prof. Mike Ozekhome, SAN (https://dailypost.ng/2019/02/13/ozekhome-gives-nine-reasons-cct-arrest-order-onnoghen-cannot-stand/). (13th February, 2019).

CONCLUSION

Ultimately, Justice Walter Onnoghen’s acquittal is a landmark victory for judicial independence and a testament to the enduring principles of justice and due process. His journey from indictment to acquittal serves as a potent reminder that the rule of law must remain inviolable, even in the face of political pressures. 

Onnoghen’s case will remain a watershed moment in Nigeria’s legal history, a vivid reminder that the judiciary’s role is to safeguard the rule of law, protect citizens’ rights and ensure that democracy even when faced with formidable forces of political influence, triumphs. It should be able to skillfully navigate through the ever present interplay of centripetal and centrifugal forces.

As Nigeria continues to evolve as a work-in-progress, Justice Onnoghen’s exoneration stands as a powerful reminder to us all that, in the words of Proverbs 21:3, “To do what is right and just is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.” Congratulations, Milord. Enjoy your hard won-back integrity, honour and dignity.

It is amazing how time flies as Governor Godwin Nosakhare Obaseki of the People’s Democratic Party, PDP relinguishes power to his successor, Senator Monday Okpegholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) on Tuesday, November 12, 2024.

This day is both bitter and sweet to both Obaseki and Okpegholo, akin to the transfer of power from incumbent President Joe Biden to President-Elect Donald Trump in the United States of America, USA, despite the bitter political fight that both waged against each other for their respective political parties to control the heart and soul of Americans. The good news about the U.S. transition, scheduled for January 20, 2025, is that it promises to be peaceful, as indicated by Biden’s extention of invitation to the White House to President-Elect Trump, the 45th president returning as the 47th to the White House.

In contrast, although in comparable circumstances, since the incumbent governor’s candidate also lost in the race, the path to political leadership transition in Edo State has been fraught with personality clashes between outgoing Governor Obaseki and Governor-Elect Okpegholo. In fact, the tension is very high to the extent that there is a likelihood that Governor Obaseki may not be present to officially hand over the baton, as his team alleges that he hasn’t received an invitation, while Okpegholo’s representatives claim that Obaseki has already vacated the government house ahead of inauguration day. This disagreement has affected the traditional handover ceremony, resulting in a less than ideal image for Nigerian democracy, which, after 25 years of continuous practice, should have moved beyond these early-stage challenges such threat of impeachment at the drop of a hat and handing over to puppets than can be played.

Unequivocably, one of the key issues facing Nigeria’s democratic process is the tendency of governors to choose successors who will cover up their tracks or be easily controlled. This week’s column is dedicated to examining the practice of godfatherism, especially the type where a godfather seeks to “serve” a third term indirectly by making a puppet of their successor.

The irony of the succession crisis in Edo State—centered on former Edo Governor and current Senator Adams Oshiomhole and his successor, the outgoing Governor Obaseki—is evident in a photograph of both of them sharing corn on the streets of Benin City. This image friends today enemies today common amongst political allies highlights the failure that often results from choosing a surrogate as a successor instead of allowing the electorate to exercise their civic rights to elect their governor freely. It is remarkable that , generally outside of the South-West, the bond between godfather and godson tends to break shortly after formation. The exception in the south-west is likely owed to the fact that their traditional rulers and elders who are highly respected in yoruba land, often mediate in conflicts between governors and their sucessors/surrogates, before the relationship degerates irreverseably.

The candid photo, which inspired part of this article’s title—“Eat Corn Today, Corn-flict Tomorrow”—was taken eight years ago when Oshiomhole, then incumbent governor, was campaigning with Obaseki as his chosen successor.

While an anonymous person had aptly tagged the scenario: “Be careful who you walk with: Eat corn today, corn-flict tomorrow,” I couldn’t resist adopting it as part of the title of this piece which is rather too long , but it is for the purpose of giving full context.

There is no doubt that the photo and caption will go down as one of the most creative and fitting representations of Edo State politics after the contentious September 21 gubernatorial elections. It also reflects the tendency of governors to impose surrogates , only to be dissappointed and clash with them after handing over power to their anointed candidates, who they were expecting will be puppets. From accrinonous outcomes of those who enter such unholy alliances, the need for our governors to seek more efficacius alternatives can not be overemphasized.

As we now know, the highly contested Edo State gubernatorial race resulted in APC candidate, Senator Monday Okpegholo, emerging as the winner and this outcome has left the outgoing Governor Obaseki and his chosen successor, Mr. Asue Ighodalo, dismayed.

The third candidate in the race, Mr. Olumide Akpata of the Labour Party (LP), lacked a powerful godfather, particularly as Mr. Peter Obi, the party leader who once had a cult-like following, has been somewhat “demystified.” This unravelling of Obi’s influence has been painful and somewhat humiliating, as some of the harshest criticism against him have come from his own constituency, which expects him to be more isolationist—a persistent challenge for any Igbo presidential candidate in Nigeria. Justifiably,Mr. Obi has intentionally tried to distance himself from this perception, yet some critics interpret gestures like his congratulatory message to former Head of State Gen. Yakubu Gowon on his 90th birthday as pandering. It is a tag that the LP presidential candidate in 2023 has vehemently rejected.

Returning to Edo State, godfatherism remains a defining feature of its politics. Since the return of multi party democracy in 1999, except for Governor Lucky Igbinedion, who served from 1999 to 2007 without a godfather, most other governors have had influential patrons. Igbinedion’s successor, Professor Osariemen Osunbor, was backed by the late Chief Tony Anenih, famously nicknamed “Mr. Fix It.”

Oshiomhole contested against Osunbor, challenging the election results and eventually winning in court. This victory elevated Oshiomhole as a “giant killer” in Edo politics, as he had triumphed over the highly respected and accomplished political leader, chief Anenih, the celebrated godfather. Oshiomhole even boasted that he had retired Anenih as a political force.

Ironically, the same Oshiomhole, who disrupted Anenih’s reign as the preeminent godfather in Edo State, later became a godfather himself, helping Obaseki secure the governorship eight years ago. It was during Oshiomhole’s 2016 campaign to promote Obaseki that the well-known photo of the two of them eating corn on the streets of Edo State was taken. This image was used as a photo opportunity to convey camaraderie and continuity in governance, portraying the godfather and godson as grassroots-oriented leaders.

It is unsurprising that the photo opportunity, meant to display Oshiomhole and his anointed successor, Obaseki, as populist and grassroots-friendly politicians, worked like magic, helping Obaseki easily secure the mandate of the people for his first term.

Ironically, this photo has now come back to haunt them, serving as an instructive and cautionary tale to politicians who aspire to governorship positions and to those preparing to leave office that they should becarefull of entering master-servant relationships.
There are allegations that Oshiomhole is poised to become a “third-term” governor by exerting influence over Governor-Elect Okpegholo, as he is perceived as the force behind Okpegholo’s success. But it is claimed that he has forcefully pushed back against.

In any case such is the game of politics everywhere in the world, where politicians often fallout due to a misalignment of interests between former allies who suddenly become foes. As such , the unfolding scenario in Edo State validates the popular aphorism: there are no permanent friends or permanent enemies in politics, only permanent interests.

Nevertheless, it would be a rare feat for Oshiomhole to assume the role of godfather a second time, having played that role during Obaseki’s first term in his two terms tenure and now potentially for Okpegholo, who assumes office today, November 12, 2024.

As experience has shown from events in Rivers State—between Governors Rotimi Amaechi and Nyesom Wike during Wike’s first term (2015-2019), and currently between Wike and Fubara (2023 to date)—the godfather/godson bond between Oshiomhole and Okpegholo may be short-lived. The romance seldom last beyond the first term.
This is especially likely if Oshiomhole decides to maintain a strong grip on Edo State’s affairs, much like Wike’s influence over Fubara in Rivers State and the consequential schism, which has wrought severe socioeconomic consequences on the state, leaving the citizens as victims. One can only hope that the people of Edo State will not experience a similar political fallout, if Oshiomhole and Okpegholo fail to read the ‘tea leaves’ and ‘thread the kneedle better to avoid the current unsavory experiences that have manifested especially in Kano and Rivers states.

As readers may be aware a major political power struggle threatens to stall Rivers state’s progress. This became apparent when “jungle don mature” (meaning “the jungle has matured”) became the rallying cry of Governor Fubara, signaling his break from his godfather, Wike, who is now the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). Since then all hell has literally been let loose in Rivers state with allocations from federation account being ordered withheld by court based on legal infractions as determined by the ruling of the judge.

Assuming that INEC’s decision to declare Okpegholo the winner of the gubernatorial contest, currently being challenged in court, is upheld against the plan of Governor Obaseki and the PDP candidate Asue Ighodalo, (Obaseki’s preferred successor) who have insisted that Okpegholo’s victory is pyrrhic and must be overturned by the courts.

Perhaps due to the negative associations of godfatherism, Oshiomhole has denied any intention of becoming a godfather, a concept he previously denounced when he ran for governor of Edo State in 2007/2008. At that time, Oshiomhole faced significant opposition from figures like Anenih, an influential political leader, who supported Professor Osunbor as the next governor of Edo State.

Just as Governor Osunbor served as a surrogate of Anenih in 2007-2008, Senator Monday Okpegholo, the new governor of Edo State, can likewise be seen as a surrogate of Oshiomhole. This is evident in both words and actions, as the former labor leader and ex-governor frequently appeared on multiple media platforms—including television, radio, print, and social media—to campaign on behalf of Okpegholo, much as he did for Obaseki eight years ago.

One can only hope that Oshiomhole and Okpegholo will resist the temptation to enter a godfather/godson relationship, which has proven to be ineffective in the long run as both always fallout with dire consequences for the states that they govern with Rivers and Kano states as typical examples.

In reality, what is often derogatorily referred to as godfatherism in politics is actually a form of succession planning, which is critical for leadership continuity. In the private sector, a business leader’s foresight in grooming a successor is typically seen as a commendable virtue.

However, many Nigerians believe that the criteria for selecting successors in public governance are not always altruistic; rather, they are often driven by the personal agendas of politicians rather than patriotic goals or the greater good. Consequently, this practice has acquired a negative reputation. So,basically Nigerians have become wary of governors imposing their loyalists as successors, rather than basing their choices on objective principles. As a result, politicians who promote surrogates to succeed them are frequently labeled godfathers.

The strained relationships between former governors and the successors they handpick have become legendary in Nigeria. Although it’s common for godfathers and godsons to turn against each other after a period of initial cooperation, it is curious that the tendency to impose chosen successors has become even more entrenched in Nigerian politics, suggesting that few lessons have been learned by the new governors from the former ones.

This trend dates back to conflicts such as the one in Abia State, where current Senator Orji Uzor Kalu handpicked Theodore Orji another current senator as his successor as governor of Abia stater in 2007, later leading to friction when the godson turned against his godfather. Similarly, in Anambra State, the relationship between Mr. Peter Obi and his chosen successor, Willie Obiano, soured due to undue interference and antagonism between godson and godfather. Generally, such situations can be seen as a form of retribution against the questionable practice of installing successors to maintain influence or enjoy a third term by proxy rather than choosing a successor based on merit and ability to deliver superior performance.

A comparable godfather/godson conflict played out in Kano State, where Dr. Musa Kwankwaso, as governor, chose his former Chief of Staff, Prof. Umar Ganduje, as his successor. Not long after, both men found themselves in a prolonged struggle for power, with one outcome being the destabilization of the revered Kano emirate. For the first time in the history of this ancient emirate, there are two emirs, each having been deposed and reinstated, reflecting the political power struggles between former governors and their chosen successors.

In 2007, a similar scenario unfolded when then-President Olusegun Obasanjo, in the aftermath of a bitter political fallout with Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who intended to succeed him, did everything possible to prevent Abubakar’s ambition from materializing. Instead, Obasanjo supported former Katsina Governor Umaru Yar’Adua of blessed memory and who is the younger brother of Obasanjo’s political ally, the late Shehu Musa Yar’Adua, to become president.

Tragically, due to severe health issues, President Yar’Adua passed away in 2010, barely two years into his first term, leaving the country in a precarious situation, as this was the first time a sitting president had died under democratic rule. The military dictator, General Sanni Abacha had died while serving as a military head of state.
The National Assembly ultimately resolved the constitutional crisis created by that unprecedented situation by invoking the “Doctrine of Necessity,” allowing for a smooth transition of power.

Remarkably, before Yar’Adua’s passing, he was not following OBJ’s agenda. In fact, he had overturned the sale of NNPC refineries to private sector investors, including Dangote, and even reversed the privatization of the electricity sector—policies that the current administration under President Bola Tinubu appears to be reviving, as seen in recent fuel and gas policies shifting control of energy security to the private sector.
What the examples above underscore is that there is no evidence that engineering surrogates as successors as has long term benefits as such perfidous acts always backfire.

As I wish Senator Monday Okpegholo, who assumes office as governor of Edo State today, a successful tenure, I would also like to offer him counsel as a good friend of many years. He should be guided by the experiences of his predecessors in the godfather/godson dynamic that has shaped Edo State over the past few decades. This counsel is to help him draw lessons from history and establish guardrails against any such damaging relationships.

To my senior friend, the distinguished Senator Oshiomhole, I believe he understands the futility of playing the godfather role, having fought against it nearly two decades ago. God has blessed him with enough achievements in labor movement where he was at the helms of affairs as well as in politics as a governor and also empowered him to serve as a distinguished senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,so he should not descend from swimming in an ocean to playing in a puddle. He has demonstrated that he possesses sufficient political influence to impact who becomes governor of Edo State relying on the power of incumbency and also when he is not governor. So, the political prowess, once ascribed only to President Bola Tinubu as the former governor of Lagos State who still influenced the the choice who becomes governor of the state continuosly even after a couple of decades since he exited office, should be put to positive use. I trust that he will not follow the example of the politicians, who, after serving as governor still attempt to control governance in their home state, thereby causing instability and reflecting poorly on both democracy and politicians.
As for Obaseki and Ighodalo, who have been left holding the wrong end of the stick in the battle for the control of Dennis Osadebey house, Edo state seat of power, as a democracy advocate l urge them to continue to pursue justice in court to test the law and make democracy sturdier as it develops taproots in Nigeria.
That is one way that we can hand our children “a banner without stain” as captured in a stanza of our national anthem.

Magnus Onyibe is an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, an alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government. He sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.

To continue this conversation and more, please visit www.magnum.ng.

Last week, Dr Ifeanyi Okowa, the former governor of Delta State was arrested by EFCC over an alleged N1.3tn fraud. If you asked me, I will say this, once again, is another evidence of war of attrition by Nigerian state against Niger Delta whose leadership has come under intense scrutiny since the birth of the 4th republic. EFCC’s periodic attempt at dragging leaders of the region to court over corruption charges, when we, the assumed victims, never asked outsiders for help, is seen as an attempt to cause disaffection between the people and their leaders.

A people, as it is often said deserve the leadership they get. I am sure the leaders of the Niger Delta who are about the most educated, most sophisticated, professionally accomplished, leaders in the banking, entrepreneurship and the media where they maintain a complete monopoly cannot be said not to know what is best for their impoverished people. In any case, the poor but proud people of the Niger Delta whose leaders often say “Warri no dey carry last’ have not sought for help.

The problem with our successive leaders who are ill-trained in the art of governance since the collapse of the first republic has been their failure to appreciate the fact that as a multi-cultural society with groups at different level of cultural development, no one group can impose its own value system on the other. It was for this reason, Sir Ahmadu Belo in the run-up to independence warned Zik that rather than forget our differences for the sake of independence, they, the founding fathers  must first try to understand them.

Awolowo unfortunately learnt this lesson too late.

He had gone to the Middle Belt and north-eastern regions of Nigeria to preach egalitarianism and free education. Ahmadu Bello at their last meeting held in the house of a common friend in Ikorodu insisted those Awo wanted to liberate were his great grandfather’s slaves. And this became very clear after Tarka’s death when successive leadership of the Middle Belt chose to align with northern conservative parties from NPN to PDP rather than Awo’s progressive UPN.

And as if to prove Ahmadu Bello right, the Middle Belt that had always provided soldiers of fortune for the northern jihadists, had Yakubu Gowon, Theophilus Danjuma and other Middle Belt officers. leading  the war which at the beginning was essentially between the north and the east until it became ‘war to keep Nigeria one”’ when the attack on the West and Midwest by the secessionist convinced the two regions that sitting on the fence would only turn their regions to theatre of war.

It is the same story with the Ibibio, Efiks and the minorities in the East whose battle Awo carried on his head to the London Constitutional Conference. The people of the area after independence probably realized their best safeguard against their more aggressive Igbo neighbours was an alignment with the north and that has been the trend till today.

Nearer home, except for the Benins that are culturally related to the Yoruba, the Urhobos, Ijaws and the Isokos have since independence aligned with the northern conservatives. In fact Pa Edwin Clark while trying to play politics of identity not too long ago, was reminded by a prominent northern leader that, he, Clark must remember he was always at the head of Ijaw group seeking coalition with the north.

What history has taught us therefore is that no individual or groups can impose their values on others who are not ready for change. Change can only be effected from inside when the people are ready for it. This universal truth is no less true of the people of Niger Delta, a microcosm of Nigeria. And this explains why EFCC’s periodic indictment of Niger Delta leaders for corruption has led to no uprising or even condemnation of their leaders.

Instead, the people remain unequivocal on their demand for a revenue sharing formula, based on derivation as was the case in the first republic and in the worst scenario, a sharing formula that provides succour for farmers, fishermen and youths who no more have access to land, rivers and employment opportunities.

In any case, corruption, for the people of Niger Delta according to President Jonathan is not a big deal. “What many Nigerians refer to as corruption is actually stealing.  Stealing is not the same thing as corruption”. And even if you ignore Jonathan’s Freudian, slip, the impoverished people of Niger Delta have demonstrated to our anti-corruption crusaders from Obasanjo to Buhari who like the proverbial undertakers cry louder than the bereaved, that the more the billions of their monies converted to personal use, the more the honours such vilified leaders get.

Let us start with Alfred Diette-Spiff. He was at 25, the first governor of Rivers under the administration of Gowon. Following Murtala Mohammed’s coup against Gowon, the governor was missing for three days. When he was eventually located, it was on the high seas where he was cruising with his friends in his private ship. Although he was demoted by Murtala Mohammed regime and a number of houses seized from him in Port Harcourt, Alfred Papapreye Diette-Spiff has gone on to become the Amayanabo (king) Twon Brass and remains one of the most powerful voices from Balyelsa.

The case of Chief Diepreye Alameyeseigha, Governor- General of the Ijaws and the brain behind rampaging Niger Delta militants in the Creeks was more intriguing. In fact, he was being groomed by his people as Obasanjo’s potential successor. But that was before his successful contest for the PDP presidential primaries after which Obasanjo declared him morally bankrupt to aspire to lead Nigeria. He was chased from Germany to France and to Britain from where he escaped to Nigeria dressed like a woman.

Following mobilization of Britain, USA, South Africa, Bahamas and Seychelles and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes and the World Bank under the stolen Assets Recovery by President Obasanjo, we were told of his accumulated properties , bank accounts, investments in cash of up to 10 million pounds in five banks in the UK, Cyprus, Denmark and the US;  his four London properties acquired for a total of four million pounds; a Cape town Harbour penthouse acquired for one million pounds, houses in the US and  about one million pounds stored in one of his London properties.

Living a lavish ostentatious life style at the expense the people, as it turned out, only endeared the Ijaw governor general to his impoverished people. Then Ribadu committed an affront by securing his conviction. An attempt was not only made on Ribadu’s life, he was demoted and forced to flee the country. And his judicial victory was a pyrrhic one as President Jonathan who declared “when God gives us power, we must use it for the glory of his name” wasted no time in granting his ‘Ijaw Governor General and former boss, presidential amnesty.

James Ibori was another Niger Delta governor widely celebrated by his impoverished people for converting their commonwealth to private use. He was dragged before an Asaba High Court over financial malfeasance against his people by EFCC. The case was thrown out for lack of substance. But the same case, with the same evidence, the Metropolitan Police in London secured James Ibori indictment and jailed him for 13 years.

But the ancient Asaba town and its environs were literally paralyzed in jubilation, when the news of his release from London prison where he had served 10-year jail term for money laundering and other offences filtered into Asaba and its environs.  The event was described by one newspapers as follows: “Thousands of supporters, admirers and friends of the ex-convict, James Onanefe Ibori, converged Sunday morning for the thanksgiving service at First Baptist Church”. “Various Quarters’ residents, especially Asaba youths, rolled out their drums to celebrate the man they described as “Odidigborigbo.”

The youths sang Asaba-Ibo songs along Nnebisi Road, Summit Junction; they danced freely to drumbeats, causing serious traffic gridlock. Popular Ogbeogonogo Market Women were not left out in the jubilation. Chief Ibori who wore Urhobo traditional attire, a gold-coloured lace top with blue wrapper to match, arrived at the church in an unmarked Lexus SUV at exactly 10.20 am, amidst cheers from his admirers”.

Governor Ifeanyi Okowa of Delta who many believed was single-handedly installed by Ibori, as “a way to show gratitude to Chief Ibori” allegedly bankrolled the elaborate church thanksgiving service and reception to the tune of N350m.

Uche Secondus, the then national chairman of PDP confirmed Okowa’s indebtedness to Ibori when he spoke in March 2018 at a thanksgiving and grand reception organised by Olorogun John Oguma, in honour of Ibori at the Ibru Unity Square, Ovwor-Olomu, Ughelli South Local Government According to him, “Before the 2015 elections, I received a call from our leader (Ibori), and I asked him the direction. He (Ibori) told me Okowa should be supported.”

We don’t need a soothsayer to know that with the support of his impoverished but proud people who detest outsiders reminding them of the inhumanity of their leaders, Okowa corruption case will end like those of his predecessors.

Let us all hail Niger Delta leaders for keeping faith with their people.

The November 5, 2024 Presidential election in the USA has come and gone. Americans have spoken. Donald Trump is returning to the White House as the country’s 47th President with a convincing win, poling 312 electoral votes to Kamala Harris’ 226.

There are several observations on how Trump’s second term in office could possibly impact on Africa:

A major fear of many African leaders is not just that Trump, widely regarded as a racist, might cut America’s humanitarian aid to Africa. The belief is that Africa will be a lower priority for him than it is for other world leaders, and that he will prioritise transactional relationship in which aids and grants would be drastically cut. In August 2024 for instance, during a visit to Dakar, Senegal, Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration, Julieta Valls Noyes, announced more than $64 million in humanitarian assistance for Sub-Saharan Africa, which reportedly brought the total “U.S. humanitarian assistance in Sub-Saharan Africa to more than $3.8 billion so far in Fiscal Year 2024.

The United States is proud to be the largest single humanitarian donor to Africa/Sub-Saharan Africa globally”, a briefing from the Office of the Spokesperson to the US Department of State, claimed on August 24, 2024. While we do not know the nature of the humanitarian assistance the money is meant for, we do know that aids, whether tied or untied, are tools of foreign policy and there is an unresolved debate on whether aid facilitates or hinders economic development. Following from this, a Trump presidency cutting aid to Africa could help to wean African leaders of their ‘begging bowl syndrome”, and bring some respect to the continent.

There are also legitimate concerns that a Trump presidency may lead to massive deportation of ‘illegal immigrants’ and a tightening of immigration rules for Africans and others from developing countries. True, this may affect the remittance in-flows from African migrants who have not regularized their stay in the country. However, American institutions are so strong that there will be serious legal challenges if the Trump government takes extreme measures against illegal immigrants or on immigration rules.  The tightening of immigration rules in America, and even the likely deportation of some Africans, as bad as it may be for Africa in the short term, however could also lead to a greater push to make the continent better, which would eventually curtail the desire by some to vote with their feet.

What would be Trump’s trade policy towards Africa?  Trump ran his campaign under the moniker, MAGA – Make America Great Again. He is certainly not a multilateralist – meaning he is not likely to depend on multilateral institutions like the United Nations and its agencies in efforts to solve America’s problems.  Trump had declared during his first term that he would not renew the African Growth and Opportunity Act, which is due for renewal in 2025. Created in 2000 and renewed in 2015, AGOA gives countries in sub-Saharan Africa preferential access to U.S. markets, allowing them to export products to the United States tariff-free. The truth however is that the benefits from AGOA are exaggerated. For instance under AGOA, eligible sub-Saharan African countries (35 countries as of May 2023) stand to benefit from the U.S. trade programme, but AGOA utilization rates and results vary widely. Kenya and Lesotho have some of the highest AGOA utilization rates – 88% of Kenyan exports and 99% of Lesotho’s exports – mostly apparel products for both countries.

Remarkably, almost half of all beneficiary countries under AGOA have a utilization rate of 2% or lower, meaning  that about 98% of U.S. imports from those eligible countries were subject to U.S. tariffs. During his 2024 campaign, Trump pledged to implement a universal 10% income tariff on all foreign-made goods. Trump could paradoxically be a wake-up call to those African leaders manacled by the neo-liberal brand of economics pushed down Africa’s throat by the Bretton Woods institutions and which never worked anywhere.

Even if Trump wants to, can he in reality be able to make America pursue purely isolationist foreign and economic policies? I doubt it. The truth is that a dominant world power which still wants to retain its global hegemony in the face of overt economic competition from China and efforts by a resurgent Russia to create a multipolar world that will whittle down, if not overthrow its Western security, economic and governance systems, cannot afford to be fully isolationist. With groups like BRICS+ expanding to create alternatives to the Bretton Woods institutions and the SWIFT system, the USA can only go fully isolationist at its peril.

There is also the Truman Doctrine, a policy enunciated by President Harry Truman in 1947 which made it an article of faith for the US to contain Soviet expansionism wherever it reared its head. With Russia, which succeeded the Soviet Union trying to reclaim the glory of the old Soviet Union by projecting power onto the global space, there are already visible signs of the activation of the Truman Doctrine. Despite the supposed personal relationship between Trump and Putin, it is unlikely that the US would remain content for Russia to continue expanding its influence in Africa and Asia without trying to contain it.

Despite his unflattering reputation, we may also pose the question of what we have really gained from former US Presidents we cozied up to, contra those we had very dim views of. Good examples here are Barrack Obama, the 44th President and George W Bush, the 43rd US President. In the run-up to the election of Barrack Obama as the first Black President of the USA in 2012, Africans were literally falling over themselves to offer him support as our ‘cousin’. With an African father from Kenya, we appropriated him as a fellow African who can understand Africa’s problem. True, he organized the US-Africa summit in 2014 and started the Africa Power initiative, but these were more of gesture politics than anything substantial. In contrast, there was angst in Africa and African American community when George W Bush was campaigning to be US president in 2000.

He was thought to be a spoilt child, a C-average student and a bit aloof, if not racist. His Democratic rival, Al Gore, was overwhelmingly preferred by Africans and African Americans. Yet, under George W Bush, African Americans were given choice positions in government. George W Bush also set up the President’s Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR/Emergency Plan) to address the global HIV/AIDS epidemic and help save the lives of those suffering from the disease, primarily in Africa. PEPFAR is said to be the largest health initiative ever initiated by one country to address a disease. Remarkably Obama cut funding for PEPFAR. Also Obama refused repeatedly to sell weapons to the country to fight Boko Haram on human rights concern.

Ironically it was Donald Trump who sold 12-high tech aircraft to Nigeria in the fight against Boko Haram despite a damning 2017 Human Rights Report.  Similarly the Obama’s regime’s role in NATO’s attacks on Libya in 2011 is said to be one of the reasons for the upsurge in terrorist activities especially in Mali. President Obama was also accused of talking down on Africans and African Americans during his presidency. Yes, Trump is racist and profiles Africans but so are some of our own leaders, and we routinely profile and demonize one another.

While Trump could be unpredictable, he appears consistently fascinated by ‘deals’, and   during his first term, constantly talked of offering countries ‘deals’ – a term commonly used by business people but rarely by politicians or Presidents. Trump usually imagines himself as the ultimate dealmaker so he may be offering deals to even countries he famously regarded as ‘shithole’ countries depending on the leverages those countries could bring to the table or what he wants to use them to achieve.

A quote from Trump’s book, The Art of the Deal (1987) could probably provide an insight on how to deal with the 47th President of the USA: “I never get too attached to one deal or one approach. For starters, I keep a lot of balls in the air, because most deals fall out, no matter how promising they seem at first.”

Jideofor Adibe is a Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Nasarawa State University and founder of Adonis & Abbey Publishers (www.adonis-abbey.com). He can be reached at: 0705 807 8841 (WhatsApp and Text messages only).

President Bola Tinubu on Monday in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia called for an end to Israeli aggression in Gaza, warning that
"the conflict in Palestine has persisted for far too long, inflicting immeasurable suffering."

Addressing the extraordinary Arab-Islamic Summit, convened to address the current situation in the Middle East, President Tinubu expressed deep concern on the humanitarian conditions in Gaza.

The one-day summit was a follow-up to the Riyadh summit last year, and was attended by Heads of State and Government of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the League of Arab States.

Reiterating Nigeria's call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, President Tinubu affirmed the country’s support for a two-state solution, where both Israeli and Palestinians can co-exist in security and dignity.

He noted that this solution remained a viable part to lasting peace in the region.

''The conflict in Palestine has persisted for far too long, inflicting immeasurable suffering on countless lives.

''As representatives of nations that value justice, dignity, and the sanctity of human life, we have a moral obligation to collectively bring about an immediate end to this conflict.

''It is not enough to issue empty condemnations. The world must work towards an end to Israeli aggression in Gaza, which has persisted for far too long.

"No political aim, no military strategy, and no security concern should come at the expense of so many innocent lives,'' he said.

The Nigerian leader called on parties in the conflict in the Middle East to respect the principles of proportionality and the basic rights of civilians, consistent with global legal and diplomatic frameworks.

''In a rules-based international order, States have the right of self-defence. But self defence must take proportionality into account, in line with global legal, diplomatic - and moral - frameworks.

''An entire civilian population, their dreams and futures, cannot be dismissed as collateral,'' he said.

Explaining Nigeria's principled and consistent stance on the two-state solution, President Tinubu noted that it stands as a beacon of hope, representing the rights of both Israelis and Palestinians to self-determination and peace.

''It is not just a diplomatic article of faith; it is a vision grounded in the principles of equality and mutual recognition.

''Achieving this vision requires a commitment to dialogue and respect for history. We all know this conflict did not begin on October 7 in 2023. It can only be resolved through principled compromise, based on appreciation of the proper context.

''This conflict, in the cradle of history, is so visceral that the ripples of division spread far and quickly. The corrosive impact of the images of endless violence, repeated on a billion smart phones around the world is huge. We need to find new pathways to peace, without delay,'' he said.

The Nigerian leader commended King Salman of Saudi Arabia and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for convening the summit, describing it as a vital opportunity to renew diplomatic efforts and work toward a sustainable peace.

He assured that Nigeria given its own experiences would continue to support international efforts that advance peace and stability in the Middle East.

''Our own experiences, domestically and regionally, have taught us that identity politics are no substitute for respecting the nuances of diversity,'' he said.

According to President Tinubu ''the path to reconciliation may be fraught with challenges, but it is through honest conversation that we can foster understanding.

''The international community has the opportunity to bring to bear new thinking on this most relentless challenge.

''It is our duty to engage in this dialogue with sincerity and resolve, recognising the complexities that each side faces.''

President Tinubu called for the establishment of a secretariat to implement the resolutions of the Summit.

He urged the leaders to mandate a select Heads of Government to canvass support globally and oversee the implementation of the Summit resolutions, providing regular reports to a joint OIC and Arab League leadership until permanent peace is achieved in the Middle East.

In his opening remarks, Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman condemned Israeli actions in Gaza and Lebanon, including the targeting of civilians and the continued violation of the Al-Aqsa mosque.

He also condemned Israeli ban on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) from delivering relief aid to Palestinians and the displacement of Lebanese people.

He emphasized the importance of preserving Lebanon's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The Crown Prince highlighted Saudi Arabia's role in promoting Palestinian statehood based on the 1967 borders, mentioning international recognition and the establishment of a Global Coalition with the European Union and Norway.

He urged more states to join the Global Coalition.

Bayo Onanuga
Special Adviser to the President
(Information & Strategy)

Last week, President Bola Tinubu ordered the immediate termination of the treason charge against 119 protesters standing trial for treason arising from the August 1-8, 2024 protests against bad governance and hardship in the country. Consequently, the Attorney-general of the Federation, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi SAN applied for the withdrawal of the charges. Since there was no objection from the defence counsel, the case was struck out by Justice Obioma Egwatu. It is pertinent to review the attempted criminalization of peaceful protests in Nigeria by a governments that is completely intolerant of criticism in a democratic society.

Right of citizens to protest

The fundamental rights of Nigerian citizens to assemble and protest against unpopular policies of governments are guaranteed by Section 39 and 40 of the Constitution as well as Articles 9 and 10 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, 2004. In the case of the Inspector General of Police v All Nigeria Peoples Party (2008) 22 WRN 65, the Court of Appeal declared police permit for rallies illegal and unconstitutional and directed the National Assembly to amend the Public Order Act to facilitate the enjoyment of the fundamental right to peaceful protests by aggrieved citizens.

While the National Assembly ignored the directive of the Court of Appeal, the police and other security forces intensified the infringement of the right of Nigerians to protest against governments and other public authorities. However, the right to protest by Nigerians was statutorily protected in the 2015 Amendment of the Electoral Act 2010. Furthermore, section 83(4) of the Police Establishment Act 2020 has imposed a duty on the Nigeria Police Force to provide adequate security for protesters during rallies, meetings and protests.

Breach of the right to protest against bad governance

In a brazen violation of the right of Nigerians to assemble and freely voice out their views on bad governance and rising cost of living in the country, the Federal Government and several state governments embarked on a campaign of calumny against the organisers of the August 2024 protests. When the vicious campaign did not achieve its dubious objective, the Federal Government threatened to deal ruthlessly with the organisers of the protest. Out of sheer desperation, the Lagos and Ogun states governments as well as the federal capital territory administration surreptitiously secured ex parte orders to stop the protest.

For having the temerity to participate in the protest, the police and the armed forces shot at many unarmed protesters. At the end of the protest, not less than 22 protesters were killed. Thus, the deliberate refusal of the police to provide adequate security for the protesters and the unwarranted killing of some of the protesters led to the violence that marred the peaceful protests in some states.

However, before the protest was called off, President Bola Tinubu said that the Federal Government had heard the protesters loud and clear and would enter into dialogue with the leaders. Notwithstanding the presidential declaration, the police turned round to commence the prosecution of the over 2,000 protesters that were arrested in several states.

Criminalization of protest

Even though charges were filed against a number of protesters in some state capitals, the Nigeria Police Force decided to arraign 130 protesters including 29 minors on 10 counts, including treason, incitement to mutiny by urging the military to remove President Bola Tinubu and other related charges before the Abuja judicial division of the Federal High Court. Notwithstanding that section 2(4) of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2022 states that a protest, demonstration or stoppage of work is not a terrorist act, the police sought and obtained an ex parte order to detain the suspects for 60 days for the purpose of investigating them for alleged involvement in terrorism.

Alhough the police had secured an order to detain the suspects for 60 days, they were held for 92 days before they were arraigned in the Federal High Court. Among the suspects were 29 children who were malnourished and dehydrated during their arraignment. Owing to hunger and exhaustion in the congested court room, four minor defendants collapsed and they were rushed to a hospital.

Illegal arraignment of children in the Federal High Court

In 2001, Nigeria ratified the United Nations Child’s Rights Convention and enacted the Child’s Rights Act in 2003. We have confirmed that the 36 states of the federation have adopted and enacted the legislation. Thus, under the Child’s Rights Law applicable in each State, child offenders under the age of 18 years cannot be charged in the Federal High Court or State High Court but in the Family Court.

The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi SAN, was reported to have said that the minors were properly charged before the Federal High Court because the Constitution makes it clear that the Federal High Court has jurisdiction in matters related to treason and related offenses. With respect, the Federal High Court does not have exclusive jurisdiction to try treason and related offences.

Even if there was a reasonable suspicion that the minors committed treason they ought to have been arraigned in a Family Court pursuant to section 149 of the Child's Rights Act. But contrary to the Child's Rights Act applicable in the Federal Capital Territory, the minors were charged with treason at the Federal High Court after they had been detained in the midst of hardened criminal suspects in the anti robbery detention facility in Abuja. Even though they pleaded not guilty to the charge, the arraignment of the minors is illegal in every material particular.

Phoney evidence to prove treason charge

It is trite that under the Penal Code and Criminal Code, treason is committed by anyone who levies war against the state to intimidate the President or a State Governor or who conspires to levy war against the state. The charge of treason filed by the police did not allege that the suspects raised any war or conspired to levy war against the President and State Governors. The main offence allegedly committed by the suspects arrested is that they displayed the Russian flag during the protest. A tailor who was sewing the flag was arrested by the police.

The police Prosecutor ought to have known that it is not a criminal offence to waive a foreign flag in Nigeria. Hence, the flags of the United States, United Kingdom, France, Germany and other European countries are hoisted by the majority of hotels in Nigeria while churches hoist the flag of Israel based on the erroneous belief that it is a Christian country.

Seven Polish students were arrested for taking photographs during the protest. They were going to be charged with espionage to give the impression that the protests were instigated by foreign interest groups. The students have since been released when it was confirmed that they are taking part in an exchange programme at the Bayero University, Kano.

As if such embarrassment was not enough, Comrade Michael Adaramoye was charged with treason because he answers to the sobriquet “Lenin”. Comrades Elejo Opaluwa and Mosiu Abolaji were equally charged with treason for belonging to a socialist organisation that supported the protest. Povey was charged with treason because he sells socialist books in a bookshop at the Secretariat of the Nigerian Labour Congress.

In a total abuse of prosecutorial powers the police had wanted to prove the grave charge of treason evidence with two fire extinguishers, two prepaid meters, 76 Russian flags and the statements of the defendants. During the investigation the police claimed that it had evidence of
the billions of Naira with which a British national, Andrew Wynne (a.k.a. Andrew Povich) had funded the protest. Even though Mr. Whyne was declared wanted and charged for treason in absentia, the proof of evidence does not refer to the billions of Naira allegedly spent by him on the protest.

Trivialisation of treason in Nigeria

It is often forgotten that after the military conquest of Nigeria, the British colonial regime imposed the Criminal Code and Penal Code on the southern and northern protectorates respectively. The offences of treason and treasonable felony were set out in both Codes. But the imperial regime never charged any of the "natives" with treason or treasonable felony for calling for an end to colonialism. Even when the Zikists called for a revolution in the course of a 1948 lecture they were only charged with sedition, tried, convicted and sentenced to three years imprisonment.

But the first civilian regime charged J.S. Tarka and his political lieutenants with treason. They were discharged and acquited. Chief Obafemi Awolowo and his political associates were charged with treasonable felony, convicted and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. Since then, the country has witnessed a complete trivialisation of treason in the hands of civilian and military wings of the Nigerian ruling class.

The Ibrahim Babangida military junta went to the ridiculous extent of charging five of us with treasonable felony for calling for an end to military rule. Of course, the late Chief Gani Fawehinmi SAN and I, turned the case into the trial of General Babangida and his armed colleagues who had sacked the elected Shehu Shagari administration on December 31, 1983. The junta had no choice but to abandon the frivolous charge.

Babangida's comrade-in-arms, General Sani Abacha, made a complete mockery of the law by charging every imaginary enemy with treason. For declaring himself President on the basis of the June 12, 1993 presidential election won by him, Bashorun M.K.O Abiola was charged with treasonable felony. Shortly thereafter, General Abacha authorised that Senator Ahmed Bola Tinubu (now President and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces) and 5 other Senators be charged with treasonable felony for demanding the validation of the results of the June 12, 1993 Presidential election. 4 journalists who exposed the 1995 phantom coup were charged with being "accessories after the fact of treason."

Ironically, President Bola Tinubu who had fled the country to escape the death penalty under a murderous dictator has allowed the police to charge protesters including minors with treason for challenging the untold economic hardship arising from the religious implementation of neoliberal economic policies dictated by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. But for the abrupt termination of the treason charge because of the global condemnation of the trial of child protesters for treason, the regime would have prayed the Federal High Court to convict and sentence 130 Nigerians for exercising their fundamental rights to assemble peacefully and express themselves via the August 2024 protest.

Conclusion

From the foregoing, it is crystal clear that the Federal Government set out to use the case of the 130 protesters to discourage Nigerian people from protesting against the harsh living conditions. Since the plan has since boomeranged the Federal Government should be advised to appreciate that charging protesters with terrorism, treason, treasonable felony and allied offences will not cow Nigerians to submission.

Instead of exposing the country to avoidable shame by charging protesters with a crime punishable by death, the police should be directed to comply with the law by providing adequate security for protesters. That is the only means of ensuring that protests are conducted in a peaceful and civilised manner within the ambit of the law.

The Kano State Judicial Service Commission has relieved two Shariah Court Judges, Yusuf Kawu and Abdulmuminu Nuhu, of their duties for various offences bordering on misuse of office.

Naija News reports a magistrate, Nasir Ado, was also dismissed for alleged misconduct.

The decisions were taken at the 76th meeting of the Commission based on recommendations by the Judiciary Public Complaint Committee (JPCC).

The spokesperson of the Kano State Judiciary, Baba Jibo Ibrahim, who made the developments known in a statement, revealed that two court registrars, Salisu Nayola and Shamsu Abbas, were also ordered to proceed on compulsory retirements.

He said Magistrate Ado was found guilty of conducting a proceeding without record, and when asked, he falsified and tampered with the record to show that there was a record of the proceeding.

Also, Alkali Yusuf used his position to release a convict who was sentenced by another Alkali to 12 calendar months without option of fine in correctional centre.

According to him, “The Judiciary Public Complaint Committee (JPCC) investigated two petitions filed against Magistrate Nasir Ado, where the investigation revealed that the magistrate conducted a proceeding without record, and when asked, he falsified and tampered with the record to show that there was a record of the proceeding. The commission adopted the recommendation of the JPCC that Nasir Ado’s actions of falsifying and tampering with the court’s records constitute an act of gross misconduct, and accordingly, he is recalled from judicial duties.

“Following a complaint filed against Sharia court judge Yusuf Kawu by the Association of Fighting Criminals, it was confirmed that Alkali Yusuf Kawu used his judicial position to release a convict who was sentenced by another Alkali to 12 calendar months without option of fine in correctional centre. The commission found the actions of Alkali to be unlawful and his defence untenable; consequently, he is recalled from judicial functions indefinitely.

“The commission issued a warning to Magistrate Sanusi Usman Atana following two petitions against him, where he was found to have assumed the role of recovery of premises in a criminal trial and, in the second petition, granted bail to a suspect before the date slated for ruling without notifying the prosecution. Accordingly, the commission issued a strong warning to Sanusi Atana to desist from exceeding his jurisdictional limit and avoid circumventing the established principles of fair hearing in handling matters before him.

“The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has directed the immediate compulsory retirement of Salisu Adamu Nayola, the Finance Registrar of Kiru Sharia Court, after an investigation by the Judiciary Public Complaints Committee (JPCC) following a petition on allegations of bribery. The JPCC received a petition alleging that Adamu Nayola was collecting money from families of deceased persons before processing their inheritance entitlements.

“Upon review, the JPCC found direct evidence of these actions, including Adamu Nayola’s admission to receiving bribes from multiple litigants. It was confirmed upon investigation that Salisu Nayola was in cohort with Alkali Abdulmuminu Nuhu, who was complacent in the acts of collecting bribes by the registrar. The commission adopted the recommendation of the JPCC, and Salisu Nayola, whose actions amounted to a gross violation of his duties as a judiciary staff, has been directed to proceed on compulsory retirement, while Alkali Abdulmuminu Nuhu is recalled from judicial duties for a period of two years to remain under the supervision of the Chief Registrar, Sharia Court of Appeal.

“The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) issued a strong warning to Alkali Abubakar Abdullahi of the Sharia Court, Takai, following an investigation by the Judiciary Public Complaints Committee (JPCC). The JPCC found Alkali Abdullahi to have presided over an estate distribution case located outside his jurisdiction in Sabo Garba Housing Estate, Kabuga, and Dorayi Kwanar Makabarta. The Commission endorsed the JPCC’s recommendation, warning the judge to strictly adhere to his territorial limits and avoid handling cases outside his designated jurisdiction.

“Following the investigation of the JPCC on the petition filed against Shuaibu Bello, a court messenger, who was found to have engaged in an act of corruption by collecting money in excess of the official amount charged for opening a file. The committee also found him to engage in conduct unbecoming of a judiciary staff by being rude and disrespectful to a court user and deceiving the petitioner into signing a letter of withdrawal of the petition. The commission endorsed the recommendation of the committee, issued a strong warning, and further suspended him for four months without pay.

“Sequel to an investigation conducted by the Judiciary Public Complaints Committee (JPCC) into a petition filed against Shamsu Abbas, a court registrar. The investigation revealed the registrar to have assumed an adjudicative role by releasing a suspect on bail without the case being officially assigned to any court, making an order for the suspect to make financial restitution related to the alleged crime, actions that are beyond his scope of duties as a court registrar. The committee found his actions to constitute a flagrant violation of the responsibilities of a court registrar. Considering the JPCC’s recommendations and after extensive deliberation, the Kano State Judicial Service Commission has directed the immediate compulsory retirement of the court registrar, Shamsu Abbas.

“The Judicial Service Commission remains dedicated to ensuring that all judicial personnel perform their duties within the boundaries of the law and with the utmost respect for judicial processes, and the commission will continue to apply the appropriate sanctions against any erring staff, particularly those saddled with judicial responsibilities, to safeguard the integrity and accountability of the judicial system and maintain public confidence,” Ibrahim said.

[NaijaNews]

SCRIPTURES say heaven and earth may pass away but not one jot of the word of God will go without fulfilling the purpose for which it was sent (Matthew 24:25). So also did the Preacher say there is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1; 9). What is happening today has happened before and there is nothing new regarding the decision of the electorate in the United States to reject Kamala Harris while electing former President Donald Trump. That decision has biblical antecedents. Read the whole story in the Gospel according to St. Matthew chapter 27: despite the spirited efforts of Pilate to set Jesus Christ free, an innocent man wrongly accused by the Jews, the mob insisted that he be crucified but that Barabbas, whom the bible describes as “a notable prisoner”, a robber known as such to everyone, be set free. All attempts made by Pilate to let them see reason fell on deaf ears. In the end, Barabbas the thief was released while Jesus the innocent man was crucified. Does this sound familiar with the unhappy ending, to many, of the just-concluded United States election? What bricks and mortars did they not throw at Donald Trump, the eventual winner of the election! How many criminal convictions did he not suffer! I do not think there has been any American candidate so hunted, so rend apart as Trump; yet, he came out tops.

It looks like our own 2023 presidential election. Few people thought Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu would surmount the obstacles stacked on his way, first to the party primaries and then to the election proper. His entire life history and political career were turned inside out. What crime was he not accused of? Where did his detractors not contact to seek damaging evidence against him? Exactly, the same thing was suffered by Trump. I think on the weight of probability, the incriminating documents mounted against Trump made a child’s play of those that Tinubu had to contend with. What lessons do we learn from this? If we say a man with the weight of baggage that Tinubu was alleged to carry sailed through because we are a Third World country where democracy and civil education are yet to take firm roots and where corruption is rife, what do we say of the United States of America, the so-called bastion of democracy and civil rights movement? And my mind went back to those polemics during our Philosophy and Political Science classes at the then University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University), Ile-Ife of the distinction/dichotomy between politics and morality, politics and religion, religion and morality, etc. Nicollo Machiavelli is very popular with his statement: the end justifies the means. Politics, as we say here, is a dirty game not suited for bishops and popes! And it is not only in politics that this holds true. Neither is it only political leaders that throw moral scruples to the dogs.

The US election demonstrated quite clearly what we know here: that every politics is local. The issues that determined the winner were local issues. Gone are the days when foreign affairs dominated the politics and elections of the US; now, stomach infrastructure, as we call it here, does! In the US, they call it the economy. Trump campaigned principally on the twin issues of the economy and immigration, both of which dovetailed into each other. The economy was deemed by most Americans to have performed better under the former president’s four-year rule than under Joe Biden/Kamala Harris. It is very instructive to note that the economic downturn that we complain bitterly about here in Nigeria is not limited to us alone. If you have people in the Diaspora, ask them; they will tell you they now spend three or four times more on goods and services than they did four years ago. Where people feel the impact of the government most is their pockets and pot of soup! Trump is deemed to have performed better here than Biden/Harris. Talks by the Democrats about protecting democracy sounds highfalutin to a hungry stomach. It is the living that protects democracy, not the dead.

When an economy begins to bite hard, the first scapegoats are immigrants and Trump made this drum beat louder than any excuse the Democrats could make about protecting fundamental rights. This is not limited to the US alone. It happens all over the place. We have recently seen such backlash against immigrants in Britain and France. Years back, we saw it rear its ugly head against Nigerians and east Africans in South Africa. This is not to forget that when we first had our own economic downturn in the early 1980s during the Shehu Shagari administration, an estimated over two million undocumented migrants were sent packing in what came to be (in)famously called “Ghana Must Go” perhaps because majority of the immigrants so sent packing were Ghanaians. This is a natural phenomenon which everyone involved in the “Japa” syndrome, be it locally and be it across borders, must take into consideration. If you abandon your own territory and run to another person’s, one day you will be asked to leave, regardless of the law and regardless of the number of years you have spent there or of the investments you might have made there. The Yoruba have a saying, to wit, ultimately, the houseboy will leave!

Many are already apprehensive that Trump will come down heavily on immigrants; he said repeatedly during the campaign that he will. He has also said so in his acceptance speech. He said, though, that only illegal immigrants have cause to fear but many people believe every immigrant has cause to worry. White Americans want to take “their” country back. They are alarmed at the rate immigrants are overwhelming their own White population. So, if nothing is done, they will become a minority in their own country and will have nowhere to go. They are both wrong and right! Wrong because they stole the country in the first place from its rightful and original owners and developed it with the sweat and labour of others, especially Africans shipped there as slaves. So, the descendants of those people have a stake in the US. We are also aware that the “Shitholes” that the immigrants are running away from have been made and kept so by the policies, wars and exploitation of successive United States governments. The reparation they have refused to pay to the continents they pillaged is what the peoples of those places are trying to take back in the form of “Japa”. A lesson for us here in Nigeria is that there is no “no man’s land” anywhere. If you pour your population there today, no matter how huge, the owners of the land will always remain the silent majority. The day they stir is the day they will show you the door. The votes of Blacks, Latinos, Jews and others were overwhelmed by those of silent White Americans who keyed into Trump’s battle cry of “Take our Country Back” and “Make America Great Again”!  Harris and the Democrats had no answer to Trump’s battle cry which resonated well with White Americans and those impoverished by Biden’s economic policies.

The war in Ukraine, into which Biden has poured billions of US dollars, must partly account for the Democrats’ failure. So is the war in Gaza. The Democrats’ effort to rally Arabs and Muslims failed spectacularly. It is believed that Trump has a better plan and bigger heart to stop the senseless wars and save the US the billions it is pouring into the war efforts in those two places. The Russia/Ukraine war especially has affected food chain supply across the globe. It is one reason why some food items like wheat and dairy products have become scarce and expensive in a place like Nigeria, for instance. Stomach infrastructure apart, what role did gender and ethnicity play in the results of the election? Trump must be accounted as a giant female-killer! He defeated Hilary Clinton to win his first slot as president and has now defeated another woman to make his come-back. Na only women you fit fight? Male chauvinism is still alive and well in the US while gender equality is still light years away. While they might not have been the dominant factors in the election, they, nonetheless, played a part. Racism is yet to be completely erased from the United States’ day-to-day existence. Combining both minuses – gender and race – did not do Harris any good. The fact that she carried the baggage of Biden – like Tinubu carries Buhari’s – made her case worse. Had Biden heeded calls for him to exit the race earlier and had the Democrats the opportunity to throw their net farther afield in search of a replacement, maybe the outcome of the race would have been different.

We have many lessons to learn from the US election: Stop wasting time on the opponent; sell yourself instead. In the last election here, the other presidential candidates focused all their attention and attack on Tinubu and had little or no time to sell themselves. They failed. In the US, the Democrats did similarly with Trump. They failed. Morality and politics may not be bedmates. Rather than focus undue attention on the baggage of a candidate, focus attention on issues that affect the populace. In Nigeria today, the biting economy is one such issue. Can anyone tell me what the opposition leaders have told us they will do differently if they get into office or if they were the ones there right now? I don’t know of any, other than their saying blandly that they would have acted differently from what Tinubu is doing? How? In what areas? Incessant power outages, weak currency, skyrocketing food and fuel prices are scourges that seem to defy solutions. What are the plans of the opposition and where do they differ from what the government is pursuing? Let them learn from Trump who left no one in doubt concerning what he would do. He clearly outlined his policies regardless of whose ox is gored. Not the kind of unserious politics that we play here with serious issues. You know Trump is coming for you; so, get ready for him. He did not have a word for everyone on everything simply to win an election.

Trump’s second coming will be action-packed on the foreign scene as well. To repair the United States’ damaged economy, he must cut costs on the foreign scene. Europe will not have it easy with him as they will be required to cough out more for their own security. China must sit up as Trump will fight to re-establish America’s hegemony. He will most likely also call the bluff of Israel’s Netanyahu. Ukraine should be imagining what hit it right now: Negotiate with Russia to end the senseless war or carry the can on your own. For African countries, you know what he thinks of you: Trump’s America has no time – and no milk – for whining babies!

Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has given state governments an ultimatum of December 1, to implement the new minimum wage.

The NLC made this known on Sunday in a communique signed by its President, Mr Joe Ajaero at the end of its National Executive Council (NEC) meeting, held in Port Harcourt, Rivers.

Ajaero, who expressed dissatisfaction over the delay by some states to implement the new wage, said workers in affected states were finding it difficult to sustain themselves given the worsening state of the economy.

“The NEC notes with deep frustration the persistent delay and outright refusal by some state governments to implement the 2024 National Minimum Wage Act.

“This betrayal by certain governors and government officials across the country flies in the face of both legality and morality, as workers continue to be denied their rightful wages amidst rising economic hardship.

“It is a blatant disregard for the law and the lives of millions of Nigerian workers, who are being exploited by the very leaders sworn to protect them.

“The NEC therefore resolved to set up a National Minimum Wage Implementation Committee that will commence a nationwide assessment, mobilisation and campaign to educate citizens on the need to resist this assault on their dignity and rights.

“Furthermore, the NLC shall initiate a series of industrial actions in all non-compliant states and shall not relent until the minimum wage is fully implemented across Nigeria.

“To this end, all state Councils where the National Minimum Wage has not been fully implemented by the last day of Nov., 2024 have been directed to proceed on strike beginning from December 1,” he said.

[NIGERIAN TRIBUNE ]

The recent public apology tendered by Stephen Abuwatseya, an Abuja-based Bolt driver, to Hon. Alex Ikwechegh, the House of Representatives member who allegedly assaulted him, has sparked outrage across social media. Many Nigerians, particularly those who rallied behind the driver, felt betrayed and disappointed. They were quick to express their dismay, with some accusing Abuwatseya of being an ingrate who compromised justice for financial gain. But beyond the fury and resentment that followed this unexpected turn of events, it is essential to pause and reflect on the significance of Abuwatseya’s decision to apologize.

The saga began when Abuwatseya alleged that he was slapped by Hon. Ikwechegh, causing public outrage after social activist Martin Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), brought the issue to light. VDM, along with human rights lawyer DejiAdeyanju, took up the fight for justice. The outcry led to an investigation by the House of Representatives, which summoned Ikwechegh to account for his actions. The lawmaker later tendered a public apology, expressing regret and acknowledging his misconduct.

However, the narrative took an unexpected twist when VDM shared a video revealing that Abuwatseya had apologized to Ikwechegh. According to VDM, an agreement had been reached wherein Ikwechegh’s camp compensated Abuwatseya with ₦5 million and a new car, terms that Abuwatseya allegedly accepted without informing his advocates. This abrupt apology triggered backlash, with social media users labeling the driver as ungrateful and opportunistic.

While it is easy to join the chorus of condemnation against Abuwatseya, it is crucial to consider the context and motivations behind his actions. In an environment where survival is often a day-to-day struggle, many individuals are driven by the need to secure their immediate wellbeing. The reality of poverty in Nigeria cannot be underestimated; it influences decisions that may appear perplexing or even disappointing to those on the outside looking in.

Abuwatseya’s decision to apologize may not necessarily be a sign of betrayal but rather an effort to find closure and move forward. He might have realized that in the grand scheme of things, holding onto bitterness would only perpetuate the cycle of resentment. His willingness to reconcile with Ikwechegh, despite the past incident, demonstrates a rare but necessary quality, letting go for the sake of peace.

We live in an era where social media amplifies conflicts, often making it harder to forgive and forget. In the heat of public outrage, the human element of forgiveness is frequently overlooked. Abuwatseya’s apology, though surprising, might be his way of seeking peace, not only with his assailant but also within himself.

While VDM, Adeyanju, and countless Nigerians poured their energy into seeking justice for Abuwatseya, the driver ultimately chose a different path. It is easy to judge from afar, but the reality is that forgiveness and reconciliation are deeply personal choices. In a world that is becoming increasingly polarized, Abuwatseya’s gesture reminds us that sometimes, stepping back and making peace, even with those who have wronged us, can be a more rewarding outcome.

The harsh reactions from social media users reflect a larger issue, our tendency to judge quickly and harshly without understanding the full picture. Yes, Abuwatseya’s actions may seem disappointing, especially to those who advocated for him. However, rather than demonizing him, it is more constructive to recognize the complexities of his situation.

In our pursuit of justice, we must not lose sight of empathy. Social activism is vital for holding public figures accountable, but it is also essential to respect the choices of those we claim to be helping. After all, no one but Abuwatseya knows the pressures he faced or the factors that led him to accept the compensation and issue an apology.

At the heart of this incident lies a powerful message: the need for forgiveness, understanding, and reconciliation in our society. While Hon. Ikwechegh’s initial actions were wrong and should not be condoned, his apology showed a willingness to admit fault. Likewise, Abuwatseya’s decision to reconcile is a step toward healing a fractured relationship.

Rather than fixating on the perceived betrayal, Nigerians can learn from this episode. The world is already filled with conflict and division; perhaps what we need more of is the courage to forgive, to accept apologies, and to seek common ground.

Let us not forget that the ability to forgive and move on is a virtue that strengthens the social fabric. Abuwatseya’s apology may have shocked many, but it also highlights an essential truth, we all make mistakes, and sometimes, the best course of action is to let go, extend a hand of peace, and move forward.

As Nigerians, we can choose to dwell on our differences, or we can rise above them to build a more harmonious society. The road to unity is paved with understanding and forgiveness, values that both parties in this unfortunate incident have shown, even if in ways we might not fully agree with.

In the end, making peace, however it comes about, should be seen as a victory for all.