• Note many APC defectors are not under EFCC probe

Wale Igbintade

The Association of Nigerian Students for Accountability and Good Governance (ANSAGG) has faulted the public outcry by former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, over his ongoing investigation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), describing it as an attempt to whip up public sympathy to evade lawful scrutiny.

In a statement issued on Monday, the association said Malami’s reaction was unbecoming of a former Chief Law Officer of the Federation and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, urging him to respect due process and allow the courts to determine the allegations against him.

The statement was jointly signed by ANSAGG President, Adaisong Gabriel, and General Secretary, Abu Abdullahi.

ANSAGG described Malami’s posture as ironic, recalling that while in office he consistently maintained that investigation and prosecution do not amount to guilt and that only the courts can determine innocence or otherwise.

“As Attorney-General, Malami repeatedly defended investigations and prosecutions, insisting they do not translate to conviction. It is therefore disturbing that he now cries foul simply because the searchlight is on him,” the group said.

The students’ body stressed that Malami was neither the first nor the only former minister to be investigated by the EFCC, noting that several former public office holders have undergone similar probes without alleging persecution.

Rejecting claims of political witch-hunt, ANSAGG said the investigation had nothing to do with Malami’s defection from the All Progressives Congress (APC), pointing out that many politicians who have also defected from the APC are not under any EFCC investigation.

“Defection does not trigger EFCC action. Several defectors are not being investigated, while some individuals who remain within the APC have also faced probes. Party affiliation offers no shield against accountability,” the association stated.

The group reminded Malami of his own public position as AGF that anyone with nothing to hide had no reason to fear investigation by law enforcement agencies.

“If he has nothing to hide, he should submit himself fully to investigation and allow the courts to do justice,” it said.

ANSAGG dismissed Malami’s call for the recusal of the EFCC Chairman over alleged bias arising from the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry, describing the claim as speculative and self-serving.

According to the association, the EFCC Chairman’s past role as Secretary to a lawful judicial commission does not, without more, establish bias or invalidate the commission’s statutory powers.

“To suggest that such involvement permanently disqualifies an official from performing statutory duties stretches the doctrine of bias to an absurd level,” it argued.

The group also rejected Malami’s claim that he had been “prejudged,” describing it as premature in the absence of any adverse judicial pronouncement.

On allegations of illegal detention, media harassment and procedural abuse, ANSAGG said such claims are best addressed before a court of competent jurisdiction rather than through media statements.

“The courts remain open. If his fundamental rights have been breached, the Constitution provides clear remedies. Resorting to media trials while demanding arraignment is contradictory,” it said.

ANSAGG further dismissed Malami’s criticism of the EFCC’s alleged reliance on witnesses convicted abroad, stressing that issues of credibility and admissibility are matters for the courts.

“Nigeria’s criminal justice system is robust enough to determine the weight to attach to any witness. Malami knows this better than most,” the group added.

The association warned against attempts to delegitimise anti-corruption institutions simply because an individual is under investigation, saying such conduct undermines public confidence in accountability mechanisms.

“It is wrong to cry foul now that it is his turn. As a former Attorney-General, Malami should lead by example, cooperate with investigators, respect due process and allow the judiciary to pronounce on his innocence or otherwise,” it said.

ANSAGG urged the EFCC to continue its work without fear or favour, insisting that no individual, regardless of status or former office, is above the law.

Meanwhile, the EFCC has denied allegations of targeting opposition politicians, insisting that its operations are guided strictly by its Establishment Act.

In a statement posted on its official X handle on Monday, the commission said its mandate is to investigate and prosecute economic and financial crimes without regard to political affiliation, noting that only political office holders enjoying constitutional immunity are exempt from prosecution.

The EFCC said records of arrests and prosecutions over the past two years show that suspects from both the ruling party and opposition parties, including former governors and ministers, have been investigated and prosecuted.

It stressed that corruption has no political, ethnic, religious or gender identity, warning that claims of selective prosecution cannot serve as a defence against investigation.

The commission cautioned against attempts to intimidate or blackmail it into abandoning investigations under the guise of protecting democracy, describing such actions as a greater threat to democratic governance.

“The commission will not succumb to blackmail or be railroaded into inconclusive investigations just to appear non-selective,” it said.

The EFCC called on Nigerians to support its mandate, describing the fight against corruption as a collective national responsibility.

Wale Igbintade

Justice Ibrahim Kala of the Federal High Court, Lagos, has fixed September 18 for a review of facts in the case of two staff of the Integrated Payroll and Personnel Information System (IPPIS) who admitted to diverting salaries of exited workers totaling N1.17 million.

The defendants, Shola Onasanya, a Chief Accountant, and Halimat Olalere, a Principal Executive Officer of Accounts, are attached to the IPPIS Payroll Desk Office of the Federal Medical Centre (FMC), Ebute Meta, Lagos.

They were arraigned by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) on an amended two-count charge bordering on corruption and unlawful conversion of public funds.

During the proceedings, ICPC prosecutor Enosa Omoghibo informed the court that the defendants had entered into a plea bargain agreement filed on September 4.

He applied for the amended charge to be read to them, after seeking the court’s leave to substitute the earlier charge.

The defendants pleaded guilty to both counts.

Relying on Section 270 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, Omoghibo prayed the court to adopt the plea bargain agreement and enter it as judgment.

Justice Kala, however, noted that the court could not convict solely on their guilty pleas without some evidence from the prosecution, citing Section 274 of the ACJA.

“The prosecution still has the burden of proof, even though the defendants’ guilty pleas have lightened that burden,” the judge held.

Following the court’s observations, defence counsel applied for an adjournment to enable the prosecution present evidence to support the guilty plea.

The case was subsequently adjourned to September 18 for review of facts.

According to the charge, the defendants allegedly failed to stop the salaries of some FMC staff who had left the service between January and December 2023.

The funds were allegedly paid into Olalere’s account, from which she transferred them to Onasanya’s account for personal use, in violation of Section 18(2)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2022.

Sponsored Post  September 11, 2025

NOTICE OF DISCLAIMER

We are solicitors to Amb. (Dr.) Mrs. Adedoyin Rosaline Amangbo, accredited representative of PI International Royal Diplomatic Club of the United Nations, EU Republic of Lithuania and UNIPGC Africa and the Deputy Head of Mission & Secretary General, respectively in Nigeria and Africa, on whose instruction we write this disclaimer.

Our client hereby denies any knowledge of the nomination and/or appointment of Dr. Kingsley Amafibe as an ambassador of the International Royal Diplomatic Club of the United Nations (IRDCUN) Nigerian Chapter and with any rights or privileges attached to the said alleged appointment as published in The Guardian newspaper dated 14th of August 2025 and other news outlets.

Dr. Kingsley Amafibe, to the best of the knowledge of our client, was only appointed as an ambassador of United Nations International for Peace and Governance Council (UNIPGC), Africa, with full rights and privileges as a member of UNIPGC and not as a member of International Royal Diplomatic club of the United Nations (IRDCUN) and our client has nothing whatsoever to do with and/or in connection with either of such nomination, appointment or conferment or award.

Bankole Kayode Esq.
LEGALSOFT BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS

Sponsored Post September 11, 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE IN THE LAGOS JUDICIAL DIVISION HOLDEN AT LAGOS

SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF DECLARATION AND CLARIFICATION
OF
I, AMB. (DR.) MRS. ADEDOYIN ROSALINE AMANGBO, Females Christian, Nigerian of 135A, Eti-Osa Way, Dolphin Estat Lagos Nigeria do hereby state on oath as follows.

1. That I am the above-named person and accredited
   representative of PI International Royal Diplomatic C Of the United Nations, EU Republic of Lithuania and uNter Africa and the Deputy Head of Mission in Nigeria and Africa.
2. That my attention was drawn to a newspaper publication in online Platform of The Guardian Newspaper dated 14th of
   August, 2025 written by one ‘Sola Akinsanmi with a caption, ‘AMB. AMAFIBE RECEIVES DIPLOMATIC ELITE MEMBERSHIP OF UN” asserting that the said Amb. Amafibe has been “handed the membership of the International Royal Diplomatic club of the United Nations (IRDCUN) by the Nigerian Chapter of the
   “International organization. The said publication went on to assert that “A membership letter signed by the IRDCUN Protocol Director, Mr. Mustapha Idowu, said Amb. Amafibe is now entitled to all the rights and privileges of the United Nations” and further that,” He also received other insignia of the organization, including its identity card, customized number plate and others.”
3. That I hereby state on record that I know absolutely nothing about the alleged nomination or appointment of Mr. Amafibe as an Ambassador of International Royal Diplomatic club of the United Nations (IRDCUN) or any organization whatsoever and has nothing whatsoever to do or in connection with the granting of any rights, privileges and /or benefit to the said individual.
4. That I also have nothing to do with or in connection with such publication in The Guardian Newspaper dated 14th of August, 2025 and the said appointment or nomination did not emanate from me or my office at any time or in any way whatsoever and howsoever and that I am not aware of or have any contact, relationship, discussion or
   dealings whatsoever with the said Mr. Amafibe in respect of any
   appointment or nomination. I was not even present or aware or informed of the event where he was nominated or awarded the alleged ambassadorial position.
5. That I was only informed between the 3rd and 4th of September, 2025 by my Boss Amb. (Dr.) Jonathan Daniel Ojadah that Mr. Amafibe has been appointed as an ambassador of the United Nations International for Peace and Governing Council, Africa with full rights and privileges as a member of UNIPGC and not as a member of International Royal Diplomatic club of the United Nations (IRDCUN) • I was never aware of such nomination and appointment nor informed of his appointment prior to 3rd of September and I was never present or participated or involved in the planning and organization of the event where he was appointed.
6. That I have instructed my solicitors to legally take up everything connected with
   and/or incidental to the said
   publication with The Guardian Newspaper with a view to unraveling the source of the said malicious and false publication and to bring the perpetrators to justice.
7. That I have never done and will never do anything or engage in any activities that will bring the International Royal Diplomatic club of the United Nations (IRDCUN) or any organization to disrepute or involve, engage, participate in any nomination or appointment without the express written consent of International Royal Diplomatic club of the United Nations (IRDCUN)•
8. That I depose to this affidavit in good faith, consciously believing the same to be true and correct and in accordance
   with the Oaths Law of Lagos State.

Amb.Dr. Rosaline Adedoyin Amangbo
Deponent
Sworn to at the High Court of Lagos State, This day
09/09/25 of September, 2025.

Last Saturday’s by-elections in Kaduna State is seen by many not only as a watershed moment in the state’s political history, but a definitive endorsement of Governor Uba Sani’s inclusive governance philosophy and a rebuke of divisive, exclusionary politics, Wale Igbintade writes.

The by-elections conducted last Saturday in Kaduna State emerge not merely as a routine political event but as a profound testament to the transformative power of inclusive and visionary governance under Governor Uba Sani.

In a state long marked by political volatility, sectarian tension, and historical divisions, the results delivered a compelling message: the people of Kaduna are yearning for, and embracing, a new political order founded on equity, justice, and collective progress.

At the forefront of this electoral wave was the resounding victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Felix Bagudu in the Chikun–Kajuru Federal Constituency, who secured an impressive 34,580 votes to decisively outpace his nearest rival from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who garnered 11,491 votes. The Chikun–Kajuru Federal Constituency was since 2015, a stronghold long held by opposition forces.

This victory was complemented by similar sweeping successes in the state House of Assembly elections, where APC candidates, Isa HarunaIhamo of Zaria Kewaye and Dahiru Umar-Sani of Basawa, triumphed with commanding margins.

These results are more than numerical victories; they are the public’s emphatic endorsement of a governance model that prioritizes inclusiveness and sustainable development.

The electoral process itself, lauded for its transparency and orderliness, demonstrated a political maturity that augurs well for the democratic future of Kaduna State.

Professor Abubakar Mohammed Jumare, the Returning Officer for the Chikun–Kajuru constituency, encapsulated the spirit of the exercise, noting it was “transparent” and marked by “cooperation of security agencies, party agents, and voters,” culminating in an outcome reflective of the “will of the people.” This serene electoral environment stands in stark contrast to Kaduna’s past electoral turbulence and symbolizes a deeper social transformation.

Celebrations erupted across Kaduna metropolis and Kujama, where the results were met with enthusiasm and joy: not just for the APC’s victory, but for the dawning of a new political chapter. This jubilation, however, is grounded not in partisan triumphalism but in the collective hope for peace, justice, and equitable governance that has become synonymous with Governor Sani’s tenure. The electoral sweep reflects a consolidation of APC’s popularity across urban and rural constituencies alike, signalling that the governor’s inclusive message resonates widely.

Secretary of Kaduna APC, Yahaya Baba-Pate, aptly summarised this political moment as “not mere electoral wins,” but “eloquent affirmations of the people’s steadfast faith” in the APC’s ideals and the governance philosophy championed at both federal and state levels. This synergy between President Bola Tinubu’s national leadership and Governor Sani’s state administration is instrumental in advancing the “Renewed Hope Agenda,” which centres on peace, prosperity, and equitable development.

Baba-Pate’s words echo a broader reality: Kaduna’s electorate is aligning behind a leadership that listens, serves, and empowers.

On Monday, 48 hours after the huge electoral victory, the governor conferred with stakeholders, leaders, and members of the state APC at the Yar’Adua Hall, Murtala Square. While appreciating the party stakeholders for their sacrifice and hard work that led to the success of the party, the Governor reaffirmed his commitment to inclusive leadership where everyone is carried along, regardless of political, religious, or ethnic affiliation.

Governor Sani’s approach to governance, marked by inclusivity and pragmatic action, has redefined Kaduna’s political and social landscape. His administration’s commitment to “pro-people, pro-poor, and all-inclusive government, with equity, justice and fairness as the foundation for peace and progress” has shifted public expectations and realities. This philosophy manifests in policies that have strengthened security, revitalized rural communities, and fostered social cohesion across Kaduna’s ethnically and religiously diverse population.

Indeed, Kaduna has long been emblematic of Nigeria’s complex socio-political challenges, where ethnic and religious fault lines have often erupted into conflict. The state’s history since the return to democratic governance in 1999 is punctuated by episodes of violence and political fragmentation.

Against this backdrop, Governor Sani’s emphasis on “party blindness”  (when it comes to governance proper) and unity represents a radical departure, a governance model that prioritises shared humanity over divisive identities. His leadership has shown that political allegiance need not be a barrier to cooperation and common purpose.

This inclusivity is further underscored by high-profile defections from opposition parties to the APC earlier this year, including the notable arrival of former Governor Mukhtar RamalanYero, serving and former members of the national and state assemblies, as well as other political stalwarts at a well-attended rally, held at the Murtala Square in Kaduna. Such movements underscore the magnetic appeal of Governor Sani’s policies and the confidence his leadership inspires across the political spectrum. They also signal a realignment in Kaduna’s political culture; one that is increasingly oriented toward development and stability rather than factional rivalry.

Security has been a cornerstone of Governor Sani’s administration and an area where his leadership has yielded tangible dividends.

In collaboration with federal agencies and the National Security Adviser’s office, he implemented a holistic security strategy that blends kinetic and community-based approaches. As a result, Kaduna has witnessed a significant reduction in violence, emerging as one of the safest states in Northern Nigeria. This security transformation has restored public confidence and created an environment conducive to economic and social development.

Complementing security improvements is the administration’s commitment to financial inclusion. The governor’s Executive Order targeting the formal financial integration of at least 2.5 million previously underserved citizens is a landmark initiative designed to empower marginalised communities and reduce poverty. This move is part of a broader poverty alleviation agenda that focuses on youth empowerment and sustainable economic growth, embodying the administration’s pro-poor ethos.

Fiscal prudence also marks the governance style of Governor Sani. Under his watch, Kaduna State has implemented significant cost-cutting measures, including reductions in the salaries and allowances of political officeholders. This lean approach to governance ensures that resources are redirected toward infrastructure, social services, and development projects.

“We have drastically reduced the cost of governance and that is why we can do certain things,” the governor had remarked, highlighting his administration’s commitment to fiscal responsibility.

This wave of inclusive governance and electoral success delivers a political setback to the coalition aligned with the immediate past governor of the state, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai. Once a dominant figure in Kaduna’s political landscape, el-Rufai and his alliance, including the African Democratic Congress (ADC) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP), have witnessed their influence wane.

Their failure to translate online support into votes, and the sparsity of attendance at their rallies, mark a significant decline in their political capital. The electorate’s rejection of their divisive politics reinforces the ascendancy of Sani’s unifying vision.

This political realignment reflects a broader national dynamic. Nigeria’s electorate is displaying patience and resilience amid economic reforms and difficult policy decisions at the federal level. Despite challenges such as subsidy removal and inflationary pressures, the public is placing faith in a leadership committed to long-term national revival.

As Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon Tajudeen Abbas, observed, “This triumph is a clear reflection of the trust and confidence our people continue to repose in the APC under the visionary leadership of President Tinubu, and Governor Sani.”

Governor Sani’s leadership style, marked by humility, vision, and inclusiveness, offers a compelling alternative to Nigeria’s often fractious political environment. His administration’s frequent engagement with citizens through town halls and consultations has institutionalised a participatory governance culture.

In his own words, “Our plans were easily understood and welcomed with relief by the populace. The people quickly keyed into our agenda, which was unambiguous: an inclusive governance that is calibrated to leave no one behind.”

This clarity of purpose and responsiveness to the people’s needs have galvanized a broad coalition of support, transcending traditional ethnic and political divides.

The Kaduna by-election results, therefore, signify not just political dominance for the APC but a deeper societal embrace of governance rooted in fairness, justice, and shared progress.

As Kaduna continues on this promising path, it serves as an exemplar for other Nigerian states grappling with similar challenges. Governor Sani’s vision affirms that leadership anchored in empathy, inclusiveness, and pragmatic action can indeed transform societies and foster enduring peace and prosperity.

Wale Igbintade

A Lagos High Court has ordered the arrest and production of Rahmat Omolara Animashaun over allegations of making false accusations of sexual assault against her estranged husband, involving their two minor children.

The order follows an investigation report by the Nigeria Police and legal advice from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Lagos State Ministry of Justice, both recommending her prosecution for multiple criminal offences.

Justice I.O. Harrison of the Lagos State High Court issued a bench warrant for Ms. Animashaun’s arrest after she failed to appear in court on July 9, 2025, in a pending criminal case marked LD/25997C/25, filed by the State of Lagos.

According to the DPP’s legal advice, Ms. Animashaun faces charges of perjury, false accusation, making false statements to a public officer with intent, and attempting to pervert the course of justice.

These offences are punishable under Sections 86, 95, 96, and 97(3) of the Lagos State Criminal Law, Chapter C17, Volume 3, Laws of Lagos State, 2015.

The case arises from a contentious custody dispute between Ms. Animashaun and her estranged husband, Mr. Adewale Olatunji, following their separation and ongoing divorce proceedings. The couple shares custody of their two young children.

On October 16, 2022, Ms. Animashaun alleged that both children returned from their father’s care appearing pale and sickly.

She subsequently filed a petition with the Zone 2 Police Command in Lagos, accusing Mr. Olatunji of sexually molesting the children, and supported her claims with medical reports from the Mirabel Centre.

Based on the petition, Mr. Olatunji was arrested by the Zone 2 Police Command.

During interrogation, he strongly denied the allegations and requested further medical evaluation.

Subsequent examinations at the Police Cottage Hospital found no signs of bruising or sexual abuse.

The attending doctors recommended specialist reviews by a pediatric surgeon (for the male child) and a gynecologist (for the female child), scheduled for November 17, 2022, with both parents expected to attend.

However, Ms. Animashaun and the Zone 2 Police failed to present the children for these examinations. Mr. Olatunji, suspecting foul play, alleged collusion between Ms. Animashaun and police officers to falsely incriminate him.

Through his legal counsel, he petitioned the Deputy Inspector General of Police at the Force Criminal Investigation Department (FCID) Headquarters in Abuja.

The FCID subsequently took over the case via a directive referenced CR:3100/X/FHQ/ABJ/SEB/ADM/VOL.2/284, dated December 13, 2022.

Ms. Animashaun was invited for questioning at the FCID Headquarters but failed to appear.

Investigators also directed her to present the children for medical evaluation at the National Hospital, Abuja, to substantiate her allegations.

Despite repeated invitations, she neither complied nor produced the children. She later fled to the United States with them.

A magistrate court in Lagos eventually issued a warrant for her arrest.

Following prolonged custody proceedings, the Queens Family Court in New York ordered that the children be handed over to Mr. Olatunji for repatriation to Nigeria.

Upon their return, Mr. Olatunji took the children to the FCID Headquarters in Abuja on February 7, 2025, for the required medical evaluation at the National Hospital.

Examinations conducted by Dr. Ukpai Nwankwo Ukpai and Dr. Idris Liman declared both children healthy.

The four-year-old boy showed no signs of injury, while the five-year-old girl was reported to have a normal and healthy genitalia, with an intact hymen and no evidence of trauma.

Ms. Animashaun was eventually arrested by FCID operatives in March 2025 and granted bail.

The police investigation also revealed that the medical reports she initially submitted to support her claims were likely forged.

Based on the cumulative evidence—including medical evaluations and investigative findings—the DPP concluded that Ms. Animashaun knowingly made false accusations to implicate her ex-husband and obstruct justice.

The DPP’s legal advice cited key judicial precedents, including Kayode Odukoya v. FRN (2023), which outlines the elements of perjury, and Alhaji Moshood Aroyewun v. Commissioner of Police, Ogun State (2004), which clarifies the offence of false statements to public officers.

According to the DPP, “The conduct of the suspect was less than honest and honourable.”

The case has been adjourned to September 29, 2025.

*Awards N5m against orchestrator

Wale Igbintade

A Lagos High Court sitting at the Commercial Courthouse, Tapa, has delivered a landmark judgment in favour of a businessman, Chukwuemeka Akachukwu Ewereaku, condemning the Nigeria Police Force and a private complainant for the unlawful arrest, detention, and intimidation of the trader over a N560,000 hair transaction dispute.

Justice Anjorin-Ajose ruled that the entire incident was civil and did not justify the involvement of the police.

In its decision, the court awarded N5 million in general damages against one Tessy Chiamaka Nnadi for orchestrating what it described as a gross abuse of state power.

The matter arose from a December 2024 sale of luxury human hair valued at N560,000, advertised and sold by Mr. Ewereaku through WhatsApp.
Dissatisfied after receiving the product, Ms. Nnadi reportedly stormed the businessman’s shop and insisted on a refund.

When her demands were not immediately met, she escalated the matter to the police.

On December 11, 2024, armed policemen from the Lion Building Division allegedly arrested Ewereaku without any prior invitation.
He was then taken to the station, where he claimed to have been physically assaulted and forced under duress to refund the money.
In response, Ewereaku filed a fundamental rights enforcement suit—LD/1863MFHR/2024—through his counsel, Chibuenyim Precious Onyemachi of Enyim Solicitors.

The suit named the Nigeria Police Force, the Inspector-General of Police, the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Inspector Tolu of Lion Building Division, and Ms. Nnadi as respondents.

He sought declarations and injunctive relief, contending that his arrest and detention were illegal and that the entire episode constituted a breach of his fundamental rights.

He also submitted evidence, including medical reports and receipts, to support his claims of assault, harassment, and psychological trauma, including symptoms consistent with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

In his judgment, Justice Anjorin-Ajose held that: “The police cannot be used as debt recovery agents in purely commercial or civil transactions.”

The judge cited relevant constitutional provisions—Sections 34, 35, and 41—to reinforce Mr. Ewereaku’s right to dignity, personal liberty, and freedom of movement, noting that these had been violated.

The court ruled that the police acted outside the scope of their constitutional mandate when they responded to Ms. Nnadi’s complaint by arresting and detaining Mr. Ewereaku over a strictly civil refund disagreement.

The court declared: “The invitation, arrest, and detention of the applicant at the instance of the 5th respondent were illegal, unlawful, and unconstitutional.”

While the judge declined to issue a perpetual injunction restraining the police from any future investigation of the applicant, it granted several critical reliefs: “A declaration that the police, acting on Ms. Nnadi’s instigation, violated the applicant’s rights; and damages award of N5,000,000 against the 5th respondent, Tessy Nnadi, for the unlawful use of state machinery to pursue a private civil claim.

Interestingly, while Chris Ayiyi appeared for Ms. Nnadi, the police respondents, Inspector-General, Lagos CP, and Inspector Tolu—did not enter any defence in court.

Justice Anjorin-Ajose emphasised the growing trend of citizens abusing law enforcement powers to intimidate business counterparts over commercial disagreements and warned that such actions would no longer be condoned by the courts.

“Any individual who uses the state security apparatus to harass or intimidate another in a civil matter risks being held personally liable,” the judge ruled.

Wale Igbintade

Nigeria has again performed poorly on key human rights indicators, according to new data by the Human Rights Measurement Initiative (HRMI), an independent global non-governmental organisation.

The report alleges significant shortfalls in government protections for civil liberties, personal security, and basic living standards.

In its 2025 dataset, published via the Rights Tracker platform, HRMI rated Nigeria 3.2 out of 10 in the category of Safety from the State, which includes protection from arbitrary arrest, torture, enforced disappearance, extrajudicial execution, and the death penalty.

The report, obtained by Premium Times, said all of these rights, except for the death penalty, fell within HRMI’s “bad” or “very bad” range.

HRMI is an independent non-profit that produces peer-reviewed, data-driven human rights assessments.

Its Rights Tracker platform provides civil and political rights data for over 40 countries (2017–2024) and economic and social rights data for 195 countries (2000–2022), based on the award-winning SERF Index.

HRMI’s data are used by organisations including Amnesty International, the World Bank, and the United Nations.

Freedom from arbitrary arrest received Nigeria’s lowest score in this category at 2.5, placing the country among the lowest ranked globally, alongside Mexico and Venezuela. Within Africa, Nigeria ranked third worst among the eight countries assessed, behind only Kenya and Mozambique.

 “This is the first time we have produced civil and political rights data for Nigeria, and it is already clear that the government in Abuja has a long way to go in protecting the basic rights of its citizens,” said Nkosi Sibanda, HRMI’s East and Southern Africa Lead in a statement dated 17 June.

The findings come as Nigeria’s National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) continues to document a surge in reported violations.

In May 2025, the commission said it recorded 275,256 cases, marking a five per cent increase from April’s figure of 261,483.

HRMI’s assessment also raised concerns in the Empowerment category, which covers freedoms of expression, assembly, association, religion, and democratic participation. Nigeria scored 4.5 out of 10, with all subcategories, except freedom of religion and belief—rated as “bad.”

Human rights experts surveyed by HRMI said that protesters, activists, Indigenous communities, and labour advocates remain highly vulnerable to repression.
The report cited crackdowns on demonstrators during the August 2024 #EndBadGovernance protests, as well as actions against #EndSARS, #RevolutionNow, #EndHunger, and Ebi np awa (“We Are Hungry”) movements.

“Many people who speak up or protest non-violently in Nigeria remain at risk of serious rights violations,” the report noted.

The NHRC has also linked the rise in violations to deteriorating economic conditions. In October 2024, the commission recorded 427,606 complaints—a 27 per cent increase over the previous month. That month also saw the highest number of killings and abductions, according to the commission’s Senior Human Rights Adviser, Hilary Ogbonna.

Ogbonna explained that the spike was partly due to the explosion of a fuel tanker in the Taura Local Government Area of Jigawa State, which killed 167 people. The tragedy occurred as residents attempted to scoop fuel from a fallen tanker.

“Because of economic hardship, people saw an opportunity to make a profit, which sadly led to their death,” Ogbonna said.

“The security and welfare of the people is the primary duty of the government. It doesn’t matter whether they can read ‘inflammable’ or not. What is a mechanically unfit fuel tanker doing on a public road?”

In HRMI’s Quality of Life category, Nigeria’s scores were equally troubling. The country rated in the “very bad” range across all indicators—health, food, housing, and work—with particularly low figures for access to water (38.25%) and sanitation (46.6%).

“In many parts of Nigeria, especially urban centres, rent prices have soared—sometimes by over 100%—while wages remain stagnant,” said Kehinde Adegboyega, HRMI’s Nigeria Ambassador and Executive Director of the Human Rights Journalists Network.

“People are being pushed out of decent housing, forced to downsize, or even sell personal belongings just to survive.”

Adegboyega urged the government to treat access to affordable housing as a fundamental right, not merely an economic policy issue.

HRMI’s Co-Executive Director, Thalia Kehoe Rowden, said the country has the resources to reverse these trends but lacks the political will.

“Our scores show that Nigeria has all the resources it needs to make very significant improvements in people’s lives,” she said.“The government must fulfill its obligation to devote maximum available resources toward basic rights like education, healthcare, and food.”

Wale Igbintade

A former Nigerian Ambassador, Lilian Onoh, has petitioned the Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), alleging judicial bias and procedural irregularities in a defamation suit filed against her by a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Geoffrey Onyeama.

In her petition, Onoh questioned the judgment delivered on June 4, 2025, by Justice Keziah Ogbonnaya, which ruled in favour of Onyeama.

She described aspects of the decision as troubling and claimed that it conflated her criticism of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with personal defamation against the former minister.

Onoh, who previously served as Head of Mission in Jamaica and High Commissioner to Namibia, argued that the ruling undermined institutional accountability by treating criticism of the ministry as a personal attack on Onyeama.

She also alleged that certain procedural steps were not followed.

According to her, the court declined to hear some of her pre-trial applications and required her to bear costs associated with virtual court proceedings, including the provision of technical resources.

In the petition, she further alleged that there were delays in the issuance of the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment, which she said hindered her ability to file an appeal promptly.

Onoh suggested that the handling of the case may have been influenced by her prior petition in 2023 concerning alleged misconduct, and called for a review of the judgment.

She also urged the FCT Chief Judge to investigate certain remarks made in court, which she believed amounted to improper judicial conduct.
The petition, which was also sent to the Inspector General of Police, the Attorney General of the Federation, and several diplomatic missions, called for an independent inquiry and an interim suspension of the judgment’s enforcement.

Efforts to obtain comments from Justice Ogbonnaya and Mr. Onyeama were unsuccessful as of press time.

As the Supreme Court is set to hear the appeal filed by the governorship the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the Edo State gubernatorial election, Mr. AsueIghodalo, the people of the state are in hope that it will display courage, uphold the rule of law and the principles of democracy, Wale Igbintade writes.

Any moment from now, the Supreme Court will begin hearing on the appeal filed by the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the September 21, 2024 Edo State gubernatorial election, Mr. AsueIghodalo. He is basically asking the court to nullify the victory of Governor Monday Okpebholo in the election.

Recall that the Court of Appeal in Abuja had recently affirmed Okpebholo’s election as the governor, and dismissing the petition filed by Ighodalo and the PDP.

After the election, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Okpebholo, of the All Progressives Congress (APC), victorious with 291,667 votes, while Ighodalo, who garnered 247,274 votes, and OlumideAkpata of the Labour Party (LP) finished a distant third with 22,763 votes.

But dissatisfied with the outcome of the poll, the PDP and Ighodalo approached the tribunal, praying it to nullify INEC’s declaration of APC and Okpebholo as winners of the contest.

The petitioners, among other things, alleged non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act. They argued that the respondents did not secure the highest number of lawful votes cast at the poll.

However, in April 2025, the three-member tribunal, led by Justice Wilfred Kpochi, dismissed the case.

In its ruling, Justice Kpochi who headed the three man-panel, while delivering the lead judgment, stated that Ighodalo failed to provide credible witnesses or sufficient evidence to substantiate claims of electoral irregularities. He emphasised that allegations of non-compliance with the Electoral Act must be clearly proven.

The tribunal highlighted that the petitioners’ inability to present polling unit staff, presiding officers, or voters as witnesses critically weakened their case. It concluded that the petitioners simply dumped documents on them and failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeal equally upheld Okpebholo’s victory and dismissed Ighodalo’s appeal.

While the Supreme Court is about to hear the appeal, there are many issues it needs to consider to help add credibility to Nigeria’s electoral process.

Before the governorship election, all the odds were stacked against Ighodalo and PDP, as many questioned the neutrality of the police and INEC. The concerns followed allegations that the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) in the state, AnugbumOnuoha, and the Commissioner of Police, Mr. Nemi Edwin-Iwo, were allies of Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), NyesomWike.

While the REC was alleged to be Wike’s cousin, who had also served as his Special Adviser on Lands when he was the governor of Rivers State, the police commissioner, who was said to be an indigene of Rivers State, was alleged to be an associate of Wike, a known political enemy of the then Governor Godwin Obaseki.

Despite the objections raised by the PDP that the posting of the police commissioner and the REC to the state could not have been a coincidence, but a deliberate plot to deliver Edo State to the APC, INEC and the police authorities ignored the objections.

But the reports of the various election observers on the collation of the results suggested that the pre-election fears were not baseless. The manner of collation of the results tainted the credibility of the poll, as voiced out by local and international observers.

Interestingly, the same INEC which declared Okpebholo and APC winners of the poll, could not defend its credibility at the tribunal. The commission, which said it had a line-up of five witnesses that would give evidence to support its results, failed to field any witness to defend its action.

Following the judgments of the tribunal and the Court of Appeal, attention has so far shifted to the Supreme Court to right the wrongs.

Analysts and lovers of democracy are demanding that the court exhibit courage, absolute impartiality and independence. They argued that the outcome of the litigation would send out a powerful message about Nigeria’s commitment to democracy.

They hope the apex court will repeat the judicial courage it displayed in the appeals filed by Governor Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau State and Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf of Kano State respectively, after the tribunal and Appeal Court delivered what were considered bias judgments based on influence peddling and the bidding of a political party.

At the Supreme Court, Ighodalo’s legal team has advanced their arguments at the Court of Appeal, where they urged the court to allow the appeal and set aside the judgments of the tribunal and Court of Appeal.

They argued that in relation to their allegations of non-compliance, the tribunal and Appeal Court failed to appreciate the nature of the non-compliance complained about, noting that there was no record of serial number on Form EC25B as required by Section 73(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

They contended that “The tribunal said we required evidence of polling agents or witnesses to prove how the forms were filled or not filled. That was not our case. Our case was that the Form EC 25B did not contain the serial number.”

The appellants’ lawyers faulted the tribunal’s verdict that the documents they tendered at trial were dumped on them. They also noted that as against the tribunal’s finding, oral evidence was not needed in the nature of the case of the appellants, who were petitioners before the tribunal, stating that their clients did not challenge the conduct of the election, but the conflict in the results collated and announced.

In conclusion, they pointed out that part of their  contention is that the results that were collated at the ward level were not the results declared at the polling units.

Those who thought as cases go up the ladder of adjudication whatever errors of law, evaluation and of facts that were committed at the lower courts would be corrected for justice to have been done were disappointed at the Court of Appeal. Unfortunately, this has not been the case, leaving many to wonder whether the court is serving other ends than ensuring that litigants obtain justice.

This is why many other lawyers have also faulted  the tribunal for holding that the petitioners simply dumped documents on them and failed to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, a decision the Court of Appeal upheld.

They accused the courts of working to produce predetermined judgments, noting that the judges were not patient and meticulous enough to peruse the documents tendered before them.

Citing Section 51 (2) of the Electoral Act, they argued that the judges did not need a witness to prove over-voting, adding that what they needed to do was to go through the documents to see things for themselves.

They equally cited the Supreme Court’s judgment in Ihedioha vs Uzodimma, where the APC only presented two witnesses and got a favourable judgment.

Others were miffed beyond words at the pronouncements of the courts, saying they were contrary to the Electoral Act. They wondered if the panels were expecting the petitioners to produce witnesses from all the polling units where malpractices took place in a tribunal that had a very limited time to hear the petition.

“If the petitioners were complaining of over voting in 133 units and documentary evidence from the polling units showed that the number of votes cast exceeded the number of accredited voters, what else were the judges expecting to see and hear?” one of the lawyers, a SAN, queried.

They criticised the tribunal for dismissing documents that had already been accepted as exhibits, stating that even INEC did not dispute their authenticity. They also added that Section 72(1) of the Electoral Act mandates INEC to record the serial numbers and quantities of sensitive election materials, including ballot papers and BVAS machines, before the election.

“PDP pleaded about three cases: One was about non-compliance, the second was over-voting, and the third was an incorrect collation of scores. In the case of over-voting, they tendered documents which are INEC Certified True Copy. These were INEC documents to prove over-voting. We were shocked that the judge wanted us to bring 133 individuals from each polling unit to prove over-voting. How was that to happen when there is documentary evidence, not PDP documents but INEC documents? The court had accepted these documents as exhibits and INEC did not cry foul to her own documents.”

While citing Section 137 of the Electoral Act, the lawyers stated that in cases of non-compliance, oral evidence is unnecessary when documentary evidence is available. They lamented that the tribunal and Court of Appeal failed to demonstrate their commitment to justice.

This is why they expect the Supreme Court to do justice to their case based on objectivity.

Wale Igbintade

The National Industrial Court sitting in Lagos has ordered a deposit money bank in Lagos to pay over N162 million in outstanding retirement benefits to a group of its former employees.

The court held that the bank unlawfully withheld the entitlements of long-serving staff who were engaged through a third-party employment arrangements.

The claimants, Ann Nwabulu, Chidinma Fred Oka, Doris Alfred-Okhilua, Dayo Johnson-Olayemi, Julius Ubah, Obiageli Mbadiwe, Obasi Esobe, Sophia Milton, Yemisi Femifalade, Abiamuwe Sylvester, and Nnenna Ekwueme were represented by their lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN.

They sought “A declaration that the bank’s failure to pay their retirement benefits constituted a breach of their employment contracts and violated established labour laws and practices. A declaration that the bank’s attempt to retroactively apply a new retirement policy to deprive them of their entitlements was unlawful. An order directing immediate payment of various sums owed to them.”

In a judgment delivered by Justice R.H. Gwandu, the court found that the claimants, including the 10th claimant who joined the bank following its merger with another commercial bank and Manny Bank, had sufficiently proven their employment and entitlement to the benefits claimed.

The court considered two key issues namely, “Whether it had jurisdiction to hear the 10th claimant’s case. Whether the claimants had established their entitlement to the retirement benefits and other reliefs.”

On jurisdiction, Justice Gwandu held that the court was competent to hear the 10th claimant’s case.

Although the said bank denied having a direct employment relationship with him, arguing that he was only seconded, the court found that he worked with FSB under Direct Resources Limited and continued with it for 11 years post-merger until his retirement in 2016.

Evidence such as long service awards and letters of recognition issued by the bank confirmed his status as a long-serving staff member. The judge stated: “It would be inequitable and unjust to hold that no employment relationship existed. The defendant cannot use technicalities to avoid its obligations when the facts are clear and uncontroverted.”

Regarding the substantive claims, the court ruled in favour of the former employees, who were employed through a Securities firm, a third-party firm, but served the said bank directly.

Justice Gwandu criticised the practice of using third-party entities to avoid labour obligations, noting that the bank acknowledged the claimants’ years of service through letters and service certificates.

“The practice of using third-party companies to avoid liability under the guise of privity of contract is one this honourable court has consistently frowned upon,” the court stated.

It further rejected the commercial bank’s argument that the claimants lacked the 15 years of unbroken service required under its retirement policy.

Wale Igbintade

PRO International Concept, a limited liability company, has filed an application at the Federal High Court in Lagos seeking to commit several bank managing directors to prison for contempt of court.

The respondents named in the suit include Mr. Moruf Abiola Oseni, Managing Director of Wema Bank Plc; Mr. Babatunde Olofin, Managing Director of Moniepoint Microfinance Bank; and Mr. Musty Mustapha, Managing Director of Kuda Microfinance Bank

Others are Mr. Henry Obiekea, Managing Director of Fairmoney Microfinance Bank, and Mr. Daudu Gotring Wuritka, Managing Director of Opay Digital Services Limited.

The company alleged that these individuals willfully disobeyed court orders issued on November 21, 2024, in connection with a fraud case involving the unauthorised withdrawal of N95 million from its bank account.

PRO International Concept is asking the court to compel the respondents to appear and show cause why they should not be jailed for defying the court’s orders.

In an affidavit deposed to by Omotayo Adebayo, litigation manager at the law firm representing the company, it was stated that the company’s operational bank account was hacked on September 5, 2024.

The breach allegedly led to the fraudulent transfer of N95 million, which was subsequently split and moved across multiple accounts in nine banks.

The company immediately alerted the relevant bank officers, who then sent “Block and Recall” requests to the fraud desks of 28 financial institutions.

While the funds were temporarily frozen, the institutions required a court order to maintain the freeze beyond 72 hours.

On September 9, 2024, PRO International Concept secured a court order from a district court in Nasarawa State to extend the freeze.

The current suit was subsequently filed at the Federal High Court.

On November 21, 2024, the Federal High Court ordered that the frozen funds be reversed to the company’s account and directed further investigations, including the placement of liens on the respondents’ accounts.

Despite these clear directives and proper service by court bailiffs, the respondents allegedly refused to comply or reverse the funds.

With no alternative, PRO International Concept has now commenced contempt proceedings, seeking the immediate imprisonment of the respondents to compel compliance and uphold the authority of the court.

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke has fixed July 3 for the hearing of the contempt application.

Wale Igbintade

The trial of former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), Mr. Ahmed Kuru, over alleged fraud involving Arik Air was stalled yesterday due to the absence of his counsel, Mr. Olasupo Shasore (SAN).

Kuru and four others are facing charges in connection with an alleged N76 billion and $31.5 million fraud.

Other defendants in the case include Kamilu Omokide, former Receiver Manager of Arik Air; Capt. Roy Ilegbodu, the airline’s Chief Executive Officer; Union Bank; and Super Bravo Ltd.

They are being prosecuted on a five-count charge bordering on theft, abuse of office, and dishonest conversion of property.

Union Bank faces an additional charge of making false statements to a public officer.

At Monday’s proceedings, Dr. Wahab Shittu appeared for the prosecution.

Prof. Taiwo Osipitan represented the first and third defendants, Tochukwu Amaefule represented the second defendant, Oluwaferanmi Rotimi appeared for the fourth defendant, and Chukudi Nwandike represented the fifth defendant.

Shittu, counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), informed the court that a witness was present and the matter was scheduled for further cross-examination.

However, Mr. Tochukwu Amaefule, who held brief for Shasore, requested an adjournment, citing a letter dated May 13.

He informed the court that Shasore was out of the country receiving medical treatment.

Shittu confirmed that Shasore had personally called to explain his health situation.

He said: “While I appreciate his courtesy and wish him a speedy recovery, I must point out that his call is more a matter of courtesy than one of justice.

“The court will recall that the second defendant previously delayed arraignment until a bench warrant was issued. I am concerned as to why a junior lawyer from the learned Silk’s chambers cannot proceed with the matter.

“This is a case of national and international importance concerning the aviation sector. While Mr. Shasore is entitled to seek medical care, this matter also deserves to proceed without delay.”

In response, Prof. Osipitan, counsel to the first and third defendants, stated that his clients were ready for trial and eager to defend themselves against the allegations.

He urged the court to fix multiple dates to ensure a speedy hearing.

Justice Mojisola Dada subsequently adjourned the matter to May 28, June 4, June 30, July 1, and July 2, 2025, for continuation of trial.

According to the EFCC, Union Bank allegedly made false statements to AMCON in 2011 regarding Arik Air’s performing loans, which led to the unjustified sale of the loans and bank guarantees.

The bank is accused of subsequently transferring N71 billion to AMCON.

The EFCC further alleged that in 2022, Kuru, Omokide, and Ilegbodu were involved in the diversion of N4.9 billion to NG Eagle Ltd.

It also claimed that Ilegbodu converted N22.5 million for the benefit of one Magashi Ali Mohammed, funds purportedly belonging to Arik Air.

Additionally, the defendants are accused of unlawfully authorizing the teardown and destruction of aircraft 5N-JEA (Serial No. 15058), valued at $31.5 million, an act the EFCC claims was arbitrary and detrimental to both Nigeria’s economic stability and that of Arik Air Ltd.

The alleged offences violate Sections 73, 96, 278(1), and 278(6) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.

Wale Igbintade

Prominent Nigerians including President Bola Tinubu, former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan, and former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, among others, yesterday, paid glowing tributes to the late Afenifere leader, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, who passed away on February 14, 2025, at the age of 97.

At a ‘Night of Tributes and Service of Songs’, held at Eko Hotel and Suites, Lagos, President Tinubu in his tribute sent to the family, described Adebanjo as one of the last nationalists and independence heroes, who laid Nigeria’s foundation.

In the president’s words: “The nation has lost a political leader whose decades-long struggle for democracy and unity left an indelible mark. All who knew Baba Adebanjo drew from his boundless wisdom and admired the democratic ideals he championed. Though we mourn, we thank God for a purposeful life – 96 years of tireless advocacy for equity and progress.”

Tinubu hailed Adebanjo as a lawyer, statesman, and a devoted disciple of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, recalling his political journey spanned from his role as Organising Secretary of the Action Group in the First Republic to leading the Unity Party of Nigeria in the Second Republic.

He also lauded Adebanjo’s courage during national crises, especially his leadership during the aftermath of the June 12, 1993, election annulment as a prominent figure in the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO).

Tinubu recalled Adebanjo’s support for his 1999 governorship bid in Lagos State under the Alliance for Democracy, describing him as unwavering in his pursuit of justice.

Obasanjo, represented by Senator Ibikunle Amosun, described Adebanjo as a foremost nationalist and patriot.

“I received the news of his passing while in Addis Ababa. When I visited him on February 3, though frail, I didn’t expect he would leave us so soon,” he said, adding, “He was a great man, a voice of the people, and a committed community leader.”

Acknowledging their political differences, Obasanjo praised Adebanjo’s dedication to national progress, restructuring, and justice.

“His thoughts transcended partisanship. Though his dream of a restructured Nigeria remains unfulfilled, it continues to inspire,” he said.

Jonathan, in his tribute, described Adebanjo as a national hero and a symbol of resilience.

“He championed the rights of the common man and advocated democracy and good governance until the very end. His death is a profound loss to the nation. He was a man of principles, courage, and unity,” Jonathan said.

Atiku called Adebanjo a fearless elder statesman and one of Nigeria’s last true nationalists.

“He spent his youth fighting colonialism, his middle years resisting military rule, and his later life promoting democracy and good governance. He was a formidable advocate for justice and equity.”

President of the African Development Bank, Akinwumi Adesina, described Adebanjo as an indomitable statesman and lifelong champion of truth.

“He consistently spoke out on Nigeria’s challenges and inspired generations. I saw him as a father figure. Even at 95, he attended the Awolowo Prize for Leadership ceremony to support me. That gesture moved me deeply.”

Labour Party presidential candidate in 2023, Mr. Peter Obi, described him as a man of courage, integrity, and unwavering commitment to truth and service.

“We are here to honour a man who lived a life of courage, truth, and dedication,” Obi said, adding: “He reminded us that true success lies in living a life of value.”

Obi recalled his interactions with Adebanjo during his presidential campaign and noted how deeply he cared about the impact of policies on ordinary Nigerians.

“I met him during my campaign. Even in our last conversations, he would ask, ‘What’s your position on this issue?’ He always insisted I explain how policies would affect Nigerians,” Obi said.

“He cared deeply about the poor. It didn’t matter whether the policy affected the North, East, or West – he just wanted to know how it would impact the people.”

Former Education Minister and ex-Vice President of the World Bank (Africa), Dr. Oby Ezekwesili, described Adebanjo as a revolutionary who spoke truth to power with boldness.

“He was a man of character, whose life is worthy of emulation,” she said.

Former SEC Director-General, Arunma Oteh, praised him as a courageous patriot and exceptional mentor.

“He lived a life of integrity, compassion, and sacrifice. He taught us that Nigeria thrives when united, and leadership must be grounded in character and competence.”

President of Dangote Group, Aliko Dangote, said Adebanjo was a steadfast advocate of true federalism and justice.

“His courage and belief in an egalitarian Nigeria will continue to inspire generations. He was never afraid to speak truth to power,” he said.

In his sermon titled: “Lord, Make Me to Know Mine End, and the Measure of My Days”, Pastor Tunde Bakare reflected on the brevity of life and the importance of living purposefully.

“Money, fame, and power are fleeting. What truly matters is not the praise of men, but God’s judgment,” he said.

According to him, “Chief Adebanjo stood for truth, even when it was unpopular. As we reflect on his legacy, we must ask ourselves: what legacy will we leave behind?”

Other dignitaries at the event included former Osun State governor, Rauf Aregbesola; former Ogun State governor, Otunba Gbenga Daniel; and retired General Zamani Lekwot, among others.

Wale Igbintade

Justice Daniel Osiagor of the Federal High Court in Lagos has modified a mareva injunction in the dispute between Ecobank Nigeria Plc and Kam Industries Nigeria Limited over an alleged $9.5 million credit transaction.

In a recent ruling, the court granted Kam Industries a one-time release of N500 million to pay outstanding salaries to over 4,000 employees nationwide.

The original mareva injunction, granted on October 7, 2024, had frozen assets across 25 banks and financial institutions linked to the defendants, pending the determination of the main suit (FHC/L/CS/1748/2024). 

Other defendants include Dr. Kamoru Yusuf and Kamsteel Integrated Company.

The variation followed a motion on notice filed by Chief Afolabi Fashanu (SAN), lead counsel for Kam Industries, who asked the court to temporarily lift the ex parte order to allow limited access to funds.

The application was brought under Orders 26 Rule 10(1)–(3) and 28 Rule 1(1)(3) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019, as well as Sections 6(6) and 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), and the court’s inherent jurisdiction.

Granting the request, Justice Osiagor held that the court had the authority to entertain the application and emphasised that the relief was necessary to keep the company operational, preserve jobs, and protect injured workers.

He also encouraged both parties to seek an amicable settlement and report back to the court.

Earlier, Ecobank’s counsel, Mr. Kemi Balogun (SAN), informed the court that a Notice of Appeal and Stay of Proceedings had been filed, challenging the court’s jurisdiction.

He argued that since the court had already heard the originating summons and adjourned to June 4, 2025, for ruling, the case could not be relisted without an application for abridgment of time.

In response, Chief Fashanu maintained that the court had inherent jurisdiction to hear the motion and noted that the hearing notice issued was standard practice in Federal High Courts.

In a bench ruling, Justice Osiagor granted the application, permitting the N500 million disbursement.

Kam Industries supported the application with a 28-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Olumide Abdulkareem, Executive Director of Global ������Ƶ Development and Legal. 

The affidavit pleaded for judicial discretion to prevent the company’s collapse and protect employee welfare.

Wale Igbintade 

The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos yesterday sentenced one Igboezue Emeka to one-month imprisonment for money laundering. 

Justice Alexander Owoeye also ordered the forfeiture of $40,000 to the Federal Government of Nigeria.

Emeka, was arrested on February 12, 2025, at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport by officers of the Nigerian Customs Service (NCS) for failing to declare the sum of $40,000 in his possession.

He was immediately handed over to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for further investigation and prosecution.

“That you, Igboezue Emeka, on or about the 12th day of February, 2025, at Murtala Muhammed International Airport, Lagos, within the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, failed to declare the sum of $40,000 USD (forty thousand United States Dollars) to the Nigerian Customs Service, thereby committing an offence contrary to Section 3(3) of the Money Laundering Act, No. 14 of 2022, and punishable under Section 3(5) of the same Act.”

Emeka pleaded guilty to the charge.

Following his plea, the prosecution counsel, Nnaemeka Omewa, sought the court’s permission to review the facts by calling an EFCC operative, Michael Olaremi.

Olaremi told the court that the EFCC received an intelligence report from the NCS around 1:20p.m. on February 12, 2025. Customs officers had intercepted Emeka with $40,000, which he failed to declare. 

Olaremi instructed a team member, Lanre Michael, to retrieve Emeka and the monetary exhibit from the NCS.

“At about 4p.m., Emeka was brought in with the cash, his international passport, and two mobile phones. In the presence of his relatives, he voluntarily gave a statement admitting that he was en route to Seoul, South Korea, via Qatar Airways. 

“He confessed that when asked by Customs officials whether he had any currency to declare, he falsely answered “No.”

Olaremi further testified that Customs officer Ogar Sadin John, who initially intercepted Emeka, became suspicious and discovered the money hidden in one of Emeka’s shoes inside his hand luggage.

The court admitted Emeka’s statement and the recovered cash as exhibits.

Justice Owoeye found him guilty and sentenced him to one month imprisonment, with the term commencing from the date of his arrest, February 12, 2025.

Wale Igbintade

The Federal High Court in Lagos has struck out a lawsuit challenging the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Road project, ruling that it lacks jurisdiction over the matter.

The case filed by indigenes and property owners of Okun-Ajah Community in Eti-Osa Local Government Area has been transferred to the Lagos State High Court for adjudication.

Justice Akintayo Aluko, in his ruling on case number FHC/L/CS/1488/2024, upheld preliminary objections raised by the defendants and ruled that the Federal High Court was not the appropriate venue for the case.

The judge however agreed to transfer the matter rather than dismiss it outright.

The plaintiffs, led by Chief Saheed Olukosi and other community representatives had sought to halt the project, alleging encroachment on their properties.

They requested court orders to set aside the road plans affecting their land and to restrain the defendants from further trespass. They also sought damages for alleged unlawful land occupation.

The defendants, including the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi, the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing, the Lagos State Attorney-General, and Hitech Construction Limited, argued that the case should be struck out for lack of jurisdiction.

Their legal teams, led by Senior Advocates of Nigeria, filed preliminary objections on seven grounds.

In his judgment, Justice Aluko cited Section 22(2) of the Federal High Court Act, which allows for cases to be transferred rather than struck out when filed in the wrong court.

He ruled in favour of the defendants’ objections but granted the plaintiffs’ request for the case to be heard at the Lagos State High Court instead.

With this decision, the dispute over the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Road project will now proceed in the state court.

Wale Igbintade

Zumax Nigeria Limited, an oil services company, has filed a N4.1 billion lawsuit against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), alleging gross negligence and complicity in what it calls a fraudulent receivership imposed by the apex bank.

In the case, filed before the Federal High Court in Lagos, Zumax claimed that the CBN failed in its statutory duty to supervise banks and protect customers’ interests.

The Plaintiff was a visible player in the oil services industry and was regularly engaged by the oil majors like Shell Explorations Limited and Chevron Limited, and from which jobs it earned regular substantial incomes in US Dollars.

At the hearing of the matter yesterday before Justice Akintoye Aluko, counsel to the plaintiff, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), told the court that the Plaintiff (Zumax) had an application dated February 20, 2025, and urged the court to hear the application.

Olanipekun further prayed the court to allow him move the application as the defendant had responded.  He also told the court that the Plaintiff and defendant’s preliminary objection can be consolidated and heard together.

Olanipekun further requested the court to consolidate and hear both the plaintiff’s application and the CBN’s preliminary objection together.

He argued that there was no conflict over which should be heard first, as the plaintiff had not objected to the court considering the CBN’s preliminary objection.

However, CBN’s counsel, Adeleke Agboola (SAN), maintained that the defendant’s preliminary objection – which challenges the court’s jurisdiction – should take precedence.

He argued that CBN filed its notice of preliminary objection within time and that the Plaintiff has responded to it.

Agboola said: “This preliminary objection has priority over any other applications. The Plaintiff’s application is not meritorious.

“There is no suggestion by the claimant that we did not file within time. We are saying that this court does not have the jurisdiction to hear this matter, I urge your lordship to allow us to argue this matter.

“There is no doubt that preliminary objection takes precedence. It says it must be heard first and determined our objection is very serious we have complied strictly by the rules.

“We urge this court to hear the preliminary objection and dismiss the Plaintiff’s application”.

In his response Olanipekun said: “My learned friend said the application we filed is not meritorious. It is the court that can make any pronouncement on that.

“My lord even when we talk of being tidy, we are not saying the court should not hear his preliminary objection. He is now the one saying that our application should not be heard.

“The court has to determine whether the objection has to be heard first or the Plaintiff’s application dated February 20,2025, has to be heard first.

“It’s no longer the law; in fact, it has never been the law that when there is a preliminary objection the court will say let’s take it first. We urge your lordship to take our application which haven’t not been contested by the defendant.”

After listening to the submissions and arguments of both parties, Justice Aluko adjourned the case till April 22, 2025, for ruling on which application to hear first.

According to court documents, Zumax held an account (No. 0101020000026) with the defunct IMB International Bank PLC, which was later merged into First City Monument Bank (FCMB).

The plaintiff initially obtained a N50 million overdraft facility from IMB, which was later increased to N200 million in 1998.

However, Zumax alleged that the bank fraudulently inflated its debt, and by December 6, 2002, claimed the debt had risen to N465.6 million – a claim Zumax vehemently disputed.

Zumax further accuses FCMB’s former Managing Director, Edwin Chinye, of taking control of its foreign currency earnings held in a JP Morgan Bank account through Redsear Limited, a sister company of FCMB.

Zumax contends that FCMB, under its former Managing Director took control of its foreign currency earnings held in a JP Morgan Bank account through its sister company, Redsear Limited.

According to the plaintiff the Bank’s Managing Director, not only insisted upon and got shares in Redsears Limited and a directorship of that company as a condition precedent for the loan, he also allegedly inserted himself as the lone signatory for the company’s bank account with JP Morgan Bank.

The plaintiff further alleged that “The bank misappropriated $4m from this account, a shortfall discovered during an audit.

“Rather than addressing the dispute, FCMB appointed receivers to take over Zumax’s operations, a move the company described as fraudulent.

“The receivership, which lasted from December 2002 until 2022, led to severe financial losses, including the collapse of Zumax’s business and the loss of contracts without multinational oil companies such as Chevron.

“The company claimed it was unable to operate for two decades due to the receivership, which was based on what it describes as an entirely fabricated debt.

“Zumax further alleged that despite repeated petitions, the CBN failed to investigate FCMB’s actions or intervene to prevent the alleged financial mismanagement.

“The company maintained that a 2007 CBN report confirmed that it had paid over N547m, to FCMB, proving it was never in debt to the bank.

“Additionally, the Court of Appeal ruled in December 2021 that the consent judgment upon which the receivership was based was fraudulent and should be set aside.”

The plaintiff is seeking, for a court declaration that the CBN was negligent in its duty to regulate Nigerian banks.

It’s also asking for special damages amounting to $41m, including lost income and asset depreciation; general damages of N2 billion exemplary damages of N2 billion and legal costs amounting to N100m.

•Warns against judiciary-politics proximity

Wale Igbintade

Former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission (Nigeria), Prof. Chidi Odinkalu, has criticized the presence of Supreme Court Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim and Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, at the University of Calabar’s Golden Jubilee Special Convocation held on March 22, 2025.

In a statement issued yesterday, the renowned human rights lawyer argued that the event raised concerns about judicial impartiality, pointing to photographs suggesting improper proximity between political figures and members of the judiciary.

Citing Rule 2.8 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers in Nigeria (2016), Odinkalu emphasised that judges must avoid excessively close relationships with frequent litigants, including government ministers, to prevent any appearance of bias.

He referenced Justice Niki Tobi’s ruling in Buhari vs. Independent National Electoral Commission & Ors (2008), where the Supreme Court warned against judges getting involved in politics, stating: “The two professions do not meet and will never meet at all in our democracy… If they meet, the victim will be democracy, and that will be bad for sovereign Nigeria.”

Odinkalu also cited former Chief Justice Atanda Fatayi Williams, who, in his 1983 memoir ‘Faces, Cases, and Places’, warned that in Nigeria, “familiarity does not breed contempt – it breeds obligation.”

Besides, Odinkalu highlighted the case of Aminu Ado Bayero, the Chancellor who conferred an honourary degree on Wike.

He noted that Justice Agim authored a recent Supreme Court decision favouring Wike’s allies in Rivers State.

Given these contexts, Odinkalu condemned the optics of the convocation, arguing that such interactions undermine judicial independence and democracy.

He accused those involved of showing “hubris and impunity” by disregarding the potential damage to the judiciary’s reputation.

Wale Igbintade

A Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja has rejected a document presented by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in the ongoing fraud trial against the former Managing Director of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), Ahmed Kuru.

The EFCC had accused Kuru and four others of defrauding Arik Air of N76 billion and $31.5 million.

The co-defendants include Kamilu Omokide, a former receiver manager of Arik Air Ltd; Captain Roy Ilegbodu, the airline’s CEO; Union Bank Ltd; and Super Bravo Ltd.

They face six charges, including theft, abuse of office, and dishonest misappropriation of property.

During the proceedings, an EFCC witness, Austen Obigwe, attempted to submit an exhibit but was met with strong opposition from the defense.

The defence lawyers argued that the document was unsigned, undated, lacked an author, and was missing an original copy.

Obigwe, a former Union Bank staff member, testified that the bank had acted as a guarantor for Arik Air to secure financing for five aircraft – three Boeing 737-800s and two Airbus 340-500s.

He stated that while he was at the bank, the airline consistently serviced its loans, but he could not account for events after his departure in 2009.

Defence counsel Olalekan Ojo (SAN) challenged the credibility of Obigwe’s evidence, arguing that he left Union Bank long before AMCON took over Arik Air in 2017 and was, therefore, not in a position to authenticate the document.

However, EFCC’s prosecuting lawyer, Dr. Wahab Shittu (SAN), insisted that the document was admissible regardless of its source.

Justice Mojisola Dada ruled against the EFCC, dismissing the evidence due to improper identification.

She adjourned the case to May 19 and 28, 2025, for further hearings.

Wale Igbintade

Media Rights Agenda (MRA) has strongly condemned the brutal assault on Port Harcourt-based broadcast journalist, Mr. Precious Amadi, by members of Salvation Ministries Church in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.

The organisation called on the federal government and law enforcement agencies to conduct a thorough investigation into the incident and ensure that all those responsible are identified, prosecuted, and punished.

According to reports, Mr. Amadi was violently attacked and left unconscious after he posted a report on Facebook about a fire outbreak at the church’s premises at 17 Birabi Street, Port Harcourt.

Recounting the incident, Mr. Amadi explained that he had assisted church members in removing flammable furniture from the premises and attempted – unsuccessfully – to contact the Rivers State Fire Service.

Despite his efforts to help, he was falsely accused of spying and subsequently assaulted by church members under the supervision of some junior pastors.

During the attack, his two mobile phones were destroyed, and he sustained multiple injuries.

He was also unlawfully detained for several hours. Furthermore, his Facebook posts calling for help were deleted without his consent, and his phone data was wiped in an apparent attempt to erase evidence of the assault.

In a statement issued in Lagos, MRA’s Programme Officer, Mr. John Gbadamosi, described the attack as a “despicable act and a grave violation of media freedom and human rights.”

Mr. Gbadamosi emphasized: “Violence against journalists is completely unacceptable and constitutes a direct attack on media freedom and the right to freedom of expression – both fundamental pillars of any democratic society. No journalist should ever face intimidation, harassment, or physical harm for their reporting.”

He urged the federal government and law enforcement agencies to thoroughly investigate the incident and hold accountable everyone involved, including those who carried out, ordered, or supervised the attack.

He stressed that, “the safety and protection of journalists must be guaranteed at all times, and any attempt to suppress media freedom must be met with the full force of the law.”

Additionally, Mr. Gbadamosi called on the leadership of Salvation Ministries to condemn the attack, cooperate with law enforcement to identify those responsible, and ensure justice is served.

He also urged the church to educate its members on the importance of respecting journalists and upholding democratic values, emphasizing that press freedom is non-negotiable.

Wale Igbintade

A former Union Bank staff, Mr. Peter Omokaro, testified yesterday before the Ikeja Special Offences Court in the ongoing trial of a former Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) Managing Director, Ahmed Kuru, over an alleged N76 billion fraud.

Kuru and four others were accused of defrauding Arik Air of N76 billion and $31.5 million.

The other defendants included the former Receiver Manager of Arik Air Ltd., Kamilu Omokide; the airline’s Chief Executive Officer, Capt. Roy Ilegbodu; Union Bank Ltd, and Super Bravo Ltd.

Omokaro, the first prosecution witness, was led in evidence by Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) counsel, Dr. Wahab Shittu.

A retired Assistant General Manager at Union Bank, Omokaro stated that he worked at the bank from 1980 until his retirement in 2015.

He told the court that he was invited by the EFCC to make a statement regarding the case.

According to Omokaro, Arik Air had approached Union Bank for financial support to purchase aircraft.

However, instead of disbursing cash, the bank provided guarantees for loans that Arik Air secured from foreign financial institutions — HSBC Bank and the US EXIM Bank — to facilitate the purchase of aircraft from Airbus and Boeing.

“Union Bank only guaranteed the facilities secured by Arik Air. The bank, in turn, collected indemnity from the airline, and the aircraft were delivered,” he testified.

Omokaro explained that in August 2009, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) intervened in Union Bank’s management.

Subsequently, AMCON acquired the bank’s non-performing loans.

However, he claimed that Union Bank mistakenly included the guarantees in the assets sold to AMCON.

By early 2011, realising the error, a meeting was held in London involving AMCON, Union Bank, HSBC Bank, and US EXIM Bank — but without Arik Air’s participation.

He said Union Bank attempted to correct the mistake by stepping in as the obligor to take over Arik Air’s responsibility.

However, the primary lenders never called in the guarantee, nor did Union Bank demand indemnity from Arik Air,” Omokaro stated.

 He insisted that Union Bank never granted a direct loan to Arik Air and that the airline had not defaulted on its payments.

Instead, he alleged that the bank converted the guarantee into cash to obtain funds from AMCON.

“Union Bank never disbursed cash for the aircraft acquisition. Arik Air remained up to date with its payments,” he told the court.

The prosecution submitted five documents related to the transaction, which the court admitted as evidence.

During cross-examination, Omokaro acknowledged that Ahmed Kuru and Capt. Roy Ilegbodu were not involved in the transaction when it took place in 2010.

“I was not present at the London meeting myself,” he admitted.

Kuru’s lawyer, Mr. Olasupo Shasore (SAN), emphasised that his client was not the Managing Director of AMCON at the time of the deal.

Meanwhile, Union Bank’s counsel, Mr. Olalekan Ojo (SAN), questioned Omokaro about a lawsuit he had previously filed against the bank over his alleged wrongful termination.

The court has adjourned further hearings until March 19, 2025.

Wale Igbintade

The producers of the film “Gangs of Lagos” have agreed to issue an unreserved apology to the Isale-Eko Descendants’ Union, the Bajulaiye Chieftaincy Family, and the Sasore Chieftaincy Family for misrepresenting and disparaging the cultural heritage of the Eyo Masquerade, as well as misrepresenting the nature and longstanding traditions of the Isale-Eko people in the film.

This agreement is part of a court-approved settlement endorsed by Justice Idowu Alakija of the Lagos High Court, formally resolving the dispute between the Isale-Eko Descendants’ Union (Applicants) and Amazon Web Services (Defendant), along with 11 other parties.

Released in 2023, “Gangs of Lagos” is a Nigerian thriller directed and produced by Jadesola Osiberu.

The film follows three friends – Obalola, Ify, and Gift – who grow up in Isale-Eko, a neighborhood controlled by politically connected gangs. As rival factions clash, they become entangled in escalating violence.

Concerned about the film’s portrayal of their community, the Isale-Eko Descendants’ Union, alongside the Bajulaiye and Sasore Chieftaincy Families, filed suit No. LD/6903GCM/2023 against multiple parties, including the Attorney General of Lagos State, the Lagos State Film and Video Censors Board, and 10 others.

Among those named in the lawsuit were filmmaker Jadesola Osiberu, producer Kemi Akindoju, actors Adesegun Adetoro and Demi Olubanwo, as well as industry executives Olumide Soyombo, Bankole Wellington, Adesua Etomi-Wellington, Kola Aina, Greoh Limited, and Amazon Web Services Nigeria Ltd.

As per the settlement, the film’s producers (3rd to 11th respondents) must formally acknowledge that “Gangs of Lagos” misrepresented the Eyo Masquerade and Isale-Eko traditions and issue an unreserved apology to the Isale-Eko Descendants’ Union.

Additionally, Amazon Web Services Nigeria Ltd. (12th respondent) is required to publish an official apology on its letterhead, recognizing the Applicants’ concerns regarding the film’s depiction of their heritage.

In a statement, Adeniji Kazeem (SAN), Chairman of the Isale-Eko Descendants’ Union, expressed satisfaction with the court’s ruling, commending the judiciary and the Lagos State Attorney General for facilitating the resolution.

Kazeem also called for stricter scrutiny by national and state film censors to prevent cultural misrepresentations in films released in Nigeria, whether in cinemas or on digital platforms.

He further emphasized the need for Lagos State to assert its constitutional authority over the production and censorship of films that incorporate its cultural heritage and resources.

He extended gratitude to Oba Rilwan Akiolu I (Oba of Lagos), the union’s legal team led by Supo Shasore (SAN), and the Isale-Eko community members who supported the cause.

Wale Igbintade

The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division has upheld the appeal filed by Union Bank of Nigeria Plc against the judgement of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos in connection with a dispute over a $2 million facility granted to Origin Oil and Gas Limited.

The Appellate Court in its unanimous decision allowed the appeal and set aside the judgement of the lower court.

Justice Paul Ahmed Bassi (presided) delivered the lead judgement, while other members of the panel, Justice Ngozika Uwazurunonye Okaisabor, aligned with the decision.

At the lower court, plaintiffs were Origin Oil & Gas Limited and its directors; Abiodun Ponnle and Adetoye Adegbite, Commic Holdings Limited, Miccon Cables and Wire Ltd, Registrar of Titles Federal Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development and Registrar of Titles, Lagos.

The respondents had initiated an action against the appellant (Union Bank) vide a writ of summons and statement of claim dated October 26, 2016 disputing the $2 million facility.

Following the appellant’s demand for repayment of the facilities, a dispute arose between the parties bordering on allegations of unlawful and/or excessive Bank charges and also as to some alleged undue debits, charges and interests charged on the 1st respondent’s bank accounts domiciled with the appellant.

The 1st Respondent also raised alleged non-compliance with CBN regulations with respect to already negotiated and agreed interests and charges on loan facilities granted to the 1st Respondent.

At trial, the appellant brought an Application to appoint the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) as Referee/Auditor to investigate and audit the account of the 1st respondent in respect of the allegation of unlawful, excessive debits and interest charged on the accounts of the 1st Respondent as well as the alleged non-compliance with CBN regulations with respect to already negotiated and agreed interests and charges on loan facilities and thereafter make a report to the court.

This application was unopposed and consequently granted. However, despite fully participating in the aforementioned CBN audit review, the 1st respondent elected to engage the services of its forensic accountant for a fee to generate its independent audit reports.

This appointment of the forensic accountant was made without recourse to either the court or the appellant.

The lower court in its judgement upheld the 1st – 5th respondents’ reliefs against the appellant and dismissed the appellant’s counter-claim.

Aggrieved by the decision, the Appellant, through its counsel, Mr. Kunle Ogunba (SAN) challenged same vide a Notice of Appeal dated July 5, 2024, and prayed the court to set the judgement aside

In his lead judgement, Justice Justice Paul Bassi stated that the issue was whether the lower court was correct in accepting the status of the PW2 as an expert witness and the consequent reliance on his report, who had been engaged

in those professional capacities to undertake the review and reconciliation of the 1st respondent’s accounts with the appellant bank.

The PW2 had in his statements on oath stated that he was not only a Chartered Accountant but a fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria who had been engaged in those professional capacities to undertake the review and reconciliation of the 1st respondent’s accounts with the appellant bank interests of judicial economy.

The court held that experts are qualified according to a number of factors, including but not limited to the number of years they have practiced in their respective field, works, certifications, licencing training, education, awards, and peer recognition.

Justice Bassi held that the application for appointment of the CBN as the Referee in his opinion, made sense and there was nothing on the face of the record to show the bad inherent in the resort to the CBN that necessitated the reliance on PW2’s testimony as the fulcrum of the 1st -5th Respondents’ case.

“It is my considered opinion’ here that the PW2 may be knowledgeable as an chartered accountant and in forensics, there are insufficient grounds to accord him the title of an “Expert witness” where his experience, qualifications, works, certifications, licensing training, education, awards and peer recognition have not been established.

The court further held, “I cannot subscribe to the conclusion that the PW2 is a better expert witness as compared to the DW2. An important distinction must be made between the 2 witnesses here.

“PW2 was acting on his own accord and based on his expertise. DW2 on the other hand was subpoenaed to tender the report of an impartial, court-appointed Arbiter who, as far as the Records show, had no interest, pecuniary or otherwise in the determination of the Suit one way or the other.

“The CBN Report’s veracity on the aforementioned Grounds are unimpeachable. Whether or not the DW2 spoke to the contents of the Record she tendered, the fact that it emanated from a Public Office, in the proper admissible format and in compliance with the Order of Court renders it admissible with the appropriate probative value attached to it.

“It is therefore my conclusion that the lower Court was in error to have placed reliance on a suspect Report from a witness whose status the

Lower Court itself ought to have questioned.”

The court held that so long as the appellant had shown evidence of the offer of the $2 million facility to the 1st respondent and the disbursement, the burden then moved to the 1st respondent to show it had repaid the facility.

Wale Igbintade

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court, Lagos, has fixed March 28, 2025, for the arraignment of four directors of Petro Union Oil and Gas Limited over alleged £2.5 billion fraud

The arraignment was adjourned after it was established that only three out of the five defendants had been duly served with court summons.

The defendants include Petro Union Oil and Gas Limited (1st Defendant); Abayomi Kukoyi (2nd Defendant); Kingsley Okpala (3rd Defendant); Chidi Okpalaele (4th Defendant), and Emmanuel Okpalaele (5th Defendant).

The defendants, all directors of Petro Union Oil and Gas Limited, were accused of fraudulently procuring a Barclays Bank cheque dated December 29, 1994, worth £2,556,000,000, which they presented to Union Bank of Nigeria Plc under the pretense that it was meant for constructing three petrochemical refinery complexes in Nigeria.

They were also accused of forging a statement of account in the name of Goldmatic Limited, allegedly issued by the Central Bank of Nigeria, in an attempt to obtain an additional £2,159,221,313.54 billion.

The offenses were allegedly committed between 1994 and 2007.

At the mention of the case yesterday, Rotimi Jacobs, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), represented the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), while Olubiyi Adediji appeared for the 1st and 3rd defendants.

However, there was no legal representation for the 4th and 5th defendants.

This case was previously handled by Justice Mohammed Liman, who had reached the stage where the prosecution closed its case.

The defendants then filed a no-case submission, which was overruled, and they were ordered to enter their defense.

However, Justice Liman was later promoted to the Court of Appeal, leading to the case being reassigned to Justice Aneke, who is now starting the trial de novo (afresh).

Some of the charges in the amended charge stated: “That you, Petro Union Oil & Gas Company Limited, Abayomi Kukoyi, and Princess Gladys Okpalaeze (now at large), on or about the 29th of December, 1994, at Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, fraudulently procured a Barclays Bank cheque dated 29th December 1994 in the sum of £2,556,000,000.00 (Two Billion, Five Hundred and Fifty-Six Million Pounds), made payable to Gladstone Kukoyi & Associates.

“You falsely represented that the said cheque was intended for foreign investment in the construction of three refineries and a petrochemical complex in Nigeria, whereas you knew the cheque was unlawfully procured.

“By doing so, you committed an offence contrary to Section 1(2)(a) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, and are punishable under the same section.

“That you, Petro Union Oil & Gas Company Limited, Abayomi Kukoyi, and Princess Gladys Okpalaeze (now at large), on or about the 29th of December, 1994, at Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, fraudulently uttered a Barclays Bank cheque dated 29th December 1994 in the sum of £2,556,000,000.00 (Two Billion, Five Hundred and Fifty-Six Million Pounds) to Union Bank Plc, made payable to Gladstone Kukoyi & Associates.

“You falsely claimed that the cheque was meant for foreign investment in the construction of three refineries and a petrochemical complex in Nigeria, whereas you knew the cheque was false. By doing so, you committed an offence contrary to Section 1(2)(a) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990, and are punishable under the same section.”