Category: Lawal Ogienagbon

  • Mike and Jerry

    Mike and Jerry

    • •Why Tali Shani UK property transfer failed

    Everything about the case reeked. The smell oozed from a distance that anybody could perceive it. Both parties were up to something, and they used virtually every trick in the book to get their way. But the watchful judge was a step ahead of them, waiting for the appropriate time to bring down the gavel. He did seven days ago.

    Both parties lost woefully, and were ordered to bear their own costs, that is each party will be responsible for the expenses incurred on litigation. The case of the applicant and the respondent was bad ab initio. Interestingly, a strange name was at the centre of the legal drama. The applicant, who claimed to be a woman but never showed up in court for the over two years that the case lasted, gave her name as  ‘Ms Tali Shani’.

    To the respondent, Mike Ozekhome (SAN), the ‘Tali Shani’ that ‘gifted’ him the property was a man. Ozekhome was seeking the transfer and registration of the property at 79, Randall Avenue, London NW2 7SX to himself in terms of the ‘gift’. He claimed that “the transfer is not for money or anything that has monetary value”, but in consideration for his “legal services”, which he added, the client could not pay for anyway. The court held that he never stated the nature of the ‘legal services’.

    ‘Ms Tali Shani’ took the wind out of Ozekhome’s sail when she objected to the transfer on the grounds that she is the original owner of the property. Judge Ewan Paton was faced with a puzzle. First, to unravel the gender of this ‘Tali Shani’, and second, to determine who he should order the Land Registry to give the property to between Ozekhome and ‘Ms Tali Shani’. This decision became the lot of Paton, who was called to bar in 1996, and became a judge four years ago, to make when the issue became too hot for the registry to handle.

    Paton’s observations are noteworthy: “That apparently routine application (of transfer and registration) has, however, generated proceedings of a quite extraordinary nature. At their heart are mutual allegations of identity fraud by impersonation. These in turn generated multiple allegations of forgery of documents, fraud, conspiracy and corruption of public officials. A key figure in both parties’ cases… was a very prominent and now deceased former Nigerian general and politician, General Jeremiah Useni”.

    Read Also: FG disburses N330bn to households under social protection Programme

    Jeremiah ‘Jerry Boy’ Useni, who the court eventually identified as ‘Tali Shani’ and who admitted in the cited Jersey Royal Court matter that he used ‘coined’ names, such as ‘Tim Shani’, to transact businesses, testified in the Randall case for Ozekhome. Though, Useni died in the course of proceedings, his testimony helped Paton in deciding the case. Conversely, ‘Ms Tali Shani’ and her lawyers were busy giving all sorts of excuses for her non-appearance in court, including faking her illness, purported death and funeral, as the judge held.

    The Randall property is valued at over £700,000. One of the questions the judge asked during the proceedings was where ‘Tali Shani’, who was called as a witness by Ozekhome got the money to acquire the property in 1993 when he was just 20 years old. The witness claimed to be a cattle rearer and mango and sweet trader in school! He said he bought the property and gave it toUseni to manage.

    The same question can be asked from ‘Jerry Boy’. Where did Useni, who the court held to be the owner of the property, get the money to buy it, as a soldier then? It goes without saying that he could not have bought it from his legitimate earnings, and also at the same time have another property described as Flat 213 Quadrangle Tower Cambridge Square London W2 2PJ.

    Money from the Quadrangle was said to have been used to run the Randall property. As a reputed lawyer, was Ozekhome not curious about the house ‘gift’ from Useni? As a rights activist, critic and anti-corruption crusader, did he not ask his friend where the money for the property came from? By accepting the ‘gift’ and attempting to formalise its acquisition without asking questions, can he still lay claim to being a social crusader? Crusading comes at a price, a steep price, at that. No other person should know this more than Ozekhome who practiced in Gani Fawehinmi’s chambers as a young lawyer.

    If not for Judge Paton, the property would have changed hands without the gullible Nigerian public being any wiser about some of the things their so-called heroes do. The name ‘Tali Shani’ should have sounded the alarm bell and made Ozekhome to ask questions. Rather, he told the court that such names are common in Nigeria. Really?

    As the judge said: “Mr Tali Shani – whether that is the name he was born with, or whether it was changed at some point in the past – was simply a vehicle or conduit by which General Useni tried to transfer to the respondent a property previously registered by him in the false name ‘Tali Shani’ in 1993. I do not know, and do not need to make findings, on how and when General Useni first came across and involved Mr Tali Shani in this or any other transaction…; whether this man already had that name (which the respondent himself said was not an uncommon name in Nigeria)… I do find, however, that he did not purchase this property himself in 1993, and so had no title of his own to pass to the respondent.

    “Both parties have failed. Neither ‘Tali Shani’ was who they said they were, and neither was the person who purchased this property in 1993. The real owner, via a false name, was General Jeremiah Useni. His evidence clears all doubts about the ownership. I have him on record as saying: ‘I owned it… I bought the property… before I gave it to someone to run… I paid the deposit… then bit by bit… I bought it… It is my property’”.

    With these words, he lengthened his name to Jeremiah ‘Jerry Boy Tali Shani’ Useni; and unwittingly voided the property ‘gift’ to his good friend and lawyer.

  • Return of Fubara

    Return of Fubara

    Today, the six-month state of emergency in Rivers lapses. The suspended Governor Siminalayi Fubara may return to work today or tomorrow, along with his deputy and the House of Assembly members. The emergency rule was for a reason – to restore law and order and governance in the state in the wake of the Supreme Court verdict that anarchy loomed there then.

    Read Also: Fubara’s return: MOSIEND calls for peace, unity, inclusive governance

    Of course, not everybody supported the emergency rule, especially the suspension of Fubara. All that is behind us now as a nation. Going forward from today, it is in the interest of Fubara and the other returnees to build on the legacy of peace of the outgoing Administrator Ibok-Ette Ibas. Let peace endure in the Garden City so that the people can feel the impact of governance.

    The difference between being in and out of office should be clear to the returnees by now. Thus, it will be foolhardy for anyone to allow lightning to strike him twice.

  • Osun LG crisis: Jankaraism at play

    Osun LG crisis: Jankaraism at play

    Ankara Was A popular slang among lawyers those days when legal practice was at its best. Those were the days when lawyers stuck to the rules of their trade. They only argued their cases in court and not on television, radio and in newspapers.

    Unfortunately, the reverse is the case today. What is troubling is that lawyers who should know and set examples for young wigs as their own seniors did for them when they started out are most guilty of this unprofessional act.

    They go on air masquerading as legal pundits when in fact they are discussing matters in which they are lawyers to a party. What they are doing is forbidden in law practice. It is elementary that cases are not discussed outside the hallowed precincts of the courtroom. Even law students and lay men know this. It is called sub judice in latin.

    But these days, very senior lawyers have made punditry their hobby. They hop from one television and radio studio to the other, commenting on the very case they are handling in court, in breach of their practice rule. They and their interviewers try to be clever by half – pretending as if the interviewees know nothing about such cases before coming on air.

    Whereas the interviewee knows a lot about the case and only came to defend his position. But they mask their intentions by skirting around other issues to deceive the gullible viewer before returning to where they are going which is the lawyer’s case in court. Thinking that he is wise, the interviewer after leading the interviewee on, will say something like this:

    “That is not where I am going. I didn’t know that you are seized of this matter. Now, since we have touched on it, let’s take it up from there. What are the issues involved in the case…” Responding in kind, the lawyer will cut in: “I am seized of the case. You see… (calling the interviewer’s name), there are two judgments of the Federal High Court and a judgment of the Court of Appeal on the matter…”

    And the lawyer goes on and on, without stating that he is a lawyer in the case. This is the depth to which legal practice has sunk. Regrettably, the undertakers are the many senior lawyers who are expected to shine the light for their juniors to follow, and their professional body, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA).

    This is the kind of Jankara practice that eminent lawyers deplored in the olden days, even though some of then engaged in it too when it suited them. Jankara is the use of stealth to win a case by all means. It is a deplorable act which decent lawyers condemned then and still condemn now, but it has remained an untamed monster in legal practice because of the incorrigibility of many lawyers.

    Jankara is a strong phrase which no lawyer wants his colleague to use for him inside or outside the court. It was fun those days watching eminent lawyers in court, doing battle over the slang. They threatened fire and brimstone, even going to the extent of saying they would withdraw their appearance, if the Judge did not ask the user of the phrase to withdraw it.

    Read Also: Experts urge Nigerian universities to prioritise soft skills training to tackle youth unemployment

    Going the Jankara way as witnessed in the Osun local government debacle and in other cases, particularly during the last presidential election petition matters, did not start today. The only difference is that it was limited to the courtroom then. Now, it has been brought to the marketplace. Incidentally, Jankara is the name of a popular market in Lagos, where buyers and sellers, must be at alert in order not to be duped. Otherwise, either party may end up being shortchanged.

    In other words, some lawyers through their Jankara way attempt to con their colleagues and the Judge, as well, so as to obtain justice at all costs. Those who call lawyers liars may be right after all. What is happening in the Osun case has shown some lawyers for who and what they are. And these are the same lawyers who go all over the place, preaching on how to make society better.

    How can a lawyer or his association that is not true to himself or itself be true to the society? Honesty is an innate quality. It is either you have it or you do not have it. What do you say of a lawyer who cannot disclose that he is involved in a case, but goes on air to analyse the same case for the viewing audience? What do you say of the NBA that comments on a case that is in court and takes sides with one of the parties? Is that a bar association? A union of motor drivers will do better than that!

    NBA has since turned itself into a “busybody” in many matters. It has become a tool for blackmail and it is manipulated by many lawyers and politicians to fight their battles. At the bottom of it all is filthy lucre. There is nothing some lawyers and NBA cannot do for money.

    Their deployment of Jankaraism in the Osun council case is a big shame. Yet, they call themselves ministers in the temple of justice! Ministers? Do they truly understand the halo around the name that they cherish but desecrate with so much impunity? With ministers like these, can a nation ever be saved?

    These lawyers and NBA should allow the court to do its work without let or hindrance.

  • 2027: Will Jonathan push his luck?

    2027: Will Jonathan push his luck?

    He took the gamble in 2015 and scaled the legal hurdle on his way. But then, the 1999 Constitution was not clear on the status of contestants like him. This was in 2015. These are the contestants who had held office as president or governor under extenuating circumstances.

    Such a circumstance arose in 2010 when Jonathan’s principal, President Umoru Yar’Adua died, and he automatically succeeded the deceased in line with constitutional requirement. Thus, Jonathan became an accidental president in May 2010. His presidency was not borne out of his direct election into the nation’s highest office. It came by accident. He had been elected in 2007 on the joint ticket with Yar’Adua. Jonathan became vice president (VP) by virtue of that.

      It is likely that Jonathan would have remained  VP and served for eight years, if Yar’Adua had not died. This is now history. Fifteen years after he became president by accident in 2010, and 10 after he left office in 2015 after being elected in his own right in 2011, Jonathan is now at the centre of some people’s self-serving campaign for him to run again. They want Goodluck Ebele Azikiwe Jonathan to try his luck for the exalted office. Jonathan has always been a lucky man. Those rooting for his return seem to be counting on this luck, which saw him become accidental governor and president at different times, to get him through in 2027.

    By sheer luck, he always got on a platter what many others hankered after and never attained. He sits down on his own jeje reading newspapers, as his wife, Dame Patience, recounted in the uncertain days of the illhealth of his principal when he was sidelined by the hawks in government, and just like that luck smiles on him – the way manna drops from above. Those who will benefit from Jonathan running in 2027 are fighting tooth and nail to win the argument.

    They have exhumed a 2022 court judgment by the Federal High Court in Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State capital, to help their case that there is no constitutional encumbrance on their man’s path. There has always been something about Jonathan and the  Constitution. He became acting president in February 2010 by virtue of a ‘Doctrine of Neccesity’ created by the Senate to sort out a constitutional logjam.

    Indeed, the framers of the Constitution never envisaged the kind of crisis the nation witnessed then – where the president would be infirm and unable to hand over to his deputy during his long absence. Jonathan has since revealed that Yar’Adua did the needful, but the letter never got to the National Assembly. Some of those who hid the letter are now championing his return in 2027. He has to watch his back.

    In 2015, his reelection bid generated another constitutional interest. Those opposed to him running went to court, claiming that he was no longer eligible to contest, citing Section 137 (1) (b). The section says: A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of president if – he has been elected to such office at any two previous elections. To the plaintiffs, Jonathan had run for election twice and as such was no longer eligible. The high court disagreed and the appeal court upheld that decision. Jonathan contested and lost to President Muhammadu Buhari.

    The rumour of his running again in 2023 opened another constitutional challenge. By then the Constitution had been amended, with the insertion of a new Section 137 (3) which  states: A person, who was sworn in to complete the term for which another person was elected as President shall not be elected to such office for more than a single term. Having completed Yar’Adua’s term and subsequently elected into office in 2011, Jonathan is clearly caught by this provision. The snag is the amendment was done in 2017, but signed into law in 2018, three years after he left office in 2015.

    His supporters are arguing that the provision cannot take retroactive effect, citing the 2022 judgment of Justice Isa Dashen of the Bayelsa Federal High Court, which this paper analysed last Thursday. Going by the verdict, Jonathan can run. But it is wrong to describe  the judgment as ‘final’ on the ground that it can no longer be appealed because of the effluxion of time.

    Read Also: TALI partners government on enforcement of disability rights in Nigeria

     For the avoidance of doubt, no verdict of the high court can ever be ‘final’ because litigation does not end there. It ends at the Supreme Court, if the litigants decide to go all the way. Because it has been three years since the judgment, whereas the time for appealing it is 90 days, the ‘we want Jonathan again’ crowd is trying to wear it the toga of finality. It is for them to do whatever they can to have their way, but they must bear in mind that those opposed to their plan are not sleeping too.

    There is no argument over the subsistence of the verdict. However, those using it to make a case for Jonathan’s return are either only trying to be clever by half or do not know how the courts work. That the judgment can no longer be appealed does not mean that a fresh case cannot be instituted on the same matter since it never got to the Supreme Court where all legal disputes end. Another litigant can, therefore, go to court to stop Jonathan from running, if he decides to do so.

    Jonathan has beheld this spectacle before. This is not the first time that fairweather political friends will be gathering in his name to chorus ‘run, Jonathan run’. He knows what they are looking for – a pay check for all their hue and cry.Only Jonathan knows what is good for Jonathan and not the so-called do-gooders whose sole aim is to use him to achieve their selfish political ends. Will Jonathan’s running in 2027 change anything? It won’t. His first-and-a-half comings, that is his own four years from 2011 – 2015, and the completion of Yar’Adua’s term between 2010 and 2011, were nothing to write home about.

    He has no record to run on. His luck has always carried him, though. But he should not push his luck too far. In Jonathan’s life, luck has always lurked around him. From deputy governor in Bayelsa, he became accidental governor in 2005 when his principal, Diepreye Alamiyeisegha, got into trouble and was jailed in Britain. But he should not be carried away by this luck and the sweet talks of deceitful politicians.

    I can hear Chinua Achebe addressing Jonathan in his book: Things fall apart, “those whose kernels were cracked by a benevolent spirit should not forget to be humble”. Jonathan should remain true to himself as his  humility has always been his strength. He should not allow himself to be led by the nose by people who are only interested in building a political empire for themselves by using him to achieve their aim.

  • Enugu 2025: Before NBA leaves coal city

    Enugu 2025: Before NBA leaves coal city

    It was supposed to take place in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital. But the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) changed its mind at the die-minute and relocated the hosting of its annual general conference which ends tomorrow to Enugu. It changed the venue when it was discovered that it collected N300 million for the conference from the Rivers State Government, which it never disclosed. The bubble burst when NBA became too big for its breech.

    Things would have remained hush-hush if it did not open its mouth too wide. NBA is a professional group. It comprises many eminent lawyers who can write off the bill for its annual general conference. But the body, like many other related associations, rather than look inwards for the funding of their conferences and other activities, prefer to go cap in hand begging. Under arranged courtesy visits to some personalities, especially governors, they solicit for funds for many things. Some even beg for money for the wedding of their children! It is that bad.

    These visits become intensified when the event is close at hand. It was a few months to the conference then slated for Port Harcourt that NBA visited the now suspended Rivers State Governor Siminalayi Fubara. After ‘people had talked to people, and people understood’, as we used to say in some political gatherings in the short-lived third republic, NBA left Government House N300 million richer. It kept the ‘donation’, so it calls today, to itself, until Administrator Ibok-Ette Ibas blew the lid open. Ibas did because NBA pushed him to the wall. With his back to the wall, he fought back with what he had.

    The matter would have remained in the dark, if NBA had not tried to play smart. It wanted to have its cake and eat it. But you cannot run with the hare and hunt with the hound. You must maintain a position. It is either you are a critic or a collaborator. You cannot play both sides. This was what NBA attempted to do, and it got its hands burnt. Unknown to NBA, Ibas had looked at the books after he was appointed Rivers administrator in the wake of the emergency rule in the state. Under the emergency, President Bola Tinubu also suspended Fubara and the House of Assembly. The President’s action got NBA’s dander up.

    In a swift reaction, it described the President’s action as illegal. According to NBA, Fubara’s “suspension or otherwise summary removal” was unconstitutional. To political watchers, NBA’s position is its opinion which does not carry any weight, until decided by the court. But NBA wanted its opinion to be taken as the law, notwithstanding that some of its members hold contrary views on the issue. Without a second thought, it decided not to hold the bar conference in Port Harcourt, any more, and moved it to Enugu. But it conveniently forgot to do the needful, that is return the N300 million ‘gift’. The association did not know that Ibas was aware that it took money from Fubara for the conference.

    It thought its relocation of the conference to Enugu was the end of the matter. It was not. NBA was shocked to its marrows when Ibas asked for the refund of the N300 million which he described as “hosting fee”paid by Fubara, but which the group called “gift”. What was NBA celebrating that Fubara gave it N300 million? Did he give the association the money because he liked the members’ faces? Was it not the group that solicited for the money or gift or donation, or by whatever name some NBA jokers want to call it? As an association which more or less also acts as a pressure group and societal watchdog, NBA is supposed to know that there are certain things it must not be involved in. It costs a lot to host a bar conference, no doubt. And there is no offence in seeking help to host such a conference. But then are the consequences of such begging not more than the benefits when the chickens come home to roost?

    Read Also: ‘Nigerians under 40 accounted for 82.48% of CPS contributors in Q2’

    This is the dilemma NBA put itself. If in the past, it got funds from governors to host its conferences and got away with it, that does not make its action right. It is because of a day like this – that a provoked governor or administrator may spill the beans – that NBA and other related associations must always think twice before going to beg for funds for any of their activities. Unabashedly, NBA has refused to refund the money, daring Ibas to go to court. There is no need for Ibas to do that because he has shown NBA for what it truly is. If NBA were to be a firm believer of what it preaches, it would have refunded the money even before Ibas asked it to do so.

    Holding on to the money and probably collecting another sum from the Enugu State Government, which is today hosting the conference, does not portray NBA in good light. What would it cost NBA to have returned the money after shifting the conference? By not returning the money, NBA has diminished its status in the eyes of right-thinking members of the society, and it no longer has the moral right to be societal watchdog. What societal rebirth is NBA preaching if it cannot set good examples so that”nature”, as Shakespeare said, “may stand up and say to all the world: this is an association”.

    It is curious that the issue is not even an item on the agenda as curtain falls on the conference tomorrow. Rather than take a look at itself in the mirror, NBA, in its usual style, will look elsewhere and point fingers. It should stop living a lie, if it really wants to stand out, and stand tall. It can start by refunding the N300 million which belongs to the Rivers people. The money is neither Fubara’s nor Ibas’. Though collected from Fubara, refunding the money through Ibas is the same thing as returning it to Rivers people whose collective patrimony he holds in trust as their administrator, irrespective of the circumstances of his appointment.

  • Royal roulette

    Royal roulette

    • Alaafin reignites supremacy war with Ooni

    What WILL Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Abimbola Owoade, do now that his 48-hour ultimatum to Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Ogunwusi, has expired? The ultimatum expired yesterday. Up till now, the Alaafin has yet to make good his threat that “there will be consequences” if the Ooni did not comply with his demand after the ultimatum’s expiration.

    What is the demand? The Alaafin wants the Ooni to withdraw the title of Okanlomo of Yorubaland that the Ife monarch conferred on a business magnate, Chief Dotun Sanusi, last Saturday. The ultimatum expired yesterday, but there have been no visible signs of any “consequences”, 24 hours after. According to the Oyo monarch, the Ooni has no power to confer such titles on anybody. From time immemorial, there has been no love lost between occupiers of the two leading Yoruba stools.

    In the past, they hardly saw eye to eye. Where one was, the other was never there. They avoided each other’s company, as if they were rival wives married to the same man. The rivalry affected whatever group or council they belonged to. Everything done by the authorities to accommodate both monarchs so as to avoid being perceived as taking sides with either of them never worked out. One saw himself as above the other.

    Until Osun State was created out of Oyo in 1991, this cat and mouse game defined the relationship between the revered monarchs. The rotational chairmanship of the Oyo State Council of Traditional Rulers and Chiefs between them never solved the supremacy battle. The ice was only broken when Osun became a state and Ife was listed there. Yet, the rivalry continued on other fronts. When Ogunwusi became Ooni in 2015, he embarked on a peace mission to the then Alaafin in Oyo, Oba Lamidi Adeyemi, against the advice of some hardline culture activists who wanted him to maintain his distance.

    From the outset, he showed that he believed in jaw-jaw rather than war-war. He and Owoade are in the same age bracket. They are in their 50s. Owoade celebrated his 50th birthday last month, Ogunwusi was 50 last year. As young kings, it is expected that they should be more tolerant of each other as they work for the progress of their people and the larger Yoruba race. Certain things should not come between them. Even, nothing should come between them to the extent that it would blow open. They can disagree in private and resolve whatever their differences are without a third party knowing about it.

    When the spat of royalties like them becomes public, it affects not only their status, but the royal institution they represent. What is it about conferring a title on an individual that it should split the Alaafin and the Ooni? Did the Ooni confer the title on Sanusi in secret? Monarchs like to protect their domains in their own interests, but the conferment of titles on persons is not the exclusive preserve of any king. They can give titles to whoever they liked, as long as it is within their purview. The Alaafin is saying the Ooni does not have the power to confer the Okanlomo of Yorubaland title on Sanusi.

    Read Also: Olubadan: Oyo govt fixes Sept 26 for Ladoja’s coronation

    He urges the Ooni to restrict himself to awarding such titles in Ile Ife, which is historically known as the cradle of the Yoruba. Owoade refers to a Supreme Court judgment which he says recognises the Alaafin as the sole authority to confer titles on individuals in Yorubaland generally. Other monarchs of the race, he claims, can only perform such functions in their respective domains. Is the Alaafin saying that his predecessor, Oba Lamidi Adeyemi, was not aware of the Supreme Court judgment?

    If Adeyemi was aware, why did the late monarch not raise an objection when the Ooni was said to have publicly announced in 2020 that he would confer the Okanlomo of Yorubaland title on Sanusi? Or had the Supreme Court not given the judgment then? For a matter to have reached the Supreme Court, it must have gone through the high and appeal courts. With the kind of justice system we operate, that would have taken some years. Owoade became Alaafin five months ago, and they are not long enough for this matter to travel all the way from the high court to the court of appeal, and finally the Supreme Court.

    Ironically, the Ooni and Alaafin are the sons of Oduduwa, the Yoruba progenitor, who founded Ile Ife. That is why till today, the Ooni is referred to as Arole Oodua (the heir of Oduduwa). The two of them are major monarchs who should set examples for other Yoruba obas. There will be squabbles at times, but they should not be over what could be considered mundane issues. If Oduduwa’s two leading sons fight, what will their brothers do?  Who will settle the big brothers?

    Except there are other underlying factors, I see no reason why the Alaafin reacted the way he did. If he really wants to follow the rule of law as he claimed by citing that Supreme Court verdict, he should have returned to court for remedy. But he resorted to self help by issuing the Ooni a 48-hour ultimatum to uninstal Sanusi or “face the consequences”. As the nation waits with bated breath for those “consequences”, the Alaafin can, in the meantime, give answers to these pertinent questions:

       Which year was the case filed? Who are the parties? What is the subject-matter of the suit, as well as the suit and appeal numbers? And when did the Supreme Court give its judgment on the basis of which he is claiming to be the overlord of rulers in Yorubaland. Softly, softly, your royal majesty.

  • Air rage: Not a season film

    Air rage: Not a season film

    It is something that happens infrequently, at least, at the scale witnessed twice in recent days. Most times, it ends after tempers might have cooled down. Air rage is not different from road rage – in the sense that senses take temporary flight as the disputants throw caution to the wind. When tempers flare, people lose their sanity, and resort to violence.

    It first happened on a ValueJet flight with renowned Fuji musician Wasiu Ayinde Marshall alias Kwam 1, and then on an Ibom Air flight, with a woman, Comfort Emmanson. In Kwam 1’s case, he attempted to stop the plane from taking off by standing in its front. You said haa! I did too, until I saw the video. Barely a week later, it was Comfort and the cabin attendants slugging it out after the plane landed. The optics of both incidents were not good, at all.

    Read Also: Knights of St. John International marks 50 years of faith, evangelisation in Nigeria

    Air rage is dangerous because of the inherent fatal consequences. It could lead to a crash in which people including the innocent who are on the ground can die. This is why it is a serious offence. Air rage should not be allowed to become a series movie to be shot in the aircraft, as it happened in Comfort’s case, or outside it, as in the Kwam 1 show.

    I have strong views on the handling of both incidents, but I will keep my gun powder dry since Aviation Minister Festus Keyamo (SAN) has decided to be merciful to all the feuding parties. To quote Shakespeare: “The quality of mercy is not strained; it drops as the gentle rain from heaven upon thè place beneath. It is twice blest; it blesses him that gives and him/her that takes….”

    What remains is to ensure that measures are put in place to avert a recurrence. Complying with instructions that you cannot board with a flask containing an unknown substance; or that you should switch off your phone before take off are minor issues that should never ever snowball into an air rage again.

  • A coalition story

    A coalition story

    THE THREE OF THEM ARE AN ITEM. Wherever one is, the other two will be. The trio, Rotimi Amaechi, Nasir El-Rufai, and Kayode Fayemi, all former governors and ministers, were expected to be together when the coalition took off in Abuja where it adopted the African Democratic Congress (ADC) last month.

    Some members of ADC led by its presidential candidate in the 2023 elections, Dumebi Kachikwu, is resisting the adoption. Kachikwu has vowed to go to any length to ensure that the intruders do not have their way. To the public, Amaechi, El-Rufai and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who were at the unveiling ceremony, are the brains behind the coalition. The assumption may not be entirely correct going by recent developments.

    Amaechi has been prattling all over the place on how the coalition was born. He claims that he and Fayemi laid its foundation. Since President Bola Tinubu beat him to a distant second for the ticket of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2022, Amaechi has been unrelenting in his pursuit to get the President out of office, at all costs.

    This was why he started plotting to remove the President from power some 20 months ago when the administration was barely four months old. Amaechi loves to be in power, a privilege he enjoyed for 24 uninterrupted years between 1999 and 2023, as Rivers assembly speaker, governor and minister, at various times. It is strange to him that he and his family are no longer kept at public expense. Or how else, do you describe his desperation to get back into office for, wait for it, the simple reason that: “I am hungry”. Just two years after leaving office after 24 unbroken years?

    How can he be “hungry” when, according to him, he has an industrialist wife who feeds him and their family. Where did the money come from? Well, Nigerians have not forgotten the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike’s story about someone collecting N4 billion monthly from the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) for training women and youths in soap making and skills acquisition! With that kind of money, you can feed the whole nation for the whole year!! I am not here for this today.

    I am more interested in what is becoming a row between Amaechi and Fayemi over the coming of the coalition. Over a week ago, Amaechi told the story of the coalition’s birth. He said he and Fayemi were its arrowheads. Fayemi replied last weekend in a tame statement in which he only rose in defence of Amaechi without saying anything about his own role in the coalition. Is he in the know of the coalition’s birth? It is a simple question that demands a yes or no answer. “Simple yes or no”, as Lagabaja, the masked musician, will say.

    Read Also: UK-based firm empowers 500 Nigerians with skills

    What is Fayemi hiding? Where does he stand on the coalition? A man like Fayemi, going by his recent activities is capable of anything, including forming a coalition with others, in order to achieve his goal. Check: he publicly said the 2012 petrol subsidy removal protest was a ploy by the opposition to undo the Jonathan administration. His party, the Tinubu-led Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), was the leading opposition party then.  He consequently apologised to the former president.

    Check: Just before the Amaechi bombshell, Fayemi had blamed the present government for what he calls the  hunger in the land. Amaechi has been singing the same hunger song for how long God knows when. I hate to say it, but I believe Amaechi, who has come out the second time to tell the coalition story.

    “The coalition started between I and Fayemi in the house of…. He wanted us to reconcile. After the reconciliation, we agreed to broaden it so that it would involve more than just the two of us talking about starting a new party….”, Amaechi restated on Tuesday. I do not know what Fayemi’s response will be this time. But his first was nothing to write home about. What will Fayemi’s defence be now that Amaechi has, so to say, stood by his initial story which the former Ekiti governor claimed there was no “credible evidence to support”.

    What other “credible evidence” does he need now that Amaechi is rubbing the statement in? Fayemi should stop talking from both sides of the mouth. In his statement, he also said he “is still in APC, Ekiti State”. What about the party at the national level? Can his membership be limited to APC, Ekiti State, as he seemed to portray in his statement? Can APC, Ekiti State stand alone without its national arm? Surely, Ekiti APC cannot exist in isolation of the national APC. In fact, it owes its existence to the national APC.

    Fayemi cannot pull the wool over people’s eyes on this matter. His job is not to question the veracity of Amaechi’s statement, but to respond to the specific part that concerns him about the formation of the coalition. To do otherwise is deceitful. Nigerians know better.

  • Doyin Abiola (1943-2025)

    Doyin Abiola (1943-2025)

    Dr Doyinsola Hamidat Abiola (nee Aboaba), former editor, columnist, leader-writer, publisher and manager, who died on Tuesday night came into journalism at a time it was queer for women to do so. She was 82. Her gender was rare to find in the newsroom when she joined the Daily Sketch, a publication owned by the defunct Western Region in 1969. She did not come to journalism unprepared. She came well educated, having read English and Drama at the University of Ibadan. It is to her eternal credit that she held her own against the men who her crossed path on the job.

    As a woman of letters, it was only fitting that she be deployed on the Features Desk, a department that expands and expounds the news. She did her job well, doing riveting feature news. She wrote a column to boot, under the title: Tiro, a name which has English and Yoruba connotations. It did not take long for her to switch jobs from Daily Sketch to Daily Times,  which was the paper to be then.

    Read Also: UAE, Nigeria deepen ties as trade, investment rise

    She soared at the Times too and travelled abroad for her Ph.D. Her time at the Times was marked by many firsts – the first woman features editor, group features editor, and a member of the Editorial Board. To be a member of the Editorial Board at a time it was filled with other fine writers like Stanley Macebuh, Dele Giwa, and Amma Ogan, among others, showed her strength of character and intellect. Again, she moved. This time to National Concord, which was founded by her husband, Bashorun M.K.O Abiola, who she married in 1981. She was the pioneer editor of the Concord, the first Nigerian woman to hold such a newspaper title.

    Mrs Abiola did not stop there. She became the managing director/editor-in-chief, with her husband as chairman/publisher. She became the publisher when Abiola was incarcerated over the June 12, 1993 quagmire. In this capacity, she held fort, running the Concord until the paper was hounded out of circulation by the Abacha junta. Her passing stunned the media world. Mrs Abiola was a media juggernaut, to borrow the word of K.O. Mbadiwe. She was a journalist through and through, with attention to fine details. She was one of the profession’s finest, who paved the way for the few women editors that have come after her. May she find rest in the Lord’s bosom.

  • Their one-term kite

    Their one-term kite

    Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP)) in the 2023 elections, was not saying anything new when he spoke of doing only a single-term of four years, if elected in 2027. Before him, Atiku Abubakar and Rotimi Amaechi said the same thing. It is all aimed at winning votes, no more, no less. But Obi, being who he is, has been trending on social media since he made the statement. First, to run again, as he did two years ago, Obi must get the ticket of a party. Which party will that be? LP? The coalition African Democratic Congress (ADC)? or the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    The question is pertinent because Obi seems to be caught in between the three parties. He claims that he is still in LP, but is romancing ADC. He and his running mate in 2023, Datti Baba-Ahmed, were at the coalition’s Abuja unveiling of ADC as its special purpose vehicle for prosecuting the 2027 elections. Typical of Obi, he is hedging his bet. He is running with the hare, and hunting with the hound. He has one foot in ADC, and the other in LP, where he is sure to get the presidential ticket – that is if he mends his way and stops hobnobbing with ADC.

    His erstwhile runningmate Baba-Ahmed has seen the light and run back to LP. He may cut the feet from under his principal in the emerging political scenario. Baba-Ahmed said he went back to LP to help in putting the crisis-ridden party back on track. Obi is still weighing his options on which way to go. Sensing his dilemma, the embattled PDP threw him a lifeline to come over to Macedonia and help to rebuild the party on which platform he ran with Atiku in 2019. Will he hearken to the call?

    He is at a crossroads. As he ponders what to do, he pulled a rabbit out of his magic bag, as they say. He says he would do only one-term of four years, if elected. Some have described it as a vow, pledge, promise, undertaking and so on and so forth. It is none of these. I see it more as a kite being flown to test the waters. This was the same bait that Atiku, the serial contestant, who has made the rounds of almost all the parties in his desperation to become president, dangled before the electorate in 2019 and 2023. Amaechi followed suit after they ‘hijacked’ ADC. Now, Obi is singing the same tune.

    When Atiku first flew the kite in 2019, it was to truncate the second term bid of the late President Muhammadu Buhari, a fellow northerner. His thinking was that the electorate would swallow the bait hook, line and sinker, and vote him in to complete the eight-year tenure of the north under the perceived power rotation agreement between the north and the south. The unwritten pact was broken in 2010 when President Umoru Yar’Adua, who succeeded President Olusegun Obasanjo died in office. Death prevented him from completing his first term, not to talk of doing a second term.

    Read Also: Invest in Nigeria’s eco-tourism destinations, says Balogun

    Certain politicians from the north have not forgotten about these ‘outstanding four years’ and they have been looking for all means possible to regain those years. Time, they seem to have forgotten, waits for no one. Since there can be no vacuum in leadership, President Goodluck Jonathan completed his principal, Yar’Adua’s first term in 2011. Politicians like Atiku then rose in arm during the next election to make a case for a northerner to become president to complete eight years that Yar’Adua would have served.

    With that process aborted by Yar’Adua’s death, and Jonathan constitutionally stepping in to fill the gap, getting him not to run in 2011 so that the north can have its way failed and the unwritten rotational presidency accord at eight years interval snapped. Atiku’s ploy to use the one-term bait to unseat Buhari failed in 2019, just as that of Obi and others to wrest power from President Bola Tinubu in 2027 will collapse.

    It has nothing to do with the sincerity of Obi’s statement, but what he has to offer. Obi’s performance in the 2023 presidential election has given him the false confidence that he is an astute politician. Saying that he would do one term is one thing, but what is his blueprint for turning the country around in those four years of that term? One term of what? What are the deliverables and what is his timeframe for achieving them? He should share them with the electorate. This is no time to say these are details he would keep to his chest until he gets to office. Nor that he would lay the foundation for others to come and build on. He should turn the sod and start the building, if he can, within the time allotted for that by the Constitution.

    The public does not want him to turn around later to say that the foundation was destroyed by successive administrations because they did not understand his ideas. He should execute his own ideas; nobody is going to steal or execute them for him because they are original to him. The fear of someone stealing anybody’s idea is a sign that none exists in the first place. If there is one, the brain behind the idea must have perfected it to the point of how it will be executed within a stipulated time to achieve maximum benefit for all. This is the beauty of an original idea, and stealing it would do the thief more harm than good.

    Pledging to do one-term when the Constitution allows for two terms is a political gimmick that can no longer win votes. The electorate know what they want and they know how to go about getting it. They cannot be swayed by talks of one-term, no matter how it is framed, by those who cannot deliver when the chips are down.