The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Uwaifo’s judgments transcend the ordinary, says Akaahs

    Uwaifo’s judgments transcend the ordinary, says Akaahs

    • Book on judgments for presentation February 19

    A former Justice of the Supreme Court, Kumai B. Akaahs, has described the judgments of Justice Samson Uwaifo (rtd) as remarkable and transcend the ordinary.

    He said they also reflect his brilliance, humanity and commitment to justice.

    Akaahs wrote the forward to: “Justice Uwaifo: A legacy of jurisprudential wisdom and substantive justice.”

    The book, published by CLDS Publishing, is a compilation of landmark judgments by Justice Uwaifo.

    It will be presented in Lagos on February 19.

    Former Edo State Governor Oserheimen Osunbor will chair the launch; Prof. Fabian Ajogwu (SAN) will review the book.

    Former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Kanu Agabi (SAN), will unveil it.

    In the forward, Akaahs hails the judgments, adding they were written “with the highest intellectual rigour”.

    He adds: “Often described as a Jurist with a unique blend of wisdom and wit, Justice Uwaifo’s rulings and judgments transcend the ordinary, leaving an indelible mark on Nigerian Jurisprudence.

    “His judgments for instance, characterised by their precision, are often punctuated with moments of dry humour – a style that reflects his intellectual confidence and mastery of the law.

    “This ability to convey complex legal principles in a manner that is both clearly understood and memorable has earned him great respect within legal circles and beyond.

    “Throughout his illustrious career, Justice Uwaifo consistently championed the cause of justice, fairness and equity.

    “His dedication to the rule of law was unwavering and his decisions often shaped the course of the Nigerian legal system in fundamental ways.

    “Whether dealing with intricate constitutional issues, commercial disputes or matters of human rights, his judgments have had a lasting impact on the legal landscape of Nigeria.

    “This book pays homage to his judicial excellence, offering readers a glimpse into the mind of a legal titan who understood that justice does not need to be devoid of humanity or humour.

    Read Also: Obaseki inaugurates Edo creative hub to immortalise late Victor Uwaifo

    “It is through these landmark judgments that we witness the interplay between intellect, wit and wisdom – a combination that makes Justice Uwaifo’s contributions to the judiciary both profound and enduring.”

    Writing in the preface, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), O.A. Omonuwa, states that the essence of justice lies not merely in the decisions rendered, but in the enduring impact of those decisions on society.

    He adds: “This volume seeks to illuminate the profound contributions of Justice Uwaifo to the legal landscape of our nation, capturing the essence of his judicial philosophy, his unwavering commitment to the rule of law and his role in shaping the jurisprudence of  Nigeria.

    “Throughout his illustrious career on the superior courts of record of Nigeria, Justice Uwaifo demonstrated an extraordinary ability to navigate complex legal issues with wisdom, fairness and a deep sense of justice.

    “His judgments, many of which are now seminal cases in our legal system, have left an indelible mark on the interpretation and application of law in areas ranging from constitutional rights to commercial disputes, and from criminal justice to administrative law.

    “This book is not merely a record of his decisions, but a testament to the enduring principles of justice that he upheld with such distinction.”

  • Court acquits Fani-Kayode of medical forgery

    Court acquits Fani-Kayode of medical forgery

    Justice Olubunmi Abike-Fadipe of an  Ikeja Special Offences Court has discharged and acquitted the Former Minister of Aviation, Femi Fani-Kayode, of the charge of medical forgery leveled against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Abike-Fadipe while delivering ruling on the no case submission filed by Fani-Kayode’s Counsel, Mr Wale Balogun (SAN), held  that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the defendant.

    Abike-Fadipe said the prosecution failed  to establish a link between the defendant and the offences for which he was charged.

    She said the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against  the defendant.

    She noted  that  the prosecution also failed to present the defendant’s associates who allegedly collected money from him or the lawlwyer who allegedly stated that the defendant had instructed his law firm to take the medical reports to the Federal High Court.

    The court held that the extra-judicial statements which are intended as evidence, cannot be used for any purpose other than to contradict the person who made the statement when he is in the witness box.

    “I have carefully studied the evidences of the prosecution witnesses and I cannot find  where the defendant committed the offences  being  alleged.

    “The prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case which  would  require the defendant to open  his defence.

    “As to the issue of costs, the defendant is at liberty to file an action report and do so in private.”

    The judge consequently discharged and acquitted the defendant of the alleged offences.

     EFCC had on November 11, 2021 charged Fani-Kayode on a 12-count charge of procuring and execution of documents by false pretences, use of false documents, fabrication of evidence and use of fabricated evidence.

    During trial, the prosecution had called seven  witnesses to testify against the former minister and closed its case.

    Fani-Kayode had on December 7, 2024 filed  a no case submission and submitted that  the prosecution had failed in establishing the charges against him.

    Chief Femi Fani-Kayode has faced criminal prosecution and criminal charges and trials in four major cases and four appeals by the EFCC which have jointly lasted over the last 18 years.

    Read Also: JANUARY 15th 1966: A MORNING OF MURDER, MAYHEM AND CARNAGE by Chief Femi Fani-Kayode.

    He has been discharged and acquited  of all the cases and the last one was  on February 4, 2025.

    He was prosecuted from 2008 to 2015 by EFCC at the Federal High Court Lagos before Hon. Justice Ahmad, Hon. Justice Binta Nyarku and finally Hon. Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.

    He was discharged and acquitted on July 1, 2015 by Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.

    He was prosecuted by EFCC from 2016 to 2023 at the Federal High Court Lagos before Justice M.S. Hassan,  Justice Aikawa and finally  Justice Oziagor.

    The charges that were proffered against him before Justice Oziagor were quashed by the Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos on April 21, 2023.

     He was prosecuted by EFCC from 2016 to 2025 at the Federal High Court Abuja before  Justice John  Tsoho, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court,  on  three-count charge of money laundering levelled against him by EFCC.

    He was discharged on all counts on January 15, 2025 by  Justice  Tsoho, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court. 

    In the same vein, a Federal High Court in Abuja had on January 15  discharged  the former minister of the three-count charge of money laundering levelled against him by EFCC.

    Justice John Tsoho in his ruling, held  that  EFCC failed woefully in proving the charge against Fani-Kayode.

    Tsoho held that the court’s decision was based on the prosecution’s failure to provide sufficient evidence linking Fani-Kayode to the alleged offences.

    He had said: “The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the defendant and therefore, the no-case submission was upheld.

    “The prosecution presented three witnesses and tendered exhibits to support their case. However, this court finds that the evidence presented was inconsistent, contradictory, and unreliable.

    “The evidence of PW3 (Mohammed Goji) left more questions than answers and was not conclusive.

    “PW1’s (Victor Ehabhi) evidence under cross-examination showed fundamental inconsistencies and PW2 (Francis Abu) did not link the defendant to the charges.”

    The ruling delivered by Justice John Tsoho  reminiscent of a similar case in 2015, where Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia discharged and acquitted Fani-Kayode of money laundering charges.

    Fani-Kayode’s ordeal began in 2016 when he was initially arraigned by EFCC on a six-count charge, which was later amended to three counts in 2023.

    EFCC alleged that Fani-Kayode received and used N26 million in 2014, which was purportedly for a media campaign on behalf of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the office of the President.

  • Woman arraigned for allegedly defrauding trader of N4.01m

    Woman arraigned for allegedly defrauding trader of N4.01m

    A 37-year-old woman, Jennifer Edward, was arraigned before an Ojo Magistrates’ Court in Lagos for allegedly obtaining N4.01 million under false pretences.

    Edward appeared before Magistrate Funke Ogun, who presided over the case on behalf of Magistrate L.K.J. Layeni. She pleaded not guilty to the two-count charge of fraud and stealing.

    According to the prosecutor, Inspector Esther Adesulu, the defendant committed the alleged offences on October 14, 2024, at Alaba International Market, Ojo. Adesulu stated that Edward fraudulently obtained N4.01 million from a trader, Mr. Chidi Innocent, under the pretext of supplying him with 2,000 tubers of yam.

    Read Also: CapriTrader 6.3 Ai Review 2025: Real or Scam Trading Platform?

    However, she allegedly failed to deliver the goods and instead converted the money for personal use.

    Following her arrest, Edward was charged with violating Sections 287 and 314 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.

    Magistrate Ogun granted the defendant bail in the sum of N500,000 with two sureties in like sum. The case was adjourned to February 26 for trial.

  • Supervisor jailed two years for N11.234 million fraud

    Supervisor jailed two years for N11.234 million fraud

    Justice Olubunmi Abike-Fadipe of an Ikeja Special Offences Court  yesterday sentenced a supervisor at the Hajj and cargo terminal gate of the Murtala Mohammed International Airport, Lagos, Muhammed Idris to two years imprisonment for making false returns and corrupt self-advantage to the tune of N11,234,000.

    Justice Abike-Fadipe sentenced the convict to one year imprisonment on each of the two count charge brought against him by the  Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

    Idris was however fined  N1million on each of the count  in lieu of a fine of N1,000,000 for both counts. The sentences are to run concurrently.

    In addition, the defendant is required to be of good behavior and enter a bond with the registry of the High Court in the sum of Two Million Naira (N2,000,000).

    Read Also: Electoral Fraud: Northern groups applaud Tinubu, INEC over dismissal of three RECs

    Justice Abike-Fadipe said failure to comply with these terms will result in a further imprisonment of ten years.

    During trial, ICPC revealed how the accused collected missing monies in the course of his work but could not account for them.

    In the two-count charge, ICPC counsel, Yvonne Williams-Mbata, led evidence before the court on how  investigation uncovered a total loss of N11,234,000 under the defendant’s supervision and watch between February 2001 and April 2021.

    His offence is contrary to Sections 26(1)(b) and Section 25(1) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000.

  • Court to hear contract breach suit against Virgin Atlantic Feb. 27

    Court to hear contract breach suit against Virgin Atlantic Feb. 27

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has fixed February 27 for the hearing of a suit filed by a security expert, Alhaji Ahmed Rabiu, against Virgin Atlantic Airways over allegations of breach of contract and the loss of his luggage on board its London to Lagos flight on September 24, 2024.

    The court, which had initially fixed Monday for the hearing, adjourned due to the absence of Justice Alexander Owoeye, who was said to be attending an official function outside the state.

    Rabiu is demanding $4000 for the value of the items contained in the stolen luggage and N20 million as damages for the distress, inconvenience and solicitors’ fees incurred in the course of recovering the luggage.

    In an affidavit filed in support of the suit, the passenger averred that he boarded flight No. CNY3JV from London-Heathrow, United Kingdom, to Murtala Mohammed Airport in Lagos after undergoing rigorous security checks.

    He was properly checked in, along with his tagged prime luggage, by the Defendant’s operational staff.

    But after the plane landed in Lagos, he waited at the conveyor belt from the moment the baggage carousel was activated until it was switched off.

    He said other passengers picked up their luggage except him as he was left devastated.

    The plaintiff also maintained that he immediately informed the defendant’s staff on ground and he was given the Defendant’s Loss of Baggage Form to fill out and submit, which he did immediately.

    Read Also: Court restrains family from entering Badagry community

    But the airline neither gave him his luggage, replaced it or pay for the value of the contents of his luggage.

    The plaintiff claimed that he was devastated by the fraudulent action of the defendant’s relevant operational staff and their recklessness or negligence.

    This, he said, led to the disappearance of his newly bought bag containing his purchases in London properly received and tagged in an accident-free flight which landed in Lagos on schedule.

    He further stated that the defendant’s failure to deliver his luggage to him upon arrival in Lagos after straining his finances to purchase the defendant’s flight ticket was a huge breach of contract.

    Ahmed also claimed that upon the theft and loss of his luggage, he caused his lawyers to write the defendant a demand letter requesting the luggage or payment for the contents of the luggage.

    The plaintiff alleged that the defendant did not respond to the letter, and his lawyer, yet again, sent a reminder, which, again, was not responded to.

    He insisted that he had suffered enormous economic losses and emotional distress and that it was in the interest of justice that the court grant his claims.

    The plaintiff averred: “There was neither accident nor armed robbery on the plane from London-Heathrow to Lagos Nigeria and there no reason why the Plaintiff’s prime luggage could no longer be found upon arrival in Lagos.

    “The plaintiff’s luggage was at all material times at the care and control of the Defendant’s staff, who ought to exercise maximum care on the plaintiff’s luggage.

    “The theft and loss of the plaintiff’s luggage under the defendant’s custody has caused significant inconvenience and distress, and the contents of the said luggage were precious valuables purchased from Zara stores, Mark and Spencer, Diesel jeans outfit, Primark, Calvin Klein, Puma and AC & Co for the plaintiff’s use, his five male children, family and friends as well as valuable gift items for the plaintiff’s boss and colleagues in the office valued over £4000 (Four thousand Pounds). The Plaintiff shall rely on the Loss of Baggage Form showing the loss of the Plaintiff’s luggage.”

  • Court orders demolition of new buildings on disputed Oregunland

    Court orders demolition of new buildings on disputed Oregunland

    Justice Ganiyu Safari of the Lagos High Court in Eti-Osa has ordered the demolition of newly constructed buildings and structures on a disputed land at 10, Kudirat Abiola Way, Oregun, Ikeja, Lagos.

    He made the order in a bench ruling delivered on the motion filed by G. C. Nwosu for the claimants in the suit ID/1375/2011.

    The claimants are: Ayinde Egunaye, Chief Mudiratu Egunaye and Chief Tajudeen Egunaye, who sued for themselves and on behalf of the Egunaye family of Oregun, Ikeja.

    The respondents are Mrs. E. O. Fasehun, Estate of E. 0. Fasehun, Clay Industry (Nig.) Limited, Bamikole Adewunmi, Mrs. Deborah Situ and Mrs. Oyebanji Caroline.

    Justice Safari held: “It is my view that in order to protect the dignity and integrity of the court and in order not to turn the Court into a laughing stock, that this application be granted to send a serious warning to people with the potential to treat the court orders with levity.

    “Consequently, this application is granted. It is hereby ordered that all the new structures built or being built during the pendency of this suit on the land and after the order of Adebiyi J. of 15th May, 2013, being at No. 10, Kudirat Abiola Way, Oregun which is the subject matter of this suit be demolished forthwith.

    “It is ordered that the Deputy Sheriff of this Court, the police and all necessary Law Enforcement Agencies do go into and demolish all new structures built or being built during the pendency of this suit on the land after the order of Adebiyi J. of 15th May, 2013 being at No. Kudirat Abiola Way, Oregun which is the subject matter of this suit and the subject matter of this suit be preserved and left in the state it was as at 15th May, 2013 when the order to maintain status quo was made by my learned brother Adebiyi.

    “It is ordered that a picture of the Res of this case taken after the order of demolition is executed be filed in this Court after the demolition. This shall be the ruling of this court.”

    The claimants prayed for an order demolishing all new structures built or being built within the pendency of the suit on the land.

    They provided exhibits of photographs of the ongoing development on the land.

    According to them, “the court severally ordered that parties maintain status quo and have on several other occasions warned parties against resorting to self-help whilst the matter is before the court”.

    Read Also: S’Court dismisses Fubara’s appeal against 26 lawmakers

    They added: “Claimants had complained before this Honourable Court that one Olufemi Omoola Fasehun who attempted twice to be joined in this suit was developing the land against the orders of the court but the allegation was denied by Counsel for the party seeking to be joined.

    “The person or persons illegally developing the land had continued to develop the land for Engr. E. O. Fasehun despite this matter still being before this court.

    “The Honourable Court has the inherent powers to protect a Res before it and uphold the sanctity, integrity and respect of the Court.

    “The action of those developing the land is capable of causing a breach of peace.”

    The motion was supported by an affidavit deposed to by Chief Egunaye and an affidavit of urgency by Fatimo Abimbola.

    Upon moving the motion, Nwosu urged the court to grant the orders as prayed.

  • Teaching hospital declares self illegal in suit over worker’s sack

    Teaching hospital declares self illegal in suit over worker’s sack

    There was a legal summersault in a case where one Joachim Egerue is challenging the alleged wrongful termination of his appointment by Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri, Imo State.

    Lead counsel to the defendants asked the court to dismiss the case on the ground that the Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri is an illegal institution and therefore cannot be sued. 

    Mr Nnamdi F. Ninis who is the lead counsel to the defendants had based his argument on the allegation that the hospital which was formerly known as Federal Medical Center (FMC) Owerri is yet to have its registration gazetted by the Federal Government and therefore cannot be sued.

    But the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) which was presided over by Justice Nelson Ogbuanya had frowned at the argument of the defence counsel which he described as an attempt to waste the time of the court and had subsequently ordered him to file his defence if any as to enable the court proceed to decide on the matter.

    Egerue, who is a key staff of Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri, had approached the National Industrial Court of Nigeria sitting in Owerri in a Suit No NICN/OW/32/2024 to request for the reversal of the termination of his appointment which occurred in 2021.

    Defendants in the case are the Chief Medical Director of Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri Dr Kingsley Achigbu Ihedioha, the Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri, the Honourable Minister of Health, and the Federal Ministry of Health.

    Egerue is praying the court to order his reinstatement to his position with attendant arrears of promotion or in alternatively order to direct the defendants jointly and severally to pay the sum of N200 million as Special damages to the Claimant being the salaries, allowances, emoluments, benefits etc. which the claimant should have earned from July 2021 when his appointment was wrongly terminated to 2035 which would have been his retirement age.

    Egerue is asking the court to order the Defendants jointly and severally to pay his arrears of salaries, allowances, emoluments, benefits etc from March 2021 until judgment is delivered and thereafter, interest thereon at the banking rate of interest until the judgment sum is fully liquidated.

    Read Also: Blackout: Ondo orders BEDC to restore power to teaching hospital

    The other prayers are for orders directing the defendants jointly and severally to pay N250 million as General damages and compensation for flagrant and unlawful termination of appointment/employment, an order directing the Defendants jointly and severally to pay N75 million as aggravated, exemplary and punitive damages for flagrant and unlawful termination of the claimant’s appointment/employment.

    Speaking to newsmen shortly after the matter was adjourned to March 28, counsel to the claimant, Dr Christian Nwadigo hinted that the counsel to the defendants, Ninis rather than file their defence to enable the hearing of the matter to proceed, filed a preliminary objection on grounds that “Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri has no “juristic personality to be sued” because it has not been gazetted,” among other reasons.

    He confirmed that Justice Ogbuanya frowned at the grounds of the preliminary objection including the assertion that the National Industrial Court of Nigeria has no powers to grant “declaratory reliefs,” noting that the court described it as a lack of “intellectual diligence.”

    Nwadigo said that the action of the defendants amounted to an alleged resort to technicalities in order to “buy time,” instead of filling their defence, saying that the defendants have since been served in 2024.

    He further said that the court adjourned to March 28, to enable the defendants file their substantive defence.

    Giving a background of the matter, Nwadigo hinted that the matter emanated from the termination of the appointment of Mr Egerue by the Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri based on an “audit report of Dental Stores of December 2020, conducted by the 2nd defendant, the Federal University Teaching Hospital Owerri, on the instructions of the 1st Defendant, Dr Kingsley Achigbu Ihedioha (Chief Medical Director) in the absence of the claimant Joachim Egerue, and without notifying him, without inviting him…”

    Nwadigo stated that the action of the defendants was tantamount to a violation of the claimant’s constitutional rights to a fair hearing in Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution” amid relevant circulars of the Ministry Of Health.

    He disclosed that his client, Egerue is praying the court to, among other things, “declare as unlawful, wrongful, illegal and unconstitutional, the 2nd Defendant’s, Federal University Teaching Hospital, Owerri purported letter of termination dated 01/07/2021 issued to the claimant, Joachim Egerue on the instruction of the 1st Defendant, Dr Kingsley Achigbu Ihedioha (Chief Medical Director) and “an order directing the defendants jointly and severally to re-instate the claimant, Joachim Egerue to his position.”

  • Court restrains family from entering Badagry community

    Court restrains family from entering Badagry community

    Justice Yetunde Adesanya of a Lagos High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square has restrained the Idasa Iyesi family of Ilogbo Eremi from entering the Agunmo Community in Badagry Local Government area of the state.

    Justice Adesanya issued the order of injunction restraining Idasa Iyesi Community in a ruling delivered on January 23.2025.

    The order of the court  sets aside the wrongful execution illegally carried out on an area measuring 46.43 hectares of the community’s ancestral land over which possession notices, posts, marks and boards were erected by Idasa Iyesi family of Ilogbo Eremi.

    Justice Adesanya  further directed the removal of all illegal structures, notices and barred Idasa Iyesi family from entering the said portion of land, over which the judgment was delivered in Suit No.BD/28/2012 and Appeal No CA/LAG/CV/940/2020 were sought to be executed, but which  the Agunmo Community was not a party nor sued in the matter.

    According to the certified true copy of the judgment, the Idasa Iyesi family of Ilogbo Eremi in Badagry Local Government Area of the state represented by Hon. Ayo Raji, and Mulero Ogunbiyi and five others had sued the Iyesi community represented by  Posu Asu Govoeyi and four others in respect of a large portion of land stated to be 108.425 hectares at Iyesi Idasa Land in Suit No.BD/28/2012.

    Read Also: End of Fubara’s ‘rascality’ close, says Speaker Amaewhule

    Judgment was delivered by Justice Yetunde Adesanya on June 22.2020 in favour of the Idasa Iyesi family.

    The defendants approached the Court of Appeal against the judgment.

    The parties entered into a consent judgment at the Court of Appeal, in Appeal No CA/LAG/CV/489/2020 where it turned out to be that the area over which the said defendants were in possession was actually 58.930 hectares, which was divided and partitioned into the ratio of 32.227 hectares and 26.603 hectares between the parties, and made the consent judgment of the Court of Appeal, contrary to the allegations that the entire land was 108.425 hectares.

    On January 31, 2023, the judgment creditors in the above Suit BD/28/2012 and Appeal No.CA/LAG/CV/489/2020 in their efforts to claim the other part of the judgment of the  High Court of Lagos State,  went to Agunmo Community which was not sued, and not party to either the suit or the appeal, with several buses filled with officers of Nigeria police armed with guns and land grabbers to levy execution on the portion of Agunmo land measuring 46.43 hectares from the boundary of Iyesi town, to the centre of Agunmo town where there is the popular Agunmo market marking several houses and erecting bill boards and possession  notices.

    The Agunmo Community, led by Chief Job Ogunbiyi, through their Counsel, Peters Oladipo Agboola, filed an application dated November 10, 2023,  praying the court to set aside the execution that was illegally levied on his client’s land on the ground that the said interveners/ applicants, who are Agunmo Community, are distinct and separate  and were not parties to any suit involving the Idasa Iyesi family at the High Court or the Court of Appeal.

    Counsel to the Judgment Creditors, Mr Ola Sobowale  urged the court to dismiss the application on the ground that the judgment was executed on the land covered by the judgment and did not get into Agunmo Land.

    In her ruling, spanning 34 pages, Justice Adesanya, granted the reliefs of the Agunmo  Community, and granted leave to apply to set aside the writ or warrant of execution, writ or warrant of possession/attachment including all processes ordered by the court including the possession notices, posts or marks in respect of the areas which was covered by the judgment, and those not covered by the judgment, over which the Agunmo community is in exclusive possession, since they were not sued and not parties to the suit and the judgement, set aside the execution, ordered the removal of the possession notices.

    The court also  granted an  order and injunction restraining the Iyesi Idasa community from trespassing into any portion of Agunmo Community land.

    The judge, however, refused the reliefs for damages claimed by the Interveners/ Applicants.

    Justice Adesanya ruled: “The Applicants/Interveners are in occupation of the land upon which possession notices were pasted and execution sought to be levied, and they were not parties to this Suit No. BD/28/2012. The Judgment Creditors/Respondents will, therefore, need to institute a separate suit against the applicants/interveners for either the enforcement of the Judgment or a determination of title as between them and the Applicants/Interveners.

    “On the totality of the foregoing, the application succeeds in part. Prayers 1-10 are granted as prayed. Prayers 11, 12 and 13 on damages are refused.”

    With the ruling, peace has returned to the Agunmo community who was not a party to the suit, whose judgment was sought to be executed upon it.

  • Three jailed 14 years for attempted robbery

    Three jailed 14 years for attempted robbery

    Justice Yetunde Adesanya of a Lagos High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS) has sentenced three men to 14 years imprisonment each for attempted robbery.

    The convicts, Ajayi Olayemi, Olawale Kudus and Wasiu Nurudeen were sentenced  following a plea bargain agreement adopted by the court.

    Justice Adesanya adopted the plea bargain agreement on Tuesday, January 21, 2025.

    Deputy Director, Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON) who represented the convicts, Mrs Grace Adenubi said that they were arrested and remanded for alleged offence of Armed Robbery sometime in December, 2021.

    Mrs Adenubi said they were charged to court sometime in 2022 in Charge No. LD/19982c/2022.

    She said that trial commenced in the matter with a witness.

    Mrs. Adenubi said after looking at the weight of  evidence by the lone witness, “in our wisdom, we opted for plea bargain.

    “We applied and the defendants pleaded guilty to a lesser offence of attempted robbery and 14 years sentence was approved by the Directorate of Public prosecution (DPP) following the Lagos State Judiciary (Sentencing Guidelines) Practice Directions 2018.

    Read Also: IGP warns officers against gross violation of rights, misconduct

    “The defendants accepted the sentence and it was adopted by the court”, she said.

    Mrs Adenubi explained that though death penalty is yet to be abolished in Nigeria despite continuous advocacy for same, “I humbly submit that plea bargain is a way of escape from death penalty for those that are likely to be convicted.”

    She stated further, “this is a welcomed development in our criminal justice sector, reason being that experience has shown that in our society of today, it is still possible to convict an innocent person despite the trite law that it’s better to acquit 99 criminals than to convict one innocent person.”

     She thanked  the Rule of Law and Anti-Corruption (ROLAC) Programme, DPP,

    Legal Aid Coordination Committee (LACC)  and all other stakeholders for the continuous awareness on plea bargain saying, “kudos all”.

  • Prince sues Makinde over exclusion from Alaafin stool

    Prince sues Makinde over exclusion from Alaafin stool

    Oyo Prince and an aspirant to the Chieftaincy stool of Alaafin of Oyo, Ismaila Olamilekan Owoade,  has filed a suit against Oyo State Governor, Seyi Makinde and 19 others for allegedly excluding him from the race after the process was truncated  with the appointment of Prince  Abimbola Owoade.

    Also alleged to have been excluded from the process was one Baba Iyaji.

    The Alaafin elect, Prince Owoade is the 4th defendant in the suit.

      The claimant is praying the court to restrain Prince Abimbola Owoade and Prince Lukman Ayinla Gbadegesin  (5th defendant) from parading themselves as the Alaafin of Oyo on the basis of the process filed in the court.

    Justice Jimoh Adesina of Oyo State High Court sitting in Oyo  has  fixed March 11, 2025 for hearing of the suit filed by  the claimant through his counsel, Bamidele Ogundele.

     The claimant is seeking an order of the court setting aside the purported appointment and presentation of staff of office to the 4th defendant, Prince Abimbola  Owoade as Alaafin of Oyo.

    He claimed the appointment of Alaafin-elect was conducted in violation of the provision of the registered Alaafin Chieftaincy declaration of 1961 and Chiefs Law of Oyo State 2000 adding that it was consequently illegal, unlawful , unconstitutional invalid, null and void.

     Other 16 defendants in the suit are: the Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Oyo State, the Commissioner for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Oyo State, Prince Abimbola Owoade, Prince Lukman  Ayinla Gbadegesin, Prince Yusuf Layinka (The Basorun of Oyo), Chief Lamidi Oyewale (the Iba Samu of Oyo) and Chief Asimiyu Atanda (The Agbaakin of Oyo).

     The defendants also included Chief Wakeel Oyedepo (The Laguna of Oyo), Chief Amusa Yusuf (The Akinku of Oyo), Chief  Moshud Aborode (Ona Ilemole), Chief Mukaila  Afonja (The Baba Iyaji of Oyo), Chief Isiaka Tella Titiloye (Ona Isokun of Oyo),Chief Oyedemi  Olatunde Oyelowo (The Mogba of Oyo), Chief Samuel Olusegun Odunrinde (Alajagba of Ajagba of Oyo), Chief Ganiyu Busari (The Alagooja of Oyo), Chief Gbadebo Mufutau (Alapo of Okeapo, Oyo), Chief Wahab Oyetunji (Aareago Basorun of Oyo).Chief Ikusaanu Ifaleye (Oluwo of Alaafin Oyo) and Atiba Local Government , Oyo town as the first to 20th respondents respectively.

    Read Also: End of Fubara’s ‘rascality’ close, says Speaker Amaewhule

    In his statement of claim, Prince Owoade stated that the governor and all other constituted authorities failed to comply with due process which exclude the 12 defendants, Chief Mukaila Afonja (Baba Iyaji of Oyo) under paragraph 5(a) and (b) of the registered Alaafin Chieftaincy Declaration of 1961 who must present the candidate who is in his opinion is best  qualified to be appointed, together with the name of the other candidates to the Kingmakers  under the leadership of Basorun of Oyo and the Chiefs  Laws of Oyo State 2000 and Registered  Alaafin  Chieftaincy  Declaration of 1981 hence the grievances of the claimant now ventilated before the court.

      He said that it is the responsibility of 12th defendant (Baba Iyaji)  to conduct a transparent screening amongst the applicants prince based on the criteria by Oyo Mesi and representatives of the ruling house after due consultation with other stakeholders.

      The claimant is, therefore, praying the court for an order restraining the 5th defendant, , Prince Gbadegesin, Prince Abimboa Owoade  which excluded Baba lyaji under paragraph 5(a)&(b) of the Registered Alaafin Chieftaincy Declaration of 1961 who must present the candidate to the Kingmakers, who in his opinion is best qualified to be appointed, together with the names of the other candidates to the Kingmakers under the Leadership of Basorun of Oyo did not comply with the Registered Alaafin Chieftaincy Declaration of 1961 and the Chiefs Law of Oyo State 2000.