The Nation Newspaper

Category: Lead

APC, INEC to poll tribunal: Obi’s petition a waste of time

• ‘LP’s candidate was PDP member when he picked ticket’
• Election conducted in compliance with Electoral Act, agency insists

Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate Peter Obi’s petition before the Election Tribunal lacks merit, All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) submitted yesterday.

To the APC and the electoral commission, the petition, which is a waste of time, should be dismissed.

LP and Obi are challenging the victory of President-elect Bola Tinubu of APC, winner of the February 25 election, on grounds of alleged non-qualification and non-compliance, among others.

In their separate responses filed before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) last night, the APC and INEC urged the court to dismiss the petition for being unmeritorious.

They are querying the competence of the petition and the grounds on which it was premised.

APC, in its response filed at the PEPC secretariat in Abuja by Thomas Ojo, a member of the party’s legal team, led by Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), faulted the petition on many grounds.

It also challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear the petition on the grounds that it is, among others, incompetent.

Among APC’s grounds for challenging the competence of the petition are that Obi was not a valid member of the LP as at the time of the election and the exclusion of Atiku Abubakar and his party as a party to the petition, among others.

On Obi’ s claim to being a member of the LP, the APC argued that he was a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) until May 24, 2022, when he was screened as the party’s presidential aspirant in April 2023.

The APC stated that Obi participated in PDP’s screening exercise and was cleared to contest the presidential election as an aspirant.

It added: “The 1st petitioner (Obi) purportedly resigned his membership of Peoples Democratic Party on 24th May 2022 to purportedly join the 2nd petitioner (LP) on 27th May 2022.

“The 2nd petitioner conducted its presidential primary on 30th May 2022, which purportedly produced 1st petitioner as its candidate, which time contravened Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act for him to contest the primary election as a member of the 2nd petitioner.

“The 1st petitioner was not a member of the 2nd petitioner as at the time of his alleged sponsorship.

“Whereas, by the mandatory provisions of Section 77 (1) (2) and (3) of the Electoral Act 2022, a political party shall maintain a register and shall make such register available to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) not later than 30 davs before the date fixed for the party primaries, congresses and convention.

“All the presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) were screened on 29th April, 2022, an exercise in which the 1st petitioner herein participated and was cleared to contest while being a member of the party.

“The 1at petitioner herein resigned his membership of the PDP on Thursday 26th May, 2022 and joined the Labour Party the following day being 27th May, 2022.

“The 2nd petitioner herein conducted its presidenual primary on 30th May, 2022, which produced the 1st petitioner as the candidate it intended to sponsor in the general election.

“By Section 77(3) of the Electoral Act, 2022, the 2nd petitioner is mandated to have submitted its comprehensive register of members to the 1st respondent (INEC) 30 days before its presidential primary, that is to say the said register of members must have been submitted to the 1st respondent on or before 30th April, 2022

“The 1st petitioner, as at 30th April 2022 was still a member of the PDP and his name was not and could not have been in the register of members submitted by by the 2nd petitioner to the 1t respondent.”

On the non-inclusion of Atiku, the APC wondered why Obi and its party excluded the PDP and its candidate from their petition, having admitted that the PDP candidate came second in the election.

It added that it would amount to a breach of Atiku’s right to fair hearing should the court grant Obi’s relief to declare him winner and void Atiku’s votes without hearing him.

INEC argued that, as against the claim by Obi and his party, it conducted the election in full compliance with relevant laws and challenges the petitioners to prove the contrary.

April 11, 2023
How legal landmines against Tinubu/Shettima were defused

At least, 18 cases were filed by individuals, groups and political parties against President-elect Bola Tinubu. All got to the Supreme Court. None succeeded. ERIC IKHILAE reviews them.

No fewer than 18 cases were instituted before the February 25 presidential election by individuals, groups and political parties, with the sole aim of voiding the Bola Tinubu/Kashim Shettima joint ticket.

The majority of the pre-election cases queried Tinubu and Shettima’s qualifications to stand for election, while others challenged the primary election from which they emerged as the presidential and vice presidential candidates of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Most of the cases were, however, terminated unceremoniously either for lack of locus standi (the right to sue on the issue raised) or for being statute-barred.

Suit by ex-Minister of State for Education, Nwajiuba

The Supreme Court, on March 30 dismissed an appeal filed by former Minister of State for Education, Dr. Chukwuemeka Nwajiuba, challenging Tinubu’s candidacy.

In a unanimous judgment, a five-member panel led by Justice John Okoro found that the case was statute-barred and that it had become an academic exercise.

The apex court dismissed the appeal after the appellant’s lawyer, John Kalu, applied to withdraw it shortly after the court drew his attention to the fact that his case was filed at the trial court outside the 14 days allowed by the Constitution.

In the lead judgment in the appeal marked SC/CV/429/2023, Justice Okoro held: “Upon the application for withdrawal by the appellant’s counsel and without any objection from the respondents’ counsel, the appeal is dismissed.”

The Supreme Court proceeded to affirm the two previous decisions by the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court (both in Abuja).

Nwajiuba had, in his suit before the Federal High Court, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1114/2022, sought among others the voiding of Tinubu’s candidacy on the grounds that he and the APC allegedly failed to disclose the source of the N100million he paid for his nomination and expression of interest forms, relying on section 84(13) of the Electoral Act 2022.

Nwajiuba prayed the court, among others, to declare him as the presidential candidate of the APC on the grounds that he was the only aspirant who disclosed the source of the N100m he paid to the party for his nomination and expression of interest forms.

Listed as defendants in the suit were Tinubu, APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

In a judgment on November 23, 2022, Justice Zainab Abubakar of the Federal High Court, Abuja upheld the preliminary objection filed by Tinubu and APC and held that Nwajiuba’s suit was statute-barred by the provisions of section 285(9) of the 1999 Constitution.

Nwajiuba appealed the decision at the Court of Appeal, Abuja, and in a judgment on February 24, 2013, a three-member panel of the court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court.

“The appeal is lacking in merit and is hereby dismissed,” the court said and awarded a cost of N3millon against Nwajiuba, requiring him to pay N1m to each of the three respondents – Tinubu, APC and INEC.

PDP’s case

On March 25, the Court of Appeal in Abuja dismissed an appeal by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) seeking the disqualification of Tinubu and Shettima as presidential and vice-presidential candidates.

The PDP sought the reversal of the January 13 judgment by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja which dismissed the suit the party filed because it was without merit.

In the March 25 judgment, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal held that the PDP failed to establish that it had locus standi to institute the case at the trial court.

In the lead judgment, Justice James Abundaga described the PDP as a “busybody,” which dabbled into issues that relate to the internal affairs of the APC.

The judge, who affirmed the January 13 judgment by Justice Ekwo, also awarded N5 million cost against the appellant’s lawyer, J. O. Olotu.

The PDP, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1734/2022, claimed that Shettima’s nomination as Tinubu’s running mate was in breach of the provisions of sections 29(1), 33, 35, and 84(1)(2) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

The party argued that Shettima’s nomination to contest the position of vice-president having earlier been nominated as the candidate for Borno Central Senatorial District contravened the law.

The PDP, which sought an order disqualifying the APC, Tinubu, and Shettima from contesting the presidential election, also prayed for an order nullifying their candidacy.

In his judgment, Justice Ekwo said the court found the action incompetent for lack of locus standi and that the matter bordered on the internal affairs of the APC, in which the PDP had no legal right to file the case.

He agreed with the defendants that the suit was an abuse of court process, adding that the PDP disclosed no cause of action against the defendants.

AA’s case

On December 12, 2022, a Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed the certificate forgery suit filed by the Action Alliance (AA) against Tinubu, the APC and INEC.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu upheld the notice of preliminary objection raised by Tinubu and the APC and held that the suit was statute-barred, having not been commenced within the mandatory 14 days provided for under the 1999 Constitution (as amended by the Fourth Alteration Act).

Justice Egwuatu said the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/954/2022, had become academic and grossly incompetent, thereby denying the court the required jurisdiction to entertain it or grant the reliefs sought by the plaintiff.

The judge, while also holding that the plaintiff lacked locus standi to file the suit, noted that the AA acted like a busybody, having interfered in the internal affairs of another party.

The AA had, in the writ of summons filed by its lawyer, U. O. Ukairo, prayed the court to declare that Tinubu’s claim, in his INEC FORM CF 001 which he presented to INEC in 1999, that he attended the Government College, Ibadan and the University of Chicago, was false.

The plaintiff also urged the court to declare that “the false information on the APC presidential candidate’s INEC FORM CF 001 wherein he claims to have been awarded a Bachelor of Science Degree in Economics by the University of Chicago is a forged certificate.”

It further sought a declaration that in view of Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, Tinubu, having in 1999 presented a forged certificate to INEC in INEC Form CF 001, which he submitted as a candidate in the 1999 general elections for the post of the Governor of Lagos State, was not qualified to contest for the office of president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The party equally urged the court to declare that APC’s submission of Tinubu’s name to INEC as its 2023 presidential candidate was null and void and of no effect and prayed for an order of perpetual injunction restraining INEC from publishing his name as a candidate in the general elections.

AA also sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining INEC from listing APC as a political party in the ballot for the conduct of the 2023 presidential election to be conducted by INEC.

Suit by three APC members

The Supreme Court on March 29 dismissed an appeal filed by three members of the APC, who sought to disqualify Tinubu, claiming he was not qualified to contest the last presidential election.

A five-member panel of the apex court held, in a unanimous judgment, that the appellants, led by one Memuna Suleiman, lacked the locus standi to have instituted the case before the Federal High Court.

The court noted that the appellants, who were not aspirants at the APC presidential primary, could not challenge Tinubu’s nomination.

While dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered on February 17.

Suleiman and two others in the suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1094/2022 listed the APC, Tinubu, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), the National Assembly and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants.

They had prayed the court to, among others, declare Tinubu has not met the minimum educational qualification to contest for the position of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

They urged the court to issue an order disqualifying Tinubu as the candidate of the APC for the February 25 presidential election.

The plaintiffs equally sought an order restraining Tinubu from parading himself as the presidential candidate of the APC and a further order directing INEC not to recognise Tinubu as the APC’s candidate.

In a judgment on November 2022, Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court held that the plaintiffs had mis-joined causes of action and lacked the locus standi to institute and maintain the action against the APC.

Justice Mohammed, after holding that the plaintiffs, who were not aspirants in the primaries of the APC, lacked locus standi and being a threshold issue, the court dismissed the suit as lacking in merit.

On appeal, the Court of Appeal in a judgment on February 17, 2023, upheld the respondents’ objection and struck out the notice of appeal filed by Suleiman and others.

The court, while determining the appeal on its merit, held, among others, that the appeal lacked merit and proceeded to dismiss it.

It was the February 17 decision of the Court of Appeal that the Supreme Court affirmed in its March 29 judgment.

RAI and Nwajiuba

On February 17, the Court of Appeal in Abuja dismissed an appeal filed by a group, Right for All International (RAI) in which it sought the reversal of the December 15, 2023 judgment by Justice Ekwo (of the Federal High Court, Abuja) which dismissed a suit jointly by RAI and a former Minister of State for Education, Prof. Chukwuemeka Nwajiuba.

They had sought, among others, the nullification of Tinubu’s nomination as the presidential candidate of the APC.

A three-man panel of the Court of Appeal, in a judgment on February 17, held that RAI’s appeal was incompetent.

The group filed the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/942/2022 with Nwajiuba before the Federal High Court in Abuja, which the court, in a judgment on December 15, 2022, dismissed and outlawed the group.

But, on appeal, the group excluded Nwajiuba from the case, a decision the Court of Appeal found to be unlawful.

The Court of Appeal, in its February 17 judgment, upheld the objection by the APC and other respondents, that the suit by the appellant, filed at the trial court – the Federal High Court, Abuja – was not a pre-election matter because the plaintiffs could not be said to be a person covered by Section 285(14) a, b and c of the 1999 Constitution being an NGO.

The appellate court held that the removal of Nwajiuba who was a party in the case at the lower court meant the judgment of the lower court was not appealed.

The court noted that the appeal was an attempt by the appellant – the RAl – to revive itself having earlier been dissolved by the judgment of the trial court.

The appellate court after dismissing the appeal, awarded N100,000 against the appellant and in favour of Tinubu and Atiku.

It affirmed the judgment of the trial court and held that “the appeal is lacking in merit and the appellant only sought to revive the dissolved NGO through the back door, the counsel to the appellant who is also a trustee of the NGO should live with the same in sober reflections.”

At the trial court, RAI and Nwajiuba had sought among others, to void the primaries that produced Tinubu and Atiku Abubakar as candidates of the APC and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) for the next presidential election.

They claimed that both parties’ primaries were marred by corrupt practices and prayed the court to replace Tinubu with the ex-Minister, who said he participated in APC’s primary and scored one vote.

The plaintiffs prayed for “a declaration that having regard to the clear, unambiguous and express provisions, spirit and tenor of Section 33(1) And (5) (C) of the Constitution of the Peoples Democratic Party 2017 (as amended) the Special National convention of the 2nd defendant (PDP) held on May 28 and 29, 2022 was not properly constituted as regards the composition of delegates who should attend and vote at the said convention and did not confer the convention the powers to elect the 4th defendant (Atiku) as the presidential candidate of the 2nd defendant (PDP) for the 2023 presidential election.”

They also prayed for a declaration that all the votes cast in favour of the 3rd and 4th defendants (Tinubu and Atiku) at the special convention of the 1st and 2nd defendants (APC and PDP) held on June 6 and 7, 2022 and on May 28 and 29, 2022 respectively are illegal, null and void and of no effect whatsoever on the grounds of corruption, buying and selling of delegates votes and voter inducement.

The plaintiffs urged the court to issue “an order returning the 2nd plaintiff (Nwajiuba) as the duly elected and nominated presidential candidate of the 1st defendant (APC) being that, by operation of Section 90(3) of the Electoral Act, the 2nd plaintiff (Nwajiuba) is the only candidate out of the 10 contestants, who polled votes at the 1st defendants’ convention and whose source of the N100m is verified and complied with the Electoral Act as contained in the print out of the names in the bank statement of over 1000 individual contributions in person.”

In his judgment on December 15, 2022, Justice Ekwo after upholding the defendants’ objections, held that there was no credible and reliable evidence provided by the plaintiffs in their supporting affidavit, to support their case.

He then dismissed the substantive case for being incompetent.

Justice Ekwo condemned the involvement of RAI, which claimed to be a non-government organisation, in politically motivated cases.

The judge held that, by its involvement in politically motivated cases and by extension, partisan politics, RAI went outside the objectives for which it was registered under Part F of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC)) and taken steps inimical to public policy.

He added: “It is only in this country that an association registered for charitable purposes will venture into partisan politics with such an audacious sense of impunity.

“At this time in the political journey of this country, politics and political activities must be left to those who are authorised by law to do so.

“This action by the first plaintiff (RAI) is an outrageous act and an aberration to all known principles of the law of associations. In short, it is the height of lawlessness and ought to be stopped forthwith.

“Associations registered under Part F of the CAMA 2020 must understand the limits of their operations under the law. Where they fail to do so, the legal sanctions will apply.”

Justice Ekwo proceeded to dissolve RAI and ordered the CAC to take over the dissolved group and deal with it in accordance with the provisions of the law on the dissolution of bodies registered under Part F of the CAMA 2022.

Incorporated Trustees of Kingdom Human Rights Foundation International (KHRFI)

A Federal High Court in Abuja on January 27 dismissed a suit filed by a group – the Incorporated Trustees of Kingdom Human Rights Foundation International (KHRFI) – seeking Tinubu’s disqualification from the elections.

Justice Binta Nyako held that the KHRFI lacked the locus standi to institute the case.

“The issue of locus standi of the applicant is a threshold issue because anything conducted without locus will be a nullity and it will be set aside,” she said.

Justice Nyako held that the plaintiff, having not been a political party nor a member of APC, had no legal right to file the action.

The judge, who also described the suit as “an abuse of court process,” condemned the plaintiff for filing multiple suits with similar reliefs.

She noted that Justice Inyang Ekwo (also of the Abuja division of the Federal High Court) had, on December 15, 2022, delivered a judgment in a similar suit during which it was dismissed.

Nyako observed that the earlier suit before Justice Ekwo and the instant suit had the same reliefs though the names of the parties were slightly different.

“Consequently, the case is hereby dismissed for being an abuse of court process,” she said.

Named as defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1960/22, were the INEC Chairman, the APC and Tinubu.

The group, in an originating motion on notice, sought an order of mandamus directing INEC to exercise its statutory power under Section 84(13) of the Electoral Act 2022 to immediately expunge Tinubu’s name from its final list of presidential candidates contesting the 2023 poll.

The group anchored its ground to the failure of the APC to comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 91(3) of the Electoral Act 2022 which stipulates that a political party shall not receive any contribution of cash or kind exceeding N50 million without showing INEC the source of the contribution, among others.

Suit against same-faith ticket

On January 18, Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a suit by a lawyer, Osigwe Ahmed Momoh, who sought the voiding of the Tinubu/Shettima joint ticket because both candidates are of the same Islamic faith.

Justice Mohammed held that the plaintiff lacked the requisite locus standi.

The judge held that the plaintiff, not being a member of the APC and having not participated in the process that produced Tinubu and his running mate, could not query the nominations.

Justice Mohammed, who upheld the preliminary objection filed by the APC and Tinubu, however, did not award any cost against the plaintiff.

The lawyer had, in the suit, prayed the court for an order nullifying Tinubu’s candidature and preventing him from participating in the February 25 election on the grounds that the same faith ticket offends the spirit and letters of Sections 14, 15 and 224 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

The plaintiff, who claimed to be an apostle of rule of law and social justice, argued that the Muslim-Muslim candidacy runs foul of national cohesion, integration and unity.

He, therefore, asked the court for an order of perpetual injunction to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from publishing the name of APC and its presidential candidate for purposes of the 2023 polls.

Suit seeking to compel IGP to investigate Tinubu

There was also the suit filed by the Incorporated Trustees of Advocacy for Social Right Advancement and Development Initiative (ASRADI), alleging that St. Paul Aroloya Primary School, Lagos, which Tinubu claimed to have attended, was found to be non-existent, therefore, he (Tinubu) should be tried for lying under oath.

ASRADI is, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2197/2022, sought among others an order of judicial review, compelling the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) to investigate Tinubu in respect of his educational qualifications and the credentials he submitted to INEC in 1999.

The group stated that the suit was necessitated by the alleged failure of the IGP to probe allegations of perjury it raised against Tinubu.

APM’s suit

Another one was the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1215/2022 filed by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) to challenge the replacement of Ibrahim Masari with Shettima as the APC vice presidential candidate.

The suit was dismissed on December 5, 2022, for lacking in merit.

APP’s suit

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on November 21, 2022, struck out the suit filed by the Action Peoples Party (APP) for want of diligent prosecution.

The APP, had in the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/124/2022 queried, among others, the propriety of the presidential primary conducted by the APC, from which Tinubu emerged as the party’s candidate.

Ohioma’s suit

On December 8, 2022, the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed the suit filed by Elder Ngozika Ohioma.

Ohioma had in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/854/2022 challenged the emergence of delegates who participated in the APC primary leading to Tinubu’s emergence as the presidential candidate.

He equally queried the propriety of the primary, alleging bribery and vote buying, among others.

Suit by Habu Abdulrahaman & six others

Habu Abdulrahaman and six other APC members had sued before the Federal High Court in Abuja, challenging among others, the process leading to the emergence of delegates from Taraba State, who participated in the national convention from which Tinubu emerged as the party’s candidate.

The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/938/2022 with INEC and two others as defendants, was struck out on December 8, 2022, for lack of diligent prosecution.

April 11, 2023
National Assembly: APC governors seek urgent action on zoning

• Hardline positions by aspirants worry NWC

All Progressives Congress (APC) governors have urged the ruling party to expedite action on its proposal for the zoning of Senate President and House of Representatives Speaker, it was learnt yesterday.

According to sources, the governors have proposed a joint meeting of the Progressives Governors’ Forum, the National Working Committee (NWC) and President-elect Bola Tinubu to take decision on the choice of the presiding officers.

Last week, the governors, who met in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), brainstormed on the implications of the huge number of aspirants for the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the National Assembly.

The 10th National Asssembly is expected to be inaugurated in June, following a proclamation by the president.

Sources close to the governors said the governors wanted the party to be mindful of religion as a crucial factor in the choice of the next presiding officers.

The President-elect is a Muslim from the Southwest while his deputy, Senator Kashim Shettima is a Muslim from the Northeast.

A source said: “Many APC governors are sensitive to the geo-political and religious make-up of the country. It appears that they may favour the zoning of the Senate President and House of Representatives Speaker to the Southsouth, Southeast and Northcentral. This means that if the Senate President comes from either of the Southsouth or Southeast, the Speaker will then come from the Northcentral.

“Other principal positions will be zone to the appropriate regions as well. But these suggestions, which are still within the Progressives Governors’ Forum, are subjected to debate and ratification by the tripartite meeting.”

There is anxiety in the ruling party over the hardline stance of some National Assembly members-elect jostling for Senate President and House of Representatives Speaker.

The APC NWC is worried by the scramble for the Senate and House positions, which may contradict any proposal for zoning of the offices, it was also learnt.

No fewer than eight senators-elect have unfolded their ambition to serve as Senate President.

They are Senate President Ahmad Lawan (Northeast), Senator Godswill Akpabio (Southsouth), Senator Barau Jibrin (Northwest), and Senator Ali Ndume (Northeast).

Others are Senator Sani Musa (Northcentral), Senator Orji Kalu (Southeast), Ebonyi State Governor Dave Umahi (Southeast), and Senator Osita Izunaso (Southeast).

Aspirant for House Speaker include Deputy Speaker Idris Wase (Northcentral), Yusuf Gagdi (Northcentral), Abdulraheem Olawuyi (Kwara, Northcentral) and Chairman, House Committee on Appropriation, Aliyu Mukthar Betara (Borno, Northeast).

Others are Chairman of the House Committee on n Media and Public Affairs, Benjamin Kalu (Abia, Southeast), Chairman, House Committee on Land Transport, Tajudeen Abbas (Kaduna, Northwest), Chairman, House Committee on Water Resources, Sada Soli (Katsina, Northwest), Abubakar Makki Yalleman (Jigawa, Northwest) and Usman Sani Jaji (Zamfara, Northwest).

The lawmakers-elect have stepped up their lobby for the positions by obtaining endorsement from notable party leaders and other influential Nigerians across the country.

Also, sources said some APC lawmakers-elect have opened talks with their opposition counterparts ahead of the contest.

Worried by the intra-party scheming, APC Vice Chairman (Northwest), Salihu Lukman urged the party to regulate aspirants’ conduct to avert an implosion.

There is an uneasy calm, following intense lobby of the party leadership by the newly elected lawmakers for zoning to the geo-political zones.

The APC National Chairman Senator Abdullahi Adamu had told the aspirants to wait for the proposed zoning plan, which will be done by the party leadership in consultation with the President-elect.

However, following the delay in unveiling the zoning plan, the aspirants have been locked in maneuvering that had heated up the party.

While some have continued to lobby the NWC members for endorsement, others are mounting pressure on the NWC to jettison zoning.

Lukman alleged that some contenders were wooing party leaders with gifts to support their aspiration.

Lukman had in a statement titled: “Cash-and-Carry Contest for Leadership of 10th National Assembly” queried: “How can anyone aspiring for position of leadership at all levels seeking to bribe his/her way be said to be interested in rendering service?

“Such a person will only be interested in rendering service to himself and himself alone.

“Once aspirants win leadership positions through cash-and-carry methods, their loyalty to the government, led by Asiwaju Tinubu, and the APC will be weak. Such a person could even hold the government hostage in pursuance of their personal ambitions, which is known only to themselves.”

Ndume had urged the party leadership to allow senators to pick their leaders instead of zoning.

He said senators-elect are not “small boys” who cannot choose their presiding officers.

Ndume said: “The APC leadership did not take any position during the presidential primary. Aspirants from all the geopolitical zones participated in the exercise.

“Senators should be allowed to choose a competent person among them that has adequate legislative and managerial experience to lead the Senate.

“Zoning may not lead to the emergence of the best person for the job. That is why the decision to choose the Senate presiding officers must be the sole responsibility of the senators.”

A source said other aspirants are eagerly awaiting zoning to decide whether they will vie for the Senate President or consider running for Deputy Senate President.

Senator Sani Musa, said the source, may opt for Deputy Senate President, if the Senate President is not zone to the Northcentral.

A source in Ndume’s camp also said he would consider the post of Senate Leader, if the zoning formula does not favour the Northeast to produce the next Senate President.

The source said: “You know he is presently one of the most ranking APC senators-elect. Ordinary, the position of Senate President for him is supposed to be a given if you follow parliamentary traditions in advanced country.

“Don’t also forget that he was once a Senate Leader in the 8th Senate and he contested the position of Senate President against Lawan during the inauguration of the 9th National Assembly.”

Party sources hinted that the geo-political zone most likely to produce the next Senate President is the Southsouth.

This is notwithstanding, the agitation of the Southeast senators-elect for the position, it was learnt.

While Senator Kalu has called on the party to zone the position to his ward in Igbere, Abia North Senatorial District, Umahi and Izunaso are relying on their performance and legislative experience respectively.

Senator Jibrin has called on the APC to reward ranking, experience and the number of votes delivered to the President-elect in the Northwest during the election.

Sources close to Akpabio said he is relying on his legislative experience as Senate Minority Leader in the 8th Senate and his decision to step down for Tinubu during last year’s presidential primary of the APC.

Northern ex-councillors meet

The Forum of Northern Nigeria Ex-Councillors has endorsed Senator Jibrin for Senate President.

Jibrin, who was re-elected to represent Kano North District, is currently the Senate Committee Chairman on Appropriation.

The Chairman of the group, Adamu Saleh Muhammad Kafin Malamai, told reporters that Jibrin has “unprecedented achievements and unmatchable records in terms of bills and motions, as well as oversight functions.”

The forum said “since the Southwest has the presidency, Northeast has vice president and North Central has national chairman of the party, the Senate President should come from the Northwest”.

A group, Asiwaju-Shettima Presidential Agenda (ASPA), urged the party to support a credible candidate for Senate President.

The group also urged the party to zone the Senate Presidency to the Southeast.

ASPA Director General, Ighe Osiebe, who spoke with reporters in Abuja called on President Muhammadu Buhari and the President-elect, to back a competent person for the job.

Osiebe said “for the attainment of the country’s quest for unity, fairness and national cohesion, the next Senate president should be zoned to the Southeast.”

He said: “The leadership of our great party the APC as a matter of necessity zone the Senate Presidency of the 10th Senate to the South East Geo-Political zone. This will not only be in the pursuit of the fairness doctrine of our party but in line with the article and spirit of federal character in our constitution.

“For APC as a party, zoning the Senate Presidency to the South East will more than national equity, as this will open the pathway to our party in the zone.”

The group threw its weight behind former APC National Organising Secretary, Senator Osita Izunaso.

Justifying its position, Osiebe said: “Zoning without consideration for merit and competency defeat the very spirit of ‘adequate representation’, which only democracy provides. Consequently, we urge the party to zone and nominate Sen. Osita Izunaso, the most qualified ranking Senator from the South East zone for the exalted office of the Senate President in the 10th National Assembly.

“We strongly believe that our choice of Sen. Osita Izunaso will further guarantee the hold of our party on Imo State ahead of the coming Imo State gubernatorial election.”

April 11, 2023
Governor-elect rejects life pension plan by incumbent

• ‘House not aware of bill’

A campaign to block a life pension plan by outgoing Benue State Governor Samuel Ortom has been launched.

It was initiated yesterday by governor-elect Fr. Hyacinth Alia, who kicked against a Life Pension Bill about-to-be sent by the governor to the House of Assembly for consideration.

The governor-elect called all citizens of conscience to prevail on their representatives in the House of Assembly to reject such bill when forwarded to them.

Passing such bill, the governor-elect noted, will deepen despondency of the state, he said.

Alia’s opposition to the bill was contained in a statement by his Director of Communications, Tersoo Kula, who gave an insight to the content of the bill.

The bill, according to the statement, stipulates that after May 29, Ortom should be allowed to go with some choice properties of government in his possession as his post-service package.

The statement reads: “According to the bill, Governor Ortom should be built a mansion of his taste in any part of the country he chooses to stay after leaving the Government House.

“His medical trips with those of his family members should be paid by the state, in addition to a jumbo monthly pay package.”

According to Kula, the lawmakers have given a condition to the governor before they will take action on the bill believed to be more in Ortom’s interest.

“Is it not appalling that Ortom, who has throughout his time as governor treated pensioners with utmost barratry that slides most of them to destitution, now wants to be a pensioner?”, the statement asked.

But the Chief Press Secretary to the Speaker of the House of Assembly, Wuese Orshi, debunked the insinuations, describing it as mischievous.

He said: “I have seen such a publication but so far, as I know, the Ninth House of Assembly is not in receipt of such a bill. I have not bothered to respond to such mischievous publication because it bothers more on the governor and so, I have left it for his media handlers to either respond or ignore it.”

April 11, 2023
BREAKING: Police arrest three officers for assaulting man in Rivers

The Police have arrested three officers seen in a viral video assaulting an unidentified man in Rivers state.

The Nation learnt the incident took place at Port Harcourt East West Road, Emouha Junction.

Rivers Commissioner of Police, Okon Effiong, earlier ordered arrest of the policemen.

The Force Public Relations Officer, Muyiwa Adejobi also condemned the action of the officers.

Giving an update Monday evening, Adejobi said: “These men have been arrested, and their commander will personally bring to the Force Headquarters tomorrow Tuesday for further actions.

“They are 3 in number, attached to RRS, Rivers State. Their action does not portray the police in a good light at all.

“It is still to buttress my point that whatever a policeman does is personal, not systemic.

“I wonder how a man, a reasonable man, would be flogging or slapping a grown-up man in that manner. So barbaric and unpolice.”

April 10, 2023
Rivers Police CP orders arrest of operatives in viral assault video

The Rivers Commissioner of Police, Okon Effiong, has ordered immediate identification and arrest of policemen in a trending video harassing and assaulting an unidentified man at Elibrade junction, Emohua Local Government Area.

Effiong in a statement by the Rivers Police Public Relations Officer, SP Grace Iringe-Koko, assured members of the public that the policemen would be investigated in line with the rules guiding the conduct of police personnel.

Read Also: VIDEO: Police Officer seen assaulting motorist in Rivers

He said: “As a defender of human rights, the CP assures members of the public, that the Police Officers will be investigated in line with extant rules underlying the conduct of police personnel; and appropriate sanctions meted accordingly.

“The Command further assures the good people of Rivers State of its unalloyed commitment to promoting the rule of law. People are enjoined to report cases of human rights abuse and infractions.”

April 10, 2023
BREAKING: Ex-Nasarawa Deputy Gov regains freedom after N4m ransom

Prof Onje Gye-Wado, a former Deputy Governor of Nasarawa State, who was kidnapped last Thursday night, has been freed after N4m ransom.

The Professor of law was kidnapped in his country home, Rinza, near Wamba, the headquarters of Wamba local government area.

His kidnappers placed a ransom of N70m but the family bargained from N2m to N3.5m and finally negotiated close to N4m before he was released.

Read Also: Ex-Imo deputy gov regains freedom after nine days in prison

“They collected the ransom near Mada Hills Secondary School in Akwanga with N200 recharge card. Then he was released near Angwan chiyawa close to those hills between Akwanga and Nasarawa Eggon,” a family source said.

It was gathered Gye-Wado was taken back to the palace of the paramount ruler of Wamba, Oriye Rindre, Justice Lawal Musa Nagogo after his release.

A former National Union of Journalists (NUJ) chairman and ex-Commissioner of information, Mr Dogo Shammah, confirmed the release of Prof Gye-Wado.

He said: “To God be the Glory Prof. Onje, is finally release from the hands of kidnappers just now.”

April 10, 2023
Governors under pressure over security vote spending

•Fed agencies NFIU, EFCC seek movement of account to CBN for proper monitoring

Governors have come under more pressure over how they spend security votes.

The Federal Government has barred state and local governments from operating security votes with commercial banks.

Any governor who desires to deploy their security votes in cash must open a special account with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) specifically for that purpose.

These measures are to keep the two tiers under close watch on their use of cash.

They are in line with the January directive of the Nigeria Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) halting the withdrawal of cash from public accounts with effect from March 1.

The Federal Government later granted state and local governments a reprieve to operate only their security votes in cash till May 29.

A source at the Presidency told The Nation: “Regarding the security vote issue, they have found harmony, they have all agreed that they will maintain security votes in cash until May 29 this year.

“But they are not going to use commercial banks to withdraw money for security votes.

“All state and local governments will open specific accounts with the CBN just for security vote.

“In that way, of course, it will be monitored.”

It was gathered that the governors remain opposed to the idea Federal agencies supervising how they spend funds accruing to states which are sub national governments.

Another source added that the governors might sue the Federal Government on the issue.

The new plan was announced at last Tuesday’s meeting between Federal agencies —the NFIU, the CBN, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC)— and governors. The meeting was virtual.

The Presidency official said there were a lot of negotiations and pleas from the governors for the extension of the cash withdrawal deadline.

The Federal Government and the NFIU had initially agreed to grant the states until April 15 to withdraw cash only for security votes use, but the state governors prevailed on the NFIU, CBN and EFCC for the May 29 extension.

The implication of the agreement is that the ban on cash withdrawal from all public accounts by state and local governments will apply to the incoming governors.

The NFIU claims that the intention of the new arrangement is to stop the withdrawal of cash from public accounts to curb likely money laundering, terrorism financing and other untoward activities.

It was also meant to ensure that all transactions, including payments and transfers, are done electronically through banks, in line with global best practices.

The directive applies to all public entities, including federal, state and local governments, as well as all their agencies and parastatals.

The NFIU has warned that any violation of the directive will result in severe sanctions and penalties, including fines and imprisonment of up to seven years.

Governors who go against this directive will be investigated but not prosecuted immediately because of the immunity they enjoy.

The agency has also advised all public officials to comply with the directive and to ensure that all accounts are linked to the Bank Verification Number (BVN) of the authorised signatories.

April 10, 2023
Senate indicts Budget Office over illegal N19b payment

The Budget Office of the Federation has been indicted for releasing  N19 billion to four unnamed agencies without  approval of  the Ministry  of Finance  the Senate has revealed.

This is contained in the 2016 Report of the Auditor General of the Federation   adopted by the Senate.

According to the AuGF, the Budget Office violated extant financial regulations when it released the N19  without   approval.

In addition to the indictment, the Senate directed  the Budget Office to retrieve the money from the four  MDAs and return it to the ministry.

The Senate had in October 2022 commenced investigation into the alleged   payment of the sum.

However, during the investigation   by the Senate Public Accounts Committee, the Budget Office was unable to present evidence of approval from the     Service Wide Vote to the four   agencies.

The Budget Office,   in its response to  a query  by the AuGF, claimed that it had written the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation requesting for details about the four MDAs without response.

The  Matthew Urhoghide-led  Senate committee noted that the Budget  Office did not present the letter it purported to have written to the Office of the Auditor-General requesting for the said details.

The failure made  the Senate to  adopt the report of the committee   and ask  that the money be refunded to the treasury.

The query is in the 2016 audit report of the Auditor-General of the Federation which was submitted to Senate for consideration.

The query   reads, “Four MDAs were paid the sum of N19 billion from the Service Wide Vote without the approval of the  Minister of Finance, some of the payments were made on a purported verbal directive from the Director-General.

“This act is against the Financial Regulation 301 and 302 which state that ‘recurrent  expenditure is paid from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) and no expenditure may be incurred except on the authority of a warrant issued by the Minister of Finance.

“In view of the above, it is difficult to accept the payment to the MDAs as proper and legitimate charges against the public funds.

“The Director-General should provide evidence of approval from the Minister of Finance for these expenditures or recover the sum of N19 billion from the benefiting MDAs.”

April 10, 2023
APC asks tribunal to dismiss AA, APM, APP petitions

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has asked the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) to dismiss the petitions by three political parties against the return of its candidate, Bola Tinubu, as the winner of the February 25 presidential election.

The request forms the core relief in the replies by the APC to the petitions by the Action Alliance (AA),   Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and the Action Peoples Party (APP).

Thomas Ojo, a member of the Lateef Fagbemi-led APC legal team filed the replies to

at the secretariat of the PEPC in Abuja yesterday.

The APC faulted the claim by the AA that its presidential candidate, Hamza Al-Mustapha, was excluded from the February 25 election by Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC).     Al-Mustapha, a former Chief Security Officer to the late Gen. Sani Abacha, was produced by a faction of the AA led by Kenneth Udeze.

Another faction led by Adekunle Omo-Aje had consistently said that Solomon Okanigbuan was its candidate and not Al-Mustapha.

Omo-Aje claimed he was the actual national chairman of the AA and that INEC failed to accept the list of the candidate he sent before the election.

In its objection to the AA petition, the   APC stated that contrary to AA’s claim, Tinubu “was duly elected and returned as the president-elect, having won the majority of lawful votes cast in the said election devoid of corrupt practices or vices and in substantial compliance with the provisions of Electoral Act 2022 (as amended). “

It argued that the ground on which the AA brought its petition “is not meritorious and facts in support of same are not availing to validate the petitioners’ claims and/or purported right to present the instant petition.

The APC added that Okanigbuan (listed as the 2nd petitioner “is not the 1st petitioner’s (AA’s) validly nominated and sponsored candidate to contest the presidential election held on February 25, 2023.

The APC also argued that as against   AA’s claim, INEC (listed as the 1st respondent) did not unlawfully exclude Okanigbuan’s name because he was never the lawfully nominated and sponsored candidate of the petitioner, which did not submit his name to INEC as its candidate for the election.

It added that there was no evidence that the AA conducted a valid primary from which Okanigbuan emerged as a candidate, noting that Al-Mustapha was recognised by INEC as a candidate.

The APC stated that Okanigbuan was not nominated and sponsored by the AA as its candidate to contest the presidential elections, adding the party “was not and could not have been excluded from the election as it participated in the presidential election with the 4th respondent (Al-Mustapha) as its candidate” who scored 14,542 votes.

In its notice of preliminary objection, the APC questioned the competence of the petition, noting that it was based solely on pre-election issues.

It said: “For an election petition to be competent, it must complain against the return and/or election of the winner of the disputed election.

“The instant petition is neither challenging and/or questioning the election of the 2nd and/or 3rd respondent (APC/Tinubu).”

“The petition as presently constituted amounts to a pre-election matter of nomination and sponsorship of candidate(s).

“The crux of the petition being the nomination and sponsorship of the 1st petitioner’s candidate is statute-barred having not been commenced within the mandatory 14 days provided for under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999;

“Issues of nomination, sponsorship and exclusion of candidates for an election are issues that precede the conduct of an election and are preelection matters that cannot be raised or canvased before an election tribunal.

“Facts in support of the petition speak to intra-party issues, pre-election disputes and administrative actions of INEC triable by Federal High Court under Section 285 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as altered by the 4th Alteration Act and outside the original jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal being a Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.”

In urging the court to dismiss the petition by the APM, the APC queried the legal capacity of the party in challenging the mode it adopted in nominating its candidate.

It also faulted the competence of the petition in view of the exclusion of its presidential candidate as a party to the petition’.

The APM is contending in its petition that Tinubu was not qualified to contest the election on the grounds of the alleged double nomination of his vice presidential candidate.

It is also questioning Tinubu’s candidacy on the grounds of the substitution of the initial placeholder, Kabir Masari with Kashim Shettima.

The APC argued that since the APM was not a member of the party, it did not know how it becomes the petitioner’s business and how it nominates its candidates.

“The petitioner does not fall under the category of persons that can challenge the internal working operation of the 2nd respondent (APC) regarding the nomination and sponsorship of the 2nd respondent’s candidates for the election.”

The APC equally faulted the competence of the petition by the APP, arguing that the grounds on which it was founded are not sustainable.

It described the petition as frivolous and an attempt to waste the court’s time.

April 10, 2023