The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Attorney General of the Federation

  • Court to rule on AGF’s objection to MTN’s suit May 7

    The Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday reserved ruling on a preliminary objection by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) challenging a N3billion suit by MTN Nigeria Communication Ltd.

    MTN sued the AGF for demanding N242 billion and $1.3 billion as import duties and withholding tax assessments from it.

    By a September 10, 2018 writ, MTN is challenging the legality of the AGF’s assessment of the import duties, withholding tax and value-added tax.

    But, the AGF, in the preliminary objection, is arguing that the suit was statute-barred, thus robbing the court of jurisdiction.

    Arguing the motion yesterday, AGF’s counsel Mr Tijani Gazali urged the court to strike out the suit on the ground that was instituted outside the time prescribed by law.

    He said the AGF was covered by Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act, so there was no issue of abuse of office.

    He said rather than MTN responding to the demand, it filed the case.

    But, MTN through its counsel Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), who led Damia Dodo (SAN) and Prof Fabian Ajogwu (SAN), argued that the AGF’s objection was unfounded.

    MEN’s lawyers maintained that the AGF’s contentions were unacceptable and unknown to law.

    They argued that the cause of action actually crystalised when the AGF made a demand of MTN and threatened the company with court action on August 20.

    Previous correspondence from the AGF was acted upon in good faith by the company, Olanipekun continued.

    He revealed that the previous correspondence had requested a self-assessment.

    He posited that the organisation not only undertook the self-assessment but went ahead to submit the result of that process to the AGF’s office.

    The assessment, he said, was undertaken by KPMG and showed clearly that no back taxes were owed to the country.

    He said AGF’s letter heightened issues and led to the company seeking to protect itself from the unlawful actions of the AGF.

    The learned SAN further argued that to the extent that the letter has not been withdrawn, the cause of action continues to exist.

    Therefore MTN remains within its rights to approach the courts, he said.

    Counsel to AGF was asked directly whether the cause of action had been withdrawn, but he declined to respond.

    Olanipekun further posited that from the AGF’s pleadings his office had admitted the submission of MTN in so far as his main argument is not in response to the core issues raised by MTN, but to whether or not the AGF is protected in law from the consequences of his actions.

    The SAN argued that it is implicit in the AGF’s failure to address the substance of MTN’s case, that the AGF is aware it does not have the legal authority to take the action it has taken.

    The AGF is contending that the suit disregarded Section 2 of the Public Officers Protection Act, which provides that any lawsuit against a public officer must be within three months of what was complained of.

    But, MTN is seeking a declaration that the AGF’s demand of N242 billion and $1.3 billion from it was premised on a process that is malicious, unreasonable and based on incorrect legal reasons.

    The plaintiff said the purported “revenue assets investigation” carried out by the Federal Government for the period of 2007 – 2017 violated Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

    MTN is praying the court to declare that the AGF acted in excess of his powers by directing a “self-assessment exercise” which usurps the powers of the Nigerian Customs Service to demand duties on imported physical goods.

    It is seeking a declaration that the AGF acted illegally by also usurping the powers of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) to audit and demand remittance of withholding tax and value-added tax.

    The plaintiff wants declaration that the purported “self-assessment” exercise instituted by the AGF via its letter of last May 10 is unknown to law, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    MTN is further praying the court to for an order vacating the AGF’s demand letter.

    It is claiming N3billion as general and exemplary damages as well as legal costs from the Federal Government.

    Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke adjourned until May 7 for ruling.

     

  • Court to rule on AGF’s objection to MTN’s suit May 7

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on Tuesday reserved ruling on a preliminary objection by the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) challenging a N3billion suit by MTN Nigeria Communication Ltd.

    MTN sued the AGF for demanding N242 billion and $1.3 billion as import duties and withholding tax assessments from it.

    By a September 10, 2018 writ, MTN is challenging the legality of the AGF’s assessment of the import duties, withholding tax and value-added tax.

    But, the AGF, in the preliminary objection, is arguing that the suit was statute-barred, thus robbing the court of jurisdiction.

    Arguing the motion on Tuesday, AGF’s counsel Mr Tijani Gazali urged the court to strike out the suit on the ground that was instituted outside the time prescribed by law.

    He said the AGF was covered by Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act, so there was no issue of abuse of office.

    He said rather than MTN responding to the demand, it filed the case.

    But, MTN through its counsel Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), who led Damia Dodo (SAN) and Prof Fabian Ajogwu (SAN), argued that the AGF’s objection was unfounded.

    MEN’s lawyers maintained that the AGF’s contentions were unacceptable and unknown to law.

    They argued that the cause of action actually crystalised when the AGF made a demand of MTN and threatened the company with court action on August 20.

    Previous correspondence from the AGF was acted upon in good faith by the company, Olanipekun continued.

    He revealed that the previous correspondence had requested a self-assessment.

    He posited that the organisation not only undertook the self-assessment but went ahead to submit the result of that process to the AGF’s office.

    The assessment, he said, was undertaken by KPMG and showed clearly that no back taxes were owed to the country.

    He said AGF’s letter heightened issues and led to the company seeking to protect itself from the unlawful actions of the AGF.

    The learned SAN further argued that to the extent that the letter has not been withdrawn, the cause of action continues to exist.

    Therefore MTN remains within its rights to approach the courts, he said.

    Counsel to AGF was asked directly whether the cause of action had been withdrawn, but he declined to respond.

    Olanipekun further posited that from the AGF’s pleadings his office had admitted the submission of MTN in so far as his main argument is not in response to the core issues raised by MTN, but to whether or not the AGF is protected in law from the consequences of his actions.

    The SAN argued that it is implicit in the AGF’s failure to address the substance of MTN’s case, that the AGF is aware it does not have the legal authority to take the action it has taken.

    The AGF is contending that the suit disregarded Section 2 of the Public Officers Protection Act, which provides that any lawsuit against a public officer must be within three months of what was complained of.

    But, MTN is seeking a declaration that the AGF’s demand of N242 billion and $1.3 billion from it was premised on a process that is malicious, unreasonable and based on incorrect legal reasons.

    The plaintiff said the purported “revenue assets investigation” carried out by the Federal Government for the period of 2007 – 2017 violated Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.

    MTN is praying the court to declare that the AGF acted in excess of his powers by directing a “self-assessment exercise” which usurps the powers of the Nigerian Customs Service to demand duties on imported physical goods.

    It is seeking a declaration that the AGF acted illegally by also usurping the powers of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) to audit and demand remittance of withholding tax and value-added tax.

    The plaintiff wants declaration that the purported “self-assessment” exercise instituted by the AGF via its letter of last May 10 is unknown to law, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    MTN is further praying the court to for an order vacating the AGF’s demand letter.

    It is claiming N3billion as general and exemplary damages as well as legal costs from the Federal Government.

    Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke adjourned until May 7 for ruling.

  • Akwa Ibom APC seeks tribunal’s relocation to Abuja

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) in Akwa Ibom has asked the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice to relocate all election tribunals from the state to Abuja.

    In a letter by the State Chairman, Ini Okopido, APC said the move became necessary in view of plots by the Resident Electoral Commission (REC), Mike Igini, the state government and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to perpetrate electoral fraud.

    Okopido said the trio were planning to destroy electoral materials needed to substantiate APC’s petition.

    The statement reads: “We observe with deep regrets that since Mr. Mike Igini superintended over the worst general elections ever conducted in Akwa Ibom State, the REC is now unveiling a grand scheme to thwart and create a chaotic environment to pave way for the pervasion of justice.

    “We have been reliably informed that the REC is now intimidating electoral officers, particularly, Collation Officers, Supervisory Presiding Officers (SPOs), Presiding Officers (POs) and Assistant Presiding Officers (APOs), by using hired assassins and PDP killer squad to forcefully coerce them to concoct and fabricate reports of violence, ballot paper snatching, to justify Igini’s clandestine activities days after the purported declaration of results.

    “This latest action has vindicated our stand that Igini is a biased umpire, heavily compromised by the Akwa Ibom State government to truncate the smooth conduct of credible elections.

    “We, therefore, reiterate that INEC under Igini cannot guarantee credibility and fair play as demonstrated with this plot hatched to frustrate the electoral process.”

    The party said relocating the election tribunal to Abuja would forestall a breakdown of law and order, and reiterated its call for Igini’s redeployment “to allow a level-playing ground” for all parties.

    But Igini debunked the allegations, saying: “On the allegation that the commission is destroying ballot papers needed to substantiate election petition at the tribunal, I challenge anyone to come forth with proof to show where and when such thing happened.”

    Igini said it was ridiculous for anyone to link him with electoral fraud, adding that he was just and unbiased in the elections, and did not play any role in determining who Akwa Ibom voters choose.

    “Mike Igini was not in any of the 298 polling units where elections held. I was not in any of the local government collation centres where the results were collated and announced.

    “The people of Akwa Ibom openly expressed their will on whom to govern them through the ballot, and that was what happened in the elections. The people have spoken. My job was only to supervise the elections,” he added.

  • Again, Appeal Court fails to hear Onnoghen’s appeals

    · Reschedules hearing for Feb 27

     

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Tuesday postponed its planned hearing of the three appeals filed by suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen to February 27.

    This is the third time, in one month, the court will postpone hearing in the appeals filed against the decisions of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) before which Onnoghen is standing trial for alleged breach of code of conduct for public officers.

    Onnoghen is, by his first appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the CCT to hear the charge against him, being a serving judicial officer.

    He is, in the second appeal, querying the propriety of the CCT’s ruling of January 14 this year, in which it elected to hear all pending application.

    The third appeal is against the CCT ex-parte order directing Onnoghen to vacate office as CJN and President Muhammadu Buhari to appoint an acting CJN.

    The court had, in late January this year, scheduled hearing in the appeals for February 12 thus year.

    When parties got to court, the court could not form a quorum for the purpose of hearing the appeals. Two of the three Justices, required to form a quorum, were said to be attending a seminar.

    The court subsequently adjourned to the next day. It could also not hear the appeals on February 13 owing to a request by the Federal Government to be allowed to engage a new lawyer.

    Oyin Koleoso, who represented the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), told the court that the AGF has instructed that Aliyu Umar – SAN – (who is prosecuting the charge at the CCT) should take over the case of the respondent.

    Kolaoso noted that Umar was, (at the moment the Court of Appeal proceedings were on), at the CCT.

    Koleoso sought an adjournment to enable Umar take over the case of the respondent.

    Lawyers to the appellant, Chris Uche (SAN) objected to an adjournment, but he was overruled by a three-man panel of the court presided over by Justice Abdul Aboki.

    The court further adjourned hearing in the appeals till February 20.

    Again, when parties got to court on Tuesday, Umar, who appeased for the respondents, said he has filed an application, in which he, among others sought to be afforded time to familiarise himself with what had been filed in the appeals so far.

    Appellant’s lawyer, Uche did not object to a request for a brief adjournment, following which the court adjourned till February 27 this year

  • AGF calls on INEC to allow Zamfara APC field candidates for elections

    The Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr Abubakar Malami, (SAN) has asked the Independent National Electoral Commission, (INEC) to allow the All Progressives Congress (APC) Zamfara, field candidates for the general elections.

    Malami, who doubles as the Minister of Justice, made the call in a letter to INEC dated Feb. 13, and made available to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN).

    The minister said that INEC could not foreclose the right of a political party to participate in elections without recourse to the Act.

    “My office received a petition from the firm of M. A. Mahmud, (SAN) & CO, in respect of the need to urgently consider Sections 38 and 39 of the Electoral Act and extend the time for the APC Zamfara to field a gubernatorial candidate in the light of a Zamfara High Court judgment in suit No.ZMS/GS/52/2018.

    “The letter was requesting that the subsisting judgment in the suit be upheld and respected by INEC, as the Court of Appeal has upheld the appeal with No. CA/S/23/2019; thus effectively annulling the grounds upon which the purported cancellation of the APC Primaries in Zamfara by INEC was based.’’

    Malami, in the letter invited INEC to comply with the judgment of the Court of Appeal by admitting the results of the APC Zamfara primaries.

    He also invited INEC to comply with the provisions of Section 38 of the Electoral Act, which empower the commission to postpone the election for the governorship, National Assembly and House of Assembly elections.

    He said this was in view of the fact since the Court of Appeal had upheld the primaries as valid, the APC in Zamfara would need a little time to catch up with its contemporaries in the election.

    “Granting them this concession is not necessarily a favour but a right that inures to all contestants under similar circumstances.”

    The AGF maintained that by the doctrine and principle of judicial precedence, the appeal superseded the Federal High Court’s position which foreclosed APC Zamfara from fielding candidates in the Feb. and March general elections. (NAN)

  • Activists seek alternative penalties for armed robbery

    Two rights groups, the Access to Justice (A2Justice) and the Avocats Sans Frontèires France, have filed a suit at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja to challenge the mandatory imposition of the death penalty by courts for armed robbery.

    They seek to overturn all death sentences passed under laws that denied courts the jurisdiction to impose alternative sentences.

    The plaintiffs argued that the imposition of mandatory death penalty pursuant to Section 1(2) of the Robbery and Firearms Act and similar provisions is unconstitutional and inconsistent with the 1999 Constitution and other international obligations.

    Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Nigerian Prisons Service Controller-General and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) are the defendants.

    Under Section 1(2) of the Robbery and Firearms Act, a judge is required to impose a death sentence on those found guilty of the capital offence of armed robbery.

    But, the plaintiffs argue that the mandatory imposition of the death penalty does not take into consideration whether such sentence is appropriate for the crime.

    The Amnesty International Global Report on Death Sentences and Executions 2017 says that 2,285 persons are known to be under the sentence of death in Nigeria as at December 2017.

    The plaintiffs, represented by their counsel Dr Oluwatoyin Badejogbin and Dr Agada Elachi, are praying for a declaration that Section 1(2) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions Act) Act, Cap R11 and similar statutory provisions that make the death penalty mandatory in Nigeria violate the right of appeal and fair hearing guaranteed by sections 36, 233(1) and 241(e) of the 1999 Constitution and Article 7(1)(a) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, (African Charter), and are unconstitutional, unlawful and void.

    They sought declarations that the provisions perpetrate a discriminatory system for awarding the death sentence; violates the rights to human dignity, equality before the law and equal protection of the law; violate the separation of powers, and are unreasonable, unjustifiable and inconsistent with section 45 of the Constitution, among others.

    They sought an order for the defendants to immediately commence processes for re-sentencing convicts who were sentenced under Section 1(2) of the Robbery and Firearms Act.

    The plaintiffs prayed the court to order for the second defendant to immediately remove convicts sentenced under the law from death row and reassign them to appropriate prison facilities pending the review of their sentences.

    They sought an order directing the NHRC to examine within six months of the order, the cases of death row inmates who were sentenced under sundry mandatory death penalty laws and to commence processes for the review of their sentences.

    The plaintiffs said: “The obligatory element in mandatory death penalty provisions violates section 36(4) of the 1999 Constitution and Nigeria’s obligations under Article 7 of the African Charter. Both provisions recognise the right to a fair trial, which includes the right of appeal.

    “The mandatory death sentence circumscribes the right by foreclosing appeals against sentence.

    “The mandatory death penalty also detracts from the obligation of courts to accord defendants their fair trial rights under the aforesaid provisions of the Constitution and African Charter.

    “The right imposes two obligations on courts, namely the obligation to entertain pleas for sentence mitigation and to hear appeals against sentences. The mandatory death penalty precludes courts from discharging both obligations.”

    The plaintiffs further argued that the mandatory death penalty provisions discriminate against offenders who are not members of the armed forces by denying them the rights of appeal that service men enjoy.

    They noted that whereas the Armed Forces Act allows service men to appeal mandatory death sentences, civilians cannot.

    The plaintiffs added: “Mandatory death penalty laws also discriminate between crimes or offenders.

    “Whereas a mandatory death sentence attaches to armed robbery, regardless of whether the crime resulted in the victim’s death, the death sentence is discretional for capital crimes under the Terrorism Prevention Act 2011 (TPA) as amended.

    “Under the TPA also, the penalty for murdering an internationally protected person is life-imprisonment. This discriminatory approach violates section 42 of the 1999 Constitution.

    “It also violates the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law guaranteed by Article 3 of the African Charter.

    “The principle that punishment must fit the crime is a very important principle of criminal law. It is also a constitutional principle that is recognised under international and regional law.

    “The mandatory death penalty easily violates this principle because it is prone to arbitrariness, and to being excessive, disproportionate, inhuman and degrading. It violates Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the African Charter.

    “Mandatory death penalty provisions violate section 4(8) of the 1999 Constitution by stripping courts of jurisdiction to entertain appeals against mandatory death sentences. They violate Section 6(6)(a) of the 1999 Constitution by stripping courts of discretion.

    “According to Section 6(6)(a), judicial powers include all inherent powers and sanctions of a court of law. Part of this panoply of judicial powers is the inherent power of judicial discretion.

    “The mandatory death penalty abrogates this power in sentencing, stripping courts of capacity to determine when the death penalty fits a crime.  This violates the separation of powers.

    “The mandatory death penalty, as with all punishments, is a limitation on the fundamental rights of the condemned offender.

    “Section 45(1) of the 1999 Constitution requires laws that limit rights to be reasonably justifiable in a democracy. The mandatory death penalty does not fulfill any objective that is reasonably justifiable in our democracy,” the plaintiffs said.

    The suit has been assigned to Justice J. Okeke.

     

     

  • I will split Accountant General, AGF offices, says Tambuwal

    Governor of Sokoto state and 2019 People’s Democratic Party (PDP) presidential aspirant, Aminu Waziri Tambuwal, has vowed to split the  offices of  the Accountant- General and Attorney- General  of the federation, when elected president.

    He said that this will lead to transparency, professionalism, fiscal discipline and loyalty to the nation in the conduct of government business

    Tambuwal said this in Markudi, Benue state, while on a courtesy visit to Governor Samuel Ortom on Sunday.

    He also promised that his government will facilitate a robust process that would lead to the restructuring of key areas of the Nigerian State and its political economy.

    The governor, who made this disclosure in a statement by his campaign spokesman, Dr. Okey Ikechukwu, said, “for there to be transparency, fiscal discipline and professionalism, the office of the accountant general of the federation must  be separated from that of the accountant general of the federal government. This, we have to do, as one of the first key exercise of my government, if I receive the mandate to be president of this great nation. A serious Nation desirous of making progress should have an accountant general for the federation different from the accountant general of the federal government.

    “The accountant general of the federation should be a pure professional, whose loyalty must be to the federation, not the federal government alone. In the same manner the Attorney General mustn’t necessarily be the minister of justice. And mustn’t be a card-carrying member of any political party. The idea, for instance, of making a card carrying member of a political party an attorney general of the federation already compromises that office. Attorney general ought not to be an agent of the government in power; rather the office should at all times serve the interest of the nation and the totality of the citizenry.

    To achieve a restructuring of these two critical offices of the federation, the former Speaker, House of Representatives, promised that his administration, “shall initiate an amendment of the requirement of the constitution that says that every minister  appointed by the federal government must be a card carrying member of a party in order to correct this .This is to ensure that the attorney general to be appointed is a core professional that will work for the entire nation and deliver to the best of his ability, without prejudice,” he said.

    Tambuwal also proposed the restructuring of the power sector, by empowering states through effective legislation that can assist to creatively generate their own electricity power. “When I talk of restructuring, it doesn’t necessarily mean physical restructuring our land mass, but fiscal restructuring and the making of fundamental changes in other areas, aimed at devolving more powers to the states and make them more effective in actualizing the aspirations of the citizenry.

    “For instance, there is no reason why states should not facilitate power investments within their territories. To enable them do this, we shall move power generation, transmission and distribution from the exclusive legislative list to the concurrent legislative lists.”

    Tambuwal argued that “the energy needs of Benue, and many other states, will also be tapped into and harnessed. If, for instance, a state can generate power by harnessing its mineral deposits of hydro, coal and sunlight. They may, thereby, generate say 25 megawatts from each of the above; totaling 75 megawatts in all. This approach will ensure that the people’s energy needs are comprehensively addressed.

    He accused the federal government of paying lip service to the issue of minimum wage, pointing out that when government proposes an increase in the national minimum wage it should also send a corresponding bill to the National Assembly for a review of the federal allocation that would ensure that the states can bear the cost of the increased wage bill. ”

    The presidential aspirant assured that when he eventually wins the ticket of the PDP and wins the presidential election, come February 2019, “Nigerians will have a leader that will make them proud in the comity of nations, a leader that has the credential of togetherness, visionary leadership, bridge-building and a leader that will not take decisions shrouded in ethnic and religious biases.

    “From my experience and exposure and broad world view, and having visited and interacted with people in all the 360 federal constituencies, as Speaker, I have full understanding of the complexity of Nigeria’s unique diversity. And I know that our strength is in this our diversity. That is why we need a leader with the ability, understanding and willingness to unify this great nation and bring her to the path of peace and progress. Nigeria has never been this polarized along ethnic and religious lines and the time to end this polarization is now. This country belongs to all of us and everyone has the right to live and prosper in any part of the country without fear. We must say no to clannishness and reclaim our collective dignity once again,” Tambuwal said.

     

  • FEC okays N185 billion for 14 roads 

    …2018 Budget to be signed next week

     

     

    The Federal Executive Council (FEC) on Wednesday approved N185 billion for the rehabilitation, construction and repairs of 14 roads across the country.

    The Special Adviser on Media and publicity, Femi Adesina, disclosed this to State House correspondents at the end of FEC meeting chaired by President Muhammadu Buhari at the Presidential Villa, Abuja.

    He also said that arrangement has been finalized to sign the 2018 Appropriation Bill into law by President Buhari next week.

    Read Also:FEC okays N1.6b for 68 anti-smuggling vehicles

    According to the Attorney General of the Federation, Malami Abubakar, Nigeria will soon get another repatriation of $500 million.

    He said that FEC also approved N500 million for lawyers who represented the Federal Government and succeeded in recovering N330 billion from MTN.

    The Minister of Trade and Investment, Okechukwu Enelamah, said that FEC approved construction of phase 2 of the industrial training fund centre in Abuja at a cost N6.5 billion.

    Details Later…

  • Court to deliver judgment on Apo six March 9

    Justice Ishaq Bello of the FCT High Court would on March 9 deliver  judgment in the alleged extra judicial killing of six Apo traders.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the slain traders were Ifeanyi Ozor, Chinedu Meniru, Isaac Ekene, Paulinus Ogbonna, Anthony Nwodike and Augustina Arebun.

    The Attorney General of the Federation in 2005 charged six police officers to court for the alleged crime.

    The defendants are Danjuma Ibrahim, Othman Abdulsalami , Nicholas Zakaria, Ezekiel Acheneje, Baba Emmanuel and Sadiq Salami.

    They were arraigned on a 9-count charge of conspiracy and culpable homicide, which contravened the provisions of Sections 97 and 221 (a) of the Penal Code Law.

    NAN recalls that the absence of the defendants (Ibrahim) presently enjoying a court bail had stalled the judgment earlier slated for Feb.13.

    The defendants allegedly played different parts in the killing of the victims, aged between 21 years and 25 years, while they were returning from a night party on June 7, 2005 in Abuja.

    Following their deaths and the subsequent public outcry, an official panel of inquiry was set up by ex- President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration to unravel the plot.

    The report of the panel said that the victims were at a nightclub located at Gimbiya Street, Area 11 in Abuja on the night of the incident.

    The panel further said that face-off had ensued between Ibrahim and the group when the female victim (Augustina) allegedly turned down Ibrahim’s love advances at the club.

    NAN further recalls that the other five policemen accused of the killings and eight other police witnesses had testified that Ibrahim, the senior police officer among them, had allegedly ordered the killings.

    However, the defendants, including Ibrahim, had pleaded not guilty to the allegations.

    NAN further reports that the provisions of Sections 97 and 221 (a) of the Penal Code Law with which the defendants were tried attracts death sentence.

     

  • BREAKING: Banire steps down as APC’s legal adviser

    BREAKING: Banire steps down as APC’s legal adviser

    • Quits electoral reform membership
    The National Legal Adviser of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Dr Muiz Adeyemi Banire (SAN), has stepped down from the position following an allegation that he bribed a judge with N500,000.
    The decision is contained in a letter on Monday to the party’s National Chairman Chief John Odigie-Oyegun.
    Banire also wrote the Attorney-General of the Federation Abubakar Malami (SAN) about his decision to quit his membership of the Electoral Reform Committee.
    He said he was offering to step aside on moral grounds until investigation into the allegation is concluded.
    Banire’s letter is entitled: Offer to Step Aside as National Legal Adviser Pending Conclusion of Investigation of My Person by the EFCC. He copied President Muhammadu Buhari and Vice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN).
    The former Lagos Commissioner for Transport and the Environment said he read an online publication on October 29 entitled: APC National Legal Adviser, Muiz Banire, Allegedly paid Federal Judge N500K.
    He said he voluntarily reported to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to help clarify the issues.
    “The allegation, as I have come to understand it, is that a Statement of Account of one judge of the National Industrial Court, the Honourable Justice J. T. Agbadu-Fishim, who is the subject of an ongoing EFCC’s investigation, contained a June 2013 entry of a ‘N500,000.00’ payment ascribed as being from one ‘Dr. Muiz B’.
    “I did not hesitate in confirming that this probably referred to me because I remember that about three years ago, I received a text message from someone I recollected at the time to be an old colleague in my days as a lecturer at the University of Lagos, an ‘Agbadu-Fishim’ who was then a Research Fellow at the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, informing me of the death and funeral programme of his mother.
    “The last contact (of any sort) I had with this person before that text would have been about 14 years earlier, that is, before I was appointed Special Adviser to the Governor of Lagos State at the inception of civil rule in 1999 (now 17 years ago).
    “Indeed, it was with considerable difficulty that I was able to eventually recognise his face when I eventually saw him again (after 17 years of my leaving the University of Lagos) on my attendance at the EFCC on Thursday the 3rd day of November, 2016.
    “When I received the said message and his information to me of the death and funeral programme of his mother in which he solicited for financial assistance in a tone suggesting great distress, I considered it necessary to assist an old friend in dire need.
    “Without any further prompting, he sent his account details to me and I made a cash gift of N500,000.00 to him,” Banire said.
    He said while he personally never appeared before the judge, two cases worth less than N2million in legal fees were handled by lawyers in his chambers.
    Banire said: “As I have now come to realise after my interactions with the EFCC, that payment is being investigated from the angle of whether or not it was to influence the receiver in the performance of his judicial duties on the Bench of the National Industrial Court.
    “This is perfectly understandable to me within the general context of the investigation in which the allegation had arisen, and considering that I have lately come to also realise that two of my colleagues in chambers had been involved as defence counsel in two cases before the subject judge amongst 12 cases in all they have ever done at the Industrial Court since inception.
    “My review of the two case files which I came to be conscious of after my interactions with the EFCC shows that one of them was amicably settled between the parties for a sum less than N1.2m, thereby technically losing the case, whilst they won the other and that the combined professional fees (net of taxes) for the two cases was less than N2m.
    “While protesting my innocence, and will therefore do everything within legal limits to defend myself, I have, from the first instance, become aware of the allegation, offered my full cooperation to the EFCC and will continue to cooperate with, and give it all the assistance it may require of me in the course of its ongoing investigation into the matter.”