The Nation Newspaper

Tag: decision

  • ‘nPDP will make its decision known this week’

    NEW Peoples Democratic Party (nPDP) members in the All Progressives Congress (APC) have said that they will make their position public with regard to the party’s membership this week.

    The members comprising Alhaji Abubakar Kawu Baraje, Senate President Bukola Saraki, the Speaker House of Representatives, Yakubu Dogara, Sokoto State Governor Aminu Tambuwal and others.

    The group’s leader, Baraje, in a statement from his media office in Ilorin, Kwara State yesterday, added that before the end of this week, members of the group would have  concluded their consultations and come out with their stand on all what they stand for.

    He emphasised that whatever decision they would take will seek to promote the wellbeing of the Nigerian masses.

    Baraje added that the general interest of Nigerians and a united Nigeria, where no man is oppressed is paramount and very dear to their hearts.

    He thanked Nigerians who have always seen reason for their struggle, particularly the media, for adequate reportage of their activities.

     

  • Decision good for APC, democracy, says Tinubu

    To All Progressives Congress (APC) stalwart Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, yesterday’s recommendation of President Muhammadu Buhari that the party should organise congresses at the expiration of its officers’ in June, is in order. In his reaction entitled: “The president has spoken: The APC stands for internal democracy”, the former Lagos State governor says fresh congresses will create a level playing ground for interested party loyalists, including incumbent officers to aspire to positions of choice. 

    In the clear, straightforward manner that is his mode of expression and that befits the moment, President Muhammadu Buhari affirmed that our party remains faithful to the principles of internal democracy and the rule of law.

    In his address to the March 27 NEC (National Executive Council (meeting), President Buhari stated that talk of extension or elongation of the tenures of national and state party executive officers was improper. The President declared that any such moves would contravene both the national and party constitutions.

    Additionally, he stated that the designation of existing officers as caretaker committees also violated constitutional requirements.

    President Buhari’s action saves the party from serious legal turmoil. If the elongations were deemed illegal, then, all subsequent party actions, including the nomination of all of our candidates for elective offices, might also be of questionable legality. Such a predicament would constitute an unnecessary and mortal blow to the party and its role in promoting progressive governance to Nigeria.

    Moreover, President Buhari has affirmed for all to see that our party is one based on the rule of law coupled with a firm adherence to internal democracy. While it would have been easy to allow the ill-conceived motion of 27 February to stand, President Buhari showed principle and courage by steering the party back to its original and correct path.

    The President has spoken. Today is a good day for those who cherish democracy and legality.  His action will also serve to strengthen the party by allowing party members, including present incumbents, to seek to contribute to the party by vying for executive offices as they see fit.

    His action will go far in advancing the process of internal reconciliation that is now underway. It is a time for the party to move forward and begin to plan and organise the needed congresses according to the existing timetables.

    After all, a party bearing the name All Progressives Congress should be the last party to resist holding congresses in which all its people have a fair say and fair chance to aspire to any position in the party for which they are qualified to hold.

    Again, this is a good day for the APC and democratic political practice in Nigeria. We shun the politics of old to move toward a new and better way of governing ourselves and this nation.

  • Appellant can’t use other court’s decision as appeal ground

    Appellant can’t use other court’s decision as appeal ground

    Lead Judgment Delivered by Ayobode Olujimi Lokulo-sodipe, J. c. a.

     

    Concise facts

    This is an appeal against the judgment delivered on 25/4/2016 by the Federal High Court holden in the Owerri Judicial Division.

    The Appellant (then Plaintiff) by way of Originating Summons, commenced the case leading to this appeal against the Respondents (then defendant). Appellant’s grouse was based on the conduct and outcome of the primary elections conducted by the People Democratic Party (PDP)(1st Respondent) for the selection and nomination of a candidate to represent the party in the 2015 National Assembly election for the (Orlu) Senatorial District, Imo State.

    By a motion filed on 21/4/2015, the Respondents challenged the jurisdiction of the trial Court to entertain the suit. On 25/4/2016, the trial Court duly delivered its judgment wherein it upheld the preliminary objection of the 1st and 2nd Defendants therein (now 1st and 2nd Respondents) challenging its jurisdiction to entertain the substantive matter and struck out the Appellant’s suit in limine.

    This decision greatly aggrieved the Appellant and he subsequently lodged this Appeal.

    The Respondents raised a Preliminary Objection in a process titled: “Notice by 1st and 2nd Respondents of Intention to rely on Preliminary Objection brought pursuant to Order 10, Rule 1 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2016 and under the inherent jurisdiction of the Court” wherein it gave the Appellant notice that they shall raise a Preliminary Objection. to the hearing of this appeal and shall seek for the order to dismiss or strike out the appeal in its entirety.

     

    Issue(s) for determination

    The Appellant formulated three issues for the determination of the appeal viz:

    Issue 1: Whether the learned trial judge of the Court below was right when he held that the order for the nullification of primary election is not within the purview and contemplation of Section 87(9) of the Electoral Act, (sic) 2010 as amended. (GROUNDS 1 and 2).

    Issue 2: Was the learned trial judge right in not nullifying the Imo West Senatorial District primary election of the 1st Respondent conducted on 7/12/2014 and declaring the Appellant the candidate of the 1st Respondent for the Imo West Senatorial District Election held in April, 2015. (GROUND 3).

    Issue 3: Whether the learned trial judge was right when he failed to consider the substantive suit after the 1st and 2nd Respondents’ preliminary objection was upheld and does this failure not amount to denial of Appellant’s right to fair hearing. (GROUND 4).

    N:B The Court said “in line with the settled position of the law in respect of Preliminary Objection to an appeal, the Court is duty bound to first resolve the Respondents’ Preliminary Objection as upholding same could result in the non-entertainment of the appeal on the merit.” The case ofGARBA (RTD) V. MOHAMMED (2016) LPELR – 40612 (SC) was called in reference and on this note, the Court dealt with Respondents’ Preliminary Objection first.

     

    Respondent’s argument

     

    The grounds for the objection as set out in the Preliminary Objection are:

    The Appellant has failed to appeal against the ratio decidendi of the decision of the lower Court.

    Grounds 1 and 2 of the Appellant’s grounds of appeal are foundation of the decision; not the ratio decidendi of the decision of the lower Court.

    Grounds 3, 4 and 5 of the grounds of appeal do not relate to the decision of the lower Court.

    The Appellant in his brief of argument, argued issue 1 (formulated from competent grounds 1 and 2) together with issue 2 (formulated from incompetent ground 3).

    The Appellant distilled issue 3 from incompetent ground 4 of his grounds of appeal.

    The Appellant is in his brief seeking very different reliefs from what he pleaded and claimed at the lower Court and in his notice of appeal filed on 20th July, 2016.

    The appeal is manifestly incompetent.

    This Honourable Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.”

    While canvassing the first and second legs of the Preliminary Objection together, the Respondents stated the position of the law to be that the ratio decidendi of a case is the principle of law upon which the case was decided. According to him, it is this principle (ratio decidendi) that is binding on the parties that can be the subject of an appeal; not an obiter dictum. The Respondents posited that the holding of the trial Court with respect to their Preliminary Objection and as contained on page 459 of the record of Appeal shows that grounds 1 and 2 in the notice of appeal are issues relating to the foundation of the decision, i.e. interpretation of Section 87(9) by the trial Court preparatory to making its pronouncement and not the ratio decidendi.

    In arguing the grounds of the Preliminary Objection, Respondents’ counsel, in respect of grounds 3, 4 and 5 of the notice of appeal said the grounds do not arise from live issues at the trial and not any hypothetical assumption by the Appellant. It is the stance of the Respondent that ground 3 which is to the effect that the trial Court failed to nullify the primary election of the 1st Respondent cannot be said to have arisen from the objection before the trial Court and which was the only matter the said Court pronounced on. The Court was consequently urged to strike out ground 3 and issue 2 formulated therefrom for being incompetent. Dwelling on ground 4 which the Respondents said complains about failure of the trial Court to consider the substantive suit, the Respondents submitted that this ground like ground 3 also erroneously presupposes that the trial Court had jurisdiction to entertain the suit but refused to hear and determine the substantive matter. Further, the Respondents pointed out that grounds 3 and 4 are also incompetent for contradicting each other and since the Appellant cannot approbate and reprobate, Respondent urged the Court to strike out grounds 3 and 4.

    On ground 5, the omnibus ground, it is the stance of the Respondent that the said ground is designed to allow a complaint on the evaluation of evidence and it encompasses complaint of improper evaluation of evidence but that as the trial Court did not consider the substantive case, ground 5 cannot be said to have arisen from the judgment of the trial Court and is therefore incompetent and liable to be struck out. It was further pointed out that since the Appellant has not distilled any issue from the said ground, the ground is liable to be struck out since the position of the law is that any ground of appeal upon which no issue has been distilled and upon which no argument has been canvassed is deemed abandoned by an appellant and deserves to be struck out.

    Respondents submitted that the Appellant’s argument in his brief on issue 1 (formulated from competent grounds 1 and 2) together with issue 2 (formulated from incompetent ground 3) should be stuck out in its entirety since Appellant has argued both issue 1 and issue 2 together. It was Respondents’ submission that the position of the law is that where an issue formulated from an incompetent ground of appeal is argued in the brief of argument with those formulated from competent grounds, the entire argument on both issues must be discountenanced. That it is not the duty of the Court to extract arguments in respect of the valid grounds from the invalid ones.

    Also dwelling on issue 3 distilled from what they described as incompetent ground 4, the Respondents equally urged the Court to strike out the said issue as the position of the law is that issues for determination must be distilled from only competent grounds of appeal. It is respondents’ stance that an incompetent ground of appeal cannot give birth to a competent issue for determination, similarly, issues for determination distilled or framed from incompetent grounds of appeal which has been struck out, share the same fate with grounds of appeal which gave rise to them and such issues will be struck out.

    Conclusively, Respondents posited that the Court lacks the jurisdiction to proceed with the appeal since same is manifestly incompetent and the Court was urged to strike out this appeal in its entirety.

     

    Appellant’s argument

    Appellant adopted and relied on the portion of their reply brief in respect of the Preliminary Objection to the appeal and urged the Court to overrule same and allow the appeal.

    In response to grounds 1 and 2 of the Preliminary Objection, Appellant submitted to the effect that grounds of appeal consist of all the attacks and complaints against the judgment of a trial Court being appealed against and which an appellant relies on in urging an appellate Court to dismiss the judgment of the trial Court. It was canvassed by the Appellant that the grounds of appeal can be on the final decision, the finding of a Court, the reason for the decision, the omission in the judgment, a mistake or error found in the judgment and everything which the appellant feels is the reason why the judgment of the trial Court cannot be allowed to stand. It is Appellant’s contention that as long as the grounds relate or have a link to the issues canvassed before the trial Court or the judgment of the Court, they are competent and shall not be struck out by the Court.

    The Appellant also submitted that a ground of appeal is not rendered incompetent if it is not lifted verbatim ad literatim from the judgment of the Court; or if it is couched in the language of the appellant. That as long as it relates to the decision of the Court or what the Court could have decided or acted upon; it is a valid ground of appeal. Cases considered relevant including that of Akpan v. Bob (2010) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1223) 421, were cited in aid of the submissions. Appellant therefore posited that grounds 1 and 2 in the notice of appeal are competent.

    Dwelling specifically on the Respondents attack on his ground 5, i.e. the omnibus ground of appeal, the Appellant submitted that the Respondents have displayed a total misconception of the omnibus ground of appeal. That an omnibus ground of appeal is a general ground which does not attack a specific finding of a trial Court and therefore to that extent needs no issue to be formulated therefrom as it is a ground which is general in terms and cases considered relevant were cited in aid.

    In relation to his argument of issues 1 and 2 together, the Appellant submitted that it was proper to do so.

    In concluding, the Appellant posited that the arguments of the Respondents in respect of his (Appellant’s) grounds of appeal are unduly technical and this Court was urged to discountenance the Preliminary Objection in its entirety as it is quite unmeritorious.

     

    Court’s findings

    The Court observed that though an appeal is not a new action vis-à-vis the one from which it has arisen but its continuation; as it is a complaint against the decision of the trial Court, it must not only be initiated by a notice of appeal embodying the appellant’s grounds of appeal and particulars, but the complaint in the ground or grounds must be relevant to the decision appealed against and not to any matter which is not subject of the appeal. The case of FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC V. T.S.A. INDUSTRIES LTD (2010) LPELR – 1283(SC) was cited.

    The Court went on to say that the settled position of the law has always been and still remains that where a notice of appeal is defective in a fundamental manner; such as where all the ground(s) in the notice are not valid or proper ground of appeal in that they are not distilled in relation to the decision appealed against, this Court (notwithstanding any appeal to the interest of the justice in the appeal) is invariably left with no option than to strike out such a notice.

    In determining Respondent’s argument that the grounds of the Notice of appeal are unconnected with the decision of the trial Court appealed against, the Court herein looked into the motion for Preliminary Objection filed by respondents at the trial Court and the Court said that a party cannot disclose in his notice of appeal that he is appealing against a particular decision of the trial Court in a proceeding and go about formulating grounds of appeal in respect of another decision of the Court in the same proceeding.

    The court found that grounds 1 and 2 are glaringly connected with the decision of the said trial Court that is the subject of the instant appeal and therefore competent. However, in respect of grounds 3 to 5 the Court held that they all relate to matters in respect of which the trial court never made pronouncement in that it never considered the substantive case before it on the merit. Consequently, grounds 3-5 are incompetent as it is not related in any way to the decision of the trial Court appealed against and same were struck out.

    In the same vein, the court stated that the issues distilled from the grounds namely, issues 2 distilled from ground three and issue 3 distilled from ground 4 must and are hereby struck out having been distilled from incompetent or invalid grounds of appeal. The cases of ACHONU V. OKUWOBI (2017) LPELR – 42102 (SC); DREXEL ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES LTD. V. TRANS INTERNATIONAL BANK LTD (2008) LPELR – 962(SC), (2008) 18 NWLR (Pt.1119) 388 (SC); and BALIOL NIGERIA LTD. V. NAVCON NIGERIA LTD (2010) LPELR – 717(SC), (2010) 16 NWLR (Pt. 1220) 619 (SC); were referenced.

    On the propriety or otherwise of the Appellant arguing issue 1 formulated from grounds 1 and 2 (which have been held to be valid grounds) together with issue 2 distilled from ground 3 (which has been struck out for incompetence, the Court upheld Respondents’ argument to the effect that by arguing together the competent issue 1 and incompetent issue 2, it has rendered the arguments on both the issues liable to be discountenanced by the Court. Resultantly, the arguments in relation to Appellant’s issues 1 and 2 were discountenanced.

    Flowing from above, grounds 3 – 5 in the notice of appeal have been struck out; and issues 2 and 3 distilled from grounds 3 and 4, having also been struck out; and arguments on issues 1 and 2 having been discountenanced, the appeal is left bare and without issues for its determination.

     

    Held

    The Preliminary Objection of the Respondents to the appeal was upheld. Consequently, the appeal was struck out for being incompetent. No order was made as to costs.

     

    • Copyright: Lawpavilion(2017) LPELR-42881(CA)
  • DAY OF DECISION

    DAY OF DECISION

    THE outcome of today’s national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is believed to be one of the factors that will determine how far the party will go in its quest to recapture the presidency, which it lost over two and half years ago, in the next general elections in 2019. At the convention, delegates from state chapters will elect a new set of leaders to run the party’s affairs for the next four years. So far, eight candidates have signified their intentions to run for the office of national chairman: two of them are from the Southsouth geo-political zone, while six others are from the Southwest.

    They are Uche Secondus and Raymond Dokpesi from the Southsouth and Bode George, Jimi Agbaje, Gbenga Daniel, Tunde Adeniran, Taoheed Adedoja and Rashidi Ladoja from the Southwest. Other zones in the South had agreed to concede the position to the Southwest, which explains why there are more candidates from the zone. But, contrary to earlier agreement, the Southsouth appears determined to snatch the position. Even within the Southwest, there is no agreement on a consensus candidate. Some members of the Board of Trustees (BoT) from the region, led by Chief Shuaib Oyedokun, had endorsed a candidate, but other party chieftains were of the view that such BoT members merely expressed their personal opinion. The PDP National Vice Chairman (Southwest), Dr. Eddy Olafeso, is one of the chieftains who believe that the endorsement does not carry any weight, because it was not a collective decision. Apparently, the race for the 2019 presidential election has cast a long shadow on today’s convention.

    What are the chances of each of the aspirants and who are those that will influence the direction of voting? Unlike in the past when such matters was a “family affair” and a consensus is reached beforehand, opinions are divided as to who will emerge victorious in the chairmanship race. Uche Secondus Indications as at press time were that the former Acting National Chairman, Uche Secondus, had been anointed by the power brokers in the Southsouth zone, backed by allies from the Southeast and the North. Secondus, who campaigned intensely for the plum job by holding consultations with leaders and selling his agenda to the six regions, is believed to be backed by the governors in the region, led by Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike.

    The aspirant, however, denied the allegation that he is being propped up by Governor Wike for the position. He affirmed in an interview on Monday that his aspiration to be national chairman was a personal one. Popularly known as ‘Total Chairman’ in his days as state chairman of the PDP during the era of Governor Peter Odili, Secondus, without betraying the backing or support of Wike, insisted that he was ably qualified for the position. Explaining why he jettisoned his deputy national chairmanship bid for the national chairmanship race, he said his decision was a reflection of political dynamism. He said the anxiety over his entry into the race showed that he is the candidate to beat.

    The National Caretaker Committee (NCC), headed by Senator Ahmed Makarfi, is being accused of trying to railroad Prince Secondus as the new national chairman of the party. Secondus has served the party in the past as National Organising Secretary, Deputy National Chairman and until May 2016, the Acting National Chairman. He also occupied the position of chairman of the Rivers State chapter for two terms.

    Thus, he has a deep knowledge and workings of the PDP, a knowledge that may come handy if he eventually emerges as the next national chairman of the party. There are forces within the party, however, who are working against his aspiration. Founding fathers and major stakeholders, like former military president Ibrahim Babangida and former President Goodluck Jonathan, are not disposed to electing a chairman from the Southsouth. This is because the party leadership has zoned the presidential ticket in 2019 to the North while the Southeast is tipped to produce the running mate. As such, it would be difficult to have a chairman from the Southsouth. That is not forgetting also that the Southsouth produced the immediate past president.

    Hence, they have thrown their weight behind a candidate from the Southwest. Raymond Dokpesi Towards the tail end of the campaign, the aspiration of the Rivers State-born Secondus has inevitably shifted focus from High Chief Raymond Dokpesi who had initially dominated the race in the Southsouth. In fact, Dokpesi was dubbed an interloper by stakeholders in the Southwest, for daring to enter the race that the region had assumed was theirs for the taking. The party leadership had agreed to micro-zone the chairmanship position to the Southwest during the botched convention in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital, last year. But within one year, the Makarfi-led National Care taker Committee (NCC), threw the contest open to chieftains from all the three zones in the South. Dokpesi is also a founding member of the PDP. He retired as chairman of Daar Communications Plc, owners of AIT and Raypower Television and Radio, to concentrate on his political career and aspirations.

    The media mogul was perhaps the only candidate that traversed the length and breadth of the country to meet with delegates as he sought to emerge chairman before the ill-fated Port Harcourt convention. However, when the leadership tussle of the PDP between former Chairman Ali Sheriff and Makarfi defied solution, the Edo State-born Dokpesi and others decided to form a new party, the Advanced Peoples Democratic Alliance (APDA). He was named the chairman of the Board of Trustees of the party. When the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Makarfi, the Edo High Chief retraced his steps back to the PDP. He sued APDA and its leadership following the crisis that engulfed the new party after PDP’s problems were over. Observers say Dokpesi has what it takes to displace the APC in 2019. One of such observers said:

    “He can ‘bulldoze’ his way and does not shy away from taking decisions, no matter how unpopular. He challenged the leadership of the PDP and defied everyone in 2015 when it was decided that the office of national chairman should be micro-zoned to the South west.” But Dokpesi appears to have tactically withdrawn from the race. Going by recent events, the media mogul appears to have toned down his push for the coveted office. Like Ladoja, he would need a waiver to be on the ballot. This is because it has not been officially announced that he has resigned his membership of APDA. Besides, he was recently seen at the commissioning of the campaign office of Olabode George in Abuja, forcing Nigerians to wonder if he has decided to step down and support the former NPA chairman. He is also facing corruption charges in court.

    Tunde Adeniran Former Minister of Education, Prof. Tunde Adeniran, was favoured to clinch the seat because of the overwhelming approval his candidature received from the North. Although the PDP leadership has dropped the idea of micro-zoning the chairmanship position to the Southwest, Adeniran’s bid for the job was considered a way of giving the Southwest a sense of belonging. This is because the party has zoned the office of president to the North and has equally agreed to pick a vice presidential candidate from the Southeast. But through the intervention of the governors, delegates from the North are no longer united in their earlier resolve to elect the former ambassador to Germany as the new chairman. Before the entry of Secondus into the contest, Adeniran was the establishment candidate in the contest for the PDP chairmanship. His candidature was canvassed in party circles as that of the North. But at press time, that was no longer the case.

    The development has caused a considerable tension in the camp of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the major supporters of the former minister in the North. Adeniran is a founding member of the PDP. Unlike many top PDP members, Adeniran never defected to another political party. He has also remained visible in all the happenings within the PDP. Generally regarded as a “gentleman”, he is seen by many PDP faithful as a loyal party member who means well for the progress of the party. He is a former chairman of the board of Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC). He also chaired the presidential inauguration committee of former President Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999. The professor of political science is also seen as someone with the intellect and charisma needed for the party to forge ahead.

    However, these same character traits appear to be Adeniran’s weakness. Critics are quick to point out that the next chairman of the PDP should be someone ready to “fight dirty”. Many are of the view that the PDP is not currently giving the APC the kind of opposition expected, owing to the “gentle” nature of the man at the helm of affairs, Ahmed Makarfi. For Adeniran to convince delegates he has what it takes to lead the party, he needs to convince them of his ability to bite and not just bark whenever the need arises. Though Adeniran’s aspiration has received the backing of many stakeholders in the Southwest, he does not have the support of the governor of his state, Mr. Ayodele Fayose of Ekiti State. Fayose insists he is not aware of Adeniran’s aspiration.

    The governor’s spokesman, Mr. Olayinka Lere, said the governor and the state chapter of the party are not officially aware of Adeniran’s intentions. He said: “The governor has heard of Prof. Adeniran’s aspiration to be national chairman of the PDP just as every other pergates, but you and your supporters boycotted the congress. Who is to blame? If you were sure of your popularity in Ogun PDP, the congress was an opportunity for you to demonstrate it. “Kashamu should stop flexing muscle over the former executive. Adebayo Dayoled executive has become history; no amount of threat, blackmail or court injunction will bring it back.

    The reality is that there is a new PDP executive in Ogun State and I Sikirulai Ogundele as Chairman will lead Ogun State delegates to the national convention in Abuja on Saturday.” The PDP state congress in Oyo state produced two parallel executives. A faction loyal to former governor of the state, Senator Rasheed Ladoja, elected Chief Kunmi Mustapha as state chairman of the party while Mr. Jacob Adetoro emerged chairman at the congress held by the Makinde group. The two congresses were monitored by INEC and party officials from Abuja. Prominent members of Ladoja group include former ministers Elder Wole Oyelese; Ms Jumoke Akinjide; Senators Femi Lanlehin, Ayoade Adeseun and Gbenga Babalola; Dr Saka Balogun; Hameed Gbadamosi; Chief Ali Oyedeji; Chief Olayiwola Olakojo and Dr. Muraina Ajibola.

    The Makinde faction parades eminent politicians like former leader of the House of Representatives, Mrs. Mulikat Adeola Akande; Senator Hosea Ayoola Agboola; a former deputy governor in Oyo State, Alhaji Hazeem Gbolarumi; wife of the late strong man of Ibadan politics, Alhaja Bose Adedibu; Tirimisiyu Okunola; Oluyemi Taiwo and Dare Adeleke. Attempts by the national caretaker committee to broker peace between the two factions have failed. It is not clear which of the factions’ delegates would be recognised by the Convention Planning Committee. A member of Ladoja group, who spoke to our correspondent on condition of anonymity, said there was no controversy over the validity of the congress held by the Ladoja group. He said the congress met all the requirements stipulated in the PDP Constitution. According to him, the group is made up of PDP mainstream in Oyo State.

    The national body recognised the Ladoja group as authentic. But Alhaji Tunde Olalekan of Makinde group has warned the national executive committee against recognising delegates other than those that emerged from the congress held by the group. He said doing otherwise will affect PDP’s fortune in the state. The emergence of Lagos State PDP executives through consensus has pitted a factional leader of the party, Mr. Segun Adewale, against the party leaders in the state. Adewale has faulted the process by which the state executives emerged. According to him, the position of the Chairman was decided by one leader. Adewale said: “I and the House of Representatives members were against it. I don’t see how election can be won by selecting who get positions on the basis of who is your leader, without considering your ability, electoral value, education and managerial expertise. “Positions were shared based on sentiments and loyalty.

    Real congress will bring an end to political hegemony and a paradigm shift in the political narratives of Lagos State because vibrant, Young, grassroots leaders will emerge through credible congress. But the state PDP Publicity Secretary, Mr Taofik Gani, explained that members of the state congress met with party leaders and arrived at a consensus. He said: “By this consensus, we have concluded our congress, and in the absence of any appeal resorting to any cancellation, the state PDP executive is set up with constitutional powers to manage the party. Public Affairs commentator, Mr. Tony Smith, said the new executive was an imposition because they did not emerge through due process. According to him, the party leaders have usurped the powers of members to elect leaders of their choice to manage the party. Smith regretted that the PDP has not learnt its lessons from its past mistakes. “The culture of impunity and imposition that led to the defeat of the party in the last general elections still subsists,” he said. “It is not good for the image of the party. Lack of internal democracy in the party scares many people from joining. That is why PDP has failed to win governorship election in the state since 1999.

    The leaders may have succeeded in imposing members of the executive, but it would affect the party in subsequent elections.” In Osun State, there are two factions of the PDP, each of them claiming to be authentic. A faction led by Mr. Soji Adagunodo had accused the chairman of the caretaker committee in the state, Alhaji Sarafa Isola, of manipulating the congresses in favour of Senator Iyiola Omisore’s group. The party congresses in many wards were inconclusive. Attempts by the national leadership of the party to harmonise and share positions among the two factions in the state have been rejected. Adagunodo said the harmonisation arrangement was unacceptable because it did not reflect the will and wish of the majority of members of the party in the state.

    He explained that the template for the sharing of party executives in the local government areas as discussed during the harmonisation process at the PDP national headquarters last week could not stand, insisting that free and fair congress should be conducted to resolve the matter. He said his group had written a letter to convey their disapproval of the harmonisation arrangement to the national chairman of the party, Senator Ahmed Makarfi. Adagunodo said: “After due consultation with the leadership, stakeholders and members of the party across all the local government areas of the state, it became clear the harmonisation was not acceptable because it was not proportional to the strength of our group as reflected in the result of the ward congress conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). “Members of the party are insisting that due process and internal democracy must be followed.

    Majority of the people that would benefit from the harmonisation are those that did not obtain nomination forms during the congress. We demand true certified copy of the results of the ward congress. We are not confrontational but leadership demands that we convey the position of our teeming party members in the state.” The Court of Appeal’s recognition of the Eddy Olafeso-led zonal executive of the PDP in the Southwest has deepened the party’s crisis in the zone. It has dashed the hope of Chief Makanjuola Ogundipe leading the delegates from the zone to the national convention.

    The Olafeso executive belongs to Makarfi-led Caretaker Committee while Ogundipe is loyal to Kashamu and by extension to Ali Modu Sheriff’s camp. The Appelate Court granted the prayers of the Olafeso-led zonal executive in the Southwest to attend the Saturday, December 9 PDP national convention in Abuja. The implication of the judgment is that the Kashamu group would not be represented at the convention unless there is a court order that puts the judgment on hold. Analysts have cautioned the national leadership of PDP against treating the groups that lost out at the congresses as inconsequential. Rather, they should be accommodated and given a sense of belonging. They argued that as long as there are disgruntled party members after the convention, the party would remain vulnerable. They believe that the December 9 national convention would go a long way in not only shaping the future of the party at the national level but also determine its capacity to win elections at the state level.

  • Grabbing current crisis to take right decision

    A whirlwind of mostly negative emotions is sweeping over Nigeria. While a dwindling few still see some hope in the Buhari war against corruption, most have given up on it. Daily garish stories of discovery of tomes of cash stolen from Nigeria’s treasury, and of huge super-expensive houses abandoned and denied by their owners, generate fleeting excitement and no more. Hardly anybody still believes that the recovered money and properties are being returned to Nigeria’s coffers and not to the pockets of some favoured individuals in today’s high echelons of power. Beyond the fanfare and the hoopla, no culprit gets penalized. In many cases, we are aware that looters of public wealth are successfully wielding their influences and connections to negotiate their crimes out of existence. In short, the war against corruption, once the flagship of the Buhari presidency, has lost almost all credibility among Nigerians.

    But that is only a symptom. The root and stem of the disaster exist in the fact that the Buhari government operates essentially in the dark. Even the most uninformed Nigerians know that the power of their federal executive government is being exercised from some dark room by a hidden unelected “cabal” of Buhari’s close clansmen, while the elected president himself, sick, is hidden away in some other dark room where, according to stories in the media, even his own wife is not regularly allowed access to him. Even though we pray, and should pray, for the Buhari whom most of us once admired, the truth of the condition of our country is not lost on us. In terms of governance with integrity and dignity, Nigeria has been slipping steadily downwards since 1960; today, Nigeria has reached the absolute bottom. Nigeria’s brand of governance is now no more than a comic opera – a comic opera that makes people across the world laugh.

    Chaos, poverty and conflicts are the inevitable outcomes of poor governance. The first thing that Buhari and his clansmen did in government was to disband the political party that brought Buhari to the presidency and that won the majority of the National Assembly. It has been escalating chaos since then. The National Assembly has disintegrated into a medley, engaged in an almost childlike game of ego shows, without any desire to understand and grapple with the real needs of the country. And between the executive and the legislature, an inexplicable and shameful war rages perpetually. In the midst of it all, we seem to be breeding the barons that will lead as war-lords in our country’s near future.

    The poverty has been growing in our lives relentlessly – even though our country is one of the most endowed countries on earth. Nigerians rank among the poorest in the world in access to electricity, water, transportation, dependable public administration, entrepreneurial incentive, and business support services. Nigeria’s GDP is contracting. Nigeria’s foreign reserves are being wiped out. Direct foreign investment is declining. Businesses are closing up or relocating to other countries. Nigeria’s oil production declines off and on, and it is very difficult, off and on, to get buyers for Nigeria’s oil. Jobs are being lost day by day. The inflation rate is rising relentlessly. The Naira is in shambles. The prices of food and other essentials are daily rising beyond the capability of masses of Nigerians. More than 70% of Nigerians are said officially to be living in “absolute poverty”. Destitution and street begging are skyrocketing.

    Much of these economic disasters are sustained by the loss of economic development initiatives in the regions, states, and localities of Nigeria. Because of decades of relentlessly concentrating all of Nigeria’s power and resource control in the hands of the Federal Government, regional, state and local initiatives have more or less perished, and deep-seated feelings of helplessness reign, in all parts of Nigeria.

    The conflicts are growing everywhere. In the South-east, we have the protest demonstrations by youths of the Igbo nation – in the name of “Biafra”, demonstrations pitching masses of resolute youths against law enforcement operatives, and leading to many deaths. In various influential quarters all over the world, the Biafra cause is attracting attention and gathering sympathy.

    We have the stubborn youth revolt in the North-east, which has chosen Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism as its banner. In spite of frequent optimistic reports from the Nigerian military since Buhari’s presidency began, Boko Haram remains a big problem. Its support base in parts of the North-east does not appear to be seriously eroding – and that is because youth unemployment, hopeless poverty, and Kanuri nationalism are motivating and strengthening it.

    We have the old revolt in the South-south, with its many terrorist organizations. Since the advent of the Buhari presidency, the terrorist groups in the South-south have returned powerfully to business – because Buhari continues the regime of total federal power and resource control, ignores all advice and demands for the restructuring of our federation, and believes that the use of federal power and federal bribes will crush the South-south insurgency. After some weeks of respite, those boys are now threatening to return to the war.

    We may forget (but we must not forget) recent agitations from the Arewa North. In 2014, large numbers of mostly educated youths belonging to the Arewa Youth Development Forum held demonstrations during which they decried the poverty in the North and the “discrimination” by the Federal Government against the North. Speaking through their Chairman, Aliyu Usman, they issued a call “on all Northerners to rise and support agitations for a peaceful dissolution of this union called Nigeria”. They then warned all southerners resident in the North “to relocate to their respective states to make room for Northerners who would be returning home”. Nor have those voices been isolated voices. This past week, those youths were heard again.  And even eminent citizens (such as Prof. Ango Abdullahi, spokeseman for the Arewa Elders Council) have said almost exactly what these youths have said. Recently, the august statesman, Maitama Sule, called for a revolution. And the Emir of Kano, one of the most informed Nigerians about the Nigerian economy, has been warning seriously concerning the horrific poverty in the North.

    And we must not forget the several “self-determination” groups among the Yoruba nation of the South-west. Heavily educated, heavily equipped with advanced ideas, these youths are potentially the most potent weapon of change in Nigeria. If, or when, they launch out, Nigeria cannot easily contain them. They are suffering in desperate poverty right now, or fleeing abroad in droves, but they are likely to stop and fight back at home someday – and that may be soon.

    Most immediately devastating right now, we have the Fulani terrorism, which we choose to call Fulani herdsmen’s attacks on farmers across most of Nigeria. Countless Nigerians are daily dying violently from this terror. The federal government and federal security agencies are putting up no credible defence of Nigerians, and the government of most states, intimidated by the federal establishment, are reeling in doubt and impotence while their people are being killed. In self-defence, most non-Fulani Nigerian communities are becoming dangerously radicalized and militarized.

    In totality, we are heading towards something big – something big and terrible. If we let it come, it is likely to wreck a lot of what we all hold dear, take the lives of a lot of our dear ones, and shake Africa to its foundations.

    Should we wait for it to come? My answer is No – and I am sure that most Nigerians would agree with that answer. There is news that the federal government intends to call some kind of national conference specifically on the issue of Fulani terrorism. I hope they do that. And I hope that when the conference convenes, it will seize the freedom to consider all aspects of the Nigerian crisis that has now reached dangerous heights – all aspects including whether we really want to continue to live together as one country, and if the answer happens to be Yes, then a thorough establishment of the conditions and rules for our remaining as one country. God knows we have reached such a point. Better to part peacefully than to implode in rivers of blood.

  • ‘Starting Jobberman was my best business decision’

    ‘Starting Jobberman was my best business decision’

    Lekan Olude is the co-founder of Jobberman, an online portal which has grown to become the biggest job online portal in Nigeria. In this interview with Bukola Aroloye he speaks on the mission and vision behind Jobberman, plans for the future and his management style. Excerpts:

    Tell us about your job at Jobberman

    I’m Lekan Olude, one of the co-founders at Jobberman. As the Operations Manager, l see to the day-to-day running of the business. There are other two guys who also run the company with me.

    What has been the challenges and achievements since you started Jobberman?

    In terms of the achievements, it has been quite tough trying to blow our trumpet. Based on what the market has shown, we are currently the biggest job board in the country and also in sub-Sahara Africa. In the past seven years, we have expanded to Ghana and have strategic partnership in East Africa.

    Overtime, we have been able to touch about 60,000 companies and at the same time, we have about three million candidates on the portal that applies for job online. Have we done so much? I will say no. Do we have a long way to go? I will say yes. Considering the fact that if you look at the companies registered with Corporate Affairs Commission, we have not even scratch the surface. If you also look at the workable population, we have not done anything. In terms of challenges, we have encountered challenges that every normal business in Nigeria face where you have to practically be your own ‘country’ in business. In terms of policies, we have had challenges in terms of support from the banks considering the fact that banks hardly support internet companies. This is because we don’t have assets and the only assets we have is our data and that doesn’t amount to anything for the banks. In terms of the country accepting the fact that the business has come to stay, it is also a challenge.

    Nigeria is country where the big companies don’t want to leave space for the upcoming companies. So you fight your way into the space. It has been interesting because Nigeria is an interesting place. When you wake up in the morning, your life can change whether you are making money or not.

    What informed the idea of Jobberman in the first place?

    For Jobberman, the idea came up when we were in school. There was strike and the three of us didn’t find it interesting going back home so we decided to make the most out of it. When we started, we didn’t think about making money. We decided to look into the internet space since we don’t need so much money to set up Internet Company.  We decided to go into jobs because we felt it’s going to create value to the youths and create biggest impact.

    We were pretty clear on what we wanted to achieve and how we wanted to go about it. While we were in school, we were able to take things one at a time and improve on them. The good thing is that 10 months before we left school, someone reached out to us and said he had been studying the website and wanted to be a part of us. So it gave us opportunity in terms of sustenance, and at the end, it brought us to Lagos. We had our first two major investments and the big break came when we had partnership with MTN. Before then, there were lots of challenges.

    What has been the success rate in terms of the number of people that eventually gets job through your portal?

    Recently, I read online where some people were saying Jobberman is not working, that people don’t get job on Jobberman. While I understand where their complaint was coming from, this is an opportunity to set things straight.

    Jobberman doesn’t give jobs, we only link candidates to available jobs. For example, if you are an engineer and there is engineering job in Kaduna and you don’t know about it which if you had known, would have applied for it, we link you to it.

    The company also does not know about you because if they had known about you, they wouldn’t have gotten an expatriate to do the job. That is one of the classic ways Jobberman operates.

    In respect of the number of jobs we create, the number of jobs is enough for the number of candidates looking for employment so that speaks to say that if you have one job and 100 people applied for the job, 99 of them will not get the job. We do 6,000 fresh jobs in a month but not everybody on Jobberman is actually looking for job. People get on Jobberman to reach out to a candidate.

    To determine the success rate, one will look at it from the perspectives of jobs clients gave to us and how many of them we are able to fill. We cannot provide jobs for everybody but the job that we brought out for people to see, the question is have we been able to fill those jobs? I will say yes. About 60 to 70% of the jobs that comes to us are filled. The remaining 40% is because some times, the skills needed are difficult to find in this country.

    If a client is looking for a candidate with a certain skill and we have not been able to find that candidate, we reach out to the client to tell him we have not been able to find one. We have lots of that happen so in terms of success rate, we have done above average. We still have lots to do to ensure more people gets job.

    How do you get information about vacancies?  Also, people say there are no jobs in Nigeria but from your experience, will you agree to that since you said you do 6,000 fresh jobs every month?

    There are jobs in Nigeria but the jobs are not enough. Access to information is not that strong. Employability is also a big problem. Are companies hiring? Yes they are. Are Nigerians filling all the jobs? No.

    But the country churns out thousands of graduates every year?

    Yes but for most of the roles that don’t get filled, they are not graduates roles. They are specialty roles and Nigeria has a huge brain drain. On a daily basis, people are carrying their bags and travelling out of the country and that is something to be worried about. Our educational institutions have not fixed the issue of specialist roles. For example, in the power sector, the technology is trying to change to make power more accessible and reduce wastage. But who are the people that are going to man these technologies. They have to bring them in. New roles are coming up but Nigerians are not filling them.

    Technically, jobs are being created on a daily basis and information is not totally out there. Words of mouth is still the biggest channel of communication for jobs. Companies approach us for candidates and we also go to companies to ask them if they have vacancies.

    Are you saying our tertiary institutions are part of the reasons we don’t have competent candidates?

    They are not solely responsible but they are part of it. The strength of an organisation is the people and when you have weak people, you have weak organisations and when you have strong people, you have strong organisations.  The people are the bedrock of a company. The people are formed within the academic world because they spend a lot of time acquiring knowledge. The quality of these people when they step out of school is extremely important. The incubation period is when people are in school.

    From your experience, what kinds of job do you think are in high demand? Could it be those  in administrative, ICT or those in technical field?

    If you take a business and break it down, you realize most of the guys are those sales which means sales related roles are in highest demand. Then you have in-between mid level managers in the administrative   field though not much compare with those in technical roles.

    Technical roles are also so much in high demand. As a nation we are not strong technically and that is why more often than not, companies tend to go outside the country and bring in experts. The approach of government to ensure people gets technically sound is very key. Most companies in Nigeria are within SMEs rate which tells us that the transaction size of their businesses is very small. That also means most of the demands for roles are within lower and mid cadre. If trainings are focused along that cadre, we will have competent people and companies will begin to hire them and forget hiring expatriates.

    We should be targeting people in the bottom of the pyramid, people that earns les than $3,000 a month and about 90% of Nigerians earns less than that.

    What are your future plans for Jobberman?

    One of the things we are trying to do is to increase our penetration along the recruitment capital value change. We are also trying to see how candidates can become more employable through Jobberman learning portal.

    To our clients, we also try to strengthen some of the value added services. We are trying to leverage on the Jobberman assets in Nigeria,Ghana and East Africa by centralizing human capital assets and give employers more access to people, better efficiency in hiring and access to lots of data to be able to deliver better value added services to our clients.

    What is your management style?

    My style is to make everything inclusive. My role is to create the right atmosphere and moderate the company in terms of rules and regulations.

    How do you motivate your colleagues?

    Every human being wants some level of dignity and respect even from the driver to the CEO. The good thing about Jobberman is that a lot of us are young so it is pretty easy to motivate them. We try to ensure that at the time any staff comes to the company, and wants to leave, the staff becomes a better person from financial and developmental standpoint.

    We try to ensure we pay our colleagues very well. We also bring in speakers to talk to the staff on any topic and have one-on-one interaction. Another thing we also do is organise social gatherings such as our ‘Thank God it’s Friday’ party where our staff have lots of fun.

    We try to ensure the office is very good looking. To make it easier for our staff to get to office, we had to leave our office at Lekki and move to Marina. We continue engaging them and create an open office where staff can walk up to the top management staff and share ideas.

     What has been your toughest decision?

    When I make decision, if it goes good, fine and if it goes bad, I take it. Any decision that I made and does not take your life but gives you room to correct things, I don’t regret it. I hate to make people sad especially when you have to let an employee go.

    What is the best decision that you have ever made?

    You can say starting Jobbermnan is the best decision I have ever made but it could also be the worst decision because at a time of starting the company, I had other offers. The other offer was a lot better than starting a Jobberman as at that time.

    However, I and my partners believed we should not dwell too much on our successes so it becomes very hard to pinpoint the best decision.

    What makes you special?

    I ask a lot of questions and talk to professionals whenever I want to make a decision.

    What attracts you to people?

    I love people that are intelligent, smart and knowledgeable. I like flexible people. I believe this life is not hard. I like humble people and those that love God.

  • Enyimba yet to make decision on Aigbogun

    Enyimba yet to make decision on Aigbogun

    Enyimba International Football Club are uncertain of the future of coach Paul Aigbogun.

    “We are yet to take a decision on whether he (Paul Aigbogun) is to return or not so for now nothing is certain,” a top official of Enyimba told Goal.

    “We are focused on reviewing our season and mapping out plans on how to bounce back in a big way. The issue of coach Aigbogun’s future is shelved for now.

    “The management is filled with experienced personnel led by Felix Anyansi Agwu. So a good decision that will favour the club will be taken as and when due. We urge the press not to speculate but wait for official confirmation from us.”

  • Saraki, Ekweremadu hail decision

    Saraki, Ekweremadu hail decision

    Senate President, Bukola
    Saraki, and Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu, yesterday described their discharge by the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory on charges of forgery as a welcome development.

    They also called it a vindication of their position from the beginning of the case that they are innocent of the accusations leveled against them.

    In a statement signed by the Special Adviser to the Senate President on Media and Publicity, Yusuph Olaniyonu, the duo said the court decision was consistent with their position that the case lacked any merit and that the charge of forgery of the Senate rule filed against them can never be substantiated by any fact.

    The two men described the case as a ‘politically-induced distraction’ which came at a time when all hands ought to be on deck to solve the problem of economic recession biting the people, destroying homes and creating severe social disorientation in communities.

    They, however, acknowledged that the federal government finally displayed courage and strength of character in halting the unnecessary waste of precious time of both parties by agreeing with the defence team that the case lacks merit and therefore should be discontinued.

    They expressed appreciation to “all our colleagues in the Senate for their solid support and understanding while the case lasted. We also thank other parliamentarians in and out of the country and the international community as a whole for the consistent solidarity they displayed to us and their belief in our genuine cause since the commencement of the case”.

    “We believe much time has been wasted in pursuing this needless case and we hope that the same treatment will be extended to other politically-motivated cases. It is also hoped that from now on, the various arms of government will be allowed to devote all the available time and resources to working on the problems confronting the country and finding solutions that will lead to higher standards of living for the majority of the people of Nigeria.

    “At this point, what the country needs is a strong economy where a very large percentage of those who are willing to work can be productively engaged; where there is solid infrastructure, where the atmosphere brings the best out of the people and where all are able to realize their full potential. We pledge to work for Nigeria to achieve all these,” Saraki and Ekweremadu stated.

  • Messi decision sad – Griezmann

    Messi decision sad – Griezmann

    France striker, Antoine Griezmann has described Lionel Messi’s decision to retire from international football as “frustrating and sad”.
    Messi announced that Argentina’s Copa America Centenario final penalty shoot-out defeat to Chile on Sunday would be his last appearance for his country.
    The decision brings an end to a disappointing international career for Messi, whose only honour for Argentina came in the form of a gold medal at the 2008 Olympic Games in China.
    Griezmann and Messi have been rivals at club level in recent seasons, and the Frenchman was only four goals behind the Barcelona star in La Liga’s goal table with his 22 strikes for Atletico Madrid last season.
    Of Messi’s decision, Griezmann said: “He must have his reasons. I think he lost three or four finals.
    “It’s frustrating, it’s sad. It must be difficult for him. May be it’s just an immediate reaction but after that, we must accept it.
    “He’s a great player who did everything for his country. He has not had the chance to win a cup with his country, unfortunately.”
    Griezmann helped France maintain their own challenge for silverware by scoring both goals in a 2-1 win over the Republic of Ireland at Euro 2016.
    The 25-year-old has emerged as the talisman for Didier Deschamps’ side but he insists he is not feeling the kind of pressure that Messi experienced with Argentina.
    He said: “At Atletico too, they say that I’m the leader [of the attack]. I went to the final of the Champions League, and I scored 32 goals. This pressure does not weigh too much.
    “I’m on the field to have fun and give pleasure to the fans.”

  • Bravo: I hope Messi decision is not true

    Bravo: I hope Messi decision is not true

    Chile’s Copa America-winning goalkeeper, Claudio Bravo hopes Barcelona team-mate, Lionel Messi rethinks his decision to retire from international football and continues playing for Argentina.
    Emotional captain Messi stunned the football world after Argentina’s 4-2 penalty shoot-out loss to Chile in Sunday’s Copa America Centenario final, announcing his intention to walk away from national team duty.
    Messi – the country’s all-time leading goalscorer – was in tears post-match following his unsuccessful spot-kick, which led to a third consecutive final defeat for Argentina.
    But Bravo, who plays alongside the five-time Ballon d’Or winner at Camp Nou, is holding onto hope that the 29-year-old will add to his 113 caps.
    “For me Messi is the best player in the world,” said Bravo, who claimed the centenary tournament’s Golden Glove award for best goalkeeper.
    “We know too well the quality of person he is. I’ll take the best player in the world.
    “I hope he continues playing for Argentina many years.”
    Tenacious Chile midfielder Arturo Vidal was also asked about Messi’s bombshell after celebrating back-to-back Copa America titles.
    Vidal, however, was far more conservative, insisting Messi has his reasons for taking such action amid reports of unrest within the Argentina Football Association (AFA).
    “It is too bad for Messi to leave the team but he will have his reasons and is very difficult to talk about this issue,” the Bayern Munich star added.