The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Gabriel Kolawole

  • Updated: Court sacks Aidoko as Kogi East Senator

    ……..awarded N1.5M against Aidoko and PDP respectively

     

    Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja on Wednesday sacked a Senator representing Kogi East Senatorial district of the People’s Democratic Party Senator Atai Aidoko.

    The court also ordered the clerk of the National Assembly to withdraw all privileges being accorded to Aidoko.

    In his judgement the court held that Aidoko was not property nominated by the PDP for the March 2015 election.

    He also ordered the immediate swearing of Air Marshall Isaac Alfa by the clerk of the National Assembly of the PDP.

    He said;”I hearby order the clerk of the National Assembly to swear in AVM Alfa as the newly elected Kogi East to immediately replace Aidoko

    ”The plantiff has proved that the result of the primary election which he produced are genuine and he scored the highest number of votes in the election”The judge held.

    The court also ordered the electoral empire to issue a fresh certificate of return to Alfa being the winner of the December 7 2014 PDP primaries into the National Assembly election.

    However the court awarded a cost of N1.5M against PDP and Senator Aidoko respectively.

    The trial judge also condemned the ways and manner in which the PDP subverted the result of the primaries held that rogue documents were used by the PDP to submit Senator Aidoko’s name to INEC.

    The purported nomination of Aidoko by PDP to INEC was an exercise in futility to rob the plaintiff the fruit of his election in the primary.

    While delivering his judgement Justice Kolawole said that from the totality of the evidence placed before the court, it was clear that Sheidu Idoma was the Returning Officer for the Senatorial election and not Umar Sanusi, and that this was corroborated by key witnesses in their statements made on oath

    The judge also said the fact that the sacked senator refused to call his agent at the primary election, Mallam Farouk Adejo, left a credibility gap on the side of Aidoko.

    Earlier, Justice Kolawole had dismissed the preliminary objection by Aidoko challenging jurisdiction of the court to entertain the matter.

    He described the preliminary objection as an abuse of court process employed by Aidoko to delay the trial.

    He held that the challenge of the court’s jurisdiction was an abuse of court process because it had earlier been resolved both at the Court of Appeal and the Supreme court against the senator.

  • Court remands man for alleged possession of cocaine

    Court remands man for alleged possession of cocaine

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday ordered the remand of a 32-year-old man, Ya’kau Audu, for alleged illegal possession of 2.7 grammes of cocaine.

    Audu, who was arraigned by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency ( NDLEA ), is standing trial on a count charge, bordering on unlawful possession of cocaine.

    Counsel to NDLEA, Mr Mike Kassa, told the court that the accused committed the offence on Sept. 10 at Nyanya, Abuja.

    Kassa said the defendant was arrested on the same date by the police with 2.7 grammes of cocaine while driving a Honda Civic car.

    He said the offence contravened Section 19 of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, Cap N30, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.

    The defendant pleaded guilty to the one-count charge.

    Kassa, who urged the court to summarily convict the defendant having pleaded guilty, however, asked for a short adjournment to enable him present facts of the case.

    He also informed that the defendant was once convicted for one year imprisonment on Dec. 2, 2013 by Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court, Abuja, for trafficking seven grammes of cocaine.

    Counsel to the defendant, Mr Victor Edeh, however pleaded with the court to temper justice with mercy, adding that the defendant had become remorseful and self-reformed.

    Edeh said the defendant did not waste the time of the court by pleading guilty and had been cooperating with the prosecution in its investigation.

    The judge, Justice Gabriel Kolawole, consequently ordered the remand of the defendant in prison and adjourned the case until Oct. 4, for review of facts of the case.

  • Ikoyigate: Reps to probe N13b discovered

    Ikoyigate: Reps to probe N13b discovered

    The House of Representatives on Wednesday mandated its Committee on National Intelligence to investigate the source of the N13 billion discovered in a residential apartment at Osborne Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

    The House also mandated the committee to ascertain the owner of the money discovered by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    The resolution followed the adoption of a motion sponsored by Rep. Gabriel Kolawole.

    Moving the motion, Kolawole said the call to unravel the true identity of the owner of the money was based on claims and counter claims as to the true ownership of the funds.

    He said that the development was having negative effects on the anti-corruption drive of the Federal Government.

    “There is need for thorough investigation into the matter in order to ascertain the source of the money given the claims on its ownership, purpose and the damaging effects it is having on Federal Government’s anti-corruption drive,’’ Kolawole said.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) recalls that a three man presidential panel headed by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo is currently investigating the matter.

    The Director-General of National Intelligence Agency (NIA) Amb. Ayodele Oke had claimed that the money belongs to the agency and was approved by the previous administration for covert operation.

    In a new twist, Gov Nyesom Wike declared that the money found in the Ikoyi apartment belonged to the Rivers state government.

    Wike told newsmen that investigations by the Rivers State Government revealed that the money was proceeds from the sale of gas turbines by the immediate past governor of the state, Mr Rotimi Amaechi.

  • Charles Okah fit for trial, says court

    Charles Okah fit for trial, says court

    Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja, yesterday declared Charles Okah medically fit to undergo trial.

    The judge’s confidence in Okah’s ability to stand trial became evident yesterday when, upon receiving the report of the psychiatric evaluation carried out on the accused by experts at the National Hospital, Abuja, directed lawyers to choose a date for commencement of trial.

    Okah is being tried with Obi Nwanbueze on treason charges over their alleged involvement in the 2010 Independence Day bombing in Abuja.

    They are charged with 22 particulars of overt acts of treason and another eight-count charge of terrorism.

    Their trial had been stalled lately owing to the Federal Government’s inability to ascertain Okah’s mental health status.

    Justice Kolawole had, in view of Okah’s strange behavior, ordered the government to present him before experts at the National Hospital, Abuja for psychiatric evaluation. Okah once urinated in open court during proceedings.

    His lawyer, John Ainetor of the Festus Keyamo Chambers, had consistently claimed that Okah was too ill to stand trial.

    Yesterday, the judge upon receiving the medical report and examining it handed it to the prosecution lawyer, Alex Izinyon (SAN) and Ainetor to read.

    When Ainetor tried to react, the judge stopped him on the ground that a person’s medical report was not what should be made a public issue. The judge later asked both lawyers to pick a date for the commencement of trial.

    Ainetor told the court about his pending application dated January 13. He said his application is seeking an order of the court granting leave to Okah to be examined by an independent private medical practitioner to ascertain his mental and physical health status.

    He added that the application is also seeking an order granting leave for independent private medical practitioner to produce a medical/scientific analysis/report on the side effect of Epilim Sodium Valproate (ESV) on Okah.

    “There is need for the accused, Charles Tombra Okah, to be examined by an independent private medical practitioner, for an impartial neutral confirmation of the medical reports from both the Kuje Prisons Clinic and National Hospital Abuja, to ascertain his mental and physical health status,” Ainetor stated.

    The judge directed parties to file the necessary processes and adjourned till May 16 for argument.

     

  • A welcome challenge

    A welcome challenge

    •Sanusi’s decision to challenge his suspension in court is good for rule of law

    Sanusi Lamido Sanusi’s recourse to seek judicial salvation in his bid to reclaim his post as the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor is commendable. He was suspended as Governor of the CBN by President Goodluck Jonathan last month, and he is now in court through his attorney, Kola Awodein, SAN, to challenge the suspension in an Abuja Federal High Court. Such seeming presidential impunity had hitherto gone unchallenged.

    His bid to restrain the President, the Attorney-General of the Federation and the Inspector- General of Police from giving effect to his purported suspension from office, pending the determination of the suit, has been, understandably, rejected by the court. This interim setback notwithstanding, the court has in the interest of justice, ordered that the President should be put on notice while the matter was fixed for March 12 so as to avail both sides the opportunity to argue the motion.

    Justice Gabriel Kolawole, the presiding judge’s ruling would definitely allow the defendants to appear before the court to explain why the application should not be granted. Despite this justice-oriented legalese, we must quickly state that what is of more significant interest to us is that the substantive suit will go a long way in determining whether statutory laws guiding the operations of institutions of government can be breached by the President when suspending or removing the heads of such agencies from office.

    We do know that Central Bank of Nigeria Act, 2007 in Section 11 clearly provides instances under which the governor or any of his deputies can be removed from office. None, to the best of our understanding, allows for presidential suspension of the governor. The only mention of the word ‘suspension’ is in section 11(1)(d) and that relates to the removal of the governor whenever he is disqualified or suspended from practicing his profession in Nigeria. And surprisingly, that was not the case in the prevailing circumstance. Furthermore, the only time the President can exercise any disciplinary control or recommend the removal of the CBN Governor is under section 11(1)(f) and that recommendation must be supported by two-thirds majority of the Senate before the CBN governor can be successfully removed. We will always stand by the tenets of the Rule of Law because this is by far preferable to the rule of the jungle – which we are deeply convinced Nigeria is not -but a sovereign country governed by rules and regulations. Her affairs should be devoid of sentiments but anchored on these written rules and regulations.

    We abhor official meddlesomeness, which is why the recourse to judicial solution in the present impasse is well appreciated. Some years back when Professor Maurice Iwu was unilaterally removed by the President, the move was applauded not because of its legality but because the public was already fed up with his leadership style as Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Sadly, the seeming public approval given that illegal presidential act must have given the President the impetus to go ahead and suspend Sanusi as CBN governor. Unfortunately, in Sanusi’s case, this act is only tantamount to an indirect termination of his appointment because before the expiration of the period of suspension, his tenure would have expired, thereby making restitutio in integrum impossible.

    We consider this case a testy good one that is capable of extending the frontiers of constitutional governance and causing a reduction in executive impunity, now or in the future. It is even the more imperative that we know the position of the law on such matters, especially with general elections only about a year away. A situation where the fear of the President will be the beginning of wisdom is not good for INEC, for example. This would have been settled long since if Iwu had the courage to challenge his removal by the President.

  • Judge’s absence stalls hearing in PDP’s suit against Amaechi, Nyako, others

    Judge’s absence stalls hearing in PDP’s suit against Amaechi, Nyako, others

    The absence of Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja stalled yesterday, hearing in the suit by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), against five of its former governors, who defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    The PDP, is by the suit, seeking to sack the governors on the grounds of their defection to the opposition party.

    The governors are Murtala Nyako (Adamawa), Rotimi Amaechi (Rivers), Aliyu Wamakko (Sokoto), Rabiu Kwankwaso (Kano) and Abdulfatai Ahmed (Kwara).

    On the last date, Justice Kolawole ordered that a fresh summons be served on the defendants, upon complaint by defendants’ lawyers that they were wrongly served with processes, prompting the judge to order the plaintiff to ensure proper service on the defendants.

    Parties were to begin hearing in the case yesterday, but for the absence of the judge, who court officials said was away with the Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, in a conference.

    When parties got to court, they learnt from the court registrar that the judge would be around by noon. At 12pm, the registrar shifted the proceedings to 2pm, hoping the judge would be back.

    When, at 2pm, it became obvious that the judge would not make it, the registrar suggested that the parties should return on February 26.

    Parties could not agree on when next to return. While the plaintiff’s lawyer, Alex Iziyon (SAN), agreed. To the date suggested by the registrar, the defence lawyers said they would prefer to return next week.

    Sued with the governors is the Independent National Electoral Commission (listed as the first defendant).

    It is PDP’s contention that the governors should be sacked on the grounds that upon their defection, they have forfeited their offices, which, as a result, have reverted to the party.

    Should the court accede to its request and sack the five governors, PDP wants the court to order the deputy governors or speakers of the houses of assembly of the affected states, or any officer next in rank, who is still its member, to assume the office of governor.

    The PDP wants the court to declare that by the combined provisions of sections 177 (c), 221 and 222 (c) of the 1999 Constitution, the five governors, who were elected on its platform, cannot continue to enjoy the mandate given to it (PDP) by the people/electorate of the concerned states, as they (governors) have defected to another party.

    It is also seeking a declaration that in the absence of any division in the PDP, the five governors have vacated or forfeited their seats upon their defection to the APC.

    The party wants a declaration that by the combined provisions of sections 87 of the Electoral Act 2011 (as amended), and sections 177 (c), 221 and 222 (c) of the 1999 Constitution, the offices of the defected governors have reverted to the PDP.

    The PDP also wants the court to declare that by the combined provisions of sections 177 (c), 221 and 222 (c) of the 1999 Constitution, upon the defection of the five governors, the mandate reverts to the deputy governor or speaker of the houses of assembly of the respective states or any officer next in rank, who is still a member of the PDP.

  • Court threatens to set Boko Haram suspects free

    Court threatens to set Boko Haram suspects free

    •Gives AGF seven-day ultimatum

    A Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday gave the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) seven days to file charges against six suspected Boko Haram members held by the Department of State Services (DSS).

    Justice Gabriel Kolawole said he would set the suspects free should the AGF fail to file formal charges against them within the period.

    The suspects, Dr Nazeef Yunus (a lecturer with the Kogi State University), Umar Musa (aka Abubakar), Mustapha Yusuf (aka Habib), Ismaila Abduazeez, Ibrahim Isa Hayafu and Salami Abdullahi were arrested by the DSS last October on suspicion that they were members of the Boko Haram sect.

    Yunus was accused of, among others, providing intellectual support to the sect.

    They have all been held in the DSS’ custody since their arrest.

    The DSS on November 25 got an ex-parte order from the Federal High Court, empowering it to further detain the suspects for 45 days.

    The 45 days ended yesterday, following which the DSS applied for a further extension of the order for the remand of the suspects.

    The suspects’ lawyers, Hassan Liman (SAN) and James Ocholi (SAN), objected to the DSS’ application on the grounds that the agency had not provided cogent reasons why it was yet to arraign the suspects in court.

    They argued that the DSS’ claim that investigation was still on was not enough reason to keep the suspects in custody perpetually.

    The lawyers urged the court to grant them bail, pending when the state was ready to formally charge the suspects to court.

    Justice Kolawole held that despite that the suspects were being held in relation to alleged terrorism offences, they were to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

    He ordered the AGF to file formal charges against the suspects within seven days.

    The judge ordered that they should be further detained in the custody of the DSS for seven days.

    Justice Kolawole held that should the AGF fail to file formal charges against the suspects before then, he will not hesitate to set them free.

    He adjourned till January 23.

  • Court upholds Ndume’s appeals

    Court upholds Ndume’s appeals

    The Court of Appeal in Abuja, yesterday, upheld the two appeals filed by Senator Mohammed Ali Ndume against decisions of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in his trial on terror-related charges.

    The appellate court, in a judgment read by Justice Amiru Sanusi, faulted the decisions by Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court in which he, on December 11 and 14, last year, admitted some computer-generated items in evidence.

    The Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred when it admitted the items although the prosecution failed to comply with the condition precedent as required under Section 84(1) and (2) of the Evidence Act 2011 (as amended).

    The court held that the word “shall” used in Section 84 of the Evidence Act makes it mandatory that its provisions must be complied with.

    “In this case, the respondent failed to comply with the condition precedent as prescribed in Section 84 (2) of the Evidence Act,” the court held.

    It, consequently, declared as wrong, the admission in evidence of the items, marked exhibits “P7, P8, P8a and P8b”, containing alleged call data records of purported interactions between Ndume and a spokesman of Boko Haram, Ali Sanda Umar Konduga.

    Ndume, a senator from Borno State, was arraigned before Justice Kolawole on December 12, last year, on a four-count charge by the Department of State Services (DSS).

    He is accused of sponsoring the Boko Haram sect, and failing to disclose the cell phone number of Konduga, which was alleged to be in his possession.

    During the trial, the prosecution, through its third witness, tendered on December 11 and 14, last year, some call logs and three discs, containing call-data records intended to prove the allegation that Ndume interacted with Boko Haram members.

    Also admitted were documents containing findings based on investigations by a Special Investigation Panel (SIP) set up by the DSS.

    A prosecution witness told the trial court that there were 73 instances of communication between Ndume and Konduga.

    A Nokia E7 phone allegedly belonging to Ndume was said to have been used in communicating with Konduga, whose phone was given as Nokia 2700.

    Despite Ndume’s argument that the items marked P7, P8, P8a and P8b were inadmissible, the trial judge admitted them in evidence, a development that prompted Ndume’s two appeals.

    In his appeal, Ndume asked the court to invalidate the admitted evidence on the grounds that the judge erred in law when he admitted non-admissible materials.

    The senator argued that the evidence in question was admitted in violation of provisions of the Evidence Act.