The Nation Newspaper

Tag: legal battle

  • Southwest Senior citizens set for legal battle with governors

    RETIREES in the Southwest geopolitical zone under the auspices of the Nigeria Union of Pensioners (NUP) yesterday threatened to institute legal action against the 36 state governors over their failure to pay accumulated arrears of gratuities and pension.

    The pensioners vowed that they would institute the case in the next two months in line with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to determine if it was lawful or not to owe them their entitlements.

    NUP Southwest Zonal Chairman Chief Ayo Kumapayi and its secretary,  Olusegun Abatan, handed down the threat while speaking with reporters at the end of their zonal meeting in Akure, the Ondo State capital.

    Abatan said the legal action became necessary in view of the rising cases of sick and dead pensioners as a result of unpaid entitlements by Ogun, Lagos, Ekiti, Oyo, Osun and Ondo states as well as other parts of the country.

    Kumapayi, who was supported by the Ondo State NUP Chairman, Chief Raphael Adetuwo and other chairmen and secretaries from the six states, blamed failure of the state governors to pay their gratuities and pension regularly on “reckless spending on humongous salaries and allowances of political office holders”.

    He said: “Humongous salaries and allowances of public office holders, especially senators and House Representatives members who take home N13million and N14million monthly need to be reviewed. How can those people will be collecting such huge money in a country where 80 per cent are battling to meet daily meal.”

    The NUP zonal leaders also demanded the review of law setting up the Revenue Mobilisations, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) to empower it to place all the political office holders, including the President, governors, ministers, Federal and state lawmakers on the same salary scale with civil servants from Grade Level18 to Grade Level 25 .

    The step, the pensioners said, would save the country’s economy from collapsing and enable government to have more money to take care of the needs of the less-privileged Nigerians, who are wallowing in abject poverty and deprivation.

    They said: “President Buhari should use his second term in office to do something about such take home by our federal lawmakers. They should be placed on same salary scale with the civil servants to reduce pressure on the nation’s economy.

    “Let the President be on GL 25, Vice President will be on GL 24, governors on GL 23 downward like that. This will save our nation from reckless and killing due to non-payment of salaries and allowances.”

    The Southwest NUP hailed Buhari for huge step taken recently to grant local government financial autonomy, saying the decision would prevent many state governors from spending local governments’ funds “as a pocket money”.

    Also speaking, the NUP National Deputy General Secretary, Chief Joseph Okunade, said the national leadership of the pensioners was in full support of the legal action against the state governors.

  • APC, PDP set for legal battle

    Atiku, PDP seek access to election materials

    We’ll prove our candidate won, says APC

    Secondus, others march on INEC to reverse verdict

    A legal battle is set to begin between the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) over the February 23 presidential election won by President Muhammadu Buhari.

    The PDP and its candidate, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar yesterday approached the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT) for permission to inspect the materials used for the poll.

    They are seeking the tribunal’s order to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to grant them and their agents access to the materials.

    Also yesterday, the leadership of the PDP took its protest over the poll to INEC’s doorstep in Abuja.

    They were led by the party’s National Chairman, Prince Uche Secondus.

    But the APC said its legal team would defend the ruling party’s victory at the tribunal with facts and figures.

    According to it, the PDP has taken the only democratic route to register its grievances by approaching the tribunal.

    The Director of Strategic Communication of the APC Presidential Campaign Council, Festus Keyamo, (SAN, said the ruling party is prepared to prove that the election, won by its candidate President Buhari, was conducted in a free and fair atmosphere, deviod of rigging as being claimed by the opposition.

    In a statement in Abuja yesterday, Keyamo noted that resorting to court was the only democratic way for Atiku to ventilate his perceived grievances about the election, stressing that the council was not in any way prevailing on the former vice president not to seek judicial redress.

    Keyamo denied reports that the council had written to some international organisations and development partners to prevail on Atiku not to challenge the outcome of the election in court, adding that the body that wrote the letter was not known to the council and does not speak for it and the President.

    The statement reads: “Our attention has been drawn to some news item and posts on social media reporting that we wrote a letter to some international bodies to prevail on Alhaji Atiku Abubakar not to proceed to court to challenge the result of the 2019 Presidential Election.

    “Our investigation reveals that a letter to that effect was purportedly written by a certain ‘Buhari Campaign Organisation’. This is the second time we will be informing the public that the said ‘Buhari Campaign Organisation’ does not act at the behest of the APC Presidential Campaign Council, nor does it represent the Muhammadu Buhari Campaign Organisation in any way.

    “As a result, whatever it has released does not represent the position of the APC Presidential Campaign Council or President Muhammadu Buhari.

    “Our official position is that we believe that Alhaji Atiku Abubakar has a constitutional right to seek redress in court and we do not seek in any way to curtail that right. In fact, it is the resort to court that is the only democratic way to ventilate his perceived grievance and any attempt to restrict or discourage the exercise of such right would be an invitation to anarchy.

    “In addition, we are very anxious to meet Alhaji Atiku Abubakar in court in order to show the world in a conclusive manner the free and fair nature of the comprehensive defeat of Atiku at the polls. An election is not termed ‘rigged’ only by the mere claim of it by the loser.

    “That is what Atiku and the PDP want to ram down our throats. Unfortunately for them, international, continental and sub-regional observers (who can be seen as neutral by all standards) ALL declared the election to be free, fair and credible. No ego-massaging narrative can change that.

    “We therefore totally disassociate ourselves from the letter purportedly written by one of, perhaps, many support groups of President Buhari. They may have a right to their opinion, but it does not represent our official position.”

    In their application to the PEPT, Atiku and the PDP prayed that they be allowed to examine election materials

    Their prayers are contained in a motion ex-parte they filed before the tribunal in Abuja, in which they are seeking leave to inspect the voters register, the Smart Card Reader (SCR), ballot papers and other vital documents used in the conduct of the presidential election.

    They also want the tribunal to order INEC to allow their agents to scan and make photocopies of vital documents used for the election to enable them establish what they  alleged were irregularities in the exercise.

    In the motion filed by their lawyer, Chris Uche, (SAN), Atiku and the PDP said that the reliefs being sought against INEC were for the purpose of filing and maintaining an election petition, which they are preparing to file against the outcome of this year’s presidential election.

    The Director, Contact and Mobilisation of the Atiku Abubakar Presidential Campaign Council, Col. Austin Akobundu (rtd), deposed to a 12-paragraph supporting affidavit filed with the motion.

    INEC, President Muhammadu Buhari and his APC have been listed as respondents to the motion.

    No date has been fixed for the hearing of the motion.

    The Nation learnt yesterday that the motion, being one of the preliminary steps towards initiating an election petition, may not necessarily be heard in the open, but in the chambers of the tribunal.

    A member of the Atiku/PDP legal team confirmed to our reporter that the motion was filed to enable the team gather sufficient materials to prepare their petition.

    The member said that such a motion was one of the preliminary steps in filing election petitions.

    He said: “Since the petition was intended to challenge the outcome of the election, it was necessary to inspect vital materials used for the election to enable the intending petitioner source sufficient materials to prepare his/her petition.”

    He was optimistic that his team would file the petition before the end of this week.

  • Buhari’s travel ban on 50 VIPs sparks legal battle

    FROM party offices and the media, the battle to reverse Executive Order 6 under which 50 prominent Nigerians have been banned from travelling has moved to the Court of Appeal.

    Two lawyers yesterday filed an appeal seeking to set aside Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu’s October 11 judgement validating the Order.

    They are asking the Court of Appeal in Abuja to set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court upholding the constitutionality of the Presidential Order..

    But the President’s camp scoffed at the moves against the Order, saying corruption was fighting back.

    The Order empowers the Federal Government to take steps, in liaison with investigative agencies, to temporarily seize property linked with corruption, pending investigation and conclusion of trial to prevent the dissipation of such assets.

    Justice Ojukwu held that it was within the powers of the President, as granted by the Constitution, to issue Executive Orders for the execution of Executive policies, as long as such orders do not offend the doctrine of separation of powers.

    In a notice of appeal, the plaintiffs in the suit, Kenneth Udeze and Ikenga Ugochinyere, faulted the decision.

    They also filed a motion of injunction pending appeal, with which they seek to restrain the President and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) or their agents from giving effect to Executive Order No 6, pending the determination of the appeal.

    In the notice of appeal, they argued that Justice Ojukwu erred in law and thereby caused a miscarriage of justice when she declared  that the Executive Order No. 6 of 2018 did not violate the rights of citizens to own property and that the Judge erred in law also when she unilaterally varied and modified the express terms of Executive Order No. 6 by issuing judicial caution, that the powers of the AGF must be exercised in accordance with the provisions of the constitution, instead of nullifying the Executive Order.

    They argued that the lower court does not have the powers to issue advisory opinion on what the law ought to be as in the present circumstances and added that the Executive Order 6 violates the doctrine of separation of powers and all tenets of the constitutional democracy.

    The appellants noted that the trial Judge shut her eyes against the materials placed before the court and deliberately failed and/or refused to make specific findings of fact on the issue they submitted before the court, in view of the fact that, “none of the persons listed at the First Schedule of the said Presidential Executive Order No. 6 of 2018 has been found guilty as charged, as their respective trials are still ongoing in various courts in Nigeria”.

    Some activists are hailing the Order. They said the implementation of the Order would deal a fatal blow to corruption.

    The Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership (CACOL) and a human rights activist, Dele Igbinedion, made the claims in separate statements.

    CACOL praised President Muhammadu Buhari for signing the Executive Order 6, Igbinedion said those without skeletons in their cupboards should have nothing to worry about.

    CACOL, in a statement by its Executive Chairman, Mr. Debo Adeniran, said tackling corruption required drastic measures.

    “When we view the precarious situation into which corruption has thrown this nation and its people, we will better appreciate why drastic and precarious situation calls for a measure of drastic steps/ actions,” it said.

    The group faulted those criticising the Federal Government for the order, saying that most democratic countries of the world have such provisions in their statute books.

    CACOL said pending when all the laws needed to fight corruption are enacted and institutions strengthened, the President should be encouraged to deploy his powers such as the Executive Order 6.

    “We commend the leadership of Muhammadu Buhari for taking advantage of such provisions and enjoin him to judiciously and expeditiously utilise same in a manner that is completely devoid of witch-hunting or any form of undue flagellations while, constantly, holding our public office holders to account, irrespective of whose ox is gored,” CACOL said.

    Igbinedion said the President’s action was “courageous, commendable and salutary”.

    To him, the President has dealt a fatal blow to corruption, corrupt people, corrupt tendencies and corrupt enrichment from political office.

    “It has been suggested that the Order 06 is unconstitutional, restrictive of human liberty and ultimately illegal. But all that posturing and postulation has been wiped away, broken-hearted, by the recent decision of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    “It is now accepted, subject to any contrary decision of a higher court, that the Presidential Executive Order 06 is valid, constitutional, legal and applaudable. It is also enforceable pronto, and enforce it, the President has ordered. Amen.

    “Some have also claimed that the Order is targeted at political opponents, said the activist, who added that those who embrace this “position fail to explain how their argument stands up in the presence of apolitical persons and even members of the President’s political party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) on the list”.

    “But whatever the argument for or against, the Presidential Executive Order does not and cannot affect ordinary, hardworking Nigerians. So, fear not, my friends. For too long have corrupt people and their corruption held Nigeria and Nigerians by the jugular. It is now uhuru!

    “Only corrupt former and present political office holders need to tremble in fear over Order 06. Anyone who is not corrupt should walk tall, happy and rejoice. Indeed, a Daniel is come to judgment,” Igbinedion said.

    The Buhari Campaign Orgainsation (BCO) also described as absurd the barrage of criticisms trailing the travel ban on 50 prominent citizens facing corruption charges.

    The BCO described the criticisms as “a clear case of corruption fighting back.”

    The group noted that if the President’s directive on the full implementation of the Executive Order 6 would send shivers down the spines of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and other opposition camps to the extent of generating negative reactions from them, then they truly have skeletons in their cupboards.

    In a statement by its Director of Communications and Strategic Planning, Mallam Gidado Ibrahim, the BCO said: “This is a clear case of corruption fighting back. No wonder Nigeria has not been progressing because a good chunk of its people encourage corruption.

    “We cannot continue living with corruption because it denied Nigeria development, respect and promoted insecurity, poverty, and even disunity among its citizens. President Buhari should be given due regards rather than degradation for taking such a decisive action.

    “The origin of this kind of uproar and criticisms is quite known. Nigerians had been in the dark for so long that whenever any leader tries to stop the criminality in high places committed against them, the perpetrators of the act would weave all sort of sentiments to blindfold them the more.

    “The government placed a travel ban on 50 persons who directly or indirectly subjected Nigerians to unemployment and deprived them of their daily source of livelihood and the opposition with their shrill voices are condemning a president who is true to his words on tackling corruption.

    “Even though some who are on the list are not members of the opposition, as long as it is Buhari, he hasn’t done any good. Unfortunately for them, they will have to put up with this for another four years because right now the war on corruption has taken centre stage.”

  • Bodo community wins right to legal battle against Shell

    ABritish judge ruled yesterday that Nigeria’s Bodo community, which has been involved in a protracted legal battle with Shell over the clean-up of two 2008 oil spills, should retain the option of litigation for another year.

    Lawyers for Bodo had accused Shell of trying to kill off the legal case by seeking a court order that would have meant the community had to meet onerous conditions before it could revive its litigation, which is currently on hold.

    A London High Court judge, Mrs Justice Cockerill, ruled that the litigation should remain stayed until July 1, 2019, with no conditions attached should the Bodo community’s representatives seek to re-activate it before then.

    “We are delighted the court has rejected Shell’s attempt to restrict the community’s legal rights,” said Dan Leader, the Bodo community’s lead UK lawyer.

    “The message is clear – Shell must clean up this appalling oil spill and the Bodo community will keep on with its legal case until they are confident that it will do so,” he said.

    The 2008 oil spills devastated the lands and waterways of Bodo, which is just one of numerous communities in the oil-producing Niger Delta that have suffered environmental harm and profound economic and social dysfunction linked to the industry.

    In 2015, Shell accepted liability for the spills, agreeing to pay 55 million pounds ($83 million at the time) to Bodo villagers and to clean up their lands and creeks.

    After years of delays, the clean-up is currently underway, under the auspices of the internationally recognised Bodo Mediation Initiative (BMI).

    Shell’s lawyers had argued at a hearing on Tuesday that the community should only be able to re-activate the legal case should Shell fail to comply with its obligation to pay for the clean-up.

    But Bodo’s lawyers had countered that the community should have unfettered access to the London courts if the clean-up was not completed to a high standard.

    Arguing that the pressure of litigation was a key factor in pushing Shell to implement the clean-up, they had asked the judge to keep the legal case on hold until May 2020.

    A spokeswoman for Shell said she had no immediate comment on the ruling.

     

    Oil spills, sometimes due to vandalism, sometimes to corrosion, are common in the Niger Delta, a vast maze of creeks and mangrove swamps criss-crossed by pipelines and blighted by poverty, pollution, oil-fuelled corruption and violence.

    The spills have had a catastrophic impact on many communities where people have no other water supply than the creeks and rely on farming and fishing for survival.

    At the same time, oil companies have run into problems trying to clean up spills, sometimes because of obstruction and even violence by local gangs trying to extract bigger payouts, or to obtain clean-up contracts.

  • 2015: PDP joins legal battle over Jonathan

    2015: PDP joins legal battle over Jonathan

    Is the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) planning to field President Goodluck Jonathan in 2015?

    This question remained relevant yesterday, with the PDP applying to be joined in a suit challenging the President’s eligibility to contest the election. Dr. Jonathan is yet to speak on his political future.

    A PDP card-carrying member and Port Harcourt lawyer, Henry Amadi, is before a Federal High Court, Abuja, contending that Jonathan is no longer eligible to contest in 2015 because, by so doing, he would be spending more than the maximum of two terms of four years envisaged by the 1999 Constitution.

    The suit is similar to another filed by a chieftain of the PDP, Mr Cyriacus Njoku, on March 20, 2012 before an Abuja High Court.

    Judgment in that suit is pending before Justice Mudashiru Oniyangi.

    The respondents in this suit are Jonathan and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    In the application by its National Legal Adviser, Mr. Kwon Victor, the PDP is urging the court to join it as an interested party because it would be affected by the outcome of the suit.

    It is also asking the court to make a consequential order directing the plaintiff to amend his originating processes to reflect PDP as a defendant and cause same to be served on the party.

    In the affidavit in support of the application, Kwon argued that from the reliefs sought by the plaintiff, PDP’s right to sponsor Jonathan for the office of the President in the 2015 presidential elections is being challenged.

    He averred that ‘’this action cannot be effectually and completely be determined without joining the applicant herein.

    “By the very tenor of the reliefs sought the plaintiff, this suit questions the right of the applicant to sponsor one of its members (Jonathan) for the 2015 presidential elections. The applicant herein seek to protect its interest in the present action by this application.

    “Having been sponsored by the applicant (PDP) for the 2011 election and Jonathan been a member of the PDP who is capable of being sponsored for the 2015 presidential election, the PDP will directly be affected by the outcome of the decision of this court one way or the other.

    Justice Adamu Bello has fixed February 26 to hear the PDP’s application, following the plaintiff’s lawyer C.N.Eke’s intention to oppose the application for joinder.

    In his response to the suit, Jonathan had said he would contest in the election, as allowed in the Constitution.

    According to him, with the political situation of Nigeria, it is better for him to spend nine years in office than to spend less than the eight years stipulated in the 1999 Constitution.

    He spoke through his lawyer, Ade Okeya-Inneh (SAN) in a counter-affidavit.

    Jonathan asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.

    According to him, the plaintiff is an ordinary individual who is not qualified to request the court to stop him from contesting the election.

    Jonathan said Amadi failed to disclose reasonable cause of action and that the plaintiff’s claim is hypothetical and academic.

    Jonathan averred that he took the first oath of office on May 6, 2010 following the death of erstwhile President Umaru Musa Yar’adua.

    Amadi is contending that Jonathan is no longer eligible to contest in 2015 because by so doing, he would be spending more than the maximum period of two terms of four years envisaged by the 1999 constitution.

    The plaintiff wants the court to direct INEC not to accept Jonathan’s nomination as candidate of the PDP for 2015 because by the oath of allegiance and oath of office he would take, if he wins, will violate the two oaths of allegiance and office stipulated by the 1999 constitution.