Tag: Ogun

• By ‘Dare Odufowokan 

The year 2023 ended on a blissful note for Ogun State. For the first time in a long time, the Gateway state has taken its pride of place among the comity of states in Nigeria. To put it mildly, Ogun State under the governance of Prince Dapo Abiodun is proving its mettle and attaining its potentials at a pace unimagined a couple of years ago.

The governor is not only carrying out infrastructural developments across the state but also reaching out to organisations and individuals with the capacity and interest to take advantage of these by investing in Ogun State. Through his famed ISEYA agenda, Abiodun has not only laid the foundation for the new Ogun State, he has also started building on it and taking the state towards its dream future.

And some of the results of his relentless hard work are already here with us. According to a recent report, apart from Nigeria’s economic capital, Lagos, Ogun State is the country’s most economically viable state as at today. The report by Economic Confidential, while affirming Ogun State’s status as the topmost investment destination in Nigeria today after Lagos, confirmed that Ogun State under Abiodun has outraced other states of the federation, including Rivers, along with Kaduna, Kwara, Oyo and Edo states, which joined Lagos and Ogun on the list of economically viable states as at the year under review.

According to figures sourced from the Nigerian Bureau of Statistics (NBS) and the Federal Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), Lagos received the sum of N370, 921, 413, 425.62 from the Federation Account and generated N651,145, 633.085 as internally generated revenue while Ogun received N113,404, 027,439.22 from the Federation Account and generated N120,548, 157,140.78 internally. On the other hand, Rivers State received N363.4bn from the Federation Account and generated N172bn; Kaduna received N155bn and generated N58bn; Kwara received N99bn and generated N35.7bn; Oyo received N181bn and generated N62bn, while Edo received N147bn in federal allocation and generated N47.4bn. These results which were made known during the presentation of the Annual States Viability Index Report in Abuja recently, showed that the total Internally Generated Revenue of N1.5trn from the seven viable states is almost twice the total IGR of the other 29 states which, when added together, is about N650bn.

The report also established that Bayelsa, Akwa Ibom, Katsina and three other states, failed to generate up to 10% of the total allocations received from the Federal Government for and were declared insolvent states. The others are Kebbi, Taraba and Yobe states. Unlike the Abiodun-driven Ogun State, the poorly performing states were unable to attract investments that would have improved their IGR fortunes. This and many other realizations are enough reasons for Ogun State to celebrate the giant economic strides of the current administration amidst a global economic struggle.

When he took over the mantle of leadership in 2019, Abiodun made it clear that Ogun state was not where it ought to be. He promised to saddle himself with the task of taking the state to where it should be. And he set about doing that immediately.

“Our vision summarises the kernel of our Agenda: To give Ogun State focused and qualitative governance and to create the enabling environment for a public private sector partnership, which is fundamental to the creation of an enduring economic development and individual prosperity of the people of Ogun,” the governor had declared on May 29, 2019.

Today, the state is reaping from the foresight of the governor. While presenting the 2024 budget to the state Hose of Assembly, Abiodun mentioned some of the many efforts of his administration to prepare Ogun for the future.

Said he: “Our administration has brought development to every ward in the 20 Local Government Areas of the State. We have constructed, reconstructed, and rehabilitated over 500 kilometres of roads. The 45km Sagamu Interchange-Siun-Abeokuta Expressway, now renamed the Muhammadu Buhari Expressway; the 14km Ijebu Ode-Epe Mojoda expressway; the 19KM Atan-Lusada-Agbara tolled expressway which is near completion, and other road projects spread across all four zones of the State, have been newly constructed, rehabilitated, or reconstructed. 

“Our Community Electrification Project has improved power supply in the 20 Local Government Areas, while the expansion of the Ogun State Electricity Distribution System will cover more areas especially the corridor from the Sagamu Interchange to Abeokuta (As a phase 1 Project). In our quest to make Ogun State a modern city with diverse transportation options, we have established the Ministry of Transportation and developed the Ogun State Urban Transport Policy and Strategic Multi-modal Transport Master Plan comprising air, sea, rail, and road. We have also recently launched our CNG-fuelled mass transit bus system in partnership with the private sector to make bearable to cost of transportation for our citizens. 

“An emblematic feature of our Multi-modal Transport Master Plan is the Gateway Agro-Cargo International Airport which is one of the crowning achievements of our clear vision. This world-class airport, covering 800 hectares of land, is designed to handle cargo, including agriculture related cargo, and passenger services,” the governor had revealed.

Beyond what Abiodun revealed, many analysts, home and abroad, have attested to the wisdom in the construction of the airport. With a 4-kilometre runway, one of the biggest aprons in Africa and several other state-of-the-art facilities including the control tower, terminal and cargo builds, and a parking lot, the project is current adjudged as one of the fastest-built airports in Africa. It is also important to add here that the accompanying aerotropolis (airport city) spans 5000 hectares and has already attracted federal agencies and various businesses, including international logistics companies, a maintenance and repair operations facility, and agro-processing industries.

Read Also: Sanwo-Olu arrests soldier, okada rider for driving against traffic

Expectedly, numerous proposals on concessions are daily being received by the state government concerning the airport. The government recently announced that it will be signing a major concession deal with a private sector player that will pay the state a percentage of their revenue during the term of the agreement in addition to a concession fee. Talks are also on with a private aviation company to use the airport as a base for its commercial operations expected to start soon after regulatory approvals.

Arise IIP, a private company, has already signed an MOU with the government towards the development of an agro-processing zone covering about 2000 hectares as a Special Agro Processing Zone (SAPZ). According to projections, upon completion, the airport and its allied businesses in the aerotropolis are expected to generate over 25,000 direct and indirect jobs.

Furthermore, the Abiodun-led administration also invested in automating business processes to improve the Ease of Doing Business Index in the state. Many processes including, initiating requests for permits, tax administration, and payments which were time-consuming can now be initiated online and completed online with luxurious ease.

Also, the issue of security is one that the Abiodun administration takes very seriously as it continues to strengthen the already established Security Trust Fund and regularly procuring relevant security gadgets, including drones, for security agencies in the state while also augmenting the allowances and living conditions of security personnel to enhance security and safety in the state.  With so much done to improve the socio-economic fortunes of the state, not many people were surprised when Analysts Data Services and Resources also ranked Ogun State sixth out of 36 states and Abuja in its just released Socio-economic Scorecards of Nigerian states.

No doubt, these many laudable efforts being recognized and applauded by researchers have made Ogun State an investment-friendly destination and contributed to job creation and revenue generation as part of a trickle-down effect on the economy.

•Odufowokan contributed this piece through katrotary76@yahoo.com

• By Funmi Branco

On Friday November 24, a special panel of the Court of Appeal delivered judgment in the appeal filed by Ladi Adebutu and PDP against the re-election of Governor Dapo Abiodun as Governor of Ogun State in March. The court dismissed PDP’s appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Election Petition Tribunal which upheld Governor Abiodun’s declaration as governor. Three justices heard and judged the appeal – Justice Ikyegh, Justice Mustapha, and Justice Inyang. Ikyegh and Mustapha dismissed the appeal, while Justice Inyang upheld the appeal.

PDP and Adebutu have since gone to town saying that they won the appeal, based on Justice Inyang’s decision. By simple logic, Justice Inyang’s judgment cannot be the judgment to follow – she was only one of three justices. The other two justices dismissed the appeal – their collective decision outweighs hers. This is a simple fact that common sense dictates, and is the practice of the courts. What Justice Inyang wrote was a dissenting judgment, which Oxford online dictionary defines as “one delivered by a Justice who disagrees with the majority as to the final order resolving the litigants’ dispute.”

Nigeria has many cases in which courts have declared that no matter how forensic or eloquent a dissenting opinion is, it is not the decision of the court on the case. The decision remains the judgment of the majority. If PDP is so sure that it won the appeal stage of the gubernatorial petition against Governor Abiodun, then PDP should not appeal against the decision. PDP and Adebutu should accept the judgment and wait for the supplementary election that Justice Inyang mentioned.

Ordinarily, that should end the matter, but there is more. The dissenting opinion of Justice Inyang is shocking because it completely departs from what Nigerian lawyers have known to be the law and what the courts have consistently expressed as correct – even up until this year in other petition appeals, like the Presidential Election Petition case.

For instance, an elementary legal principle says that witnesses must not give hearsay evidence. This means that a witness can only testify about things they did or saw. They cannot testify about information that was told to them. PDP’s case in the petition was that the number of voters with PVCs in the polling units where elections were cancelled was more than the number of votes in the margin of lead between Governor Abiodun and Adebutu. However, the individual witnesses who testified about the number of PVCs collected in their polling units all said that they did not have personal knowledge of the number of PVCs collected. Each person testified that the figures in their witness statements were told to them by third parties on Election Day. So, what witness evidence did Justice Inyang use to come the conclusion that the margin of lead was slimmer than the number of disenfranchised voters?

And even on disenfranchised voters, Nigerian law is clear – the voters who were disenfranchised must come to court themselves, show that they had PVCs to vote and that they attended the polling units to vote on Election Day. While PDP alleged that over 40,000 voters were disenfranchised in Ogun State, they brought only about 40 acclaimed voters to court – a mere 0.10% of the number of witnesses needed. So, again, what did Justice Inyang use?

Read Also: Lagos, Ogun, five others named most viable states

Moreover, it is on record that practically all the documents tendered by PDP were dumped on the tribunal. What this means is that the documents were just brought to court but were not read to the court to show what part is relevant to the case. An example may help here – in a case, one side may tender in evidence a dictionary that has 1,600 pages. The court cannot and should not read the entire 1,600 pages. Even the opposing party need not. The party tendering the dictionary has the duty to identify the specific page and definition in that dictionary that he wants to use. Similarly, if a petitioner tenders the voters register, that register is useless until specific witnesses come and start mentioning the precise entries in the register that are relevant to the petitioner’s case.

In its haste to file an unjustified petition, PDP and Adebutu filed a petition without referring to the documents. The register of voters was tendered in a Ghana-Must-Go bag and after the day of tendering that register (before trial began), those documents never featured in the case again. No witness spoke to the documents. No witnesses read them. No witnesses tied them to PDP’s case. PDP did not even eventually use it – because it was not relevant to the Margin of Lead point that was the heart of PDP’s case. So, whose evidence did Justice Inyang rely on to ascertain the number of voters with PVCs who could not vote on Election Day?

On the number of voters who could not vote on Election Day, only two witnesses set out the total number. These were the star witness (whose evidence was all hearsay) and one forensic analyst whose evidence was thrown out because it came by subpoena. Justice Inyang did not upturn the tribunal’s conclusion that the star witness merely repeated hearsay evidence. Justice Inyang also did not upturn the rejection of the subpoenaed witness’ evidence. This means that there was no single witness who stated the total number of voters with PVCs who could not vote on Election Day. So, what figures did Justice Inyang use?

Justice Inyang’s justification for her conclusion was that INEC did not call witnesses and so INEC was firstly deemed to have admitted the PDP’s evidence and secondly subject to the legal presumption of withholding evidence. INEC never admitted PDP’s case. How could INEC have done so? INEC filed a robust defence to the petition, denying practically every allegation that PDP and Adebutu made. Not done, INEC cross examined these witnesses and in fact, some of the strongest bases for the tribunal disbelieving these witnesses were the answers elicited under cross-examination by INEC. Under Nigerian law, if you cross-examine your opponent, you have disputed the case. You can no longer be said to have admitted the case or abandoned your case. Where did Justice Inyang then get the backing for her conclusion that INEC admitted PDP’s case?

Further, it is completely alien to Nigerian law to say that if a party to a court case does not call witnesses, then the presumption of withholding evidence applies. This presumption states that if there is evidence to produce and a party does not produce that evidence, the law will assume that the evidence was not produced because it was unfavourable to the party that withheld it. However, that principle does not quite apply to calling witnesses. The correct position is that a party is not under obligation to present witnesses at all, to present a specific witness, or to present a particular number of witnesses. This is because a party is free to conduct its case as it likes, and because a defending party is only required to call witnesses to answer parts of the opponent’s case that have been proven or credibly substantiated.

If your opponent has not been credible, the burden to refute his case does not even shift to you. Even PDP did not argue that the presumption of withholding evidence applied to the petition.

In any event, an elementary legal principle states that even an admitted claim cannot set up declaratory reliefs. Adebutu approached the court to be declared the Governor of Ogun State. A declaratory judgment is a very potent legal tool because it settles the entitlement of parties against the world. As such, under Nigerian law, even if your opponent admits your claim, you must still prove your case, if you want declaratory reliefs. And this makes sense – imagine that Peter Obi sues Atiku before the court and asks for a declaration that Peter Obi was the winner of the February 2023 Presidential Election. Imagine further that Atiku responds to that case by admitting the claim and confirming that indeed, Peter Obi won the election. Should the court then declare Peter Obi as president because his opponent admitted his claim? That would be ridiculous. Because the relief is a declaratory relief, Obi would be compelled to prove it – he would not be allowed to rely on Atiku’s admission. 

So, when Justice Inyang expressed her dissenting opinion, she was saying that Adebutu did not need to prove the case. She was saying that Adebutu could obtain a heavy declaratory judgment simply based on admission. She also closed her eyes to the robust defence filed by APC and Abiodun – both of whom did not admit the case. When the founders of the law stated that justice should be blind, they did not require or envisage that judges themselves would be blind to truth and legal principles.

In summary, PDP’s case was so bad that the only Justice who expressed a minority opinion in its favour had to allege things that PDP did not allege, argue points PDP did not argue, investigate documents that PDP did not read to the court by itself, and express legal points that PDP itself never expressed knowing them to be wrong. It is a good thing that the correct outweighed the incorrect in that court.

• Branco contributes this piece through funmibranco@aol.com