The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Supreme Court

  • JUST IN: Supreme Court reserves judgment in Ighodalo’s challenge of Okpebholo’s election in Edo

    JUST IN: Supreme Court reserves judgment in Ighodalo’s challenge of Okpebholo’s election in Edo

    The Supreme Court has reserved judgment till a later date in the appeal filed in relation to the dispute over the last governorship election held in Edo State.

    After taking arguments from lawyers to parties on Wednesday, a five-member panel of the apex court, presided over by Justice Mohammed Garba, said the date for judgment would be communicated to them.

    The appeal was filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the election held on September 21, 2024, Asue Ighodalo (SAN).

    Respondents in the appeal are the  Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Okpebholo and his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC). 

    Read Also: Okpebholo not waiting for Supreme Court to appoint full cabinet, says legal adviser

    While arguing the appeal, appellants’ lawyer, Ken Mozia (SAN) prayed the court to allow the appeal, set aside the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal and return Ighodalo as the winner of the election with the majority of lawful votes cast.

    Lawyers to the respondents prayed the court otherwise and sought a dismissal of the appeal.

    Details shortly…

  • Osun LG crisis: Only Supreme court can invalidate A’court verdict on reinstated excos—APC

    Osun LG crisis: Only Supreme court can invalidate A’court verdict on reinstated excos—APC

    The All Progressives Congress(APC) Osun State on Monday said only the Supreme Court can invalidate February 10, 2025 Appeal Court verdict that reinstated its members to take control of councils in the state. 

    The opposition party noted the fresh dismissal of another suit on Local Government at the Appeal Court in June 2025, never invalidated the earlier verdict by the same court. 

    A statement by the party through its State Legal Officer, Chief Adegoke Ogunsola warned the Osun State Govenor, Ademola Adeleke and Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) against inciting the public and court against the reinstated excos. 

    He said: “Since the duo lost the control of the local government administration in Osun State following the judgment of the Court of Appeal of 10th February, 2025, they have resorted to all manner of desperate antics to cause confusion in the interpretation of the Court of Appeal ruling of 13th January and the judgment of 10th February, 2025.

    “The latest acts of mischief unleashed by the Governor and his party men were caused by the latest decision of the Court of Appeal of 13th June, 2025 refusing to relist the appeal of the Allied People’s Movement (APM) and the All Progressives Congress (APC). 

    Read Also: Cardtonic Launches Upskill 3.0 to Give Out Free MacBooks to 20 Young Nigerians 

    “The major reason for the refusal to relist the appeal is that the same Court of Appeal had decided the same issues raised by the Appeal in Appeal No. CA/AK/270/2022 in its judgment of 10th February, 2025 which reinstated the Chairmen and Councilors elected under the platform of APC during the October 15th 2022 local government elections.”

    He added: “We urge security agencies and Nigerians to ignore attempt of desperation and harassment by the government of Mr. Ademola Adeleke and its PDP handlers to confuse the polity and seize by the force of arms the local government administration in the State of Osun.”

    Reacting to APC, Adeleke in a statement through his spokesperson, Olawale Rasheed said he is committed to peaceful resolution on the LG crisis through legal means. 

    He reaffirmed that validly elected excos are that of PDP chairmen and councillors following the dismissal of their appeal in June 2025.

  • Supreme Court clears air on Justice’s trip to Edo

    Supreme Court clears air on Justice’s trip to Edo

    The Supreme Court has dismissed as false, an allegation that one of its Justices travelled to Benin, Edo State, on account of a political case pending before the court.

    In a statement that was signed by its Director of Information and Public Relations, Dr. Festus Akande, the apex court said its attention was drawn to the allegation that is trending on social media and online news platforms.

    The court clarified that contrary to the allegation, the said jurist, with the permission of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, visited Edo State for a burial ceremony.

    “For the avoidance of doubt, the Honourable Justice in question travelled to Benin City on Thursday, 12th June, 2025 to attend the funeral rites of the late mother of Mr. Hannibal Uwaifo, a senior member of the Bar and immediate past President of the African Bar Association.

    “Prior to the journey, the said Justice formally sought and obtained permission from the Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria to embark on the trip.

    “This private visit was strictly for the purposes of condolence and bereavement as is customary and humane.

    “The Honourable Justice neither attended any political meeting nor solicited for inclusion on any panel as falsely alleged.

    Read Also: FG, NASS not to blame for non–implementation of Supreme Court Judgment on LG autonomy — Karimi

    “In fact, apart from the funeral service held at St. Matthew’s Catholic Church and a brief stop at the service of songs, the Honourable Justice retired to his hotel room without attending any further gatherings or receptions.

    “The image being circulated purportedly as evidence merely shows the Justice returning alone to his hotel, hardly a basis for the sensational claims being peddled.

    “The Supreme Court wishes to state unequivocally that this sort of baseless speculation and malicious conjecture, especially when publicly propagated by persons who ought to know better is not only unhelpful but also deeply harmful to the integrity of the Judiciary.

    “We strongly urge members of the public, especially commentators on judicial matters to exercise responsibility and discretion.

    “Where there is any doubt or lack of clarity, the appropriate step is to seek verification from the Supreme Court through its official communication channels rather than resorting to the spread of falsehoods aimed at maligning the image of the Justices or bringing the judiciary into disrepute.

    “The judiciary remains committed to upholding the rule of law and will not be distracted by deliberate attempts to undermine its credibility,” the statement further read.

  • Senator seeks increase in number of Supreme Court justices from 21 to 30

    Senator seeks increase in number of Supreme Court justices from 21 to 30

    The Nigerian Senate is considering a legislative proposal that would increase the number of Supreme Court Justices from the current 21 to 30 in a bid to tackle the mounting backlog of cases and improve the efficiency of the apex court.

    Senator Osita Izunaso (APC – Imo West), who is sponsoring the bill, disclosed this while answering questions from reporters in Abuja on Friday to mark his two years in the 10th National Assembly.

     He argued that the current number of justices is inadequate, despite the recent appointment of 11 justices in 2023 that finally filled the constitutional quota for the first time in Nigeria’s history.

    “Even with the full complement of 21 justices, the Supreme Court is overwhelmed. The volume of cases reaching the court daily is alarming. Some litigants are being given hearing dates as far ahead as 2027 and 2028,” Izunaso stated.

     According to him, the proposed legislation would enable the apex court to form more panels to expedite the adjudication process.

     “Supreme Court justices typically sit in panels of five, or seven for constitutional matters. If we have 30 justices, it would allow the formation of at least five panels simultaneously. That way, more cases can be handled at a faster pace,” he said.

    He also canvassed a major reform in the type of cases the Supreme Court entertains, calling for an end to what he described as the “judicial congestion caused by trivial matters.”

    He questioned the rationale behind allowing cases such as land disputes, tenancy disagreements, and divorce cases to reach the highest court in the land.

     “Why should a land matter in my village end up in the Supreme Court? Many of these issues should start from the Customary Court and end at the High Court,” he said.

    Read Also: FG, NASS not to blame for non–implementation of Supreme Court Judgment on LG autonomy — Karimi

     The people at those levels understand the context better. The apex court should be reserved for cases of national or constitutional importance, things like terrorism, homicide, and grand corruption.”

     Izunaso cited examples of ongoing absurdities in the judicial system.

     “Do you know that even tenancy disputes, like ‘pay me my rent’ or ‘my landlord kicked me out’, go all the way to the Supreme Court? This is clogging the system and delaying justice for more critical matters.”

     The lawmaker recalled a personal legal experience where a case involving deceased parties was only scheduled for hearing three years after resolution had been reached among their descendants.

     “The case was fixed for 2026, even though the matter had already been settled. That’s an indictment of our system,” he lamented.

     He said while some legal reform advocates have suggested the establishment of regional Supreme Courts, he is in support of an increase in the number of justices of the apex court. 

  • Buhari hails Supreme Court victory of Emir of Gwandu

    Buhari hails Supreme Court victory of Emir of Gwandu

    Former President Muhammadu Buhari has congratulated the Emir of Gwandu, Major-General Muhammadu Iliyasu Bashar, following his victory at the Supreme Court in a legal battle that spanned two decades.

    The congratulatory message was conveyed in a telephone call from London, where the former president is currently residing. 

    A statement on Thursday by his spokesman, Mallam Garba Shehu, said Buhari, who described the outcome as a “stunning victory,” praised the Emir for his perseverance throughout the prolonged legal challenge mounted by deposed Emir, Major Haruna Jokolo (Rtd).

    “You have always worked for the betterment of your people and the nation, even under those circumstances. I hope you will continue to promote peace, happiness, and prosperity of the people in Gwandu Emirate and beyond,” said Buhari.

    The Supreme Court ruling, which marks the end of a 20-year dispute over the Gwandu throne, has been widely regarded as a decisive resolution to one of Nigeria’s most prolonged traditional leadership cases.

    In the phone call, Buhari also expressed his gratitude to God for the outcome. “I thank Allah for this victory and pray for your long life and good health,” he told Emir Muhammadu Iliyasu.

    Read Also: Buhari, Katsina Governor Radda mourn

    The legal dispute began following the deposition of Major Haruna Jokolo by the Kebbi State government in 2005 and the subsequent appointment of Major-General Bashar as Emir. 

    Jokolo challenged the legitimacy of the new appointment, leading to a protracted litigation process that only concluded this year.

    Major-General Muhammadu Iliyasu Bashar, a retired senior military officer and respected traditional leader, has continued to serve as Emir throughout the legal proceedings. 

    The Gwandu Emirate, one of the oldest and most historically significant traditional institutions in northern Nigeria, holds a prominent place in the cultural and religious life of the region. 

  • JUST IN: Supreme Court strikes 36 states’ suit against FG over recovered loot

    JUST IN: Supreme Court strikes 36 states’ suit against FG over recovered loot

    The Supreme Court has struck out a suit by the 36 states’ governments and the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) challenging the federal government’s application of recovered looted funds.

    In a judgment on Friday, a seven-member panel of the Supreme Court was unanimous in holding that the suit was wrongly instituted before the apex court.

    In the lead judgment, prepared by Justice Chidiebere Uwa, but read by Justice Mohammed Idris, the apex court held that the plaintiffs wrongly invoked its jurisdiction.

    It held that the subject matter of the suit, marked: SC/CV/395/2021, was within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

    The plaintiffs had claimed that “between 2015 and 2021 when the suit was filed, the FG has secured both international and municipal forfeiture, recovery and repatriation of “stolen assets” in the sum of NI,836,906,543,658.73, about 167 properties, 450 cars, 300 trucks and cargoes, and 20,000,000 barrels of crude oil worth over N450million,” which it allegedly failed to remit as required by the Constitution.

    They alleged that instead of paying the cash into the Federation Account, the FG illegally diverted it into the Consolidated Revenue Accounts (CRA) and other accounts not recognised by the Nigerian Constitution.

    The states argued that the CRA is the account into which FG’s share from the Federation Account, other federal earnings and funds belonging to specific state governments are paid.

    They added that other federal earnings payable to the CRAs include receipts from federal government licenses and land revenue, administrative fees, earnings and sales, rent of government property, interests from federal government investments, repayments from state governments, Personal Income Tax of Armed Forces and others.

    The plaintiffs stated that by establishing the Asset Recovery Account and Interim Forfeiture Recovery Account, into which revenue from recovered assets was to be paid, the Asset Recovery Regulation contradicts the provisions of the Constitution.

    They noted that since 2015, “numerous recoveries of illegally acquired assets have been secured through anti-corruption and law enforcement agencies,” including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Nigerian Police Force and the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation.

    Read Also: No governance in Rivers when I declared emergency, President tells Supreme Court

    The plaintiffs, citing sections 162(1), 162 (10) and 80 of the Constitution and section 2 of the Finance (Control and Management) Act, 1958, argued that recovered funds qualify as revenue payable to the Federation Account instead of the Consolidated Revenue Account of the Federal Government.

    They stated that it is “unconstitutional to remit or divert revenue payable into the Federation Account to the Consolidated Revenue Account of the Federal Government or any other account whatsoever, or to apply the said revenue to any other purpose,” the plaintiffs argued.

    The plaintiffs prayed the court to, among others, declare, “that by the provisions of Section 162(1) and Section 162(10) of the Constitution of all income, returns, proceeds or receipts howsoever described derived from confiscated, forfeited and/or recovered assets constitute revenue of the federal republic of Nigeria, must be remitted to the Federation Account for the collective benefit of the federal, state and local governments.

    They urged the court to issue a d order compelling the remittance of N1.8 trillion (cash) and N450 billion (non-cash) in recovered loot since 2015 into the federation account.

    The plaintiffs also prayed the court to compel the defendants to give a detailed account of the recovered assets that are not remitted into the Federation Account by the President, as well as all the relevant officials and agencies of government.

    They also want the apex court to compel the FG, through the Revenue Mobilisation and Fiscal Commission (RMFAC), to design the modalities for distributing recovered assets among the federating units.

  • No governance in Rivers when I declared emergency, President tells Supreme Court

    No governance in Rivers when I declared emergency, President tells Supreme Court

    Supreme Court heard yesterday that there was no governance in Rivers State when President Bola Ahmed Tinubu slammed emergency rule on the state.

    He said the Supreme Court had earlier confirmed it in one of its judgments, adding that the proclamation got the backing of the National Assembly.

    The President said the Executive and the State House of Assembly were mired in conflict with many suits to wit.

    Tinubu made the submissions in a joint affidavit filed on May 20 at the Supreme Court by the Senior Special Assistant to the President of the State House, and the Federal Ministry of Justice, Mr. Taiye Hussain Oloyede.

    The affidavit was for the President, the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), Rivers State Administrator, Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas and the suspended Governor Similayi Fubara.

    The affidavit was in response to another application before the apex court seeking to nullify the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State.

    The latest suit was filed by Yirabari Israel Nulong, Nengim Ikpoemugh Royal and Gracious Eyoh-Sifumbukho.

    The presidential aide, who admitted that he was conversant with the case, said the President acted to prevent anarchy in the state.

    He said Oloyede said the fact, leading to the proclamation of the state of emergency were captured in the address of the President to the nation.

    He said: “I am also aware that, following the said proclamation, the President assumed responsibility for the administration of Rivers State and formally appointed the 3rd Defendant as Sole Administrator to oversee the affairs of the state during the emergency period, and the 3rd Defendant assumed responsibility for day to-day administration and oversight in Rivers State following the proclamation.

    Read Also: Alleged $1.04m fraud: Supreme Court orders Fred Ajudua’s remand in prison pending trial

    “The depositions in paragraphs 3(b),(c), (d), (f} and (g) of the JE Affidavit are true. The deposition in paragraph 3(e) is true, but only to the extent that after the inauguration of the members of the executive and legislative organs of the Rivers State Government (‘the RSG’), an intractable conflict ensued between both organs.

    “The deposition in paragraphs 3(h) and 3(i) of the JE Affidavit are untrue and misleading. As at 18 March 2025, when the 1st Defendant issued the Proclamation, the executive and legislative organs of the RSG were still mired in conflict and there was no indication that the impasse was about to be resolved.

    “Indeed, so intractable was the conflict that it paralysed the organs of government in the state and jeopardised public safety and order.

    “In the proclamation itself, the 1st Defendant stated that there is a clear and present danger of an imminent breakdown of public order and public safety in Rivers State and that the crisis, if left unchecked, could degenerate, leading to massive loss of lives and property in the State.”

    Oloyede said the two chambers of the National Assembly approved the declaration of the state of emergency.

    He said although the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) opposed the proclamation, many scholars and jurists said the President’s decision was in line with 1999 Constitution and current case law.

  • All-inclusive

    All-inclusive

    Senate’s move to include local govts’ representatives in FAAC meeting is welcome

    The implementation of the judgment of the Supreme Court which granted financial autonomy to the local governments has continued to suffer hiccups, and the senate appears to be taking steps to ameliorate the challenges. Last week, the senate passed a resolution, following a motion by the Deputy President of the Senate, Sen. Barau Jibrin, titled: “Urgent Need to alter the Composition of Federation Account Allocations Committee (FAAC) by including representatives of Local Governments and Area Councils.” The resolution is to give further impetus to the judgment of the apex court.

    Nigerians hailed the landmark judgment as a veritable way to ignite more development at the grassroots. The apex court berated the state governments for abusing the constitutional provision for a joint account with the local government, into which the federal allocations meant for the local councils are paid. In the motion, “The Senate notes that LGCs established by Section 7(1) CFRN 1999, as a 3rd tier of the Federation, are entitled as such and by Section 162(3) CFRN 1999 to share directly in Federation Account Allocations as benefitting entities.”

    It however noted that section 5 of the Allocation of Revenue (Federation Account, etc) Act 1981 which prescribes the membership of the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) to be only representatives of the Federal Government and state governments, to the exclusion of the 3rd tier of government, i.e. local government councils (LGCs); is not in consonance with the judgment of the Supreme Court.  We agree with the senate’s effort to ensure that local governments sit at FAAC to get their allocation directly from the federation account.

    The senate had noted “that the Supreme Court has construed Sections 162(5) and (6) CFRN 1999, to the effect that the states are agents of the federation to collect local government allocations from the Federation Account and pay to LGCs and did not give the states any right or interest in the said allocations to the LGCs, from the Federation Account.” Unfortunately, that trusteeship was abused by the states, necessitating the judgment of the apex court, to release the local governments from the chokehold of the states.

    Read Also: Why Nigeria must promote local languages, culture, by Soyinka

    The constitution further provides that the states should pay the LGCs money into that account for the use of the local governments. Of course, the states were authorised to make laws for the democratic administration of the local governments, and spheres of economic development were provided for the local councils, knowing that they remain the closest level of development for the people. Sadly, in practice, the state governments across party lines turned the local councils to mere outpost for imperial whims and caprices.

    The senate directed its clerk to communicate to the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Mr Wale Edun, who doubles as Chairman of FAAC, the resolution, for necessary action, and sought the concurrence of the House of Representatives.

    As we said earlier, we support every constitutional effort to give bite to the judgment of the apex court. Until the judgment, most governors ran the local governments through incompetent surrogates.

    Every effort to bring democracy and financial viability to the local governments should be supported by all and sundry. Those who claim that federalism can only be two-tier miss the mark. Many countries, including Brazil, Germany, Switzerland, South-Africa, Argentina, Spain and the United Arab Emirates have three-tier federation, and it is working for them.

    What we need to guard against is the mockery of democracy at the grassroots. Since the judgment, weeks have turned to months and the envisaged impact of the financial autonomy on the rural economy is yet to blossom.

  • MRA lauds Supreme Court’s landmark FOI judgment

    MRA lauds Supreme Court’s landmark FOI judgment

    An organisation, Media Rights Agenda (MRA), has commended the judgment by the Supreme Court which confirmed the applicability of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, 2011 to all tiers of government.

    The organisation described it as “a democratic milestone in Nigeria which affirms the principle that governments at all levels are accountable to the public.”

    In a statement, MRA’s Deputy Executive Director, Mr. Ayode Longe, noted that the Supreme Court’s decision has strengthened the legal foundation for open government and provided additional impetus for the media, civil society organisations and citizens across the country to fight corruption and work to eradicate the scourge of secrecy in all public institutions.

    Longe said: “MRA is obviously pleased by the judgment of the Supreme Court confirming what has always been our position on this issue, that the FOI Act is binding on all public institutions at federal, state, and local government levels.

    “It is a historic decision that has finally settled this issue and we see it as a resounding victory for transparency, accountability, and the right of every Nigerian to access information held by public institutions, regardless of their state of residence or the level of government involved.”

    He noted that “over the last 14 years, some state governments and institutions have claimed that the FOI Act only applies to federal public institutions because they had not “domesticated” it in their respective states.”

    READ ALSO: Atiku’s metamorphosis

    “This was obviously a ploy by such state governments to avoid being transparent or accountable as nothing stopped them from passing their own Freedom of Information laws if they genuinely believed that the law passed by the National Assembly did not cover their institutions and agencies.

    “The Supreme Court’s judgment brings an end to that long-standing uncertainty, which we believe to have been contrived by state governments that did not want to be accountable.”

    Saying that the judgment sends a clear message to all government, that no public institution in Nigeria is above the duty to be transparent, Longe commended the courage, foresight and steadfastness of the litigants and their legal representatives who pursued the matter to the highest court of the land.

    He also applauded the Supreme Court for upholding the principle that the public has a right to know how they are governed, including how public resources are managed.

    Longe said: “Media Rights Agenda calls on all public institutions, especially at the state and local government levels, to immediately begin implementation and ensure full compliance with the FOI Act, including by responding to requests for information, proactively publishing all information subject to proactive disclosure, designating FOI Desk Officers as required by Act, and instituting efficient and effective procedures for members of the public applying for information.”

    He urged civil society organisations, the media, and citizens across the country to make full use of the law to demand accountability from public institutions at all levels and participate meaningfully in governance.

  • Supreme Court ruling a monumental victory for democracy, says LP

    Supreme Court ruling a monumental victory for democracy, says LP

    The Labour Party’s National Caretaker Committee (LP NCC) has described the Supreme Court ruling that removed Julius Abure as the National Chairman of the party as a monumental victory for democracy.

    Reacting to the judgment, the Secretary of the NCC, Senator Darlington Nwokocha, who was in court, in a statement in Abuja, hailed the verdict as a turning point for the LP and a reinforcement of the nation’s democracy.

    He said it was a resounding affirmation of the rule of law and the independence of Nigeria’s judiciary.

    The party celebrated the ruling as a step toward unity and reform.

    “This judgment is a beacon of hope, not just for the Labour Party, but for the entire country,” Nwokocha stated. “It reaffirms that the judiciary remains the last hope of the common man and that democracy will always prevail over impunity and illegality.”

    The Labour Party emphasised that the ruling marks the end of the party’s prolonged leadership crisis, allowing it to focus on its broader political agenda.

    According to the LP NCC, the judgment underscores the resilience of Nigeria’s democratic institutions and provides an opportunity to reposition the party as a formidable force in the nation’s political landscape.

    “This is more than a party matter; it is about strengthening Nigeria’s democracy. It sends a clear message that the rule of law must be respected, and no individual is above the constitution,” the statement continued. “We are now focused on rebuilding, uniting our members, and advancing a governance agenda that truly represents the will of the Nigerian people.”

    Read Also: Supreme Court sacks Abure as LP National Chairman

    The LP NCC also extended a hand of fellowship to all Nigerians, regardless of political affiliation, urging collective efforts to strengthen democratic institutions and uphold justice. “We invite all well-meaning Nigerians to join hands with us in restoring the true values of democracy, justice, and equity,” the party stated.

    With the leadership tussle now settled, the Labour Party has pledged to intensify its commitment to national development and to champion the aspirations of millions of Nigerians who see the party as a vehicle for change. It also expressed appreciation to its supporters for their steadfast loyalty throughout the crisis.

    “The Labour Party remains the people’s party, and together, we will continue the struggle for a just, equitable, and prosperous Nigeria,” Nwokocha said.