The Nation Newspaper

Tag: witnesses

  • ‘Africa’s Travel Indaba’ witnesses record attendance

    Delegates from 80 different countries recently stormed Kwazulu Natal Province of South Africa for the 2018 edition of Africa Travel Indaba. The annual event which was once again held in Durban experienced a significant rise in participation from last year’s event with 23 African countries in attendance this year.

    According to the organisers, ‘Indaba 2018’ was positioned as a call to action to focus on the success of the continent as a whole, urging its people to go out and tell Africa’s story to the world. To this end, the event was rebranded from simply ‘Indaba’ to ‘Africa’s Travel Indaba’ highlighting a passion for Africa.

    This was announced by South Africa’s newly reinstated National Minister of Tourism, Derek Hanekom.

    The minister in his message at the official Welcome Networking Function said; “Tourism growth, and sharing the benefits of tourism, contribute to replacing poverty and despair with prosperity and hope. Africa’s Travel Indaba is the ideal springboard for further growth.”

    He further spoke about Travel and Tourism being the fastest growing sector in the world.

    To further strengthen existing partnership and collaboration within the continent, South African Tourism’s West African hub hosted 26 delegates from Nigeria and Ghana at the Africa’s Travel Indaba. Among the West African tourism delegations were President of the Tour Operators Association in Nigeria, Mr Kwesi  Eyison ,The President of the Tour Operators Union in Ghana, Alhaji Rabo Saleh, Federation of Tourism Association of Nigeria ,The President of The Travel Agents of Nigeria , Mr Bankole Bernard, CEOs of travel agencies and a host of others.

    The West African trade and media delegates who arrived South Africa days earlier were treated to an activity-filled exploration of South Africa. The delegates enjoyed a variety of experiences including, quad biking, power boating on the Kysna lagoon, and picnics at Cape St.Francis. They also explored Tsitsikamma Nature reserve and the very brave went bungee jumping.

  • Buhari’s horde of witnesses

    It was interesting reading accounts of emergency witnesses seeking to exculpate President Buhari from the sectional interpretation of his request to the World Bank. The deluge of self-assigned witnesses followed disclosure by World Bank President, Jim Yong Kim that in their first meeting with Buhari, “he specifically said that he would like us to shift our focus to northern regions of Nigeria and we’ve done that”.

    Not unexpectedly, the statement at once, drew stern criticisms from several quarters given the sectional tinge it conveys. And for a country where sectional and primordial cleavages are always in contention, it is not surprising the length some critics have gone to impugn the integrity of the president as a sectional, clannish and biased champion. And when this is juxtaposed against some other past actions of his, the furore generated by the statement can be better understood.

    Kim is not a Nigerian. Neither can he be said to nurse any ulterior motive either in running the president down or in the politics of the country. He was just responding to reporters’ questions. All this add serious weight to the account of his encounter with Buhari and the avalanche of criticisms that have trailed it.

    Apparently sensing danger in the surge of the attacks, two of the governors present at the occasion, Kashim Shettima of Borno State and Adams Oshiomhole, then governor of Edo State hurriedly jumped into the witness box with their own accounts of what they understood the president to have said. The main thesis of their evidence was that the president spoke against the background of the huge crisis in the north-east of Nigeria consequent upon the Boko Haram insurgency that had devastated the region.

    Buhari’s demand they said, was for more focus to the north-east given the peculiar circumstances of that region especially as Buhari had just taken over the mantle of leadership. The two witnesses were in agreement on this. They also pointed out that a governor from the south-west and south-east were equally present when Buhari made the demand. The purport of the latter is that the president could not have possibly made sectional demands with some southern governors in attendance. These governors are also Buhari’s witnesses and are there to corroborate their evidence. And since none of them has come up with anything to the contrary, neither has Kim produced fresh evidence to sustain the sectional undertone in his statement, nor is he likely to do so, we are not left with any other option that to give Buhari the benefit of doubt.

    Then, there could be two possible sources to the misunderstanding: It is either Kim did not fully comprehend what Buhari said or Buhari failed to articulate and communicate his views very lucidly or both.  Whichever, the responsibility for whatever gap there is to the discussion should rest squarely on the shoulders of Buhari. It is therefore unfair for some self-assigned witnesses and other regime apologists to be fingering imaginary enemies for allegedly twisting the discussions out of context.

    Kim’s statement is unambiguous. The much that can be argued as regime supporters have done, is that it should be situated within the context it was spoken, whatever that means. This position could also be a subterfuge to evade reality. Even then, it is still the duty of the speaker to clearly contextualize his statement to leave no room for ambiguity. And if anybody has issues with the statement, he should direct his anger to the man who failed to communicate or contextualize his statement such that Kim took his plea to be for the entire northern part of the country.

    So the attempt to blame phoney enemies for allegedly twisting the president’s statement out of context collapses irretrievably in the face of this reality. There is nothing in Kim’s account that was twisted by critics. The meaning given to it is precisely what it conveys. The main issue was perhaps, in the president’s inability to contextualize his statement such that Kim could fully understand him.  Ironically, the misinterpretation worked in favour of the northern region as the bank went ahead to focus its development in that region. Vicariously, the north is the beneficiary of that communication gap since the bank did what they understood the president to have said. So who do we blame for this? Or are we now going to re-direct such development projects to the south that has been adversely affected by the inability of the president to put his request in context?

    Beyond this however, why do we wallow in self-denial of elements of preferential treatment by leaders either present or past? Is the evidence of Buhari’s horde of witnesses meant to imply that he is a detribalized leader with no trace of sectional prompting? Or put differently, why did that level of public outrage trail the disclosure by Kim?

    Answers to these lie in public perception of Buhari’s image. Those accused of capitalizing on Kim’s statement to get even with the president were not just fouling the air. Neither can it be said they were unnecessarily alarmist and unpatriotic. Some of them may have been very hard on the president. But they adduced corroborating evidence between his previous actions and utterances and the one in contest. If that was the first time Buhari was entangled in sectional controversy, that could perhaps, have been excused. But it was not.

    Around the same period he met with the World Bank, he was also lampooned for saying he would give preferential treatment to sections that gave him 95 per cent votes as against areas that gave him five percent. Since much of his votes came from the north, the purport of that statement was not in doubt. Even then, his initial personal ap pointments were almost exclusively northern, composed mainly of his relations. His key military appointments were also disproportionately skewed in favour of the north brazenly excluding a major tripod on which this country was erected.

    The excuse then was that he needed to appoint people he could trust. Those who canvassed this view lost sight of the absurdity in having a sitting president with a mindset that he can only trust and work with his close relations and people of his ethnic stock in a country of about 180 million. The moment such convoluted and puerile excuse was accepted, was the time the stage was set for what we are currently harvesting. Even if we excuse Buhari for perhaps, not contextualizing his request to the World Bank, it is not possible de-odorize the sectional stench that pervades his actions and major decisions.

    And when elections are fought along sectional and primordial lines as was in 2015, the outcome is not hard to predict. Why do we still place much premium on rotation, tribe and religion in political recruitment instead of merit, qualification and competence? In this, we can locate why there is bound to be suspicion Buhari is deploying the office to satisfy the north in the same prebendal fashion foremost political scientist, Richard Joseph characterized the politics of the Third World. That is why every section wants a shot at that office. Until we have whittled down the enormous powers at the centre, we are deluding in collective deceit assuming that the current pass would soon peter out from our political chessboard.

    So it should not surprise anyone if Buhari indeed asked the World Bank to focus on the northern region. He could have been doing that in many other areas without notice. After all, we have had people ask: what did Jonathan do for the South-south in his six years in office? Those averse to cries of sidelining of the South-east by the current regime are quick to point at the inability of their sons and daughters who allegedly dominated Jonathan’s government to do anything for their zone.

    Shettima and Oshiomhole may have succeeded in contextualizing Buhari’s request to the World Bank. They may have succeeded in saving him from himself in the instant case. Had the president adorned the toga of a statesman; had his previous actions and utterances not given out his sectional predilection, they would have had no cause to jump into the witness box with such frenzy. But then, can the leopard change its colours?

  • Jehovah witnesses meet in Ibadan

    Thousands of delegates from Oyo, Ogun and Osun states in the ongoing regional convention of Jehovah’s Witnesses have arrived Ibadan, the Oyo state capital, for the third in the nine series of the annual gathering.

    The convention with the theme “Don’t give up!” starts on Friday.

    It ends at the Assembly Hall of Jehovah’s witnesses Ifatumo village along Lalupon, Ejioku road, Ibadan.

    Spokesperson of the convention, Olayinka Dada, in a statement explained the three- day programme is divided into 52 parts.

    He said it will be presented in a variety of formats, including brief discourses, interviews and short videos.

    “The convention pro-gramme will feature content that will empower individuals not only to keep enduring but also to cope with challenges productively,” he added.

    According to the spokesperson, each day’s programme starts by 8:20am and end on Friday and Saturday by 3:50pm and by 2:45pm on Sunday.

    He added that admission to each event is free and no collections are taken.

  • Witnesses: how we recovered huge cash in Ngwuta’s home’

    Witnesses: how we recovered huge cash in Ngwuta’s home’

    •Judge re-arraigned on 13-count charge

    A clearer picture emerged yesterday about how security officials allegedly recovered huge cash at the Abuja home of Justice Sylvester Ngwuta of the Supreme Court and how he volunteered a statement.

    Two officials of the Department of State Services (DSS) – Tanimola Alao and John Utazi – took turns, at the resumption of proceedings in the judge’s trial yesterday, to explain their roles in the recovery and how Justice Ngwuta voluntarily offered a statement to investigators.

    Led in evidence by lead prosecuting lawyer Mrs. Olufemi Fatunde, Alao and Utazi testified as the 4th and 5th prosecution witnesses in the trial before Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    Justice Ngwuta is being tried on charges of corruption, money laundering, possession of multiple travel passports, among others.

    Utazi, who said he led the team of DSS officials to the judge’s house at the Supreme Court Quarters, said they initially encountered difficulty in accessing the house until the policemen on guard were directed by their superiors to give way.

    He said when they were allowed in last October 7, his team met the judge at home, standing in the sitting room on the ground floor.

    “I introduced myself and my team members to him and we showed the defendant our identity cards. I also gave him the search warrant to read, after which he asked us if the Chief Justice of Nigeria was aware. I answered that I was not aware.

    “Thereafter, I requested the defendant to search me and members of my team. He declined and said there was no trouble. However, I asked my team members to search one another in his presence, after which we told the defendant that we were ready to conduct the search.

    “He took us upstairs. There were four rooms and a sitting room upstairs. The four rooms included the defendant’s study. He took us to the first bedroom. We started searching while he sat on a seat.

    “There were two wardrobes in the room. One was by a closet and the other was facing the closet. As we opened the one facing the closet, there were bags. We opened the bags and asked the defendant to see the content. The content was money.

    “The second wardrobe was concealed with a cloth. When the wardrobe was opened, we saw a lot of bags and were filled with foreign currencies.

    “He took us to another bedroom. We searched it again and we also discovered money. After the second bedroom, he took us to his study.

    “In the study room, we recovered bank statements, building plans, land documents, documents relating to the defendants salary and some vehicle papers,” the witness said.

    Utazi said his team did not find any incriminating item in other parts of the house, including the fourth bedroom, the ground floor (where the two rooms and two sitting rooms were located), the boys’ quarters and the car park.

    He added: “We brought down the items recovered to the sitting room downstairs, where we counted the money.

    “We documented everything on the back of the search warrant. The documentation was done in his presence. I endorsed the documented items recovered and also gave it to him to see.

    “After seeing it, he read through and signed on it. Thereafter, I assembled all items recovered and told the defendant to search us just like we did when we came in.

    “The defendant declined to search us but we searched ourselves in the presence of the defendant. We then requested the defendant to follow us and he did follow us,” Utazi said.

    Mrs. Fatunde later tendered the search warrant, dated October 5, 2016, which was issued by a Magistrate Court in Abuja. The trial judge, in the absence of any objection by the defence, admitted the document in evidence.

    Earlier, Alao testified on how he obtained statement from Justice Ngwuta at the DSS office in Abuja on October 9, 2016.

    “I was directed by my superior to witness his (the defendant’s) statement writing. Before I did that, I read the cautionary words, contained in the statement form, to him, to the effect that he is at liberty not to make a statement as any statement he makes could be used against him in the court of law.

    “He said he understood and was prepared to make the statement, to this end he signed the statement form. He signed the first page,” Alao said.

    The witness said when the defendant ended his statement, he signed, dated it, and it was counter-signed by the chief investigator.

    Under cross-examination by lead defence lawyer and former Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Kanu Agabi (SAN), the witness said he did not know what Ngwuta wrote down in the statement, because he (Alao) was only instructed to witness the writing of the statement.

    Justice Tsoho adjourned to today for Agabi to cross-examine Utazi.

    At the commencement of proceedings yesterday, Mrs. Fatunde informed the court that the prosecution has further amended the charge on which the judge was being tried, making it the third time since the suit was filed in December.

    Agabi did not object to the amendment and the defendant’s re-arraignment, but expressed displeasure at the prosecution’s frequent amendment.

    He argued that the development is a confirmation the prosecution was merely “fishing”.

    The judge said the court can reject the amendment, if it was not convinced about it.

    Agabi said: “We shall eventually address your lordship on the several amendments. It further confirms that the prosecution is fishing.”

    Justice Tsoho later directed that the charge be read to the defendant, to which he (Justice Ngwuta) pleaded not guilty.

    When the charge was eventually read, it turned out that the prosecution merely re-inserted the count in which the judge was accused of possessing more than one diplomatic passport.

    In the new count, which now raised the counts to 13, the judge was accused of giving false information to the Nigerian Immigration Service (NIS) concerning his diplomatic passport with the purpose of procuring another one.

    This count was part of the 16 counts contained in the original charge, but was removed in March when Fatunde took over prosecution of the case.

    The removal of the count relating to the diplomatic passports became public on March 17, as the 3rd prosecution witness, an official of the NIS, Tanko Nuhu Kutana, told the court the defendant used his two diplomatic passports interchangeably.

    Kutana, who was being cross-examined by Agabi, said his investigation showed Justice Ngwuta used the diplomatic passports at the same time.

    Agabi later told the witness not to bother about what his client did with the diplomatic passports, because issues about diplomatic passports were not contained in the charge before the court.

  • Witnesses insist Jonathan authorised payment of N400m to Metuh

    Witnesses insist Jonathan authorised payment of N400m to Metuh

    •Court to rule tomorrow on motion for permission for foreign trip

    Two witnesses called by Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) spokesman Olisa Metuh have told a Federal High Court in Abuja that former President Goodluck Jonathan authorised the payment of N400million to Metuh.

    The PDP spokesman and his company, Destra Investment Limited, are being tried before the court on charges of unlawful receipt of N400 million from the office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) and money laundering.

    They are said to have received the money for contracts not executed.

    They were also accused of engaging in money laundering to the tune of $2 million.

    The first witness, Anthony Okeke, a lawyer and a former acting  PDP National Publicity Secretary, told the court that Jonathan engaged Metuh to execute an image laundering project for him.

    Okeke said the former president’s image was battered by the then opposition All Progressives Congress’ (APC) “smear campaign”.

    He said the opposition party’s campaign negatively affected Jonathan’s image so much that a number of consultants was needed to change public perception about the former President ahead of the 2015 presidential election.

    Okeke, who was Metuh’s 4th defence witness, said the APC “cleverly” tagged Jonathan as an ineffective and unserious president and that he was not surprised to learn that Jonathan authorised the payment of  N400 million to Metuh to counter the opposition’s campaign against him.

    The three witnesses earlier called by Metuh, including former Senior Special Adviser (SSA) to Jonathan, Doyin Okupe, had given evidence to the effect that the N400 million payment to Metuh was authorised by Jonathan for image laundering activities.

    Led in evidence by Metuh’s lawyer, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), Okeke said: “I was not surprised that the President promised to bring money for the election.

    “Like I said before, at a time before the national convention, the then President, being the presumptive nominee of the party, would ordinarily do everything within his power to launder his personal image, the image of his government and the image of his party because, at that time, elections were less than three months away.

    “In my own estimation, before his nomination and after his nomination, there were issues that needed to be clarified. The opposition at the time had mounted a massive smear campaign against the President.

    “They cleverly tagged him (Jonathan) clueless and went to town giving the impression that he was an ineffective and unserious President. That smear campaign needed to be countered.

    “The party needed a lot of consultants and media outfits to counter it. I will agree that there was an improvement on the image of the President,” Okeke said.

    Under cross-examination by lawyer to Destra Investment, Tochukwu Onwugbufor (SAN), Okeke said no fund was passed to him when he took the office of acting National Publicity Secretary of the party on June 20, 2013.

    He added that he did not transfer any money to Metuh by the time he (Okeke) handed over to him in September 2013.

    Okeke described Metuh as a man with “an unrivalled passion for his job”. He added that Metuh “was so determined to make a success in his job as the National Publicity Secretary of the party”.

    “To the best of my knowledge, the first defendant is a principled person with very high integrity. I think his commitment to his job led to his present condition,” he said.

    Metuh’s second witness, Richard Ihediwa, who described himself as a journalist, narrated how Metuh appointed him as his special assistant in January 2013.

    He described Metuh in superlative terms, including claiming that the PDP spokesman “is a loving family man and a responsible individual”.

    Prosecution lawyer Sylvanus Tahir did not cross-examine Okeke.

    The trial judge, Justice Okon Abang, suspended Ihediwa’s testimony to entertain arguments on Metuh’s motion seeking the release of his international passport to enable his travel to the United Kingdom on health ground.

    Justice Abang adjourned to May 25 for ruling on the motion and the resumption of Ihediwa’s testimony.

     

  • Rivers APC to Buhari: halt intimidation of tribunals’ witnesses

    Rivers APC to Buhari: halt intimidation of tribunals’ witnesses

    The Rivers State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) has urged President Muhammadu Buhari to halt the alleged intimidation of witnesses who testified  before the election petitions tribunals in Abuja.

    Rivers APC, through its Chairman, Chief Davies Ikanya, in a statement yesterday in Port Harcourt, through his Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Chief Eze Chukwuemeka Eze, said the witnesses wanted to assist the tribunal to ensure justice.

    APC in Rivers said: “Photos of the APC witnesses at the tribunals in Abuja are being posted on Facebook by a group known as The Youth Coalition For Good Governance. They held a demonstration and tagged our witnesses with all sorts of unprintable names and accused them of being saboteurs.

    “Today, these men (witnesses) live in hiding and can no longer do their businesses freely to maintain their families.”

    It urged Buhari to institute a probe into the murder of 97 persons during the 2015 polls in Rivers State.

    APC said:  “We passionately plead with President Buhari to hasten to make good his promise to Rivers people on May 13, 2015 when he vowed to revisit the issue, saying: ‘We will confront them with facts and figures. We will not forgive and we will not forget those who perpetrated killings and arson in Rivers State during the elections (of March 28 and April 11, 2015).’

    “We demand that the Prof. Chidi Odinkalu Commission of Inquiry report be revisited urgently,”

    Rivers APC also called on all the security agencies to take necessary preventive measures, to guarantee the safety of the witnesses testifying at the various election petitions tribunals in Abuja.

  • Ajimobi closes appearances of witnesses

    Oyo State Governor, Abiola Ajimobi, who is the first respondent and candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the 2015 elections yesterday, closed the appearances of his witnesses at the Election Petition Tribunal? sitting in Ibadan, the state capital.

    Ajimobi’s lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN)?, called off the appearances of his client’s witnesses after the appearances of six witnesses within three days.

    The Tribunal had earlier given the first respondent five days to present his witnesses.

    The Accord Party governorship candidate,  Rashidi Ladoja, ?is challenging the declaration of Ajimobi by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the winner of the April 11 governorship election in the state.

    The petitioner also joined APC, Dr. Rufus Akeju, who is INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) in the state and INEC as co-respondents.?

    Speaking on the development, Olanipekun? said: “We have used three days out of the five days allotted to us by the tribunal.

    “We are pleased with the six appearances we have presented so far. We have observed the appearances of the ?petitioners’ witnesses and we have reserved our observations.”

     

  • Oyo Tribunal: Ladoja calls 26 witnesses

    Oyo Tribunal: Ladoja calls 26 witnesses

    Oyo State Accord candidate in the April 11 governorship election Senator Rashidi Ladoja has called 26 witnesses at the hearing of his petition filed before the state governorship election petition tribunal.

    Ladoja is challenging the declaration of Governor Abiola Ajimobi of All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the election in the suit filed before a three-man panel.

    The witnesses were drawn from some of the state’s local governments, which results were being challenged by the petitioner.

    They were later cross-examined by the counsel to Ajimobi,  Olumuyiwa Aduroja; APC lawyer Babatunde Aiku; and Yusuf Ali, representing the Resident Electoral Commission (REC), Ambassador Rufus Akeju, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    Results of 21 local government areas are being disputed and electoral materials used in the councils have been admitted and marked as exhibits before the tribunal.

    The petitioner’s counsel, Richard Ogunwole, has spent eight of the 10 days allotted to him to call his witnesses and present his evidence.

    He will close the appearances of his witnesses today.

    The respondents’ lawyers are expected to open theirs on Monday.

  • Gradual calling of witnesses circumstantial, says APC counsel

    Counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its governorship candidate in the last general election,

    Ayoola Ajayi, has said their idea of bringing in witnesses gradually was tactical to their case.

    Ajayi, who spoke at yesterday’s sitting where he called two witnesses, recalled that he once said they were just starting and would take off very soon.

    He said: “We are taking the witnesses the way we feel will be good for our case. We are bringing them gradually. Maybe tomorrow we will bring some and we will continue that way. It’s just to take care of the circumstance.

    “I told you the other time that we are just starting. Soon we will take off.

    “You know it’s an election that involved many wards, polling units and the rest of them. You don’t just rush in things like that.

    “You need to bring in the witnesses gradually in order to have the spread and this is exactly what we are doing.”

    Ajayi said the forensic examination of materials as ordered by the tribunal was still being carried out, adding: “I understand they are in Deba in continuation of the exercise and it is still part of what we intend to bring to the tribunal.”

    He said they would do their best to meet up with calling the witnesses within the two weeks they were given to pursue their case, despite having eight days remaining.

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Witnesses’ absence stalls poly student’s trial

    Trial of Tunde Aderinola, a student of The Lagos State Polytechnic (LASPOTECH), suffered another adjournment yesterday because of the absence of the complainant, Solaja Omotayo, and the Investigating Police Officer (IPO).

    Aderinola was first arraigned on June 2, on a three-count charge of mobilising hoodlums to attack Omotayo; assault and breach of peace in contravention of Sections 409, 171 and 16(d) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State.

    His lawyers, O.S.A. Aromolaran and O.M. Folami pointed that the complainant had failed to appear in court since the trial began. They argued that their client’s liberty was at stake as the matter had been on since May 26.

    They urged Magistrate O.O. Olatunji to strike out the case for want of diligent prosecution.

    Magistrate Olatunji advised the prosecuting, Inspector Iyabode Johnson to serve a summons on the witnesses to appear in court on the next adjourned date or the case would be struck out.

    He adjourned the matter till August 28.