Connect with us

Judiciary

Osun 2022: Oyetola appeals court ruling nullifying his candidacy

Published

on

Former Osun State Governor Gboyega Oyetola
Osun State Governor Adegboyega Oyetola
Share

 

…seeks stay of execution on judgement

Governor Adegboyega Oyetola of Osun has appealed the Federal High Court judgement that nullified his nomination as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) for the July 16, 2022 governorship election in the State.

This is as the Governor and his deputy have also filed an application before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking to stay execution of the court judgment pending the final determination of the appeal.

Justice Emeka Nwite of the FHC, Abuja, had while delivering ruling in the suit filed by the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, invalidated the candidacy of Oyetola and his deputy, Benedict Alabi, on the grounds that Governor Mai Mala Buni of Yobe, who submitted their names to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) violated the provisions of Section 183 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

Oyetola and Alabi in an appeal filed by the APC through their counsels, Dr Abiodun Layonu (SAN) and Abdulfatai Oyedele, listed 19 grounds of appeal against the lower court judgment.

According to them, the decision of the Federal High Court was against the weight of evidence and constitutes a grave miscarriage of justice. They therefore asked the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling of the lower court and affirm their nominations as valid and lawful.

In the appeal, the governor and his deputy argued that all the actions taken by Governor Buni in respect of their nominations were valid and legally cognizable as it was in compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 and the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria.

The appellants noted that the setting up of the defunct Caretaker Committee/Extra-ordinary Planning Committee (CCEPC) by the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party did not violate provision of the Constitution and Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022.

The APC further argued that the PDP lacked the locus to commence the legal action against Governor Oyetola as the issue of nomination of candidate was an internal affair of political parties, hence does not concern the PDP.

“By the provision of Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act 2022, it is only an aspirant that participated in the primary election that can complain that the provision of the Electoral Act and the guidelines of the political party have not been complied with in the selection or nomination of candidate of a political party for an election.

“The issue of nomination and sponsorship of candidates of a political party is strictly an internal affair of a political party which is not justiciable. The 1st respondent (the PDP) therefore lacks the locus standi to bring any cause of action that relates to internal affairs of the appellant (APC),” it said.

Another ground of appeal filed by the appellant was that the suit initiated by the PDP had been caught by the Issue of Estoppel which indicates that where an issue has been decided by a competent court, the court will not allow it to be re-litigated by different parties.

“The principal issue raised by the 1st Respondent (PDP) before the trial court is whether the 3rd and 4th Defendants (Oyetola and his deputy) were validly nominated and sponsored for the Gubernatorial Election held in Osun on the 16th of July, 2022.

“This same issue involving the same parties have been laid to rest in the case of JEGEDE V. INEC (2021) 14 NWLR (1797) 409 and Plaintiff suit as presently constituted is a duplication, repetition and remake of what has been settled and decided by the Supreme Court in the said case.

“The provisions of Sections 180 and 183 of the Constitution upon which the decision of the Supreme Court in JEGEDE V. INEC was based is still very extant.”

The appellant therefore held that the suit filed by the PDP was an abuse of Court process and that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon it.

The APC also argued that the suit filed by the PDP was statute-barred as the party failed to file the case within the time frame stipulated by the Constitution, hence, the court lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon it.

“The law stipulates that every pre-election matter must be filed within 14 days from the date of occurrence of the event, decision and act complained of in the suit. The period within which to file action elapsed on the 31st of March, 2022, and the PDP filed the suit on 7 April.

“Therefore, the court lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the 1st respondent’s suit as the action was statute barred. The act complained of came into existence on or before 18th March, 2022 and not 25th March, 2022 as claimed by the 1st respondent.”

Judiciary

Court Orders Interim Forfeiture of Properties Linked to Timipre Sylva

Published

on

Timipre Sylva
Timipre Sylva
Share

A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the interim forfeiture of nine properties allegedly linked to former Minister of State for Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

Justice Obiora Egwuatu granted the order following an ex parte application filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The court held that the properties, believed to be proceeds of unlawful activities, should be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government pending the determination of a motion for final forfeiture.

Justice Egwuatu also directed the EFCC to publish the interim forfeiture order in at least two national newspapers within seven days of receiving the certified true copy of the ruling. Interested parties were given 14 days to appear before the court and show cause why the properties should not be permanently forfeited.

The case was adjourned until May 25 for a compliance report.

According to the EFCC counsel, Oluwaleke Atolagbe, the commission sought the order on the grounds that the assets were reasonably suspected to have been acquired through unlawful means.

The affected properties are located in Abuja districts including Maitama, Wuse, Garki, Mpape, and Dakibiyu.

The properties include residential apartments, duplexes, terraces, and office complexes, including a structure currently occupied by the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA).

Sylva has also been linked to allegations surrounding a failed coup plot against President Bola Tinubu, although no formal charge has been filed against him in relation to the allegation.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Plateau Govt Arraigns Suspects Over Anguwan Rukuba Killings, Charges Them With Terrorism

Published

on

Plateau State Map
Share

The Plateau State Government has arraigned several suspects allegedly linked to the deadly Anguwan Rukuba attack, a tragic incident that claimed over 30 lives and sparked widespread outrage across the state.

The suspects, who were apprehended by operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS), were brought before the Plateau State High Court in Jos on multiple charges bordering on terrorism and conspiracy.

The arraignment took place before Justice Gidelia Fomyong and Justice Jacob Longden in Courts 12 and 9 respectively, drawing significant public attention as grieving families and concerned residents continue to demand justice.

According to the State Attorney General, Philemon Daffi, who filed the charges, the accused persons allegedly violated provisions of Sections 269 and 270 of the Plateau State Penal Code Law, 2017.

The defendants include Isa Umar Ibrahim and Musa Abubakar Ibrahim from Riyom Local Government Area; Auwalu Abubakar, also known as Auwalu Dogo, from Jos North Local Government Area; and Musa Abubakar Ibrahim, also known as Yaroro, also from Jos North. Another suspect, Ado Ibrahim from Riyom, is currently at large.

In the charge sheet presented before the court, the prosecution alleged that the defendants conspired on March 28, 2025, in Farin Gada, Jos North, to plan, organize, and finance the attack in Anguwan Rukuba.

They were further accused of facilitating and contributing resources that led to the violent assault on the community.

The prosecution maintained that the attack resulted in the deaths of more than 30 people, describing the actions of the suspects as acts of terrorism under the state’s penal laws.

The suspects were reportedly arrested between April 3 and April 10, 2026, following investigations by security operatives.

The Anguwan Rukuba killings had heightened tensions across Jos and surrounding areas, prompting calls from civil society groups and residents for swift justice and improved security measures.

For families who lost loved ones, the court proceedings signal the beginning of a long-awaited quest for justice. Observers note that the outcome of the trial could have far-reaching implications for security and accountability in Plateau State.

The case has been adjourned to a later date for further hearing, as the court begins the process of examining the charges and evidence presented by the prosecution.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

DSS Arraigns Former Kaduna Governor Nasir El-Rufai on Five-Count Charge, Pleads Not Guilty

Published

on

Former Kaduna State Governor,Nasir El -Rufai
Share

The Department of State Services (DSS) has arraigned former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, before the Federal High Court in Abuja over an alleged breach of national security.

El-Rufai was brought before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik and faced a five-count amended charge. When the charges were read to him, he pleaded not guilty to all counts.

At the hearing, counsel to the DSS, Oluwole Aladedoye (SAN), informed the court that the matter was scheduled for the defendant to take his plea. He also revealed that the prosecution had filed a new amended five-count charge on April 13, asking the court to replace the earlier three-count charge.

The defence counsel, Oluwole Iyamu (SAN), confirmed receipt of the amended charge and raised no objection. The court subsequently struck out the initial three-count charge.

Following El-Rufai’s plea, the prosecution requested three consecutive days to begin trial. However, the defence objected, citing logistical challenges. Iyamu told the court that his client was currently in the custody of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), which could make access to him difficult during the proposed trial period.

The defence also drew attention to a bail application filed on February 17. Although a supporting affidavit was initially missing from the court file, the issue was resolved after the matter was briefly stood down. The DSS stated it did not oppose the bail request.

Meanwhile, the prosecution applied for an order to protect the identities of two witnesses expected to testify. It requested that their names be concealed in public records and that pseudonyms be used during proceedings, citing security concerns and the potential risk to the witnesses’ families.

The defence opposed the request, arguing that it is the constitutional right of an accused person to know the identity of their accusers. Iyamu maintained that there was no evidence suggesting that El-Rufai posed any threat or had a following capable of endangering witnesses. He warned that granting anonymity could unfairly prejudice the defendant.

In addition, the defence asked the court to compel the prosecution to provide all relevant evidence needed to prepare for trial. The prosecution opposed this request, arguing that the documents sought were not part of the materials filed before the court.

The defence also informed the court of a separate application to quash the charges. Legal arguments followed, with the prosecution contending that such an application cannot be filed after a plea has already been taken. The defence responded on points of law.

Justice Abdulmalik is expected to rule on the various applications and adjourn the case for further proceedings.

Continue Reading