Connect with us

Judiciary

Court Sacks 20 Cross River Lawmakers For Defecting To APC

Published

on

Symbol of Justice and APC Flag
Share

 

A Federal High Court in Abuja has sacked 20 members of the Cross River State House of Assembly for defecting to the All Progressives Congress (APC).

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) had instituted a suit against the lawmakers over their defection to the APC.

The affected lawmakers are Michael Etaba, Legor Idagbor, Eteng Jonah William, Joseph A. Bassey, Odey Peter Agbe, Okon E. Ephraim, Regina L. Anyogo, Matthew S. Olory, Ekpo Ekpo Bassey, Ogbor Ogbor Udop, and Ekpe Charles Okon.

Others are Hillary Ekpang Bisong, Francis B. Asuquo, Elvert Ayambem, Davis Etta, Sunday U. Achunekan, Cynthia Nkasi, Edward Ajang, Chris Nja-Mbu Ogar, and Maria Akwaji.

In opposing the suit, Mike Ozekhome, counsel to the 4th-25th defendants, had challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear the suit.

He submitted that the cause of action arose in Calabar and that the matter should be transferred to the high court in Calabar.

In his judgement, the presiding judge, Justice Taiwo Taiwo, held that “there is nothing against the law that the suit be heard by this court”.

He said the 4-25th defendants are joined with other defendants who have their offices in Abuja.

Furthermore, in their defence, the lawmakers had argued that there was rancor in the PDP which led to their expulsion from the party.

The APC had in their submissions, told the court that the lawmakers are not registered members of their party.

However, the judge held that the defendants had intentions to mislead the court. He said he found gaps and loopholes in their defence as they tried to twist events to suit their own narratives.

Taiwo noted that they not only defect loudly but “took pictures of their defection and were received by the officials of the 26th defendant.

“The is no doubt that the defendants can belong to or join any political association and assembly as they are free to do so. However, the truth must be told.

“I consider the attempts of the 6th – 25th defendants to justify their defection, feeble in the circumstances of this case.”

Taiwo noted that the public voted for the lawmakers through the plaintiff who sponsored them and they were not voted for as independent candidates.

“They had a vehicle which conveyed them and that vehicle belongs to the plaintiff. They cannot abandon the vehicle,” he held.

He stated that politicians treat citizens that elected them into power as if they do not matter when they assume office, adding that a day will come when elected officers must resign their post if they migrate to another party or seek the permission of the people for permission before they decamp.

CTV

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Judiciary

Court Jails Two Chinese Nationals 46 Years Each for Cyberterrorism, Fraud

Published

on

Two Chinese nationals, Huang Haoyu and An Hongxu
Share

The Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, on Wednesday sentenced two Chinese nationals, Huang Haoyu and An Hongxu, to 46 years’ imprisonment each for cyberterrorism and internet fraud.

The trial judge, Justice Daniel Osiagor, handed down the sentence after the defendants changed their initial not guilty pleas to guilty during the court proceedings.

Huang and Hongxu were arraigned alongside one Friday Audu on a seven-count charge bordering on cyberterrorism, internet fraud, and money laundering involving N3.4 billion and $2.56 million.

The convicts were among 792 suspected fraudsters arrested on December 19, 2024, during a coordinated operation by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) tagged “Eagle Flush Operation.”

According to the prosecution, the syndicate orchestrated cryptocurrency, investment, and romance scams targeting unsuspecting victims. Investigations further revealed that Audu, allegedly acting on Huang’s instruction, incorporated Genting International Co. Ltd. to facilitate the fraudulent operations.

The court also heard that the defendants recruited Nigerian youths to impersonate foreign nationals online as part of the scheme to defraud victims.

Following their guilty pleas, the prosecution urged the court to impose the maximum penalty prescribed by law.

In his judgment, Justice Osiagor convicted and sentenced Huang and Hongxu to a cumulative term of 46 years’ imprisonment each, with an option of a N56 million fine. The court also ordered three days of community service and directed that the convicts be repatriated to China upon completion of their sentences.

Additionally, the court granted the prosecution’s application for the forfeiture of all items recovered during the EFCC investigation to the Federal Government.

The forfeited items include 1,596 mobile phones, 43 computer systems, hundreds of SIM cards, office equipment, generators, vehicles, and other electronic devices seized from four properties located in Victoria Island and Ikoyi, Lagos.

Meanwhile, the trial of the third defendant, Friday Audu, who maintained his not guilty plea, has been adjourned to April 29, 2026, for continuation of proceedings.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Nnamdi Kanu Opts to Defend Himself as Legal Team Withdraws from Trial

Published

on

Nnamdi-Kanu
Nnamdi Kanu
Share

A dramatic twist unfolded on Thursday at the Federal High Court in Abuja as the detained leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, announced that he would represent himself in court following the withdrawal of his entire legal team.

Lead counsel, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), informed the court that he and other Senior Advocates had stepped down from the case, stating that Kanu had decided to “take back his case.”

Confirming the development, Kanu told the presiding judge, “I will be representing myself for now. That might change later.” When asked if he wanted the court to assign a lawyer to him, he declined.

Speaking directly before the bench, Kanu argued that the court lacked jurisdiction to continue with the case against him. His submission formed part of an oral argument he personally presented—a rare occurrence in such a high-profile criminal trial.

The development marks a new phase in the long-running case, which has faced multiple adjournments and legal battles since Kanu’s arrest and extradition from Kenya to Nigeria in 2021.

Kanu faces charges bordering on treasonable felony and terrorism-related offences. Legal observers say his decision to conduct his own defence could significantly affect the direction and tempo of the trial in the coming weeks.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Natasha Files Objections to FG’s Criminal Defamation Suit

Published

on

, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan
Share

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed preliminary objections before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and the Federal High Court, contesting criminal defamation charges instituted against her by the Federal Government.

The senator described the case as an abuse of power and a calculated attempt at political persecution, alleging that the charges arose from petitions filed by Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello.

Her legal team, led by four Senior Advocates of Nigeria—Prof. Roland Otaru, SAN; Dr. E. West-Idahosa, SAN; J.J. Usman, SAN; and M.J. Numa, SAN—argued that the prosecutions are unconstitutional and aimed at silencing opposition voices rather than advancing public interest or national security.

The lawyers tendered exhibits indicating that the senator’s comments were part of legitimate public discourse and media commentary. They further contended that the Attorney-General of the Federation lacks the legal standing to prosecute defamation cases on behalf of private individuals.

According to the defence, defamation is a civil matter and criminalizing it amounts to intimidation, suppression of free speech, and misuse of the justice system.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan also accused authorities of selective justice, stating that while her own petitions over threats to her life were ignored, complaints from her political rivals were quickly acted upon. She maintained that this amounts to discriminatory prosecution in violation of Section 42 of the Constitution.

Her lawyers urged the courts to dismiss the cases at the preliminary stage, warning that allowing them to proceed would erode public confidence in the justice system and waste national resources.

 

Continue Reading