Connect with us

Judiciary

Ekiti Guber Poll Fall Out: Court Strikes Out Suit Challenging Gov-Elect’s Candidacy

Published

on

Ekiti Governor Elect, Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji
Share

 

A Federal High Court, Ado Ekiti Division, has struck out a suit filed by an All Progressives Congress governorship aspirant in the January 27 primary in Ekiti State, Kayode Ojo, challenging the emergence of the governor-elect, Mr Biodun Oyebanji, as the party candidate.

Ojo, dissatisfied with the conduct of the APC governorship primary, had approached the court, urging it to nullify what he called “gross irregularities” in the exercise.

He also faulted the use of individuals he described as political appointees as electoral committee/returning officers and consequently ordered a fresh primary.

But APC and Oyebanji, who were first and second defendants in the suit, averred that the direct primary held in all the 177 wards in the state were valid and in compliance with the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended), and the constitution and guidelines of the party.

While Ojo’s counsels urged the court to uphold their statement of claims and grant them the reliefs being sought, counsels to Oyebanji said that the suit was not competent, saying that the discrepancies in the originating processes had rendered the case academic.

Delivering judgment, Justice Babs Kuewumi, who upheld the preliminary objection of the counsel to Oyebanji, Mr Kabir Akingbolu, that the writ of summons and statement of claims of Ojo were defective which dealt a fatal blow to the case, threw out the case.

Justice Kuewumi said, “Due to the irregularities in the identity of the lawyers who filled the processes, the case is defective and terribly bad. As the Bible says, when the foundation is bad what can the righteous do? We must know you can’t put something on nothing, which therefore renders the entire suit as a mere academic exercise. I hereby strike out the suit.

“Having ruled on the issue of objection, there is no further judgment to deliver. The plaintiff is free to approach the higher court for appeal.”

Counsel to Oyebanji, Akingbolu, expressed satisfaction with the verdict, saying, “Before a process is filed in court, a known lawyer must sign, it but many lawyers subscribed to this originating process but there was only one signature. The law is that you must tick the name of the person who signed it and this was not done in this case.

“Again, the NBA seal, which is the authority of office for a lawyer to signal document was affixed but the name on the seal was different from the one on all the process.

“So, there was no way the court could determine whether it was signed by a clerk or whether it was signed by a street urchin or a lawyer. On the ground, the court has rightly thrown away the case and the whole thing has crumbled.”

However, Ojo rejected the judgment, saying, “The judge wrongly dismissed our case based on technicallity. Though, we believe in the santity of the court, but the judge erred in his judgement and we know the appeal court will correct the error.

 

 

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Judiciary

Taraba Court Jails Four for Life Over Staged Kidnapping Scheme

Published

on

Court-symbol
Court-symbol
Share

In a landmark ruling that underscores the judiciary’s zero tolerance for kidnapping in any form, a Taraba State High Court on Friday sentenced four individuals to life imprisonment for orchestrating a staged abduction scheme aimed at extorting millions from their families.

Presided over by the State Chief Judge, Justice Joel Agya, the court found Prosper Paul, Samuel David, Nosiu Buba, and Samuel Kelvin guilty of attempted kidnapping under suit number TRSJ/75C/2021. The plot, according to the court, revolved around Paul’s deliberate plan to fake the abduction of his girlfriend and another woman in order to demand ransoms.

The judge noted that while the victims, Miss Fyafyatirmam Andeteran and Miss Brenda Anthony, were not forcibly taken, their collaboration in the scheme did not diminish the criminality of the act. “This was a clear attempt to obtain ransom through deceit, which amounts to kidnapping under the law,” Justice Agya said.

Paul’s girlfriend’s family reportedly paid N4 million, while a separate demand of N10 million was made in Brenda’s case. Their location was eventually traced to a hotel in Jalingo through phone records. Paul was handed an additional 12-month sentence for criminal conspiracy, while the other three defendants were discharged of that charge but sentenced to life for their role in the attempted kidnapping.

The judge strongly condemned the growing pattern of young women colluding with partners to defraud their families, calling it “a disturbing social menace.”
Though both victims escaped prosecution, the court made it clear their actions were deeply troubling. “They were lucky not to be standing in the dock today,” Justice Agya remarked.

Defence counsel pleaded for leniency, citing remorse and reformation, but signalled their intent to study the ruling for potential appeal. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Justice hailed the verdict as a powerful deterrent.

“This judgment reinforces the rule of law and sends a clear message to criminal-minded individuals,” said Mustapha Adam, Deputy Director of Citizens’ Rights.

 

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Appeal Court Affirms IPOB As Terrorist Group

Published

on

IPOB Flag
IPOB Flag
Share

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has affirmed the January 18, 2018 order by Justice Abdu Kafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja proscribing the Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, and designating it as terrorist organisation.

In a judgment on Thursday, a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal was unanimous in holding that the Federal Government acted lawfully in proscribing the group, whose activities threatened the nation’s continued existence and the security of citizens.

In the lead judgment, Justice Hamma Barka resolved all the issues raised for determination against the appellant – IPOB and declared the appeal unmeritorious and dismissed it.

 

 

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Court Stops VIO, Others From Seizing Vehicles, Imposing Fines

Published

on

VIO Vehicles
VIO Vehicles
Share

The Federal High Court in Abuja has curtailed the powers of the Directorate of Road Traffic Services (VIO), barring it from stopping and impounding vehicles or imposing fines on motorists across Nigeria’s capital.

Justice Evelyn Maha, on October 2, 2024, delivered this judgment in response to a fundamental rights enforcement lawsuit initiated by public interest lawyer Abubakar Marshal.

The court found that the VIO, along with other enforcement officials, lacked the legal authority to halt vehicles or penalise drivers.

The ruling impacts the Director of Road Transport, the Area Commander of Jabi, the Team Leader of Jabi, and the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), who were all named as respondents.

Justice Maha ruled that none of these parties, under the Minister’s authority, could justify the seizure of vehicles or the imposition of fines on road users.

The judge further issued a perpetual injunction prohibiting these officials and their agents from infringing on the rights of Nigerians to move freely, asserting that any such actions violate constitutional rights, including the presumption of innocence and the protection of personal property.

This ruling reinforces motorists’ rights and limits the powers of the authorities in vehicle-related enforcement without legal grounds.

 

Continue Reading