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

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

Judiciary

Court Freezes Four Bank Accounts Linked to Ex-NNPC Boss Kyari Over ₦661m Fraud Allegation

Published

on

Mele Kyari
Share

The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the temporary freezing of four Jaiz Bank accounts linked to former Group Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) Limited, Mele Kyari, over alleged involvement in a ₦661.4 million fraud.

Justice Emeka Nwite granted the order on Tuesday, August 19, 2025, following an ex-parte motion filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

EFCC counsel, Ogechi Ujam, told the court that the accounts were under investigation in connection with conspiracy, abuse of office, and money laundering. The anti-graft agency said preliminary findings revealed the accounts, allegedly controlled by Kyari through family members and associates, received suspicious inflows from the NNPC and oil companies.

According to the EFCC, the funds—spread across four Jaiz Bank accounts in the names of Mele Kyari and Guwori Community Development Foundation—were disguised as payments for a book launch and activities of a non-governmental organisation.

The judge held that the application was meritorious and adjourned the matter to September 23 for a report.

 

 

 

 

 

Continue Reading