Connect with us

Judiciary

Supreme Court Joins Rivers In Buhari’s Suit Against Section 84 (12) Of Electoral Act

Published

on

Court-symbol
Court symbol
Share

 

The Supreme Court has granted Rivers State’s request to join in President Muhammadu Buhari’s suit against Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act.

Hearing in the suit has been fixed for May 26.

The Supreme Court fixed the date after joining Rivers State as an interested party.

Justice Muhammad Dattijo adjourned the matter following the concession by Buhari’s lawyer Lateef Fagbemi that the speaker, Rivers State House of Assembly and Attorney General, Rivers State, be joined as parties.

Section 84 (12)

President Buhari and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami, had filed a suit at the Supreme Court, seeking an interpretation of Section 84(12) of the Electoral Amendment Act 2022.

In the suit filed on April 29, the President and AGF, who are the plaintiffs, listed the National Assembly as the sole defendant.
They are seeking an order of the apex court to strike out the section of the Electoral Act, saying it is inconsistent with the nation’s Constitution.

According to the court document, the plaintiffs contend that Section 84 (12) of the Electoral (Amendment) Act, 2022 is inconsistent with the provisions of Sections 42, 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 147, 151, 177, 182, 192 and 196 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended), as well as Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and People and Peoples Rights.

President Buhari and Malami also contended that the Constitution already provides qualification and disqualification for the offices of the President and Vice President, Governor and Deputy Governor, Senate and House of Representatives, House of Assembly, Ministers, Commissioners, and Special Advisers.

They urged the court to make: “A declaration that the joint and combined reading of Sections 65, 66, 106, 107, 131, 137, 147, 151, 177, 182, 192 and 196 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, (as amended); the provision of Section 84 (12) of the Electoral Act, 2022, which also ignores Section 84(3) of the same Act, is an additional qualifying and/or disqualifying factors for the National Assembly, House of Assembly, Gubernatorial and Presidential elections as enshrined in the said constitution, hence unconstitutional, unlawful, null and void.”

In the same vein, the National Assembly has asked the Supreme Court to strike out the suit instituted by President Buhari.

The National Assembly, in its counter-affidavit, filed by its lawyer, Kayode Ajulo, said the Supreme Court cannot be invoked to amend the provision of any law validity made by lawmakers in the exercise of their legislative powers as granted by the Constitution.

They argued that the 1999 Constitution, as amended gave the National Assembly the power to make laws for good governance in Nigeria.

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