Mohammed Shosanya

Sixty eight political associates of former governor of Edo State, Godwin Obaseki have been granted an injunction against the Nigerian Police from being arrested over a petition submitted by the Acting State Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) submitted in July this year pending the determination of the case.

They included political appointees, local government area chairmen, aides and others.

The suit was marked  B/266M/2024, with the of them as applicants and the Inspector General of Police,the Commissioner of Police, Edo State, Deputy Inspector Police (Force CID Abuja) and the Police Service Commission (PSC) as respondents.

It was filed before the Edo State High Court,through their counsel, Olayiwola Afolabi SAN,who sought for an interim Injunction against their arrest.

Granting their prayers,Justice A. T. Momodu ruled that “an order of interim injunction is hereby made restraining the respondents either by themselves,police officers in their department and/or any police officer acting under their instruction from inviting, arresting and detaining the applicants in any of respondents office, in respect of the petition written by the chairman of All Progressives Congress (Edo State) dated 18/07/2024 to the 1st respondent pending the hearing and determination of the originating Motion filed by the applicant’s in the enforcement of their fundamental human right.

“It is further ordered that the enrolled order of The order be served along with the originating motion on the respondents”he added.

      Mohammed Shosanya

The National Judicial Council has recommended the compulsory retirement of two Heads of Court.

Besides,the body suspended two Judges from office for one year without pay and placed them on watch-List for a period of two years thereafter, just as it
cautioned one head of court.

It has also empanelled seven committees  to investigate allegations of judicial misconduct levelled against some judicial officers in the country.

These far reaching decisions were taken
at the 107th meeting of NJC held under the Chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, on the 13 and 14 of November 2024.

The NJC at its meeting,suspended Justice G. C. Aguma of the High Court of Rivers State from performing judicial functions for a period of one year without pay and also placed him on “Watch-List” for two years thereafter.

Also, Justice A. O. Nwabunike of Anambra State High Court, was suspended from performing judicial functions for one year without pay and placed on “Watch-List” for two years thereafter.

The duo of the Chief Judge of Imo State, Justice T. E. Chukwuemeka Chikeka and the Grand Kadi of Yobe State, Hon. Kadi Babagana Mahdi, were recommended for compulsory retirement for falsification of their ages.

“The Council’s findings revealed that Hon. Justice G. C. Aguma, committed acts of misconduct by aiding a litigant who obtained a judgment at the FCT High Court, Abuja, and filed a garnishee against judgement debtors in Bori Division of the High Court, Rivers State.

“The Council finds that Justice Aguma failed to raise any query as to why the garnishee proceedings were brought to his Court in Bori for a money judgment that could effectively be enforced in Abuja.

“That the judgment was delivered on 15 July 2020, at the High Court of the FCT, while the certificate of judgment was registered at Bori Division of the High Court of Rivers State on 16 July 2020.

“The Council further finds the speed with which the Hon. Justice Aguma took and granted the order absolute against the judgment debtors showed that he had an interest, especially as he failed to take into consideration the stay of execution of the judgment granted in favour of the judgement debtors by the Bwari High Court, which had been brought to his attention.

“On the part of Hon. Justice A. O. Nwabunike of Anambra State, the Council found him to have breached the provision of Rule 3.1 of the Revised Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2016.

“He also failed to adhere to the principle of stare decisis from his different interpretation of the word “aspirant” and abused his judicial powers by granting ex parte orders without a Motion on Notice filed along with the originating summons.

“Hon. Justice T. E. Chukwuemeka Chikeka was recommended to the Governor of Imo State for compulsory retirement with effect from 27 October 2021, while all salaries and allowance received in excess by His Lordship from 27 October 2021 till date should be refunded to the Council.

“The recommendation was pursuant to the findings of the Council that His Lordship has two different dates of birth; 27 October 1956 and 27 October 1958.

“However, 27 October 1956, appeared to be the consistent date of birth, but in 2006, the Chief Judge swore to an affidavit changing the date of birth to 27 October 1958.

“Similarly,Council finds that Hon. Kadi Mahdi has 3 different dates of birth (10 December, 28 January and July) all in 1959, while his actual date of birth was 1952.

“The Council held that Grand Kadi Mahdi committed an act of misconduct in violation of Rule 02908 (i) and (ii) of the Public Service Rules, 2021 and ought to have retired from service 12 years ago.

“The Council, therefore, resolved to recommend Hon. Kadi Babagana Mahdi for compulsory retirement to the Governor of Yobe State and that he should refund all salaries and allowances received for the past 12 years.

“The Council at its meeting,also issued a letter of caution to Hon. Justice I. A. Jamil of Kogi State to be more circumspect in handling sensitive matters in the future.

“The Council further resolved to issue letter of caution to Hon. Justice J. J. Majebi, Chief Judge, Kogi State, for assigning a sensitive matter to a junior Judge on the Bench” Kemi Babalola-Ogedengbe, Esq, Deputy Director (Information) NJC, stated this on Friday.

She said the Council equally considered the Report of its Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committee, which considered a total number of 30 petitions, and subsequently empanelled 6 Committees for further investigation.

“While 22 were dismissed for lacking in merit, two were sub judice.The Council also empanelled a Committee to investigate all complaints and petitions against Hon. Justice O. A. Ojo, Chief Judge, Osun State.

Mohammed Shosanya

African Alliance Insurance Plc has prayed a Lagos the Federal High Court,  to nullify the dissolution of its Board by the National Insurance Commission (NAICOM).

The insurance firm is praying for a declaration that the purported board dissolution and removal of its Chief Executive Officer and executive directors on October 29, 2024 is unlawful,null and void.

The court  has not fixed date for hearing of the suit marked, FHC/L/CS/2008/2024

Defendants in the suit are the interim management board appointed by NAICOM, namely; Dr. Haruna Mustafa, Jacob Erhabor, Wasiu Amao, Oremeyi Longe, Anthony Achebe and Halimatu Khabee, as well as NAICOM Director of Legal, Enforcement & Market Development, Dr. Talmiz Usman and Minister of Finance.

The plaintiff is praying the court to determine whether NAICOM complied with the provisions of the National Insurance Corporation Act, the Insurance Act and the Prudential Guidelines for Insurers and Reinsurers in Nigeria 2015 in the purported board dissolution and removal of African Alliance CEO and executive directors and the appointment of the interim management board.

Through its counsel,Tayo Oyetibo (SAN),the plaintiff also asked the court to determine whether NAICOM acted in bad faith and unreasonably in exercising its powers under the laws.

Besides,the plaintiff is praying the court to hold that the act of NAICOM in seeking the approval of the Minister of Finance to take over the management of African Alliance while its application for consent to sell its assets in Pension Alliance Limited (PAL) was pending with the commission is unreasonable, in bad faith and unlawful.

The insurance firm prayed the court to nullify the dissolution of its board and the appointment of an interim management board as contained in NAICOM’s letter dated October 29 2024 and signed by Talmiz Usman for being unlawful, null and void.

It also prayed for an injunction restraining the defendants, especially the first to sixth defendants, whether by themselves, their representatives, privies or agents from dealing with or selling/disposing of any assets of African Alliance.

In its supporting affidavit to the originating summons,the insurance firm stated that NAICOM frustrated its efforts to raise funds and acted in bad faith in the dissolution of its management and board.

African Alliance stated that Pensions Alliance Limited (PAL) is a company that was incorporated in 2005 with two shareholders -African Alliance (49 percent shareholding) and FSDH Holding (51 per cent).

It said for reasons well known to NAICOM, PAL failed to hold its Annual General Meeting (AGM) that would have allowed it to consider and declare dividends to the shareholders, which would have formed part of the operational funds of African Alliance as the investment in PAL was made in the interest of the company and its shareholders.

African Alliance stated that it submitted a Business Turnaround Plan (BTP) to NAICOM outlining its short-term, medium-term, and long-term plan to address the issues raised by the Commission.

The key component of the short-term plan was to secure bridge financing through the sale of the plaintiff’s 49 percent asset in PAL, following which NAICOM directed it to inject N6 billion into the company within 90 days from July 1, 2024.

According to the firm,NAICOM still went behind to publish a notice that it had put Africa Alliance under its Regulatory Order.

The insurance firm added: “The action of the Commission was done in bad faith to frustrate the plaintiff’s efforts in raising funds for the bridge financing.

“As a result, there was a run on the company which greatly depleted the plaintiff’s operational funds and also rendered all the plaintiff’s efforts at getting investors futile, leaving the plaintiff with the only option of the sale of its assets to raise the N6 billion bridge financing.

“This action of the Commission had serious ripple effects on the finance of the plaintiff, resulting in loss of customers and investors, serious financial loss and plunging the plaintiff into serious financial and investment crisis.

“In a bid to raise the N6 billion bridge financing, the plaintiff had to put up its shares in PAL for sale and got offers from two companies: Sea Global Energy Company Nigeria Limited and Ovie-B Investment Limited.

“By a letter dated October 22, 2024, the Commission refused its consent to the sale of the assets to the prospective investor not because the timeline it gave the plaintiff had expired but on the grounds that it was not satisfied with the information about the prospective purchaser and further asked for onerous conditions which include but not limited to getting consent from PENCOM when the applicable Guidelines did not provide for PENCOM’s approval as a condition precedent to the grant of the Commission’s consent.

“Upon receipt of the Commission’s letter, the plaintiff contacted Sea Global Energy Company Nigeria Limited to see if they are willing, able, and ready to fulfil their offer of N30 billion for the assets and N5.85 billion to buy out the majority shareholders of the plaintiff, and they confirmed their readiness to fulfil their offer.

“By a letter dated 30 October 2024, the plaintiff wrote to the Commission to inform her of the offer from Sea Global Energy Company Nigeria Limited and their readiness to purchase the assets.

“Surprisingly, shortly after the delivery of the plaintiff’s letter to the Commission, the plaintiff received a letter from the Commission notifying it of the exercise of the powers under sections 41, 42, and 50 of the National Insurance Commission Act on the same 30th October 2024 to: dissolve the management and Board of the Plaintiff and remove all members of the Board, including the Chief Executive Officer and Executive Directors; appoint an interim Management/Board to steer the affairs of the company.

“After the receipt of the letter of the Commission, the plaintiff discovered that while the Commission was engaging with the plaintiff on the sale of the company’s assets, the Commission was, at the same time, seeking the approval of the Minister of Finance to take over the management of the plaintiff.

“The plaintiff also discovered that the plan of the Commission and its officers from the outset was to take over the management of the plaintiff through an interim management board and sell the assets of the company to their nominees at gross undervalue.

“The act of the Commission in seeking the approval of the Minister of Finance to take over the management of the plaintiff while still engaging the company on the sale of its assets to raise funds to meet its obligation is unreasonable and in bad faith.”

      Mohammed Shosanya

The Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) says it has  discontinued its pending litigation against Heyden Petroleum Limited, particularly Suit No. FHC/AMC/67/2024.

The agency also said it’s not in dispute with the petroleum company.

The act was sequel to the settlement of all issues between the agency and the petroleum company owned by the governor of Ogun State,Dapo Abiodun.

In a statement,the agency said the company has demonstrated commitment to meeting their obligations and has been making payments accordingly.

It added:”As a responsible debt recovery agency of the Federal Government of Nigeria, it is not the practice of AMCON to engage in a media trial of obligors who are meeting their obligation. Accordingly, the general public is urged to disregard any negative commentaries on the relationship between AMCON and Heyden Petroleum Limited”.

         Mohammed Shosanya

Three oil marketers,AYM Shafa Ltd, A. A. Rano Ltd and Matrix Petroleum Services Ltd, have told an Abuja Federal High Court,that the alleged move to monopolize the energy sector by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals is a recipe for disaster in the country.

They disclosed this in their replies to a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum against the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Nigeria National Petroleum Corporaiton Limited (NNPCL) and others.

In their response,the defendants told the court that they are well qualified and entitled to be issued import licence by the 1st Defendant to import petroleum products in Nigeria within the meaning of Section 317(9) of the Petroleum Industry Act.

They added that vesting the plaintiff with the power of monopoly in Nigeria’s petroleum industry as it seeks vide the instant suit, will kill competitive pricing of petroleum products in the country, further deteriorate Nigeria’s critically ailing economy and unleash untold hardship on Nigerians, all of which constitute a recipe for disaster in the polity”.

They also said that if the country puts all her energy eggs in one basket by stopping importation of petroleum products and allowing the Plaintiff to be the sole producer and supplier of petroleum products in Nigeria, with liberty to determine the prices at which it supplies the products, the prices of petroleum products in Nigeria will continue to rise and energy security will elude Nigeria.

They added:”That if Nigeria puts all her energy eggs in one basket by stopping importation of petroleum products and allowing the Plaintiff to be the sole producer and supplier of petroleum products in Nigeria, with liberty to determine the prices at which it supplies the products, the prices of petroleum products in Nigeria will continue to rise and energy security will elude Nigeria.

“That amidst the glaring absence of any credible and demonstrable proof that the plaintiff refines and supplies adequate petroleum products for the daily use/consumption of Nigerians, giving the Plaintiff judicial imprimatur to be the sole supplier of refined petroleum products to Nigerians, thereby encouraging monopoly in a major aspect of Nigeria’s oil industry, is a recipe for disaster in Nigeria’s energy sector.

“That in the event of any breakdown in or obstruction to the production chain of the plaintiff which stops it from producing, Nigeria will be thrown into energy crises as Nigeria does not have the reserves that would last it for the at least 30 days that it would need to order, pay for, freight and import refined products into tanks in Nigeria”.

They also told the court that granting the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff which solely aim at making the Plaintiff a monopolist in Nigeria’s petroleum sector is a design to leave Nigeria and Nigerians at the mercy of the Plaintiff with respect to availability and cost of purchasing petroleum products in the country.

They said they are fully qualified for the issuance of the import licences issued to them by the first defendant, as they duly met all the legal requirements for the issuance of such import licences, before same were issued to them. 

They said:”The import licences lawfully and validly issued to the Defendants did not in any way whatsoever, cripple the Plaintiff’s business or its refinery.

“The import licences issued to the Defendants by the 1st Defendant are in line with the provisions of Petroleum Industry Act, 2021, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018 and other relevant laws, the oil marketing firms told the court.

In the suit number: FHC/CS/ABM/1324/2024, the oil marketers told the court that the plaintiff does not produce adequate petroleum products for the daily consumption of Nigerians, adding that there is nothing before the court to prove the contrary.

The plaintiff had on September 6, 2024, sued the Nigeria Midstream And Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Nigeria National Petroleum Corporaiton Limited (NNPCL), and some oil marketers, praying the court to declare that NMDPRA is in violation of Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act by issuing licenses for the importation of petroleum products.

The plaintiff stated that such licenses should only be issued in circumstances where there is a petroleum product shortfall.

The plaintiff prayed the court to declare that NMDPRA is in violation of its statutory responsibilities under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) for not encouraging local refineries such as Dangote Refinery.

Mohammed Shosanya

Operatives of the Nigeria Police Force in Potiskum, Yobe State have been accused of brutality, negligence and disruption of justice in a case involving two officers in Potiskum, Yobe State.

In a letter addressed to the Chief Registrar of the High Court of Justice in Damaturu, the Chief Magistrate Court in Potiskum alleged that two police officers were arraigned on charges of criminal conspiracy,causing grievous hurt,and robbery.

But,despite multiple adjournments and court orders, the police failed to produce the suspects.

The court further alleged that the case was transferred to the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) for investigation, but the suspect was released on bail and failed to appear before the Civil Defence Office.

The NSCDC Public Relations Officer, Bala Garba,confirmed the incident,while the Nigeria Police Force Public Relations Officer, Dungus Abdulkarim, stated that the case was under investigation.

The Public Relations Officer of the Nigeria Police Force,Mr Dungus Abdulkarim,said the command is aware of the case and it has been under investigation.

The chairperson of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Altine Ibrahim, confirmed the incident,saying the body’s executives would meet with the Commissioner of Police to evaluate the command’s response and determine the next course of action.

Mohammed Shosanya

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has arraigned Hauwau Gimbiya Mukhtar Abdulkarim, the serving Provost of the Federal College of Education (Technical) (FCET), Gusau.

He was arraigned alongside Abdullahi Boyi, a lecturer with the Sokoto State College of Education (SSCE) Sokoto on alleged certificate forgery.

The ICPC’s spokesperson,Demola Bakare,in a statement  said the duo were arraigned on a six-count charge, registered as charge No. SS/213c/2024, before Hon. Justice Muhammad Aliyu Sambo at the Sokoto State High Court.

The agency accused the two defendants of forging an appointment letter and subsequent use of same for application for the position of Provost at the Federal College of Education(Technical) Gusau, Zamfara State.

They were also accused of making false statements to the officers of the ICPC in the course of investigation which is an offence under Section 25(1) (a) and punishable under Section 25 (ii) (b) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related offences Act 2000.

Count one of the charge,according to the statement reads,“That you Hauwa’u Gimbiya Mukhtar Abdulkarim (F) and Abdullah Boyi (M) sometimes in the year 2023 or thereabout at Sokoto within the Jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, conspired to do an illegal act to wit: forgery of a letter of “Notification for Appointment” to the Post of Chief Lecturer on COMPCASS 14 with effect from 1st January, 2017 and you thereby committed an offencecontrary to section 59(1) and punishable under section 60(2) ofthe Sokoto State Penal Code Law,2019.”

The defendants,however,pleaded not guilty to all the six charges. 

Counsel for the defendants,Dr. Muhammad Mansur Aliyu and Mr. M.S Diri SAN,respectively moved for applications for bail on behalf of their clients.

They requested the court to consider reasonable terms for bail citing the defendants’ “established positions and cooperation during the investigation.”

Counsel to the ICPC,Mr. Suleiman Ahmad did not oppose the bail applications.

Hon. Justice Sambo,granted bail under specific conditions designed to ensure the defendants’ continued presence throughout the trial proceedings.

The bail conditions require each defendant to provide two sureties who are permanent residents of Sokoto State, with each surety signing a bond of one million naira (₦1,000,000).

After granting the bail, the prosecution  counsel requested a date for trial to commence, emphasizing the Commission’s preparedness to present witnesses and evidence in support of the charges.

 Justice Sambo adjourned the matter to 21st November, 2024,for further mention on the matter.

Mohammed Shosanya

The Coalition Against Corruption and Injustice (CACI) in Nigeria has raised concerns over alleged plots by some politicians to compromise the judiciary’s independence.

Its action is against the backdrop of call by a group, which recently sought the removal of Justices John Tsoho, Peter Lifu, and James Omotosho if the Federal High Court Abuja.

In a statement signed by Prince Livinus Itodo, the Coalition accused a Governor of backing a group of blackmailers to bully the judiciary and undermine its integrity.

Itodo described such politicians as power-drunk, who are abusing their offices in a bid to silence opposition and maintain a stranglehold on power.

According to Itodo, the accusations against Justices Tsoho, Lifu, and Omotosho are unfounded and lack concrete evidence.

Itodo described the judiciary as a sacred institution, essential to Nigeria’s democratic system, adding that its independence and impartiality are non-negotiable.

“The recent call by the Joint Action for Democracy (JAD) to remove Justice John Tsoho, Justice Peter Lifu, and Justice James Omotosho from office is a thinly veiled attempt to undermine the judiciary’s integrity.

“This move, allegedly backed by a certain Governor is a blatant intimidation tactic aimed at compromising the independence of our judicial system.

“The Governor’s involvement in this scheme is particularly concerning, given his history of prioritizing personal interests over the welfare of people of the state.

“His actions suggest a focus on personal agendas rather than the well-being of his people. It has become evident that the Governor is power-drunk, abusing his office to silence opposition and maintain a stranglehold on power.

“The JAD’s accusations against Justices Tsoho, Lifu, and Omotosho are unfounded and lack concrete evidence. This smear campaign seeks to erode public trust in the judiciary, creating an environment conducive to corruption and injustice. We must not allow this to happen” Itodo stated.

The group noted that judiciary is a sacred institution, essential to our democratic system, adding that its independence and impartiality are non-negotiable.

“If we allow these politicians’ tactics to succeed, the consequences will be far-reaching.The judiciary’s integrity will be compromised, leading to widespread disillusionment with the justice system. The independence of the judiciary is crucial to our democratic system.

“Compromising this independence will have devastating consequences for our democracy. A compromised judiciary will create an environment where injustice thrives, and the rule of law is disregarded.

“JAD’s actions are not about seeking justice or accountability but rather about silencing the judiciary and advancing a selfish agenda.

“The tactics of these serial blackmailers to bully the judiciary are reprehensible and will not be tolerated” the group warned.

The Coalition commended the judiciary for its commitment to justice and fairness despite the relentless attacks on judges.

Itodo called on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to investigate these allegations and protect the judiciary’s integrity.

“The legal community must stand united against these intimidation tactics. Nigerians must demand accountability and transparency from those seeking to undermine our judiciary.

“We will not stand idly by, while some politicians attempt to compromise the country’s judiciary.We therefore urge all Nigerians to join us in defending the integrity of our judicial system.

“JAD must cease their attacks on the judiciary. The Nigerian people will not be swayed by their baseless accusations and intimidation tactics” the Coalition stated.