news
Oyetola, APC, INEC urge Appeal Court to uphold Osun election
….Court reserves judgments on four appeals
The Osun State Governor, Adegboyega Oyetola, his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) have asked the Court of Appeal in Abuja to uphold the victory of Oyetola and APC in the governorship election held in the state on September 22 and 27, 2018.
Their request is contained in three separate appeals they filed against the majority judgment given by the Osun State Governorship Election Tribunal on March 22, 2019.
The tribunal had, in the majority judgment, given by two of its three members upheld the petition by the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate in the election, Senator Ademola Adeleke and voided Oyetola and APC’s victory.
In their appeals, argued on Wednesday, Oyetola, the APC and INEC prayed the five-man panel of the Court of Appeal, led by Justice Jummai Sankey, to set aside the majority decision of the tribunal, uphold their appeals and dismiss the October 16, 2018 petition by Adeleke and the PDP.
They equally urged the court to dismiss the cross-appeal filed by Adeleke, on the grounds that it is unmeritorious.
In the appeal by Oyetola, his lawyer, Wole Olanipekun (SAN) faulted the reasons given by the tribunal in reaching the judgment appealed against, arguing that the decision was not supported by the evidence led by the petitioners.
He urged the court to void the judgment because the judge, Justice Peter Obiorah who wrote and delivered it, did not participate in all the proceedings of the tribunal.
Olanipekun noted that “the judge, who did not sit, came to write the leading judgment and reviewed the evidence of the February 6, 2019 proceedings where he was absent.
“Adjudication is like video watching. It cannot be done by proxy. The judge cannot analyse the evidence of a witness, whose demeanor he did not observe. The judgement should be declared a nullity on this ground alone”
Olanipekun, who said he and some named senior lawyers were at the tribunal on February 6, 2019, faulted the argument by lawyer to Adeleke and the PDP that it was not clear from the record of proceedings, whether or not Justice Obiorah was absent on the particular day.
He argued that the judge’s failure to sigh at the end of the proceedings on February 6, 2019 was enough evidence to justify the appellant’s claim that Justice Obiorah was absent on the day in question.
Olanipekun also faulted the tribunal’s cancellation of results in 17 polling units in the state, and noted that the petitioners did not tender any result of the election before the tribunal.
“If there was no result before the tribunal, the tribunal could not have cancelled what was not before it. Since no single result was submitted and could not have been cancelled,” he said.
He argued that the tribunal went beyond its powers by annulling results in the 17 polling units in order to justify its the judgement it gave in favour of the petitioners.
Read Also: Easter: Oyetola okays free train transport for Osun citizens
Lawyer to the APC, Akin Olujinmi (SAN), while arguing the party’s appeal, contended that the tribunal was wrong to have allowed the petition, which was incurably incompetent.
“The 1st and 2nd respondents sought to be declared winner of the election, held on September 22, 2018, which was declared inconclusive. They also asked the tribunal to void the rerun election held on September 27, 2018, because they believed it was unlawful.
“You cannot say you should be declared a winner on the election that you said was unlawful and void,” he said.
Olujinmi accused the tribunal of exceeding its jurisdiction when it engaged in amending the petitioners’ reliefs to make them grantable.
“No tribunal has the jurisdiction to reframe, amend or formulate reliefs for the petitioners.
“On realising that the reliefs could not be granted, they (members of the tribunal) amended the reliefs and granted it by themselves.
“We are saying the tribunal has no power to amend a petitioner’s reliefs. The much they ought to do, on realising that the reliefs could not be granted, was to have dismissed the petition.”
He further faulted the tribunal for holding that the petitioners proved its case of non-compliance in respect of the polling units where it voided results.
Olujinmi added: “The tribunal was wrong. They cannot use the allegation of non-compliance directed at the election of September 27 against the election of September 22.
“The tribunal relied on certified true copy of Form EC8A, which they said were dumped on the tribunal. This was what they still relied on to nullify results in the polling units in which they said malpractices were proved. The so called non-complaince did not affect the result of the election,” Olujinmi said.
He argued that the tribunal went outside its powers and contravened Section 140(2) of the Electoral Act when it engaged in the deduction of votes from the outcome of the election to arrive at the decision it gave.
Lawyer to INEC, Yusuf Ali (SAN) who argued in similar manner, contended that the tribunal erred in its majority judgment, particularly as regards the issue of non-compliance.
He noted that the tribunal, having found that accreditation was properly done and that all witnesses agreed that the votes scored were not affected by the omissions noted in some result sheets, ought not to have voided any results.
Citing Section 134 (b) of the Electoral Act, Ali argued that non-compliance means not compliance with the provision of the Act, not an act of omission on the part of INEC officials, which are not contrary to the provision of the Act.
Ali also argued that since the tribunal held that the petitioners did not prove over-voting and non-compliance, it ought not to have turned around to void votes in some polling units.
On the question of why INEC did not call it witnesses at the tribunal, Ali said it was unnecessary because the petitioners did not discharge the burden of prove placed on them by the law to warrant INEC to call fresh witnesses.
Ali added: “There is no law that said INEC most call witnesses, since the petitioners could not discharge the responsibility of proving their declarative reliefs, there was no need for INEC to have called its own witnesses.”
Lawyer to Adeleke and the PDP, Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN) faulted the three appeals and the arguments proffered by Olanipekun, Olujinmi and Ali.
Ikpeazu argued that the tribunal was right in its decision to have declared Adeleke and his party as the winner of the election.
He faulted the argument that Justice Obiorah did not participate in all the proceedings of the tribunal, arguing that there was no sufficient evidence to that effect.
Ikpeazu urged the court to dismiss the three appeals and uphold the judgment of the tribunal.
Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN), who argued Adeleke’s cross-appeal, urged the court to allow his client’s appeal and reverse the portion of the judgment, where the tribunal rejected the evidence the petitioners lead in relation to six polling units.
Ogunwumiju argued that the tribunal wrongly excluded some of its evidence, because while it called 23 witnesses to prove it’s allegation of non-compliance in 23 polling units, the tribunal only upheld 17 where it voided elections.
Olanipekun, Olujinmi and Ali argued that the cross appeal was incompetent on several grounds and urged the tribunal to reject it.
At the conclusion of proceedings that lasted over eight hours, the presiding judge, Justice Sankey said judgments would be reserved till a later date.
She told parties that the date of the judgment would be communicated to them by the court’s Registry.
Other members of the court’s five-man panel are: Justices Abubakar Datti Yahaya, Ita George Mbaba, Isaiah Olufemi Akeju and Bitrus Sanga.
President Bola Tinubu has accepted the resignation of the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, and approved the appointment of Tunji Disu as Acting Inspector-General of Police with immediate effect.
Our correspondent had earlier reported that Egbetokun tendered his resignation letter on Tuesday, citing pressing family considerations.
Appointed in June 2023, Egbetokun was serving a four-year term scheduled to conclude in June 2027, in line with the amended provisions of the Police Act.
In a statement issued on Tuesday by his Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the President received the letter earlier on Tuesday and expressed appreciation for his service to the nation.
He also commended Egbetokun’s “decades of distinguished service to the Nigeria Police Force and the nation,” acknowledging his “dedication, professionalism, and steadfast commitment to strengthening internal security architecture during his tenure.”
“In view of the current security challenges confronting the nation, and acting in accordance with extant laws and legal guidance, President Tinubu has approved the appointment of Assistant Inspector-General of Police Tunji Disu to serve as Acting Inspector-General of Police with immediate effect.
“The President is confident that AIG Disu’s experience, operational depth, and demonstrated leadership capacity will provide steady and focused direction for the Nigeria Police Force during this critical period,” the statement read.
It added that in compliance with the provisions of the Police Act 2020, the President will soon convene a meeting of the Nigeria Police Council to formally consider Disu’s appointment as substantive Inspector-General of Police, after which his name will be forwarded to the Senate for confirmation.
The President reaffirmed his administration’s commitment to enhancing national security, strengthening institutional capacity, and ensuring that the Nigeria Police Force remains professional, accountable, and fully equipped to discharge its constitutional responsibilities.
President Bola Tinubu has signed the Electoral Act 2026 (Amendment) into law, days after the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) released the timetable for the 2027 general elections.
The signing ceremony took place at the State House, Abuja, at about 5:00pm on Wednesday, with principal officers of the National Assembly in attendance.
The National Assembly had on Tuesday passed the Electoral Act 2026 (Amendment) Bill.
The latest amendment comes amid intense public debate over the electronic transmission of election results in real time.
Last week, protests erupted at the National Assembly complex as civil society organisations and opposition figures mounted pressure on lawmakers to mandate live transmission of results from polling units directly to INEC’s central server.
The protesters argued that real-time transmission would reduce result manipulation and strengthen public confidence in the electoral process.
However, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and some stakeholders have raised concerns about the technical feasibility of live transmission, particularly in communities with weak telecommunications infrastructure. They have argued for a phased or hybrid approach that would allow manual collation where electronic systems fail.
Former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, on Tuesday spent the second night in the custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, as his lawyer, A.U Mustapha (SAN), pushes for his release on bail.
There are, however, indications that the commission may seek a remand order to extend his stay in custody to enable him to respond to questions posed by investigators handling his matter.
The former governor arrived at the EFCC headquarters in Abuja on Monday around 10 a.m. for questioning in connection with an alleged N432bn corruption probe. He was, however, detained at the commission, where investigators continued to grill him.
An official of the commission who pleaded anonymity said the anti-graft agency was considering obtaining a remand order after the expiration of the hours allowed by law to enable investigators conclude questioning him.
“Forget the speculations being peddled on social media that he has been released. He has not. El-Rufai is still with us and will be spending another night in custody.
“He is very much with us and will remain so because the investigators are considering getting a remand order after the expiration of the 48 hours allowed by law.
“The investigators need some time with him to answer questions arising from his eight years as governor in Kaduna State,” the source said.
Speaking in a telephone conversation with The PUNCH on Tuesday, El-Rufai’s counsel, Mustapha, confirmed that the former governor remained with the anti-graft agency, while insisting that his client had fully cooperated with investigators.
He described his client as a responsible citizen who is not a flight risk if granted bail.
Mustapha said, “Well, as a responsible citizen, he was invited and, true to his word, he honoured the invitation.
“As we speak, he is still with the EFCC. He is cooperating to the best of his capacity, and we hope that the EFCC, given its integrity, will be kind enough to admit him to bail because he is presumed innocent, and I am sure if he is granted bail, he will not jump bail.
“He is a responsible citizen, and everybody knows him. He came to Nigeria on his own volition. He wrote a letter that he was going to honour the EFCC invitation, and he kept his word as a man of integrity. We’re hopeful that very soon he will be granted bail.”
When asked about the specific allegations against his client, Mustapha declined to offer details.
“You’re asking the right question from the wrong person. That question can only be answered by the EFCC and not by me. I would just be speculating, and lawyers don’t do that.”
Pressed further on whether he witnessed parts of the interrogation and what it was about, Mustapha responded, “That would be prejudicial. It’s a confidential matter and not meant for public consumption.”
The EFCC’s interrogation is linked to the report of an ad hoc committee of the Kaduna State House of Assembly set up in 2024 to probe finances, loans, and contracts awarded between 2015 and 2023 during El-Rufai’s administration.
EFCC extends El-Rufai detention, Plateau indigenes killed, other top stories
Rep backs real-time electronic transmission of election results
The committee, chaired by Henry Zacharia, had alleged that several loans obtained during the period were not utilised for their intended purposes.
While presenting the report, the Speaker, Yusuf Dahiru Leman, claimed that about N423bn was allegedly siphoned under the former governor’s administration.
The committee recommended the investigation and prosecution of El-Rufai and some former cabinet members over alleged abuse of office, diversion of public funds, money laundering, contract awards without due process, and reckless borrowing.
The Assembly subsequently forwarded petitions to the EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.
El-Rufai has denied the allegations, describing the probe as politically motivated, and insisted that loans obtained during his tenure were properly appropriated and used for infrastructure, education, healthcare, and security.
On Monday, an EFCC source said the commission had been investigating the matter for about a year, noting that suspects are usually invited after investigations have reached an advanced stage.
“The commission has been investigating him for about a year now. As a commission, we don’t just rush to invite suspects. Persons accused are always the last; that is, after we might have done our investigation to an advanced stage.
“We are investigating him on the allegations against him by the Kaduna State Assembly,” the source said.
Meanwhile, in a separate development, the Department of State Services has filed criminal charges against El-Rufai before the Federal High Court in Abuja over alleged unlawful interception of the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu.
The three-count charge, marked FHC/ABJ/CR/99/2026, was filed under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024, and the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.
According to the charge sheet, El-Rufai allegedly admitted during a February 13, 2026, appearance on Arise TV’s Prime Time Programme that he and unnamed associates unlawfully intercepted Ribadu’s communications.
Count One alleged that El-Rufai “did admit during the interview that you and your cohorts unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu,” an offence said to be punishable under Section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes Amendment Act.
Count Two accused him of acknowledging knowledge of an individual involved in the alleged interception without reporting it to security agencies, while Count Three alleged that he and others still at large used technical equipment that compromised public safety and national security.
The prosecution further claimed that the alleged act, reportedly admitted during the television interview, caused “reasonable apprehension of insecurity among Nigerians.”
He is yet to be arraigned.
-
news5 years agoUPDATE: #ENDSARS: CCTV footage of Lekki shootings intact – Says Sanwo – Olu
-
lifestyle6 years agoFormer Miss World: Mixed reactions trail Agbani Darego’s looks
-
health5 years agoChairman Agege LG, Ganiyu Egunjobi Receives Covid-19 Vaccines
-
lifestyle4 years agoObateru: Celebrating a Quintessential PR Man at 60
-
health6 years agoUPDATE : Nigeria Records 790 new cases of COVID-19
-
health6 years agoBREAKING: Nigeria confirms 663 new cases of COVID-19
-
entertainment1 year agoAshny Set for Valentine Special and new Album ‘ Femme Fatale’
-
news9 months agoBREAKING: Tinubu swears in new NNPCL Board