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.
news
Breaking : Tinubu Removes NMDPRA Chiefs Farouk, Komolafe Over Sabotage, Corruption Allegations; Names Replacement
The Chief Executive of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, Farouk Ahmed, has resigned.
Similarly, his counterpart at the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, Gbenga Komolafe, has stepped down.
Based on the development, President Bola Tinubu has asked the Senate to confirm new chief executives for the two agencies.
The President’s request was contained in separate letters to the Senate on Wednesday.
This was announced in a statement issued by the President’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga.
Both officials were appointed in 2021 by former President Muhammadu Buhari after the enactment of the Petroleum Industry Act.
According to the statement, Tinubu “has written to the Senate, requesting expedited confirmation of Oritsemeyiwa Amanorisewo Eyesan as CEO of NUPRC and Engineer Saidu Aliyu Mohammed as CEO of NMDPRA.”
The statement noted that Eyesan, an economist and oil industry veteran, spent nearly 33 years at the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and its subsidiaries.
She retired in 2024 as Executive Vice President, Upstream, and previously served as Group General Manager, Corporate Planning and Strategy.
Mohammed, a chemical engineer and former Managing Director of the Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company and the Nigerian Gas Company, has also served on several energy sector boards.
He recently emerged as an independent non-executive director at Seplat Energy.
“The two nominees are seasoned professionals in the oil and gas industry,” the statement noted.
Ahmed’s resignation comes amid a high-profile conflict with Africa’s richest man, Aliko Dangote, which drew national attention in December 2025.
The dispute arose from Dangote’s allegations that Ahmed and his family were living beyond their legitimate means, citing millions of dollars allegedly spent on overseas schooling for his four children.
Dangote petitioned the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission to investigate and prosecute Ahmed for abuse of office and corrupt enrichment, sparking a nationwide debate over regulatory oversight in Nigeria’s petroleum sector.
The NMDPRA chief dismissed Dangote’s claims as “wild and spurious,” insisting that he would rather defend himself before a formal investigative body than engage in public arguments.
The conflict, which traces its roots to 2024 when Ahmed criticised domestic refinery output—including Dangote’s refinery—prompted intervention by the House of Representatives, which summoned both parties to avoid destabilising the sector.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Wednesday evening met with the embattled Chief Executive of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Farouk Ahmed, at the State House, Abuja.
The meeting came amid allegations of financial impropriety made by industrialist and President of the Dangote Group, Alhaji Aliko Dangote, against the NMDPRA boss.
Dangote and Ahmed have been at odds for a while now over downstream petroleum regulation and the future of domestic refining in Nigeria.
At a press conference on Sunday at the Dangote Petroleum Refinery, Dangote accused the NMDPRA, under Mr Ahmed’s leadership, of economic sabotage, alleging that regulatory actions were undermining local refining capacity.
He claimed that the continued issuance of import licences for petroleum products was frustrating domestic refiners and deepening Nigeria’s reliance on fuel imports.
The billionaire industrialist further alleged that the regulator was colluding with international traders and petroleum importers to the detriment of local operators, accusations to which the NMDPRA has yet to publicly respond.
Mr Dangote also made personal allegations against the NMDPRA chief, claiming that Mr Ahmed was living beyond his legitimate means.
He alleged that four of Mr Ahmed’s children attend secondary schools in Switzerland at costs running into several millions of dollars, arguing that such expenditure raised concerns about conflicts of interest and the integrity of regulatory oversight in the downstream petroleum sector.
On Monday, Mr Dangote escalated the claims, accusing Mr Ahmed of corruption and misappropriation of public funds.
He alleged that about $5 million was spent on the secondary education and upkeep of the children over six years, with an additional $2 million on tertiary education, including an alleged $210,000 for a 2025 Harvard MBA programme for one of them.
The controversy deepened on Tuesday when Mr Dangote, through his lawyer, Ogwu Onoja, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), petitioned the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), calling for Mr Ahmed’s arrest, investigation, and prosecution.
In the petition addressed to ICPC Chairman Musa Aliyu, Mr Dangote alleged that the NMDPRA chief “spent without evidence of lawful means of income amounting to over $7 million for the education of his four children” in Switzerland.
The petition reportedly included the names of the children, the schools attended, and detailed figures for verification.
Mr Ahmed arrived at the Presidential Villa at about 5:30 p.m. and left the President’s office after less than 30 minutes.
He declined to speak with journalists as he exited the State House and offered no comment on the allegations or the outcome of his meeting with President Tinubu.
The immediate past Managing Director of the National Inland Waterways Authority, Bola Oyebamiji, on Saturday emerged as the consensus candidate of the All Progressives Congress for the forthcoming Osun State governorship election.
Oyebamiji’s emergence followed a motion moved by two governorship aspirants, Kunle Adegoke (SAN) and Senator Babajide Omoworare, at the primary election venue located within the premises of Ebunoluwa Group of Schools, Osogbo.
The Chairman of the APC governorship primary committee and Governor of Edo State, Monday Okpebholo, thereafter subjected the motion to a voice vote, which received overwhelming support from party members present at the primary.
Okpebholo subsequently declared, “By the power conferred on me, I present to you Bola Oyebamiji, as the governorship candidate of our party.”
Newsthumb earlier reported that the APC governorship primary in Osun State commenced in Osogbo, the state capital, with the arrival of the committee chairman, Monday Okpebholo, who noted that the candidate will emerge by affirmation.
APC’s gov candidate Oyebamiji pledges to reposition Osun
He arrived at the venue alongside the co-chairman of the committee, Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa of Ondo State, and other members of the governorship primary committee, including Governor Abdullahi Sule of Nasarawa State, Dr Obafemi Hamzat, who represented the Lagos State Governor, and former Kogi State Governor, Yahaya Bello.
Earlier on Tuesday, 1660 delegates that would elect the APC candidate in the December 13 governorship primary of the party emerged.
There were also clear indications that the seven APC governorship aspirants in the state had stepped down to back a consensus flagbearer after a late-night meeting with President Bola Tinubu at the State House, Abuja, on Wednesday.
A former APC National Secretary, Senator Iyiola Omisore, on Wednesday, speaking on a TVC News programme, Politics Tonight, declared his support for the party’s arrangement to choose a consensus candidate for the 2026 Osun State governorship election.
Omisore, who was among seven aspirants disqualified by the APC Screening Committee for alleged violations of party guidelines and electoral provisions, said he accepted the decision following guidance from President Bola Tinubu.
The Supreme Court has overridden the pardon granted by President Bola Tinubu to an Abuja-based house wife, Maryam Sanda, who was in 2020 sentenced to death by hanging for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, during a domestic dispute.
President Tinubu had reduced Sanda’s sentence to 12 years imprisonment on compassionate ground.
But in a judgment a on Friday, the Supreme Court, in a split decision of four-to-one, affirmed the death sentence handed Sanda by the Court of Appeal, Abuja which upheld the decision of a HIgh Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sentencing her to death by hanging.
The Apex Court resolved all the issues raised in the appeal she filed against her and dismissed the appeal for being without merit.
Court orders woman accused of killing husband to enter defence
Justice Moore Adumein held in the lead judgment, which he personally delivered, that the prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt as required, adding that the Court of Appeal was right to have affirmed the judgement of the trial court.
Justice Adumein held that it was wrong for the Executive to seek to exercise its power of pardon over a case of culpable homicide, in respect of which an appeal was pending.
-
news5 years agoUPDATE: #ENDSARS: CCTV footage of Lekki shootings intact – Says Sanwo – Olu
-
lifestyle5 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
-
health5 years agoUPDATE : Nigeria Records 790 new cases of COVID-19
-
health6 years agoBREAKING: Nigeria confirms 663 new cases of COVID-19
-
entertainment11 months agoAshny Set for Valentine Special and new Album ‘ Femme Fatale’
-
news7 months agoBREAKING: Tinubu swears in new NNPCL Board