Connect with us

News

Court Reserves Verdict on INEC’s 2027 Election Timetable

Published

on

 

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved judgment in two separate appeals over dispute surrounding the timetable for the conduct of the 2027 elections released by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

A three-member justices of the appellate court, in a judgment delivered by Justice Adebukola Bankole on Wednesday, held that judgments would be reserved in the appeals.

According to her, the date of the judgement will be communicated to parties in the appeal.

Two political parties, Youth Party of Nigeria, YPN, and Social Democratic Party, SDP, had approached two Federal High Courts in Abuja, to nullify the timetable released for the 2027 elections by INEC.

While Justice Mohammed Umar of the Federal High Court granted the reliefs sought in the suit by YPN and nullified the election guidelines by INEC, Justice James Omotosho, in the suit filed by SDP, granted some reliefs in favour of the party and some others in favour of the electoral umpire.

Not satisfied by the two judgements, INEC approached the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment of Justice Umar and part of the judgment of Justice Omotosho which limited INEC’s power regarding the conduct of elections.

During the hearing of the appeals, Dr Alex Izinyon, SAN, led two other SANs, from INEC to argued the appeals.

Izinyon, in his submission before the appellate court contended that INEC had the power as provided by the law under the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act to issue guidelines for the elections.

“The constitution, specifically, empowered INEC to organise, supervise and undertake elections and other political activities as provided and that the timetable provided is in consonance with the power donated by the 1999 Constitution and the enabling act for INEC to do what it did in issuing elections timetables.

Advert

“The trial court erred in law because it failed to interpret, using the Supreme Court authorities and Court of Appeal decisions on the power already donated by the 1999 Constitution to INEC to arrange for elections including pre-election matters.

“Supreme Court and Court of Appeal have held that INEC has the power to organise and supervise elections and this include timetable for elections to carry out political activities preceeding the elections.

“The trial court failed to give effect to the phrase ‘not later than 120 days and not more than 90 days’, which was a subject of contention at the trial court.

“And that not less than 120 days means it should not be more than but it can be less than but for the court to say that it must be exactly 120 days, was too mathematical and not the intendment of the lawmakers as any of the activities can be done before the 120 days and not more than.

“For the trial court to say it must be exactly 120 days is a mechanical application of the statue which is contrary to the decisions of the apex court and the Court of Appeal,” he said.

He said the same goes for the 90-day provisions, adding that the reliefs sought by the respondents at the trial court were declarative in nature.

“There was no evidence by way of affidavit to show that they have commenced any primary or taken steps or that they have suffered any injury..

“Therefore the court ought not to have granted any relief,” the senior lawyer said.

Izinyon said the second appeal was filed by SDP and the judgment delivered by Justice Omotosho, who granted some reliefs to the SDP and granted some also to the INEC.

“INEC appealed part of the judgement in that case which limits their powers by saying that the days were short by few numbers of days that INEC should go back and rectify this,” he added.

Before the main appeal was argued, Izinyon moved three applications.

One of applications prayed the court to close the door against YPN on the ground that the party failed to file its respondent brief after service of the appellant briefs on them five days earlier.

He argued that the court should hold that they had no written briefs in opposition to the appellant’s briefs as they are prohibited by paragraph 13 of the practice direction of the pre-election proceedings issued by the President of the Court of Appeal.

He said the rule states that no time shall be extended for default under the same paragraph.

The YPN’s counsel, Akinwale Irokosun, when asked by the panel, if the party filed any response to the motion, answered in the negative.

The lead counsel later moved his application and the court reserved ruling to be delivered alongside the main appeal.

Izinyon equally opposed the motion by Irokosun, praying the court to grant them an extension of time to file their respondent brief.

He argued that there was no extension of time to file respondent brief when the time provided by the rules had elapsed.

News

President Tinubu Adds Days to Working Vacation, Returns at Weekend

Published

on

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu will return to Nigeria this weekend after extending his working vacation in Europe by a few days, the State House announced Monday evening.

The President departed Nigeria on August 30 for London to begin the working vacation, which was initially expected to last three weeks. According to a statement issued by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, the President has since relocated to Paris, France, where he held meetings with French President Emmanuel Macron and businessman Mr. Vincent Bollore, whose media group includes Canal+, Multichoice, and Universal Music Group.

Despite his absence, the statement emphasized that President Tinubu has remained actively engaged with domestic affairs, particularly directing an independent panel to investigate the deaths of 37 illegal miners in Minna following their detention by the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps.

Advert

The President has delegated Vice President Kashim Shettima to represent him at official functions. However, Vice President Shettima departed Abuja on September 20 for New York to attend the 81st United Nations General Assembly. In his absence, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator George Akume, will continue to represent the President at official engagements.

On the political front, the statement noted that Senator Abubakar Yari, Director-General of the Presidential Campaign Council (PCC), has been leading consultations with prominent traditional rulers across the country alongside other notable party leaders.

The extension comes as the President’s initial three-week vacation timeline elapsed, with the State House confirming he will now return to the country at the weekend.

Continue Reading

News

Court Adjourns El-Rufai’s N1 billion Suit Against ICPC, AGF, Police

Published

on

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Federal High Court, Abuja Division, on Monday adjourned a N1 billion rights suit filed by former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and others until October 27 for a definite hearing.

Others named in the suit are the Inspector-General (IG) of police and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as the second and third respondents, respectively.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik adjourned the suit to allow counsel to the former governor, Akinyemi Aremu, to respond to the counter affidavit filed by the AGF opposing the claims.

When the case was called, Mr Aremu informed the court that the matter was scheduled for hearing.

Counsel for the AGF, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, however, told the court that the AGF had filed a counter affidavit.

She prayed the court for leave to move their motion seeking an extension of time to deem their counter affidavit as being properly filed and served.

El-Rufai’s lawyer, Mr Aremu; Ezekiel Rimamsomte, who appeared for the IG, and the ICPC counsel did not oppose the application, and the judge granted it as prayed.

Mrs Abdulmalik then adjourned the case until October 27 for a definite hearing.

Earlier in the suit, the ex-governor sued the ICPC, the chief magistrate at the Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja, the IG, and the AGF as first to fourth respondents, respectively.

He, however, dropped the name of the magistrate from the case following his inability to specify the name of the magistrate who was sued as the second respondent, after the judge made the observation.

Mr El-Rufai is, therefore, demanding N1 billion in damages against ICPC, the IG and the AGF.

Advert

In an originating motion on notice marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, dated and filed February 20 by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, the former governor sought seven reliefs.

He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on February 19 at about 2:00 p.m. by the ICPC and IG amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights.

He said it violated the dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.

He urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”

Mr El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.

He sought an order directing the first and third respondents (ICPC and IG) to forthwith return all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.

He also sought an order awarding N1,000,000,000.00 (one billion naira) as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages, among others.

In its counter affidavit, the ICPC said it received a petition against Mr El-Rufai and, acting on it, commenced an investigation that led to the search at his residence.

It argued that its operatives acted under a valid search warrant issued on February 18 and executed on February 19 between 1:37 p.m. and 3:56 p.m. at 12 Mambilla Street, Asokoro, Abuja.

The commission said its officials were accompanied by Nigeria Police Force personnel and that the exercise was witnessed by Mr El-Rufai’s wife, Hadiza El-Rufai, and his son, Mohammed El-Rufai.

The ICPC, which urged the court to dismiss the suit, listed the items allegedly recovered from the residence.

The police, also in its counter affidavit deposed to by Ewa Anthony, argued that it had the statutory power to detect, arrest, investigate and prosecute offenders.

It argued that the search at Mr El-Rufai’s residence was carried out pursuant to a search warrant issued by a competent court of law.

The anti-graft agency disagreed with the ex-governor, insisting the search warrant was a genuine court order.

It said its officers who carried out the operation complied with all applicable legal procedures in executing the search warrant.

According to the police, the applicant is trying to use the honourable court to shield him from the security investigation and prosecution in court.

It, therefore, prayed the court to dismiss the suit in its entirety.

Continue Reading

News

Tinubu Becomes First Post-1999 Nigerian President to Miss Three Consecutive UNGAs

Published

on

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

President Bola Tinubu has again delegated Vice President Kashim Shettima to lead Nigeria’s delegation to the 81st United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York, marking the third consecutive year he has personally skipped the global summit since taking office in 2023.

The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, said on Monday that Tinubu is “currently on annual leave,” describing the delegation to Shettima as “neither unusual nor a diminution of the country’s diplomatic standing”. Idris insisted Shettima “carries the full mandate of the President and the Federal Republic of Nigeria” and will deliver the national statement.

However, the explanation has done little to quell public scrutiny. Tinubu last personally attended UNGA in September 2023 for the 78th session, shortly after his inauguration. He has since been absent from the 79th session in 2024, the 80th in 2025, and now the 81st in 2026—a pattern unmatched by any Nigerian president since the return of democracy in 1999.

Advert

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, through his media aide Phrank Shaibu, demanded a “full explanation,” arguing that three consecutive absences “could no longer be dismissed as coincidence or routine delegation” but constituted “a pattern of presidential evasion”. Atiku questioned whether Tinubu’s “documented history with United States law-enforcement agencies has become a burden on Nigeria’s foreign relations”.

At the centre of the opposition’s claim is a long-standing U.S. forfeiture case in which $460,000 was held in an account linked to Tinubu, after American authorities alleged the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were involved in prohibited financial transactions. Atiku also questioned why the administration spent up to $9 million on American lobbyists to improve Nigeria’s standing in Washington while the President repeatedly stays away from New York.

The Presidency has not directly addressed the drug-case allegation. A ruling party chieftain, Olatunbosun Oyintiloye, dismissed the claims as “political propaganda,” noting that no U.S. court has reopened a criminal case or pronounced Tinubu guilty of drug trafficking.

Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Jimoh Ibrahim, had earlier announced that Tinubu would attend and that a seat had been secured for him near U.S. President Donald Trump. That seat remained empty.

Continue Reading

Trending