TheNewsGuru

Tag: Festus Keyamo

  • UTME Result: People should be careful not to destroy Mmesoma – Keyamo

    UTME Result: People should be careful not to destroy Mmesoma – Keyamo

    Senior lawyer and former Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Festus Keyamo has reacted to the outcome of the committee set up by the Anambra State governor, Charles Soludo to investigate the issues between the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board, JAMB, and Ejikeme Mmesoma concerning her UTME result.

    In his reaction, Keyamo described Mmesoma as a brilliant girl, saying that the nation should be careful not to destroy her.

    The Senior Advocate of Nigeria noted that Mmesoma needs counselling, correction and guidance.

    The committee’s report shows that the 19 year-old Mmesoma used an app to upgrade her result from 249 to 362,

    In a statement via his verified Twitter handle on Saturday, the former Minister, who described the incident as unfortunate, said he deliberately waited for the end of the investigation before commenting on the saga.

    Keyamo also advised that her parents should encourage her to do a public apology to JAMB, to her family and to Nigerians, and that she should be allowed to get her admission based on actual scores.

    He wrote, “I deliberately waited for the end of this investigation before commenting on this unfortunate case of our daughter, Mmesoma Ejikeme.

    “She’s a brilliant girl, judging by her actual score of 249. The nation should be careful not to destroy her. What she needs is counselling, correction and guidance. She obviously did not know the weight and gravity of what she was doing. As teenagers, most of us made juvenile mistakes that never came to light.

    “The parents should encourage her to do a public apology to JAMB, to her family and to Nigerians after which she should be allowed to get her admission based on her actual scores. Anyone still pushing other narratives over this issue is not helping her and her family.

    “It is time to close this very unfortunate chapter and move on. This is my plea.”

  • Keyamo speaks on fuel subsidy removal

    Keyamo speaks on fuel subsidy removal

    Nigerian lawyer, columnist and human rights activist,  Festus Keyamo has noted that President Bola Tinubu did not remove oil subsidy.

    According to Keyamo, Tinubu only inherited a budget that made no provision for fuel subsidy.

    Recall that during his inaugural speech at Eagles Square, Tinubu  said fuel subsidy was gone.

    Following his announcement, many filling stations  hiked the pump price of their petroleum products, whilst some closed up.

    Also, long queues have returned to filling stations across the country.

    The lawyer took to his Twitter handle to express his mind on the fuel subsidy removal.

    In his reaction to the subsidy removal,  Keyamo said Tinubu would have been starting on an illegal note if he had reintroduced fuel subsidy during his speech.

    Keyamo’s tweet reads: “A section of the Press is mischievously twisting the narrative to read that TINUBU’s GOVERNMENT HAS REMOVED SUBSIDY. That is NOT CORRECT. TINUBU’s govt has merely inherited a regime where there was no provision for subsidy in the 2023 Appropriation Act as from June, 2023 and the Petroleum Industry Act which is now extant has no provision for subsidy.

    “President Tinubu merely acknowledged this state of affairs in his inaugural speech at the Eagle Square.

    “So any advocate of subsidy should convince the Nigerian people why President Tinubu should start on a note of illegality by promising to reintroduce something which the law has taken away.

    “They should also convince the Nigerian people why President Tinubu should embark on a present illegality that gulped $10 billion of our scarce or unavailable resources in 2022 alone.

    “Those claiming to defend the right or welfare of workers should convince the Nigerian people that $10 billion injected into the economy yearly will not jumpstart the economy enough as to create massive jobs and even increase the same minimum wage they complain about.

    “That is the conversation the Nigerian people are prepared to have now.”

  • Festus Keyamo knocks Buhari hard over Minister of State appointment

    Festus Keyamo knocks Buhari hard over Minister of State appointment

    In what is a valedictory punch, Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Festus Keyamo has knocked outgoing President Muhammadu Buhari very hard over the office of Minister of State.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports Keyamo to have said “the concept or designation of “Minister of State” is a constitutional aberration and is practically not working for many so appointed”.

    Recall President Buhari first appointed Keyamo as Minister of State in the Ministry Niger Delta Affairs in August, 2019 and was later redeployed as Minister of State in the Ministry of Labour and Employment.

    “What I am about to say, therefore, is not and should not be construed as an indication of ingratitude. Far from it. What I am about to say is just my own little contribution to our constitutional development as a relatively young democracy and to aid future governments to optimize the performance of those they appoint as Ministers.

    “Mr. President, the concept or designation of “Minister of State” is a constitutional aberration and is practically not working for many so appointed. Successive governments have come and gone and many who were appointed as Ministers of State have not spoken out at a forum such as this because of the risk of sounding ungrateful to the Presidents who appointed them. However, like I said earlier, this is not ingratitude,” Keyamo wrote in his valedictory speech as Minister of State for Labour and Employment.

    Read the full valedictory speech by Festus Keyamo below:

    1. Mr. President, you first appointed me as Minister of State in the Ministry Niger Delta Affairs in August, 2019 and you later redeployed me as Minister of State in the Ministry of Labour and Employment.

    2. Today, I cannot find the words to express the depth of my gratitude to you for finding me worthy, out of over two hundred million Nigerians, to be nominated and subsequently appointed to serve as a Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. My curriculum vitae has been greatly enhanced – forever.

    3. From my very humble beginnings in a small dusty town in Delta State where I was born and raised by my struggling parents, all the way to the Council Chambers at the Presidential Villa where I had the honour and privilege to participate weekly in decision-making for my country in the last four years, it has been like a fairy tale. I give God all the glory.

    4. What I am about to say, therefore, is not and should not be construed as an indication of ingratitude. Far from it. What I am about to say is just my own little contribution to our constitutional development as a relatively young democracy and to aid future governments to optimize the performance of those they appoint as Ministers.

    5. Mr. President, the concept or designation of “Minister of State” is a constitutional aberration and is practically not working for many so appointed. Successive governments have come and gone and many who were appointed as Ministers of State have not spoken out at a forum such as this because of the risk of sounding ungrateful to the Presidents who appointed them. However, like I said earlier, this is not ingratitude.

    6. As a private citizen, I am on record to have gone to court a number of times to challenge unconstitutional acts of governments for the sake of advancing our constitutional democracy, so it will be out of character for me to have gone through government and be carried away by the pomp of public office and forget my role as a member of the Inner Bar and my self-imposed role over the years as a crusader for democracy and constitutionalism.

    7. Mr. President, I crave your indulgence to explain this constitutional conundrum of “Minister of State”. Sections 147 and 148 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), deal with the appointments and responsibilities of Ministers of the Federation. The said sections state as follows:

    Section 147

    “(1) There shall be such offices of Ministers of the Government of the Federation as may be established by the President.

    (2) Any appointment to the office of Minister of the Government of the Federation shall, if the nomination of any person to such office is confirmed by the Senate, be made by the President.

    (3) Any appointment under subsection (2) of this section by the President shall be in conformity with the provisions of section 14(3) of this Constitution:- provided that in giving effect to the provisions aforesaid the President shall appoint at least one Minister from each State, who shall be an indigene of such State.”

    Section 148

    “(1) The President may, in his discretion, assign to the Vice-President or any Minister of the Government of the Federation responsibility for any business of the Government of the Federation, including the administration of any department of government.”

    8. Furthermore, the 7th Schedule to the 1999 Constitution provides for the Oath of Office to which each Minister must subscribe. There are no different Oaths for “Minister” and “Ministers of State”. They all take the same Oath of Office.

    9. In addition to the above, the Ministers-designate appear before the Senate and are grilled and cleared AS MINISTERS, not as Ministers in some instances and Ministers of State in some other instances. It is at the point of assignment of portfolios that successive Presidents then reclassified some as “Ministers of State”.

    10. Some may want to justify this by saying the President is given the discretion by the Constitution to assign whatever responsibility(ies) he likes to Ministers. Yes, I concede Mr. President can do that, but not by a designation different from that prescribed by the Constitution. Simply put, it is akin to the President assigning responsibilities to the office of the Vice-President and re-designating that office as “Deputy President” under our present Constitution. That is clearly impossible. Why then should that of the Ministers be different?

    11. What is more, Ministers are appointed pursuant to Section 147(3) of the 1999 Constitution to represent each State of the Federation. Therefore, Ministers sit in Cabinet as the eye of Mr. President in each State of the Federation. It is therefore against the intendment of the drafters of our Constitution for a representative of a State to be reclassified as against another representative of another State.

    12. The Schedules of Duties of Ministers and Ministers of State that intend to cure some of these anomalies hardly help the issues. Firstly, the Schedules of Duties are observed more in breach by the Permanent Secretaries and Directors who really cannot be expected to serve two masters. And in any case, many of the roles of both Ministers are so ambiguous that the bureaucrats would always interpret them to satisfy the ones they see as the “Senior Ministers” or “main Ministers” for fear of being persecuted by them.

    13. Secondly, parts of the Schedules of Duties seem to suggest that the Ministers can delegate functions to the Ministers of State. This is a constitutional impossibility. It is only Mr. President that can delegate Presidential powers as one cannot delegate what he does not have (delegatus non potest delegare). In any case, how can someone who took the same Oath of Office with another delegate functions to that other?

    14. Thirdly, the Schedules of Duties leave so many gaping holes that bring conflicts between the Ministers and Ministers of State. In addition, the provision that “Ministers of State” cannot present Memos in Council, except with the permission of the Minister, is another anomaly. It means the discretion of the Minister of State is subsumed in the discretion of the Minister, yet both of them represent different States in Cabinet.

    15. It also follows that it would be difficult to assess the individual performances of the Ministers of State since their discretion is shackled under the discretion of the Ministers. Original ideas developed by a Minister of State are subject to clearance by another colleague in Cabinet before they can sail through for consideration by Council. The drafters of our Constitution obviously did not intend this.

    16. As a result, many Ministers of State are largely redundant, with many going to the office for symbolic purpose and just to while away the time. Files are passed to them to treat only at the discretion of the other Minister and the Permanent Secretary. Yet, the Ministers of State will receive either praise or condemnation for the successes or failures of such Ministries.

    17. I understand that when this practice first surfaced in the First Republic, it was used as a contraption to give a semblance of “Government of National Unity”, when in actual fact no “real power” was ceded to the opposition members co-opted into government who were mostly designated as the Ministers of State, so as to keep them in check under the leadership of the ruling Party’s Ministers. But, over time the custom has come to stay and now it has been established as a norm, even regarding Ministers from the same ruling Party. In fact, one political absurdity that has emerged from this is that some Ministers of State won more votes from their States for the party in power than the “main Minister”.

    THE WAY FORWARD

    18. Many Ministerial Retreats have been held to try and resolve the issues between Ministers and Ministers of State. President Obasanjo held four of such Retreats, with the last one holding at the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPSS), Kuru, Jos, from 23rd to 25th February, 2001. Yet, the problems persisted.

    19. Mr. President, unknown to many successive Presidents and the general public, these conflicts gravely affect the optimal performance of Governments. What is the way forward?

    20. Obviously, the argument that two Ministers are cramped into some Ministries in order not to unnecessarily proliferate Ministries and therefore save Government’s money is no longer tenable. This is because Government does not need any extra infrastructure or more money to maintain all Senior 36 Ministers or even a bit more appointed as is now the custom. This is because the present Ministers and Ministers of State have their separate offices, cars, security personnel and personal aides. So, what is the point?

    21. There are enough Permanent Secretaries within the system to be assigned to each Minister, or in the least, one Permanent Secretary can serve two Ministers. Since the Schedules of Duties of both Ministers already reflect the broad Mandates of the Ministries, the Ministers can be named in line with those Schedules of Duties, instead of continuing with this unconstitutional arrangement. For instance, there is no reason why we cannot have a Minister of Labour and another Minister of Employment.

    22. In my case, whilst the Schedule of my colleague had to do more with Labour and Productivity, mine had to do more with Employment. The Directorates in my Ministry that were under my office would then be fully under the Minister of Employment, without any double loyalty to the Minister of Labour and Productivity.

    23. We can also have a Minister of Trade and another Minister of Investment. We can have a Minister of Education (Tertiary) and another Minister of Education (Primary and Secondary); we can have a Minister of Mines and another Minister of Steel; we can have a Minister of Works and another Minister of Housing and so on and so forth.

    24. In all of these, no extra infrastructure is needed to sustain this suggested arrangement. The present infrastructure and present personnel in the Ministries can very well sustain it. It will be at no extra cost to government. This is preferable than successive governments continuing with this present unconstitutional arrangement.

    25. Finally, I want to place it on record again that Mr. Present gave me maximum support as his Minister to function optimally. So, this treatise is not a personal complaint. This is just a respectful recommendation for record purposes and for the sake of posterity. It is also intended to correct an anomaly that has existed for ages.

  • President Buhari will not approve 65-year workers’ retirement age – Keyamo

    President Buhari will not approve 65-year workers’ retirement age – Keyamo

    The Minister of State for Labour, Employment and Productivity, Festus Keyamo, has said that outgoing president, Buhari will not approve the newly proposed 65-year retirement age for Nigerian workers.

    Keyamo made this known in an interview with pressmen on Monday in Abuja.

    Recall that the Nigeria Labour Congress, through its National President, Joe Ajaero, during the 2023 Workers’ Day celebrations in Abuja called on the government to increase the retirement age for civil servants in the country from 60  to 65 years.

    Ajaero had also called for a general review of core civil servants’ salaries to narrow the gap between other civil servants’ emoluments and those in other segments of the public service, saying the extension of years of service should go around as it was being done in other sectors of the public service in the country.

    “We are, therefore, demanding that the age of retirement and length of service in the entire public service, including the civil service, be reviewed upward to 65 years of age and 40 years of service, ” he had said.

    But Keyamo told pressmen that an increase in service years will be the call of the next administration.

    “The process to effect that change to 65 years (if it is accepted by the Federal Government) is a process that cannot be completed before the end of the tenure of Buhari.  So, I guess the new administration will have to deal with that,” the minister stated.

  • Keyamo makes case for regulation of social media

    Keyamo makes case for regulation of social media

    The minister of state for Labour and Employment, Barrister Festus Keyamo, SAN, has noted that social media regulations must be applied to curb the spread of fake news.

    Keyamo made this known through his special adviser, Niyi Fatogun during  a media workshop tagged Balancing Ethics and Patriotism: the obligations of journalists to their country’, organised by the Coalition for Good Governance and Economic Justice in Africa.

    Keyamo posited that social media is a welcome development but laws must be put in place to regulate and sanitize the system.

    He said to kill fake news, which according to him, can destroy the fabric of the country, fake social media accounts must first be killed.

    The minister also said that laws must be put in place that illegalize fake news.

    “Social media has come to stay. Gone are those days when we used to beg editors or be at their mercy to get your views out there,” when an editor decides which story to put there and which story to ignore.

    “Today everyone puts their thoughts out uncensored which is a very good thing.

    “It is good for mankind. However, we also know that it comes with its own problems.

    “We must make sure we don’t kill the good because of the bad. So the best [we can do] is to support the good and mitigate against the bad and ugly.

    “Before it was very possible to hold people accountable for fake news. Media houses had professionals who were very responsible…today we have the social media and the gate keepers have become more or less sidelined, so what do we do to mitigate against the bad and ugly?

    “You kill fake news by killing fake social media accounts. Secondly, we must make laws that illegalise fake news that are capable of destroying the fabric of the nation.

    “Fake news is capable of destroying the fabrics of the nation. Those forwarding such news must also be held liable….such should not be tolerated,” he said.

    Addressing journalists, convener of the workshop, John Mayak, who is the Country Director, Coalition for Good Governance and Economic Justice in Africa, said that the best and easiest way to tackle fake news is self regulation.

    He said that there should be both government and self regulation to fight fake news, calling for laws to be established to regulate how people use social media, just like it is in China and other developed countries.

    “Let us regulate ourselves. Self regulation is the best. It’s a democratic system and we don’t expect the government to shut down the media or regulate media content.

    “But for us as journalists, we can regulate ourselves. For me, it’s the best. Social media doesn’t have regulation. You sit down in the mountain or dungeon and post anything and there’s a crisis everywhere.

    “I can’t promise you that fake news is going to die. All the conferences in the world and in Nigeria will not kill fake news. But we can self-regulate.

    “We should thank God that Nigeria hasn’t collapsed. In the issue of fake news nobody is above the law.

    “That’s what we call government regulation and self regulation. I expect social media to be regulated. Look at China, there is a level of sanity in China. Not all social media apps are used in China. Even in the UK and some other countries, I mean cyber laws should be enforced.”

  • Election tribunal: “Justice rushed is justice crushed”, Keyamo warns

    Election tribunal: “Justice rushed is justice crushed”, Keyamo warns

    As Nigeria’s election tribunal is set to begin hearing opposition petitions challenging president-elect Bola Tinubu’s victory on Monday, the Minister of State for Labour and Productivity, Festus Keyamo, has warned that calling for a speedy determination of the petitions before May 29 may be counterproductive.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission had announced Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress party as winner of the election, defeating his closest rivals Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party and Labour Party’s Peter Obi, who alleged fraud and have launched a court challenge.

    The hearing on May 8 will be before Court of Appeal judges, who constitute the tribunal, but Keyamo said on Sunday that those calling for the determination of the Election Petitions before the swearing-in ceremonies on May 29th are either ignorant or mischievous.

    “Those who think by such a call they are doing the Petitioners any good, do not realise that they are, in fact doing a great harm to the cases of the Petitioners,” the Minister said.

    According to him, it is the Petitioners who need more time to prove their cases and not necessarily the defendants and the cases files cannot be determined before May 29th because of the time given by the rules for parties to file their Notices of Appeal and exchange their briefs.

    “It is more arduous to prove an Election Petition than to defend it…The rules of Election Petitions do not allow Petitioners to prove their cases piecemeal. A Petitioner cannot pursue a single point up to the Supreme Court and after losing, return to the Tribunal or Court and say he/she/it wants to now prove other aspects of the case.

    “The advocates of pre-May 29th determination of the Election Petitions are doing the cases of their Principals (the Petitioners) great harm. They should realise that just as we say ‘justice delayed is justice denied’, we also say ‘justice rushed is justice crushed’,” Keyamo said.

    Under Nigeria’s electoral laws, the first day of hearing will see candidates’ lawyers agree on the witnesses and evidence to be used during the proceedings.

    While Atiku and Obi are asking the tribunal to invalidate Tinubu’s victory on the ground that the election was fraught with irregularities, among other criticisms, Tinubu, who is set to be sworn in on May 29, says he won “fair and square” and wants the petitions dismissed.

    Although there have been numerous legal challenges to the outcome of Nigeria’s presidential elections in the past, none has been successful.

    Obi who previously reclaimed his “lost mandate” from the 19 April, 2003 governorship election in Anambra State through the court says he is confident the process will yet again deliver him victory.

  • EFCC, ICPC ask court to dismiss Keyamo’s suit seeking Atiku’s probe

    EFCC, ICPC ask court to dismiss Keyamo’s suit seeking Atiku’s probe

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has prayed a Federal High Court, Abuja to dismiss a suit by Minister of State for Labour, Festus Keyamo, seeking the probe and prosecution of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar.

    The Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC) also urged Justice James Omotosho to discountenance Keyamo’s case.
    The minister, who was als the spokesperson, Tinubu-Shettima Presidential Campaign Council (PCC), in the suit filed on Jan. 20, had sought an order compelling the EFCC, ICPC and the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) to probe and prosecute Abubakar following claims by one of his ex-aides, Michael Achimugu, that between 1999 and 2007 when he was vice president, he conspired with ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo to rip off the country using what he termed “Special Purpose Vehicles.”

    At the resumed on Wednesday, lawyers to the EFCC and ICPC, Samuel Okeleke and Mrs. O B. Odogu, in two separate preliminary objections, faulted the competence of the suit and prayed the court to dismiss it.

    Okeleke argued that Keyamo did not comply with the requirement of the law in filing the suit, arguing that he ought to have first obtained the leave of the court in seeking to compel an agency of the government to act.

    The lawyer contended that having failed to comply with the rules, the suit should not be accorded any attention.

    Mrs. Odogu argued that Keyamo did not approach her agency properly, adding that the ICPC works discreetly.

    “We do discrete investigation. He (Keyamo) gave us 72 hours ultimatum within which to investigate and prosecute the 1st defendant.

    “That is not how we operate. We take our time to do discreet investigation,” she said.

    Lawyer to Atiku, Benson Igbanoi, also faulted the competence of the suit while arguing the preliminary objection he filed for his client.

    Igbanoi, who accused Keyamo of engaging in abuse of office, urged the court to decline jurisdiction among other grounds, that  no cause of action was disclosed by the plaintiff.

    He urged the court to disregard the response filed against his preliminary objection by the plaintiff, arguing that it was filed outside the seven days allowed under the court’s rules.

    Keyamo’s lawyer, O. C. Uju, urged the court to dismiss the objections raised by the defendants and proceeded to hear the case on the merit.

    Uju queried the competence of Atiku’s objection, arguing that it was filed when the court had not assumed jurisdiction over the case and before he could be served with the originating processes.

    Justice Omotosho, after entertaining the arguments by lawyers to the parties, adjourned until June 5 for ruling in the preliminary objections.

  • BREAKING: Finally, President-elect, Tinubu returns to Nigeria [VIDEO]

    BREAKING: Finally, President-elect, Tinubu returns to Nigeria [VIDEO]

    President-elect, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu has finally returned back to Nigeria after embarking to France, reportedly to rest.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports Tinubu arrived in the country with his wife, Oluremi via Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja ahead of the May 29 inauguration.

    Festus Keyamo, Minister of State for Labour and Employment announced the return of Tinubu via Twitter.

    “The Eagle has landed,” Keyamo captioned a video he shared on the return of the president-elect.

    The Minister of State for Labour and Employment also tweeted Tinubu is ” looking well relaxed and well rested for the task ahead”.

    TNG reports Tinubu was received at the presidential wing of the Abuja international airport by the Vice President-elect, Kashim Shettima and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila in the company of some State Governors.

    Watch videos of Tinubu return to Nigeria below:

  • I didn’t acquire my latest property in US with public funds – Keyamo

    I didn’t acquire my latest property in US with public funds – Keyamo

    The Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Festus Keyamo, has finally spoken about his latest acquisition in the United States of America, saying that he didn’t buy the house with public funds.

    Recall that  Keyamo was dragged on social media after he appeared before a building worth over $300,000 in the US.

    According to Keyamo, the house belongs to him but claims it was acquired with money he made from legal practice.

    Keyamo said on Twitter that he had decided to bait the horde of those he called sore losers at the last elections with a video of his vacation in “one of my properties abroad” as he did a light workout.

    Expectedly, he said they fell so terribly for the bait, saying they seem to view everyone from their depraved universe and assuming everyone will wallow in the same moral squalor as them.

    Continuing, the legal luminary added that, on March 6, 2019, he wrote to the relevant government agencies, informing them of the closure of his foreign account(s) and the repatriation of the funds to the country, “being some savings I had made as a private legal practitioner and a property investor over decades.”

    Keyamo said the foreign funds were lying in his accounts until he was appointed Minister in 2019.

    “In 2021, I again wrote to the relevant agencies (by letters dated January 22, 2021), informing them of the movement of those funds out of the country to purchase a property as a better investment decision, instead of the funds lying idly in the account whilst I am in public office,” he said.

    The Minister said he laughed when he saw the trending issues regarding “just one of my properties in the US.”

    He described as very laughable the fact that some think that he could not afford such a property after his 30 years of active, high-profile practice of law.

    He said some people seemed to underrate him because he had chosen to live a simple and modest life and not given to the ostentatious display of wealth.

    He said the building is “about the cheapest of my several properties.”

    Keyamo added that his flourishing and manned law chambers and his real estate investments are still far more financially profitable than serving Nigeria, saying, “ours is a labour of love to my country.”

    He boasted that “Some of us don’t need Government funds or patronage to get by.”

  • Keyamo is lobbying for his next job under Tinubu – Atiku

    Keyamo is lobbying for his next job under Tinubu – Atiku

    The  Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar has accused the Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Festus Keyamo of lobbying for his next job under Tinubu.

    According to Atiku, Keyamo has been trying to suppress and abuse the rights of innocent Nigerians who oppose the alleged fraudulent victory of the APC presidential candidate, Bola Tinubu.

    Atiku who spoke through his spokesman, Frank Shaibu, Atiku described Keyamo as a jobless Minister who abandoned his duties as a minister and opted to be Tinubu’s spokesman.

    A statement by Shaibu reads partly: “Keyamo is among those suppressing the rights of others.

    “Keyamo’s job as campaign spokesman is officially over since the campaign has ended. But he is currently lobbying intensely for another appointment.

    “With Sen Ovie Omo-Agege’s failed governorship bid in Delta State, many from the APC in Delta have in their delusion shifted focus to the central government that will soon be delegitimized by the judiciary.

    “Keyamo should save what is left of his legacy by facing his job as a minister and stop trying to suppress and abuse the rights of innocent Nigerians who oppose the fraudulent victory of Bola Tinubu.”