Tag: ozekhome

  • Hushpuppi saga: ‘Abba Kyari is safe under Nigeria law’

    Hushpuppi saga: ‘Abba Kyari is safe under Nigeria law’

    The Executive Director, Corruption Observatory, Richard Ovie, on Tuesday said the Nigeria law will give protection to the embattled Deputy Commissioner for Police, Abba Kyari, who is under investigation in respect to his indictment by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States.

    His comments follow the issuing of an arrest warrant by a U.S magistrate judge, Otis Wright in the case involving popular socialite, Ramon Igbalode, a.k.a Hushpuppi.

    Ovie asked that Abba Kyari should not be shielded but that the steps taken are positive and are being followed the way they ought to be.

    He is of the opinion that Kyari should not be released to the US without investigations done underground.

    “Abba Kyari will not be released to the US just like that, Nigeria is not a ‘Banana Republic’”.
    “The FBI cannot come into Nigeria and pick Abba Kyari like a common criminal and take him away to America, it is not going to happen, it has never happened before. I do not believe it will ever happen. Nigeria is a sovereign state and that must be respected within the boundaries of Nigeria,” he said.

    “So if for example America is not satisfied with the way Nigeria is handling the matter, they can protest or have call to call or diplomatic discussions.

    “Abba Kyari is safe under Nigeria law, he is entitled to his protection under the constitution of Nigeria, particularly section 36 that presumes his innocence.”

    “There is an agreement between both countries, but first, a thorough investigation has to be conducted here before extradition.

    “We need to do our own internal investigation here and ensure that what the FBI found out is also what we have found out here and based on that we will begin to consummate the process of extradition”, he added.

    Similarly, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, (SAN) Mike Ozekhome asked that the extradition law of 2005 must be followed and the US must write to Nigeria through its envoy before the process of extradition can begin.

    His words: “The US must first make a written case through their envoy in Nigeria saying they want Abba Kyari back in America.

    “They must state the offence he allegedly committed in America, if he has been tried or jailed, they must attach a certification of conviction”.

    Ovie made the remarks on Tuesday during Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily.

    He said that if Nigeria really wants to save the image of Abba Kyari that the Attorney General is supposed to take over the entire matter and look at the reasons why he is wanted in their country.

    According to documents unsealed in the US, Mr. Kyari had arrested and jailed one Chibuzo Vincent, at the behest of Hushpuppi.

    He also allegedly sent Hushpuppi bank account details into which he (Hushpuppi) could deposit payment for Vincent’s arrest and imprisonment.

    Mr Kyari, in a Facebook post on Thursday, however, denied the allegations.

    The Police Service Commission on August 1 suspended Abba Kyari pending the outcome of the investigation in respect to his indictment by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States.

    He was later replaced by a former commander of the Rapid Response Squad (RRS) Lagos State, Tunji Disu.

  • Go beyond Twitter ban, dissolve Nigeria, Ozekhome tells FG

    Go beyond Twitter ban, dissolve Nigeria, Ozekhome tells FG

    Human rights lawyer and social commentator, Mike Ozekhome SAN, has asked the Federal Government to go beyond the suspension of micro-blogging site, Twitter, and “dissolve the Nigerian people which it has become so allergic to and no longer wants to see or hear about”.

    The senior advocate also averred that the government is trying to cover its atrocities from global exposure with its decision to suspend the operations of Twitter in the country.

    Ozekhome made this known in a statement on Friday titled, ‘When A Tottering Government Twiddles Twitter’.

    He said, “Well, I am not surprised that the Federal Government has suspended Twitter operations in Nigeria. Are you? I have always said that this Government has a very thin skin for criticism. It is a government that cannot take punches, but delights in always giving punches to adversaries, real or imaginary.

    “The Government knows that Nigerians now express their resentment and protest through Twitter, by telling the whole world how Nigeria has been turned into a corruption haven, and a sprawling field of butchery, extra-judicial executions and slaughtering.

    “Those in Government do not want the world to hear about their atrocities. So, they just gleefully tell the world that they have suspended Twitter and that they would soon license other OTT and social media operations. These people in Government know that Nigerians have been reaching out to the whole world, and they are very embarrassed that the breeze has been blowing, and the smelly backside of the fowl is always being opened for the whole world to see and smell its odorous side.

    “This is the same Government that undeservedly rode to power using the same Twitter and other social media platforms it now detests.

    “My humble appeal to this Government is that it should go further than this. It should actually suspend or dissolve the Nigerian people which it has become so allergic to and no longer wants to see or hear about. Then, it can now go ahead to elect or select another people in place of the present Nigerians who appear to have become a nuisance to it.

    “I am greatly disappointed about this government round and round. I feel very sad as a Nigerian being led by a Government of one scandal per day.”

     

  • Asaba Accord: Why Northerners feel threatened by Southern Governors’ decisions – Ozekhome

    Asaba Accord: Why Northerners feel threatened by Southern Governors’ decisions – Ozekhome

    Human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mike Ozekhome, has disclosed that northern elite kicked against Southern governors’ Asaba accord because the North was afraid that the South had woken up and “may finally attain their independence”.

    The senior lawyer was reacting to the opposition mounted by the Governor of Kogi State, Mr. Yahaya Bello; Senate President, Dr. Ahmad Lawan and other northern elite against the resolutions of the Southern governors.

    In a statement issued last week, Ozekhome stated that, “The sudden unexpected kick by some Northern elite against the patriotic resolutions passed last week at a meeting held in Asaba by the 17 Southern Governors of Nigeria is quite worrisome, but definitely uncalled for. The kick is illegal, unconstitutional and even immoral.

    “The sudden hoopla and ruckus seem to suggest that these few vocal elements are suddenly scared. What are they afraid of? I do not know. Or do you? But, let me do some guess work here. They may probably be afraid that the South has finally woken up and shaken off its Stockholm Syndrome.

    “I guess they are scared that the assumed long suffering ‘slaves’ of Nigeria may finally achieve their overdue liberation, liberty and freedom, and attain their independence from the asphyxiating grip of perpetual overlords, ‘slave’ masters, neo-Colonialists and territorial expansionists.

    “They may fear that under a true fiscal federation, anchored on the true principles of Federalism, everyone will now be required to contribute to the baking of the national cake and not just merely sharing it.”

    The senior lawyer reminded those against the Asaba Declaration that it was the northern governors that actually first set the ball rolling at their Virtual Meeting of February 9, 2021,about the urgent need to ban open grazing.

    He stated that the northern governors’ communique then was to the effect that open cattle grazing should be immediately abolished.

    “The forum had then set up a four-man Committee headed by its Chairman, Governor Simon Lalong of Plateau State, to implement their decisions. This meeting was immediately followed, upon the Northern Governors ‘ prodding, by the 25th Virtual Meeting of all Nigerian Governors’ Forum, two days later, on February 11, 2021. It was presided over by its Chairman, Governor Kayode Fayemi of Ekiti State.

    “At this meeting, all the 36 State Governors unanimosly agreed to end nomadic rearing of cattle; to end open, night and underage grazing in Nigeria, and to transit to ranching and other modern systems of animal husbandry, in view of its adverse security effects on the country,” Ozekhome explained.

    While wondering what has changed between February and May, he warned that the Nigeria Civil War which lasted for three years and claimed over three million lives was as a result of the insincerity that attended the implementation of the Aburi Accord in Ghana.

  • Late vendor’s family sues Gbajabiamila, demands N500m

    Late vendor’s family sues Gbajabiamila, demands N500m

    Ifeanyichukwu Okereke’s family, the vendor who was shot dead by a security aide to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila, has demanded N500 million for compensation.

    Okereke’s family in a letter to the speaker dated November 23, 2020, demanded the compensation. The letter was signed by the lawyer of the family, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN).

    Ozekhome was asked to write the letter by the father of the deceased, Okorie Okereke; and the younger brother to the deceased, Destiny Okereke.

    In the letter, Okereke’s family made three demands which must be met otherwise they take legal actions.

    The family demanded firstly that the speaker uses his good office to ensure the immediate prosecution of your security aide (Abdullahi Hassan), who shot the innocent and armless vendor.

    “Our clients have instructed us to make from your good self, the following modest demands: That you use your good offices to ensure the immediate prosecution of your security aide (Abdullahi Hassan), who went on a frolic of his own, clearly acted outside the purview of his duty and responsibility by shooting to death an innocent, harmless and armless citizen, the letter read.

    Secondly, they asked that the speakers compensate the Okereke family with a modest sum of N500m. The family stated that the money cannot adequately replace the deceased but will at least mitigate the trauma and hardship of his premature demise.

    Okereke’s family demanded lastly that the speaker ensure that the safety of vendors are guaranteed as they have become afraid to return to the streets since the tragic incident.

    “Take note therefore that it is our clients’ firm instruction that in the event that you fail, refuse and/or neglect to accede to or proffer reasonable compensatory terms to our above modest demands within seven days from the date of this letter, we shall without any further correspondences from us, take appropriate legal steps to enforce our clients’ constitutional rights,” the letter stated.

  • Sagay, Ozekhome, Falana react over immunity for NASS presiding officers

    Sagay, Ozekhome, Falana react over immunity for NASS presiding officers

    Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) Chairman Prof Itse Sagay (SAN) on Tuesday said immunity for legislature’s principal officers would weaken the anti-graft war.

    He believes public officers with nothing to hide should not demand immunity from prosecution.

    He said: “I think that is unacceptable because it is going to weaken our war against corruption. Already, we have those statutorily exempted by the Constitution.

    “It’s unacceptable to extend immunity beyond what we already have. We have to wait eight years for governors, allowing them to misbehave as they like before any action can be taken against them.

    “Anyone who has a clean record should not be thinking of immunity. They shouldn’t.”

    Human rights lawyer Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) is of the view that the bill should be killed “with the heaviest of sledgehammers”.

    He said: “The bill is another way of asking for legislative immunity against legislative rascality and lawlessness. It is a bill asking for immunity against transparency and accountability.

    “It is a bill asking to be shielded from criminality even when a crime is committed. It is a bill seeking to be regarded as a sacred cow, not accountable to anybody, including the Judiciary.

    “If it were not for selfish purposes, if it were altruistic and nationalistic, or because they want to be at par with the Executive, why have they not also brought in the Chief Justice of Nigeria, who heads the third arm of government under Section 6 of the Constitution?

    The bill is an insult to our collective intelligence.

    “It undermines our humanity as a country, disrespects us as Nigerians and makes the tail want to wag the dog. It is unacceptable, insulting, narcissistic, egregious, insidious and invidious.”

    Lagos lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) said the bill is illegal and would not survive.

    “The bill will soon be defeated on the floor of the House because it is illegal and unconstitutional.

    “Apart from the President, Vice President, Governors and Deputy Governors who are entitled to immunity under Section 308 of the Constitution, no other public official or citizen is entitled to be excluded from prosecution for corruption or other criminal offences.

    “Only a constitutional amendment can confer immunity on any other group of Nigerians.

    “I can assure you that the amendment will not be approved by Nigerians. It was tried in the past but it was popularly rejected,” he said.

    A former senator representing Rivers East, Magnus Abe, said the bill’s timing was wrong.

    He added that it would not enjoy public support.

    He said to widen immunity to lawmakers might lead to giving it to other categories of people including heads of the Judicial arm of the government.

  • El-Zakzaky: Falana, Ozekhome condemn proscription on Shiites, demand immediate withdrawal

    El-Zakzaky: Falana, Ozekhome condemn proscription on Shiites, demand immediate withdrawal

    Leading rights activists Chief Mike Ozekhome and Femi Falana, both Senior Advocates of Nigeria, on Saturday described the proscription of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) as illegal and immoral.
    While Ozekhome said the proscription was “discriminatory”, Falana, who represents IMN leader Ibrahim el-Zakzaky, urged the Federal Government to withdraw the order.
    Ozekhome said: “The proscription by the government of the Shiites religious group is highly discriminatory, unconstitutional, as was the case of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra (IPOB).
    “What group could be more terrorist than the Herdsmen that has held Nigeria down by the jugular for years, killing, maiming, burning, raping, turning Nigeria into a crimson field of bloodbath? Until the government bans and outlaws these, it is certainly not serious.
    “They (Shiite members) are demanding the release of their leader still kept in government dungeon inspite of several court orders. The Shiite group is a religious group, like the President’s Sunni group. It is not an association that could be banned.
    “Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution makes Nigeria a secular state. You cannot ban religion, a people’s belief.
    “There is also freedom of thought, conscience and religion in Section 38, while sections 40 and 41 allow for freedom of movement and association.
    “The Constitution is ruthlessly being shredded by an intolerant and overbearing civilian dictatorship.”
    For Falana, the proscription is immoral and illegal.
    He noted that the IMN’s proscription by the Kaduna State government in 2016 was gazette, yet IMN has continued to operate in defiance of the proscription.
    Similarly, he said IPOB’s proscription in 2017 by the Buhari regime via an ex parte order issued by the Federal High Court was also gazette, but IPOB has continued to operate in spite of the proscription.
    “However, in a desperate bid to prevent the Shiitesfrom demanding for the release of their detained leader, Elzakzaky and his wife from the custody of the State Security Service, the Buhari administration has proscribed the IMN.
    “Since there are millions of Shiites who belong to the IMN, the Federal Government will soon realise that it has merely driven the body underground,” Falana said.
    The respected activist-lawyer recalled that in 2003, General Buhari and other members of the defunct All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP) held a rally in Kano to protest the rigging of the 2003 General Election.
    The rally was violently attacked by the Police on the ground that the ANPP leaders did not obtain police permit.
    “On the instructions of General Buhari and other the ANPP leaders, I challenged the disruption of the rally and the legal validity of police permit for rallies and political meetings at the Federal High Court. ANPP won the case.
    “Apart from condemning the violent disruption of the rally by the Police, the court declared that police permit for rallies was illegal and unconstitutional. The appeal filed against the judgment by the Police was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
    “In fact, the Justices of the Court of Appeal unanimously held that the right of Nigerians to protest against the policies of the government is part of the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution.
    “Therefore, the proscription of the IMN for the demonstrations of the Shiites against the disobedience of court orders by the Buhari regime is immoral and illegal in every material particular,” he said.
    Falana called for the withdrawal of the proscription order.
    “It is particularly opportunistic on the part of the Sunnis occupying public offices to use the instrumentality of the state to liquidate the Shiites.
    “The illegal proscription of the IMN should be withdrawn. It will not stand as the fundamental right of the Shiites to freedom of religion is constitutionally guaranteed,” Falana added.

  • Ozekhome writes INEC, says A’Court didn’t clear Zamfara APC to field candidates

    Lawyer to the Senator Kabiru Marafa faction of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Zamfara State, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) confirmed on Friday that the judgment by the Court of Appeal in Abuja given on Thursday set aside the January 27, 2019 judgment by Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    Justice Ojukwu had, in the judgment, held among others that there was no evidence before her court that the APC in Zamfara conducted valid primaries for the purpose of producing candidates for this year’s general elections.

    The decision of the Court of Appeal on Thursday, setting aside Justice Ojukwu’s judgment, for lack of jurisdiction, has since been interpreted by many to mean that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should now accept candidates from Zamfara APC, a position Ozekhome faulted.

    He argued that, since the Court of Appeal only set aside the judgment, but failed to make a consequential order directing INEC to accept candidates from Zamfara APC; it implies that the earlier decision by the electoral body, refusing the party’s candidates, still stands.

    In two separate documents issued on Friday – a press release and a letter to INEC Chairman (both of which he personally signed), Ozekhome urged INEC to reject candidates from Zamfara APC on the grounds that that “nothing has changed,” despite the Appeal Court judgment given in Abuja on February 21, 2019.

    Ozekhome insisted that, since an appeal filed by his client, Marafa, was still pending before the Court of Appeal in Sokoto State, against the judgement of the Zamfara State High Court, which said there were valid primaries, the issue (of whether or not there were valid primaries) could not be said to have been safely resolved.

    The Senior Advocate said: “Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on 21st February, 2019, dismissed the appeal filed by APC challenging the judgment of Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, which had affirmed INEC’s stand that the APC did not conduct any primary election in Zamfara state and that INEC was right to have rejected APC’s candidates from Zamfara state.

    The dismissal followed an application by APC to withdraw the appeal. The application was granted and the appeal dismissed accordingly.

    Next was the cross-appeal filed by Yari & Co on jurisdiction and cause of action.

    The judgment given by the Court of Appeal today clearly stated that the appeal partially succeeded and went ahead to set aside the judgment of the lower court on jurisdiction only, but refuse to grant the cause of action component of the appeal.

    By this, the Court of Appeal refused to grant INEC any order to revive candidates of the APC from Zamfara state.

    The cross-appeal therefore partially failed because, from the onset, APC had a complaint against INEC only. Governor had applied to join the case voluntarily.

    And, Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu in her judgment held that ‘APC did not seek any relief against the 2nd to 6th dependents (Yari & Co) and considering that Yari and & Co didn’t file a counter claim, or cross action against APC in the suit, she now held that Yari & Co have nothing to add in this case.

    From the foregoing, it is clear that the cross-appeal by Yari and his group, before the Court of Appeal, having partially failed, becomes at best, a mere academic exercise bereft of any utilitarian value to the entire case.

    The false assertion that the Court of Appeal had cleared the way for the APC to participate in Saturday’s election is therefore a lie from the pit of hell.

    It is nothing short of the desperate minute by frustrated politician holding on any available straw to smuggle themselves Willy nilly into Saturday’s election. This cannot work.

    INEC is hereby reminded that there exists in addition to the above legal obstacles, a subsisting appeal which arose from the Zamfara State High Court judgment, which is still extant and pending before the Sokoto division of the Court of Appeal , in Appeal no: CA/S/32/2019.

    In any event, the judgment of the Federal High Court, going by the judgment of the Court of Appeal still partially succeeded, since the Court of Appeal refused to make any clear mandatory orders directing INEC to receive any candidates from Yari group for the purpose of Saturday’s elections.

    INEC is therefore obligated and legally bound to stand by its earlier well founded position that APC, having never conducted any primaries in Zamfara state, have no candidates in the forthcoming elections in Zamfara state, have no candidate in the forthcoming elections in Zamfara state, except the presidential election.

    Any other act by INEC in fielding any candidates from the Governor Yari’s group or the “G-8” group will be illegal, unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatsoever,” Ozekhome said.

    He made similar argument in the letter to the Chairman of INEC.

    Part of the letter reads: “Sometimes in October 2018 when INEC wrote to APC, intimating it that the commission would not be expecting any list of candidates from them, having failed to conduct primaries within the stipulated time, APC challenged that decision of the commission by filing a suit at the Federal High Court, Abuja, which decided the case in favour of the commission and dismissed the suit.

    Governor Abdulaziz Yari of Zamfara State had cross-appealed. By the judgment of the Court of Appeal on 21st February, 2019 the intermediate court held that the lower court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the matter in the first place and therefore struck it out.

    What this decision means sir, is that, as at today, there is no valid or extant decision of any court of law in Nigeria, which has set aside the well-grounded decision of INEC as contained in its letter of 9th October, 2018.

    In addition to this clear legal obstacle against any of the parties fielding any candidate in the forthcoming Zamfara elections (aside the presidential election), there also exists and still pending before the Sokoto division of the Court of Appeal, a valid appeal filed by Senator Kabiru Marafa in appeal no: CA/S/33/2019.

    Consequently, by way of summary, nothing in the decision of the Court of Appeal, Abuja has changed the well-grounded position of maintenance of status quo of disallowing. Any of the parties to field candidates for the forthcoming elections, except the presidential election.

    The Court of Appeal, Abuja division merely struck out the suit which had been dismissed by Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu of the Federal High Court, Abuja with no consequential order.

    Please sir, this letter urges you to firmly maintain your earlier position so as to prevent a clear circumvent of the judicial process and an appeal that is still pending before the Sokoto division of the Court of Appeal,” Ozekhome said.

     

  • How we'll secure Fayose's release from EFCC custody – Ozekhome

    Human rights lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), said efforts had begun to secure release of former Governor of Ekiti State, Mr Ayodele Fayose, from Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) custody.
     
    Ozekhome said this in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria in Abuja on Thursday.
     
    Fayose, whose tenure as governor ended on Monday, had on Tuesday reported at the EFCC office in Abuja to answer to some allegations levelled against him while in office as governor.
     
    Ozekhome said “Fayose’s lawyers are already taking steps to enforce his fundamental human rights by getting him released.
     
    “Yes, his lawyers will go to court to enforce his fundamental human rights.
     
    “The EFCC has no right to keep him for over 24 hours.
     
    “If they have done that by obtaining a Magistrate Court’s Order that will be in the form of “holding charge” which has been declared unconstitutional and illegal by the Supreme Court.
     
    “Holding charge is illegal. It is unconstitutional.’’
     
    Ozekhome said that the section of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) permitting a magistrate to detain a suspect for 14 days was illegal.
     
    According to him, any action outside the provisions of Section 35 of the Constitution which specifically provides for 24 hours, is illegal and unconstitutional.
     
    He explained that the ACJA allowed for detention of a suspect for 14 days, but that Section 35 of the Constitution made it clear that a person could only be detained for 24 hours.
     
    “So, when there is a clash between the statute, like the ACJA, and the Constitution, the Constitution prevails by virtue of Section 1(3).
     
    “If they have gotten an order for two weeks from the magistrate court, it is unconstitutional,” Ozekhome stressed.
     
     

  • Senator Dino Melaye ill – Ozekhome tells court

    The Senator representing Kogi West, Dino Melaye, was not in court on Thursday to answer charges against him bothering on gun running.

    Melaye’s counsel, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), blamed his client’s absence on health ground.

    Ozekhome, who was represented by one Yemi Mohammed, presented a medical report.

    However, two other persons charged alongside Melaye – Kabir Seidu and and Nuhu Salihu – were present in court.

    At the last hearing, Melaye was also absent during the court sitting.

    Magistrate Sulyman Abdallah on that day fixed August 9 for commencement of trial.

    This followed complaint by the senator that he was attacked by gunmen on his way to Lokoja.

  • Fayose heads to S/Court to upturn EFCC’s freezing of his account

    Gov. Fayose of Ekiti State, Ayodele Fayose is headed to the Supreme Court, seeking to upturn the judgment of the Appeal Court in Ado Ekiti on Thursday, permitting the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to freeze his personal accounts.

    He has also filed a stay of execution of the judgement of the appeal court pending the determination of the case.

    The accounts were in June 2016 frozen by the EFCC after they were linked to the $2.2billion arms deal fraud which occurred at the office of National Security Adviser under the erstwhile government of Goodluck Jonathan.

    But the Federal High Court in Ado-Ekiti under the leadership of Taiwo Taiwo, unblocked the accounts after faulting the steps taken by the commission in barring Mr Fayose access to the accounts.

    Thursday’s Appeal Court judgment, granted the prayers of the EFCC, and overruled the judgment of the Federal High Court.

    The judge said although Mr Fayose enjoys constitutional immunity, his accounts, found to be linked to the proceeds of crime, were not covered by the said immunity.

    Speaking to PREMIUM TIMES on Saturday, the counsel to Mr Fayose, Mike Ozekhome, said his client had appealed the judgment at the Supreme Court.

    “We have already appealed the judgment at the Supreme Court on Friday,” said Mr Ozekhome, who also confirmed that a motion for a stay of execution had also been filed.

    “The entire judgment of the Court of Appeal was perverse and did not take the facts and the law into consideration,” he said.

    “In fact, the judgment was against an earlier ruling of the same Court of Appeal two days ago, when the EFCC wanted to adduce further evidence on the matter.