TheNewsGuru

Tag: Supreme Court

  • JUST IN: Dasukigate: Supreme Court orders Justice Abang to continue Metuh’s trial

    JUST IN: Dasukigate: Supreme Court orders Justice Abang to continue Metuh’s trial

    The Supreme Court on Friday ordered Justice Okon Abang of a Federal High Court in Abuja to continue the hearing on charges of money laundering and fraud instituted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, against a former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Parties, Olisah Metuh.

    A five-man bench of the apex court made the order in a unanimous ruling in which it dismissed Metuh’s application for an order of stay of proceedings of his trial before the Federal High Court.

    The trial will now continue on June 19, a date fixed by Justice Abang to deliver some interlocutory rulings in the trial.

    Abang had adjourned until June 19 to await the outcome of the Supreme Court’s ruling delivered on Friday.

    Metuh’s application which was dismissed by the Supreme Court on Friday was anchored on his pending appeal before the court.

    The appeal before the apex court is challenging an earlier ruling of the Court of Appeal which affirmed Justice Abang’s decision dismissing Metuh’s no-case submission.

    Metuh had through his application for stay of proceedings, urged the Supreme Court to halt his trial before the Federal High Court pending the outcome of his appeal before the apex court on the no-case submission.

    But the five-man bench of the apex court dismissed the application on Friday.

    The lead ruling of the apex court dismissing Metuh’s application for a stay of proceedings was prepared by Justice Clara Ogunbiyi.

    The summary of the ruling was, on Friday, read on behalf of Justice Ogunbiyi by Justice Ejembi Eko, who also agreed with the lead ruling.

  • PDP Crisis: I might quit if Supreme Court affirms Sheriff as chairman – Wike

    Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State has said he might quit his membership of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, should the Supreme Court rule in favour of Senator Ali Modu Sheriff as the National Chairman of the party.

    The governor revealed this while featuring on a monitored programme on Channels Television. Wike noted that he was not comfortable working under Sheriff’s leadership. The governor said working under Sheriff “is against my belief and tradition.”

    Wike also hinted on dumping the party should the apex court ruling favour the Sheriff’s faction.

    He said,“Why we are following up this issue is for the stance of the law on certain things to be stated properly.

    “It is very, very unlikely for me to be under Sheriff if the supreme court rules he is the party chairman. I can’t say if I will leave but of course I have my choice.

    “There are things you can’t go on with, they’re certainly wrong.

    “Have you seen the characters around Sheriff? Do the party have any clear roadmap with such person? And then you want me to go and work under such person? It is against my belief. It is even against the tradition, no I can’t do that.”

  • Zuma appoints first woman to head Supreme Court

    South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma has appointed Justice Mandisa Maya as the President of the Supreme Court of Appeal, the president’s office said on Friday, making her the first woman to occupy the position.

    “Her appointment to the position elevates her to the third highest position in the Judicial Branch, after the Chief Justice and Deputy Chief Justice of the Republic,” Zuma said.

    NAN reports that on April 4, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) recommended Maya to Zuma for appointment.

    Maya filled the vacancy that occurred following the discharge from active service of Mr Justice Khayelihle Mthiyane.

    Justice Maya has close to thirty years’ experience in the legal profession, having started as an attorney’s clerk at a law firm in uMthatha in 1987.

    She then went on to work as a court interpreter, prosecutor and assistant state law adviser in uMthatha.

    She served her pupillage at the Johannesburg Bar and practised as an advocate between 1993 to 1995.

    She was appointed an acting judge of the High Court in 1999 and a fulltime judge the following year. She has acted as a judge at the Labour Court, an acting judge in the Supreme Court of Appeal, and as an acting judge at the Constitutional Court.

    In 2006 she was appointed a judge at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

    Justice Maya holds three university degrees: B.Proc from the University of Transkei, LLB from the University of Natal, and LLM from Duke University in the United States where she was a Fulbright scholar.

  • JUST IN: PDP Crisis: S’Court rule in favour of Makarfi

    The Supreme Court on Monday struck out application by the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Ali Modu Sheriff, seeking to stop the party’s appeal against him.

    The Justice Walter Onnoghen-led court consequently granted the appeal filed by the sacked Caretaker Committee Chairman of the party, Ahmed Makarfi on behalf of PDP.

    TheNewsGuru.com recalls that a Port Harcourt Appeal Court had affirmed Sheriff as the authentic Chairman of the former ruling party, while sacking the Makarfi’s committee.

     

    Details shortly…

  • PDP factions in war of words as Supreme court hears appeal today

    The National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party, Senator Ali Modu Sheriff, has said the Supreme Court should not hear an appeal filed by the sacked National Caretaker Committee of the party led by Senator Ahmed Makarfi.

    Although, hearing in the appeal is slated to take place before the Supreme Court on Monday (today), the Sheriff-leadership of the party has asked the apex court to strike out the appeal, marked SC/133/2017.

    The Makarfi-faction filed the appeal on February 27, 2017 against the February 17, 2017 judgment of the Port Harcourt Division of the Court of Appeal which sacked their caretaker committee.

    But Sheriff, as the National Chairman of the party, and Prof. Wale Oladipo (as the Secretary), prayed for the striking out of the appeal in their written argument accompanying an application which they filed on March 21, 2017.

    The written submission was filed on May 10, 2017, in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directive made during the proceedings of May 4, 2017.

    The applicants argued that having been declared illegal by the February 17, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt, Makarfi and members of the sacked committee lacked the powers to take decisions for the party, including initiating court proceedings in its name.

    Sheriff and Oladipo maintained that the PDP, under the current leadership, was comfortable with the judgment of the Court of Appeal and did not intent to challenge it.

    Their retinue of lawyers, led by Mr. Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), who filed the court processes on their behalf, argued that since the Court of Appeal, in its February 17, 2017 judgment, declared the Sheriff-led National Working Committee as the authentic leadership organ of the PDP, the Makarfi-led committee could no longer pursue an appeal in the name of the party.

    The Sheriff-led PDP leadership argued that the decision of the Makarfi committee to file an appeal in the name of the PDP without its (the party’s) authorisation was not only illegal, it violated the party’s constitution.

    They cited the provisions of Chapter 5, Articles 35(1), 36(1) and 42(1) of the PDP constitution to back their position.

    They stated, “The decision of the Port Harcourt division of the Court of Appeal cited above (that nullified the ‘National Convention’ of the 21/5/2016, as well as the appointment of the ‘National Caretaker Committee’) and the order made therein for status quo as of May 18, 2016, judgment of Justice Mohammad in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1443/20l6, to be reverted to by parties, are still valid and subsisting, and as such, are not only binding on the parties and their privies, but also on the courts including the Supreme Court.

    “In the circumstances, we humbly urge that these orders be given effect by recognising that only the National Executive Committee of the PDP, as represented by its National Chairman (Sheriff), National Secretary (Oladipo) and National Legal Adviser can act for the PDP to prosecute this appeal and to instruct counsel to act on behalf of the PDP.”

    The Sheriff-led PDP leadership noted that it had not, by its argument, said the Makarfi Committee could not appeal the May 17 judgment of the Appeal Court, having been parties in the case from the trial court, it (the Makarfi Committee) or its members could only appeal as interested parties after first obtaining the court’s leave to so appeal.

    In a counter-argument, the Makarfi committee’s group of lawyers, led by Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), urged the court to discountenance the Sheriff leadership’s arguments and proceed to hear its appeal.

    In its reply of argument, dated May 15, 2017, the Makarfi committee queried the legitimacy of the application filed by the Sheriff-leadership and argued that it was not only strange, but intended to frustrate the hearing of the main appeal.

    It argued that it was wrong for Sheriff and others, who had briefed Akin Olujinmi (SAN) to represent them in the substantive appeal and had filed a respondents’ brief, in which they also made similar arguments in relation to the competence of the appeal, to go ahead to brief Fagbemi to ask the court not to hear the appeal but to strike it out.

    Relying on Order 8 Rule 6 (1), (2) and (4) of the Supreme Court’s Rules, the Makarfi faction faulted the March 15, 2017 letter of the Sheriff-led NEC, applying to withdraw the appeal and the subsequent application for it to be struck out.

    It argued that since the appeal was not filed by Sheriff and others, they lacked the right to apply to withdraw it.

    In a response on point of law, filed by Fagbemi on May 18, the Sheriff-led NEC faulted all legal arguments by the Makarfi committee, urging the court to discountenance its contention and hold that it lacked the locus standi to file an appeal in the name of the PDP having been sacked by a subsisting judgment.

  • Allow me defend my innocence – Embattled Justice Ngwuta tells court

    Allow me defend my innocence – Embattled Justice Ngwuta tells court

    Embattled Supreme Court Justice, Sylvester Ngwuta, on Wednesday said he is “innocent and anxious to defend himself” of the charges against him.

    He said this through his lawyer, Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), following a request for adjournment by the prosecution.

    TheNewsGuru.com reports that Ngwuta is currently under trial at a Federal High Court in Abuja for charges bordering on money laundering and passport fraud.

    Federal Government’s counsel, Mrs. Olufemi Fatunde, had earlier on Tuesday requested an adjournment till Wednesday to enable the prosecution to produce some certain exhibits in court.

    Fatunde, expressed regrets that she would have to seek an adjournment due to the unavailability of the exhibits being expected.

    She said, “I am still waiting for the exhibits.

    “The exhibits are not here for reasons unknown to me. Till now, the exhibits have not arrived.”

    ” My Lord, I pray for a short adjournment.”

    TheNewsGuru.com reports that the Federal Government on Tuesday re-arraigned Ngwuta at the Federal High Court, Abuja, on allegations of money laundering and abuse of office.

    Ngwuta had earlier been arraigned on corruption related offences based on 16-count charge.

    Details later…

  • Supreme Court Victory: I have forgiven my detractors – Ikpeazu

    Governor Okezie Ikpeazu of Abia State whose election was affirmed earlier in the day at the Supreme Court has said he has forgiven his political opponents after distracting him with litigation that lasted for about two years.

    Speaking through his Chief Press Secretary, Enyinnaya Appolos, shortly after the Supreme Court reaffirmed him as governor on Friday, following a case filed by Dr. Uche Ogah, challenging his candidacy under the platform of thePeoples Democratic Party, Ikpeazu said he now expected all Abians including his political opponents to join hands with him to move the state forward.

    He said, “The time for politics is long over, and I have forgiven all those that were bent on distracting me. Let all well-meaning Abians, including my opponents, come and join us to grow and develop our state without distractions as we ultimately have stakes in the growth and development of our state and people.

    “Today, there is work to do in Abia and history will judge us by how much of that work we do, not by how much of politics we play. My doors are open to all, my ears are open to hearing and my eyes are strong enough to read suggestions on how we can best deliver greater dividends to those who really matter.”

  • B R E A K I N G: Okezie Ikpeazu wins at Supreme Court

    The Supreme Court, Friday morning, affirmed Okezie Ikpeazu as the Governor of Abia State.

    The case was filed by Uche Ogah who had accused Ikpeazu of allegedly submitting false tax information to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    Ikpeazu defeated Ogah in the Peoples’ Democratic Party, PDP, primaries ahead of the 2015 gubernatorial election in the state.

    Justice Okon Abang of a Federal High Court in Abuja had on June 27, 2016 sacked Ikpeazu from office as governor of Abia State, after the court found him guilty of tax offences.

    Abang ordered Ikpeazu to vacate office for Ogah, who challenged Ikpeazu’s eligibility to contest the 2015 governorship election as the flag bearer of the PDP.

    Following the judgment and order for the immediate inauguration of Ogah as Abia governor, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, issued him with the Certificate of Return.

    But in another judgement in August, 2016, the Court of Appeal affirmed the election of Ikpeazu and quashed the judgment of Justice Abang.

    The Court of Appeal described the ruling by Justice Abang as a rape of democracy, and ordered Ikpeazu to retain his office.

    Subsequently, Ogah approached the Supreme Court where he prayed that the High Court judgement should be upheld.
    ‎In a judgement by the apex court, it faulted the judgement of the High Court, even as it awarded the sum of N250,000 against Ogah.

    Two out of the three-man panel of the Supreme Court struck out the appeal, thereby affirming the judgment of the appeal court.

    Mr Oga’s appeal was dismissed for lacking merit.

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria described the case as a storm in a teacup, which shouldn’t have been entertained in the first case.

    He warned politicians against trying to influence the judiciary, saying there was a security breach which will be investigated by the court.

    He wondered why some politicians would attempt to bribe court employees to know who is writing the judgment or what the judgment is.

    Meanwhile, in a reaction, Governor Ikpeazu, has dedicated his victory to the people of Abia state, who he said stood by him all through the period of litigations.

    In a statement by his Chief Press Secretary, Enyinnaya Appolos, Governor Ikpeazu stated that the victory is a re-affirmation of the mandate given to him by the people, and now twice confirmed by the Supreme Court.

    He stressed that only God will take glory for the victory, and commended the judiciary for standing firm on the side of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    Governor Ikpeazu wishes to call on all Abians to join hands with him to ensure accelerated growth and development of the state.

    According to him; “the time for politics is long over, and I have forgiven all those that were bent on distracting me. Let all well meaning Abians, including my opponents, come and join us to grow and develop our state without distractions as we ultimately have stakes in the growth and development of our state and people

    “Today, there is the work of Abia to do and history will judge us by how much of that work we do, not by how much politics we play. My doors are open to all, my ears are open to hear and my eyes are strong enough to read suggestions on how we can best deliver greater dividends to those who really matter: the great people of Abia State.”

  • PDP crisis: Supreme Court adjourns case, orders for written arguments

    The Supreme Court, on Thursday adjourned the hearing on the objection filed by the National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party, Ali Modu Sheriff, against the appeal filed before the court by the Ahmed Makarfi’s faction of the party.

    The case has been adjourned till May 25, 2017 for further hearing.

    The motion brought before the court by Sheriff, requesting it to disqualify the other faction from appealing the judgment of the Appeal Court was heard and argued, but the court asked the counsels to submit written arguments before the next date of hearing.

    During cross examination, Sheriff’s Counsel, Olujimi, SAN, could not substantiate the locus by which he filed the motion, but asked the court to disqualify the case.

    Meanwhile, the original panel headed by Justice Ibrahim Tanko is no longer in charge of the case.

    A new panel of Supreme Court justices has been constituted to go on with the matter

  • Indian govt mulls alternative technology to phase out telecom towers

    Indian govt mulls alternative technology to phase out telecom towers

    Amid growing concerns about health hazards due to radiation from mobile telecom towers, Indian communications ministry is looking at ways to develop alternative technology whereby dependence mobile towers can be brought down and eventually phased out.

    A draft proposal has been prepared for discussions among the ministries concerned, according to local media reports.

    According to The New Indian Express, sources in the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) said the issue is of concern to the larger public, and that it is examining the feasibility of dispensing cell phone towers by replacing them with underground cables or other alternative technologies adopted by foreign countries,

    Gadgets Now reports Indian Telecom Minister, Manoj Sinha, had sought to allay concerns over radiation emitted from mobile towers, saying studies so far have not revealed any health hazards, emphasising that prescribed limits for radiation emissions in India are more stringent than global norms.

    Manoj Sinha comments came in the wake of a report that Supreme Court ordered shutting down of a BSNL mobile tower in Gwalior on the plea of a 42-year-old cancer patient.

    After the apex court directed BSNL to remove its mobile tower in Gwalior, demands to remove the structures in residential areas because of their negative impact has also started to gain momentum in Indore, Times of India reported.

    Indore radiation safety officer, Shivakant Vajpayee said radiation levels recorded in different parts of his city is as high as 10 times as compared to guidelines set for it.

    “As per government rules, the radiation level should not be more than 4.5 watt/square metre but in many places it is around 45 watt/square metre,” Vajpayee told Times of India.

    While the Supreme Court order is expected to intensify ongoing deliberations on the impact of radiation from mobile phone towers on health, Shivakant Vajpayee said a viable solution is for the government to make a strategy of ‘low power, more towers’.

    “Telecom companies should be asked to install towers with lower power frequencies,” Vajpayee said.

    Meanwhile, operators in the country are unhappy with alternatives to towers.

    According to them, if the Telecom Commission, the policy-making arm of the communications ministry, decides in favour of a phased replacement of mobile towers, it could increase operators’ cost of operations, stressing that the additional burden, in turn, may be passed on to customers.

    Tilak Raj Dua, Director-General of Tower and Infrastructure Providers Association notified that the tower industry, however, feels such measures will only deteriorate the quality of voice and data.