Former Minister of Youths and Sports Development, Solomon Dalung, has described politicians moving from opposition parties into the ruling All Progressives Party (APC) as sinners seeking forgiveness.

Dalung who spoke in Abuja disagreed with the postulation that politicians were trooping into the APC because the ruling party has performed well, “rather they are sinners, who are seeking forgiveness for their numerous sins.”

Dalung said the defectors were only fulfilling what a former Governor of Edo State, Adams Oshiomhole said regarding corrupt politicians, that no matter the gravity of their sins, they will be forgiven as soon as he join APC.

Oshiomhole has severally denied this quote attributed to him but politicians have been using it.

He said, “These are people who have committed heinous crimes against the Nigerian people and they are jumping into the APC ship for the forgiveness of their sins. Not that they believe in Tinubu, no; they do not. They are only assembling so that their sins will be forgiven.

“So it is a conclave of political cardinals who have committed grave sins against the Nigerian people and a political party has offered them the opportunity of forgiveness on entrance,” he said.

The former minister also warned that if care is not taken, the defectors would create problems in the ruling party in the future.

He said: You know there is an adage in Hausa that if animals celebrate the death of a butcher, has the knife also died? If beneficiaries of the mandate of the people are defecting, have the people also defected?

“So there is no value added to Tinubu except that he has compounded the situation in his party and there will be an implosion.”

He also dismissed concern in certain quarters that the entrance of politicians like the former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai into the Social Democratic Party (SDP) could be a potential threat to the presidential ambition of Prince Adewole Adebayo, the party’s 2023 presidential candidate, adding that “Adebayo’s political charisma, image and personality within the Nigerian political environment has presented him as an obvious force to deal with in 2027.”

He emphasized that Adebayo is the only presidential candidate who has consistently maintained a media campaign against the failed and unpopular policies of the current government.

“So, Nigerians are very conversant with Adebayo’s voice, charisma and leadership qualities. So, whether you mobilize the whole politicians into the SDP, you must resolve the question of Adebayo in the SDP as a presidential candidate before any other person.

“This is because nobody has promoted the SDP in Nigeria like Adebayo. After Chief MKO Abiola, you rank Adebayo in the contemporary SDP as the highest. So, the concern as some people are expressing is normal. Human beings entertain such fears but the reality is that the name SDP since 2023 has been sustained unilaterally by the doggedness, commitment, dedication and selflessness of Prince Adebayo.

“So, he is a force to beat in whatever political arrangement that the SDP will put on ground to produce a presidential candidate. He is a patriot who did not join politics for himself; he has surrendered the rest of his life to the service of humanity and he did that at his 50th birthday.”

[DailyTrust]

The Nigerian government has said it has commenced payment of five-month wage award arrears of N35,000 to civil servants since the end of May 2025.

This comes as the federal government clarified that it has implemented a N70,000 minimum wage payment to all its employees.

The Director of Media, Office of the Accountant General of the Federation, Bawa Mokwa, made these clarifications known in an exclusive interview with DAILY POST on Monday ahead of the resumption of work after the Eid-Al-Adha holidays.

Recall that the Nigeria Labour Congress, through its spokesperson, Benson Upah, in an Arise Television interview on Sallah day (last Friday), berated President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s administration over the delay in payment of wage awards and allowances.

Upah had lamented that the Tinubu’s government had neglected workers’ welfare, as economic hardship took a toll on civil servants.

He described the delay as a “betrayal of trust” and “shameful”.

“This is a betrayal of trust and an abuse of our patience,” Upah declared, adding: “It’s completely unacceptable.”

However, reacting, Mokwa explained that the government has kicked off the payment of the arrears of the wage award.

He stated that the payment would be made in installments in the next four months.

“We have commenced the payment of N35,000 wage arrears.

“Except for some agencies that are independently paying for the wage award, for example, the Independent National Electoral Commission.

“The N35,000 wage award was an interim solution by the federal government before the N70,000 minimum wage approval.

“This was done in five months, but Labour argued that the payment didn’t commence immediately, having a five-month arrears.

“Of the five months, we have paid the first month. Four months are remaining, which would be paid in installments,” he told DAILY POST.

Similarly, Mokwa clarified that the federal government has commenced the minimum wage payment across its ministries, agencies, and parastatals.

“On the minimum wage pay, it has been implemented across the board,” he added.

Efforts to speak with Upah over the matter were unsuccessful as of the timf of filing this report.

Recall that in July Tinubu signed the minimum wage bill into law.

However, despite the minimum wage approval, there are still complaints of its full implementation at both federal and the state government levels nearly a year later.

[DailyPost]

Filmmaker Funke Akindele, often hailed as the box office queen, has announced the return of ‘Aiyetoro Town’ with Season 2, five years after the debut.

In a X post, she revealed that the highly anticipated second season of the hit movie will premiere on FAANtv’s YouTube channel on June 22, 2025.

Funke teased that the new season will deliver a mix of laughter, drama, and meaningful life lessons, continuing the legacy of the first season, which debuted five years ago.

Expressing gratitude, Funke praised the cast and crew for their dedication and talent, crediting them for bringing the story to life.

She described them as the “real MVPs” behind the project. 

She wrote: “5 years ago, we brought you Aiyetoro Town season 1, and now we’re back with season 2!!

“Get ready for laughter, drama and of course, life lessons.
Aiyetoro Town Season 2 premieres on FAANtv’s YouTube channel on Sunday, June 22nd!

“A big thank you to my amazing cast and crew – your dedication and talent made this story come alive! You all are the real MVPs!”

[TheNation]

A two-term Presidential aspirant and a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party, Dele Momodu, on Tuesday, submitted that only a coalition of political parties can wrest power from President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress in 2027.

He made this submission while featuring on a Broadcasting Corporation of Oyo State monthly programme: “Guest of the Month,” in Ibadan, the state capital.

Momodu said his soul has already left the PDP, while only his body remained in the party.

“If PDP is united, it has all that it takes to wrest power from the All Progressives Congress in 2027, but forces against it would not allow this to be.

“The APC is jittery of the PDP, noting that it is the only opposition party that can challenge its dominance in 2027. This is one of the reasons why the leadership of the APC at all levels is ensuring that the party is factionalided.

“There is no way that a disunited PDP can wrest power from APC in 2027. The ideology of the ruling party is to weaken the main opposition party

“Another challenge is the problem within the party. Some of its members are being used to work against its stability and progress. But PDP is a law-abiding party. It always follows due process before making any decision on its members.

“It is the law that will stimulate the process of suspending or sacking erring members,” he stressed.

Momodu explained further that it’s almost impossible to remove President Tinubu in 2027 unless there is a formidable team and coalition.

“Also, whoever would contest favourably against the current president must come from the opposite direction in terms of regions in Nigeria,” he added.

[Punch]

The Presidency and presidential candidate of the Labour Party, LP, in the 2023 elections, Peter Obi, clashed yesterday over the fuel subsidy removal and foreign exchange policies of President Bola Tinubu’s administration.

While Obi noted that both policies were haphazardly implemented by the government to plunge the country into economic crisis, the President accused Obi of being too desperate for power and lacked understanding of governance.

Although the former Anambra State governor agreed that the removal of fuel subsidy was necessary, he, however, quarrelled with the manner it was executed.

He also asked the Tinubu administration to account for the money saved so far from the removal of the subsidy and also show proof of its expenditure on such infrastructure as education, health and poverty reduction, as it claimed.

Recall that President Tinubu had, on his inauguration on May 29 2023, announced the removal of fuel subsidy and flotation of forex exchange, triggering the economic crisis the country had been facing, especially with regards to inflation and devaluation of the naira.

In an interview on Arise Television, Obi said while the removal of fuel subsidy was necessary, the policy should have been implemented in a “gradual and organised” fashion.

He said: “I have consistently maintained that I would have removed the fuel subsidy. If you go to my manifesto, it is there and the steps I would have taken in an organised manner.

“There is nothing wrong with the removal of the fuel subsidy. What is wrong is the haphazard way it was announced and implemented.”

He acknowledged that the subsidy regime was riddled with “criminality and corruption” and needed to end, but criticised the current administration’s approach, describing it as poorly executed.

Obi questioned the management of the funds saved from the subsidy removal, saying, “since we were told that we removed it because we don’t want to borrow and that the funds will allow for investments in critical infrastructure.

‘’Billions saved. Where is it? Where is it invested in critical areas of development? Everybody knows critical areas of development — education, health, and pulling people out of poverty. Have any of these three improved? No.’’

Obi said a fair pricing template should have been negotiated with stakeholders to cushion the impact on citizens.

He also addressed the decision to float the naira, saying the policy wasn’t inherently wrong but must be backed by economic productivity.

“There is nothing wrong in floating and devaluing your currency. You do this when you have productivity. In all of this, I would have done the same thing in an organised manner,” he said.

Since President Bola Tinubu’s announcement on May 29, 2023, ending the fuel subsidy, the price of petrol has surged from N190 to over N850 per litre. The administration also adopted a currency float policy, allowing market forces to determine the naira’s value.

Obi desperate for power, ignorant about governance — Presidency

But replying Obi yesterday, Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communications, Daniel Bwala, described the Labour Party’s presidential candidate as a ‘shallow’ personality who was not well grounded in issues of economics and governance.

Bwala, in a statement posted via his official X account, stated that he was surprised Obi could agree with the economic policies of President Bola Tinubu, especially on fuel subsidy removal and the unification of foreign exchange, but emphasised that it was obvious the former Anambra governor and other opposition figures were simply after taking over power, all the while.

He wrote: “Is anybody watching Peter Obi on Arise TV? He agreed with our policy of removal of subsidy and unification of the foreign exchange; he claimed he would have done it better than us in an ‘organised manner’

“He was asked what the ‘organised manner ‘ is.’ He played with words, yet to arrive at agreeing with us.
“Anybody with a rational mind knows these guys are just looking to grab power, but they don’t have any alternative agenda.

“He seems to have very shallow knowledge of economics and governance. Remember, this is even an interview anchored by a member of his Obidient movement.

“That’s why you don’t hear ‘I put it to you’ and no barking like a rottweiler; Yet ‘if it didn’t Dey it didn’t Dey.”

Petrol subsidy removal generates $84bn, 40 roads — NOA

In what seemed an account of receipt from fuel subsidy removal, the National Orientation Agency, NOA, weekend, said the federal government has so far generated $84 billion from the removal
The agency said the funds generated have enhanced the funding 40 critical road projects across the country in the past two years.

In its policy explainer, titled ‘’Two Years Later: Key Benefits of Subsidy Removal,’’ NOA, stated: “For decades, particularly since the advent of the current democratic dispensation, a major albatross of the federal government had been the oil subsidy regime.

“Successive administrations’ zeal to tame the menace had proved a fiasco while the economy continued to haemorrhage profusely. However, by 2015, many Nigerians had reached a consensus that it was high time the subsidy was consigned to the dustbin of history, as the subsidy budget in 2022 rose by 700 per cent to N4tn, the highest ever in subsidy history.

“Between 2005 and 2022, successive governments spent $84.39bn on fuel subsidies. These subsidies consumed over 70 per cent of potential federal revenue, pushing the country to the brink of bankruptcy.

But with the bold decision to remove it, Nigeria is now saving billions and investing in real infrastructure.

“Removal of subsidy not only saved the entire economy from imminent collapse, it also rescued several states of the federation from bankruptcy. Upon the take-off of this incumbent administration, Nigeria was spending 97 per cent of its revenues to service debts until its debt profile exceeded N100tn.

“Fuel subsidies consumed more than 70 per cent of the potential Federal Government’s revenue, forcing both the central and state governments to resort to heavy borrowings to finance their budgetary expenditures, but the removal helped the country to save billions.

“States now swim in inflows of funds, paying salaries as at when due despite more than 100 per cent minimum wage increase and drastically reducing their debt portfolios because subsidy removal puts more money into their hands.

“In 2023, the 36 states of the federation and 774 local government areas got a total of N6.16tn as FAAC allocations, implying a 28.6 per cent increase from the N4.792tn they received in 2022, but in 2024, revenues rose astronomically to N15.26tn as a result of subsidy withdrawal, giving the states and 774 LGAs N9.58tn, which was N3.42tn higher than what they received in 2023.

“Thus, as records from the Debt Management Office have shown, in the last 18 months, the total domestic debt profile of the 36 states and FCT had declined from N5.82tn in June 2023 to N3.97tn in December 2024. This implies that subnational administrations had repaid N1.85tn debts within one and a half years.

“As part of the gains of subsidy withdrawal, for the first time in decades, Nigeria’s capital expenditure in the 2025 Appropriation Act is higher than its recurrent annual spending. Successive administrations had always allocated 70 per cent of their annual budgets to recurrent spending, leaving only a paltry 30 per cent for the capital budget.

“However, the incumbent administration provides N23.96tn for capital expenditure in the 2025 budget. This is N10tn higher than N13.64tn for recurrent expenditure. The impacts of investments in road infrastructure have been the ongoing commissioning of 40 road projects in commemoration of two years of President Tinubu’s administration.”

[Vanguatrd]

This is a season of political divorces, that strange separation of godsons from their godfathers and the end to political alliances between people of like interests. The events of the last two weeks were quite revealing, from the rift that blew open in the political relationship between Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu and the governor of Lagos State, Babajide Sanwo-Olu Lagos in Nigeria to collapse in the political romance between US President Donald Trump and billionaire tech entrepreneur Elon Musk in the United States. 

The former is more of a godfather and godson relationship, while the later is/was a marriage of political interests.

Sanwo-Olu’s emergence as the favourite for the governorship of Lagos was spectacular, after Tinubu – the godfather of Lagos politics – fell out with Governor Akinwunmi Ambode in the run-in to the 2019 election. A relatively lesser-known figure at the time, Sanwo-Olu’s strong point which was sold as Ambode’s weakness, was his unwavering loyalty to party directives and the Tinubu political dynasty. Six years down the road, the Tinubu-Sanwo-Olu relationship, which became a model of political loyalty, is now under growing strain. 

The tension first started after the 2023 presidential election in which Lagos delivered a far narrower vote margin than expected, a poor performance in Tinubu’s traditional stronghold that saw Labour Party’s Peter Obi win the state convincingly. The loss, though not blamed directly on Sanwo-Olu, raised concerns within the Tinubu camp about the governor’s effectiveness in maintaining grassroots control and party loyalty.

More revealing was the political turmoil that erupted in Lagos, involving the State House of Assembly Speaker, Mudashiru Obasa. When Obasa was abruptly impeached in early 2025, allegedly with Governor Sanwo-Olu’s tacit approval, Tinubu reportedly intervened to secure the Speaker’s swift reinstatement. Sanwo-Olu’s perceived involvement, or at least his failure to prevent the move, was seen as another red flag in his handling of affairs as they affect the godfather. Instructively, the reinstatement was done with the governor totally blind-sided.

Sanwo-Olu’s increasingly independent governance style which drew him closer to technocrats, private sector figures, and policy experts, many of whom operate outside Tinubu’s traditional political machinery, further widened the gap. To add to the matter, he was reportedly building legacies around his name rather than the godfather. 

 What was once a quiet, behind-the-scenes divergence has in recent weeks increasingly become more apparent to the public, as subtle tensions between the two key figures of Lagos politics began to unfold. While neither the President nor Governor Sanwo-Olu publicly acknowledged a political rift, a series of subtle but telling public displays have fueled growing speculation that tensions are rising between the two. Since then, their public appearances together have noticeably dwindled and when it happens, creates even more curiosity among the people. 

If what happened at the recent inauguration of the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway on May 31, 2025, during which President Tinubu was seen bypassing Governor Sanwo-Olu during a handshake session, is anything to go by, then there is indeed, a deeper crack than was ever imagined. This public snub, captured on video, quickly went viral and was widely interpreted as a sign of deep discord between the two leaders. Further evidence of the rift emerged during President Tinubu’s recent official visits to Lagos – for the ECOWAS 50th anniversary and the commissioning of Lagos deep seaport road – with Governor Sanwo-Olu noticeably absent in both occasions.

Should the President, the father of all, have engaged in such open disagreement with his political godson? Is it a good record that he has consistently quarreled with the men and women, including the 2 people that served as his deputies while he was Lagos governor, who are his well-known political proteges? These are questions begging for answers as Nigerians chew over the troubling matter.

Such political divorces in the recent past did not end in Lagos. In far away United States, billionaire Elon Musk who emerged as a pivotal supporter of Donald Trump and who forged a political alliance that significantly influenced the 2024 campaign’s trajectory in the US, also spectacularly fell out with the President. Musk touted himself as Trump’s friend and ally and became one of Trump’s most substantial financial backers, establishing America PAC that mobilized voters, particularly in swing states and contributed over $250 million to Trump’s campaign. 

His eventual appointment as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), did not surprise many though it was marked by controversial measures, including the elimination of certain federal agencies and programs as he advocated for significant federal budget cuts and deregulation. However, the alliance began to fray in the past 2 weeks when Musk publicly criticized Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” for its potential to increase the national deficit and reduce electric vehicle subsidies, which directly impacted Musk’s business interests negatively.

The rift and eventual political divorce was swift, quickly breeding unprecedented bad blood and bitterness. Trump’s threat to revoke Musk’s government contracts and Musk’s threat to release damaging information about Trump’s past escapades have seen a dramatic shift from alliance to adversary between two influential figures.

The political relationship between Trump and Elon Musk has undergone a dramatic shift, evolving from mutual admiration to growing animosity, as their alliance has suffered from a clash of personal interests, political ambitions, and ideological differences.

While the exact nature of the potential revelations that Musk has threatened to reveal remains unclear, his bitterness is growing over the loss of over $150 billion in value of his businesses within days. Musk is believed to possess communications, private correspondences, knowledge of personal matters and previous associations with individuals in Trump’s orbit that could prove politically damaging. His willingness to air such information would represent a serious escalation in their feud, turning a political disagreement into a personal battle.

The consequences of the Tinubu-Sanwo-Olu disagreement and the collapse of the Trump-Musk relationship highlight the volatile intersection of politics, business, personal ambition, and ego. While it is heartening to hear that the elders in Lagos State intervened last week to resolve the Tinubu-Sanwo-Olu dispute, leading to the President ‘forgiving’ the governor’s ‘sins’, the gulf between Trump and Musk on the other hand, is widening. The clash between the world’s most powerful leader and the earth’s richest man has degenerated to name-calling, childish banters and frightening threats. It could have wide-ranging implications in US politics, with the potential for further conflict as they appear, on the surface, beyond repair. 

Sheddy Ozoene, Editor-In-Chief of People&Politics, is Vice President of the Nigerian Guild of Editors.

Bode George has an abiding faith in PDP. And using the humongous amount of Rivers State funds frittered away on some ungrateful “chop and clean mouth” PDP politicians as index of measurement, the only other person close to Bode George in this regard is Nyesom Wike, his estranged godson, with whom he is currently engaged in brickbats over the soul of their beloved PDP.

Not many of those who once swore by PDP’s name want to identify with it today. Many are in a mad rush to abandon a sinking PDP ship. The South-south geo-political zone once regarded as the bedrock of PDP, we now know, was because the now tattered PDP umbrella provided cover for massive mismanagement of state funds in a zone where leaders claim stealing state funds is not corruption but ‘misapplication of funds’. (Augustus Aikhomu and Goodluck Jonathan).

While PDP stalwarts who once ate with their 10 fingers in the 16 years of the locust are today falling over each other to escape PDP sinking ship, what we hear from the likes of Olusegun Obasanjo, Atiku Abubakar, David Mark, Olagunsoye Oyinlola, etc., the oligarchy that changed PDP from its founding fathers’ dream to a garrison-commanded by self-serving leaders, is a foreboding silence.

Bode George however remains not only passionate about PDP, but its very embodiment as conceived by its founding fathers. When Obasanjo asked him to choose a role he would like to play after being foisted on the Yoruba nation and Nigeria as PDP candidate in 1998 by the military and the interest they serve, Bode George’s choice without hesitation was a PDP apparatchik. And even when offered the position of Sole Administrator of NPA by Abiye Sekibo, after the government had been inaugurated, his response was “My Honourable, thank you for the honour. I have more important job to do in the party than go and be any sole administrator.”

Even now as the oligarchy and other PDP stakeholders pretend not to hear the tolling of the death knell of their party, Bode George’s vociferous voice is the only one ‘jarring our earlobes’. Nigerians can still hear the ringing echo of his voice as he squared up with Arise TV’s Charles Aniagolu last week, insisting:

“PDP is like Iroko tree. Or the Oak tree found in Saudi Arabia”; “PDP is the only party in Nigeria”; “Our party is not like APC owned by individual”; PDP party as packaged by our founding fathers has the capacity to solve Nigeria problems”, etc.

More intriguing is that George is not exhibiting any evidence he is ready to give up on PDP despite his political son’s last week call on him to go and ‘read newspapers’  if he had nothing doing. And that was after challenging him to identify one politician PDP made from Lagos or one PDP elected politician he successfully supported despite his 25 years of misguided war against Tinubu. AD senators Wahab Dosumu, Adeseye Ogunlewe and Musiliu Obanikoro that he and Obasanjo lured into PDP in 2002 was regarded as ‘mandate theft’ while the 2003 governorship mandate theft in Edo, Ondo, Osun, George took credit for, were reversed by the courts.

Long before Wike’s advice, one of his other disrupting political son, Ayo Fayose had, back in 2020, asked him to retire to give room to younger ones. In his words “it’s high time Bode George retires. Let him be a support stand for the younger ones in the party …all those stories of how we formed this party in 1998, eight of us sat in my sitting room to form the party, is no longer important because the young too must be allowed to grow. (African Examiner September 30, 2020).

Indeed, the joke was on George himself when in an attempt to admonish Wike who is insisting “he is Mr PDP’ resorted to his favourite Shakespeare quote “Life is like a walking shadow… It is like a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury and after that you are heard no more”.

Consumed by his love for PDP, Bode George is yet to come to terms that there is indeed ‘time for everything’.

But is Bode George’s passion enough to save PDP? I don’t think so. It will appear it is too late to change the tide. It is also of little relief that not many members of his embattled party share his optimism.

 For the PDP governors who are not ready to take chances, because they are seeking re-election: “if the taste of the wine changes, drinking habit must change” or “if you must fly to Abuja and your private jet is grounded, it will be foolhardy not to join another plane that guarantees a safe flight”. And to PDP former governors like Gabriel Suswan and PDP stalwarts like Segun Sowunmi, Atiku’s former spokesman, PDP is ‘in intensive care’. 

And neither can anyone fault APC, the irresistible bride that “we are in a democracy and democracy allows freedom of association”.

Unfortunately for Bode George, the pervading gloominess gives no assurance of light at the end of the tunnel. By the verdict of students of political party system including John Campbell, former US envoy to Nigeria, PDP, unlike parties that serve as recruitment centres for political office holders and as modernization agents, is in fact not a political party. It is an association of ‘wheelers and dealers he dismissed during a debate on Nigeria in British House of Commons as “an elite cartel at the centre of power in Nigeria that came together essentially as a club of elites for sharing of oil rents and political spoils”.

Much as PDP card-carrying members in borrowed toga of journalists may want to change the narrative, not all Nigerians suffer from collective amnesia. Nigerians remember it was PDP stalwarts that created artificial fuel scarcity at the onset of Obasanjo’s government to stampede him to set up the Petroleum Pricing Product Regulatory Authority (PPPRA) under which PDP leaders and their siblings defrauded Nigeria of about N1.6trillion through fuel subsidy scam. Only last week, the son of retired Brigadier Ahmadu Ali, former PDP chairman and PPPRA chairman, was jailed for 13 years for the same offence.

Nigerians remember Atiku Abubakar supervised the ill-implemented privatisation programme, through which Nigeria’s total investments of about $100billion acquired between 1957 and 1997 were sold to PDP stalwarts and their fronts for a paltry $1.5billion.

We remember the monetization policy was another scam through which PDP stalwarts including ex-Senate President David Mark, ex- House speaker Dimeji Bankole and ex CBN governor Chukwuma Soludo bought their mansions at giveaway prices while other government officials and civil servants converted to personal use properties kept in their temporary care for our children at prices determined by them.

Of course, there was the unbundling of PHCN during which government injected between $8billion and $16billion, taxpayers money only to have the electricity distribution companies sold to stalwarts of PDP some of whom shamelessly donated as much as N5b to President Jonathan’s 2015 re-election bid.

Bode George’s passion for PDP will most likely not erase the memory of how Sambo Dasuki, President Jonathan’s National Security Adviser (NSA) became an ATM without password with leading PDP men and women sharing US$2.1billion loan meant for our fighting soldiers’ hardware and welfare.

We remember very clearly the years of the locusts when for 16 years, PDP stalwarts without self-discipline, ate with their 10 fingers and boasted they would rule for an uninterrupted 60 years.

Without excusing Buhari’s eight years of gross incompetence and Emefiele’s mismanagement of foreign exchange market through forex ‘round tripping’ or even the toll of current President Tinubu’s two years economic policies on Nigerians, we remember Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala told Nigerians that Jonathan government was borrowing money to pay salaries. And more foreboding, both she and Chukwuma Soludo predicted that whoever or whatever party took over in 2015 would have an uphill task trying to reverse the damage of 16 years of economic recklessness.

Unfortunately for George, Atiku Abubakar who presided over the sales of our budding industries and Peter Obi, the ‘container economist,’ who as importer of foreign labour, are jointly responsible for our nation’s current nightmare. Driven by greed for power, both have serially betrayed PDP, their party as they did Nigeria.

The tragedy is that they are today jostling for power not on the basis of a new vision to redress the tragedy they brought on a nation where my total estacode as a young journalist going for holiday in London in 1982 was N500, an amount that cannot buy a loaf of bread today, but on the basis of current temporary hardship, the result of their repeated rape on Nigeria.

Condolences to the Uwais Family

I express my condolences to the Uwais Family on the passing of their Patriarch, Honourable Justice Mohammed Lawal Uwais, GCON, the 7th Indigenous Chief Justice of Federal Republic of Nigeria (CJN). May Allah, in His infinite mercy, grant him the highest level of Jannah. Ameen.

Today’s This Day Lawyer publication, is a tribute and testament to CJN Uwais, the longest serving Supreme Court Justice and second longest serving CJN in Nigeria’s history, how he conducted himself and discharged his duties admirably as CJN. 

For me, when such a death occurs, I see it as a time for deep reflection on my own life, as it should be for all of us. I start to ask myself questions such as, what positive impact have I made on anyone’s life or on society generally? Will I have enough, to bag me a verdict of ‘Not Guilty’ in ‘Kootu Òlòrun’ (Heavenly/God’s Court)? The death of his Lordship is a reminder that life, no matter how long, holding a position, for no matter what length of time, is temporary; and death is a debt that we all owe God. And, that, even if Section 6(6)(c) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)(the Constitution) which ousts the jurisdiction of the courts with regard to Chapter II of the Constitution, that is, the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, so that Government and its Officials escape ‘worldly’ accountability to the people, aside from the fact that none of us will escape accountability to God for our actions, what will people say about us when we die? Will the report be good, like that of CJN Uwais? 

‘Kootu Òlòrun’

I fear for many within the three arms of Government today, that their report and judgement may not be favourable. And, in ‘Kootu Òlòrun’, Justice, which is something that is so precious to the Almighty, will be handed down accordingly! There is no technical justice there! In Akpan v Bob (2010) LPELR-376(SC) per Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, JSC (later CJN), the Supreme Court held inter alia that “…technical is no justice at all….”; I concur. 

However, it appears that courts do not always follow this precedent. Take for example, the recent Supreme Court decision in the Gwandu Emirate Case – can we say that substantive justice was truly served  in a 20 year old case in which all the proceedings were set aside by the Supreme Court (in a 3:2 decision), because deposed Emir, Alhaji Mustapha Jokolo allegedly didn’t serve a pre-action notice on the Kebbi State Governor/Government (KSG) before legal proceedings were instituted? While I have not had the benefit of reading the full judgement in this case, I read several news items reporting the matter, including one that quoted excerpts of the judgement. 

Pre-Action Notice

In Ntiero v N.P.A. 2008 N.W.L.R. Part 1094 Page 129 at 142 per Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, JSC (later CJN); per Samuel Akinola Akintan, JSC the Supreme Court held that a Pre-Action Notice “should be in form of a letter usually written by a Plaintiff or his Solicitor to the prospective Defendant giving him notice of intention to institute legal proceedings against him for specified reliefs”. In Abuja Municipal Area Council v C.N. Okoli Transport Co. Ltd (2009) LPELR-3579(CA) the Court of Appeal held that “The rationale behind the jurisprudence of a pre-action notice, is to enable the Defendant know in advance the anticipated action, and a possible amicable settlement of the matter between the parties, without recourse to adjudication by the Court. The purpose of giving notice to a party, is that it is not also taken by surprise, but so that it should have adequate time to prepare to deal with the claim in its defence”. 

One of the reasons for the pre-action notice, is for the Defendant to be made aware of the imminent institution of legal proceedings, particularly to stop abuse and fraud, for instance, where some Plaintiffs have been known to file cases surreptitiously and obtain judgements against Defendants without their knowledge. The importance of such a notice or the need for it, varies from one circumstance to the other, even if it is a condition precedent, and in some cases, there may be no real need for it, as it may be superfluous (like saying reverse back!).  

Considering the fact that it was the KSG that deposed Alhaji Jokolo, and they were ably represented in the matter, no one can say the Defendants weren’t aware of the case. The question should have been, whether non-compliance with the pre-action protocol impacted the KSG negatively and/or whether it’s absence could not have been treated as a procedural irregularity, and not one that was fatal to the proceedings. 

Even if the Kebbi State Chiefs (Appointment and Deposition) Law, required a pre-action notice protocol to be followed where there’s such a dispute, before the institution of legal proceedings, that is, the fulfilment of a condition precedent before litigation, does non-compliance with a pre-action notice protocol necessarily result in the proceedings in a matter being set aside/nullified? The answer is, not always. 

I submit that the issue of non-compliance with serving a pre-action notice, should be settled on a case by case basis, and not in a blanket fashion, particularly because circumstances may differ from case to case, and additionally, there are exceptions to the rule of service of pre-action notices, that is, in the case of fundamental rights enforcement, and when the Defendant waives the right to a pre-action notice and doesn’t include the non-service of same as an issue in the pleadings. See the case of Obasa & Ors v Fadeyi (2020) LPELR-51758(CA) per Mistura Omodere Bolaji-Yusuff, JCA. 

Matters Arising 

Like I mentioned before, since I’m yet to read the Gwandu Emirate case’s judgement, I do not know whether the Kebbi State Government raised the issue of non-compliance to the pre-action notice protocol in their pleadings; but, the truth of the matter is that, the fact that the Defendant defends the suit is enough to imply that he/she is aware of the case and has waived the right to the pre-action notice; because, with or without the pre-action notice, the reasons for its issuance can be fulfilled without it, and it’s essence also fulfilled in its absence, as in the Gwandu Emirate case, that is: 1) knowledge of the case – the Kebbi State Government was aware of the case and participated in it fully; 2) possible amicable settlement – nothing stops parties to an action from adjourning the process of litigation, to allow for settlement. The court usually grants adjournments for report of settlement, and if a settlement is reached in the course of the proceedings, Terms of Settlement are filed, and entered as the judgement of the court in the matter. 

My point? In this particular instance, non-service of a pre-action notice does not appear to be more than a mere procedural irregularity, and is nothing fundamental that goes to the root of the case. The non-service of the pre-action notice in the Gwandu Emirate case doesn’t appear to be something so crucial, that it was adjudged to be fatal. See Abuja Municipal Area Council v C.N. Okoli Transport Co. Ltd (Supra).

Additionally, in Alhaji Jokolo’s case, it appears that there were issues of fundamental rights involved, as it was canvassed that he was not given the right to fair hearing before he was deposed, contrary to Section 36(1) of the Constitution. See Muhammed & Ors v ABU Zaria & Anor (2012) LPELR-22366(CA) on the right to fair hearing. 

In Akahall & Sons Limited v NDIC (2017) LPELR-41984(SC) per Kumai Bayang Aka’ahs, JSC, the Supreme Court in drawing a distinction between substantive irregularity and procedural irregularity cited the case of Mobil Producing (Nig.) Unlimited v LASEPA 2002 18 N.W.L.R. Part 798 per Ayoola, JSC where it held inter alia thus: “Much stress has been placed on the argument that non-compliance with provisions such as Section 29(2) of the Act (Federal Environmental Protection Agency Act) leads to a question of jurisdiction which can be raised at any time, and which if resolved against the Appellant, renders the entire proceedings a nullity. This rather mechanical approach to the issue, which tends to ignore the distinction between jurisdictional incompetence which is evident on the face of the proceedings, and one which is dependent on ascertainment of facts, leads to error……”.

In the locus classicus, Madukolu & Ors v Nkemdilim (1962) LPELR-24023(SC) per Vahe Robert Bairamian, JSC, the Supreme Court listed the conditions that must be satisfied before a court can exercise its jurisdiction, the last being that the case must be initiated by due process of law and upon the fulfilment of any conditions precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction. By failing to serve the pre-action notice on the Kebbi State Governor, the Apex Court majority decision held that Alhaji Jokolo didn’t initiate his suit via the due process of law, and this had robbed the court of jurisdiction. In short, such an important case which offered a golden opportunity to establish judicial precedent on the deposition of traditional rulers was not decided on its merits, but on procedure and technicalities. I must concur with his Lordship, Ayoola, JSC in Mobil Producing (Nig.) Unlimited v LASEPA (Supra), that this approach by the majority judgement appears to be mechanical. And, perhaps, since the non-service of the pre-action notice didn’t appear to affect the meat of the matter, it should have been treated as a procedural irregularity that wasn’t fatal to the case, so that substantive justice could be done. 

I respectfully disagree with the majority decision, as it appears to visit what may have been a mistake on the part of Counsel in not serving the pre-action notice on the Kebbi Governor, on Alhaji Jokolo, thereby denying him of the opportunity of having the actual subject-matter of his case determined by the Apex Court. In Iroegbu & Anor v Okwordu & Anor (1990) LPELR-1539(SC) per Philip Nnaemeka-Agu, JSC, the Supreme Court held inter alia that “It should be regarded as settled by a long line of decided cases, that the courts do not normally punish a litigant for the mistakes of his Counsel”. In Alston S.A. & Anor v Saraki (2000) LPELR-436(SC) per Adolphus Godwin Karibi-Whyte, JSC, the Supreme Court held that “The Courts have always followed the established principle that the fundamental object of adjudication is to decide the rights of the parties, and not to impose sanctions merely for mistakes they make in the conduct of their cases, by deciding otherwise than in accordance with their rights”. I submit that, after 20 years, the majority decision of the Apex Court didn’t decide the Gwandu Emirate case on its merits, and in accordance with the rights of the parties. 

Conclusion 

In the interest of justice, for especially for so long, it is my humble opinion that, particularly in a situation that ordinarily, on the face of the statement of claim, the court of first instance is clothed with the requisite jurisdiction to hear and determine a matter, where the Apex Court is able to treat a mistake that doesn’t affect the substance of a case as a mere procedural irregularity and determine the appeal on its merits, it should. In Andrew v Oshoakpemhe & Ors (2018) LPELR-53228(CA) per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, the Court of Appeal held thus: “These days, the Courts should or ought to concern themselves less with mere technicality and concern themselves more with matters of real substance and substantial issues in contention between the parties, in order to render substantial justice to them. Long gone are the heydays of technicality riding roughshod over substantial justice! The Courts have since charted a new path, aimed at consolidating substantial justice between the parties and would sparingly accord mere technicality, just for its own sake, any pride of place except in very well deserving cases”. I concur. 

In my humble opinion, the Gwandu Emirate Appeal, should have been determined on its merits by the Apex Court, as it would not have been unjust to the KSG to do so. Having been unilaterally deposed as Emir of Gwandu by the KSG, Alhaji Mustapha Jokolo was again denied fair hearing at the Apex Court based on a procedural irregularity – double denial. I believe that this another instance of technical justice being handed down by the majority, over and above substantive justice. Also see the Kebbi State Law, on Statute of Limitations to institute legal proceedings touching on Chieftaincy Matters.

Even though pre-action protocols have been introduced by the various courts in their Civil Procedure Rules as a condition precedent to the institution of legal proceedings, I still believe that the absence of it doesn’t have to be a deal breaker in all cases! Certainly, when a Plaintiff tries to pull a fast one on a Defendant by securing a questionable judgement in his/her absence, the issue of the non-service of a pre-action notice must necessarily be fatal and grounds to nullify such unusual proceedings. 

But, when a Defendant fully participates in the case, why should the non-service of a pre-action notice be fatal, when everything a pre-action notice sets out to achieve, still remains fully achievable without it? The existence of this fact in some cases, automatically downgrades the absence of a pre-action notice from a fatal accident to a scratch on the vehicle. We must use some of these mechanisms fairly, as this is the essence of justice, and not in a blanket manner that could lead to the denial of justice for no legitimate or sound reason.