Daybreak, Politics, Entertainment, Sport

Tag: Appeal Court

  • Kogi Guber: Appeal Court Dismisses Sen. Smart Adeyemi’s Case, Ododo’s Candidacy Upheld

    Kogi Guber: Appeal Court Dismisses Sen. Smart Adeyemi’s Case, Ododo’s Candidacy Upheld

    From Noah Ocheni, Lokoja

    The Court of Appeal, seating in Abuja on Friday dismissed an appeal brought before it by Senator Smart Adeyemi, seeking the nullification of the primary election of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Kogi State which produced Usman Ododo as the party’s flag bearer for the state’s governorship election slated for November 11.

    In a unanimous judgment of a 3-man panel of Justices of the Court, Adeyemi who recently represented Kogi West Senatorial District in the Senate was said to have failed woefully to establish all grievous criminal allegations made against the conduct of the primary election by APC and its leaders.

    Justice Shuaib said that the allegations of manipulations and falsification of the primary election results made by Adeyemi, being criminal in nature, ought to have been proved beyond reasonable doubt as required by law.

    He also dismissed another allegation by the Appellant that he was denied fair hearing by the Appeal Committee of the APC based on his petition against the alleged unlawful conduct of the primary election.

    Justice Shuaib said that the issue of denial of fair hearing was not raised in his originating summons at the Federal High Court, hence, cannot be raised as a fresh issue at the Court of Appeal.

    In the absence of cogent and verifiable evidence on the part of Adeyemi, the Court of Appeal held that his allegations remained mere assertions that cannot enjoy any probative value.

    Justice Shuaib who proceeded to dismiss the appeal for want of merit, held that the appeal argued by Adekunle Oladapo Otitoju on behalf of Senator Adeyemi was completely bereft of merit and was thrown out.

    The Court of Appeal upheld the judgement of Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja delivered on July 12, which held that Adeyemi did not prove his allegations that Ododo was not lawfully nominated by the APC.

  • Again, Court Affirms Julius Abure As LP National Chairman

    Again, Court Affirms Julius Abure As LP National Chairman

    The Court of Appeal sitting in Benin City, the Edo State capital, has affirmed Julius Abure as the National Chairman of the Labour Party, a statement by the party’s National Publicity Secretary, Obiora Ifoh, said Monday.

    In a unanimous decision, the three-member panel of justices dismissed the appeal of the appellant.

    It will be recalled that the plaintiff, Lucky Shauibu, said to be a member of the Labour Party in Ward 3 Executive in Esan North East Local Government Area of Edo State, suspended Abure.

    In the lead judgement, Justice Theresa Ngolika Orji Abadua affirmed the decision of the High Court of Edo State and held that one man cannot suspend the national chairman of Labour Party in line with Article 13 and 17 of the Constitution of the Party and the extant Electoral Act of 2022, particularly when the appellant has been described by the party as unknown.

  • Money Laundering: Appeal Court Affirms 8-year Jail Term for Maina

    Money Laundering: Appeal Court Affirms 8-year Jail Term for Maina

    The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja, on Friday, affirmed the eight-year jail sentence that was handed to the former Chairman of the defunct Pension Reform Task Team, PRTT, Mr. Abdulrasheed Maina, following his conviction on a 12-count money laundering charge.

    The appellate court, in a unanimous decision by a three-member panel, said it found no reason to set aside the judgement of the Federal High Court in Abuja which found him guilty.

    It held that no evidence was adduced to establish that the former pension boss was denied fair hearing by the trial court.

    In its lead judgement that was delivered by Justice Elfreda Williams-Daudu, the appellate court resolved all the issues Maina raised before it, against him.

    It held that that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.

    Consequently, it dismissed the appeal as lacking in merit.

    It will be recalled that the high court had in a judgement it delivered on November 8, 2021, convicted and sentenced Maina over his complicity in money laundering.

    The court equally found Maina’s firm, Common Input Property and Investment Limited, guilty of the crime.

    Trial Justice Okon Abang held that the sentence would run concurrently with effect from October 25, 2019, which was the day the defendants were arraigned.

    More so, the trial judge ordered Maina and his firm to forfeit about N2.1billion that was traced to their bank accounts, as well as another sum of $223, 396, 30, to the Federal Government, after which he directed that the company should be wound up.

    The court held that the forfeited funds should be paid to FG within 90 days.

    Likewise, it ordered the forfeiture of Maina’s two choice properties at Lifecamp and Jabi districts of Abuja, to the government, as well as the auction of a bullet proof car and a BMW 5 Series exotic car that was found in premises of the convict.

    Justice Abang stressed that though the law made provision for a maximum sentence of 14 years for the offence that was committed by the defendants, he said he was moved by Maina’s plea for mercy.

    EFCC had in the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/256/2019, alleged that Maina used a bank account that was operated by his firm and laundered funds, part of which he used to acquire landed properties in Abuja.

    It told the court that the 1st defendant (Maina) used fictitious names to open and operate various bank accounts, as well as recruited his relatives that were bankers to operate fake bank accounts through which illicit funds were channelled.

    The EFCC further alleged that Maina induced staff of both the United Bank of Africa, UBA, and Fidelity Bank Plc, to open accounts for him, without conducting the requisite due diligence to verify the identity of the beneficial owner.

    According to the anti-graft agency, the defendants committed criminal offences, punishable under sections 11(2) (a), 15(3), and 16(2) (c) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, and also acted in breach of the Advance Fee Fraud Act.

    Maina had midway into his trial, jumped bail and escaped from the country.

    Though the court okayed his trial in absentia and issued a warrant of arrest against him, Maina, was subsequently re-arrested in Niger Republic and returned back to the country on December 4, 2020.

  • Appeal Court To Rule on Obi, INEC Case on Wednesday

    Appeal Court To Rule on Obi, INEC Case on Wednesday

    The Court of Appeal, Abuja has slated Wednesday, February 8th, to rule on the application by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to be allowed to reconfigure the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) it used for the presidential election.

    A three-member panel led by Justice Joseph Ikyegh also adjourned to rule on the application filed by the Labour Party (LP), and its candidate, Mr Peter Obi, to be allowed to conduct a physical inspection of all the BVAS that was used for the poll.

    Onyechi Ikpeazu, Counsel to Obi says the essence of the application was to enable them to extract data embedded in the BVAS, which represents the actual results from polling units.

    Ikpeazu, prayed the court to allow them to conduct a physical inspection of all the BVAS that was used for the presidential election, as this is to ensure that the evidence is preserved before the BVAS are reconfigured by INEC.

    He added that if they are wiped out, it will affect the substance of the case.

    They equally applied to obtain the certified true copy, of all the data in the BVAS.
    Counsel to INEC, Mister Tanimu Inuwa, urged the court to refuse the application, insisting that granting the request by obi and the Labour Party (LP) would affect its preparations for the impending governorship and national assembly elections.

    It told the court that there are about 176, 000 BVAS that were deployed to polling units during the presidential election, and each polling unit has its own particular BVAS machine which they need to configure for the forthcoming elections. He says it will be very difficult to reconfigure the number, within the period, within the period, to reconfigure the 176,000

    He added that no information in the BVAS will be lost as they will transfer all the data in the BVAS to their backend server.

  • Appeal Court Upholds Bwacha, Binani’s Candidacy

    Appeal Court Upholds Bwacha, Binani’s Candidacy

    The Court of Appeal in Yola on Thursday upheld the governorship candidacy of All Progressives Congress candidates, Emmanuel Bwacha and Aisha Binani for Taraba and Adamawa states respectively.

    The Appeal Court set aside a ruling by the High Court nullifying their candidacy and ordered that their names be forwarded to the Independent National Electoral Commission as the APC governorship candidates for both states.

    In September, Justice Simon Amobeda of a Federal High Court in Jalingo, the Taraba State capital, sacked Bwacha after a petition by an ex-aspirant, David Kente.

    The judge had argued that it is not possible for all the primary results to have the same handwriting while the returning officer declared that no primary was held in the state at the police headquarters due to security threats.

    The former Deputy Minority Leader of the Senate later appealed the judgement, and alleged that the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Taraba State is the major cause of the APC problems within the state.

    Similarly, last month, a Federal High Court sitting in Yola nullified APC primary that produced Binani as the party’s governorship candidate for Adamawa.

    Justice Abdulaziz Anka declared that the judgement was based on substantial evidence of non-compliance with the party guidelines and that of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    A former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Nuhu Ribadu, who came second during the exercise, had dragged Binani and INEC before the high court, alleging vote buying and illegal delegates list at the primary conducted on May 27, 2022.

    However, the appellate court on Thursday set aside both judgements.

  • Appeal Court Removes Akpabio as APC Senatorial Candidate

    Appeal Court Removes Akpabio as APC Senatorial Candidate

    The Court of Appeal has nullified the candidacy of the former Minister of Niger Delta, Godswill Akpabio, as the All Progressives Congress, APC, senatorial candidate for Akwa-Ibom North/West District in the 2023 General Elections.

    The judgment was delivered on Monday evening in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory.

    Recall that the Federal High Court had ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, to recognise Akpabio as the APC Senatorial candidate.

    Justice Emeka Nwite, the lead judge then held that INEC acted illegally by refusing to accept and publish Akpabio’s name after it was sent by APC, following which it ordered INEC to accept and publish Akpabio’s name as APC senatorial candidate for Akwa Ibom North/West senatorial district in 2023.

    However, the appellate court has set aside the judgement.

    More details later…

  • Kanu To Remain In DSS Custody – Appeal Court

    Kanu To Remain In DSS Custody – Appeal Court

    The Court of Appeal on Friday upheld the Federal Government’s application for stay of execution of the October 13 judgment which set Nnamdi Kanu free.

    Justice Haruna Tsammani also ordered that the result of the ruling be forwarded to the Supreme Court within seven day for expeditious hearing.

    This means Mr Kanu, the self-styled leader of the Indigenous Peoples of Biafra, is expected to remain in the custody of the Department of State Services pending when the Supreme Court hears the case.

    The Court of Appeal on October 13 had discharged Kanu who is being prosecuted by the Federal Government at the Federal High Court in Abuja for charges bordering on treasonable felony and terrorism.

    A three-man panel of the Court of Appeal said the Federal High Court lacks the jurisdiction to try him in view of his abduction and extraordinary rendition to Nigeria in flagrant violation of the OAU convention and protocol on extradition.

    The court also held charges preferred against Kanu did not disclose the place, date, time and nature of the alleged offences before being unlawfully extradited to Nigeria in clear violation of international treaties.

    To stop Kanu’s subsequent release, the Federal Government had applied that the execution of the judgment be suspended pending the resolution of its appeal lodged at the Supreme Court.

    Justice Tsanammi on Friday held that the counter affidavit filed against the Federal Government’s application by Kanu’s legal team was misleading.

  • Judges’ Transfer not about Nnamdi Kanu – Appeal Court

    Judges’ Transfer not about Nnamdi Kanu – Appeal Court

    The Court of Appeal headquarters in Abuja on Tuesday clarified that the transfer of its 21 Justices to various divisions in the country has nothing to do with the judgment of the Court that discharged and quashed the terrorism charges against the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra, IPOB, Nnamdi Kanu.

    Contrary to a report in a section of the media, the Appellate Court said that the postings of 21 out of its 81 Justices was a routine exercise aimed at reinvigorating the justice delivery of the Court.

    The Chief Registrar of the Court, Malam Umar Mohammed Bangari, in a statement denied the media report that the three Justices who delivered the October 13 judgment that ordered the release of Kanu from detention were transferred.

    In the statement he personally signed, the Chief Registrar said that only one Justice out of the three that handled Kanu’s matter was affected by the postings.

    The statement read in part “The attention of the Court of Appeal has been drawn to a publication in the media on Monday October 24, 2022 with a caption “Nnamdi Kanu: 3 Justices on Appeal Court Panel Transferred”

    “The publication in question conveyed the innuendo to the effect that the recent postings of Justices of the Court of Appeal were in connection with or in response to the judgment of the Court of 13th October 2022 in Nnamdi Kanu Versus the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “We wish to state categorically that the general postings of the Justices of the Court of Appeal under reference were routine and aimed at reinvigorating the justice delivery system of the Court.

    “In fact, 21 out of 81 Justices including 6 Presiding Justices of the Court were affected by the general postings.

    “It is therefore incorrect to insinuate that the Honourable Justices who delivered the judgment in the Nnamdi Kanu appeal were the targets of the routine posting exercise.

    “A few minutes of inquiry by the media could have clarified the fact.

    “We appeal to the media to exercise restraint and circumspection in reporting matters pertaining to the Court and its operations.

    “The Court of Appeal has an open door policy of providing easy access to the media to make inquiries and seek clarification on any matters of interest to the media for the benefit of the general public.”

  • Nnamdi Kanu: Appeal Court Rejects FG’s Request For Adjournment

    Nnamdi Kanu: Appeal Court Rejects FG’s Request For Adjournment

    The Court of Appeal on Monday refused to grant the request of the Federal Government to adjourn the application seeking to stay the execution of the judgment that struck out the terrorism charges against the leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.

    Rather, the court gave the Federal Government till 12 noon today to move its application.

    At the day’s proceedings, counsel for the Federal Government, David Kaswe, complained that he was served with counter affidavit by Kanu’s lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, last week Friday.

    Kaswe claimed that a list of one additional authority was served on him this morning and that he needed time to react to the authority.

    Counsel for Kanu, however, objected to the request on the ground that only one additional authority was served and the Federal Government should have no excuse to seek adjournment because of that authority alone.

    Ozekhome claimed that the government is yet to obey the court order of October 13 that ordered Kanu’s release.

    He told the court that the freedom of Kanu was being trampled upon as he was terminally ill. He further urged the court to reject the request for any adjournment.

    The presiding judge, Justice Haruna Tsanami subsequently gave the Federal Government till 12om today, to move its application for the stay of execution of the judgment and to respond to the fresh one authority cited by Kanu’s legal team.

  • Nnamdi Kanu: AGF, Malami Reacts To Appeal Court Ruling

    Nnamdi Kanu: AGF, Malami Reacts To Appeal Court Ruling

    The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, on Thursday reacted to the decision of the Appeal Court to discharge leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.

    In a statement signed by spokesperson, Dr. Umar Jibril Gwandu, Mr Malami said the appeal court only discharged Kanu and did not acquit him.

    “The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice has received the news of the decision of the Court of Appeal concerning the trial of Nnamdi Kanu,” the statement said. “For the avoidance of doubt and by the verdict of the Court, Kanu was only discharged and not acquitted.

    “Consequently, the appropriate legal options before the authorities will be exploited and communicated accordingly to the public.

    “The decision handed down by the court of appeal was on a single issues that borders on rendition.

    “Let it be made clear to the general public that other issues that predates rendition on the basis of which Kanu jumped bail remain valid issues for judicial determination.

    “The Federal Government will consider all available options open to us on the judgment on rendition while pursuing determination of pre-rendition issues.”