News
Femi Falana replies the SSS
Our attention has been drawn to the self contradictory press release of the SSS in which an unsuccessful attempt was made to absolve itself of responsibility for the armed invasion of the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division, in general, and the desecration of Court No 7 of Hon. Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu in particular as well as the illegal rearrest of Omoyele Sowore.
First, pretending to forget that the abominable desecration of the Federal High Court was covered live by domestic and international media outfits and journlists, some of whom were also direct victims of the gangsterism, barbarism and brutalisation displayed by officers of the Service on the 6th day of December 2019, the Service has conducted “eye witness” accounts of what transpired with the aim of showing that officers of the Service were not involved in the rearrest of Sowore.
Second, the Service argues on the one hand that the arrest of Sowore was “stage managed” by his supporters in order to give the Service a bad name whilst also admitting at the same time that officers of the Service arrested Sowore outside the Court. Having declared that the Service arrested Sowore “outside the court”, despite the “stage managing” argument, what the Nigerian people want to see happen is the immediate release of Sowore, pending his trial as ordered by the court.
INDUBITABLE FACTS CONFIRMING DESECRATION OF COURT AND RE-ARREST BY THE SERVICE
However, the following facts underscore our insistence that the Service was solely responsible for the desecration of the hallowed chambers of the court:
By the advantage of information technology, the whole world has placed responsibility for the gangsteric desecration of the court on the SSS. The SSS cannot extricate itself from the abominable acts of 6th December, 2019.
When I informed the court that fresh charges were being filed against our clients and that they could be re-arrested, the prosecution denied any such plan.
As soon as the case was adjourned the SSS pounced on Sowore and caused a disruption of the proceedings of the court. Having taken over the court room vi et armis Justice Ojukwu hurriedly rose and asked the Registrar to adjourn all other cases. After the learned trial judge had risen for the day she summoned the heads of the prosecution and defence teams to her chambers.
When the lead prosecutor, Dr. Liman Hassan SAN denied knowledge of the invasion of her court she directed him to invite the head of the sss team in the court. When challenged to justify the invasion of the court the officer could not. He apologised to Justice Ojukwu on behalf of the sss. The judge then directed the officer to withdraw the sss operatives from the court room. The directive was complied with as the operatives withdrew from the court room but rushed out to join their colleagues who had taken over the entire court house.
Notwithstanding that the sss could not produce any warrant of arrest for Sowore the defence team decided that I should accompany him to the sss headquarters in view of his physical brutalisation inside the court room and the open threat to his life. I did and ensured that he was driven in my car to the sss headquarters where I handed him over to the officers on duty. Thereafter, I requested for a meeting with the head of the sss but I was informed that he was not in the office.
Though, ordinarily, officers of the Service do not wear any uniform, on the 6th day of December, some of them were in mufti, many were not only armed but also masked while others disguised in lawyer’s black and white suit. Regardless of the form of appearance, the officers of the Service inside Court No. 7 were identifiable by their roles and acts of seizing Sowore and pinning him down. It is an utter poor reasoning to say that Sowore’s supporters were also those bent on injuring him in order to arrest him. The argument of the Service in this respect is as unfortunate and pitiable as the earlier argument of the Service in respect of the Late Chief Gani Fawehinmi who was once accused of wanting to set ablaze his own house.
If Sowore’s supporters subjected him to such brutalisation in the presence of sss operatives why were they not arrested for contravening the provisions of the Anti Torture Act, 2017? Or were the SSS operatives expecting the supporters of a defendant wanted by the State to kill him in their presence?
Before submitting himself for arrest Sowore had rightly demanded for a warrant of arrest and detention order but the sss operatives were unable to produce either.
ON RATIONALISATION OF RE-ARREST OF SOWORE BY THE SERVICE
In rationalizing the re-arrest of Sowore, which is denied in the same Press statement, the Serivce alleged that Sowore held metings with some people. Assuming without conceding that Sowore held meetings with some people in Transcorp Hotel as alleged by the sss, why did the Prosecution not inform the trial court that the defendant had breached his bail condition?
ON THE CLAIM OF THE SERVICE THAT IT IS LAW-ABIDING
The sss says it is a law abiding institution. But why did it refuse to comply with the order of Justice Taiwo to release Sowore? Why did the sss threaten to report the judge to the NJC for granting bail to Sowore?
Why did the sss subject the order of Justice Ojukwu for the release of Sowore to its own approval by asking the sureties already verified by the judge to report themselves to the sss? Why the SSS wait for the 24-hour ultimatum issued by the trial judge before releasing Sowore and Bakare,?
Incidentally, the current prosecutor, Dr. Liman Hassan SAN was the counsel to the defendant in the case of FRN v Air Commodore Mohammed. In that case the order of Justice Nnamdi Dimgba for the release of the defendant on bail was flouted by the SSS. As if that was not enough, the sss invaded the home of the judge on 8th October 2016 when the houses of judges accused of corruption were raided. Even though I have never appeared before Justice Dimgba I have always known him as a judge of impecable integrity. So, I challenged the sss for painting an incorruptible judge with the brush of shame. It was after my intervention that the NJC gave the judge a clean bill of health.
Thereafter, the judge was compelled to withdraw from the case. The SSS thought that it had won but it was a phyrric victory. Thus, Justice John Tsoho (current Chief Judge of the federal high court) to whom the case was re assigned reiterated the orders of Justice Dimgba and proceeded to rule that trial would not commence in the case until the defendant was released from custody. It was at that stage that the sss complied with the order of the federal high court.
Conclusion
In the light of the foregoing we reiterate our demand for the release of not only Sowore in obedience to court orders, pending the verdict of the court in their trial. We equally call for the release of all other political detainees, and criminal sispects who have been admitted to bail pending trial by competent courts.
Finally, it is common knowledge that this country was ruled by military dictators for about three decades. On no occassion did security operatives invade court premises to arrest political activists inside a court room. Therefore, the bizzaire harassment of courts cannot be tolerated under a democratically government that claims to operated under the rule of law.
Femi Falana, SAN
The Electoral Act 2026, signed into law by President Bola Tinubu on February 18, 2026, introduces a massive overhaul of campaign financing and election management in Nigeria.
A central pillar of the reform is the substantial increase in campaign spending limits across all elective offices to account for inflation and logistical costs.
The national assembly has doubled the campaign spending limit for presidential candidates to N10 billion and increased the governorship ceiling to N3 billion in the Electoral Act 2026.
On February 17, the national assembly harmonised versions of the Electoral Bill 2026 passed by both chambers and transmitted same to President Bola Tinubu for assent ahead of the 2027 general election.
Tinubu signed the bill into law within 24 hours of its transmission, completing a two-year consultative process.
In a statement issued on Sunday by his directorate of media and public affairs, Opeyemi Bamidele, senate leader, disclosed the revisions while outlining key reforms introduced in the new electoral framework signed into law ahead of the 2027 general election.
Under the repealed Electoral Act, 2022, presidential candidates spend was capped at N5 billion, while governorship candidates were limited to N1 billion.
The 2026 law, however, raises the senate spending ceiling from N100 million to N500 million.
The limit for house of representatives candidates has been increased from N70 million to N250 million.
For state house of assembly elections, the ceiling rises from N30 million to N100 million.
Area council chairmanship outlay has been reviewed upward from N30 million to N60 million, while councillorship candidates can now spend up to N10 million, up from N5 million.
Bamidele said the upward review under section 92(1-8) reflects prevailing economic realities and rising campaign costs, while retaining statutory limits to regulate election financing.
He added that enforcement provisions remain in place to sanction candidates who exceed the prescribed thresholds.
The National Assembly has officially rolled out the Electoral Act 2026, introducing aggressive reforms aimed at securing the 2027 general elections.
Key highlights include a two-year prison sentence for any INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) who refuses to release essential election documents, and the launch of a dedicated fund to bolster the commission’s financial independence.
These changes, detailed by Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele on Sunday, come amid heavy pushback from opposition parties. Critics argue that the new rules specifically those regarding candidate primaries, campaign spending, and election schedules are unfairly structured to benefit the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).
Bamidele’s attempt to highlight the benefits of the electoral reform comes barely 24 hours after opposition parties fumed that provisions in the 2026 Act on primaries, campaign funding, and election timelines tilted the playing field in favour of the ruling All Progressives Congress.
While the Presidency and the APC have defended the amendments as necessary reforms to deepen democracy and strengthen electoral integrity, opposition figures insisted the changes were skewed to weaken political competition.
The Senate leader, however, argued that there were several merits that many Nigerians were not considering in the new Electoral Act.
He said, “The new electoral governance framework equally mandates the INEC to deploy a Bimodal Voters Accreditation System; recommend two-year jail imprisonment for the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) who withholds vital documents; establish an electronic register of voters and review campaign funds upward for different elective offices.”
The Electoral Bill 2026 was harmonised by both chambers of the National Assembly — particularly over contentious Clause 60(3) — before it was transmitted to President Bola Tinubu for assent to avert any constitutional crisis in the build-up to the next general election.
The President signed the bill into law within 24 hours of its passage, completing what lawmakers described as a painstaking two-year process of recrafting Nigeria’s electoral framework.
Although some civil society organisations questioned the speed of the presidential assent, the Senate leadership maintained that the process had been inclusive and exhaustive.
According to Bamidele, the making of the new regime “is a collective work that involves nearly all critical stakeholders. The National Assembly worked with such different stakeholders as OAGF, CSOs, INEC and our development partners, among others, before we eventually completed the process.
“As we were making progress, the stakeholders too were making their input, and all the inputs were incorporated in the Act.
“In view of the time constraint we are facing now, I do not believe the Executive requires days or weeks to review it before assent since we all contributed to it. Its outcome is not a unilateral effort of the parliament, but of Nigerians at large,” he stated.
Under Section 3 of the new law, a dedicated fund has been established for INEC to ensure financial autonomy, operational stability and administrative continuity.
The provision also mandates that election funds be released at least six months before a general election.
With this measure, Bamidele said INEC would operate with greater independence and quicker corrective powers, including expanded authority to review questionable result declarations made under duress or procedural violations.
He noted that the new framework is “designed to strengthen institutional independence, enhance transparency in election management, improve technological integration, and reinforce accountability mechanisms in the country’s electoral system.”
Section 60(3) now makes electronic transmission of results to the INEC Result Viewing Portal mandatory, while Section 60(6) prescribes “a six-month imprisonment or a fine of N500,000 or both against any presiding officer who willfully frustrates the electronic transmission of election results.”
er rattles NNPC, PDP heads to court over FCT poll, INEC officials risk jail and other top stories
Bamidele said, “This provision is consistent with the public demands. It also stipulates another measure of consequence if any presiding officer refuses to electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to IREV.
“We must equally understand that iRev is not a collation platform. It was designed to enhance transparency in our electoral process. An electronic collating system is a project that requires its own planning,” Bamidele clarified.
He explained further that the law conditionally permitted a resort to Form EC8A where electronic transmission failed due to communication challenges, as prescribed by INEC.
In a move aimed at curbing administrative bottlenecks and electoral impunity, Section 74(1) mandates a REC to release a certified true copy of any requested document within 24 hours after payment. Failure to comply attracts a minimum imprisonment of two years without the option of a fine.
Similarly, Section 72(2) provides that a certified true copy of a court order shall suffice for swearing in any candidate declared a winner by the court where INEC fails or neglects to issue a certificate of return.
Under Section 125(1-2), the Act stiffens penalties against vote-buying, impersonation and result manipulation, recommending a two-year imprisonment or a fine ranging between N500,000 and N2m both upon conviction.
Unlike the repealed 2022 Electoral Act, the new law phases out indirect primaries, retaining only direct and consensus primaries under Section 84(1-2) to broaden participation and curb the monetisation of party delegates.
Section 77(1-7) further mandates political parties to maintain a digital register of members, issue membership cards, and submit such registers to INEC at least 21 days before primaries, congresses or conventions.
A political party “shall not use any other register for party primaries, congresses and conventions than the register submitted to the INEC.
“Besides, any political party that fails to submit the membership register within the stipulated time shall not be eligible to field a candidate for that election.
“These are indeed consequential restraint measures that will deepen internal democracy and reduce the monetisation of politics in the country,” Bamidele said.
The new regime also reviews the spending limits for elective offices under Section 92(1-8).
Bamidele said, “The presidential spending cap has been raised from N5bn to N10bn; governorship from N1bn to N3bn; Senate from N500m to N1bn; House of Representatives from N70m to N250m; House of Assembly from N30m to N100m; Area Council from N30m to N60m; and councillorship from N5m to N10m.”
Other notable provisions include gender-sensitive queue arrangements in areas where culture requires separation of men and women, support mechanisms for persons with visual impairment, and a N10m fine for political parties that fail to submit accurate audited returns within the stipulated period.
Summing up the impact of the reforms, the Senate leader declared: “The Electoral Act, 2026, represents a consolidation and refinement of the country’s electoral governance framework. In all, the Act seeks to enhance electoral credibility, reduce disputes, and strengthen democratic governance in Nigeria.
“The Act emphasises financial and operational independence of INEC; technological integration with procedural safeguards; transparency in collation and declaration; stricter penalties for electoral offences and stronger regulation of political parties.”
ISWAP insurgents launched a lethal raid on the Nigerian Army’s Garahamojili camp in Adamawa State last Tuesday, resulting in a 20-minute gun battle that killed two soldiers.
This incident was reported by Sahel security analyst Brant Philip via his X handle.
According to the report, the insurgents overran the camp, set it ablaze and destroyed three military vehicles.
They also allegedly carted away weapons and ammunition during the assault.
ISWAP claimed the attack was carried out as part of its recently launched “Burn the Camps” offensive.
According to the post, this would mark the first time the group has targeted a Nigerian Army camp in Adamawa State.
President Tinubu Signs 2026 Electoral Act; Presidential Spending Cap Raised To ₦10bn
Electoral Act 2026: 2-Year Prison Term For RECs Over Result Manipulation
Two Soldiers Killed As ISWAP Raids Military Base In Adamawa
Couple Kidnapped, One Shot In Ondo Estate Attack
TikTok Star Peller Escapes Unhurt After Fire Guts Generator At Lagos Mansion
Brake Failure Leaves One Dead, Four Rescued At Abule-Egba
FG Launches Salt-Reduction Campaign In Lagos To Combat Hypertension
Court Sets Feb 25 For El-Rufai’s Arraignment In DSS Cybercrime Case
Maureen Badejo To Appear Before Federal High Court Tomorrow On Defamation, Cybercrime Charges
