Connect with us

Breaking News

Just In: Marriages Conducted By Ikoyi Marriage Registry Legal, Valid – FG Declares

Published

on

The Ministry of Interior has debunked reports making the rounds that the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has declared all marriages conducted by the Ikoyi marriage registry illegal and invalid.

In a statement on Tuesday evening, the Permanent Secretary and Principal Registrar of Marriages, Ministry Of Interior, described the reports as “false, misleading and a deliberate distortion of the decision of the Court in Suit No: FHC/L/CS/816/18 between Eti-Osa Local Government Council & 3 others”.

See the full statement below.

The attention of the Ministry of Interior has been drawn to news making the rounds on social media claiming that the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has declared all Marriages conducted by Ikoyi marriage registry to be illegal and invalid.

We would like to state that this statement is false, misleading and a deliberate distortion of the decision of the Court in Suit No: FHC/L/CS/816/18 between Eti-Osa Local Government Council & 3 others… where the Honourable Court held that only the Local Government councils can conduct valid marriages in Nigeria.

It is noteworthy that, the same Federal High Court situated in Ikoyi, Lagos in Suit No. FHC/L/870/2002 between Prince Haastrup and Eti Osa Local Government held that the Federal Government, through the Ministry of Interior is constitutionally empowered to conduct marriages in Nigeria and held that the Local Governments were delegated by the Federal Government to conduct marriages, by virtue of Legal Notices issued pursuant to the Marriage Act.

In that case, the learned trial judge held that nothing in the role of local governments, as defined in the Constitution, suggests that local governments can conduct or contract marriages as alleged in their pleadings. The Court affirmed that powers of the local governments to contract statutory marriages is derived from the Legal Notices issued by the President.

The Court also confirmed that the role of local governments, as enshrined in the Constitution is limited to registration of all forms of marriages (including Islamic and customary marriages).

Rather than appeal this decision, the same claimants instituted another action in 2016 Suit no. FHC/L/CS/1760/16 Egor Local Government, EtiOsa Local Government and 2 others V Hon, Minister of Interior and 2 Others.

The Court held that the Suit was an abuse of court process, as it could not be invited to make another pronouncement on the same point, which would lead to conflicting decisions coming from the same court and struck out the case.

The same issue was adjudicated in the case of Olumide Babalola vs Ikeja Local Government and the Registered Trustees of the Association of Local Government of Nigeria (ALGON) in Suit No. LD/1343/GCM/2016 delivered on 15th May, 2017.

The Court held that while registration of marriages are regulated by local governments, being under the concurrent list, formation of marriage is under the Exclusive Legislative List, within the jurisdiction of the Federal Government, regulated by the Ministry of Interior.

It is further worthy of note that the issue of formation, annulment and other matrimonial causes are by virtue of item 61 of the 1st Schedule of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria exclusively reserved for the Federal Government. The General Public is invited to note that these judgments are all still subsisting, competent and have not been appealed against till date.

Further to the above, the current decision of the Federal High Court delivered by Hon. Justice D. E. Osiagor of Court 6, cannot set aside a previous decision of the same Court, which is of coordinate jurisdiction, as that would amount to the court sitting on appeal over its own judgment.. In the circumstances, the Federal Government through the Ministry of Interior, has applied for a certified true copy of the judgement and will take appropriate further action including but not limited to filing of an appeal in respect of this conflicting and confusing decision, in line with the provisions of the Constitution.

We would like to appeal to the general public, the international community, to couples who had hitherto had their marriages solemnized at Federal Marriage Registries by duly licensed places of worship and to all intending couples to be calm and continue transacting their normal businesses at all Federal Marriage Registries subsisting throughout the federation in line with statutory and constitutional provisions.

The general public is to please note the foregoing and maintain status quo ante.

Dr. Shuaib Belgore

Permanent Secretary/Principal Registrar of Marriages

Advertisement

Breaking News

Reps Plenary Turns Chaotic As Motion To Rescind Electoral Act Amendment Sparks Row

Published

on

By

The House of Representatives descended into a rowdy session on Tuesday during an emergency plenary called to reconsider the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, 2025.

The chaos was triggered by a motion to rescind the bill’s earlier passage from December 23, 2025, which had mandated the real-time electronic transmission of election results to the IReV portal.

During plenary, Francis Waive, chairman of the house of representatives committee on rules and business, moved a motion for the house to reverse its decision on the bill which was passed on December 23, 2025.

When Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the house, put the motion to a voice vote, the “nays” were louder than the “ayes”, but he ruled that the ayes had it.

The ruling triggered protests from lawmakers, who began hollering in objection. Abbas subsequently called for an executive session, but the proposal was also rejected.

Despite the resistance, the speaker moved the house into an executive session.

When the green chamber passed the electoral act in December, it adopted a proposal mandating the real-time transmission of election results to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s result viewing portal (IReV).

Continue Reading

Breaking News

El-Rufai Alleges Ribadu Behind Airport Arrest Attempt, Reveals Next Move

Published

on

By

Former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has accused National Security Adviser, NSA, Nuhu Ribadu of being behind the attempt to arrest him at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja on Thursday, shortly after he returned from a trip to Cairo, Egypt.

El-Rufai made the allegation while speaking with former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who paid him a solidarity visit at his residence on Thursday night.

According to him, operatives of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, working with the Department of State Services, DSS, and not the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, confronted him at the airport and attempted to take him into custody.

“It turned out that it’s the ICPC that procured DSS to abduct me and hands me over to them. The ICPC has never invited me.

“We just understand that it’s the ICPC not EFCC that’s responsible for what happened today and the ICPC chairman is acting of the direct order of Nuhu Ribadu,” El-Rufai said.

Responding, Atiku expressed sympathy with the former governor and stressed the need for political unity ahead of the next general election.

The ex-Vice President noted that opposition forces must organize themselves to challenge President Bola Tinubu in 2027.

“We must come together and form very viable opposition because Tinubu is determined to turn Nigeria into a one party state,” Atiku said.

Continue Reading

Breaking News

Nnamdi Kanu Challenges Life Sentence, Files Appeal Against Terrorism Conviction

Published

on

By

Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has officially filed a notice of appeal challenging his conviction and multiple sentences.

 

Kanu insisted that the trial was riddled with fundamental legal errors and amounted to a miscarriage of justice.

In the notice of appeal dated February 4, 2026, Kanu said he was appealing against his conviction and sentences on seven counts, including terrorism-related offences, for which he received five life sentences and additional prison terms after being found guilty on November 20, 2025.

“I, Nnamdi Kanu, the Appellant, having been convicted and sentenced… do hereby give notice of appeal against my conviction,” the document stated.

Kanu was convicted for offences including “committing an act preparatory to or in furtherance of an act of terrorism,” “making a broadcast… with intent to intimidate the population,” and “being the leader and member of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a proscribed organisation in Nigeria,” among others.

Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, delivered the judgment on November 20, 2025, sentencing Kanu to five life terms for terrorism-related offences, 20 years’ imprisonment for being the leader of the proscribed IPOB, and five years’ imprisonment with no option of fine for importing a radio transmitter without a licence.

In his grounds of appeal, the IPOB leader accused the trial court of failing to resolve what he described as a “foundational disruption of the original trial process” following the 2017 military operation at his Afara-Ukwu residence.

“The learned trial judge erred in law by failing to resolve the procedural and competence consequences of the foundational disruption of the original trial process in September 2017,” Kanu argued.

He also contended that the court proceeded to trial and judgment while his preliminary objection challenging the competence of the proceedings remained unresolved.

“The learned trial judge did not hear or determine the objection,” the appeal document stated, adding that judgment was delivered “while the objection remained pending and undetermined.”

Kanu further faulted the court for delivering judgment while his bail application was still pending, arguing that this affected the fairness of the trial process.

He also claimed that the trial court convicted him under a law that had already been repealed, stating that “the learned trial judge erred in law by convicting and sentencing the Appellant under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013, notwithstanding its repeal by the Terrorism (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, prior to judgment.”

Kanu further argued that he was subjected to double jeopardy, contrary to Section 36(9) of the 1999 Constitution, after being retried on facts he said had earlier been nullified by the Court of Appeal.

He also complained that he was denied fair hearing, claiming that he was not allowed to file or present a final written address before judgment was delivered.

Among the reliefs sought, Kanu asked the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, quash his conviction and sentences, and “discharge and acquit the Appellant in respect of all the counts.”

He also informed the appellate court of his desire to be present at the hearing of the appeal, stating, “I want to be present at the hearing of the appeal because I may be conducting the appeal in person.”

Kanu is currently being held at a correctional facility in Sokoto State, after his application to be transferred to a different facility in either Niger or Nasarawa State was denied.

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending