News
Tinubu’s Outburst On 25 Per Cent FCT Votes Sparks Fresh Controversy
The candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, in the 2023 presidential election and now President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Bola Ahmedu Tinubu, stirred the hornet’s nest recently when he cautioned the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, PEPT, against attempting to remove him from office on the grounds that he did not get 25 percent of the total votes cast during the presidential election in the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, Abuja.
He warned that such action could lead to chaos and anarchy in the country.
President Tinubu asked the election tribunal to dismiss the petition seeking the nullification of his election for not securing 25 percent of the lawful votes cast in the FCT, arguing that having scored 25 percent in about 30 states of the federation, his failure to obtain 25 percent in the FCT would not be strong enough to deny him of his hard-earned victory.
Tinubu contested the February 25 presidential elections on the platform of the APC and was declared the winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, after polling 8,794,726 votes to beat his closest rivals, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, who polled 6, 984, 520 votes to place second, and Mr. Peter Obi of the Labour Party, LP, who came third with 6,101,533 votes.
However, Atiku and Obi had approached the election tribunal seeking to upturn Tinubu’s victory on the grounds that the elections were characterised by massive rigging as evidenced in the alleged widespread voters’ intimidation and suppression, ballot box snatching and destruction, over-voting, results manipulations, thuggery, vote buying, INEC’s failure to abide by its own rules and procedures, physical assault on voters, among others.
Apart from these, Atiku and Obi also want Tinubu’s victory to be nullified because he did not score 25 percent of the total valid votes cast in the FCT, which according to them, is a constitutional requirement before anybody can be declared president of Nigeria.
Since Tinubu’s declaration as the winner of that election, political discussion has been swinging like a pendulum. Nigerians, who prior to the elections were passive politically, had suddenly become active, discussing and analysing political developments from the election tribunal.
Analysts are united in agreement that never in the history of Nigerian politics has there been the kind of political awareness and participation that were witnessed during the 2023 general elections.
They also agreed that the country’s political firmament has never been as charged and ominous as it was between the period when Tinubu was declared the winner of the presidential election and May 29, when he was actually sworn in as the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
However, Atiku and Obi have pursued their case at the election petition tribunal with each presenting before the tribunal pictures, videos and documentary evidence to prove that Tinubu should not have been declared as president in the first place, not to talk of swearing him into the office.
The issue around Tinubu’s failure to get 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT appears to be the strongest point against the president since it is a constitutional issue and does not require presenting any witness by the petitioners.
But Tinubu, through his legal counsel, Wole Olanipekun, in a final written address to the tribunal against the petition, argued that the FCT is the 37th state for electoral purposes. He stressed that any other interpretation would “lead to absurdity, chaos, anarchy and alteration of the very intention of the legislature.”
Stressing that the petition is novel but not familiar with the electoral law, Olanipekun said: “The issue in this address is very novel in the sense that it is not a petition stricto senso, familiar to our electoral jurisprudence, as the petitioners are not, this time around, complaining about election rigging, ballot box snatching, ballot box stuffing, violence, thuggery, vote buying, voters’ intimidation, disenfranchisement, interference by the military or the police, and such other electoral vices.”
The lawyer was specifically addressing a section of the Nigerian Constitution, which provides that a presidential candidate must score 25 per cent of the votes in two-thirds of Nigeria’s 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.
Since Tinubu was declared as the winner of the presidential election without scoring 25 percent in the FCT, several opinions have been expressed on the matter by Nigerians of all classes, including those that are not lawyers.
There are those who have kept on insisting that the constitution considers Abuja as one of the states in the country. Those on this divide are saying that the word, ‘and’ as used in the constitution, ‘36 states of the federation and the FCT,’ does not really mean that the FCT is different from the 36 states of the federation. To them, the FCT is just the same as any other state of the federation.
They, therefore, posited that Tinubu, having scored 25 percent of the votes cast in about 30 states, is eminently qualified to be declared president since the constitution said a candidate must secure 25 percent in two-third of the 36 states and the FCT, which is 24 states.
However, there are those who insist that the word, ‘and’ as used in the constitution simply means that if any candidate who scores 25 percent of the votes cast in two-third of the 36 states, fails to score 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT, such a candidate has not met the constitutional requirement and should not be declared president.
They further argued that if the framers of the constitution had a different thing in mind, they would not have inserted the word, ‘and’ there. They also disagreed with those who said that the FCT is just like any other state in the federation because while a state has a governor, who is elected by the electorate, the FCT does not have a governor, but a minister who is an appointee of the president.
However, there are others who believe that even though the constitution provides that securing 25 percent votes cast in the FCT is a compulsory requirement before any candidate could win the presidential election, it would be left for the judges to look at what will best serve national interest and unity before they pass their judgement.
However, Tinubu’s legal team seems to have agreed with those on this side of the divide as they are also saying that the courts have always been careful about giving extreme interpretations of the Constitution that could spark chaos.
“Our courts have always adopted the purposeful approach to the interpretation of our Constitution, as exemplified in a host of decisions,” the team said.
Tinubu’s legal team is also insisting that residents of the FCT, Abuja, are not more special than Nigerians from the other 36 states and cannot be treated specially.
The team said: “In concluding our arguments on this issue, we urge the court to hold that any election where the electorates exercise their plebiscite, there is neither a ‘royal’ ballot nor ‘royal’ voter; and that residents of the FCT do not have any special voting right over residents of any other state of the federation, in a manner similar to the concepts of preferential shareholding in Company Law. We urge this court to resolve this issue against the petitioners and in favour of the respondent.”
Pushing the argument further, the President’s legal team is also arguing that 25 percent votes cast in the FCT is not required by law for a president to emerge.
“May we draw the attention of the court to the fact that there is no punctuation (comma) in the entire section 134(2)(b) of the constitution, particularly, immediately after the ‘States’ and the succeeding ‘and’ connecting the Federal Capital Territory with the States. In essence, the reading of the subsection has to be conjunctive and not disjunctive, as the Constitution clearly makes it so. Pressed further by this constitutional imperative, the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, is taken ‘as if’ it is the 37th State, under and by virtue of section 299 of the Constitution.”
However, the comment credited to President Tinubu’s legal team that removing him as president over his failure to score 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT might lead to the breakdown of law and order in Nigeria has sparked another round of argument.
President of the Middle Belt Forum (MBF), Dr. Pogu Bitrus, described the president as a joker for making such a statement.
According to the Middle Belt leader, nobody is above the constitution and if the constitution has been interpreted that the ‘and’ is conjunctive, and that the FCT is additional to the two-third of the states, then it is not for President Tinubu to determine.
“He cannot tell us that he is above the constitution and the laws of the nation. If the Supreme Court interprets that according to the law and the constitution, then it is above not only him, but also above every other Nigerian like him. This is because the constitution is the grundnorm; it is superior to every other law that we have in Nigeria. It is the only thing that is binding us together.
“So, if the constitution interprets it that way, it is not how I feel or how he or any other person feels because the law is not a respecter of persons. He cannot tell us that there will be anarchy in the land if the tribunal interprets the constitution. The country and the constitution are above him,” he said.
Also, a legal practitioner, Marcellus Onah did not agree that there will be anarchy in the land if the tribunal removes the president on the grounds that he did not get 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT.
“What does he mean by anarchy in the land? Yes, a few of his supporters might want to cause trouble but that will be in Lagos only, not even in any other South West states. And I am sure the security agents will know what to do in such circumstances.
“So, he cannot threaten anybody because he is not more Nigerian than anybody. Besides, nobody is above the law. The constitution is the only document that guides how everybody operates in Nigeria, so nobody should claim to be above it.
“If the tribunal has established that he did not get 25 percent of the votes cast in the FCT, there is nothing anybody can do. That is just it and no amount of threat from him can change anything. The constitution must prevail at all times. That is the only thing that will make the outside world respect us as a nation,” he said.
News
I Delivered $15m Agency Cash To Ex-NIMASA DG Akpobolokemi, EFCC Witness Tells Court
A prosecution witness, Captain Ezekiel Bala-Agaba, testified in a Lagos Federal High Court on Thursday, that he personally delivered $15 million in cash to former NIMASA DG, Patrick Akpobolokemi.
The witness, Bala-Agaba, a former Executive Director of Maritime Safety, Shipping Development and Marine Operations at NIMASA, made the disclosure while testifying before Justice Ayokunle Faji of the Federal High Court in Lagos.
Captain Agaba, who appeared as the 15th prosecution witness, told the court that funds meant for pipeline surveillance were withdrawn from NIMASA’s accounts, converted into dollars, and handed over to Dr Akpobolokemi.
According to him, the money was taken to a Bureau de Change, which converted it into $15 million before the cash was delivered to the NIMASA office on Burma Road, Apapa, Lagos.
He said he subsequently took the money to the office of the then Director-General.
“The money was sent to a Bureau de Change, which later brought the dollar equivalent to our office at Burma Road, Apapa, Lagos. I asked my Personal Assistant, Ekene Nwakuche, to carry the bag and follow me to the Director-General’s office,” he told the court.
The witness explained that he collected the bag from his aide before entering the office.
“When we got to the door of the Director-General’s office, I collected the bag from him and asked him to wait outside. I then personally delivered the sum of $15 million to the Director-General.”
The witness was initially a defendant in the case but later opted to testify for the prosecution.
While being led in evidence by prosecuting counsel, Suleiman Suleiman, he explained the chain of command within NIMASA and how financial approvals were processed in the agency.
According to him, the Director-General is the overall head of the agency and issues instructions to directors, who then implement policies in line with the NIMASA Act.
He told the court that he chaired the agency’s Intelligence Committee, which was responsible for certain security-related operations.
“As chairman of the committee, I oversaw its activities and reported directly to the Director-General, Dr. Patrick Akpobolokemi,” he said.
During the proceedings, the witness was also shown a document containing a letter from Access Bank to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) detailing transactions in NIMASA’s accounts between 2013 and 2015.
When asked how much money he took to the former Director-General, Agaba replied: “$15 million.”
After listening to the testimony, Justice Faji adjourned the matter until April 22 and 23 for cross-examination of the witness.
The EFCC had in December 2015 arraigned Dr. Akpobolokemi and seven others before the court on a 30-count charge bordering on conspiracy, fraudulent conversion of funds and money laundering.
Those charged alongside the former NIMASA boss include, Warredi Enisuoh, Governor Juan, Ugo Frederick, Timi Alari, as well as Alkenzo Limited and Penniel Engineering Services Limited.
They pleaded not guilty to the offences.
The anti-graft agency alleged that the defendants conspired to divert funds running into over N1.15 billion under the guise of providing security intelligence in Nigeria’s maritime domain.
According to the EFCC, the NIMASA Intelligence Committee allegedly received N1,153,000,000 between December 2013 and July 2015.
Investigations further revealed that several companies contracted to execute the intelligence operations were either unregistered or lacked the capacity to perform the services, while some were allegedly linked to the defendants.
The prosecution also alleged that the defendants nominated or owned many of the companies used to execute the contracts.
One of the charges stated that the defendants conspired to commit offences punishable under the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2012.
News
CBN Bars Chronic Loan Defaulters from Accessing New Banking Services
The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has issued a directive to all financial institutions to immediately restrict certain banking services for large-ticket borrowers with non-performing loans (NPLs).
This move is aimed at strengthening credit discipline and protecting the stability of the Nigerian financial system following a rise in the industry’s NPL ratio to approximately 7%, exceeding the regulatory 5% threshold.
This order is specifically targeted at large-ticket obligors.
The CBN issued the directive in a circular to banks on Monday.
The latest instruction comes almost a week after the CBN asked financial institutions to stress test.
It is uncertain if the two directives are connected or what may have triggered the loan-related instruction, but the apex bank said it furthers its mandate to protect Nigeria’s financial system.
“In furtherance of its mandate to promote a sound financial system, protect depositors, and enhance prudential compliance within the banking sector, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) hereby directs all banks to restrict non-performing large ticket obligors, whose activities pose systemic risk to the financial system, from accessing specified banking services,” the circular reads in part.
“Any large-ticket obligor with a non-performing facility recorded in the CRMS and/or any licensed private credit bureau shall not be granted additional credit facilities. For the purpose of this restriction, credit facilities include loans and other forms of direct credit.
“In addition, such obligors shall not be granted banking facilities or contingent liabilities such as bankers’ confirmations, letters of credit, performance bonds, or advance payment guarantees.”
News
Makinde Only In PDP Because He’s Not Seeking Re-election – Otitoju
Babajide Kolade-Otitoju, the Director of News at TVC News, recently stated that Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde would likely have defected from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) if he was still serving his first term.
Otitoju stated this on Friday on TVC’s ‘Breakfast Show’.
He described the National Convention of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, in Ibadan last November as a mere waste of time.
“People must show good judgment at a critical phase. What was the point of having that convention? Two courts told you not to go ahead but you went ahead.
“I may not be a fan of former Senate President Bukola Saraki but if he says something that makes sense, I will be the first to admit it. He made sense when he said let’s go for caretaker. What’s the point of not listening to him?
“Later you will be shouting that the ruling party is behind your crisis, meanwhile you are the architect of your own misfortunes. You created this problem.
“If Makinde were in his first term, he would have fled like the dancing governor because his second term would have been in danger,” Otitoju said.
-
News1 day agoWorld War III Fears: Zelensky Reveals Warning To Trump
-
News1 day ago2027 Shakeup: 12 Lawmakers Defect To APC, ADC
-
News23 hours agoTerror Surge: Tinubu Demands Results from Security Chiefs
-
News2 days agoTensions Rise As Makoko Communities Vow To Resist Relocation Order
-
News16 hours agoBeyond My Wildest Dreams: Disu Opens Up During Handover From Egbetokun
-
News12 hours agoCorruption Probe: Court Grants ICPC Access To Data On El-Rufai’s Seized Gadgets
-
News8 hours agoMakinde Only In PDP Because He’s Not Seeking Re-election – Otitoju
-
News7 hours agoCBN Bars Chronic Loan Defaulters from Accessing New Banking Services
