Legal Affairs
Summary of what transpired at election petition tribunal as Tinubu, Shettima close case
Time: 9:23am
The 2nd and 3rd respondents (Tinubu/Shettima) are starting their defense today after INEC did their defense yesterday with just one witness from INEC who was heavily drilled by LP’s SAN Ikwueto
The court now sits.
Justice Adah welcomes everyone to the proceedings of today.
He thanks you all for the cooperation so far
The case is called.
– Datti Baba-Ahmed represents the LP
– Odunsanya George represents the APC
All other parties are absent.
Counsel appearances ongoing.
PETITIONERS (LP) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: DR LIVY UZOUKWU SAN
– Awa Kalu SAN
– Paul Ananaba SAN
– Valerie Azinge SAN
– Emeka Opoko SAN
– Peter Afuba SAN
– Audu Anuga SAN
– Rita Chris-Garba Esq
– Chike Obi Esq
– Ajuluchukwu Ozoeze Esq
2ND & 3RD RESPONDENTS (TINUBU/SHETTIMA) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: WOLE OLANIKPEKUN SAN
– Akin Olujimi SAN
– Yusuf Ali SAN
– Emmanuel Bukala SAN
– Adebayo Adelodun SAN
– Ogu Onoja SAN
– Olatunde Busari SAN
– Babatunde Ogala SAN
– Adebayo SAN
– Ibrahim Audu Esq
– Akintola Makinde Esq
– Yinka Adeni… Esq
1ST RESPONDENT (INEC) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: AB MAHMOUD SAN
– Kemi Pinhero SAN
– Ehinaya SAN
– Stephen SAN
– Tanimu Inuwa SAN
– Nasara Auta Esq
– Patricia Obi Esq
– Wendy Kuku Esq
4TH RESPONDENT (APC) LEGAL TEAM
LEAD: LO FAGBEMI SAN
– Charles Edosowan SAN
– Afolabi Fashanu SAN
– Dakas Dakas SAN
– Suraj Saida SAN
– Olusola Oke SAN
– Gboyega Oyewole SAN
– Kunle Adegoke SAN
– Marcel Oru SAN
– Tajudeen Oladoja SAN
– Mumini Hanafi SAN
– Saidu Sanusi SAN.
Time: 9:49am
Wole SAN:
He informs the court that the matter is for defense of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents. He noted that they are ready to go on but will first tender some documents from the bar.
They have filed a schedule which has been served on all parties.
He notes that there 18 items and they will tender all before proceeding to call witnesses.
He applies to tender them in batches
– Items 1 & 2
– Item 3
– Items 4 & 5
– Items 6, 7, 8 & 9
– Items 10 & 11
– Item 12
– Items 13 & 14
– Item 15
– Item 16
– Items 17 & 18
Wole SAN:
He pleads in advance that they have all the photocopies made from the originals. They will tender the originals but replace with Photocopies.
He now tender a letter from the Nigerian Police to the US Embassy dated 3 Feb 03 asking for information of the 1st Respondent.
Together they tender the reply letter from the US Embassy signed by Michael Onar. The former letter was signed by Tafa Balogun.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents.
Petitioners (LP):
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
He adds that they also do not consent (that the documents be taken as read and demonstrated).
The Court:
The Letters of the Nigerian Police and Reply of US Embassy are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA8-9 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Time 10:3am
Wole SAN:
They seek to tender Item 3, which are a bundle of 12 documents relating to educational records of TINUBU from the Chicago State University signed by Jamal T Orr, Associate General Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs, certified on 28-06-2023.
Also, a Certification receipt.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The bundle of documents together with the receipt relating to academic records are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA10 accordingly.
As the court pleases…
Wole SAN:
They now tender documents listed in Items 4 & 5, showing Data Page of Nigerian Passport issued on ++ November 2019 of the 1st Respondent (TINUBU).
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The 2 Data Pages of Nigerian Passport are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA11-12 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Time: 10:16am
Wole SAN:
They now tender documents listed in Items 6-9 which are Tinubu’s Visas to the USA issued in February 2011, 12 July 2017, 25 July 2019, and 18 November 2021 (My Lord that’s my Birthday, Wole SAN tells the court).
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The US Visas issued to the 1st Respondent (Tinubu) are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA13-16 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Time: 10:25am
Wole SAN:
They now tender documents listed in Items 10 & 11 which are 2nd Petitioner (LP) forwarding letter for the registration of membership and LP Register of Members for Anambra State. Both documents are duly certified by the 1st Respondent (INEC)
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The 2 Documents are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA17-18 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Time: 10:38am
Wole SAN:
They now tender Item 12 which is a Certified True Copy of the Report of the Committee on the Location of the Federal Capital of Nigeria.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The Report of the Committee is hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA19 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Wole SAN:
They now tender documents in Items 13 and 14 which are Form EC8D for Kano State in respect of the Presidential Election and Form EC8D(A) in respect of the Presidential Election, both of February 25, 2023.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
Time: 10:51am
Wole SAN:
They now tender documents in Items 13 and 14 which are Form EC8D for Kano State in respect of the Presidential Election and Form EC8D(A) in respect of the Presidential Election, both of February 25, 2023.
All respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
In line with their agreement reached by all the parties during the Pre-Hearing, they do not object to the two documents.
The Court:
The INEC Form EC8D for Kano State and Form EC8D(A) of the Presidential Election are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA20-21 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Wole SAN:
They now tender Item 15 which is Acknowledgment Notice for (SHETTIMA) Voluntary Withdrawal of Candidacy from Borno Central Senatorial District.
He now applies to correct 6th July 2023 written on the document to 6th July 2022
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The Acknowledgement Letters are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA22 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Wole SAN:
They now tender Item 16 which is a Supreme Court judgment SC/CV/501/2023 between PDP & INEC delivered on 26th May 2023.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They equally do not object to the court judgement being tendered.
The Court:
The Supreme Court Judgment is hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA23 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Wole SAN:
They now tender Items 17 and 18 which are Page 28 Tribune of 23 February and Page 27 of the Tribune Newspaper of 23 February 2023.
That Supreme Court Judgement is that delivered recently on the issue of Shettima Double-Nomination which was instituted by PDP.
Time: 11:5am
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
Dr Livy SAN: No Objection…. Wait ooo, that document, I object. The cooperation has ended. (No Play ooo!)
They oppose admitting the documents.
The Court:
The Pages 28 & 27 of Tribune Newspaper of 23 February 2023 are hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA24-25 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
At this point that we know if they will be calling any witness or it is an adjournment.
Wole SAN:
They will now proceed to call a witness, but He is asking for a recess before they call their witness.
Looks like there is something they didn’t tell that witness that they need to quickly tell him
The Court will now take a 10 minutes recess… We rise!
Get ready for the witness.
Time 11:38am
We are back!
Wole SAN:
He notes that before they start, he likes to commiserate with the court, as they just heard of the passing of a Justice of the Court of Appeal, who was even the number 2.
He presents condolences. Amen
Here we Go!
Justice Tsammani notes that they have not received any official communication from the President of the Court and that’s why they cannot say anything. He however appreciates the condolences, pending when the information is passed.
Wole SAN:
They now call their first witness.
He now swears with the Bible…
EXAMINATION IN CHIEF
Q. Tell my Lords your name and address
A. I’m Senator Michael Opeyemi Bamidele, I live at M ABJ
Q. Your occupation
A. I’m a Legislator and a lawyer. I hold a BA at the University of Ife, LLB at Uniben, LLM, University of.
New Hampshire and a BL from Nigerian Law School. I’m licensed as an Attorney and Counsellor at Law in the New York Bar since January 1999. I’m also a fellow at the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
Q. All what you’ve said is contained in your resume?
A. Yes sir
Q. You have a copy of it?
A. Yes sir
He’s shown the document which he identifies. Wole SAN now seeks to tender the resume in evidence.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the document sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They equally do not object to the Resume.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the document sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They equally do not object to the Resume
The Court:
The Resume of Sen. Michael Opeyemi Bamidele is hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA26 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Note: The witness is the new Senate Leader in the 10th National Assembly announced yesterday.
Q. You recall coming to the registry of this court on 12th April 2023 to depose to a witness statement on oath
A. Yes sir
Q. If you see the said witness statement on oath, can you identify it?
A. Yes sir
(Please get the statement from Pg 83-138 of the 2/3rd Resp. Reply.)
He’s shown the document.
Q. Is that the witness statement?
A. Yes sir
Q. Do you wish to tender the statement as your evidence?
A. Yes sir
Wole SAN now applies to tender the document.
Q. In Para 31, 32, 49, 51, 101, 104, 119 of your witness statement, you referred to several
Time: 12:2pm
Documents
A. Yes
Q. Look at Exhibits RA8 to RA25, are those the documents?
A. Yes my lord
Q. In your witness deposition in para 101 & 114, you deposed to a result of the election in Kano State where you said that the 2nd Respondents was not properly recorded by a shortfall of 10,929 votes?
A. Yes
Q. If you see these Forms, can you identify them?
A. Yes sir
He’s now shown Exhibits RA20 & RA21.
A. Yes they are the documents and it is contained in column 9 of each of the documents
Q. In para 114, you referenced international observers Report. If you see one such report of ECOWAS will you be able to identify it?
A. Yes sir
He’s shown the report and he identifies it
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
Dr Livy chuckles and then objects!
They vehemently oppose admitting the documents and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
Q. Tell the court who signed the report
A. It was signed by His Excellency Ernest, former president of Republic of Sierra Leone and currently head of ECOWAS Electoral Observation Mission to the Republic of Nigeria
Wole SAN now seeks to tender the Report before the court.
The Court:
The ECOWAS Report is hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA27 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Q. Lastly, we go back to your para 19 & 114, where you referred to a letter from the 2nd Petitioner (LP) forwarding the membership to INEC and 2nd Petitioners List of Membership Register of Anambra State as at 25 April 2022 (he’s shown Exhibits RA17-18)
A. Yes, I identify them.
1ST RESPONDENT CROSS-EXAMINATION
AB MAHMOUD SAN: I have no question for you.
4TH RESPONDENT CROSS-EXAMINATION
Q. You were a former chairman of the Senate Committee on Judiciary and now the Majority Leader just yesterday
A. That’s right.
Q. Exhibit RA19 which you earlier mentioned does not contain the name of Peter Obi as a member of Labour P.
A. No it does not
Q. As a US practicing attorney, you know there cannot be a conviction except there is a charge, apart from the charge, there must be an indictment
A. I do
Q. Exhibits RA8&9, you know those documents gives the 2nd Respondent a clean bill of health as far as a criminal conviction is concerned
A. Yes sir, I do
Q. Exhibit PA5 (The court documents tendered by the petitioners) does not contain conviction or sentence on the face of it
Court: there’s no mention of that on the face of the documents.
A. Sir these are verifiable information.
Justice Ugo: You are taking us to the cloud again
A. No it does not
Q. Do you have your papers of membership of the New York Bar, USA
A. Yes
Fagbemi SAN now tenders the 3 documents showing his membership of the New York Bar, USA
Court: One of these looks like a complimentary card, are you tendering a complimentary card?
Fagbemi SAN: My Lord, I’ll leave that one out.
Court: We are finding it difficult to describe these documents and you brought two exactly the same ID Cards
Fagbemi SAN: one suffices.
Time: 12:24pm
Witness: My Lord, I have plenty of these cards, they issue it every year.
Court: so which one is the latest one?
He now presents one of the American Bar Association ID Card.
All Respondents:
They do not object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Petitioners:
They vehemently oppose to this purported Membership card, and shall give their reasons at the time of final written address.
The Court:
The American Bar Association Membership Card is hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits RA++ accordingly.
As the court pleases…
Q. With a long standing relationship with Bola Tinubu as a colleague, you know that he’s a Nigerian citizen by birth
A. Yes my lord
PETITIONERS (LP) CROSS-EXAMINATION
Q. In your witness statement in Pg 136 para 56, you said you will rely on reports of local and international
observers
A. Yes
Witness is reading from a book… Livy: close whatever you are reading there and look at me, you’re a lawyer, you know the rules. Copy Copy
Q. take a look at the EU Report
He’s shown the EU Report which he identifies.
Livy SAN now seeks to tender it.
Time: 12:38pm
All Respondents:
They all object to the documents sought to be tendered.
Wole SAN: Livy SAN should have told this court that he is tendering an Exhibit that is already before this court.
Court: Before this court?
Wole: Yes
Court: it is for the PDP case not this
The Court:
The CTC of EU Observation Report is hereby admitted into evidence and marked as Exhibits X2 accordingly.
As the court pleases.
Time: 12:42pm
Q. Livy now reads Page 60, para 6 of the EU Report where it was stated that more than a quarter of the results were still missing from the portal, many of the results were UNREADABLE…’
He asks the witness to Read Para 17 of the ECOWAS Report (their evidence)
A. He reads, ‘incidence of violence, killings were recorded in several states…including the murder of LP candidate in Enugu…’ he says, except to say I do not agree with this report
Livy: Oh, you don’t agree with an evidence you tendered, it’s ok, no problem, you tendered it!
Q. Standing there, do you have a licence to practice law in the state of Illinois
A. I have a licence to practice federal law in the United States
Q. The forfeiture of 460k Dollars, the court made an order that the money represents proceeds of narcotic trafficking, it that true?
A. It was a civil forfeiture not a criminal forfeiture
Q. Answer the question
Court: just answer the question
A. Yes, but it’s civil forfeiture
The witness wants to explain
Court: you are here as a witness, not an advocate, just answer questions
Q. you are not an IT expert?
A. No I’m not
Q. You did not present any licence to practice law in New York, have you?
A. No, I didn’t
Q. American Bar Association is a voluntary association
A. It is, but you must have gotten a licence as an attorney in one of the states.
Time: 1:5pm
Q. You know what an IREV is
A. Yes
Q. All through the elections, the presidential particularly, have you accessed the IREV?
A. I didn’t have any reason to (Livy: Ok you have not, Ok)
Q. Therefore it is correct that since you have not access it, you cannot say whether the results there are readable or not
A. That’s not correct sir (Livy: Ok)
Q. I take it for granted that you’ve read very well the order made by the court in Chicago
A. Yes
Q. The court in granting that order made reference to an American law for Money laundering
A. Yes, but that was not in the petition. The judgment referred to Section 189.
Q. The Letters by Nigeria Police, Exhibit RA9, confirm that you never saw the letter written by the IG of Police to the American Embassy
A. I saw it
Q. Is that the letter you have?
A. No sir, this is a reply
Q. Confirm whether the letter made specific reference to the specific case in Chicago?
A. It did, it talked about all criminal records
Q. Can you confirm on what date INEC received the letter conveying the withdrawal
Wole: we didn’t hear the answer he gave my lord
Court: what was your answer witness?
A. I said Yes, that the report confirmed a general criminal record search and it returned with no court
Q. You know what foreign judgement is?
A. Yes
Q. Confirm before the court that this judgement from the US Court has nothing to do with money judgment
A. I so confirm
(The question begging for answer is, does such judgment now need to be registered?)
The witness is now discharged.
The witness leaves the court…with a disappointed face.
Wole SAN HAS JUST CLOSED THEIR CASE FOR THE 2ND & 3RD RESPONDENTS!
Time: 1:15pm
Fagbemi SAN:
THE 4TH RESPONDENT, APC, have just announced that they won’t be calling any witness in their defense.
The APC have just closed their case by not calling any witness or tendering any documents!
Tinubu and Shettima have just closed their defense in the Peter Obi Petition by calling ONLY 1 WITNESS AND TENDERING 18 DOCUMENTS!
The APC have also just announced that they will NOT CALL ANY WITNESS PR TENDER ANY DOCUMENTS. They’ve closed their case too!
The case is finished at this point. Who would have guessed!
INEC: 1 Witness and a few documents
Tinubu/Shettima: 1 Witness and 18 Documents
APC: No witness, no documents
The case will now proceed to the filing of FINAL WRITTEN ADDRESSES. We expect the court to change the dates.
The Court now says:
– All the Respondents Have 10 Days to file their Final Written Address counting from today.
– The Petitioners have 7 Days to file their Response thereafter
– All Respondents have 5 Days to file their Reply thereafter.
Time: 1:22pm
Wole SAN informs the court that parties have agreed that:
All their Objections will be filed differently and will contain 10 pages while their main Final Written Address will contain 40 pages. He adds that they’ve agreed to reformulate their issues to suit their arguments.
The court does not hold a contrary opinion and notes that this has already been stated before. They note however that all of this falls within the timing earlier mentioned.
Justice Tsammani thanks everyone for the cooperation so far and the peaceful conduct of everyone.
—
©Copyright 2023 News Band
(If you would like to receive CURRENT NEWS updates from News Band on WhatsApp, or Telegram, or wish to send eyewitness accounts/ reports/ articles, write to elstimmy@gmail.com and we will respond instantly. Follow us on twitter @News Band; like our Facebook page: News Band.)
Continue Reading
Relatives of the 13 wedding guests killed in Plateau State have condemned the State High Court’s decision to release 20 suspects on bail.
The victims were brutally murdered on June 12, 2025, when a mob attacked their bus in Mangun district, Mangu Local Government Area.
They were traveling from Kaduna State to attend a wedding in Qua’an Pan LGA before tragedy struck.
According to reports, the group lost their way and entered a volatile community already shaken by recent terrorist activity.
Local youths allegedly mistook them for bandits and launched a deadly assault, leaving 13 people dead on the spot.
Following the killings, security operatives arrested 21 suspects.
In an earlier court sitting, 20 of them were remanded at the Jos Correctional Center while investigations continued.
However, on Wednesday, August 20, Justice Nafisa Lawal Musa granted bail after a motion filed by defence counsel, Garba Pwul (SAN).
This ruling has triggered outrage among the families of the victims, who insist the development is a slap in the face of justice.
Mallam Abdullahi Tahir Balami, a relative of one of the deceased, condemned the court’s action.
Speaking to reporters, he described the ruling as suspicious and raised concerns about possible foul play.
“With this development, we are now questioning the commitment of the Plateau State government to justice,” Balami said.
“It is saddening that suspects in a multiple homicide case can be released on bail.”
Another relative, Mallam Ubale Anguwar Dantsoho, who lost several family members, also expressed anger.
He described the decision as shocking and warned that justice may never be served.
“How can suspects in a murder case be granted bail?” he asked. “It shows that our system is failing us.”
Maryam Usman, widow of the driver killed in the massacre, expressed her heartbreak.
She said she struggled to understand why suspects linked to such a crime would be freed.
“What kind of court is this?” she asked in despair. “Instead of justice, the court dashed our hopes. We no longer believe justice will come.”
Her words echoed the feelings of many families now convinced that the judiciary has abandoned them.
Human rights activists are also calling for urgent intervention from both the state and federal governments to ensure accountability.
The Plateau killings have become one of the most disturbing tragedies in recent months.
The case now highlights the growing tension between grieving families and a judicial system accused of ignoring victims.
The Court of Appeal in Sokoto has upheld the Federal High Court’s decision dismissing former Zamfara State Governor Bello Matawalle’s challenge over the confiscation of over 40 official vehicles seized from his residence after he left office in 2023.
Delivering its unanimous verdict on August 8, 2025, a three-member panel led by Justice A.M. Talba ruled that Matawalle failed to provide credible evidence proving personal ownership of the vehicles.
The court emphasized that the vehicles were government property, not private assets, and rejected his claim that the seizure violated his fundamental property rights.
According to Zamfara State Governor Dauda Lawal’s spokesman, Sulaiman Idris, the vehicles were recovered in June 2023 after Matawalle and his deputy ignored a five-day ultimatum to return them.
Following their refusal, the state government sought and obtained a court order, enabling police operatives to raid Matawalle’s residence and recover the vehicles.
Initially, Matawalle secured an interim ruling from the Federal High Court in Gusau for the vehicles to be returned to him.
He also filed a separate suit claiming the confiscation breached his fundamental rights.
However, the case was transferred to the Sokoto division of the Federal High Court, which dismissed his claims in December 2023, affirming that the vehicles remained state property.
Dissatisfied with the lower court’s ruling, Matawalle escalated the matter to the Court of Appeal.
The appellate court, however, upheld the Federal High Court’s decision, affirming that the police acted lawfully in investigating the alleged misappropriation and that the state government followed due process in retrieving the vehicles.
The court concluded that Matawalle’s claims lacked merit and could not shield him from investigation or potential prosecution.
The leadership crisis tearing the Labour Party apart appears to have reached a turning point as the Federal High Court in Abuja, on Friday, struck out Julius Abure’s case against the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), officially affirming that he is no longer the party’s National Chairman.
The court, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1523/2025, dismissed Abure’s suit due to a lack of jurisdiction, aligning with the Supreme Court’s earlier verdict on April 4, 2025 (Appeal No. SC/CV/56/2025), which voided all prior recognitions of his leadership.
However, while speaking on the judgment, Senator Nenadi Usman, the party’s Interim National Chairman, described the ruling as a clear victory for the rule of law.
“This decision removes every lingering doubt about Abure’s status. The chapter is closed. It’s time to put distractions behind us and rebuild the Labour Party into the disciplined, people-centred movement Nigerians deserve”, she said.
Also, INEC’s counter-affidavit in the case further solidified the court’s position, stressing that Abure’s tenure, along with that of the National Executive Committee, had expired in June 2024.
The commission also argued that the controversial March 27, 2024 “Nnewi National Convention” was invalid as it violated the 1999 Constitution, the Electoral Act 2022, INEC guidelines, and the Labour Party’s own constitution.
Senator Usman commended the electoral commission for its “clarity, courage, and institutional integrity” in presenting the facts and urged party members to “respect the supremacy of the Constitution and the authority of the courts.”
With bye-elections on the horizon and the 2027 general elections in sight, this ruling could mark the end of a year-long factional battle that has plagued the party.
The focus now shifts to uniting the Labour Party and preparing for the political challenges ahead.
On August 8, 2025, the Court of Appeal, sitting in Abuja, upheld NNPC Ltd.’s appeal against the Federal High Court’s April 2023 judgement that annulled Senator Ifeanyi Araraume’s removal as non-executive Chairman of the NNPC Board and awarded him ₦5 billion in damages.
The Court of Appeal’s judgement spares NNPC Ltd a massive financial payout and removes a legal risk that could have invalidated all decisions of the Board since 2021.
The Appeal Court agreed to NNPC Ltd.’s position that the Federal High Court’s earlier decision was delivered in error, noting amongst others, that the claim was statute-barred.
This decision of the Court of Appeal secures governance stability for NNPC Ltd., sets a corporate governance precedent in Nigerian law, and upholds the validity of Board resolutions critical to the oil and gas industry’s investment and policy direction.
An Ikeja Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday cleared Miss Comfort Emmason of all charges related to unruly behavior and assaulting the flight crew aboard an Ibom Air flight from Uyo to Lagos.
Magistrate Olanrewaju Salami struck out the five-count charge following the withdrawal of the case by the police prosecution team.
During the hearing, prosecutor Oluwabunmi Adeitan informed the court of new developments that led to the decision to discontinue the case.
She submitted a formal application for its withdrawal, which the court accepted, effectively bringing the matter to a close.
-
Celebrity/Entertainment2 days agoHow Nigerian TikToker Geh Geh Made ₦45 Million in One Night
-
Featured6 days agoYour Attacks on Peter Obi Are Petty, Stop It! Chekwas Rebukes Soludo
-
News5 days agoTension in Anambra community as senior police officer shoots kinsman dead
Colleagues, others try cover-up; victim's family fights back
-
News6 days agoNigerian visa applicants must provide 5-yr social media history — US embassy
-
News4 days agoTerrorist Organisation: APC, PDP Members in US, UK, France Risk Deportation
-
Celebrity/Entertainment6 days agoWhy single mothers can’t raise boys into proper men — Jim Iyke
-
News3 days agoVandal electrocuted while vandalizing Aba power infrastructure
-
News3 days ago15% of Nigerian girls aged 15–19 are mothers or pregnant — FG
-
News3 days agoPeter Obi’s Son Breaks Silence Over His Viral Photos Nigerians Are Talking About
-
News2 days ago
I’m not a gay — Obi’s son Oseloka speaks on viral picture