NBA lambasts Umahi, sacked gov hires 18 SANs to battle appeal - Newstrends
Connect with us

Politics

NBA lambasts Umahi, sacked gov hires 18 SANs to battle appeal

Published

on

The Nigerian Bar Association on Wednesday lambasted the Ebonyi State Governor, David Umahi, for attacking Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court who sacked him and his deputy, Kelechi Igwe, on Tuesday.

Justice Ekwo had, in a judgment on Tuesday, restrained Umahi and Igwe from parading themselves as governor and deputy governor of the state on the grounds that they contested the 2019 governorship poll on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party.

He said by defecting to the APC, they could not transfer the votes in the governorship poll to the PDP.

Among other allegations, the governor had alleged that the judgment by Ekwo was bought.

While criticising the adjectives used on the judge, the NBA said Umahi’s outburst amounted to impunity and executive rascality taken too far.

The association which stated this in a statement by its President, Olumide Akpata, demanded an apology and retraction from the governor.

The NBA said, “We noted with utter dismay, the unfortunate and totally unacceptable reaction of Dave Umahi to the judgment of the Federal High Court, Abuja delivered on March 8, 2022 by Honourable Justice Inyang Ekwo which inter-alia ordered him and H.E. Mr. Eric Kelechi Igwe to vacate the offices of Governor and Deputy Governor, respectively, of Ebonyi State on grounds of their defection from the PDP to the APC.

“While the NBA has absolutely no interest in the outcome of the case in question and will continue to stay away from partisan politics, it is inconceivable that this association that is charged with upholding the rule of law and defending the judiciary would sit idly in the face of this unprovoked and totally unwarranted attack on the judiciary.

READ ALSO:

“Indeed, the leadership of the NBA has been inundated with calls from a cross-section of well meaning Nigerians who are understandably outraged by the utterances of  Dave Umahi and who have rightly demanded that appropriate action be taken to protect the sanctity of the judiciary.”

The NBA demanded an apology from Umahi and a retraction of the comments he made against the “person and judgment of the Hon. Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court.

“It is also our demand that this apology and retraction be given as much media coverage as the press conference.”

Umahi engages 18 SANs, says I will never insult judiciary

 Umahi, on Wednesday, said he had engaged the services of no fewer than 18 SANs.

The governor also denied attacking the judiciary, pointing out that the lawyers of the PDP did the ‘hatchet job’, and not Justice Ekwo.

Umahi stated this, in Abakaliki, during a solidarity rally in his support, on Wednesday.

“There is no need to entertain any fear. Go about your business very peacefully and let me assure the NBA Chairman that he is a perfect gentleman and that we will never insult the judiciary, we have confidence in the judiciary and I know they will do the right thing and we have engaged eight SANs to proceed to Abuja, we have engaged 10 SANs to produce to Enugu,” Umahi stated.

Meanwhile Umahi and Igwe, have appealed the judgment of the Federal High Court.

In the notice of appeal dated March 9, and filed by Chukwuma Machukwu Ume (SAN), at the Court of Appeal Abuja, the appellants asked the court to set aside the judgment.

The appeal was predicated on 11 grounds.

The 16 All Progressives Congress members of the state House of Assembly who were also sacked on Tuesday by a judgment of the FHC Abuja presided over Justice Inyang Ekwo, also asked the appellate court to set aside the judgment.

READ ALSO:

In the first ground of their appeal, Umahi and Igwe contended that Ekwo erred in law and misdirected himself when he held that “I have not seen any authority which propounds that where a governor or deputy governor defects, his political party on which platform he was elected into office, he cannot be sued by that political party to reclaim its mandate…Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution did not envisage such a situation.”

The appellants submitted that the trial court set aside the Supreme Court’s decision in “AG Federation v. Atiku Abubakar & 3 ORS (2007) LCN/3799(SC) to the effect that there is no constitutional provision prohibiting President or vice and invariably the governor and or deputy governor from defecting to another political party or meting out punishment for doing same.”

“The trial court was also virtually setting aside the decision of the Supreme Court in Global Excellence Communications Ltd v. Duke (2007) LPELR — 1323 to the effect that state governors and their deputies have immunity against being sued while in office”, the appellants argued.

The appellants maintained that there is no section of the 1999 constitution (as amended) that provides for their removal as governor and deputy governor respectively for reason of defection.

Among other grounds, the appellants argued that the lower court erred in law when it assumed jurisdiction on issue of defection of appellants when it had no jurisdiction over same.

The error, according to Umahi and Igwe, was that the trial court’s interpretation of what amounts to the Federal High Court having the powers of State High Court under the constitution was wrong.

The appellants argued that they were state officers and not federal officers.

The appellants also faulted Justice Ekwo for relying on Sections 68 and 109 of the Constitution in holding that having defected from the PDP to the APC, they have offended the provisions of the Constitution and must vacate their offices.

Judgment to curb cross carpeting among politicians- SANs

Some Senior Advocates of Nigeria said the judgement would prevent cross carpeting among Nigerian politicians who had always sought defections from parties which got them elected to power.

In an interview with one of our correspondents, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, said the constitution empowered judges to make proclamations, adding that any dissatisfied person could approach an appeal court.

Another Senior Advocate, Chief Yomi Aliyu, said, “The judgment will indeed curb the high rate of cross carpeting among politicians in the country. The judgment has been appealed and definitely, the appeal judge will take a position. However, it speaks a lot of volume.”

On his part, Chief Mike Ozekhome, said the judgment cannot stand the text of time.

“I am of the firm belief that the judgment, shredded of all legal and factual details, cannot stand the acid test of constitutionalism, nor pass the furnace of appellate courts scrutiny.

“This is because the tenure of office of a governor and his deputy are constitutional matters,” he said.

PUNCH

Loading

Politics

Fresh Legal Storm for Atiku as Court Rejects ADC Resignation Letter, Nullifies 2027 Ticket

Published

on

Fresh Legal Storm for Atiku as Court Rejects ADC Resignation Letter, Nullifies 2027 Ticket
Fresh Legal Storm for Atiku as Court Rejects ADC Resignation Letter, Nullifies 2027 Ticket

 

ABUJA – The leadership crisis rocking the African Democratic Congress (ADC) has intensified after the Federal High Court in Abuja rejected a controversial resignation letter attributed to former Deputy National Chairman of the party, Nafiu Bala Gombe, ruling that the document was not genuine evidence of his resignation.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Peter Lifu on November 5, 2026, also declared the David Mark-led caretaker leadership illegal and nullified decisions taken under the disputed leadership, including the nomination of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar as the party’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general election.

Details of the judgment became public on Wednesday, November 11, following the release of reports based on the Certified True Copy of the court’s decision.

The ruling has opened another chapter in the ADC’s protracted leadership crisis, with the party challenging the judgment at the Court of Appeal, while Atiku has also vowed to pursue legal action to protect his presidential ambition.

The disputed resignation letter, dated May 17, 2025, was presented by the faction led by former Senate President David Mark as evidence that Bala had voluntarily relinquished his position before the party’s leadership restructuring.

However, Bala had consistently denied writing or signing the document, insisting that he never resigned from his position as Deputy National Chairman.

In resolving the dispute, Justice Lifu compared the signature on the purported resignation letter, tendered as Exhibit ADC-1, with signatures on Bala’s sworn witness statements before the court.

The judge found material differences between the signatures and concluded that the disputed document could not reasonably be accepted as an authentic expression of Bala’s decision to resign.

He consequently rejected the letter as reliable proof that Bala had voluntarily relinquished his position in the party.

READ ALSO:

Justice Lifu also explained that the certification of a document does not automatically establish the authenticity of a disputed signature, stressing that the court must examine the evidence before accepting such a document.

The judge’s decision undermined a central argument used by the Mark-led faction to justify the leadership transition that produced its current leadership structure.

Court Questions Emergence of David Mark, Aregbesola

Beyond the disputed resignation letter, the court examined the process through which David Mark and former Osun State Governor, Rauf Aregbesola, emerged as the ADC’s National Chairman and National Secretary respectively.

Bala had approached the court to challenge their emergence following the party’s 99th National Executive Committee meeting held in July 2025.

He argued that he was elected Deputy National Chairman on October 12, 2022, for a four-year tenure and remained the only elected member of the party’s National Working Committee who had not resigned.

He further contended that vacancies created by the departure of other party officials could not lawfully be filled through arbitrary appointments without following the ADC constitution and relevant electoral laws.

The defendants, however, maintained that the party’s National Executive Committee had the authority to dissolve the existing National Working Committee and appoint new officers.

But Justice Lifu held that the defendants failed to establish that the emergence of the new leadership complied with the mandatory requirement for democratic elections under Section 82(3) of the Electoral Act 2022.

The judge stressed that the Independent National Electoral Commission’s receipt of notice and monitoring of the party meeting could not replace the requirement for a properly conducted election.

He also held that the general powers of the National Executive Committee under the party’s constitution could not override statutory requirements governing the emergence of political party executives.

Consequently, the court nullified the relevant decisions and actions arising from the disputed leadership arrangement and restrained INEC from recognising or dealing with Mark, Aregbesola and members of the disputed National Working Committee as officers of the party.

Atiku’s 2027 Presidential Ticket Caught in Court Ruling

One of the most consequential aspects of the judgment was the nullification of decisions taken by the disputed ADC leadership, including the nomination of Atiku Abubakar as the party’s presidential candidate for the 2027 general election.

The decision has thrown fresh uncertainty into the former Vice-President’s presidential ambition, particularly as the ADC had positioned itself as a major opposition platform ahead of the election.

Atiku rejected the judgment and vowed to challenge it, insisting that the legal battle would not force him to abandon his presidential ambition.

His campaign council also said its legal team was preparing to pursue appropriate legal remedies, including applications for a stay of execution where necessary.

Atiku questioned the basis of the ruling, arguing that an earlier judgment by another Federal High Court had addressed aspects of the dispute surrounding the emergence of the Mark-led leadership.

He maintained that the latest proceedings raised legal questions that required determination by the appellate court.

ADC Heads to Appeal Court, Seeks Stay of Execution

In a swift response, the ADC filed a notice of appeal against the judgment on November 6, 2026, seeking to overturn the decision that invalidated its leadership structure and Atiku’s presidential nomination.

The party also filed an application for a stay of execution at the Federal High Court, asking that enforcement of the judgment be suspended pending the determination of the appeal.

The development was disclosed by Phrank Shaibu, Director of Strategic Communication of the ADC Presidential Campaign Council.

In a letter dated November 6 addressed to the Independent National Electoral Commission, the party’s lawyers formally notified the commission of the appeal and the application for a stay of execution.

The lawyers urged INEC to refrain from taking further action on the subject matter while the appellate proceedings remained pending.

They explained that the application for a stay of execution had not yet been determined by the court and urged the electoral commission to exercise restraint.

The party argued that taking consequential action before the appeal was resolved could prejudice the ongoing legal process.

However, the filing of an appeal does not automatically suspend the judgment. The application for a stay must first be considered and granted by the court.

Mark’s Faction Rejects Judgment as ADC Crisis Deepens

The judgment represents a major legal setback for the David Mark-led faction, which has maintained that its emergence followed the party’s internal constitutional processes.

The faction has rejected the ruling and indicated its intention to challenge the decision through the appellate process.

The dispute has also exposed divisions within the party over the control of its national leadership, state structures and preparations for the 2027 general election.

While the Mark-led camp is pursuing an appeal, Bala’s position has received significant support from the court’s findings on the disputed resignation letter and the process through which the new leadership emerged.

The crisis is particularly significant because the ADC had attracted prominent opposition figures seeking a common platform ahead of the next presidential election.

What Happens Next?

The immediate focus is now on the Court of Appeal and the pending application for a stay of execution.

The appellate court will be expected to consider the grounds of challenge raised by the party, while the Federal High Court must determine whether to suspend enforcement of its judgment pending the appeal.

The outcome could determine who controls the ADC’s national leadership, the status of decisions taken under the Mark-led administration and the future of Atiku’s presidential nomination.

For now, the ADC remains caught in a major legal and political battle, with its leadership structure and preparations for the 2027 general election facing further uncertainty.

The dispute also raises broader questions about internal democracy, compliance with electoral laws and the importance of transparent leadership succession within Nigeria’s political parties.

Fresh Legal Storm for Atiku as Court Rejects ADC Resignation Letter, Nullifies 2027 Ticket

Loading

Continue Reading

Politics

Sowore Says ‘Half-Dead’ Tinubu Should Be Taken to Old People’s Home

Published

on

Sowore Says ‘Half-Dead’ Tinubu Should Be Taken to Old People’s Home
Presidential Candidate of the African Action Congress, AAC, Omoyele Sowore
Sowore Says ‘Half-Dead’ Tinubu Should Be Taken to Old People’s Home

African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate and human rights activist, Omoyele Sowore, has launched another verbal attack on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, describing him as “half-dead” and suggesting that he should be taken to an old people’s home rather than continue leading Nigeria.

The remarks add to Sowore’s recent criticism of the President’s health and physical condition, which has generated renewed political debate over Tinubu’s ability to govern and his reported ambition to seek re-election in 2027.

On November 9, Sowore publicly alleged that Tinubu was seriously ill and questioned his suitability to contest the next presidential election.

In a post on his X account, the AAC presidential candidate claimed that the President was experiencing physical and cognitive decline and accused people around him of concealing his alleged health condition from Nigerians.

“I insist that this man is very, very sick and cannot even manage his personal affairs, let alone those of a country desperately in need of dynamic leadership,” Sowore wrote.

He further alleged that individuals benefiting from what he described as the President’s physical and cognitive decline were deliberately shielding the truth from Nigerians.

READ ALSO:

Sowore also shared a video showing Tinubu during an All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential campaign in Rivers State, which he cited in support of his criticism.

His comments followed other criticisms of Tinubu’s public appearances, including a viral video from an APC campaign rally in Akwa Ibom State, where the President appeared to stagger while walking towards his vehicle and was reportedly supported by people nearby.

The incident also prompted Paul Ibe, media aide to former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar, to question whether Tinubu could withstand the demands of another presidential campaign.

Ibe called on the President’s family, including First Lady Oluremi Tinubu and his son, Seyi Tinubu, to advise him to reconsider his reported re-election ambition.

However, Sowore’s assertions about Tinubu’s health remain allegations and have not been independently established by publicly available medical evidence.

The controversy has added to the political debate surrounding Tinubu’s age, public appearances and the 2027 presidential election.

 

Sowore Says ‘Half-Dead’ Tinubu Should Be Taken to Old People’s Home

Loading

Continue Reading

Politics

Osun Lawmaker Drags Fadahunsi to Court, Seeks Ban From 2027 Election Over Alleged Incitement

Published

on

Osun Lawmaker Drags Fadahunsi to Court, Seeks Ban From 2027 Election Over Alleged Incitement
Senator Francis Fadahunsi

Osun Lawmaker Drags Fadahunsi to Court, Seeks Ban From 2027 Election Over Alleged Incitement

A member of the Osun State House of Assembly, Kanmi Ajibola, has approached the Federal High Court in Osogbo, seeking to stop Senator Francis Fadahunsi from participating in the January 16, 2027 Osun East senatorial election over alleged inciting comments against members of the Accord Party.

Ajibola, who represents Oriade State Constituency in the Assembly, is also asking the court to direct the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to remove Fadahunsi’s name from the ballot.

The suit, marked FHC/OS/CO/206/2026, was filed on Tuesday through his lawyer, Ekene Amadi, with INEC joined as a defendant over its alleged failure to take action against the senator following the controversial remarks attributed to him.

The lawmaker is seeking an interlocutory order restraining Fadahunsi, the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate for Osun East Senatorial District, from contesting the election or any rescheduled date pending the determination of the substantive suit.

In a 21-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the case, Ajibola alleged that Fadahunsi encouraged violence against opposition members during a political rally in Ilesa on August 11, 2026, four days before the Osun governorship election.

He claimed that the senator allegedly instructed his supporters and political thugs to attack and kill innocent residents, particularly members of the Accord Party.

Ajibola further alleged that the comments were connected to the killings of some of his friends and other incidents of violence involving political supporters in the state.

According to the lawmaker, he had earlier written to Fadahunsi demanding his resignation from the Senate over the alleged remarks. He said copies of the letter were forwarded to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

Ajibola also accused the senator of threatening members of the Accord Party since October 2025, alleging that Fadahunsi had vowed to ensure their arrest and killing after the 2026 governorship election.

READ ALSO:

He claimed that several Accord Party members were unlawfully arrested and detained between June 1 and August 10, 2026, while some were allegedly killed.

The lawmaker further alleged that he had another encounter with Fadahunsi on November 7, during which the senator purportedly threatened to deal with him, his loyalists and other Accord Party members across his constituency.

Ajibola argued that the court’s intervention had become necessary to protect his life and those of other opposition members, insisting that political office holders must respect the Constitution and their oaths of office.

He is asking the court to declare that INEC has no legal justification for allowing a candidate who allegedly directed supporters to kill opposition members to participate in an election.

The case adds to the legal and political controversies surrounding Fadahunsi’s comments during the August governorship election campaign.

The senator had previously denied allegations that he called for the physical killing of Accord Party members, insisting that his remarks were misinterpreted and taken out of context.

Fadahunsi explained that he was urging supporters of the APC to defeat the opposition party through their votes rather than engage in physical violence.

He also maintained that the video of his remarks was edited to distort the context of his speech.

Earlier in August, a magistrate’s court in Abuja directed the police to investigate a separate criminal complaint concerning the senator’s controversial comments. The Osun State Government also approached a state High Court, seeking an order compelling the police to investigate the matter.

Meanwhile, attempts by the latest reporting outlet to obtain Fadahunsi’s reaction to Ajibola’s new lawsuit through his spokesperson, Pastor Sam Segun-Progress, were unsuccessful as of the time of its report.

The Federal High Court is expected to consider the reliefs sought by the lawmaker as the legal dispute over the senator’s alleged remarks continues.

Osun Lawmaker Drags Fadahunsi to Court, Seeks Ban From 2027 Election Over Alleged Incitement

Loading

Continue Reading

Trending