News
Appeal Court to hear Agip’s suit against Malabu, others April 9
A three-member panel of justices, headed by Justice Okon Abang, adjourned the case after lawyer to the appellant (Agip), Inyene Robert, moved a motion to regularise their processes and was granted by the court.
Robert told the court that though their notice of appeal was filed within time, the record of appeal was not transmitted within time.
The lawyer then said a motion for extension of time to bring the record of appeal had been filed.
She equally filed a motion dated Nov. 22 for the appellant’s brief to be deemed as properly filed.
Justice Abang also granted it after it was not opposed by counsel to the 1st respondent (Malabu), Dr Reuben Atabo, SAN.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the appeal stemmed from a Dec. 22, 2020 judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako of a Federal High Court in Abuja in suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/201/2017 in favour of Malabu.
Malabu had sued the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) and seven others, including Nigerian Agip Exploration Ltd.
In the ruling, Justice Nyako struck out the appellant (Agip)’s preliminary objection dated April 21, 2017.
Dissatisfied with the decision, Agip filed the appeal, seeking an order setting aside the lower court ruling.
The appellant sued Malabu, FGN, Minister of Petroleum Resources, Shell Nigeria Ultra-Deep Ltd, Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Ltd and Chief Dan Etete as 1st to 6th respondents respectively.
Giving four grounds of argument, Agip said the lower court failed to resolve the issues submitted to it, amounting to a breach of the appellant’s constitutional right to fair hearing and occasioned a miscarriage of justice on the appellant;
It also argued that the lower court erred when it failed to strike out the suit for being statute barred by virtue of Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act (POPA) Cap P41 LFN 2004, among other grounds.
However, in its brief of arguments to counter the appellant’s submissions filed by a team of lawyers led by J.A. Achimugu, Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd prayed the appellate court to dismiss the appeal in its entirety and affirm the decision of the lower court.
On Agip’s argument that it was not given a fair hearing by the lower court, Malabu submitted that the appellant was speaking with two sides of its mouth.
“I most humbly urge my Lords to hold that to appeal against a decision on issues and then turn around to complain that the court failed to render a determination on those same issues amounts to approbating and reprobating at the same time as both are not consistent.
“| urge my lords to refuse the appellant’s argument on the point that the court did not render a decision on the issues of the action being statute barred and abuse of court process.
“I humbly draw my Lords attention to the indisputable fact that the defendants at the trial filed their respective notices of preliminary objection which were all heard together and determined in a composite ruling.
It argued that there was no denial of fair hearing as alleged by the appellant as all the judicial decisions cited and relied upon by the appellant on denial of fair hearing were inapplicable to the case.
“I urge my lords, with respect, not to be guided thereby in reaching a determination on this appeal,” the 1st respondent said.
On the argument that the suit was statute barred and the lower court lacked jurisdiction to entertain it, the 1st respondent submitted that “in determining whether an action is statute barred, recourse must be made to the originating process to ascertain the nature of claim and when the cause of action arose.”
It said it was not in dispute that the suit was commenced outside the three months’ limitation period provided for by Section 2{a) of POPA.
“However, it is very humbly submitted that the three months’ limitation period does not operate as an absolute bar which admits of no exceptions to that general rule.
“Section 2(a) of POPA, does not offer an absolute blanket shield to public officers for the perpetuation of illegalities and injustices and therefore admits of judicially recognised circumstances when that limitation period becomes inapplicable to protect the public officer,” it said.
Malabu further urged the Appeal Court to hold that public officers are not protected by Section 2(a) of POPA where the case involved is in respect of breach of contract, where the case involves recovery of land or oil fields, among others, citing previous cases to back the argument.
It would be recalled that Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd was granted OPL 245 on April 29, 1998. The said licence was revoked in 2001 and the company filed an action challenging the said revocation.
The suit was settled out of court leading to the re-grant of the OPL 245 to Malabu on July 2, 2010.
While Malabu’s licence to OPL 245 was valid and subsisting, the FRN and petroleum minister (2nd and 3rd respondents) were alleged to have entered into a “Block 245 Resolution Agreement” on April 29, 2011 to grant the same licence to Agip (appellant), the 4th and 5th respondents.(NAN)
The Anambra Government has imposed a one-month sanction on Blossom Fount School, Awka, for allegedly selling the position of head prefect during a student election.
This was disclosed in a statement on Saturday by the Commissioner for Education, Prof. Ngozi Chuma-Udeh.
According to the commissioner, the school reportedly demanded N5,000 from each pupil aspiring to become head prefect in the primary section.
Chuma-Udeh condemned the act, describing it as an attempt to “sell the psyche of the children to the highest bidder from the cradle.”
According to her, such practices are unacceptable under the administration of Gov. Chukwuma Soludo.
She said that an investigation was ongoing to examine the school’s broader management practices, with the possibility of further actions based on the findings.
Former Vice President and 2023 presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, has criticised the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for the arrest and continued detention of former House of Representatives member, Muhammad Kazaure, describing it as a violation of due process.
In a statement shared on his official X (formerly Twitter) account on Saturday, Atiku said Kazaure’s detention reflects a brazen disregard for the rule of law, accusing the anti-graft agency of operating beyond the limits of the Nigerian Constitution.
Atiku alleged that the EFCC is increasingly becoming a tool for political repression, citing what he called a troubling pattern of lawlessness under the current administration.
He said, “The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has once again plunged headlong into its well-worn pattern of lawlessness, arresting and detaining citizens with brazen disregard for due process and without offering any justification for its actions.”
Atiku also referenced the recent arrest of social commentator Martins Vincent Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan, whose release followed intense public pressure. He suggested that Kazaure’s case fits into a broader trend of state institutions being used to silence dissenting voices.
“We witnessed this same abuse in the unlawful arrest and detention of Mr. Martins Vincent Otse, widely known as VeryDarkMan, whose release was only secured after massive public outrage and pressure.
“Now, the EFCC has targeted Hon. Muhammad Kazaure, a former member of the House of Representatives and an unapologetic critic of the gross misgovernance and failings of the Tinubu administration.
“Abducted in Kano and whisked away to Abuja, Kazaure is presently being held incommunicado, with no formal charge or explanation offered to his family, legal team, or the Nigerian people.
“Let it be stated without equivocation: even if there were legitimate grounds for arresting any citizen, such action must adhere strictly to the rule of law. The EFCC is duty-bound to publicly disclose the reasons for any arrest and must not detain individuals indefinitely under the guise of investigation.
“The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is unequivocal on this matter—every detainee must be promptly charged to court or released. By once again trampling on the fundamental rights of a Nigerian citizen, the EFCC is entrenching itself deeper into the mire of impunity and constitutional delinquency.
“It’s deafening silence regarding the arrest of Hon. Kazaure, a man who represented the good people of Kazaure, Roni, Gwiwa, and Yankwashi federal constituency, lays bare the agency’s contempt for transparency and justice.
Suspended Senator representing Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, has ignited social media buzz after posting a 15-second TikTok video set to the trending song Omo Ologo — a track closely linked with President Bola Tinubu.
The video, shared on her TikTok page on May 8, shows the embattled lawmaker smiling and playfully interacting with the camera. Captioned, “Just for fun, song choked,” the post has drawn mixed reactions online, with some interpreting it as a light-hearted moment, while others suspect a deeper political undertone.
The video comes just days after the song Omo Ologo was performed live by Kano-based singer Dauda Kahutu Rarara during a dinner in Katsina State held in honour of President Tinubu, who was on a two-day working visit to assess security in the region.
The song, which blends Hausa and Yoruba, praises Tinubu as a victorious leader who has outlasted his critics.
Akpoti-Uduaghan’s TikTok post follows a series of dramatic exchanges between her and Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
The senator was suspended from the upper legislative chamber in March after accusing Akpabio of sexual harassment — an allegation that triggered heated debate in the National Assembly.
In what appeared to be a bold response to her suspension, Akpoti-Uduaghan recently posted a sarcastic apology video to Akpabio on Facebook, in which she claimed she was sorry “for the crime of maintaining dignity and self-respect.”
The post was accompanied by a short video, further fueling controversy.
Akpabio’s legal team has since approached a federal high court in Abuja, seeking an order compelling the senator to delete the post from her social media pages.
In a counter-affidavit filed by her lawyer, Jubril Okutepa (SAN), Akpoti-Uduaghan’s camp described the motion as an attempt to silence and intimidate her.
The court is expected to rule on the matter on May 12.