News
Document okaying payment of $6.2m to foreign election observers did not emanate from my office -ex SGF tells court
The former Secretary to government of the Federation (SGF), Boss Mustapha on Tuesday told an FCT High Court the document okaying the payment of 6.2 million dollars did not come from his office.
Mustapha said this as a witness in the ongoing trial of suspended governor of the central bank of Nigeria (CBN) charged with alleged procurement fraud.
The Economic and financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charged him to court on amended 20- count charges bordering on criminal conspiracy, conferring undue advantage, breach of trust among others.
In some of the amended charge, EFCC, alleged that Emefiele, in Jan. 2023, forged a document titled: “RE: PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE ON FOREIGN ELECTION OBSERVER MISSIONS,” dated 26 January 2023 with Ref No. SGF.43/L.01/201.
The EFCC said Emefiele made the claim despite knowing that it was false “and you thereby committed an offence contrary to section 1(1) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, and punishable under section 1(3) of the same Act.”
However, he pleaded not guilty to the charges when it was read to him.
Mustapha was led in evidence by the EFCC counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, SAN.
The EFCC tendered some documents to the court among which included letters from the former president, Muhammadu Buhari and the office of the SGF.
Mustapha said:”I do not know anything about this transaction.
” All through my five years and seven months as the SGF I have never come across this documents.
” On the first value of this document have served for these years, this documents did not emanate from the office of the president ” he said.
He told the court that the seal does not carry a reference number adding the federal executive council (FEC) ‘s decision are not transmitted this way but through extract after the adoption.
Mustapha said he was a custodian and the one to give the information and have not heard of the term known as ‘ special appropriation provision ‘ as contained in the documents.
” I have not heard or known this term, the two terms known to me are ‘ Appropriation ‘ as provided by the Appropriation Act and the ‘ supplementary appropriation.
” In all the correspondence I have received, the president can never bear ‘ accept my highest regards.’
” Looking at the signature, it is an attempt to reproducing the president signature, secondly, the Nigerian government does not have business funding election observers” he said.
He told the court that at a meeting he had on Jan. 18, 2023, was presided over by the then vice president , Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, no payment of foreign election observers was approved.
” The letter did not emanate from the office of the SGF. If it did not emanate, it means I did not sign it.
” I do not know any one called Jubril Abubakar, a principal officer in my office who was said to be the cashier of the money on Feb. 8, 2023″ he said.
During cross examination by Emefiele ‘s counsel, Mathew Barkka, SAN when asked if the cashier Jubril worked in his office, he said ‘ Jubril is not my staff.’
” Whoever the Jubril is should be answerable for his act. I have never discussed money for election observers with the defendant.
After listening to the testimony, justice Hamza Muazu adjourned until March 7, March 11 and March 25 for continuation of hearing.
Earlier, the PW2, Onyeka Ogbu who testified yesterday was cross examined he told the court that he acted based on what he saw on the paper given to him.
” I did not pay any money to the defendant, and not aware such was paid into his account .
” The money was paid to one Jubril Abubakar from the former secretary to the government of the Federation (SGF).
He said the identity card he used was neither, international passport, driver license, voter’s card nor National identification number.
Answering the question that whether everyone involved in this transaction was standing trial, he said no.
When asked if the law on money laundering allows for an individual to bear cash of such amount. He answered no.(NAN)
By Abubakar Yunusa
The Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) has rejected plans by the Federal Government to regularise electricity tariffs for customers for Bands A, B and C.
In a communique released on Sunday after the National Executive Council (NEC) in Yola, Adamawa State, the labour union vowed to lead mass nationwide protests across Nigeria should the government continue with its plan.
Last Thursday, Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, said lower bands would be upgraded to Band A.
In its communique sign by NLC General Secretary, Emmanuel Ugboaja, the labour union rejected the “forcefully migration” of consumers from lower bands to Band A.
“On the Migration of Electricity Consumers with a view to increasing tariff: NEC unequivocally rejects the ongoing sham reclassification of electricity consumers by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC), which seeks to forcefully migrate consumers from lower bands to Band A under the guise of service improvement while, in reality, imposing unjustified extortion on the masses,” the NLC declared.
“This systematic exploitation, sanctioned by the Ministry of Power, is nothing short of economic violence against the working class and broader Nigerian populace.
“It is evident that the ruling elite, acting as enforcers of global monopoly capital, are determined to further deepen the misery of the Nigerian people through incessant tariff hikes, increased taxation, and relentless economic strangulation.
“Whereas inflation has soared, wages remain stagnant, and the cost of living has become unbearable, the ruling class continues to transfer the burden of their fiscal irresponsibility onto the already impoverished working masses.
“NEC-in-session warns that any attempt to announce further electricity tariff increases will be met with mass resistance.
“Consequently, the Congress resolves to immediately mobilise for a nationwide protest should the Ministry of Power and NERC proceed with their exploitative plan to further hike electricity tariffs under any guise.
“The NLC shall not stand idly by while the Nigerian people are subjected to the unholy machinations of capitalist profiteers and their state collaborators.”
For decades, Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, has been faced with intractable energy challenges, no thanks to an epileptic power supply which significantly affects productivity levels. Despite the privatisation of the electricity sector, power generation, transmission and distribution have remained bogged with hydra-headed monsters of policy inconsistency, low investments and operational challenges.
https://x.com/ZagazOlaMakama/status/1895958762063560836?t=ZQcL_C2ABzvXK0bihDZc0w&s=19
In 2024, NERC approved the upward review of electricity prices with a unit of power costing about N250 for Band A customers.
The cost of petrol and diesel which are readily available alternatives have equally increased by fivefold, compounding the dilemma of consumers. In the same year, NERC granted at least some State’s Electrify Regulatory Commissions licenses to power plants and power distribution.
The Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos has turned down a request by Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, to ban public officers from seeking medical treatment abroad.
“It will be an infringement or breach on the Fundamental Right of Nigerians be they Public Officers or not to prevent them from seeking medical attention outside Nigeria when the need arises, and it will therefore be draconian to grant the request,” Justice Polycarp Terna Kwahar who read the judgment on behalf of the three man panel of justices held.
The other justices of the court, Justice Mohammed Mustapha and Justice Paul Bassi, agreed and affirmed the judgment of the Federal High Court, Ikeja delivered on January 10, 2021.
In July 2010, Mr Falana had dragged the Federal Government before the trial court seeking among other things a declaration that Nigerians are entitled to the best attainable state of physical and mental health as guaranteed by law and the failure of the Government to repair and equip public hospitals and medical centres in Nigeria constitutes a violation of the right to protect the health of Nigerians and to ensure that they receive medical attention when they are sick.
He sought a court order directing the government to repair and equip the hospitals and an order restraining public officials from accessing medical checkups in any foreign hospital and being treated at public expense in such hospitals.
The trial court, after considering the issues, struck out the suit on the ground that the provision of adequate medical and health facilities is “not justiciable” by virtue of section 6 (6) (C) of the constitution.
Dissatisfied with this judgment, Falana appealed in 2021 and in a unanimous judgment delivered Jan. 30th, 2025, the court of appeal agreed with the trial court that, “the right to adequate medical facilities in Nigeria is part of the Fundamental Objective and Directive Principles of State Policy,” and is therefore “non justiciable”.
The court of appeal noted that while before the trial Court, Mr Falana demonstrated the ill-equipped nature of public hospitals in Nigeria and the resultant effect of the untimely deaths emanating from this lackadaisical disposition of government.
Mr Falana had posited that he could lose his life if he fell sick since the hospitals in Nigeria cannot attend to serious health ailment or challenges but the court of appeal in it’s judgment held that despite the issue of inadequate medical facilities in the country, worrisome as it is, the law must take its course.
The court also said that “It is very obvious that the right to adequate medical facilities does not come under Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution [as amended], so It will therefore be anachronistic to leapfrog this human right into fundamental right.”
The judgment reads in part: “Notwithstanding that there are cases where the right to life is expanded to include the right to food and shelter, however, since the issue before me is on medical or health matters, I shall not go on frolic to analyse the issue of right to food and shelter in this appeal. How would the matter of Public Officers treatment outside Nigeria be an issue that is linked with the fundamental right of the Appellant!” The question to ask is, what does fundamental right means?
The Court said that “A fundamental right is a right guaranteed in the Constitution. Fundamental rights’ means any of the fundamental rights provided for in Chapter IV of the Constitution and includes any of the rights stipulated in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 2004.”
“Merely entrenching a right in the 1999 Constitution does not automatically make such a right ‘fundamental right’.
“Of all the cases referred to by the Appellant, none of them has any link with our jurisprudence. They are all from India, and this court is not bound to follow them. Persuasive as they are, I refuse to follow those cases as highlighted below:
“(a) Paschin Banga Kher Mazdouer Samity V. State of West Bengel (1996) 4 SCL.
“(b) Pt Parmanand Katara V. Union of India &Ors (1989) CS 2039.
“(c) Consumer Education and Research Centres & Ors V. Union of India.
“On the contrary, it will be an infringement or breach on the Fundamental Right of Nigerians, be they Public Officers or not, to prevent them from seeking medical attention outside Nigeria when the need arises, this Court will therefore be draconian to grant the prayers.
“Although the averment of the Applicant/Appellant were not controverted at the trial court by the Respondent, this court been a court of justice, looked at the affidavit of the Appellant at the lower court and the facts therein do not fly with the extant laws on fundamental right so cannot be swept under the carpet, since doing otherwise will be going against judicial precedent and against the settled principle of stare decisis.
“This application brought by the appellant seeks to import into Chapter IV what was not and is not provided for, granting the prayers in this appeal will be a travesty of justice. The lower Court did a very perfect Constitutional Law analysis and rightly too, by explaining the difference between economic, social and cultural rights since these Human Rights fall under Chapter II of the 1999 Constitution and not under Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution.” I find no merit in this appeal, I dismiss the appeal and affirm the Ruling delivered by the Federal High Court, Ikeja on the 10ht January, 2011.
“I make no orders as to cost.”
In a statement made available to the press Sunday afternoon, Falana in his reaction to the judgment, said that “the Court of Appeal failed to appreciate that it is discriminatory to allow a few public officers to seek medical treatment abroad while the millions of poor citizens are allowed to die in ill-equipped local hospitals.”
Falana further said, “The Court equally failed to realise that the fundamental right to life is incomplete without the protection of the right to health by the federal, state, and local governments in Nigeria. I will certainly challenge the erroneous judgment of the Court of Appeal at the Supreme Court on account of the constitutional guarantee of right to life and equality before the law”.
By Abubakar Yunusa
The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) has called for an independent investigation into the sexual harassment allegation against Senate President Godswill Akpabio by Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, senator representing Kogi central.
The conflict between Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan began over a change in the seating arrangement in the senate chamber.
Akpoti-Uduaghan kicked against the new seating arrangement, claiming it was an attempt to silence her.
The dispute escalated on Friday when Akpoti-Uduaghan accused Akpabio of making sexual advances towards her in his office and residence in Akwa Ibom.
In a statement issued on Sunday by Tukur Muhammad-Baba, the ACF spokesperson, the forum said the allegation portrays a negative impression of the “national and international image” of the senate.
“We call for an independent, open, transparent, and thorough investigation, devoid of fear, favour or interference of any kind, from any quarters to be conducted,” the statement reads.
“This will be necessary to allow the senate to return, as it should, to the serious and solemn duty of lawmaking for Nigeria at a period when citizens are being overwhelmed by dire existential living conditions on account of the impact of public policies on lives and livelihoods.”
ACF also called on the northern caucus in the senate, “to support Akpoti-Uduaghan so that she gets a fair hearing and ultimately accorded the treatment she duly deserves in the red chamber”.
The forum noted that the conflict between the duo is affecting the people of Kogi central.
“While the imbroglio lasts, the interests of the people of Kogi Central are not being adequately represented in the 10th Senate,” Muhammad-Baba said.
“While perhaps far-fetched, ACF rues the development and hopes that it is not part of the thinly veiled anti-Arewa agenda now pervading the Nigerian political process.
“In the event, ACF wonders if the unfolding events constitute a pattern or are cruel coincidences at work.”
The forum urged the leadership and members of the senate to always display exemplary behaviour in matters of ethics and moral qualities.