Connect with us

Politics

Don’t Be Ignorant Of The Law, Lagos Assembly Hits Back At Suspended Chairman, Lawyer

Published

on

Don’t Be Ignorant Of The Law, Lagos Assembly Hits Back At Suspended Chairman, Lawyer

– says law does not recognise sentiment, emotions

 

The Lagos State House of Assembly has asked suspended chairman of Alimosho Local Government Area, Jelili Sulaimon, and his lawyer, Dr. Abdul Mahmud, to recognise the place of law rather than sentiments and emotions as guiding principles of legislative practices in Lagos State.

 

The advice by the Assembly on Tuesday was in response to the purported reaction of the duo to the suspension of the council chairman by the House on Monday at plenary.

The House, in the reaction signed by Hon. Stephen Ogundipe,
chairman, Committee on Information, Strategy and Security, further advised Jelili against ascribing self-made meanings to the laws empowering the lawmakers act where necessary in the interest of the people.

Read the full reaction below:

JELILI SULAIMAN’S SUSPENSION BACKED BY LAW

The attention of the Lagos State House of Assembly has been drawn to a statement supposedly signed by Dr. Abdul Mahmud, counsel to the embattled Alimosho local government chairman, Mr. Jelili Sulaimon, claiming to condemn the unanimous agreement of the Assembly to suspend his client on Monday, October 7, 2024.

Beyond the sensational rhetoric and half-baked details in the statement that is replete with emotions rather than deep-thoughts, it is pertinent to break down the real situation and puncture arguments as to the powers of the House to suspend Mr. Jelili.

In his race to the public to ‘garner’ sentiments, Jelili’s lawyer forgot to remember that there are no local government areas that created themselves. In other words, the creation of a local government follows strict processes of the law and Section 7 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria (as amended) creates the path to knowledge about this.

“The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed; and accordingly, the Government of every State shall, subject to Section 8 of this Constitution, ensure their existence under a Law which provides for the establishment, structure, composition, finance and functions of such councils.” Does this answer a question from the arguments of Jelili’s lawyer as to who has the power to create laws that regulate the activities of local government councils and their administration?

For better understanding, that section provides for the existence of: democratically elected system of Local Government to be guaranteed by a law of the State House of Assembly.

The same section provides that the House of Assembly is required to make provisions for statutory allocation of public revenue to Local Government Councils in a State. Section 8(3) highlights the procedure to be undertaken by a State House of Assembly in the creation of a new Local Government Area(s) in a State while Section 8(4) highlights the procedure to be undertaken by a State House of Assembly, through law, in the boundary adjustment of existing Local Government Areas.

Now, Section 162 (8) of the Constitution stipulates that a Law of the State House of Assembly shall provide for the distribution of monies standing to the credit of Local Government councils in a State.

Maybe we should remind him, his client and those travelling with him that Section 128 of the same Constitution further gives clarity to the powers of the House of Assembly.

“Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, a House of Assembly shall have power
by resolution published in its journal or in the
office Gazette of the Government of the State
to direct or cause to be directed an inquiry or
investigation into –
(a) any matter or thing with respect to which it
has power to make laws.

Here and based on the above constitutional provision, we are moved to ask again: who is legally guaranteed to make the law that creates the running of the local government? It is definitely not the National Assembly which is granted the constitutional powers to create states and not local governments.

This brings us to the Lagos State Local Government Administration Law (as amended) upon which the creation, administration and related activities of the local government system of Lagos State are based.

For better public information and effective knowledge, Section 24(a) of the amended law gives powers to the Lagos State House of Assembly to pass a resolution for the removal or suspension of any chairman, vice chairman, or official of any local government area (LGA) or local council development area (LCDA) after conducting an investigation. It states further that all that is needed for this resolution is a simple majority of the Assembly members. This emphasis is further highlighted in Section 5 of the law.

The amendment aims to ensure accountability and maintain order within the local government structure in Lagos State.

With this level of enlightenment as to the position of the laws guiding the administration of local government councils, it is further important to avoid misinformation or misrepresentation of the recent Supreme Court judgement concerning local governments in Nigeria. There is a marked difference between financial autonomy (upon which the lawyer’s argument rests) and administrative powers of the House. The rush to churn out a defence armed, albeit, with inferior understanding of the Supreme Court judgement does not give a sufficient case against the action of the House of Assembly.

The Local Government Administration law from which the council chairman and other elected officials of the local government system derive their powers is a product of the House of Assembly. The office of the Auditor-General for Local Governments that monitors the financial activities of this third tier of government is created by the law made by the Lagos State House of Assembly.
The Local Government Service Commission which handles issues relating to the officials of local governments is a creation of the House of Assembly. The Lagos State Independent Electoral Commission (LASIEC) that conducts elections into elective offices at the local government level is a creation of the House of Assembly. Therefore, jettisoning these facts will amount to a poor knowledge of the legislature. If you say the Lagos State House of Assembly does not have the power over local governments, it means all these laws created by the House should not be in place. If the laws should not be in place, then why would local governments exist?

We learnt that in a bid to protect the chairman, the councillors of the Alimosho Local Government Area hurriedly suspended the Vice Chairman, Akinpelu Johnson. To show how laughable this is, it is good to note that the law guiding them does not have a provision for suspension. The Local Government Administration law gives them the opportunity to remove a chairman or vice chairman but this also comes with a process. Thus, the suspension of Johnson is simply invalid. It is therefore necessary to remind the council leader that he can also be removed in line with the Local Government Administration law of Lagos State. If he does not know this, then, it is a pity.

For the few trying to juxtapose the functions of the National Assembly with those of the House of Assembly in this case, they should take a chill pill and request to be tutored. The National Assembly cannot interfere with the runnings of a State. It is not a part of its duty. On the other hand, the constitution grants the State House of Assembly powers over the local governments.

It is to be noted that this is not the first time the Lagos State House of Assembly would be suspending the same council chairman. In May 2021, he was suspended with two others by the House for their total disregard for the local government guidelines created by the State Legislature.

While we urge against mawkishness, we would also like to task residents of the council and members of the public not to allow themselves be swayed by positions and opinions that are opposite the law in this regard.

Hon. Stephen Ogundipe
Chairman, Committee on Information
Lagos State House of Assembly.

Politics

Kogi’s Quiet Shift: Reviewing Governor Ododo’s First 24 Months in Office 

Published

on

Kogi’s Quiet Shift: Reviewing Governor Ododo’s First 24 Months in Office

By Rowland Olonishuwa 

 

On Tuesday, Kogi State paused to mark two years since Alhaji Ahmed Usman Ododo took the oath as Executive Governor. Across government circles, community halls, and everyday conversations, the anniversary was more than a date on the calendar; it was a milestone that invites both reflection and renewed optimism. A moment to look back at how far the state has travelled in just twenty-four months, and where it is heading next.

 

Since assuming office in January 2024, Ododo has steered the state through a period of measured consolidation, delivering strategic interventions across security, infrastructure, human capital, and economic revitalisation that are beginning to translate into real improvements for residents.

 

Governor Ododo stepped into office at a time when expectations were high, and confidence in public institutions needed rebuilding.

 

His response to these was not loud declarations, but steady consolidation, strengthening structures, restoring order in governance, and setting a clear direction. Over time, that calm approach has become his signature: leadership that listens first, plans carefully, and moves with purpose.

 

Security has remained the most urgent concern for Nigerians, and Kogi residents are no exceptions; the Ododo-led administration has treated it as such. From deploying surveillance drones to support intelligence operations to recruiting and integrating local hunters and vigilante personnel into formal security frameworks, the government has built a layered safety net.

 

For farmers returning to their fields, travellers moving along highways, and families in rural communities, the impact is simple and deeply personal: fewer fears, quicker response, and growing confidence that the government is present and concerned about the ordinary people.

 

Infrastructural development has followed the same practical logic. Roads have been rehabilitated, easing movement for traders and commuters. Budget priorities have shifted toward capital projects and human development, while revived facilities like the Confluence Rice Mill now provide farmers with real economic opportunity. For many households, this means better income prospects, stronger local trade, and renewed belief that development is no longer a distant promise.

 

Health and education are not left out; the Ododo-led administration has expanded free healthcare services and supported students through examination funding and institutional improvements.

Parents who once struggled with medical bills and school fees have felt relief. Young people preparing for their futures now see government investment not as abstract policy but as something that touches their daily lives.

 

Governance reforms, from civil service strengthening to new legislative frameworks, have quietly improved how government functions. Salaries are more predictable, public offices are more responsive, and local government structures are more coordinated. These may not always make headlines, but they shape how citizens experience leadership every day.

 

As the second year anniversary celebrations fade into routine today and Governor Ododo enters his third year in office, the true meaning of the anniversary will continue to linger on.

 

Two years may not have solved every challenge in the Confluence State -no government ever does, by the way- but they have set a tone of stability, responsiveness, and direction. The next phase will demand deeper impact, broader reach, and sustained security gains.

 

But for many in Kogi State, the story of the past twenty-four months is already clear: steady hands on the wheel, and a journey that is firmly underway.

 

 

 

Olonishuwa is the Editor-in-Chief of Newshubmag.com. He writes from Ilorin

Continue Reading

Politics

Lagos Assembly Debunks Abuja House Rumour, Warns Against Election Season Propaganda

Published

on

Lagos Assembly Debunks Abuja House Rumour, Warns Against Election Season Propaganda

 

 

The Lagos State House of Assembly has described as misleading and mischievous the widespread misinformation that it budgeted for the purchase of houses in Abuja for its members in the 2026 Appropriation Law.

 

This rebuttal is contained in a statement jointly signed by Hon. Stephen Ogundipe, Chairman, House Committee on Information, Strategy, and Security, and Hon. Sa’ad Olumoh, Chairman, House Committee on Economic Planning and Budget.

Describing the report as a deliberate and disturbing falsehood being peddled by patently ignorant people, the statement reads, “There is no provision whatsoever in the 2026 Budget for the purchase of houses in Abuja or anywhere else for members of the Lagos State House of Assembly. The report is a complete fabrication and a product of political mischief intended to misinform the public.

“The Lagos State House of Assembly does not operate in Abuja. Our constitutional responsibilities, constituencies, and legislative duties are entirely within Lagos State. It is, therefore, illogical, irrational, and irresponsible for anyone to suggest that legislators would appropriate public funds for personal housing outside their jurisdiction.”

The statement emphasised that the budget is already in the public domain and accessible for scrutiny by discerning Lagosians and Nigerians alike. It reiterated that the Lagos State Government operates a transparent budget that speaks to the needs of the people and the demands of a megalopolis.

“We view this rumour as part of a wider attempt at election-season propaganda, designed to erode public trust, sow discord, and malign democratic institutions.”

The chairmen further clarified that the 2026 capital expenditure of the House of Assembly is less than 0.04% of the total CAPEX of the state, which clearly demonstrates the culture of prudence, accountability, and fiscal responsibility that guides the legislature. However, they noted, “Historically, the House does not even access up to its approved budget in many fiscal years.”

They stressed that the Assembly remains fully committed to excellence, transparency, good governance, and the collective welfare of the people of Lagos State, in line with the objectives of the 2026 Budget of Shared Prosperity.

“We therefore challenge those behind this harebrained allegation to produce credible evidence or retract their statements forthwith. Failure to do so may attract appropriate legal actions.

“We urge Lagosians and the general public to disregard this baseless rumour and always verify information from official and credible sources.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Democracy in the Crosshairs: How Nigeria’s Ruling APC Weaponises Power and Silences Dissent

Published

on

Democracy in the Crosshairs: How Nigeria’s Ruling APC Weaponises Power and Silences Dissent.

By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by saharaweeklyng.com

“Tinubu’s Government, the EFCC and the Strategic Undermining of Opposition Governors”.

 

In a striking indictment of Nigeria’s current political reality, Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State declared that “you cannot speak truth to power in this dispensation”, directly accusing the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of intolerance for dissent and an erosion of democratic norms.

Makinde’s remarks (made during a public event in Ibadan on January 25, 2026) were more than a local governor’s lament. They crystallised a mounting national frustration: that Nigeria’s political landscape has tilted dangerously toward executive overreach, institutional capture and political engineering.

Democracy in the Crosshairs: How Nigeria’s Ruling APC Weaponises Power and Silences Dissent.
By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by saharaweeklyng.com

This narrative is not isolated. Across Nigeria, governors from opposition parties have defected to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in numbers unprecedented in the nation’s democratic history. Critics argue that these defections are not merely voluntary political choices, but part of a strategic pressure campaign leveraging federal power and institutions to fracture opposition influence.

At its centre lies Nigeria’s principal anti-graft agency – the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The EFCC: Anti-Graft Agency or Political Instrument? Founded to combat corruption, the EFCC’s constitutional mandate is to investigate and prosecute financial and economic crimes across public and private sectors. Its legal independence is enshrined in statute and it has historically pursued high-profile cases, including recovery of nearly $500 million in illicit assets in a single year, demonstrating its capacity for tackling corruption.

 

However, critics now claim that under the Tinubu administration, the EFCC’s prosecutorial power is being perceived (if not deployed) as a political instrument.

Opposition leaders, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and coalition parties such as the African Democratic Congress (ADC), have publicly accused the federal government of using anti-corruption agencies to intimidate opposition figures and governors, effectively pressuring them into aligning with the APC.

In a statement released in December 2025, opposition figures alleged that institutions such as the EFCC, the Nigerian Police and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission were being selectively wielded to weaken political competitors rather than combat financial crime impartially.

This is not merely rhetorical noise. The opposition’s grievances centre on several observable patterns:

Reopened or New Investigations Against Opposition Figures: The ADC pointed to recent abnormal reactivation of long-dormant cases or new inquiries into financial activities involving senior opposition politicians. These, they argue, often arise shortly before critical elections or political realignments.

 

Alleged Differential Treatment: According to opponents of the current administration, individuals who have defected to the APC appear less likely to face sustained legal scrutiny or prosecution in EFCC proceedings, even in cases of credible allegations of mismanagement.

Timing of Actions: The timing of certain high-profile investigations, emerging ahead of the 2027 general elections, reinforces perceptions that anti-graft measures are tailored to political cycles rather than legal merit.

The EFCC and Presidency have publicly denied these allegations, insisting that the commission operates independently and pursues corruption irrespective of political affiliation and that Nigeria’s democratic freedoms (including party choice and mobility) remain intact.

Yet the perception of bias, once systemic, is hard to erase, especially when political actors deploy powerful state machinery with strategic timing and selective intensity.

Defections and Power Realignment: A Democracy at Risk? Since 2023 and particularly through 2025, a remarkable number of state governors and senior political leaders have crossed over from opposition parties (notably the Peoples Democratic Party – PDP) to the APC. Though defections are normal in Nigeria’s fluid political system, the scale and speed in recent years are historically noteworthy, raising critical questions about underlying incentives.

The SaharaWeeklyNG reported Makinde’s comments within the broader context of a political climate where dissenting voices face greater obstacles than at any time in recent democratic memory.

Governors who remain in opposition find themselves squeezed between growing federal assertiveness and dwindling political capital. Some analysts argue that the combination of federal resource control, political appointments and influence over public agencies exerts tangible pressure on subnational leaders to align with the ruling party for political survival. This dynamic, they contend, undermines competitive party politics and weakens Nigeria’s multiparty democracy.

 

Speaking Truth to Power: What Makinde’s Critique Exposes. Governor Makinde’s core grievance (that it is increasingly difficult, perhaps perilous, to speak truth to power) resonates widely among civil society actors, political analysts and democratic advocates:

“YOU CANNOT SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER IN THIS DISPENSATION,” Makinde declared, specifically citing the government’s handling of contentious tax reform bills as an example where dissent was neither welcomed nor transparently debated.

Makinde’s critique reflects deeper structural concerns:

Exclusion of Key Stakeholders: Opposition leaders and state executives report being marginalised from meaningful consultation on national policies affecting federal-state relations, revenue sharing and fiscal reforms.

Institutional Intimidation: The perception that state politicians become targets of federal legal scrutiny after taking firm oppositional stances (real or perceived) discourages robust democratic debate.

Erosion of Opposition Space: A symbiotic effect of party defections and institutional pressure is a shrinking viable space for genuine political opposition, weakening checks and balances essential to democratic governance.

A respected political scientist, Dr. Aisha Bello of the University of Lagos, recently argued that “when opposition becomes fraught with state leverage instead of ideological competition, the very foundation of democratic contestation collapses,” adding that “a government that shies away from criticism risks inversion into autocracy.”

Another expert, Prof. Chinedu Eze, former dean of political studies at Ahmadu Bello University, warned that “selective use of anti-corruption agencies as political tools corrodes public trust and ultimately delegates justice into the hands of incumbents rather than independent courts.” These observations echo growing public skepticism.

The Way Forward: Strengthening Democracy and Institutions. Nigeria’s path forward depends on restoring confidence in democratic norms and institutional independence.

Transparent EFCC Processes: Civil society groups and legal scholars are advocating for enhanced transparency in anti-graft investigations, including clear prosecutorial thresholds and independent audits of case initiation and closures.

Judicial Oversight: Strengthening the judiciary’s capacity and independence is critical to ensuring that allegations of political weaponisation do not go unchecked. Courts must remain the ultimate arbiters of evidence and guilt.

Political Reforms: Advocates demand reforms to party financing, federal-state fiscal relations, and consultation mechanisms to reduce incentives for defections driven by federal resource leverage.

Public Engagement: A more informed and engaged civil society, anchored by independent media and civic education, must hold both government and opposition accountable for adherence to democratic principles.

Beyond The Present Moment.

Governor Makinde’s assertion that it is no longer tenable to “speak truth to power” under the current administration reflects unsettling trends in Nigeria’s evolving democratic landscape. While the EFCC and the Presidency maintain that anti-corruption efforts are independent and constitutionally grounded, opposition leaders (backed by political data and patterns of defections) argue that state power is being used to consolidate one-party dominance and undermine political pluralism.

At this critical juncture, Nigeria must choose between entrenching competitive democracy or sliding toward a political monopoly where dissent is subdued, institutions compromised, and power concentrated.

For Nigeria’s democratic ideals to survive (and thrive) its leaders and citizens must ensure that speaking truth to power remains not a perilous act of defiance but an honoured pillar of national life.

 

Democracy in the Crosshairs: How Nigeria’s Ruling APC Weaponises Power and Silences Dissent.
By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by saharaweeklyng.com

Continue Reading

Cover Of The Week

Trending