Politics
Your Appeal Lacks Merit, Ambitious, Abiodun, INEC, APC Tell Adebutu, PDP
Your Appeal Lacks Merit, Ambitious, Abiodun, INEC, APC Tell Adebutu, PDP
Ogun State Governor, Prince Dapo Abiodun, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), on Tuesday urged the Court of Appeal to dismiss the appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and its candidate, Ladi Adebutu against the judgment of the Ogun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, which affirmed the election of the Governor during the March 18 elections.
At the hearing of the appeal by the Appeal Court, sitting in Lagos, Abiodun, APC, and INEC told the 3-man panel of justices, led by Justice Joseph Shagbaor Ikyegh that the appeal by Adebutu and PDP, lacked merit and was ambitious.
The Tribunal had on September 30, dismissed the petitions by Adebutu and his party and affirmed the re-election of Governor Abiodun.
Leading the charge, counsel to first Respondent (INEC), A.J. Owonikoko SAN urged the Court to dismiss the appeal for lacking in merit.
Reacting to the issue of 49,000 disenfranchised voters, raised by the Appellants’ counsel (Chief Chris Uche SAN), Mr Owonikoko referred to paragraphs 4.37 to 4.40 at pages 18 and 19 of his Brief to point out that Appellants only called 48 witnesses. He explained that in cases of disenfranchisement, all the disenfranchised voters must be called as witnesses but Appellants did not do so. He concluded that the Court cannot amplify 48 witnesses to 49,000 witnesses as Appellants want.
He urged the Court to dismiss the appeal
Counsel to the 2nd Respondent (Prince Abiodun), Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, also identified and adopted his Brief.
As a preliminary point, Chief Olanipekun stated that contrary to the position set out by Chief Uche SAN, the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the Atiku v. INEC case completely encapsulates the issues in the appeal.
He argued that in that appeal, the Supreme Court simply adopted in toto the decision of the Court of Appeal, adding that incidentally, the same Samuel Oduntan who was rejected as a witness by the Court of Appeal in Atiku’s case metamorphosed as PW 93 in the appeal under consideration. In response to the Court’s demand, Chief Olanipekun promised to provide a copy of the judgment.
In addition, Chief Olanipekun SAN emphasised pages 3-5 of his Brief where he identified about 8 key findings of the Trial Tribunal that Appellants did not challenge, paragraph 4.3 of the Brief arguing that Appellants have abandoned about 5 Grounds of Appeal, and issue 3 at page 17 of 2nd Respondent’s Brief where 2nd Respondent argued that Trial Tribunal rightly struck out paragraphs of the Appellants’ pleadings.
On the margin of lead, Chief Olanipekun argued that there was nothing to even consider on margin of lead and urged the Court to dismiss the appeal for lacking merit.
Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu, SAN, appearing for the third Respondent (APC), emphasised that Exhibit PT609 is not a proper document to use (referring to Pages 71-72 of his Brief).
On the Atiku appeal, Dr Ikpeazu SAN noted that the Supreme Court did not do anything novel as it relied on settled Constitutional positions already espoused in _Ararume v INEC_ and in _Oke v. Mimiko_ to the effect that all witness statements must accompany the Petition.
He argued that all the witnesses who could be said to have given substantial evidence in this appeal did so on subpoenas and thus were rightly discountenanced. He too urged the Court to dismiss the appeal.
Chief Uche SAN counsel to the Appellants had noted that there is a distinction between the facts in the Supreme Court decision in Atiku v. INEC & 2 Ors and his clients’ appeal as cited by the 2nd Respondent in support of First and Second Issues raised.
He also told the judges that Appellants called 94 witnesses, half of which were Polling Unit Agents, adding that on the issue of margin of lead, that elections did not hold in 99 Polling Units based on which about 41,000 votes were excluded.
He also pointed out that up to 37,000 ballot papers utilised by INEC were either not thumb printed or carried multiple thumb prints.
Calling on the appeal to be allowed, Chief Uche said when the 41,000 and 37,000 votes are utilised, the declaration of Governor Abiodun would have been set aside.
The Court of Appeal reserved judgment to a date to be communicated in the future
Just in: China Erases Nigeria:
A Diplomatic Earthquake or a Wake-Up Call?
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
Introduction: A Shocking Move from Beijing
In a move that has stunned the international community, the People’s Republic of China has taken an audacious and provocative diplomatic step:
Removed Nigeria from its official land map
Deactivated Nigerian presence on Chinese apps like WeChat and Weibo
Shut down the Nigerian Embassy in Beijing
Recalled its ambassador from Abuja
These actions are not just a geopolitical insult, they are a direct challenge to the legitimacy of Nigeria as a sovereign state.
Beijing’s Provocation: “Nigeria Has Expired”
According to the Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry, Nigeria was a colonial construct designed to exist for only 100 years, referencing the 1914 British amalgamation of the northern and southern protectorates. Their chilling statement read:
“Nigeria’s continued existence has no historical or legal foundation. It is an expired project being manipulated by a corrupt elite.”
This unprecedented dismissal of a country’s legitimacy by a major power is deeply disturbing and diplomatically irresponsible.
Sovereignty Under Threat: A Dangerous Precedent
China’s actions violate several principles of international law, including:
The United Nations Charter (Article 2): Respect for the sovereignty of all member states
The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961)
The African Union Constitutive Act (2000)
This move sends a dangerous message: that powerful nations can now erase weaker states based on selective historical interpretations.
Hypocrisy at Its Peak: China’s Double Standards
Beijing’s stance reeks of hypocrisy. China is itself a union of vastly different regions and ethnic groups:
Tibet and Xinjiang are held through military suppression.
Hong Kong is governed under the contentious “One Country, Two Systems.”
Taiwan, which China claims, is a fully functioning democratic entity.
How does a country that brutally suppresses secessionist sentiments now justify dismantling Nigeria for the same reasons it opposes in its own territories?
A Wake-Up Call for Nigeria’s Leadership
As painful as this is, Nigeria must reflect on why such an insult was possible in the first place. Over the last decade, the country has deteriorated in almost every global index:
Key Statistics (2015–2024):
Unemployment: Rose from 9.9% in 2015 to over 33.3% in 2023 (NBS)
Poverty: Over 133 million Nigerians live in multidimensional poverty (NBS, 2022)
Exchange rate: Naira devalued from ₦199/$1 in 2015 to over ₦1,600/$1 in 2024
Minimum wage: ₦30,000 ($18 monthly equivalent), yet unpaid in over 20 states
Debt to China: Over $4 billion owed, much of it collateralized (DMO, 2023)
Terrorism: Boko Haram, banditry, and IPOB violence still unchecked
China’s declaration may be diplomatically outrageous, but it exposes a fundamental truth: Nigeria has failed to act as a nation-state.
Weaponized Economics: China’s Neo-Colonial Grip China’s economic involvement in Africa has long raised concerns about debt diplomacy and economic colonization. Nigeria, like many African states, fell into Beijing’s web:
Railway projects: Over $2.5 billion funded by Chinese banks
Airport terminals: Chinese-built and financed with opaque terms
Sovereignty clauses: Some loan agreements allegedly waive immunity over critical assets in disputes
If China halts funding or demands repayments, Nigeria’s fragile economy could face collapse.
African Solidarity Needed Now
The silence from African governments has been deafening. If Nigeria, the largest economy and most populous country in Africa, can be humiliated this way, then no African state is safe.
The African Union must:
Convene an emergency summit
Demand a full apology and diplomatic reversal from China
Consider sanctions or diplomatic retaliations if China persists
This is not just a Nigerian issue, it is an African existential crisis.
The Deafening Silence of the West
Western nations, typically vocal about human rights and sovereignty, have responded with vague platitudes. The UK—Nigeria’s former colonizer has said nothing meaningful. The US State Department simply urged “calm.”
This lack of global outcry reflects how far Nigeria has fallen in international relevance. A once-powerful voice in the Non-Aligned Movement, a key peacekeeping contributor, and regional stabilizer is now seen as a failed state.
The Identity Crisis: Who Is a Nigerian?
Beijing’s criticism touches a nerve: Nigeria’s identity crisis.
Over 250 ethnic groups
Three major religions with deep divisions.
Electoral politics driven by tribalism and zoning, not competence.
Secessionist agitations in the South East (IPOB), South West (Yoruba Nation), and Niger Delta
More than a century after amalgamation, there is still no unifying national vision. If China’s insult triggers a much-needed national debate, it could be a blessing in disguise.
From Humiliation to Rebirth
China’s erasure of Nigeria from its map and communication networks is outrageous, unlawful, and racist. But it is also a moment of reckoning.
*Nigeria must now:*
Reclaim its dignity through good governance
Rebuild national unity with a people-first constitution
Diversify its economy to reduce dependence on exploitative powers
Assert itself diplomatically as Africa’s true leader
This is not the end, it could be the beginning of Nigeria’s long-overdue transformation.
A Democracy in Shackles: How APC’s Tyranny Redefines Governance in Nigeria
By George Omagbemi Sylvester
In a move that reeks of insecurity and political cowardice, a prominent opposition figure was recently denied access to a Nigerian state governed by the All Progressives Congress (APC). It was an act so ridiculous, so blatantly undemocratic, that it should outrage every Nigerian who still believes in the sanctity of our constitution. Yet in the twisted world of Nigerian politics under APC rule, such abuses of power are now routine, laughed off by party loyalists and excused by compromised institutions.
This incident, though outrageous, is nothing new. It is just the latest entry in the growing catalogue of authoritarianism that defines APC’s version of democracy. While it may serve as a grim masterclass for future administrations on how to stifle dissent and weaponize state power, it also marks a dangerous shift away from democratic norms and toward full-blown tyranny.
Constitutional Rights Under Siege
Section 41(1) of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution is clear: “Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof.” Denying any Nigerian, let alone a public figure with national relevance, the right to enter any state is not only unconstitutional, it is criminal. When a government starts deciding who can and cannot enter parts of the country based on political affiliation, that government is no longer democratic. It is dictatorial.
It is important to remember that political opposition is not a crime. It is a necessary pillar of democracy. The APC’s action is not governance, it is an attempt to choke the very air democracy breathes.
A Pattern of Repression
This is far from an isolated event. Since the APC took power in 2015, Nigeria has witnessed an unprecedented erosion of democratic values. The government has systematically turned law enforcement agencies into tools of oppression. Peaceful protesters are arrested. Opposition campaigns are blocked. Media outlets are intimidated. And now, opposition leaders are being barred from entire states.
In 2018, the Department of State Services (DSS) infamously barricaded the National Assembly, attempting to forcefully change legislative leadership in broad daylight. That same year, the police under the command of the APC-led executive blocked Senate President Bukola Saraki’s convoy. These events were not just violations of individual rights, they were direct attacks on the democratic institution of checks and balances.
Freedom House, the globally respected democracy watchdog, classified Nigeria as “Partly Free” in its 2023 report, citing increased government intimidation of journalists, political opposition, and civil society. Transparency International has consistently ranked Nigeria poorly in corruption perception indices, highlighting the decay of both moral and institutional integrity under APC rule.
Weaponizing Security Forces
The selective use of security forces by APC governors and the presidency has become a dangerous norm. Instead of ensuring public safety and upholding the rule of law, police and military personnel are deployed to serve narrow political interests. During elections, they harass voters and opposition agents. During rallies, they intimidate citizens exercising their constitutional rights.
The recent blockade of an opposition figure’s convoy from entering a state controlled by the APC is yet another abuse in a long line of infractions. This is state-sponsored lawlessness masquerading as governance. What we are witnessing is not just the death of democracy, but it is the burial of accountability.
APC’s Hypocrisy and Double Standards
Perhaps the most galling aspect of this unfolding drama is APC’s shameless hypocrisy. When in opposition, APC politicians cried foul at the slightest provocation. They championed free speech, free movement, and fair elections. Yet now, in power, they have become the very monsters they once condemned.
APC accuses opposition parties of inciting unrest, but tolerates its own thugs terrorizing political opponents. It claims to uphold rule of law, yet governs through executive orders, illegal detentions, and manipulated court judgments. The irony is both tragic and revolting.
Even APC’s internal party structure is a caricature of democracy. Candidates are imposed, primaries are rigged, and dissent is criminalized. It is no wonder that a party so allergic to internal democracy would extend its tyranny to national governance.
A Dangerous Precedent
Let it be clear: what APC has done sets a precedent that should terrify every Nigerian. If one political party can deny access to a state today, what stops another from declaring entire regions as “off-limits” tomorrow? Today it’s an opposition figure; tomorrow it could be a journalist, a protester, a community leader, or even an ordinary citizen with a dissenting voice.
The implications are massive. It undermines national unity. It fosters regional tension. It invites violence. Most dangerously, it signals that political might, not the constitution, now governs Nigeria.
Compromised Institutions, Complicit Silence
Where are the institutions that should speak up? Where is the Nigerian Human Rights Commission? Where is INEC? Where is the National Assembly? Where are the religious leaders, the civil society organizations, the Nobel laureates and public intellectuals?
Their silence is deafening, and dangerous. In democratic societies, institutions are designed to act as guardrails against tyranny. But Nigeria’s have been captured, bullied, or bought. The judiciary, which should be the last line of defense, often bows to political pressure. The legislature acts like an extension of the executive, not a check on it.
When all arms of government fail to stand for justice, the collapse of democracy becomes not just possible, but inevitable.
Democracy Must Be Defended
What the APC is doing is not democracy. It is autocracy painted in green and white. And it must be rejected by all well-meaning Nigerians.
The people must rise, not with violence, but with voices, votes, and vigilance. Civil society must mobilize. The press must expose. International observers must take note. The coming elections must be more than a contest of ballots and they must be a referendum on tyranny.
The opposition must also rise above fear. They must confront the APC not just with outrage, but with strategy, solidarity, and strength. If the democratic space continues to shrink unchecked, Nigeria risks descending into the abyss of fascism.
In conclusion: Defining Our Democracy
If the APC insists on defining its own version of democracy; one built on exclusion, suppression, and brute force, then the Nigerian people must define a democracy that includes every voice, protects every right, and defends every citizen.
Let no one be deceived: this is not about a single state, a single politician, or a single party. It is about the soul of a nation. The battle for Nigeria’s democracy will not be won in silence or cynicism. It will be won by citizens who say enough is enough…who reject fear and demand freedom.
History will not be kind to the APC if it continues down this dark path. And neither will the people, who, when truly awakened, have the power to end any regime that forgets who truly holds sovereignty in a democracy: the people.
Sylvester is a distinguished political and prolific writer. He writes from Johannesburg
-
Business6 months agoComprehensive Media Audit Shows Flutterwave, MTN Nigeria, and Bolt Outpacing Competitors in Media Engagement
-
celebrity radar - gossips6 months agoHow Deji Adeyanju Secured The Release Of Speed Darlington
-
Politics6 months agoMy best is yet to come’ As Ambassador Adesina ‘Lanre Ogunsola affirmed at the APC APEX body, Obafemi Owode Local Government
-
Entertainment4 months agoAliu Gafar delivers stellar performance as Esusu in Femi Adebayo’s Seven Doors