Politics
Oyo Sacked Council Officials: A’Court Refers Parties To ADR Centre
The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal has referred Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State and the embattled former local government chairmen and councillors in the state to the court’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) centre over settlement of the outstanding N3.4 billion debt.
Justice Elfreda Williams-Daudu gave the order after counsel to the state government, Ayodele Akintunde, and that of the ex-LG officials, Musibau Adetunbi, took their house-cleaning motions.
The development occurred during the hearing of the notice on motion for stay of execution filed by Mr Makinde and six others against the April 27 order absolute of Justice A. O. Ebong of an FCT High Court, Bwari, in furtherance of a Supreme Court judgment given on May 7, 2021, ordering the governor to pay the outstanding salaries and allowances of the sacked council officials.
Mr Akintunde, who informed the three-member panel about a motion for a stay of execution filed, said the matter was about payment of judgment debt.
He told the panel led by Justice Williams-Daudu that the state government was not disputing the payment of the money but that his clients were asking for more favourable payment terms.
The senior lawyer argued that the Oyo State government would not be able to pay the judgment debt in the way and manner ordered by the lower court, considering its monthly allocation from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC) for both the state and local governments, its contractual obligations, payment of wages and salaries, among others.
But Mr Adetunbi disagreed, insisting that the state government can pay the money as set out in the judgment.
He said there was no dispute about whether or not the Oyo State government could immediately pay the N1.3 billion as ordered by Justice Ebong because the bank had written to confirm that they had monies belonging to the state government in their coffers.
The panel, however, agreed that the money cannot be paid now since there is a pending appeal before it.
Ms Williams-Daudu held that after carefully considering the case, it was agreed that the matter should be sent to the Court of Appeal ADR Centre for the issue to be possibly resolved between the parties.
According to her, the process will be swift ‘’because it is faster and devoid of undue rigidity as it is with the normal court process.”
She then asked the lawyers to ensure that the parties with the authority to make decisions participate in the mediation process at the ADR centre, as mediation is party-driven, and they must ensure that they both work out a way to ensure the payment of the judgment sum.
Ms Williams-Daudu adjourned the matter until July 6 for the report on a possible settlement between both parties.
The former two-term governor went down memory lane to recall how they founded the APC but were used and dumped.
In his words, “…those calling on us to join APC, we have agreed to join the APC but on clear agreement that protects and respects the interest of my party, NNPP and my political movement, Kwankwasiyya. No state where you go that you don’t have NNPP and Kwankwasiyya. We have gubernatorial candidates, senatorial candidates and others.
“We are ready to join APC under strong conditions and promises. We will not allow anyone to use us and later dump us.
“We were among the founding fathers of the APC and endured significant persecution from various security agencies while challenging the previous administration.
“Yet when the party assumed power, we received no recognition or appreciation for our sacrifices, simply because we didn’t originate from their original faction.
“We are not in a hurry to leave the NNPP; we are enjoying and have peace of mind. But if some want a political alliance that would not disappoint us like in the past, we are open to an alliance. Even if it is the PDP that realised their mistakes, let’s enter an agreement that will be made public,” Sen. Kwankwaso stated.
Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has dismissed long-standing claims that he once sought to extend his tenure in office, insisting he never pursued a third term.
Speaking at the Democracy Dialogue organised by the Goodluck Jonathan Foundation in Accra, Ghana, Chief Obasanjo said there is no Nigerian, living or dead, who can truthfully claim he solicited support for a third term agenda.
“I’m not a fool. If I wanted a third term, I know how to go about it. And there is no Nigerian, dead or alive, that would say I called him and told him I wanted a third term,” the former president declared.
Chief Obasanjo argued that he had proven his ability to secure difficult national goals, citing Nigeria’s debt relief during his administration as a much greater challenge than any third term ambition.
“I keep telling them that if I could get debt relief, which was more difficult than getting a third term, then if I wanted a third term, I would have got it too,” he said.
He further cautioned against leaders who overstay in power, stressing that the belief in one’s indispensability is a “sin against God.”
On his part, former President Goodluck Jonathan said any leader who failed to perform would be voted out of office if proper elections were conducted.
Describing electoral manipulation as one of the biggest threats to democracy in Africa, he said unless stakeholders come together to rethink and reform democracy, it may collapse in Africa.
He added that leaders must commit to the kind of democracy that guarantees a great future for the children where their voices matter.
He said: “Democracy in Africa continent is going through a period of strain and risk collapse unless stakeholders came together to rethink and reform it. Electoral manipulation remains one of the biggest threats in Africa.
“We in Africa must begin to look at our democracy and rethink it in a way that works well for us and our people. One of the problems is our electoral system. People manipulate the process to remain in power by all means.
“If we had proper elections, a leader who fails to perform would be voted out. But in our case, people use the system to perpetuate themselves even when the people don’t want them.
“Our people want to enjoy their freedoms. They want their votes to count during elections. They want equitable representation and inclusivity. They want good education. Our people want security. They want access to good healthcare. They want jobs. They want dignity. When leaders fail to meet these basic needs, the people become disillusioned.”
The dialogue was also attended by the President of the ECOWAS Commission, Dr. Omar Touray, Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah of the Sokoto diocese of Catholic Church among others who all stressed that democracy in Africa must go beyond elections to include accountability, service, and discipline.
The Rivers State House of Assembly yesterday resumed plenary session after a six-month state of emergency imposed on the state by President Bola Tinubu elapsed on Wednesday midnight.
President Bola Tinubu had lifted the emergency rule on September 17, with the Governor of the state, Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and members of the state assembly asked to resume duties on September 18.
The plenary was presided over by the Speaker of the House, Martins Amaewhule, at the conference hall located within the legislative quarters in Port Harcourt, the state capital.
The conference hall has served as the lawmakers’ temporary chamber since their official chamber at the assembly complex on Moscow Road was torched and later pulled down by the state government.
The outgone sole administrator of the state, Ibok-Ete Ibas, could not complete the reconstruction of the assembly complex as promised.
Recall that on March 18, President Bola Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers following the prolonged political standoff between Fubara and members of the House of Assembly loyal to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike.
He subsequently suspended the governor, his deputy, Ngozi Odu, and lawmakers for six months and installed a sole administrator, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd.), to manage the state’s affairs.
The decision sparked widespread controversy, with critics accusing the president of breaching the Constitution.
However, others hailed the move as a necessary and pragmatic step.