Connect with us

Politics

Falana Assembles Legal Team To Sue Ex-Dictator Babangida Over Detention, Trial For Opposing June 12 Election Annulment

Published

on

Spread the love

 

Renowned human rights lawyer Femi Falana, SAN, has vowed to challenge what he describes as his “malicious” detention alongside late Chief Gani Fawehinmi (SAN) and three others during the military regime of General Ibrahim Babangida (retd.).

Speaking on Channels TV on Tuesday, Falana revealed that he and his colleagues were persecuted for opposing the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election, which was won by Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola.

He described their detention, prosecution, and trial as deliberate, adding that he has now assembled a legal team to seek redress.

Falana lamented that 32 years later, Babangida now admitted to regretting the annulment of the election.

He stated that Babangida deliberately nullified the election results and arrested, detained, charged and paraded them as criminals.

Recalling the events of 1993, Falana narrated how he and his colleagues were taken to the Gwagwalada Chief Magistrate Court and charged with treasonable felony.

He disclosed that, since they had no access to legal representation, he and the late Gani Fawehinmi defended themselves and their colleagues in court.

The human rights lawyer insisted that Babangida’s actions had long-term consequences for Nigeria’s democracy, adding that he is now seeking legal redress for the wrongful prosecution.

Falana said, “Even though we were asking for bail, we turned our arraignment to the trial of junta. And I recalled on that occasion, Chief Fawehinmi told the judge, Chief Magistrate Mallam Bulama that those who should be standing trial for treason, should be in the dock were in the Villa, led by General Babangida.

“Because they had sacked, they had overthrown a democratically elected government on December 31, 1983. So, those are the people that should be standing trial. And of course, when it came to my turn, I made it clear to the judge, this section of the law, Section 41 of the Criminal Code Act, which provides anybody who forms an intention to remove the president of his country, during his term of office, otherwise than by constitutional means.

“I said, my lord? The man calling himself my president has no fixed term of office. So, I couldn’t have been brought here. Of course, the judge adjourned. Two weeks later, he granted us bail very liberally, N20,000 and one surety in like sum.”

The human rights lawyer noted that Babangida’s regime could not stand another proceeding.

“They couldn’t go back to court, so that we don’t turn the thing into a full trial of General Babangida and others. So, it simply ran away,” he said.

“So, I am going to challenge the malicious prosecution. My malicious prosecution and that of my colleagues.

“I have assembled a team of lawyers. They are looking into it. Because he has now brought it to life by now admitting that there was no basis for my prosecution. Because he now says Abiola won the election, which was the basis of our protests.

“He is also saying, you know, it shouldn’t have postponed the terminal date of his transition programme,” he said.

“Which, again, we are fighting. So, which means there was no basis for our prosecution. It is malicious,” Falana said.

“Again, massive infringements of our rights, human rights. Because when you keep me in Kuje prison, you deny me my right to liberty, my freedom of movement. You also violate my right to choose the government of my country.

“Point to Article 13 of the African Charter on Human Rights. Because the man who did it has just come out to say, I did it wrongly,” he said.

Falana further explained that, echoing the ruling of the court in Abuja in the case of Femi Falana vs. Republic of Benin and others, the court stated that any violation occurring after three years cannot be pursued in the jurisdiction.

“But later, you know, the improvement of the jurisprudence of the court has now come to the conclusion. I think that was in the case of Federation of Journalists, you know, Gambia and the government of that country that once you are talking of serious abuse of human rights, statute of limitation does not apply,” Falana added.
please like my page for more update

Politics

Nothing new to reveal – Presidency reacts to US court order on Tinubu’s records

Published

on

Spread the love

The Presidency on Sunday, reacted to the United States, US, District Court of Columbia ordering the Federal Bureau of Intelligence, FBI, to reveal President Bola Tinubu’s information.

Tinubu’s spokesman, Bayo Onanuga said there was nothing new to reveal about the case.

Onanuga said reports by Agent Moss of the FBI and the DEA have been in the public space for more than 30 years.

Reacting to questions from journalists, Onanuga said the reports did not indict the Nigerian leader.

Ekwutosblog had reported that Judge Beryl Howell gave the order on Tuesday.

The development followed a motion by Aaron Greenspan, an American who is seeking a reconsideration of an earlier ruling.

 

Howell said protecting the information from public disclosure is “neither logical nor plausible.”

Greenspan had accused the FBI of violating the Freedom of Information Act, FOIA, by failing to release within the statutory time “documents relating to purported federal investigations into” Tinubu and one Abiodun Agbele.

Tinubu was claimed to have forfeited $460,000 to the American government in 1993 after authorities linked the funds to proceeds of narcotics trafficking.

Reacting, Onanuga posted on X: “Journalists have sought the Presidency’s reaction to the ruling last Tuesday by a Washington DC judge ordering the US FBI and DEA to release reports connected with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

“Our response is as follows:

“There is nothing new to be revealed. The report by Agent Moss of the FBI and the DEA report have been in the public space for more than 30 years.

“The reports did not indict the Nigerian leader. The lawyers are examining the ruling.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Gov Nwifuru didn’t sign any agreement to relinquish power in 2027- Ebonyi APC

Published

on

Spread the love

The Ebonyi State chapter of the All Progressives Congress,APC, has said that there was no agreement reached at any point that the State Governor, Francis Nwifuru would relinquish his position in 2027 after serving a single term of four years.

In a statement issued on Sunday, by the state Publicity Secretary of APC, Ogbuatu Chidi Simbad, the Party made it clear that such a claim was false and misleading.

According to Ogbuatu: “Let this be clear: Governor Francis Ogbonna Nwifuru is not leaving after four years. There was no agreement to the contrary, and any such claim is false and misleading”.

POLITICS

Gov Nwifuru didn’t sign any agreement to relinquish power in 2027- Ebonyi APC

Published

on

The Ebonyi State chapter of the All Progressives Congress,APC, has said that there was no agreement reached at any point that the State Governor, Francis Nwifuru would relinquish his position in 2027 after serving a single term of four years.

In a statement issued on Sunday, by the state Publicity Secretary of APC, Ogbuatu Chidi Simbad, the Party made it clear that such a claim was false and misleading.

According to Ogbuatu: “Let this be clear: Governor Francis Ogbonna Nwifuru is not leaving after four years. There was no agreement to the contrary, and any such claim is false and misleading”.

“There was never any agreement to stop a man who is fulfilling destiny. Let this be clear: Governor Francis Ogbonna Nwifuru is not leaving after four years. There was no agreement to the contrary, and any such claim is false and misleading”.

“It is a fact that since the creation of Ebonyi State, no governor has ever ruled for just one term. History supports continuity, and today is no different”.

“Now, a few individuals who once watched from the sidelines are trying to distract and confuse the people. But their imagination only reveals the content of their own minds. Ebonyians know better”.

He stressed that the party would not succumb to any intimidation or force from any individual or group.

The APC spokesman said: “the strength of the APC in Ebonyi was not built through intimidation or force. It was built on unity, humility, peace, and most important “Good governance”. The government’s unwavering commitment to fulfilling its promises has earned her the trust and love of the people”.

The Party further commended Governor Nwifuru for his visionary leadership and commitment to good governance in the state.

“It is no longer news that Ebonyi State, under the dynamic leadership of His Excellency, Rt. Hon. Francis Ogbonna Nwifuru is on the right path to greatness. Governor Nwifuru’s led administration is focused on building a stronger, better state, one that is greater than it was met. Governance is a continuum, and this present government is committed to sustaining progressive policies for lasting economic and infrastructural growth, Ogbuatu added.

He noted that the State APC under the chairmanship of Chief Stanley Okoro-Emegha has met will aggrieved members during his tour across the 13 Council areas and 171 wards, and assured them of reconciliation, peace and inclusiveness.

Continue Reading

Politics

House of Representatives Forms 19-Member Ad-Hoc Committee to Oversee Rivers State Amid Political Crisis

Published

on

Spread the love

 

The Nigerian House of Representatives has established a 19-member ad-hoc committee to oversee the administration of Rivers State following President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency.

This decision comes amid a political crisis in the state, primarily driven by a power struggle between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, Nyesom Wike.

The committee’s formation aligns with the Senate’s resolution to invoke Section 11, Subsection 4 of the Nigerian Constitution, granting the National Assembly authority to set up an oversight body for Rivers State’s governance during the emergency period. Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas was sworn in as the sole administrator of the state, effectively sidelining local governance structures.

The House’s action has sparked debate, with some questioning the constitutional process, including claims of insufficient votes and lack of communication with Speaker Tajudeen Abass.

Continue Reading

Trending