Connect with us

Politics

Govt Wants Supreme Court To Dismiss Rivers’ Bid To Stop Ceding Of 17 Oil Wells To Imo

Published

on

BREAKING: Supreme Court Rejects Bid To Enforce Zoning Policy In PDP

The dispute over the gownership of 17 oil wells has deepened as the Federal Government, on Tuesday, urged the Supreme Court to dismiss a suit that the Rivers State government filed to stop it from ceding the oil wells to Imo.

In processes it filed through the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, the government further prayed the apex court to vacate an order of injunction it issued on July 14, which stopped the process of ceding the oil wells located at Akri and Mbede, to Imo State.

The apex court had in an earlier chamber ruling it delivered in the matter, ordered the FG and its agencies to halt actions pertaining to an alleged plan to cede the oil wells to Imo state, pending the determination of the suit that was brought before it by the Rivers state government.

The ruling followed an ex-parte application Rivers State argued through its lawyer, Mr. Emmanuel Ukala, SAN.

The Supreme Court specifically restrained the AGF and the Attorney General of Imo state from taking any further action on the ownership of the disputed 17 oil wells, pending a resolution of legal issues sorrounding its ownership.

It further barred the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and the Fiscal Commission )RMAFC) and the office of the Accountant General of the Federation from approving, implementing, or giving effect in any manner to a letter from RMAFC office, with reference number RMC/O&G/47/1/264, dated July 1, 2021, which canceled the equal sharing of proceeds from the 17 oil wells by Rivers and Imo states.

At the resumed proceedings in the matter on Tuesday, FG’s lawyer, Dr. Remi Olatubura, SAN) and that of Imo state, Chief Olusola Oke (SAN) who are 1st and 2nd defendants in the matter, made their formal appearances in the case.

While FG said it filed a counter-affidavit against the writ of summons, Rivers State lodged with respect to the disputed oil wells, on its part, Imo state said it also filed a motion on notice to query the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to hear the case as a court of first instance.

READ ALSO: Buhari Asks Senate To Amend PIA, Ignores Oil Areas’ Demand For 5%

Counsel to Imo state, Mr. Oke, SAN, contended that since Rivers State brought the suit to challenge the action of some federal government agencies and not the FG itself, the matter ought to have been instituted before a Federal High Court instead of the Supreme Court.

Responding, lead counsel to Rivers state, government Mr Joseph Daudu (SA), asked for seven days to file his reply on points of law to the motions by the two defendants.

Consequently, a seven-man panel of Justices of the apex court led by Justice Kekere Ekun, adjourned the case till November 1 to hear all the pending motions.

The panel directed all the parties to ensure that they filed and exchanged all relevant processes before the next adjourned date.

Rivers State is in its suit, seeking a declaration that the boundary between it and Imo State, as delineated on Nigeria administrative map 10, 11 and 12 editions and other maps bearing similar delineations, are inaccurate, incorrect and do not represent the legitimate and lawful boundaries between Rivers and Imo State.

The plaintiff is further seeking a declaration that as far as Nigeria’s administrative map 10, 11 and 12 editions and other maps bearing similar delineations, relate to the boundaries between Rivers and Imo, the said maps are unlawful and void, cannot be relied on to determine the extent of the territorial governmental jurisdiction of Rivers state and to determine the revenue accuring to Rivers state from the federation account, including the application of the principle of derivation and other revenue allocation principles as contained in the 1999 Constitution.

It further applied for a declaration of the Supreme Court that the correct instrument maps and documents to be relied on in determining the boundary between Rivers and Imo States, are those used by the plaintiff in delineating the boundary line between Rivers and Imo states.

The plaintiff is also seeking a declaration that all the oil wells within Akri and Mbede communities are wrongly attributed to Imo State and that they are all oil wells within the territory of Rivers Statet

It maintained that only Rivers State is entitled to receive the full allocation of the distributable revenue from the oil wells on the basis of the 1390 derivation as contained under section 162 of the 1999 constitution.

The plaintiff is urging the court to issue an order of mandatory injunction, directing the AGF to calculate, to its satisfaction, and refund to it all revenue that has been wrongly attributed to or paid to Imo state on account of the limit or extent of their territories, including earnings due to it from revenue derived from Akri and Mbede oil wells.

READ ALSO: Why Buhari Govt Won’t Name, Shame Financiers Of Terrorism – Adesina

It further wants an order of injunction directing the AGF to withdraw from circulation its administrative map 10,11 and 12th editions and to refrain from relying on any of the said maps for the purpose of determining the boundary between Rivers and Imo state.

As well as an order of mandatory injunction directing AGF to produce administrative map bearing the correct boundary between Rivers and Imo state.

Rivers State is equally praying the apex court to award it the sum of N500million as litigation cost.

 

Read more authentic news on our social media platforms

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Politics

BREAKING: Tinubu, Shettima Know Fate On Disqualification From Presidency On Friday

Published

on

Tinubu and Shettima

Whether the Supreme Court will nullify the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its presidential candidate in the February 25 election, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, over alleged double nomination or not will be decided on Friday May 26, 2023.

The apex court on Monday, adjourned to the above date to deliver its judgment in the appeal by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) shortly after taking submissions from the counsel representing parties in the suit.

Specifically, the PDP is seeking the disqualification of the President-elect, Tinubu and the Vice-President-elect, Senator Kashim Shettima, over alleged double nomination; an act which they say violates the electoral laws.

The appellant anchored its appeal on the claims that the appellate court erred in law when it dismissed its appeal and affirmed the judgment of a trial court which held that the suit was incompetent and lacking in merit.

PDP is claiming that the APC breached the law when it nominated Shettima as the senatorial candidate for Borno Central and as vice-presidential candidate.

At Monday’s proceedings, while APC’s lawyer, Mr Babatunde Ogala (SAN), asked the court to strike out the case on the grounds that it has become statute barred, because the 180 days stipulated by law to hear the suit has elapsed, PDP’s lawyer, Mr Joe Agi (SAN), disagreed.

It is Agi’s position that the issue of 180 days does not apply in respect of double nomination, adding that since the act is purely an illegality, the court has the right to entertain the appeal.

“They have done that before, they did it in the case of Nwosu and APC and they will do it again,” Agim added.

The appellant accordingly urged the apex court to grant the appeal, set aside the concurrent decision of the two lower courts and nullify the election of Tinubu and the vice-president-elect for alleged double nomination.

The PDP had by their appeal marked: CA/ABJ/CV/108/2023, urged the appellate court to reverse the January 13 judgment by Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja which dismissed its suit on the grounds that the PDP lacked locus standi to have instituted the suit.

The three-member panel of justices of the Court of Appeal, in the lead judgment held that the PDP failed to establish its locus standi in the case.

Justice James Abundaga, who delivered the judgment of the appellate court, had agreed with the respondents that the PDP is a busy body, which dabbled in issues that are internal affairs of the APC.

“The appellant, having failed to disclose its locus standi, this appeal fails and it is hereby dismissed,” he said and proceeded to affirm the judgment of the Federal High Court.

Justice Abundaga awarded N5 million cost against the appellant’s lawyer, J. O. Olotu.

The PDP had, in the suit filed on July 28, 2022, challenged the validity of the Tinubu/Shettima ticket for the 2023 presidential election, arguing that Shettima’s nomination as the running mate was in breach of the provisions of Sections 29(1), 33, 35 and 84{1)}(2)} of the Electoral Act, 2022 (as amended).

Continue Reading

Politics

BREAKING: Court Disqualifies Alex Otti As Governor-elect,  Others In Abia, Kano

Published

on

Alex Otti

The Abia State Governor-elect, Dr Alex Otti and all the candidates of the Labour Party in Abia and Kano States have been disqualified.

The disqualification came from a Federal High Court sitting in Kano, presided over by Justice M N Yunusa.

The court ruled that their emergence was not in compliance with the provisions of the 2022 Electoral Act.

A copy of the judgement delivered by the court was made available to newsmen on Friday.

The Court in Suit No FHC/KN/CS/107/2023 filed by Mr Ibrahim Haruna Ibrahim against the Labour Party and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, ruled that the failure of the Labour Party to submit its membership register to the INEC within 30 days before their primaries renders the process invalid.

“The party that has not complied with the provisions of the electoral act cannot be said to have a candidate in an election and cannot be declared winner of an election; this being so, the votes credited to the 1st defendant are a wasted vote,” the judge ruled.

Continue Reading

Politics

BREAKING: Adeleke, Oyetola Know Fates As Supreme Court Rules On Osun Governorship Poll Tomorrow

Published

on

Oyetola and Adeleke

By tomorrow Tuesday, Ademola Adeleke will know if he remains the Osun State helmsman as the Supreme Court will rule on the governorship poll dispute.

The ruling is on an appeal filed by former Osun State Governor, Gboyega Oyetola against Governor Adeleke’s victory in the July 2022 governorship election in the state.

Oyetola is asking the apex court to set aside the ruling of the appellate court which nullified the judgement of the election tribunal.

The election tribunal had declared Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC) winner of the election.

Oyetola was declared the winner by the election tribunal after he went to court to challenge the victory of Adeleke, as announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Delivering judgment on January 27, two out of the three-member panel held that the former governor was able to prove that there was over-voting in some of the polling units.

Adeleke had rejected the judgment, describing it as “a miscarriage of justice” and “an unfair interpretation against the will of majority of voters”.

In the 31 grounds of appeal, Adeleke begged the court for “an order setting aside the whole decision of the tribunal”.

He also sought “an order striking out the petition for want of competence and jurisdiction or in the alternative, an order dismissing the petition on the merit”.

Adeleke submitted that the tribunal exhibited bias when it said: “The second respondent cannot ‘go lo lo lo lo’ and ‘buga won’ as the duly elected governor of Osun state.”

The appellate court, in a unanimous decision by a three-member panel of Justices on Friday, held that the appeal the governor lodged to challenge his sacking by the Osun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, was meritorious.

Aside from setting aside the judgement of the tribunal, the court, in its lead judgement that was delivered by Justice Mohammed Lawal, awarded N500,000 cost against APC and its candidate, Oyetola.

However, a five-member panel of the Supreme Court announced on Monday that judgment will be delivered on the matter at 2 pm on Tuesday, May 9, 2023.

This comes after the panel took arguments from the legal representatives of Adeleke and Oyetola.

Continue Reading

Top Stories