Politics
FOR-THE-RECORD: Atiku Shreds Supreme Court’s Verdict
Presidential Candidate, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25, 2023 election, Atiku Abubakar, expressed his feelings on the ruling of the Supreme Court of Nigeria (SCN) on the poll, last Wednesday at a press conference in Abuja on Monday.
He basically placed on record his dissatisfaction with the ruling, which upheld the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) declaration of Bola Ahmed Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the elected president.
The former vice president also make recommendations on the way forward.
Below is the full text of Atiku’s speech:
Someone asked me what I would do if I lost my election petition appeal at the Supreme Court. In response, I said that as long as Nigeria wins, the struggle would have been worth the while.
By that, I meant that the bigger loss would not be mine but Nigeria’s if the Supreme Court legitimizes illegality, including forgery, identity theft, and perjury.
If the Supreme Court, the highest court in the land, implies by its judgment that crime is good and should be rewarded, then Nigeria has lost and the country is doomed irrespective of who occupies the Presidential seat.
If the Supreme Court decides that the Electoral umpire, INEC, can tell the public one thing and then do something else in order to reach a corruptly predetermined outcome, then there is really no hope for the country’s democracy and electoral politics.
Obviously, the consequences of those decisions for the country will not end at the expiration of the current government. They will last for decades. I am absolutely sure that history will vindicate me. We now know what the Supreme Court has decided.
At critical points in my political life, I always ignored the easy but ignoble path and chosen the difficult but dignified path, the path of truth, of morality, of democracy and rule of law.
I always chose freedom over servitude, whatever the personal discomforts my choice entails. When I joined politics, the critical challenge was easing the military out of power so that civilian democratic governance could be restored in Nigeria.
It later became a very defining struggle, and, as one of the leaders of that struggle, I was targeted for elimination.
In one incident, nine policemen guarding my home in Kaduna were murdered in an attempt to assassinate me. I was also forced into exile for nine (9) months. In addition, my interest in a logistics company that I co-owned was confiscated and given to friends of the military government.
As Vice President in the civilian government that succeeded the military, I, again at great personal cost, chose to oppose the extension of the tenure of the government beyond the two four-year terms enshrined in our constitution.
In response to the official backlash against me, I instituted several cases in the courts, which led to seven landmark decisions that helped to deepen our democracy and rule of law.
At the current historic moment, the easier option for me would have been to fold up and retreat after the mandate banditry perpetrated by the APC and INEC.
But I went to the Nigerian courts to seek redress. I even went to an American court to help with unravelling what our state institutions charged with such responsibilities were unwilling or unable to do, including unravelling the qualifying academic records of the person sworn in as our President and by implication, hopefully who he really is.
I offered that evidence procured with the assistance of the American Court to our Supreme Court to help it to do justice in this case.
I give this background to underscore that what we are currently dealing with is bigger than one or two presidential elections and is certainly bigger than Atiku Abubakar. It is not about me; it is about our country, Nigeria. It is about the kind of society we want to leave for the next generation and what kind of example we want to set for our children and their children.
It is about the reputation of Nigeria and Nigerians in the eyes of the world. We showed incontrovertible evidence that Bola A. Tinubu was not qualified to contest the Presidential Election because he forged the qualifying academic certificate, which he submitted to INEC.
In fact, a simple check of Tinubu’s past records in its possession would have shown INEC that Tinubu broke the law and should not have been allowed to contest the election.
We showed irrefutable evidence of gross irregularities, violence, and manipulations during the elections. We showed incontrovertible evidence that INEC violated the Electoral Act and deliberately sabotaged its own publicly announced processes and procedures in order to illegally declare Tinubu elected.
The position of the Supreme Court, even though final, leaves so much unanswered.
Even the rebuke by retired Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad is a confirmation from within the apex court that all is not well with the Supreme Court. The court and indeed the judiciary must never lend itself to politicization as it is currently the norm with nearly every institution in Nigeria.
By the way, the strong rebuke of the apex court by the revered Justice, who had meritoriously served for more than four decades, should not be swept under the carpet.
The alarm raised by Justice Muhammad and recently, former INEC Chairman, Prof Attahiru Jega, offer Nigerians an explanation into why the electoral and judicial system have become the lost hope of the common man.
Judges are no longer appointed based on merit but are products of the interplay of politics and nepotism. Worse still, the appointment of electoral officials has also been hijacked by the ruling party as seen in the latest nomination of Resident Electoral Commissioners where card carrying members of the ruling party and aides to politicians in the APC are being appointed into INEC.
When two critical institutions like the court and the electoral commission are trapped in an evil web of political machination, it becomes next to impossible for democracy to thrive.
As a stakeholder in the presidential election of February 25, I, along with other well-meaning Nigerians have done my bit in ensuring that our democratic process enjoys the privilege of full disclosure of the character deficiencies of the current political leadership.
I also believe that even if the Supreme Court believes otherwise, the purpose of technology in our electoral system is to enhance transparency and not merely as a viewing centre. We have to move with the world and not be stuck in time.
Implications of PEPC and Supreme Court judgments
I leave Nigerians and the world to decide what to make of the Supreme Court’s unfortunate decision. But here’s my take.
The judgments of the PEPC and the Supreme Court have very far-reaching, grave implications, including the following:
One is the erosion of trust in the electoral system and our democracy. Nigerians witnessed as the National Assembly changed the electoral law to improve transparency in the process. Of particular importance was the introduction of modern technology to help eliminate the recurring incidents of electoral manipulation, particularly during the collation of results.
Nigerians and the world also witnessed as the leadership of the INEC, especially its Chairman and National Commissioner for Voter Education reassured Nigerians on national television multiple times that the use of that technology would be mandatory.
Yet that same INEC undermined the use of that technology during the elections and collation process and declared as winner someone who clearly did not win the Presidential election.
They then went further to take sides in the courts in a dogfight to defend their illegality. Who would convince the millions of Nigerians to vote in future elections after they suffered endlessly on queues to register to vote, to collect PVCs and to vote, based on INEC’s assurances only to see their votes stolen and given to someone they did not vote for?
When people lose trust and confidence in elections, democracy is practically on life support. And by affirming and legitimizing the continued lack of transparency in our electoral system the courts are continuing to usurp the rights of voters to elect their leaders.
The other grave implication is that contestants in Nigeria’s elections should do whatever is necessary to be declared the winner. That includes identity theft, impersonation, forging of educational and other documents, perjury, and violence.
And, as they do so, they should ignore whatever the law says and whatever assurances from the leadership of the electoral umpire about what the law says and what they would do in compliance.
And they would do so knowing that our courts would approve of their behaviour or at best pretend not to take any notice of it.
The third is that if you are robbed of victory, do not bother going to court for redress because your glaring evidence of the robbery will be ignored in favour of the mandate bandit.
Also, your lawyers, however distinguished and accomplished, may be ridiculed by the judges who may also go out of their way to make even a stronger case for the so-called “winner” than even their own lawyers were able to do.
These are clearly self-help strategies and actions bereft of the law and constitutionalism. Only lawlessness and anarchy will result from such, with violence, destruction and implosion and loss of our country likely to follow.
I believe that we still have a small window to prevent these from happening. I still believe that we can rescue this country from the strange imposters that have seized it illegally and are holding it by the jugular.
Let me caution that the leaders of those African countries that have completely collapsed into chaos never came together one day and agreed to collapse their countries. Rather their countries collapsed because of the incremental and compounding individual and collective utterances and actions of those leaders.
Nigerians know more about the person sitting in office as their President and how he got there, and the dangers that it portends for them and the country. It is for them, especially the younger generation whose futures are to be shaped by that man, to decide what they want to do with the knowledge.
Now, let me give a historical perspective to the constitutional evolution that gave birth to the 1999 Constitution.
In the build-up to the current democratic dispensation, agitation was rife amongst members of the political class and a large number of civil society bodies to envision a constitution that would operate a democracy in a functional order after the nasty military regimes.
These agitations and necessities of the circumstance of that time led to the convocation of the 1995 Constitutional Conference, which I was privileged to be a part of, alongside other prominent political actors.
The Constitutional Conference was expected to create the frameworks upon which a new constitution would be built in order to make the dreams of a democratic society.
A number of far-reaching reforms and recommendations were made, which drew from our past experiences and aimed at safeguarding the new constitution from the mistakes of the past.
One such headline recommendation was the concept of rotational presidency anchored on the principle of 6 years’ single term among the 6 geopolitical blocks.
Even the notional idea of delineating the country along geo-political blocks was a creation of the 1995 conference.
Another thematic recommendation at the conference was that the Federal Capital Territory should be given the democratic opportunity to elect for itself a mayor who shall emerge from popular franchise.
These two recommendations were part of the landmark reforms that were submitted to the military government that convoked the Constitutional Conference.
However, and rather disappointingly, the government that midwifed the current democratic dispensation and enacted what is now known as the 1999 Constitution, expunged these two recommendations from what eventually became the body of legislation to govern our fledgling democracy.
As for me and my party this phase of our work is done.
However, I am not going away. For as long as I breathe I will continue to struggle, with other Nigerians, to deepen our democracy and rule of law and for the kind of political and economic restructuring the country needs to reach its true potential.
That struggle should now be led by the younger generation of Nigerians who have even more at stake than my generation.
So, let me make a few proposals that I believe will help.
We can urgently make constitutional amendments that will prevent any court or tribunal from hiding behind technicalities and legal sophistry to affirm electoral heists and undermine the will of the people.
Our democracy must mean something; it must be substantive. Above all, it must be expressed through free, fair and transparent elections that respect the will of the people.
Firstly, we must make electronic voting and collation of results mandatory. This is the 21st century and countries less advanced than Nigeria are doing so already. It is only bold initiatives that transform societies.
Secondly, we must provide that all litigation arising from a disputed election must be concluded before the inauguration of a winner. This was the case in 1979. The current time frame between elections and inauguration of winners is inadequate to dispense with election litigations.
What we have currently is akin to asking thieves to keep their loot and use the same to defend themselves while the case of their robbery is being decided. It only encourages mandate banditry rather than discourages it.
Thirdly, in order to ensure popular mandate and real representation, we must move to require a candidate for President to earn 50% +1 of the valid votes cast, failing which a run-off between the top two candidates will be held.
Most countries that elect their presidents use this Two-Round System (with slight variations) rather than our current First-Past-the-Post system.
Examples include France, Finland, Austria, Bulgaria, Portugal, Poland, Turkey and Russia, Argentina, Brazil, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Namibia, Mozambique, Madagascar and even Liberia where a run-off is expected to hold in the coming days.
Fourthly, in order to reduce the desperation of incumbents and distractions from governing and also to promote equity and national unity, we need to move to a single six-year term for President to be rotated among the six geo-political zones.
This will prevent the ganging up of two or more geo-political zones to alternate the presidency among themselves to the exclusion of other zones.
INEC should be mandated to verify the credentials submitted to it by candidates and their parties and where it is unable to do so – perhaps because the institutions involved did not respond in time – it must publicly state so and have it on record.
A situation where a candidate submits contradictory credentials to INEC in different election cycles and the electoral umpire accepts them without question points to gross negligence, at best, or collusion to break the law by the leadership of the INEC, at worst.
The submission of contradictory qualifying documents by a candidate as well as those found to be forged or falsified should disqualify a candidate even if the falsification or forgery is discovered after the person had been sworn into office.
The burden of proving that a document submitted to INEC is forged should not be on the opposing candidates in the election. It is never the responsibility of an applicant for a job to prove that the person who eventually got the job did so with forged documents.
In addition to these proposed constitutional amendments, the Electoral Act should be amended to provide that, except where they explicitly violate the Constitution and other laws, the rules and procedures laid down by the electoral umpire and made public for the benefit of the contestants and the voters will be treated as sacrosanct by the courts in deciding on election disputes.
A referee cannot be allowed to set the rules for the game only to change or ignore them when one side has scored a goal or is about to win the match. We must restore confidence in our electoral system which the current leadership of INEC has completely eroded and undermined.
Also, we need well-thought out provisions in the legislation and regulations to reform the judiciary, including the introduction of an automated case assignment system; transparency in the appointment of judges; a practice directory that stresses that the goal of judges in election cases should be to discover and affirm voters’ choice rather than disregarding voters’ choice for the sake of technicalities.
There should also be publicly available annual evaluation of the performance of judges using agreed criteria. By improving the transparency of the electoral process and reducing the incentives to cheat, in addition to transparency in the appointment of judges and other judicial reforms, the number of election petitions as well as corruption in the judiciary will be significantly reduced.
More importantly, we would have succeeded in taking away the right to elect leaders from the courts and return it to the voters to whom it truly belongs.
Gentlemen of the Press, I thank you profoundly for listening.
May God bless you, and may God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate in the 2024 Ondo State governorship election, Agboola Ajayi, has filed an appeal against the December 2 ruling of the Federal High Court in Akure.
The court had dismissed his lawsuit challenging the eligibility of the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa, and his running mate, Olayide Owolabi Adelami.
Ajayi, in his notice of appeal dated December 7, 2024, alleged that Justice T.B. Adegoke erred in dismissing his case, which was marked FHC/AK/CS/99/2024.
READ MORE: Davido Spotted With Burna Boy’s Mother At Tony Elumelu’s All White Party
The PDP candidate’s initial lawsuit raised concerns over discrepancies in the certificates submitted by Aiyedatiwa to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Ajayi argued that these discrepancies violated electoral laws and called into question Aiyedatiwa’s qualifications to run for office.
Key Allegations in Appeal
Ajayi presented multiple grounds for his appeal, accusing the Federal High Court of failing to properly evaluate the evidence before it.
He claimed that: “Unexplained Certificate Discrepancies: Ajayi stated that the trial court failed to address “unexplained and irreconcilable differences” in the names on Aiyedatiwa’s certificates.
According to him, “The 1st Respondent submitted different certificates with different names that were not the same. Throughout the dispute before the trial court, the 1st Respondent never presented a Deed Poll to explain the irreconcilable differences.”
Failure to Grant Reliefs: He criticized the court for dismissing his reliefs despite what he described as compelling evidence.
Ajayi argued, “The lower court failed to properly evaluate the evidence presented before it, which was essentially documentary. The refusal to grant the reliefs in the face of credible evidence on record occasioned a grave miscarriage of justice.”
Neglect of Documentary Evidence: Ajayi contended that the court neglected its duty to evaluate critical statutory documents, which he said were central to proving his case.
He added, “The court was called upon to examine and evaluate the documentary evidence but failed to do so, instead relying on extraneous matters without giving appropriate consideration to whether those assertions were correct.”
Standing to Sue: The PDP candidate argued that the trial court erred by dismissing his legal standing to challenge Aiyedatiwa’s nomination. He noted, “The issue of nomination and sponsorship of a candidate is both intra- and inter-party affairs of an interested party in an election, as in this instant case.”
Ajayi is asking the Court of Appeal to overturn the High Court’s judgment and grant the reliefs he sought at the trial court.
These include an order invalidating Aiyedatiwa’s candidacy due to the certificate discrepancies and setting aside the December 2 ruling.
Specifically, he requested, “An order allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment of the Federal High Court sitting in Akure, Ondo State, delivered on the 2nd of December, 2024, by Hon. Justice T.B. Adegoke.”
“An order granting the reliefs sought by the appellants as plaintiffs before the trial court.”
Ajayi also faulted the court’s interpretation of Section 29(1)-(5) of the Electoral Act, 2022. He argued that the provisions were given a “narrow and restrictive” reading, which ignored the broader intent of the law.
The appeal is the latest development in the heated political contest between the PDP and APC in Ondo State.
Legal experts believe the outcome of the case could significantly impact the governorship race.
Osun State Governor, Senator Ademola Adeleke has congratulated the newly elected president of Ghana, John Mahama.
This was gleaned in a government house statement in Osogbo on Monday in which Gov Adeleke described President Mahama as “a true democrat and a genuine friend of Nigeria”
Gov Adeleke stated, “we have been sharing deep thoughts about the true essence of democracy and the imperative of respect for people’s will as the bedrock of virile democratic state.
ALSO READ: Midterm Scorecard: Adeleke Appreciates Osun Residents, Assures On More Democratic Dividends
“All through his days in the opposition, he adopted the best of democratic model with unbending faith in the capacity of voters to decide and the necessity of the system to accept the voters’ will as expressed without any equivocation. His faith in the electorate amidst hard work of electioneering campaigns paid off with a resounding victory at the polls.
“I further commend the ruling party for conceding defeat without attempting any electoral hijack. This was a demonstration of electoral maturity worthy of emulation by actors within the Nigerian space.
“I rejoice with my dear brother as our dreams come true by the grace of God and the people. As he prepares to return to the State House, I have no doubt that he will take Ghana to greater heights.
“I call for a closer, more robust relationship between Nigeria and Ghana. Both countries must deepen cooperation under mutual respect and opportunities. Our brotherly relationship should extend to the sub-national level for the benefits of citizens and residents of our dear nations.”
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has urged Nigeria’s Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas “to urgently assess the human rights impacts of Nigeria’s reform bills currently being discussed by the National Assembly including on Nigerians living in poverty.”
According to the SERAP said, “any discussion and consideration of the tax reform bills must ensure full compliance with provisions of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and the country’s international human rights obligations and commitments.”
The call was contained in a letter dated December 7, 2024, under the signature of its deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, in which the SERAP stated, inter alia, “The assessments should be transparent, include public participation, and shape the provisions and measures that are ultimately passed. The outcome of any such assessments should be widely published.”
ALSO READ: Like America, Like Ghana: Opposition Defeats Ruling Party In Presidential Election
The SERAP urged Akpabio, and Abbas “to pass a resolution directing Mr Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice to hold Nigeria’s state governors to account on their spending of trillions of naira of revenue derived from taxes including VATs collected by their states since 2015 and to ensure the recovery of any proceeds of corruption.”
The letter, read in part: “SERAP urges you to ensure the inclusion in the tax reform bills of transparency and accountability mechanisms to ensure that any revenue derived from taxes covered under the bills are not mismanaged, diverted or pocketed by politicians, their family members and close associates.
“SERAP notes that Nigerian authorities have the discretion to develop laws on taxation most appropriate to their circumstances.
“However, the Nigerian Constitution 1999 [as amended] and human rights and anticorruption treaties to which the country is a state party impose limits on the discretion of the authorities in the development of any such laws.
“Our preliminary review of the provisions of the tax reform bills shows that the bills contain some provisions that are antithetical to human rights and the rule of law.
“For example, section 28(2)(c) of the Tax Administration bill among others, requires financial institutions including banks to provide to tax authorities ‘the names, addresses, or any other information of new or existing customers.’
“Under section 28(4), financial institutions must make ‘additional disclosure” about their customers ‘if it is required by a notice signed by the Chief Executive Officer of the relevant tax authority.’
“These provisions, especially the phrases ‘any other information’ and ‘additional disclosure’, if implemented, could be used unjustifiably or arbitrarily to restrict the right to privacy of customers.
“The risks of violations of human rights are illustrated by the absence in the bills of sufficient safeguards against abuse of access to personal data of customers.
“The provisions also give little or no consideration to data protection, thereby increasing the risks of misuse by public authorities of a customer’s personal details including their home address.
“Another troubling provision of the tax reform bills is section 57 of the Tax Administration bill which grants broad, extensive and intrusive powers to tax authorities which may be misused to undermine Nigerians’ human rights.
“In particular, section 57(1) provides that ‘an authorised officer of the relevant tax authority shall have free access to all land, buildings, places, books and documents, in the custody or under the control of a person, public officer, or institution, for the purpose of inspecting the books or documents.’
“Such official will also have free access to ‘any property, process or matter which the officer considers necessary or relevant for the purpose of collecting any tax.’
“Under subsection 2, ‘the relevant tax authority shall take immediate possession of [any] removable media and the related removable equipment or computer used to access the stored documents on the media in order to prevent the accidental or intentional destruction, removal or alteration of records and documents.’
“Section 57(5) seems to pre-empt the nature of any judicial authorisation required for tax official ‘enter any private dwelling’ by prescribing that such authorisation will ‘be valid for a period of three months from the date of its issue or such lesser period as the judicial officer considers appropriate.’
“Under subsection 6, the tax official is required to ‘produce the written authorisation and evidence of identity “on first entering the private dwelling’. The official will only produce such evidence subsequently if they consider it reasonable to do so.
“These provisions are broadly worded and could be misused to violate Nigerians’ human rights.
“The provisions also do not contain any special safeguards which means that the broad, extensive and intrusive powers granted to tax authorities could be arbitrarily exercised without any accountability.
“Section 57 also does not contain any explicit provisions that would allow the court to examine the lawfulness or necessity of any authorisation before or after any entering.
“The provisions of section 81 of the Tax Administration bill essentially oust the jurisdiction of the court in pending tax matters by stating that ‘the pendency of a legal proceeding shall not affect the performance of the duties or obligations of any taxable person under this Act or any other tax law.’
“The provisions could be misused to infringe the rights to equality and the right of access to courts, denying the right of an effective remedy to any aggrieved party.
“Several other provisions of the tax bills lack mechanisms for effective oversight and accountability, as required by the rule of law in a democratic society, thereby increasing the risks of abuse of power or arbitrariness. The provisions could be misused to violate Nigerians’ right to property and fair hearing.
“The tax bills also do not seem to contain provisions for a fair balance between the authorities’ powers to collect taxes and the requirements of the protection of the individual’s fundamental rights.
“The absence of provisions in the tax bills on meaningful judicial oversight and review and accountability procedures would also undermine the rights of Nigerians including to privacy and disproportionately affect disadvantaged and marginalized individuals and groups.
“Under human rights law, states including Nigeria are required to make the promotion and protection of human rights central to their tax systems. Nigeria needs a rights-based tax system that works for the people and not the politicians, their family members and close associates.
“The country also needs transparent, democratic and rights-aligned tax reforms to unlock the maximum available resources for the full realisation of human rights.
“Furthermore, there are credible reports that several state governors continue to divert or mismanage the revenue derived from taxes, impeding the funding of public goods and services that are crucial for the progressive realisation of human rights.
“In many states, millions of Nigerians continue to be denied access to essential public services such as water and basic sanitation while millions of children of school age roam the streets.
“SERAP is concerned that growing reports of corruption in the use of tax revenue and other public resources continue to disproportionately affect poor Nigerians and other most vulnerable segments of the population.
“SERAP is concerned that the opposition by some state governors against the tax reform bills may be politically motivated and reduce the tax payable to the national treasury. State governors should constructively engage in good faith in the processes to adopt a national tax system for the country.
“We would be grateful if the recommended measures are taken in the consideration of the tax reform bills.
“If the offending provisions of the tax reform bills including those outlined above are not addressed and brought in conformity with human rights standards and safeguards, SERAP shall take all appropriate legal actions to compel you and other members of the National Assembly to comply with our request in the public interest.
“SERAP notes that the tax reform bills, if properly aligned with human rights standards, would enhance the ability of the Federal Government, states and local governments to fulfil their human rights obligations and adequately fund public services essential for human rights.
“However, without transparency and accountability, revenue derived from taxes may not be spent to combat poverty and fund development as well as provide essential public goods and services for Nigerians.
“The National Assembly has the constitutional responsibility to conduct and publish human rights impact assessments of the tax reform bills to ensure that proposed reforms best protect, advance and fulfill people’s human rights.
“SERAP also urges you to revise and repeal several of the provisions of the bills, particularly the Tax Administration bill.
“SERAP urges you to include provisions in the tax reform bills that will ensure that Nigerians have access to all relevant data and information on fiscal policy and government revenues, including from the corporate sector.
“According to our information, members of the National Assembly are currently discussing Nigeria’s tax bills which primarily aim to ‘provide uniform procedures for a consistent and efficient administration of tax laws in order to- (a) facilitate tax compliance by taxpayers; and (b) optimise tax revenue.’
Christmas: Shettima Assures Of FG’s Commitment To Citizens’ Welfare
Obi’s Inspiring Christmas Message Of Hope For Women’s Football
Yuletide: Adeleke Rejoices With Christians
Archbishop Martins Champions Clamour For Better Life For Nigerians
Tinubu Sends Hearty Christmas Greetings To Christians Worldwide
Olamide, Tiwa Savage, Phyno, Others Dazzle Fans At Flytime Music Festival 2024
OSSG Raises Alarm Over Murder Plot By APC Chieftain
NCC, SMEDAN, NAICOM, SEC, Others Set for SUPERNEWS SMEs Conf June 13
Sahara’s Tonye Cole resigns from GPHCDA
Niger Delta Avengers: President Buhari Reads riot Act …considers the carrot and stick option
Oando opens ultra-modern petrol station in Lagos
