NEWS AGENCY OF NIGERIA
Judiciary

EFCC arraigns foreigners over alleged cybercrime

121 total views today

Cybercrime
By Sandra Umeh

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Thursday,  arraigned several foreign nationals before a Federal High Court in Lagos for alleged cybercrime and attempt to destabilise the nation.

The defendants, who include Filipinos, Indonesian, and Chinese nationals, are standing trial before Justice Musa Kakaki, on a two-count charge bordering on cybercrime, and identity theft.

The defendants are, Kayceelyn Remorin, Jonylyn Agulto, Donny Hermanto, Guo Bin, Darwa Esmael, Lari Tayac, Jhena Samiento, Jessa Sai Chui, Rain Torida, and Kimbaley Nisperos.

Others are, Winnie De Jesus, Shairah Reyes, Gladys Joy, May Iba, Jean Calaga, Huo Wen Jie, Zhao Sui Tao, Gong Yua, and Anjeannet Topacio.

The defendants, all pleaded not guilty to the charge.

The prosecutor, Mr N.K. Ukoha, urged the court to also enter a plea of not guilty, against a company, Genting Internation C.O. Ltd, also allegedly linked to the charge, but not represented by counsel.

Following the defendants’ plea, the prosecutor urged the court to remand them in a correctional facility, pending trial.

But the Defence Counsel, Mrs Bridget Omoteno, raised objection, and urged the court to grant a short adjournment to enable parties explore plea bargain option.

Kakaki, however, granted the prosecutor’s request and ordered the remand of the defendants in custody of the correctional service, pending trial.

The Judge adjourned the case until the March 18 and March 20, for trial.

According to the charge, the defendants and the company allegedly committed the offence on Dec. 18, 2024, in Lagos.

They were said to have wilfully caused to be accessed, computer systems organised to seriously destabilise the economic and social structure of Nigeria, when they procured Nigerian youths for identity theft.

They were alleged to have done so, with the intent to gain financial advantage for themselves.

The offences, according to the prosecutor, contravene the provisions of sections 18, 22, and 27 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition) Act, 2015 (as amended) (NAN)

Edited by Kevin Okunzuwa

Judiciary

ECOWAS Court orders Nigeria to pay N52m to eviction victims

178 total views today

By Mark Longyen

The ECOWAS Court has ordered Nigeria to pay two million naira compensation each to 26 people who were forcibly evicted from various communities in Lagos and Rivers between 2004 and 2013.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the applicants, Mr Edwin Lenyie and 25 others had filed the suit No: ECW/CCJ/APP/34/17), seeking the enforcement of their fundamental human rights.

They also prayed the court to compel the Nigerian government to pay them compensation for forcefully evicting them from their communities without prior notice, compensation, or alternative shelter, rendering them homeless.

Delivering judgment on Thursday, the court held that the Nigerian government failed in its responsibility to ensure access to legal remedies for the victims.

According to the community court, the action of the Nigerian government was in violation of Article 7 of the African Charter Charter on Human and People’s Rights.

It held that the Applicants’ rights under Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), which guarantees the right to a fair trial and access to justice, were violated.

The court said that the hearings on the matter, which were held by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) “were never concluded, and no alternative means of redress were provided for them”.

“Inspite of initial hearings by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in 2014, the proceedings were suspended indefinitely, leaving the Applicants without legal recourse,” the court said.

The court further dismissed Nigeria’s objections that the Applicants should have pursued their claims in Nigerian courts and on jurisdiction, saying it had the locus standi to entertain the case.

It further struck out the NHRC as a respondent in the case, and ordered that the Federal Government must bear full responsibility for the actions of its agencies.

The three-member panel of the court which has Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding); Sengu Koroma (judge rapporteur); and Gberi-Bè Ouattara (member) held that the compensation/reparation would ensure that justice is served to the victims.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

Judiciary

ECOWAS Court dismisses suit against FG over shrine destruction

188 total views today

By Mark Longyen

The ECOWAS Court on Thursday dismissed a suit filed by a Nigerian woman, Lovina Adonor, seeking to compel the Federal Government to pay her reparation for the destruction of her shrine.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Adonor, a self-acclaimed priestess, had filed the suit marked: ECW/CCJ/APP/61/22, seeking the enforcement of her fundamental human rights against Nigeria.

Adonor had in her submission claimed that her shrine was attacked and vandalised by some private individuals, forcing her to flee the community due to threats to her life.

She also alleged that the Nigerian government failed to provide adequate protection, investigate her complaints, or address the destruction of her religious materials and property.

According to the applicant, the incident was tantamount to the violation of her right to propagate her religion, the right to security, and the right to own property without discrimination.

She had argued that such violated rights were encapsulated under ECOWAS basic texts and international human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR).

Delivering judgment, however, Justice Sengu Koroma, the Judge Rapporteur, declined to grant the applicant’s prayer for any reparations or order for perpetual injunction against the respondent.

The court held that Adonor failed to establish a direct connection between the alleged violation of her rights and the Nigerian government or its agents.

The court further held that Nigeria had adequately investigated the complaints, while the individuals responsible for the alleged acts were private citizens, who had been detained and later released after due process.

“Additionally, the Applicant’s claims under Article 3, 6, 12, 14, and 21 of the ACHPR are dismissed for lack of facts sufficient and evidence to warrant relief sought thereunder.

“Furthermore, the National laws, such as Section 43 of the Nigerian Constitution, are outside of the Court competence,” the court said.

The court explained that after reviewing both parties’ submissions, it affirmed its jurisdiction to entertain the suit because the case pertained to alleged human rights violations within an ECOWAS member state.

It added that the application was admissible, because the Applicant had sufficiently demonstrated her victim status, and also met the necessary procedural requirements.

The three-member panel of the court which has Justices Ricardo Gonçalves (presiding); Sengu Koroma (rapporteur); and Edward Asante (member), ordered that both parties would bear their own costs.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

Judiciary

Man who allegedly burnt wife, brother-in-law to death knows fate Feb. 27

207 total views today

Judgment

By Adenike Ayodele

A Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS) has reserved judgment until Feb. 27 in the case of a 50-year-old man, Benjamin Ogudoro, who allegedly burnt his wife and brother-in-law to death.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the judgment, which was slated for Feb. 13, before Justice Sherifat Sonaike, could not be read for undisclosed reasons.

Sonaike, thereafter, adjourned the judgment until Feb.27.

Ogundoro was arraigned on Dec. 7, 2022 by the Lagos State Government on a four-count charge bordering on murder.

The prosecution alleged the defendant killed his wife, Chinyere, who had just returned from Scotland and her brother, Ifeanyi, by setting them ablaze.

The prosecution said the incident happened on April 1, 2022, about 3.30 a.m, at House 5, Zone 7, Oteyi Garden Estate, Abule Ado in the Amuwo Odofin area of Lagos.

The state alleged that the defendant poured petrol on the bodies of his wife, his brother-in-law, the mattress and set them ablaze while they were asleep.

According to the prosecution, the alleged offences violated Sections 223 and 341 of the criminal law of Lagos State, 2015. (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Joe Idika

Judiciary

Counsel file several objections to charge against Otudeko, others

188 total views today

By Sandra Umeh

Counsel in the case of alleged fraud preferred against the Chairman of Honeywell Group, Oba Otudeko, on Thursday, filed several preliminary objections to the suit before the Federal High Court in Lagos.

The preliminary objections are from Otudeko and others charged along with him.

The applications included those challenging the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the case, those asking for stay of arraignment, and those seeking quashing of the charge.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) preferred a 13-count charge against Otudeko and a former Managing Director of First Bank Plc., Olabisi Onasanya.

Also charged is a former member of the board of Honeywell Group, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

The N6.2 billion fraud charge is marked FHC/L/20C/2025 and before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke.

NAN reports that the case was scheduled for arraignment on Jan. 20, but the defendants were absent on the grounds that the EFCC had not served them with the charge.

Their counsel had argued that they only got “wind” of the case on the pages of newspapers.

The court consequently directed service of the charge by substituted means, and adjourned the case.

On Thursday, Mr Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN) announced appearance for EFCC and Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) announced appearance for Otudeko, while Mr Olasupo Shashore (SAN) appeared for Onasanya.

Mr Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN) appeared for Akintayo, while Mr Ade Adedeji (SAN) aanounced appearance for Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

Mr Babajide Koku (SAN) announced appearance for the nominal complainant, First Bank of Nigeria.

Olanipekun informed the court of an application he filed on behalf of Otudeko and dated Jan. 28 which, he said, was served on EFCC on Jan. 29.

He also told the court that there was an affidavit dated Feb. 1 which gave details of Otudeko’s absence in court.

Other defence counsel briefly introduced their applications before the court.

In response, EFCC counsel, told the court that he had complied with the court’s directive on substituted service of the charge on the first, third and fourth defendants and had attached a proof of service.

He also told the court that he received processes from Olanipekun confirming that Otudeko was not within the court’s jurisdiction.

Oyedepo added that he received a “harvest of motions” from defence counsel in the suit, objecting to the suit.

He said it was important to know when the parties could return to the court for arraignment of the defendants since the first defendant was absent.

In response, Olanipekun informed the court that he had served an application on the prosecution on behalf of Otudeko, adding that EFCC had seven days to reply.

He argued that a court had to, first, decide whether it had jurisdiction to entertain the case.

He urged the court to give a date for hearing of the defendants’ applications.

In response, Oyedepo argued that the arraignment of the defendants ought to be taken first before any applications.

He cited the Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of Yahaya Bello as well as the provisions of Section 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.

He submitted that the court should adjourn the case for arraignment of the defendants.

In further response, Olanipekun argued that it was important for the parties to refrain from “pulling cases by a strand of hair”.

Citing judicial authorities decided after the enactment of the ACJA, including Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) versus Idahosa and Shema Ibrahim versus FRN, he argued that the court dispensed with the appearance of the defendants in both cases.

On his part, counsel to the third defendant, Ogunwumiju, also argued that it was important for the court to first take the objection by  defence in the interest of justice.

Citing the provisions of Edet versus State as well as Section 412(3) of the ACJA, he submitted that arraigning the defendants before hearing their objections would be prejudicial.

In the same vein, counsel to the second defendant, Shashore, urged the court to hear the applications of defence.

According to him, the fourth defendant seeks an application staying arraignment, and another quashing the charge.

He argued that it would be unfair to insist that the court would take the  defendants’ pleas to a charge that might be quashed.

He added that it was important for the court to first decide whether there was merit in doing same.

Counsel to the fourth defendant, Adedeji, argued on the authority of Nwadike versus FRN that court processes must not be made to oppress citizens.

He argued that the case of Yahaya Bello as cited by prosecution was not relevant to the suit, neither was the provisions of Section 396(3) of ACJA.

Adedeji said that the defendants ought not to face fraud trial for a civil transaction.

In reply, Oyedepo said that the cases as cited by defence counsel were out of context and did not reflect the charge.

He urged the court to make an order directing Otudeko to be present in court on the next adjourned date.

At this point, Olanipekun informed the court that Otudeko was under medical review and was advised to remain in the United Kingdom until a comprehensive review and medical advice.

He urged the court not to make such an order, but to adjourn the case for hearing of the applications.

The judge adjourned the case until March 17 for ruling on the arguments. (NAN) (www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Chidinma Agu/Ijeoma Popoola

Judiciary

PPDC unveils initiative to reduce prison congestion

410 total views today

By Ibironke Ariyo

The Public and Private Development Centre (PPDC) has launched an initiative aimed at reducing prison congestion and promoting access to justice for indigent inmates in Nigeria.

The initiative, named, “Reforming Pre-trial Detention in Nigeria Project,” was introduced by the organisation’s Chief Executive Officer, Lucy Abagi.

She made the announcement during a visit to law clinics at the University of Abuja and Philomath University, in Abuja.

Abagi explained that the project was designed to addressed the issue of Awaiting Trial Persons (ATPs) in custody.

She said the initiatives supported by the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, involved deploying law clinicians to prisons to provide free legal services such as legal counselling, court representation, and advocacy for inmates.

Abagi highlighted the pressing issue of prison congestion in Nigeria, noting that over 60,000 inmates were currently awaiting trial.

She stressed that the initiative was designed to reduce this backlog by providing legal services to indigent inmates.

“The programme also aims to train law students and young lawyers to offer pro bono services, further increasing access to justice.

“The training of law students and young lawyers is critical to expanding the pool of legal support for inmates.

“The initiative, which will run until 2026 with the possibility of extension, is set to be implemented in 10 locations across five states, including Kaduna, Nasarawa, Lagos, Abuja, and Adamawa,” Abagi said.

Abagi called for support from the government and other stakeholders, urging them to contribute to the initiative’s success.

She believed the initiative would make a significant impact on thousands of inmates and contribute to the reform of the Nigerian justice system.

“We urge the government and other stakeholders to support this cause, as it has the potential to make a real difference in the lives of inmates across the country.

‘”By working together, we can promote access to justice and reduce prison congestion in Nigeria,” Abagi urged.

The Vice Chancellor of Philomath University, Prof. Gylych Jelilov, speaking during the event, commended the initiative and assured that donated items would be used effectively at the Kuje Custodial Centre and across Nigeria.

Similarly, Prof. Uwakwe Abugu, Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Abuja, lauded the PPDC and the American Embassy for their donations.

He noted that the equipment would aid in providing justice to inmates who previously lacked access to legal assistance.

“The equipment they donated to us is coming at the nick of time, and as we all know, Nigeria needs access to justice more than any other country in Africa.

“Our law clinics have been working hard, but we faced many constraints. However, with this equipment, it will go a long way in ensuring that those who need intervention receive it. We are going to do more,” he assured.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the event saw the deployment of various items, including computers, furniture, printers, cameras, files, and solar facilities, which will support the initiative’s legal services.(NAN)

Edited by Abiemwense Moru

Court symbol
Judiciary

Retiree drags in-law to court for keeping wife

418 total views today

By Aisha Gambo

A retiree, Sani Yakubu, on Thursday dragged his wife’s grandmother, Hajiya Fatima, to a Shari’a Court sitting in Rigasa, Kaduna, for refusing to allow his wife to return to his house.

The complainant told the court that his wife, Sumayya Sani, had left their matrimonial home in December 2024, almost two months after she gave birth.

“My wife told me that she was going to meet some of her relatives and then go back home because she couldn’t continue staying with me.

“She later said that I should write a divorce letter. When she didn’t come back home that day, I went to her family’s house the following day and her grandmother insisted I give her a divorce letter,” he said.

He prayed the court to intervene in the matter and compel Fatima to allow his wife to return to her matrimonial home.

On her part, the defendant told the court that she refused to allow her granddaughter to return to the complainant because he didn’t provide her food and failed to slaughter a ram after she gave birth to a baby.

Yakubu, however, denied not providing food for his wife, but agreed to not slaughtering a ram when she delivered a baby due to financial constraints.

When asked if what her grandmother said was true, the wife, who was also in court, answered in the affirmative, insisting that her husband was financially buoyant but just refused to provide for her.

“It is my decision not to go back to him and my grandmother supported me. I didn’t love him in the first instance; she was the one who insisted that I should marry him.

“Anytime I asked for money, he would say he didn’t have but he would send money to his girlfriend, maintaining that he was going to marry another wife,” she said.

The Judge, Malam Muhammad Adamu, ordered Sumayya to return to her matrimonial home, saying that not slaughtering a ram for the baby was not a tangible reason for divorce.

He ordered the complainant to continue to persuade his wife by behaving well to her and the child until she returned to her matrimonial home. (NAN) (www.nannews.ng)

Edited by ‘Wale Sadeeq

Judiciary

Order I-G to withdraw police from private citizens- plaintiff

411 total views today

 

By Taiye Agbaje

A 79-year-old woman, Colleen Yesufu, has prayed a Federal High Court in Abuja to order the Inspector-General (I-G) of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, to withdraw police officers attached to private citizens.

 

Yesufu, who told the court in a suit filed by her lawyer, Maxwell Opara, also prayed for an order of perpetual injunction on the I-G from reassigning any member of the Police as VIP escorts to private individual, including Mrs Bilikisu Aliyu.

 

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Yesufu, a businesswoman, had, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/26/2025, sued the President, I-G and Mrs Aliyu (A.K.A. Rebecca Omokamo Godwin Isaac) as 1st to 3rd respondents.

 

She also listed the National Police Council and NPF as 4th to 5th respondents respectively.

 

Yesufu, in the originating summons filed on Jan. 9 by Opara, wants the court to determine the status of President Bola Tinubu’s executive directive made on Nov. 13, 2023.

The directive was for the I-G to immediately withdraw policemen from VIPs who are not statutorily entitled to police escort.

 

“Whether having regards to the provisions of Section 4 of the Police Act, the duties of the 5 defendant (NPF) ought to be to the general public of the state rather than a selected few.

 

“Whether or not it will be lawful for the 2nd defendant (I-G) to immediately withdraw the police VIP escorts attached to the 3rd defendant (Aliyu).”

 

The applicant, who sought five reliefs, urged the court to make a declaration that Tinubu’s executive directive is valid and subsisting.

 

She sought a declaration that it will be lawful for the 2nd defendant to immediately withdraw the police VIP escorts attached to the 3rd defendant (Aliyu).

 

“An order directing the 2nd defendant to immediately withdraw all VIP Police escorts attached to the 3rd defendant and others, other than those statutorily entitled to them in Nigeria.

 

“An order of perpetual injunction on the 2nd defendant from reassigning any member of the 5th defendant as VIP escorts to the 3rd defendant or any other private individual in Nigeria.”

 

Yesufu, in an affidavit she deposed to, averred that on Nov. 13, 2023, Tinubu ordered the I-G to immediately withdraw all personnel of the NPF designated as VIPs escorts from all citizens other than those statutorily entitled to them.

 

She said the NPF issued a press statement published in the media confirming the president’s executive directive and their compliance forthwith.

 

The plaintiff, however, alleged that in spite of  the executive directive, the I-G had failed, refused and/or neglected to comply with the directive.

 

She said that Aliyu, who is a private citizen like her, has been using the police personnel purportedly attached to her as VIP escort by the I-G to intimidate, harass and threaten her.

 

She further alleged that Aliyu had been using the officers attached to her to evade lawful invitations from other law enforcement agencies like the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

 

“The 3rd defendant currently has a pending case of fraud pending at the EFCC and has been evading service of invitation and arrest by the commission using the police VIP escort and directing them as personal employees,” she averred.

 

Yesufu said the I-G, in spite of so many demands, petitions and complaints by her, had reluctantly refused to comply with the standing directive of the president, thereby allowing individuals to privately utilise the NPF.

 

The case was yet to be assigned to a judge as at the time of filing the report.(NAN)(www.namnews.ng)

edited by Sadiya Hamza

Court symbol
Judiciary

Alleged fraud: Court admits oil magnate, Akintoye, to N500m bail

440 total views today

 

By Taiye Agbaje

A Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, admitted Mr Akindele Akintoye, Founder and Chairman of Platform Capital Investment Partners Limited, to a N500 million bail with two sureties in like sum.

Justice Emeka Nwite, in a ruling held that though he was not unmindful of the serious nature of the offence preferred against the defendant, but he was minded to grant the bail in the interest of justice.

Justice Nwite, who ordered that the two sureties shall depose to affidavit of means, directed that the sureties must have landed property within the jurisdiction of the court and the documents deposited with the deputy registrar of the court.

He ordered that all his international passports be deposited with the registrar and shall not travel without the permission of the court.

He also ordered that Akintoye and the sureties shall deposit two recent passport photographs each and the residence of the sureties verified by the court registrar.

The judge, who ordered that both the prosecution and defence counsel shall supervise and interview the proposed sureties before Akintoye is released on bail, adjourned the matter until March 4 for trial.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Nwite had, on Dec. 31, 2024, fixed today for ruling after Esedo and Martha Babatunde, who appeared for the EFCC, argued their case for and against the bail application.

Esedo, while moving the application, had posed a question whether the defendant was entitled to bail.

The lawyer argued that issues of bail is a matter of discretion which is exercised judicially and judiciously by the court.

He said Akintoye is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty, adding that he had met all the requirements for granting bail.

Esedo assured that if granted bail, the defendant would not jump bail and was ready to stand his trial.

Besides, he said that the anti-graft agency had already concluded its investigation, having held him for 55 days.

Babatunde, who vehemently opposed the bail plea, argued that Sections 158 and 162 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) did not impose on the court to grant bail.

The lawyer, who argued that a bail is not granted as a matter of must, said it is the duty of the applicant to place sufficient evidence before the court.

She argued that the evidence against Akintoye was weighty as it bordered on serious national economic sabotage and financial crime which is currently ravaging the country.

She said if admitted to bail, Akintoye would not attend trial, describing him as a flight risk.

NAN reports that Akintoye, in the four-count charge, was alleged to have diverted a sum of $26,,060, 406.00 US dollars meant to build a refinery in Brass, Bayelsa.

Akintoye, Platform Capital Investment Partners Limited and Duport Midstream Company Limited, where he is also the Managing Director and CEO, were sued as 1st to 3rd defendants respectively, by the anti-graft agency.

The EFCC, in the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/641/V/2024 dated and filed on Dec. 19 by its lawyer, Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, alleged that Akintoye and Platform Capital Investment Partners Limited had between December, 2020 and February, 2021, indirectly retained 16 million dollars.

The amount, the EFCC said, was part of the funds dishonestly converted from the money paid by the Nigerian Content Development and Monitoring Board (NCDMB) Capacity Development Intervention Company Ltd to Atlantic International Refinery and Petrochemical Limited as investment.

The said a sum of $16, 006, 000 is alleged to constitute proceed of unlawful activity.

The offence, EFCC said, is contrary to Section 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 (as amended) by (Act No. 1 of 20!2) and punishable under Section [5(3) of the same Act, among other counts.(NAN)

edited by Sadiya Hamza

Judiciary

Land commissioner defends state in court

405 total views today

 

By Rita Iliya

The Niger Commissioner for Land and Survey, Mr Maurice Magaji, on Wednesday appeared in Minna High Court 2 to defend the state government in a land case.

 

He disclosed this in an interview with newsmen shortly after his appearance in the court.

 

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the case involved the state government’s interest in acquiring land around Gurara community.

 

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the land is situated at the Gurara waterfall, which is to be developed into a world-class resort.

 

“There are many cases on our table, and my active participation will help expedite the resolution process.

 

“As a lawyer, I will continue to appear in court when necessary, defending the government and ensuring that we meet the expectations of our people.”

 

The case was filed by eight plaintiffs from Gurara community in Nov. 2024 against the state governor and commissioner as the first and second defendants.

 

Magaji added that his presence in court was necessitated by the paucity of lawyers handling cases for the ministry and also to encourage the counsels to put in their best.

 

“Today, I appeared in court to advocate for the state on this matter of land acquisition.

 

“My appearance is not just because of the limited number of lawyers we have but also to boost the morale of our legal team and ensure that cases are handled with the utmost commitment,” he said.

 

The commissioner emphasised that his decision to personally appear in court was aimed at strengthening the ministry’s defense in critical land matters.

 

Magaji further stated that this proactive step would occasionally involve him directly participating in court proceedings as it involves the ministry.

 

He noted that his role as commissioner goes beyond administrative duties such as treating files, adding that he intended to actively defend the state’s interests in court.

 

Magaji further noted that the ministry was grappling with numerous unresolved legal cases, some of which have dragged on for years.

 

According to him, this is about being proactive and ensuring that we do not allow cases to linger indefinitely.”(NAN)

Edited by Ismail Abdulaziz

X
Welcome to NAN
Need help? Choose an option below and let me be your assistant.
Email SubscriptionSite SearchSend Us Email