The amendment of the Electoral Act that is in the works in the National Assembly has called into question again the orientation of this generation of politicians. When properly scrutinised, it is easy to see that it is a selfish exercise presented to the public as law-making.
It is a demonstration of how persons with a severely limited view of history could manipulate institutions for their own here and now purposes. And the lawmakers in Abuja are going about the issue in a manner that should rankle all democratic sensibilities. There are bills for laws for the good of the people that have been pending in the National Assembly, but this one that is essentially for the benefit of the legislators appears to be their priority item now.
The law being tabled at the House of Representatives seeks to amend the Electoral Act 2010 with some curious clauses. The purposes include making federal legislators automatic members of the National Executive Council (NEC) of their respective political parties. If the bill sails through, half of the members of the NEC would form a quorum and two-thirds would be required for decision making.
Meanwhile, among the crucial decisions that the body would take is the one on nomination of candidates for election. So it is all about intra-party politics. It is obvious that if the Abuja legislators have their way, the overwhelming majority of them who happen to be members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) would dominate the NEC of that party.
Before now, moves to insert into the law a "right of first refusal" for lawmakers seeking re-election generated an outrage. The essence of such moves is to put the incumbent legislators above any legitimate challenge from their fellow party members who might also wish to seek the party tickets in the primaries that should be conducted by the party for the election.
It is clear that the sponsors of the bill are employing the weapons of lawmaking in what is otherwise a legitimate intra-party struggle for the control of the structures of influence and decision-making. In other words, as it has been the case in recent times what should ordinarily be an internal issue for a political party has now been elevated into a national issue.
It would, of course, be interesting to know the position of the legislators from other parties to this egregious manipulation of the law-making process. Hitherto, they have not been vehement in opposing moves by members of the National Assembly using the institutions for their own benefits at the expense of the public.
In other climes from where Nigeria is supposed to be borrowing the institutionalisation of liberal democracy, laws are made to promote the values that are beneficial to the society and to deepen democratic culture. There are constitutions that are centuries old. Amendments are made when national interest makes it imperative to do so and when the public need compels it.
Even where there is no written constitution, conventions and indeed the democratic practices inherited by the contemporary politicians serve as guides in even thorny situations. Not so here, laws are made with the contemporary office holders in mind. It is about those who make the laws and not overarching public interest.
Today, PDP has the majority of the federal legislators as its members. Nothing says that such a situation is decreed to be forever. Otherwise, why should the composition of the executive councils of political parties be the business of lawmakers at a time when pressing national issues are left unaddressed?
In a way, what the politicians in Abuja are attempting to do is reminiscent of the military days when a General decreed that party constitutions and even programmes should be written for them. The regime even crafted ideological nomenclatures for the parties. One was said to be "a little to the right" while the other had to be "a little to the left".
The regime claimed to be omniscient in matters of party formation, organisation and programming. But then it was understood that only a military dictatorship could embark on such a wild political experiment. It is inexplicable that those who claim to be products of a democratic process could contemplate making laws to put themselves at an advantage over their political rivals. It is distressing to observe that the military mentality lingers even after 11 years of civil rule.
Pray, why should the quorum of a political party's meeting written into the law of the federation? What if a party does not want its structures along the pattern of the PDP? A party may decide it wants slim structures to suit its organisational purpose. As an independent organisation, the party should have such rights.
A party may even decide it does not need a national executive council. Another party may decide that its national executive membership should all be open to internal party elections.
To make laws specifically for the benefit of contemporary lawmakers only is extremely selfish. It is antithetical to the spirit of institution building. The constitution empowers the National Assembly to make laws for the good of the federation. A concomitant to that enormous power is a grave responsibility that the lawmakers would perform their duties with the interest of the people being supreme in the process; it is assumed that the first consideration in the business of lawmaking would be national interest and not the political ambitions of those making the law.
Now, contrary to the popular perception, corruption is not only about looting the public treasury (which doubtless is a great issue of the moment); the current attempt to abuse legislative power in Abuja is a monumental act of corruption. Here we are talking of corruption of power and process. So it is not naira alone that is involved in corruption, values also can also be corrupted. To be sure, this is not the first time that the sacred process of law-making would be corrupted in Abuja.
The most remarkable one in recent history was the failed attempt by former President Olusegun Obasanjo to use the National Assembly to elongate his stay in power by amending the constitution to permit a third term for the president and governors. It is now little remembered that there were a lot of good items on the agenda of that constitution review process. But the whole exercise was rejected just to prevent the third term clause being smuggled into the package.
The National Assembly members should be wary of poisoning the process of the Electoral Act this time with some self-serving insertions.
For clarity, federal legislators and others have the right to struggle with other members in their respective parties be they president, governors or party apparatchiks. It is in their place to do so. However, they should not under the pretext of fighting for internal party democracy make laws that serve their selfish motives.
The National Assembly has no business making laws for the composition of party committees. Political parties should make their internal rules and build their structures as they deem fit provided they do so in conformity with the constitution and other relevant laws.
Kayode Komolafe
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Uduaghan Sacked! New Elections Ordered!
There is justice in the world, A federal appeal court in Benin, Edo state has annulled the election of Delta State governor, Emmanuel Uduaghan, and subsequently ordered fresh elections in the state within 90 days.The decision followed the appeal brought by the Great Ogboru against Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan, the current governor of the state. The appeal panel earlier dismissed the petition brought by AC candidate, Okocha, where he sought the nullification of Uduaghan's election because of his exclusion from the 2007 election by INEC.The Edo state capital erupted in jubilation over the verdict. The speaker of the house will step in as "Acting governor" pending the next election.The fresh election will also act as the first major test for the newly constituted Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), headed by radical university professor, Mahmud Jega, a former lecturer, vice chancellor at Bayero University in Kano.
Senate is wrong to cite US law
What is your reaction to the argument of the Senate spokesperson that the US democracy, which Nigeria is copying, has a ruling by the Supreme Court that the president's assent is not required to alter the constitution?
The American Law on Constitution Amendment and the Nigerian law on the same issue are radically different. Article V of the US Constitution, which governs Amendment in that country, was what the US Supreme Court interpreted. While it makes ratification of amendment proposals by required number of State Congresses at the end of the Amendment, Section 9(2) of CFRN 1999, which governs Constitution Alteration in Nigeria, requires that an Act must be passed by the National Assembly to make amendment effective. So here, when the required number of the State Houses of Assembly has supported a proposal to amend, the condition precedent for the National Assembly to pass the law has been met.
Put simply, in the US, no Act of Congress is required for amendment; in Nigeria, an Act is required. Since no Act is required in the US, the US president has nothing to assent to. In fact, the US Constitution expressly said amendment becomes valid as part of the Constitution once ratified by requisite number of State Congresses. In Nigeria, once an Act is passed by the National Assembly, it must go the way of all Acts; presidential assent or a veto thereof.
Note also that State Congresses can apply for amendment in the US and this has no place in Nigeria. Little wonder they don't amend with an Act. For example, where State Congresses propose an Amendment, can you still call it an Act? It should be a law! So they decided not to use law to amend! In Nigeria, you need a law passed by the National Assembly, an Act! This must follow the procedure for passing an Act, once the special condition precedent has been met. That's what I argued and won.
It is therefore wrong for the Senate spokesperson to apply a decision from the US on peculiar US Constitution to a peculiar Nigeria Constitution. This is why the Federal High Court held that US law does not apply.
Are there any precedents that can shed light on this judgement?
Yes. We have a very important Parliamentary precedent. A similar provision, as we have in Section 9(2), is contained in Section 4(2) of the 1960 Constitution. But when the First Republic Parliament wanted to amend the Constitution to alter Nigeria's territory in 1961 by bringing in Northern Cameroon, after the Plebiscite, they passed the Constitution First Amendment Act 1961. They took it to Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe for assent. Chief Dennis Osadebey was acting for Zik and he gave the assent. Fifty years later, we have a Parliament reacting differently to the successor of the 1960 provision for alteration! Instead of appealing to America, the National Assembly should have been appealing to this powerful local precedent! So, there are local precedents, both in Parliamentary practice and case law.
What are the implications of the judgement?
The implication is that Constitutionalism won. Rule of Law won. Between my client, Olisa Agbakoba, and the National Assembly, I think I will adopt General Yakubu Gowon's "No Victor No Vanquished."
Everybody, including the National Assembly, wants the Constitution to reign. We only disagreed on what it says to agree again. Now that the Court has decided, I believe the days of ignorance have passed and you don't trade blames.
The National Assembly should now take the inchoate amendment to the president for his assent. There is no negative effect for Nigeria. Everything already done under the Inchoate Amendment is intact. That's the meaning of Inchoate used by the judge.
The Senate intends to appeal this judgement; is this, in your opinion, the right thing to do?
The National Assembly has the constitutional right to appeal. If they do, we will meet them at the Court of Appeal and repeat our argument and even bring further points we later discovered on the point. But allowing the matter to continue to linger in the Courts may not be in national interest.
Chijioke Ogham-Emeka is a counsel to the Plaintiff.
By Ayodele Okulaja
The American Law on Constitution Amendment and the Nigerian law on the same issue are radically different. Article V of the US Constitution, which governs Amendment in that country, was what the US Supreme Court interpreted. While it makes ratification of amendment proposals by required number of State Congresses at the end of the Amendment, Section 9(2) of CFRN 1999, which governs Constitution Alteration in Nigeria, requires that an Act must be passed by the National Assembly to make amendment effective. So here, when the required number of the State Houses of Assembly has supported a proposal to amend, the condition precedent for the National Assembly to pass the law has been met.
Put simply, in the US, no Act of Congress is required for amendment; in Nigeria, an Act is required. Since no Act is required in the US, the US president has nothing to assent to. In fact, the US Constitution expressly said amendment becomes valid as part of the Constitution once ratified by requisite number of State Congresses. In Nigeria, once an Act is passed by the National Assembly, it must go the way of all Acts; presidential assent or a veto thereof.
Note also that State Congresses can apply for amendment in the US and this has no place in Nigeria. Little wonder they don't amend with an Act. For example, where State Congresses propose an Amendment, can you still call it an Act? It should be a law! So they decided not to use law to amend! In Nigeria, you need a law passed by the National Assembly, an Act! This must follow the procedure for passing an Act, once the special condition precedent has been met. That's what I argued and won.
It is therefore wrong for the Senate spokesperson to apply a decision from the US on peculiar US Constitution to a peculiar Nigeria Constitution. This is why the Federal High Court held that US law does not apply.
Are there any precedents that can shed light on this judgement?
Yes. We have a very important Parliamentary precedent. A similar provision, as we have in Section 9(2), is contained in Section 4(2) of the 1960 Constitution. But when the First Republic Parliament wanted to amend the Constitution to alter Nigeria's territory in 1961 by bringing in Northern Cameroon, after the Plebiscite, they passed the Constitution First Amendment Act 1961. They took it to Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe for assent. Chief Dennis Osadebey was acting for Zik and he gave the assent. Fifty years later, we have a Parliament reacting differently to the successor of the 1960 provision for alteration! Instead of appealing to America, the National Assembly should have been appealing to this powerful local precedent! So, there are local precedents, both in Parliamentary practice and case law.
What are the implications of the judgement?
The implication is that Constitutionalism won. Rule of Law won. Between my client, Olisa Agbakoba, and the National Assembly, I think I will adopt General Yakubu Gowon's "No Victor No Vanquished."
Everybody, including the National Assembly, wants the Constitution to reign. We only disagreed on what it says to agree again. Now that the Court has decided, I believe the days of ignorance have passed and you don't trade blames.
The National Assembly should now take the inchoate amendment to the president for his assent. There is no negative effect for Nigeria. Everything already done under the Inchoate Amendment is intact. That's the meaning of Inchoate used by the judge.
The Senate intends to appeal this judgement; is this, in your opinion, the right thing to do?
The National Assembly has the constitutional right to appeal. If they do, we will meet them at the Court of Appeal and repeat our argument and even bring further points we later discovered on the point. But allowing the matter to continue to linger in the Courts may not be in national interest.
Chijioke Ogham-Emeka is a counsel to the Plaintiff.
By Ayodele Okulaja
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Court sentences police corporal to death
By Ikechukwu NNOCHIRI, AbujaIt was end of the road for Corporal Gad Barminals yesterday as an Abuja high court sitting in Maitama, sentenced him to death following his involvement in an armed robbery attack that resulted in the death of an Abuja based taxi driver, Mr Paul Ojo.
Corporal Barminals was said to have arrested the deceased driver at gunpoint, took him to a secluded spot within the Airport road in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, pumped loads of bullets into his chest and made away with his Toyota Camry marked XA398RBC.
The lifeless body of the murdered cab driver was subsequently recovered from a ditch located close to Dantata Company, after the owner of the vehicle, one Abbas Akintayo, on May 25, 2005, reported to a police station situated at Lugbe a suburb in Abuja, that his driver was missing.
Luck, however, ran out of the daredevil police officer when he went to sell the stolen vehicle in Kaduna, where underground cops who posed as buyers, arrested and handed him over to the FCT command for interrogation.
Passing judgment on him yesterday, trial Justice Ishaq Bello, maintained that a confessional statement made by the convicted officer while under interrogation, disclosed that he was guilty of culpable homicide punishable by death.
The Judge waved aside an oral denial made by the accused person before the court, as flimsy, adding that he had ab_inition consented to committing the crime in his written statement tendered as part of the proof of evidence against him.
Justice Bello maintained that the convicted officer was not able to give a convincing alibi for himself nor tell the court where he was on the day the incident took place, stressing that the fact that he was caught on the point of selling the deceased man’s car indicted him to the crime.
Corporal Barminals, hitherto attached to the Loius Edet House in Abuja, in the said statement that nailed him, admitted robbing the deceased driver at gunpoint along the games village junction in Abuja.
He commandeered the murdered driver towards airport road and repeatedly shot him when he refused to let go of his car key.
According to him, “I was on a stop and search duty with my AK_47 very close to the games village junction that day when I stopped the vehicle and entered. Along the way, I asked the driver to stop and I give me the car key, when he refused and started fighting with me, I pushed him down and shot him”.
Despite a plea of allocutus made by his counsel, Mr A.A Aliyu yesterday to the effect that he was not only a first time offender but also the breadwinner of his family, the trial Judge, went ahead and ordered his death, inline with section 221 and 298 of the penal code.
According to the Judge, “going by the overwhelming evidence before me, I am convinced that there was an armed robbery and that the accused person conceived and executed it. The fact that he was arrested in the process of selling the stolen car in Kaduna lends credence to his confessional statement earlier tendered as exhibit_1 in this case.
“The plea that he is the bread winner of his family is inconsequential considering the gravity of the offence he committed. I will not loose sight of the fact that the deceased man might have also been an irreparable loss as breadwinner of his own family.
“The convict who should be a security to the society, by committing the offence does not deserve pity, moreover my hands are firmly tied by section 229 of the penal code which provides for death penalty in a case of culpable homicide like this, therefore, the convict is hereby sentenced to death according to the provisions of the law”, the Judge held.
Meantime, the convict immediately after the judgment yesterday, while clutching a copy of the holy Bible very close to his chest, started evangelism in the open court.
He quoted copiously from portions of the holy book that said there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus, even as he accused the Judge of passing judgment on him in error.
The convicted officer insisted that his travail was orchestrated by high_ranking police officers that he said had vowed to eliminate him, just as he denied writing the incriminating statement that was used against him.
Corporal Barminals was said to have arrested the deceased driver at gunpoint, took him to a secluded spot within the Airport road in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, pumped loads of bullets into his chest and made away with his Toyota Camry marked XA398RBC.
The lifeless body of the murdered cab driver was subsequently recovered from a ditch located close to Dantata Company, after the owner of the vehicle, one Abbas Akintayo, on May 25, 2005, reported to a police station situated at Lugbe a suburb in Abuja, that his driver was missing.
Luck, however, ran out of the daredevil police officer when he went to sell the stolen vehicle in Kaduna, where underground cops who posed as buyers, arrested and handed him over to the FCT command for interrogation.
Passing judgment on him yesterday, trial Justice Ishaq Bello, maintained that a confessional statement made by the convicted officer while under interrogation, disclosed that he was guilty of culpable homicide punishable by death.
The Judge waved aside an oral denial made by the accused person before the court, as flimsy, adding that he had ab_inition consented to committing the crime in his written statement tendered as part of the proof of evidence against him.
Justice Bello maintained that the convicted officer was not able to give a convincing alibi for himself nor tell the court where he was on the day the incident took place, stressing that the fact that he was caught on the point of selling the deceased man’s car indicted him to the crime.
Corporal Barminals, hitherto attached to the Loius Edet House in Abuja, in the said statement that nailed him, admitted robbing the deceased driver at gunpoint along the games village junction in Abuja.
He commandeered the murdered driver towards airport road and repeatedly shot him when he refused to let go of his car key.
According to him, “I was on a stop and search duty with my AK_47 very close to the games village junction that day when I stopped the vehicle and entered. Along the way, I asked the driver to stop and I give me the car key, when he refused and started fighting with me, I pushed him down and shot him”.
Despite a plea of allocutus made by his counsel, Mr A.A Aliyu yesterday to the effect that he was not only a first time offender but also the breadwinner of his family, the trial Judge, went ahead and ordered his death, inline with section 221 and 298 of the penal code.
According to the Judge, “going by the overwhelming evidence before me, I am convinced that there was an armed robbery and that the accused person conceived and executed it. The fact that he was arrested in the process of selling the stolen car in Kaduna lends credence to his confessional statement earlier tendered as exhibit_1 in this case.
“The plea that he is the bread winner of his family is inconsequential considering the gravity of the offence he committed. I will not loose sight of the fact that the deceased man might have also been an irreparable loss as breadwinner of his own family.
“The convict who should be a security to the society, by committing the offence does not deserve pity, moreover my hands are firmly tied by section 229 of the penal code which provides for death penalty in a case of culpable homicide like this, therefore, the convict is hereby sentenced to death according to the provisions of the law”, the Judge held.
Meantime, the convict immediately after the judgment yesterday, while clutching a copy of the holy Bible very close to his chest, started evangelism in the open court.
He quoted copiously from portions of the holy book that said there is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus, even as he accused the Judge of passing judgment on him in error.
The convicted officer insisted that his travail was orchestrated by high_ranking police officers that he said had vowed to eliminate him, just as he denied writing the incriminating statement that was used against him.
Confusion as police invade palace, shoot one, maim others
Confusion as police invade palace, shoot one, maim othersCrime Guard Oct 30, 2010
By Albert AkporCONFUSION, dejection and perhaps, frustration all best captured the state of mind of an embattled traditional ruler, Oba Gbolahan Akanbi Timson, the Jagunmolu of Shomolu\Bariga communities in Lagos state as Crime Guard arrived his palace strategically located on Ayoka Street in the area.
As he lifted his head in apparent retrospection laced with visible rage, all he could utter was, “They have done it again, the police; they have been here shooting and beating everybody because they could not find me. That same person who said he would not live to see me enjoy this throne, in spite of my court victories, has done it again!”
The palace invaded
Eyewitness account said the heavily armed policemen that invaded the palace to unleash terror were led by a Chief Superintendent of Police suspected to be the Divisional Police Officer in-charge of the area. Residents of the area, including guests of the royal father, fell victims to the invasion.
A French national, simply identified as Vincent, a 70_year_old second Republic Councillor, Pa Omoshebi Olayemi who were seated awaiting the arrival of the Oba when the warring policemen stormed the palace, were not spared.
Whereas, the foreigner was given the beating of his life with his clothes torn to shreds, the septuagenarian who was mistaken for the Oba was asked to frog jump before being hauled into a waiting van. He was later asked to jump down when it was discovered that he was not the man they wanted. No reason was given for this attack.
But the traditional ruler said he knew the source of the invasion, wondering, however, why they had to transfer the aggression to innocent and defenseless visitors to the palace.
Said he: “I know the man behind all this. He has started again. I thought with the court rulings, he would have soft-pedaled and back off. What they wanted to do was to assassinate me and install an Oba of his choice against the wishes of the people.
The court has ruled in favor of me and even restrained them from further harassing me.
Some times in June this year, another higher court awarded N3m as damages to me for their continuous violation of my fundamental rights. Another higher court has equally issued a mandamus to the state government, compelling it to issue me with the staff of office without further delay.
Embattled Oba Timson
But up till now, none has been complied with. Even in the face of this, I have complained to many quarters, against either the state government or the same man fanning the amber of destruction. For them to have resuscitated the aggression this morning at about 9.30am while I was still in bed is something I cannot understand.
While the shooting in my premises intensified, I sneaked out to see what was the problem, only to see armed policemen led by the DPO of Bariga harassing and beating everybody on sight.
I called him to find out what was amiss and he said they were looking for those that participated in a fight last week somewhere in Ilaje. I asked him the correlation between a fight in far away Ilaje community and those innocent people in the palace.
He then ordered his boys to calm down and vacate the palace. Then I went inside. About 10 minutes later, I was jolted by staccato of guns and the wailing of innocent people, among them were a 70- year- old second republic councillor and a passionate friend from France.
They shot at random and beat anybody as if there was war. By this time, I was afraid to come out because the shooting was too much. While at the penthouse, I heard gun shots piercing my bedroom windows. Perhaps, they thought I was sleeping there. They broke down doors, windows, all in frantic search for me.
In the process, the son of my gate man was shot in the leg while others were badly beaten. In between time, I could hear them saying, ‘though I may have won all the legal tussles, I would never be crowned an Oba in this community’. As they were leaving, they took away seven other innocent persons, including my driver.
On the ground were 19 shells of expended bullets. It was even gathered that when they discovered that the shells may be used as evidence against them, they started packing the ones outside.”
Apparently determined to defend the mandate of his people, Oba Timson, who seemed to have exhausted all known credible and legal means of resolving the unending animosity, said it was time he fought back his tormentors. “With what is happening now, I think they have pushed me to the wall. We will have to bounce back.
We will have to resist this unwarranted oppression with every tool within our reach since they have refused to abide by court orders. We will also let the world know that we are not weaklings. The mistake they are making is that they are taking the gentle stride of the tiger for cowardice”, he stated.
By Albert AkporCONFUSION, dejection and perhaps, frustration all best captured the state of mind of an embattled traditional ruler, Oba Gbolahan Akanbi Timson, the Jagunmolu of Shomolu\Bariga communities in Lagos state as Crime Guard arrived his palace strategically located on Ayoka Street in the area.
As he lifted his head in apparent retrospection laced with visible rage, all he could utter was, “They have done it again, the police; they have been here shooting and beating everybody because they could not find me. That same person who said he would not live to see me enjoy this throne, in spite of my court victories, has done it again!”
The palace invaded
Eyewitness account said the heavily armed policemen that invaded the palace to unleash terror were led by a Chief Superintendent of Police suspected to be the Divisional Police Officer in-charge of the area. Residents of the area, including guests of the royal father, fell victims to the invasion.
A French national, simply identified as Vincent, a 70_year_old second Republic Councillor, Pa Omoshebi Olayemi who were seated awaiting the arrival of the Oba when the warring policemen stormed the palace, were not spared.
Whereas, the foreigner was given the beating of his life with his clothes torn to shreds, the septuagenarian who was mistaken for the Oba was asked to frog jump before being hauled into a waiting van. He was later asked to jump down when it was discovered that he was not the man they wanted. No reason was given for this attack.
But the traditional ruler said he knew the source of the invasion, wondering, however, why they had to transfer the aggression to innocent and defenseless visitors to the palace.
Said he: “I know the man behind all this. He has started again. I thought with the court rulings, he would have soft-pedaled and back off. What they wanted to do was to assassinate me and install an Oba of his choice against the wishes of the people.
The court has ruled in favor of me and even restrained them from further harassing me.
Some times in June this year, another higher court awarded N3m as damages to me for their continuous violation of my fundamental rights. Another higher court has equally issued a mandamus to the state government, compelling it to issue me with the staff of office without further delay.
Embattled Oba Timson
But up till now, none has been complied with. Even in the face of this, I have complained to many quarters, against either the state government or the same man fanning the amber of destruction. For them to have resuscitated the aggression this morning at about 9.30am while I was still in bed is something I cannot understand.
While the shooting in my premises intensified, I sneaked out to see what was the problem, only to see armed policemen led by the DPO of Bariga harassing and beating everybody on sight.
I called him to find out what was amiss and he said they were looking for those that participated in a fight last week somewhere in Ilaje. I asked him the correlation between a fight in far away Ilaje community and those innocent people in the palace.
He then ordered his boys to calm down and vacate the palace. Then I went inside. About 10 minutes later, I was jolted by staccato of guns and the wailing of innocent people, among them were a 70- year- old second republic councillor and a passionate friend from France.
They shot at random and beat anybody as if there was war. By this time, I was afraid to come out because the shooting was too much. While at the penthouse, I heard gun shots piercing my bedroom windows. Perhaps, they thought I was sleeping there. They broke down doors, windows, all in frantic search for me.
In the process, the son of my gate man was shot in the leg while others were badly beaten. In between time, I could hear them saying, ‘though I may have won all the legal tussles, I would never be crowned an Oba in this community’. As they were leaving, they took away seven other innocent persons, including my driver.
On the ground were 19 shells of expended bullets. It was even gathered that when they discovered that the shells may be used as evidence against them, they started packing the ones outside.”
Apparently determined to defend the mandate of his people, Oba Timson, who seemed to have exhausted all known credible and legal means of resolving the unending animosity, said it was time he fought back his tormentors. “With what is happening now, I think they have pushed me to the wall. We will have to bounce back.
We will have to resist this unwarranted oppression with every tool within our reach since they have refused to abide by court orders. We will also let the world know that we are not weaklings. The mistake they are making is that they are taking the gentle stride of the tiger for cowardice”, he stated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
LinkWithin
LinkWithin