Can you please advice us or post dossiers or parts of constitution that comments on how panels are set up and how this particular panel was set up. To buttress your point.


Please I don't accept quotes from Lai Mohammad or the AC. I want quotes from the constitution.

Can you please advice us or post dossiers or parts of constitution that comments on how panels are set up and how this particular panel was set up. To buttress your point.


Please I don't accept quotes from Lai Mohammad or the AC. I want quotes from the constitution.

It's good you tell him otherwise he will quote the A.C version of the constitution to misinform and confuce people here

@McKren

Sure !  As soon as I can get a hold of a copy of the constitution (do you know of a link ?)


But you should understand that the executive arm cannot indict, that is the function of the judiciary. Infact, i think you know you are wrong on this, but you just don't want to admit it.

INEC has no legal grounds whatsoever to disqualify Atiku. We must learn to obey the rule of law in Nigeria.

I am simply not sure of how a adminastrative panel of enquiry must be set up, who must set it up and who actually set this one up.

However I ordinarily like to think a Judicial commision of enquiry is set up by a chief Judge but Administrative panel of enquiry by the president or state government.


that does not mean I am wrong, if you tell me what section of the constitution that dwells on this I will post it here right away cos I got a copy myself.

@GNature

Here you go

http://www.nigeria-law.org/ConstitutionOfTheFederalRepublicOfNigeria.htm

I'm still celebrating the great news

1. (1) This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on the authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

(2) The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any persons or group of persons take control of the Government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.

(3) If any other law is inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, this Constitution shall prevail, and that other law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.

2. (1) Nigeria is one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state to be known by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

(2) Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory.

So basically Atiku should just go and consume Cow Feces

@McKren

Please see quote below:

Source:  http://www.thetimesofnigeria.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1872&Itemid=81&PHPSESSID=e1f16924491a5c766bfef4e017

Iwu Charged To Uphold The Truth Or Resign       
BY Patricia Nwaolai     
DATE : Wednesday, 28 February 2007 
For saying that the Vice President Atiku Abubakar will not be on the ballot because, according to the words of the INEC Chairman, Maurice Iwu, “he is constitutionally barred”, the Atiku Abubakar Campaign Organisation has again expressed doubts about INEC Chairman Maurice Iwu’s capacity to conduct a free and fair elections in April.”


“Professor Iwu should have the courage to uphold the truth and abide by the Constitution and the law. He made his name in the academia and not the INEC.  So if he feels that he cannot resist the  enormous pressures from the  a desperate Presidency to manipulate the forthcoming elections he should resign honourably.  If he does that Nigerians will understand and remember him as one who tried to stand by the truth and deepen our democracy.  But if he succumbs to those pressures from the Presidency then he would have soiled his name forever.  The future of democracy in Nigeria rests on how well the upcoming elections are conducted and the Atiku Campaign strongly believes that Iwu does not have the moral integrity needed for this onerous task”, the campaign said.


"The Atiku Campaign Organisation wishes to restate unequivocally that only a court of law or a political party can disqualify a candidate from running for elective office, based on the provisions of the Constitution and the Electoral Act. We urge all Nigerians to ignore the innuendo and misleading statements emanating from both the Chairman of the EFCC, Nuhu Ribadu and Professor Maurice Iwu, INEC Chairman. Neither the EFCC nor INEC is empowered by their enabling legislations or the Nigerian Constitution to disqualify any candidate."


"The laws of Nigeria provide for an individual acting in his or her official capacity or an institution to disqualify any candidate, so that any citizen who feels his or her right has been infringed can sue for enforcement of his or her right. Logically therefore, the Constitution does not per se bar anyone from contesting because it is not a body corporate, as it cannot be sued."


"The candidacy of Vice President Atiku Abubakar as Presidential candidate of the Action Congress is clear: he has been validly nominated and has fulfilled all the constitutional provisions to contest for the post. However, in its desperate bid to derail his constitutionally guaranteed right to vote and be voted for, the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and the Presidency have marshaled all the coercive instruments of state and the federal might in an attempt to invent and sustain a charge against his person, through an evil EFCC Report that was hastily adopted by the Federal Executive Council after the Vice President has been asked to step out."


"Within 24 hours the FG constituted and published the Report of an Administrative Panel of Inquiry that handed out ‘indictments’ in a bid to satisfy section 137(i) of the Constitution that provided for the ineligibility of any person to contest for public office, so indicted by a court or a judicial or an administrative panel. The Vice president however not only appeared before the Senate Ad-Hoc Committee to absolve himself of any wrong doing but he also went to court to have the so-called ‘indictment’ annulled."


It will be recalled that a Lagos High Court had on November 27, 2006 declared reports of the EFCC and the Bayo Ojo Administrative Panel which allegedly indicted Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Otumba Fasewe, Umar Pariya and 13 others, over the handling of the PTDF funds and the gazette issued on them, as null and void and none existent in law.

Earlier on October 20, 2006 Justice Goodluck of the Abuja High Court had ruled that the Bayo Ojo Panel was not an Administrative Panel as conceived by the Constitution

in a case filed by Umar Pariya, Personal Assistant to the Vice President, and set aside the original EFCC Report and the Panel Report as null and void. Last month, another Abuja High Court gave an injunction that restrained INEC from screening candidates for the April Elections. It is well known that the so-called Bayo Ojo Panel breached all known procedures for setting up such panels, thereby making it a nullity, as the courts rightly did.


"We remind both the INEC and the EFCC that both the FG and the EFCC recognized the ruling of the Lagos High Court by appealing against it through the Attoney General of the Federation. And unless and until there is a contrary ruling  there is no indictment and, therefore, Atiku’s candidacy remain unassailable. INEC Chairman cannot choose which court ruling to obey and if he cannot resist the pressure from the powers that be, he should resign honourably and put the matter in the public domain.  And he must stop confusing the Nigerian public and soiling his reputation. Nigerians expect their electoral umpire, Professor Iwu, to be able to tell the truth on a matter as simple and clear as the INEC’s powers under the Constitution and the Electoral Law."

As you can see, a judge concluded that the administrative panel was not as conceived by the constitution

I pleaded with you to quote the constitution and not Lai Mohammad or AC. I have even provided you a link to the constitution.

@McKren

Don't you believe the judge's interpretation of the constitution ?  Two different judges came to the same conclusion.

I told you the panel was illegal.

See the quote below:


Source:  http://www.nigerianmuse.com/articles/?u=The_landmark_judgment_and_Atikus_political_future_by_Ladi_Ibrahim.htm&PHPSESSID=63cd96cc7765cdf1b3faf46a36c4335f

DAILY TRUST

MONDAY, DECEMBER 04, 2006 / Zhul-Qiddah 14, 1427 A. H             

OPINION

The landmark judgment and Atiku's political future
By Ladi Ibrahim

Vice President Atiku Abubakar appeared the major winner in a Lagos State High Court ruling dismissing the report of the Administrative Panel of Enquiry into the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF), which had also indicted former presidential confidante and friend, Otunba Oyewole Fasawe. If the ruling stands, the vice president could legally contest next year's presidential election which President Olusegun Obasanjo from whom he is estranged had strenuously sought to stop him.

In a case brought by Fasawe against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) whose report formed the basis of the indictment of the vice president and Fasawe, Justice Inumidun Akande said the work of the panel set up by President Obasanjo and headed by Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, Chief Bayo Ojo, amounted to an infringement on the powers of the judiciary and the principle of separation of powers. It said the panel's report amounted to a gross abuse of executive powers.

The administrative panel report which was immediately gazetted indicted the vice president who suspected that it was a ploy to stop him from contesting the presidential election and then went to court to challenge its validity. The ruling by the Lagos court appeared to have dealt a serious blow to the attempts to stop the vice president from contesting the election. The EFCC also received some hard knocks as the judge ordered that it should stop harassing, arresting or detaining him.

Justice Akande in the ruling dug into the statute books, emphasizing the roles, duties and laws governing EFCC which she said the body had grossly violated. Fasawe's travails began on September 29, 2005 when he was arrested and taken to Abuja. He was incarcerated and detained until December 17, 2005. He was accused of obtaining some banking facilities from Trans-International , Ibadan without sufficient collateral. On June 10, 2006, Fasawe was again arrested by the EFCC and taken to the police headquarters in Abuja where he was detained. He was allowed some fresh air on July 17, 2006, but was again arrested on August 23, 2006 at his residence in Lagos with an order that he should be locked up at SSS office at Shangisha. This time, he was accused of illegally using funds from the Petroleum Technology Development Funds (PTDF). His companies Netlink Digital Television and Mofas Shipping were also indicted. The administrative panel of inquiry on September 5, 2006 indicted Otunba Fasawe and accused him of embezzling and mismanaging PTDF funds, and said he should be prosecuted. The report was subsequently ratified by the Federal Executive Council meeting presided over by President Obasanjo on September 6, 2006.

Protesting his indictment, Fasawe went to the Lagos High Court seeking redress, and urged the court to order the EFCC to stop arresting him and to release his cars and title documents. He also asked for N500 million as exemplary and aggravated damages.

Justice Akande noted that the action of EFCC in arresting and detaining Otunba Fasawe for several days was grossly unconstitutional as the body was only saddled with the responsibility of arresting and not detaining accused persons. "The chairman of the EFCC has no statutory power under the EFCC Act 2004 to submit a report to the president of Nigeria. This makes the act of his a null act. The president has no statutory power under the EFCC Act to receive the report from EFCC".

According to Justice Akande, the EFCC showed that it was dependent and partial by submitting its report to the president, adding that the action of both the president and the EFCC breached the provision of Section 36 of the constitution of Nigeria. The judge also tongue-lashed the president together with his chief law officer, Chief Bayo Ojo and chief security officer, Sunday Ehindero for usurping the role of the judiciary, an action which she emphasized contravenes the principles of separation of powers. According to her, "the president has probative value under the EFCC Act to receive reports from the EFCC. EFCC Act does not include power to prepare reports and submit same to the president. In other words, EFCC only has the power to investigate and charge whosoever to the High Court. So the submission of the report to the president instead of filing a charge at the High Court against the applicant therein amounts to usurpation of power of the judiciary which has power to try and convict any person found to have committed any offence".

Justice Akande pointed out that since it was the duty of the court to guard the constitutional rights of citizens, the court must never uphold legislations which derogate from the constitutional rights of the citizens. Hence, "the court will not allow any departure from the procedure. It is my view that preparation of the report and its submission to the president instead of filing charges for prosecution including its investigation is a complete departure from the prescribed statutory procedure. It therefore makes the report ultra-vires" . Furthermore,

the act of the president in setting up an administrative panel headed by the Attorney-General and the act of Attorney-General submitting the report to the president amounted to the erosion of judicial powers by the executive arm of government, which is grossly unconstitutional.


If they are allowed to get away with it, judicial powers will certainly be eroded. There is no doubt that the reports can best be described as a gross abuse of executive powers under the separation of powers."

you are still quoting Lai Ibrahim, this people distort court Judgements and I have learnt not to listen to them.

The latest Judgement by Justice Babs Kuwumi was not in Atiku's favour but Lai Mohammad and co ran to the media suggesting otherwise. The Judge held that INEC had no powers to disqualify anyone but however INEC had powers to verify candidates to ensure they meet constitutional requirements. A position that has always been what INEC says, how is that a victory for Atiku??

They now went further to initiate a contempt case against IWU, do you know that 3 days ago when this case was supposed to be heard, Turaki's legal team withdrew their case and was fined by the court for wasting their time.

I simply don't listen to lai Mohammad, so please come up with something better.

"isi a gbaa la Face bracket here" (this one confuse Face no be small).

Like I said before, I am only basing my opinion on the information before me. If the qoute below is correct :

Vice President Atiku Abubakar appeared the major winner in a Lagos State High Court ruling dismissing the report of the Administrative Panel of Enquiry into the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF), which had also indicted former presidential confidante and friend, Otunba Oyewole Fasawe. If the ruling stands, the vice president could legally contest next year's presidential election which President Olusegun Obasanjo from whom he is estranged had strenuously sought to stop him.-----

Justice Akande in the ruling dug into the statute books, emphasizing the roles, duties and laws governing EFCC which she said the body had grossly violated.----

"The chairman of the EFCC has no statutory power under the EFCC Act 2004 to submit a report to the president of Nigeria. This makes the act of his a null act. The president has no statutory power under the EFCC Act to receive the report from EFCC".

Then INEC cannot disqualify Atiku based on an indictement which was declared  null and void and non existent by a court of law.

I strongly believe in following rules and the rule of law. Barring the court ruling and no other section of the constitution counteracting sec 137, I would be behind INEC but not on this occasion with the new information at hand.

Another question that bugs my mind is;

If someone is barred by the constitution from contesting election, how should INEC go about  effecting the relevant part of the constitution ? Does the electoral Act provide an answer to that ? Should the INEC obtain a court order to that effect or should they simply omit the persons name from the list of qualified persons ?

McKren,

I have in no way, shape or form quoted Lai Muhammed of the AC.

Ladi Ibrahim  & Patricia Nwaolai (from my previous posts) are both reporters for the Times of Nigeria and Daily Trust respectively. They simply reported on the rulings made by Justice Goodluck of the Abuja High Court and Justice Akande of the Lagos High Court that the administrative panel set up by Obasanjo was flawed and unconstitutional.

Source:

http://www.thetimesofnigeria.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1872&Itemid=81&PHPSESSID=e1f16924491a5c766bfef4e017

a Lagos High Court had on November 27, 2006 declared reports of the EFCC and the Bayo Ojo Administrative Panel which allegedly indicted Vice
President Atiku Abubakar, Otumba Fasewe, Umar Pariya and 13 others, over the handling of the PTDF funds and the gazette issued on them, as null and void and none existent in law.

Earlier on October 20, 2006 Justice Goodluck of the Abuja High Court had ruled that the Bayo Ojo Panel was not an Administrative Panel as conceived by the Constitution

These rulings were reported all over the media and has absolutely nothing to do with Lai Muhammed of the AC

Can someone pls tell me what Gani Fawehinmi had to say in this matter? He is the only consistent, honest, uncompromised, straightforward and resident Nigerian lawyer I TRUST. Olisa is a loud fella and more of a media man. Gani is genuine. WHAT HAS HE SAID ON THIS MATTER PLS?

I have since found Gani's positions to be heavily influenced by his emotions rather than the book.

winner oh oh oh winner
winner oh oh oh winner
INEC you don winn oh winner
Pata Pata you go win for ever
winner, INEC is following the constitution and not some people masquerading themselves as the interprete of the constitution

Atiku disqualification is illegal and unconstitutional.
INEC says it is interpreting the Constitution. It has no powers to do
so, only a court of law, with proper jurisdiction can do so. It says
it will respect the rulings of the court. That is sophistry.

Some guys are talking rubbish here. The Tribunal of Inquiry Act empowers the president, Olusegun Obasanjo Aremu, to appoint El Rufai, Oby et al as members of the pannel. Any doubt? Then read

http://www.nigeria-law.org/Tribunals%20of%20Inquiry%20Act.htm

Atiku stands unqualified for election come April 2007. Nothing will happen afterwards. The heavens will not fall.

I wish they could make me INEC chair for a day. I will usurp the executive, judiciary, legislative, even the police functions. I would re-indict, arrest, prosecute and jail Atiku. I'm not very sure of what I would do to Obj though. Maybe a caution would do.

Thanks arzorji for that link

I have said it before, if there is any tyrant or dictator I know it is Atiku. Is it not worrysome that this guy as VP is able to control the media to lie against the Nigerian State, FG and the constitution. If such a man becomes President God knows how he will control and manipulate our lives.

He is not qualified simple, if the heavens will fall let it fall.
I think we are trying too hard to protect this so called nascent democracy and that is why we are not growing. Let Atiku and AC do their worst lets see.

Democracy is just a word, if it doesn't benefit the people or the economy.

Another Judge (3rd) rules on Obasanjo's administrative panel


Court quashes FG’s white paper on indicted politicians
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Sunnews Online

The Federal High Court in Kaduna has quashed the Federal Government’s white paper on the administrative panel of inquiry on alleged corrupt practices by some public officers and other persons.

The court also declared the invitation of those allegedly indicted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the administrative panel of inquiry headed by Professor Ignatius Ayua through a newspaper as a nullity.

Delivering judgment in three separate cases instituted against the Federal Government, the EFCC, chairman of the administrative panel of inquiry, the Attorney General of the Federation, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and President Olusegun Obasanjo, Justice Abdullahi Liman also declared that Obasanjo acted in excess of his powers by enthroning the administrative panel of inquiry to look into cases concerning state public officers.

Read more on this here:

http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2007/mar/20/national-20-03-2007-01.htm

Like I have been saying, the president cannot just put people together without the involvement of the judiciary and proclaim it as an administrative panel as enshrined in the constitution.

OBJ has the power to form an administrative panel, but he must constitute it in accordance with the law, not as he pleases. Three different judges, 1 northerner, 1 yoruba and another southern judge have all ruled that the way Obasanjo constituted this panel is unconstitutional.

Go back and read my previous posts. I said this even before I researched the verdicts by these judges. Obasanjo cannot single handedly put a panel together with his ministers and the like as members, and expect to use its findings to indict people. That is just impossible.

GNature:

Delivering judgment in three separate cases instituted against the Federal Government, the EFCC, chairman of the administrative panel of inquiry, the Attorney General of the Federation, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and President Olusegun Obasanjo, Justice Abdullahi Liman also declared that Obasanjo acted in excess of his powers by enthroning the administrative panel of inquiry to look into cases concerning state public officers.

Read more on this here:

http://www.sunnewsonline.com/webpages/news/national/2007/mar/20/national-20-03-2007-01.htm

Isn't that just typical. non of the other papers carried the quote in red. Did the sun make that up?

http://www.vanguardngr.com/articles/2002/cover/march07/20032007/f220032007.html
http://www.guardiannewsngr.com/news/article24
http://www.punchng.com/Articl.aspx?theartic=Art200703192256065

And to preempt the atiku fan boys, Atiku was not a party in the case. Therefore the indictment charges against him still stand.

Though this latest pronouncement will still be appealed by the Federal Government, Atiku fans must note that the Judge was only saying it is not the duty of FG to look into State affairs (whether thats true or not) it does not affect Atiku cos his case is federal. Besides that he can not benefit from a case he is not party to.
If FG appeals this latest ruling, let no one try to bully INEC because INEC has to stay action until the case is finalised.

Actually, the beauty of the whole drama is that everytime the issue of administrative panel is brought up, the courts shoot it down.

Actually the beauty of the whole drama is that Atiku is at the receiving end

I better go buy some fireworks

Somebody said that yaradua is a member of the ogboni confrater, what is the meaning of that, till now he has not been able to explain to the house, and to tell the house where he got that information from, and proves,is ogboni confrater same as ROF?

Atiku deserve what happens to him, next time he should learn to be a loyal and humble servant to his master and maker.


How can Okro outgrows he who plant it?

Let me make this illusration.
I stole 20 naira and my brother descides to tell daddy because we were at loggerheads. He might have stolen 100 naira too but the fact remains that i stole 20 naira and must be punished.