₦airaland Forum

naturalman:
Keep embarrassing yourself......

Those roads that are still under construction for the past 6 years is what you are displaying....

I am coming for you....let me recharge my phone...

After seeing the infrastructural development in EKITI state....you will go and slap who ever is your governor....

I am coming for you....

You simply went to Nairaland and copied Abakaliki at night pix and displayed it as Ekiti State? Boy, grow up.....Check this link where you copied your Abakaliki at night and displayed it as Ekiti if you need more pix to cover your lies...
https://www.nairaland.com/3890621/comparing-developmental-projects-ogun-state/9

naturalman:
This is EKITI state.....now compare this with OSUN state

You also seem to enjoy toddler's decorated light as infrastructure...Lol #GrowUp this is Oshogbo

naturalman:
This is EKITI state.....now compare this with OSUN state

Calm down, That bridge is not at Fajuyi Ok...That road is not Ikere road. Every picture you posted is Abakaliki at night. When you come to talk online, be a little smart ok. Don't describe my area for me online. I was expecting you to start with Educational infrastructures but you have nothing to point out. When you come to Ado, I can take you around for free. Meanwhile, The bridge has not even been completed, you are posting the Abakaliki pix for Ado Ekiti online. You see how easily I burst your LIES? Be smart OK? #TryAgain

naturalman:
Get off my mention let me talk to people who are reasonable......
This is how you people go about condemning Fayose just because he is in the opposition and does not reason like E-rats.
Show me the stupid infrastructure in those state you mention and let me back it up with that of EKITI state.....let us see who will laugh last....

Don't waste your time insulting, won't respond to that.
So let me start from the closest to Ekiti, which is Osun State under Aregbesola. Now I will only post that of Schools, waiting for you to post that of Ekiti....Don't worry about the location in Ekiti, I can go there I take the pix any moment tomorrow...#JustTry

deomeelo:
This is basically letting me know that you are a troll, ipobitch and common joker that should never be taken seriously.

O sope travel to Ekiti and see infrastructure......Person wey no even know where Okemesi dey, wan describe Igbimo for me...Lol

naturalman:
Fayose is far better than those governors organising stupid and in functional summit every year....
How are the residence of those state fairing...
How is the infrastructural development of those state as to compare with EKITI state....

Don't just sit online and stroll to make conclusion....
Travel to EKITI state and see the infrastructural development going on there...

Please describe the exact place you want me to stand in Ado Ekiti or Ikere....Should I stay at Fajuyi waiting for you since it is popular, or Ijoyin?
You should at least not miss road if I stand at the poly junction or in front of Little by little photo. Osi Ekiti may be too confusing for you, so I will stand the the filling station along Supare....Lol, this guy want to tell me about Ekiti State and INFRASTRUCTURE...Funny guys wey travel ONLINE come Ekiti come see infrastructure.....

In the past few years, different State has had economic summits. Kaduna, Kwara, Kebbi, Kano, Anambra, Osun, Ogun, Lagos, Oyo...

Of all these summits, I think #FayoseSummit in #EkitiSummit he's been having for three years is the best....He keeps giving monthly updates on Buhari, then go to Ponmo joint, Amala, joint, Oguro joint, and every other joint to BOOST Ekiti economy. What do you think?

googlepikins:
Meanwhile the money Bayelsa should be making is been shared to develop Kano and Lagos

And that explains how Bayelsa Gov is spending his Fed Allocation+13%+IGR+Loans+ParishFund and still owing workers in a State less than Alimosho LGA in population??

Happy New year!

They keep shortchanging the people in their different States, then point finger to FG and MUMUS are crying FG....Zamfa Governor took money to US to buy mansion, called the suffering of his people (Meningitis) the wrath of God for the SINS of his own people...Some are stealing what is meant for IDPs in the North, and they are of the same tongue and tribe....But the victims and the oppressed are fighting on behalf of their oppressor....Lol @Restructuring

BAYELSA STATE:

- Been ruled by 4 Governors Alams, Jonathan, Silva, Dickson...since 1999

- 8 LGAs

- About 2m population (Like Alimosho LGA, just one LG in Lagos)

- Gets one of the Highest Fed. allocation

- Gets 13% Oyel Money

- Get LOANS

-The entire population is not in civil service o...

BUT......We owe LG workers nine-month salary, not 16 – Bayelsa govt

Your Govt can't take care of the enitire population less than Alimosho LGA, is owing workers of population less than 200,000....BUT "restructuring" is the problem......Lol

http://punchng.com/we-owe-lg-workers-nine-month-salary-not-16-bayelsa-govt/

Please I have a question, and will appreciate your contribution..... Naira was N116/$ during OBJ, fell to N220/ $ during GEJ, now falling further ~N400+.......Do you think Naira was strong at any time in our recent history? Can an import dependent nation have a strong CURRENCY? Once again, thank you!

buckdudebuck:
it is 5 o'clock already. I no see anything oh

You are too late!

Food is ready...... Now is an opportunity to wail afresh!

Flash:
Today 13th of February, POTUS Donald Trump will be speaking with President Buhari from his London residence. Thereafter, Trump will speak with South Africa President Jacob Zuma.

Do I need to tell you who the giant of Africa is?
Wait, are you surprised that Buhari will be speaking LIVE with Trump? Calm down, your rumor is not real.....Don't kill yourself before your time. Buhari is still the President of Nigeria.

Nigeria is a wonderland:

officialEFCC Uncovers POSH High-rise at Banana Island.
15 Floors,
18 Flats,
6 Pent-houses ACQUIRED BY DIEZANI
$37.5M

Please tell me recession is avoidable?

EFCC Uncovers Mansion at Banana Island Worth $37.5m Allegedly Acquired by Diezani.

While we are still amazed at Andrew Yakubu's $9.8M, $37.5M property allegedly belonging g to The Oil goddess Diezani was discovered.

Don't waste your time defending them, they don't even know that your family exists.

Well, they said we should forget the past, yet want to know why we are in recession!

It's like looters have converted all the loots to dollar, then they simply kept such in the SAFE, until Buhari's tenure is over!
God bless the Federal Republic of Nigeria. #iStandWithNigeria

National Code of Corporate Governance!

INTRODUCTION
The Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (“FRCN”) recently issued the National Code of Corporate Governance 2016 (the “Code”). The Code is made pursuant to the powers of the FRCN under Sections 50 and 51 of the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria Act 2011 (the “Act”) and has a commencement date of 17 October 2016.
The Code is essentially a consolidation and refinement of different sectoral codes on corporate governance and has been issued in three parts: the Code of Corporate Governance for the Private Sector; the Code of Governance for Not-for-Profit entities; and the Code of Governance for the Public Sector. The Code of Corporate Governance for the Private Sector (the “Private Sector Code”) is mandatory while that for the Not-for-Profit entities will be operated on a “Comply or Justify non-compliance” basis in a manner similar to the United Kingdom’s Corporate Governance Code. On the other hand, the Code of Governance for the Public Sector will not become immediately operative until an executive directive is secured from the Federal Government of Nigeria for that code to take effect.

Malachi 2:7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.

This is why I seek more clarification from those that know better than I do. Fortunately, Mr Yinka Ogunnubi (@yinkanubi) was available for me. This is what he said, as we discussed back and forth. very instructive….

It’s somewhat difficult for me to do a thread on the code because I share the sentiments of the community of faith concerning some provisions.
However, I have learnt that in the public square, Facts/Objectivity is what matters and not sentiments. So here I go...God helping me…
I had the premonition that a controversy will be stirred once we got that famous breaking news that our beloved Daddy was "stepping aside".

The headline events of that last 24 hours confirm my fears. Let’s start by listing what is being said and implied so far:
- That PMB’s FG is “dabbling” into Church leadership - That the Governance Code has been suspended thus no need to comply.
. - That the Law is targeted at weakening the church & make it vulnerable to attack - That provisions of the code conflicts with FRC Act & CAMA

First & foremost, in 2011 the Senate passed the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria Bill which created the Financial Reporting Council
The FRC replaced the defunct Nigeria Accounting Standard Board (NASB) then under Jim Obazee who subsequently became FRCN Exec Secretary.

Under this Act, the FRC (among others) was expected to - ensure good corporate governance practices in the public/private sectors of d economy.
It’s in this light that it sets out in 2013 to put together a Governance code (Public, Private & NGO). A draft of which it released in 2015
As expected, many stakeholders had issues with some provisions within the code but they were given the opportunity to make submissions.
The FRC was thereafter sued by some Pastors representing Pentecostal churches in July 2015. They sought six reliefs among which were:

- a declaration that d Not-for-Profit Codes 2015 is illegal & unconstitutional because it amounts to duplication of the functions of the CAC.

- that the TOR in section1 as well as sections 8,9,10 & 37 are illegal & unconstitutional being inconsistent with section 7 & 8 of FRC Act.

Needless to say the plaintiffs who claimed to be representing Pentecostals lost the case in court as the court ruled in favor of FRC.
In light of the court order in its favor, the FRC went ahead to Release the Governance Codes effective from 17 Oct 2016.
It came with a mandatory compliance for Private Sector and a "Comply or Justify non compliance" for Not-For-Profit organizations.

Not long after the release, the Minister of Trade & Investment was reported to have written or issued a query (depending on who u believe) to the FRC to suspend the code until all issues it raised concerning it are resolved. The Minister main queries were as follows:

1. Was the Governance Code in line with the FRC Act?: The combined reading of Section 2(1) and 10(d) of the FRCN Act suggests that the Board will be responsible for the overall control of the Council & the Directorates. So how did the Code pass the test of compliance with the Act given that the FRCN Board is yet to be constituted?

2. Does the Code supersede any legislation or any other Code?: A subsidiary legislation cannot supersede a principal enactment.
The Exe Sec was asked to explain the clear conflict(s) between the Code & various legislation inclusive of the FRC Act as well as others e.g. it implied the CBN will take on the burden of implementing the Code in the financial sector & it'll also take precedence over the CBN Code.
I know that people have tried to link the fact the Minister of Trade is also a Pastor in RCCG to speculate on his true intentions, but to be fair to him there was nothing in his letter that suggested he was pushing a disguised church or RCCG agenda. Rather the contrary.

His letter was more in line with concerns of the private sector than it was about concerns of leadership and succession for the church.
The expectation within the financial sector was that with the Minister’s letter, the code was suspended. Wrong. Turns out the Executive Secretary dis-agreed.

1. The FRC refused to honor the suspension request on the basis that it was not gazette. We wouldn't have known this if not for Daddy GO's decision.
2. With this evidence alone, we can perish the notion of "PMB admin is “Dabbling in Church Leadership to weaken it”. It's clearly not true. If anything, the evidence available to us points to the PMB admin trying to ensure that the code in its present form is not implemented.
In fact, it appears that the FG might be under intense pressure to sack Jim Obazee because of some “EFCC troubles" of his own.

Now, let’s go to the Corporate Governance Codes (for Non-Profit) itself.
By & large what the code tries to do is to first enforce the minimum requirements of Part C of the CAC under which religious organizations are registered.
For instance, religious bodies are supposed to make Annual Returns of its Financial Statements to CAC after audit.

Not For Profits also needs to organize yearly Annual General Meetings where they present their annual financial statement to its members.
It reinforces the legal fact that any entity that collects money must “render accounts”, whether a bank, a biz owner or a religious body.
There appears to be no dispute about this requirement even among religious organizations. However, there is the small issue of Tax.

Should religious organizations be taxed when they engage in “For Profit” activities even if that activity is for the benefit of the organization?
Obazee & his team says yes. They must be taxed if they engaged in activities designed to extract financial benefit. He put it like this:
.“If they pursue non-charitable activities like running schools, hospitals, they're to acct for them separately as profit-making entities”
This is one of the areas of conflict as many Churches have subsidiaries under them that have blurred the lines between charity & profitability.

The second and obviously most contentious issue has to do with Tenure of the Founder. Now this is exactly what the code says:

The code read in part, (Pls check the attached pix also):

“The founder or leader of a NFPO (not-for-profit) occupies a special position in the organisation and is committed to the success and longevity of the NFPO. Accordingly, a founder or leader should not take on too many responsibilities in the organisation or have an indefinite term in the running of the organisation.

“Where, for any reason, a founder or leader of NFPO also occupies any of the three governance positions of chairmanship of the board of trustees, the governing board or council, and the headship of the executive management (or their governance equivalents), the following provisions shall apply before the end of the organisation’s financial year in which this code takes effect.

“The founder or leader shall cease to occupy these three governance positions simultaneously. This is to ensure the separation of powers and avoid possible concentration of powers in one individual.

“The founder or leader may however choose – subject to the agreement of the organisation’s apex authority as expressed in the annual general assembly, annual meeting, annual stakeholder engagement, annual conference, annual synod, annual fellowship assembly or their equivalents – only one of these three governance positions subject to his current tenure. This is to ensure a clear division of responsibilities at the head of the organisation between the running of the governing body and the executive responsibility for the management and fulfilment of the organisation’s mission.

“Where the founder or leader has occupied all or any of these three governance positions for more than twenty years, or is aged seventy years or above, the choice in the section above should only relate to the board of trustees as in section below, except the constitution of the organisation otherwise provides.”

Now understand that for an NGO, there are 3 governance organs: (A) The Board of Trustees, (B)The Governing Board and (C)The Management Committee.
Now typically, and in most cases, the founder usually occupies the position of the head of these 3 organs at the same time.
So the code prescribes that:

1. The founder can only Head one of these organs 2. If he already heads all of them, he needs to relinquish
3. If he has served as head of any of those organs for more than 20 years and is more than 70, he must resign except for Board of Trustees.

Even with these provisions, the code recognizes the unique position of founders as the “Spiritual Leader” of their organizations.
Meaning the code does not in any way invalidate the spiritual authority which these organizations subscribe to & to which they derive their relevance.

The notion that these codes should not be applicable to churches as their matters are celestial & not terrestrial is utterly ridiculous. If they're celestial as said by a SAN, then why seek registration under Part C of d CAC Laws? Why not just go to heaven to get registered?

These organizations are legal entities known to law. They can sue & be sued. They can exist or cease to exist. They are very terrestrial.

They are charitable organizations that survive on gifts & donations. They need to be transparent & accountable. This must be emphasized.

The issue that most concern me now is whether or not a minister has the power to suspend the activities of an agency known to Law.

My take is that there are legal grounds to challenge the powers the FRC seems to be flexing. And we must pursue this to its logical end.

Recall that this was the same agency used to illegally suspend a sitting CBN Governor. So the FRC as constituted is not without freckles.
It will help to separate the wheat from the shaft & help bring transparency to the church and make us accountable to God and to man.
Thanks for following. Please feel free to share your thoughts and opinions.

Another Contributor (@TosinOlugbenga):
If a founder in his lifetime like our "Daddy G. O" can anoint a successor, it helps the church to handle issues of transition.
Therefore, I am of the opinion that such regulations will make the church healthy and not seen as a family property of the founder.
A popular church in Benin has serious crisis because the wife of the founder took over leadership after the founder's death.
So, to me I think such regulation is very good. The church is attended not by angels but humans. So we can ask for accountability

I think no worthwhile leader should find it difficult of handing over administrative leadership not spiritual after 10 years.
If a leader can't find someone to hand over to, such a leader is a failure. Good leaders are supposed to raise worthy leaders.
No one should drag Buhari or Politics to this issue. The law was signed under the previous admin and their’s no problem with it. Because my “mouth running governor” already said Buhari is targeting RCCG. He will just drag Buhari to anything available. (end).

Finally in my own opinion, Baba Adeboye only did what he has to do (Although he wraped it around this CODE), When it is time for Baba to “go home” God HIMSELF will choose the Spiritual leader of RCCG. The issue of Joshua, Moses and the 70 elders came to mind as I type.
Joshua was still following Moses, as at the time Moses had chosen 70 anointed ELDERS to lead God’s people administratively. Joshua was just Moses’ servant as at the time these 70 Bishops were already operating. When it was time, God CHOSE JOSHUA…...Jesus is Lord, The best of men are still men at their very best

It's becoming obvious that an average religious mind prefers to be IGNORANT.....

Unfortunately, somebody was sacked yesterday for doing his job, just because of the level of noise generated everywhere by this issue.... Do we really care?

INTRODUCTION
The Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria (“FRCN”) recently issued the National Code of Corporate Governance 2016 (the “Code”). The Code is made pursuant to the powers of the FRCN under Sections 50 and 51 of the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria Act 2011 (the “Act”) and has a commencement date of 17 October 2016.
The Code is essentially a consolidation and refinement of different sectoral codes on corporate governance and has been issued in three parts: the Code of Corporate Governance for the Private Sector; the Code of Governance for Not-for-Profit entities; and the Code of Governance for the Public Sector. The Code of Corporate Governance for the Private Sector (the “Private Sector Code”) is mandatory while that for the Not-for-Profit entities will be operated on a “Comply or Justify non-compliance” basis in a manner similar to the United Kingdom’s Corporate Governance Code. On the other hand, the Code of Governance for the Public Sector will not become immediately operative until an executive directive is secured from the Federal Government of Nigeria for that code to take effect.

Malachi 2:7 For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts.
This is why I seek more clarification from those that know better than I do. Fortunately, Mr Yinka Ogunnubi (@yinkanubi) was available for me. This is what he said, very instructive….

It’s somewhat difficult for me to do a thread on the code because I share the sentiments of the community of faith concerning some provisions
However, I have learnt that in the public square, Facts/Objectivity is what matters and not sentiments. So here I go...God helping me…
I had the premonition that a controversy will be stirred once we got that famous breaking news that our beloved Daddy was "stepping aside".
The headline events of that last 24 hours confirm my fears. Let’s start by listing what is being said and implied so far:

- That PMB’s FG is “dabbling” into Church leadership - That the Governance Code has been suspended thus no need to comply.
. - That the Law is targeted at weakening the church & make it vulnerable to attack - That provisions of the code conflicts with FRC Act & CAMA

First & foremost, in 2011 the Senate passed the Financial Reporting Council of Nigeria Bill which created the Financial Reporting Council
The FRC replaced the defunct Nigeria Accounting Standard Board (NASB) then under Jim Obazee who subsequently became FRCN Exec Secretary.

Under this Act, the FRC (among others) was expected to - ensure good corporate governance practices in the public/private sectors of d economy.
It’s in this light that it sets out in 2013 to put together a Governance code (Public, Private & NGO). A draft of which it released in 2015
As expected, many stakeholders had issues with some provisions within the code but they were given the opportunity to make submissions.
The FRC was thereafter sued by some Pastors representing Pentecostal churches in July 2015. They sought six reliefs among which were:

- a declaration that d Not-for-Profit Codes 2015 is illegal & unconstitutional because it amounts to duplication of the functions of the CAC.

- that the TOR in section1 as well as sections 8,9,10 & 37 are illegal & unconstitutional being inconsistent with section 7 & 8 of FRC Act

Needless to say the plaintiffs who claimed to be representing Pentecostals lost the case in court as the court ruled in favor of FRC.
In light of the court order in its favor, the FRC went ahead to Release the Governance Codes effective from 17 Oct 2016.
It came with a mandatory compliance for Private Sector and a "Comply or Justify non compliance" for Not-For-Profit organizations.
Not long after the release, the Minister of Trade & Investment was reported to have written or issued a query (depending on who u believe) to the FRC to suspend the code until all issues it raised concerning it are resolved. The Minister main queries were as follows:

1. Was the Governance Code in line with the FRC Act?: The combined reading of Section 2(1) and 10(d) of the FRCN Act suggests that the Board will be responsible for the overall control of the Council & the Directorates. So how did the Code pass the test of compliance with the Act given that the FRCN Board is yet to be constituted?

2. Does the Code supersede any legislation or any other Code?: A subsidiary legislation cannot supersede a principal enactment.
The Exe Sec was asked to explain the clear conflict(s) between the Code & various legislation inclusive of the FRC Act as well as others e.g. it implied the CBN will take on the burden of implementing the Code in the financial sector & it'll also take precedence over the CBN Code.
I know that people have tried to link the fact the Minister of Trade is also a Pastor in RCCG to speculate on his true intentions, but to be fair to him there was nothing in his letter that suggested he was pushing a disguised church or RCCG agenda. Rather the contrary.

His letter was more in line with concerns of the private sector than it was about concerns of leadership and succession for the church.
The expectation within the financial sector was that with the Minister’s letter, the code was suspended. Wrong. Turns out the Executive Secretary dis-agreed.

1. The FRC refused to honor the suspension request on the basis that it was not gazette. We wouldn't have known this if not for Daddy GO's decision.
2. With this evidence alone, we can perish the notion of "PMB admin is “Dabbling in Church Leadership to weaken it”. It's clearly not true. If anything, the evidence available to us points to the PMB admin trying to ensure that the code in its present form is not implemented.
In fact, it appears that the FG might be under intense pressure to sack Jim Obazee because of some “EFCC troubles" of his own.

Now, let’s go to the Corporate Governance Codes (for Non-Profit) itself.
By & large what the code tries to do is to first enforce the minimum requirements of Part C of the CAC under which religious organizations are registered.
For instance, religious bodies are supposed to make Annual Returns of its Financial Statements to CAC after audit.

Not For Profits also needs to organize yearly Annual General Meetings where they present their annual financial statement to its members.
It reinforces the legal fact that any entity that collects money must “render accounts”, whether a bank, a biz owner or a religious body.
There appears to be no dispute about this requirement even among religious organizations. However, there is the small issue of Tax.

Should religious organizations be taxed when they engage in “For Profit” activities even if that activity is for the benefit of the organization?
Obazee & his team says yes. They must be taxed if they engaged in activities designed to extract financial benefit. He put it like this:
.“If they pursue non-charitable activities like running schools, hospitals, they're to acct for them separately as profit-making entities”
This is one of the areas of conflict as many Churches have subsidiaries under them that have blurred the lines between charity & profitability.


The second and obviously most contentious issue has to do with Tenure of the Founder. Now this is exactly what the code says:

The code read in part, “The founder or leader of a NFPO (not-for-profit) occupies a special position in the organisation and is committed to the success and longevity of the NFPO. Accordingly, a founder or leader should not take on too many responsibilities in the organisation or have an indefinite term in the running of the organisation.
“Where, for any reason, a founder or leader of NFPO also occupies any of the three governance positions of chairmanship of the board of trustees, the governing board or council, and the headship of the executive management (or their governance equivalents), the following provisions shall apply before the end of the organisation’s financial year in which this code takes effect.
“The founder or leader shall cease to occupy these three governance positions simultaneously. This is to ensure the separation of powers and avoid possible concentration of powers in one individual.
“The founder or leader may however choose – subject to the agreement of the organisation’s apex authority as expressed in the annual general assembly, annual meeting, annual stakeholder engagement, annual conference, annual synod, annual fellowship assembly or their equivalents – only one of these three governance positions subject to his current tenure. This is to ensure a clear division of responsibilities at the head of the organisation between the running of the governing body and the executive responsibility for the management and fulfilment of the organisation’s mission.
“Where the founder or leader has occupied all or any of these three governance positions for more than twenty years, or is aged seventy years or above, the choice in the section above should only relate to the board of trustees as in section below, except the constitution of the organisation otherwise provides.”


Now understand that for an NGO, there are 3 governance organs: (A) The Board of Trustees, (B)The Governing Board and (C)The Management Committee.
Now typically, and in most cases, the founder usually occupies the position of the head of these 3 organs at the same time.
So the code prescribes that:
1. The founder can only Head one of these organs 2. If he already heads all of them, he needs to relinquish
3. If he has served as head of any of those organs for more than 20 years and is more than 70, he must resign except for Board of Trustees.
Even with these provisions, the code recognizes the unique position of founders as the “Spiritual Leader” of their organizations.
Meaning the code does not in any way invalidate the spiritual authority which these organizations subscribe to & to which they derive their relevance.
The notion that these codes should not be applicable to churches as their matters are celestial & not terrestrial is utterly ridiculous. If they're celestial as said by a SAN, then why seek registration under Part C of d CAC Laws? Why not just go to heaven to get registered?
These organizations are legal entities known to law. They can sue & be sued. They can exist or cease to exist. They are very terrestrial.
They are charitable organizations that survive on gifts & donations. They need to be transparent & accountable. This must be emphasized.
The issue that most concern me now is whether or not a minister has the power to suspend the activities of an agency known to Law.
My take is that there are legal grounds to challenge the powers the FRC seems to be flexing. And we must pursue this to its logical end.
Recall that this was the same agency used to illegally suspend a sitting CBN Governor. So the FRC as constituted is not without freckles.
It will help to separate the wheat from the shaft & help bring transparency to the church and make us accountable to God and to man.
Thanks for following. Please feel free to share your thoughts and opinions.
Another Contributor (@TosinOlugbenga):
If a founder in his lifetime like our "Daddy G. O" can anoint a successor, it helps the church to handle issues of transition.
Therefore, I am of the opinion that such regulations will make the church healthy and not seen as a family property of the founder.
A popular church in Benin has serious crisis because the wife of the founder took over leadership after the founder's death.
So, to me I think such regulation is very good. The church is attended not by angels but humans. So we can ask for accountability
I think no worthwhile leader should find it difficult of handing over administrative leadership not spiritual after 10 years.
If a leader can't find someone to hand over to, such a leader is a failure. Good leaders are supposed to raise worthy leaders.
No one should drag Buhari or Politics to this issue. The law was signed under the previous admin and their’s no problem with it. Because my “mouth running governor” already said Buhari is targeting RCCG. He will just drag Buhari to anything available. (end)

Finally in my own opinion, Baba Adeboye only did what he has to do (Although he wraped it around this CODE), When it is time for Baba to “go home” God HIMSELF will choose the Spiritual leader of RCCG. The issue of Joshua, Moses and the 70 elders came to mind as I type.
Joshua was still following Moses, as at the time Moses had chosen 70 anointed ELDERS to lead God’s people administratively. Joshua was just Moses’ servant as at the time these 70 Bishops were already operating. When it was time, God CHOSE JOSHUA…...Jesus is Lord, The best of men are still men at their very best.

otil1:
In summary, I pity you, op.

You use your God-given knowledge and talent to try to twist and spin things in favour of yoir viewpoint.

Even the way you have laboured to explain a simple matter should be a warning signal.

Simply put, fighting corruption with corrupt actions tantamount to a worse situation that as is.

If current govt can't find anything better than arrest, arrest, and arrest, let them just focus their energy on other things.

Pls lawyer, what's the big deal about 'arrest'?

Especially when the investigation has not been thoroughly carried out.

You are tripping on arrest and arrest; please tell me how many convictions have been secured by current govt.

Tell me also any new system it has introduced for curbing corruption. It is reaping biiiiiggggg from BVN, from compulsory e-payment and e-transfer that has created more audit trail for investigators. What has it introduced?

Any special courts? Any new systems or policies? Just arrest, arrest, arrest. Even those who have returned stolen money should be expeditiously prosecuted and convicted, rather they are being shielded.

Refunding stolen wealth should not be a shield from being prosecuted, convicted and sent to jail.

What you are hailing is hogwash, voodoo and antiquated technique in corruption fight, which is based on tools of fear and intimidation.

To hell with you and you cattle rearer, certificateless daura dùllard

Online NJC and MBA boss, are u awake now or u are still reading g your imagination?

The one by @ayoadebayo4 made me cry. Read it and see how guys are sacrificing for the same Country Politicians are taking advantage of daily.......Where fighting is heavy there I am••• I Sacrifice my today for your tomorrow my dearest one's at home•••
Soldiers in the WAR front live by the day, Knowing the day's battle might be their last. #Pray4Soldiers

Tears dried up in my eye's•Blood stop flowing through my Vein• I feel like dying these moment• Don't tell me my CO Is no more please• my 7 month spent with you was never a mistake. Taking over the whole territory captured by BHT advancing from Maiduguri To Monguno down to Baga encountering so many deadly ambush fighting for several hours••

You never relent u never get tired u never withdraw You never stayed back but u at the fore front giving us covering fire•• going to Capture Bama and Gwoza u never relent despite all the Obstacles on our way•• reaching Gwoza and seeing just few of us behind you was the turning point and u never demoralized but encourage us More•• capturing Gwoza and going to Sambisa••

I never regretted my time with you•• I believe soonest we shall unite again in a special Prepared for us by the most high GOD•• at these Point I learn to realize death is nothing to run away from•• my heart keep thinking of you My able Boss•• you throw the whole troop in 119 into deep mourning•• at these Point am heading back home to see my precious mum once more Because I see death looming anytime soon•• if I fight and die for my country I died as a Hero•• Good bye to you my trusted Boss•• LT Col Abu Ali••• Aka Dodo••• aka Sniper••• Aka Small Boko Haram Doctor•• Aka Small man with big and strong heart••• you have so many Nick Boss As we bring your body from Mallam Fatori down to Maiduguri over 14 hours drive•

I say goodbye to you once more my Role Model Where others are busy eating people's sweat•• there u are fighting for the peace of our dear Nation•• Rest on Boss Rest on Boss••• as your boys continue with rest of the Fight••• we shall Unite again Someday How do u feel seeing someone u love, ur role model, ur Mentor dying in Cold Blood right in ur eyes•• RIP Serki Yaki His last word to us•• Pray, stay Alert and Stay Alive• if someone must Die let it be me•• never knew u saw it coming!

Such a brave heart, such a lovely gallant
soldier...U sacrificed all for Nigeria...The
same Nigeria some looted to coma...such
loot that strengthened Boko Haram and
weaken our Military force....

The same loot Ebele Jonathan was bold enough just of recent to insist doesn't exist....GEJ was fulfilled that he "emboldened" boko haram, to gain ground and became monstrous.... They are still everywhere denying their wicked act...They even asked ECOWAS to challenge us for asking for justice to Dasuki who was d arrowhead Jonathan used to loot money meant for weapons....
Col Ali is # TheRealHero
Col Ali is #TheRealHero

His last word to us•• Pray, stay Alert and Stay Alive• if someone must Die let it be me•• never knew u saw it coming https:///YYl3flHeY9

Adiola:
Mumu analysis don't go and make money lazy thing and y'all have started again with this unverified news of return tomorrow your imbecilic dullard ll apply for 50 billion dollar loan and when u remind u of this returned loot ,na so so excuse we go de hear useless people

Obanikoro returns N100 million to EFCC https:///gjtgRr6Pxr via @premiumtimesng

Very simple analogy,
Almost all the media reported the N1 billion returned by Ex-custom boss Diko.
This is just a fraction of N40B alleged to have been looted by him under the hero, Ebele Goodluck Jonathan.

Just before you borrow another money to load data in order to defend your oppressors, here is the meaning on your lifetime:

1. If you collect less than N100,000 a month, Diko just returned N1 billion out of his LOOT;

2. Your annual salary is approximated at N1 million and let that sink DEEP;

3. N1 billion is the same thing as N999 million + N1 million;

4. I want to put it to you that the main reason you go to work is to have means of livelihood;

5. Without blinking his eyes, Diko, ex-custom boss just returned 999 years of your livelihood in advance, and Ebele Jonathan said it's a lie;

As you can see, the remaining N1 million is left to take care of your emergency.

God will punish that thing you all call "due process and rule of law" that is only meant for the ELITES.
Fear the oppressed when they keep defending their oppressors openly. It is called bewitchment in Africa.

You are bewitched to defend your oppressors! #FreeYourself

The problem in Nigeria is when the oppressed are defending their oppressors daily, what else?
Children of pensioners whose parents died queuing for their legitimate pension will borrow N1000 data to come and defend the guy that looted the pension fund by shouting "due process"......And some are here also to defend the National Assembly on a very simple issue that is already NULL and VOID!

The amendment of the CCB/CCT Act by the National Assembly is null and void! By Olatunde Bakare @backarray

The amendment of the CCB/CCT Act by the National Assembly is null, void and cannot stand as same is inconsistent with the provisions of CFRN.

I expected the lawyers amongst our 469 lawmakers to set the rest of their ignorant colleagues on the right part but alas, they didn't.
CCT did not just come into existence by virtue of the CCB/CCT Act but by the provisions of the 1999 Constitution as amended.

The 3rd & 5th Schedule to CFRN as amended dwells on imp part of CCT's existence and ONLY a constitutional amendment can make changes to it.

Meaning, amendment must be consented to by 2/3 of all 36 State Houses of Assembly. Without that, the provisions of 3rd&5th schedule stands.
Therefore, any other law, be it an Act by the National Assembly or not, that is inconsistent with the provisions of CCB/CCT as provided....
by the 3rd & 5th Schedule to the constitution will be invalid, null and void to the extent of its inconsistencies. The amendment can't stand.

Now let us highlight the most salient part of the invalid amendment of CCB/CCT Act by the National Assembly and point out where it fails....

Before that, may I point out that the wordings of 3rd &5th Schedule of the CFRN is 'SHALL' and that means it is Mandatory and NEVER optional:

1. NA altered the tenure of CCB Chairman to a term of 5yrs renewable once. This is inconsistent with Par. 17 (1) of the 5th Schedule CFRN.
The Paragraph says the Chairman SHALL vacate his office at the age of 70 years. The word used is shall and it is Mandatory.

Therefore the amendment by National Assembly limiting term of CCB Chairman to 5yrs renewable once is hereby NULL and VOID for being inconsistent with CFRN(Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria).

2. The National Assembly amended the Act to say all CCT nominees MUST be screened & confirmed by Senate. This is inconsistent with Paragraph 15(3) 5th Schedule.
The Par only makes it mandatory (SHALL) for the President and NJC to participate and the Senate CANNOT force their involvement.
Therefore, the amendment to provide for Senate Screening and confirmation is NULL and VOID for being inconsistent with the Constitution.

I've highlighted just 2 clauses from the amendment to show where it conflict with the CFRN and to show that the NA were totally ignorant.
The CFRN in S. 1(3) provides that any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution shall be null and void.

Except a constitutional amendment is triggered and 2/3 of all 36 States agrees,what the NA has done as its affect CCB/CCT is a waste of time.
What should the President do? Throw the amendment in the bin as same conflicts with the Constitution and tell them to go do the right thing.

The whole charade is an embarrassment and big shame on lawmakers who are lawyers for allowing this rape on our Constitution go unchallenged.



https://mobile.twitter.com/Backarray/status/791965174328471561

Simple and straight forward:

Question: We keep hearing EFCC has revovered billions of Naira, Dollar, Pounds blablabla..
Why can't this money be used to strengthen the ECONOMY and why is all this new BORROWING?

Answer: It is true that EFCC has recovered billions of Naira, and other foreign currencies from people whose cases are still in court.
The truth, however, is that until the cases are dispensed with, if possible up to the apex court in the land, the money so recovered cannot be spent by the government, because it remains a subject of litigation....

No law enforcement agency can usurp the disciplinary powers of the NJC by recommending a judge for removal or suspending a judge or exercising other form of disciplinary control over a judicial officer. Likewise the NJC cannot and should not usurp the constitutional cum statutory functions of the law enforcement agencies to investigate crimes, arrest, detain or prosecute any person, including judicial officers, for alleged crimes. Both causes of action can either run concurrently or separately depending on the circumstances of each case. Where for example a judicial officer is accused of corruption which is both an act of professional misconduct and a crime, the aggrieved party and or law enforcement agency may elect to petition the NJC for the removal of the judicial officer from office or proceed directly to subject the erring judicial officer to the criminal justice system or pursue both causes of action at the same time.
The NJC is not a court of law under Section 6 of the Constitution and has no supervisory jurisdiction over law enforcement agencies.
Third, did the SSS act within its statutory power and acceptable procedure?
The SSS is a creation of the National Security Agencies Act of 1986. The power of the SSS as stipulated in Section 3 of the Act is as follows:
(3) The State Security Service shall be charged with responsibility for-
(a) the prevention and detection within Nigeria of any crime against the internal security of Nigeria;
(b) the protection and preservation of all non-military classified matters concerning the internal security of Nigeria; and
(c) such other responsibilities affecting internal security within Nigeria as the National Assembly or the President, as the case may be, may deem necessary.
Going by the provisions of paragraphs (a) and (b) supra, it is apparent that the SSS stricto sensu ( in the strict sense) has no power to arrest judicial officers for alleged economic and financial crimes. However, a dispassionate attention should be paid to the wordings and purport of paragraph (c) above. Clearly, that provision (paragraph C) gives the President the power to enlarge the scope of responsibilities of the SSS relating to the internal security within Nigeria. Section 6 of the Act goes further to empower the President to issue an Instrument, a subsidiary legislation, in the manner the SSS should exercise its powers, etc.
In exercise of the power in Sections 3 and 6 of the National Security Agencies Act 1986, former Head of State, General Abdusalam Abubakar in 1999 promulgated the State Security Service Instrument One of 1999. By virtue of that Instrument, the responsibilities of the SSS was extended to include the prevention, detection and investigation of economic crimes of national security dimension, among other things. It is important to emphasize that the National Security Agencies Act has a special constitutional flavour being one of the four federal enactments listed in Section 315 (5) of the Constitution. The consequence is that it cannot be altered like ordinary Acts of the National Assembly. It has the same alteration procedure like the Constitution as laid down in Section 9 (2) of the Constitution.
According to the SSS, the affected judicial officers were arrested based on allegations of corrupt practices and professional misconduct. The SSS in a statement said that raw cash of different denominations, in both local and foreign currencies, assets worth millions of Naira and documents affirming "unholy acts of these Judges" have been uncovered through a sting operation. The summary of cash allegedly recovered during the "raids" conducted in the homes of the Judges was given as follows: Naira - N93,558,000.00; Dollars - $530,087; Pounds - £25,970 and Euro - €5,680.
The question is, does the grave allegations levelled against the Judges and the alleged offences committed by them constitute "economic crimes of national security dimension" to bring same within the purview of the additional powers of the SSS pursuant to Instrument One of 1999?
It is advisable for us to examine the role of judicial officers in nation building. A corrupt judge is not only a threat to justice and the rule of law but to the society and the nation. Judges are by their calling empowered to make binding decisions on behalf of the rest of the society. When judgments are obtained fraudulently, the society and the nation are endangered. A corrupt judge is more dangerous than a kidnapper or an armed robber. The worst form of corruption is judicial corruption.
Though the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is the specialised and coordinating agency for the detection, prevention and prosecution of economic and financial crimes, economic crimes committed by a judicial officer is far more serious and damaging than those of other categories of persons and there is some wisdom is categorizing same as "economic crimes of national security dimension" for which the SSS can act upon.
On the manner the searches and arrests were conducted, I concede that the SSS acted in a rather brash and indecorous manner. However, facts are sacred and the law should be separated from sentiments. It is reported that the SSS obtained both search and arrest warrants. What is in dispute is whether the warrants covered all the affected judicial officers and the somewhat "undemocratic" manner they were executed, particularly the time.
The relevant principal law on the issuance of a search/arrest warrant is the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 (ACJA). Part 18 of the ACJA is devoted to search warrants, Section 144 thereof allows for the issuance of a search warrant on any house. The warrant may also authorize the officer or other person to arrest the occupier of the house or place where any incriminating item or thing is found during the search. Where this is specified in the search warrant, there would be no need to obtain an arrest warrant separately. By Section 146 of the ACJA, a search warrant shall be under the hand of a Judge, Magistrate or Justice of the Peace issuing it and shall remain in force until it is executed or cancelled by the court which has granted it.
One important provision under Part 18 of the ACJA that those criticizing the SSS should note is Section 148. It states unequivocally thus:
"A search warrant may be issued and executed at any time on any day, including a Sunday or Public Holiday."
However, under Section 151 of the ACJA, a search warrant cannot be executed outside the jurisdiction of the court or Justice of the Peace issuing it except with the consent of the court within whose jurisdiction the search is to be made. It is doubtful whether the SSS complied with this requirement before embarking on the search of the houses of some of the judges located outside the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja where the search warrant must have been issued.
It has been argued by some lawyers, including some Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) that the ACJA does not apply throughout the federation and that the SSS was bound to follow the provisions of the enabling procedural laws in the States where they executed the search, especially as it pertains to the time of execution of the search warrants. This argument with respect is misleading.
Under Section 111 of the repealed Criminal Procedure Act Cap. C41 LFN 2004, the time for executing a search warrant in the South was between the hours of five o'clock in the forenoon and eight o'clock at night of any day of the week, including Sundays but the Magistrate had the power to direct otherwise. The repealed Criminal Procedure (Northern States) Act Cap. C42 LFN 2004, was however silent on the time. Both Acts have now been repealed by Section 493 of the ACJA 2015 and are no longer laws in Nigeria. Section 2 of the ACJA makes the ACJA applicable to criminal trials for offences created by an Act of the National Assembly, like economic and financial crimes, and to other offences punishable in the FCT, it is the ACJA and not the various laws of the States where the "raids" were conducted that governs the procedure adopted by the SSS. Accordingly, it is misleading for anyone to suggest that the SSS was wrong to have executed the search warrant(s) at night.
It is reported that the SSS forcibly broke into the house of one of the judges. Section 149 (1) of the ACJA states thus:
"Where any building liable to be search is closed, a person residing in or being in charge of the building, thing or place, shall on demand of the police officer or other person executing the search warrant, allow him free and unhindered access to it and afford all reasonable facilities for its search."
By the combined effect of Sections 9, 10, 12, 13 and 149 (2) of the ACJA the person executing a search warrant and or arrest warrant is empowered to "break open any outer or inner door or window of any house or place" where unhindered access is denied upon demand. If the SSS had requested for unhindered access into the house of the affected judge and they were denied, the breaking of the door of the judge's house was lawful as expressly stated in the ACJA.
Four, is illegally obtained evidence admissible in law? In other words, where evidence is recovered in contravention of the procedure for the search of houses and places, will the court admit same?
Every lawyer in this country that is worth his salt knows the answer to this question. The answer is YES - illegally obtained evidence is admissible. The Supreme Court held so in unmistakable terms right from 1968 in the case of Musa Sadau & Anor v. The State (1968) NMLR 208. Also in Kuruma V. R. (1955)1 All ER 236 at 239-240, the Privy Council stated, inter alia, thus:
"The test to be applied in considering whether evidence is admissible is whether it is relevant to the matters in issue. If it is admissible.....the court is not concerned with how the evidence was obtained".
It is an elementary rule of evidence that what determines admissibility is relevance and not how the evidence was procured. See Section 1 of the Evidence Act 2011 and the cases of Torti v. Ukpabi (1984) 1 SCNLR 214 AT 236 - 237 and 239 24O and Lasun v. Awoyemi (2009) 16 NWLR (Pt.1168) 513 at 553.
Accordingly, the evidence allegedly recovered from the houses of the judges are admissible in law whether search warrants were obtained or not or properly executed or not. The court will still go ahead to admit the evidence irrespective of protestations against its illegality. This may not sound comforting, but that is the law.
By way of concluding remarks, I will like to make some points clear. The Judiciary is a sacred institution that should not be desecrated by any person. However, there is no sacredness in corruption. Judges must at all times be treated with decency and respect befitting of their office but corrupt judges should be identified and treated like other criminals in the society. Nigeria is blessed with some of the best judicial brains that can be found anywhere in the world, but the nefarious activities of the bad eggs on the Bench should never be tolerated under any guise.
Judges are not above the law.
Like other public servants, judges in Nigeria are paid in Naira, not in Dollars, Pounds, Euro or Cedis. Judges are not Bureau De Change operators and are not permitted to engage in business adventures. Therefore, the Nigerian people with whose taxes and resources the Judiciary is funded deserves to know how their Lordships came about the mind-blowing hard currencies found in their homes? The public deserves to know how their Lordships came about the assets allegedly traced to them. Judges who are living above their means should be able to answer some questions from the law enforcement agencies.
Their Lordships are presumed innocent until proved guilty and they should be given a fair trial and impartial hearing.
Instead of threatening the President, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) should tell us what they have done about the recent brutal murder of their member in Rivers State, Mr. Ken Atsuwete? Where was the NBA when a High Court Judge was assaulted in open court in Ekiti State by political thugs led by a governor? Why did the NBA not declare a state of emergency on the judiciary when Justice Ayo Isa Salami was humiliated and disgraced out of the Bench by the administration of Goodluck Jonathan despite the NJC's recommendation that he should be reinstated? What has the NBA done to Mr. Ricky Tarfa, SAN for allegedly bribing judges? Whose interest is the NBA fighting for?
Records have shown that judges in other jurisdictions, including the United States, have been arrested, prosecuted and jailed for corruption and other criminal conducts. Ghana recently purged its judiciary. If this is the time to uproot the pervasive cancer of corruption in the Nigerian Judiciary it is a welcome development and should be supported. Without checks and balances, the doctrine of separation of powers is useless and unworkable.
We cannot have different standards for the rule of law; one for the influential and another for the poor or one for the judges and another for the rest of us.
Thank you.
Inibehe Effiong is a Legal Practitioner and Convener of the Coalition of Human Rights Defenders (COHRD) and can be reached at:inibehe.effiong@gmail.com