safarigirl:
So, you people are still doing this mumu popularity contest?..

I bet nothing has changed from how it was before. Once people have nominated fine girls, one funny looking sister will win because she has friends in romance section with multiple monikers

Dang! You fine

Captain red beard in the third pic

:Du

maclatunji:


An Easter programme is not crucial to your faith as a Christian. On that score you will fail woefully if the students go to court.

I don't get what you're saying. the premise of my position is on that section. it makes the act of the school not illegal

maclatunji:


Certain rules are ultra vires and of no effect ab initio. Signing them does not make them valid.

Bros read and analyze section 38(3) of the constitution

maclatunji:
By Festus Ogun

The management of the Covenant University, Ota, Ogun State has suspended about 200 undergraduates of the faith-based institution for missing an Easter ‘Youth Alive’ program. The school had earlier organized the four days Easter retreat for the students and had also made attendance mandatory. However, while some of the students were fed up – for various reasons – of going for church services in the morning and evening for the four uninterrupted days, they couldn’t just but miss some days out of the retreat. Surprisingly and unfortunately to them, they have been punished through suspension by the school management for simply missing the compulsory Easter program. Some were suspended for a year.

Suspension is a very serious punishment. As serious as it is, however, there are instances where it will and must necessarily be applicable on erring students. Yet, the means by which students are suspended from school must be reasonable and must be carried out within the confines of our laws.

This case of the Covenant University suspending about 200 of its students for not attending an Easter program is a prima facie case of unconstitutional suspension of university students.

Before continuing with this piece, there is need to state clearly that if there is any enacted law in the university that have made attending religious functions compulsory, such law is void and of no effect whatsoever. I am quite sure that the school would have relied on a particular written law of the institution before the suspension since “nulla poena sine lege” – there can be no punishment or penalty without law. And if such law exists in the school, the law is clearly against the provisions of the Constitution; the sacred book where all other laws derive their validity. And if not, that will amount to the height of total unconstitutionality because there ought to be no punishment without law. See Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution.

Interestingly, the school itself is a creation of law and the law is above the school authority or laws – the Constitution is supreme and all other laws derive their validity from it. The implication of this is that its (the school’s) actions must be within the provisions of our laws, particularly the Constitution. By virtue of Section 1(1) of the 1999 Constitution, the Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities (including Covenant University authority) and persons throughout Nigeria. See MADU v. ONUAGULUCHI (1985) 6 NCLR 365.

Therefore, any law made by the institution that is inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution shall be declared void and unconstitutional. Section 1(3) of the Constitution goes further to provides very clearly that “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.” See ABACHA v. FAWEHINMI (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) 228; F.R. N. v. IFEGWU (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt. 842) 113; A.G ABIA STATE v. A.G. FEDERATION (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt. 763) 264.

First, the students’ right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion guaranteed under section 38(1) of the 1999 Constitution has been breached. The section provides thus “every person shall be entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom (either alone or in community with others, in public or private) to manifest and propagate his religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”

The implication of this section is that even though the school is established by a church, it will be quite unapt to deny students the right to freedom of religion. Even when, for example, all the students are Christians, the constitution has granted them the right to change their religion or belief without notifying anyone. The constitution has also granted the students the freedom to manifest their beliefs either alone or in public and this can in fact justify their sitting in their hostels instead of joining the congregation.

If based on personal conviction – brought about by deep thought (a constitutional right) – the suspended students have changed their religion, should that lead them out of the school? Should exercising the constitutional right to change religion amount to automatic carry overs and extra-years? Frankly, making attendance of students compulsory and mandatory at a ‘Youth Alive’ Easter program is a breach of this fundamental right.

Section 38(2) of the Constitution goes further by providing thus: “No person attending any place of education SHALL BE REQUIRED TO RECEIVE RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION OR TO TAKE PART IN OR ATTEND ANY RELIGIOUS CEREMONY OR OBSERVANCE, if such instruction, ceremony or observance relates to a RELIGION OTHER THAN HIS OWN or religion not approved by his parent or guardian.” (Emphasis supplied by me).

The above provision has expressly precluded any institution from imposing religious instructions on students for any reason whatsoever. However, there are two main clauses that need to be clarified.

They are:

(1) Where the religious instruction relate to a religion other than his own OR (not AND)

(2) Where the religion is not approved by his parent or guardian.

Thus, if the school religion is approved by the parent of the students, it will amount to a lawful instruction. And where the instruction is in consonance with the plaintiff’s religion, it is legally binding.

After all said however, in my humble view, the former relates to where the person relying on the provision is an aduItand is deemed fit under law to make decisions of his own without any interference from anybody including the parent or guardian. And the latter will be applicable where the person relying on the section is still an infant under the law and is incapable of making some decisions without the parents’ or guardians’ consent. And that’s why the drafters of the Constitution were careful in making use of OR instead of AND. You either fall within a category. I stand to be corrected!

There is need to categorically state that an aduItdoes not necessarily need the approval of parents for the religion he wishes to practice. More importantly, the students, presumed to be adults, have been granted the right under section 38(1) of the constitution to change their beliefs and religion without the approval of or from anyone. Thus, where some of the students have exercised their constitutional right to change their beliefs, it will be unconstitutional and very violating to force the students of the institution to attend religious functions other than theirs. For the constitution has provided in clear terms that no student shall be compelled to attend religious function or ceremony where such instruction or ceremony relates to a religion other than his own. And since most of them are adults, the alternative (2) of “parents’ religion or consent” can be do away with and inapplicable to this very serious matter.

Since it has been established that the student has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religious, it will also be very unlawful for an institution to compel students to be in the midst of others for religious purpose. Apart from the fact that section 38(1) has vested on the students the right worship alone or in the midst of others, making it an imperative for the student to be in attendance has also violated the students’ right to peaceful assembly guaranteed under section 40 of the 1999 Constitution. It provides (in part) thus: “Every person shall be entitled to assemble freely and associate with other persons, and in particular he may form or belong to any political party, trade union or any other association for the protection of his interest”. See the celebrated case of AGBAI v. OKAGBUE (1991) 7 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 204) 391 and the provision of Article 10 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act.

Additionally, one of the students was reported by Punch to have said this: “They stopped me from sitting for a paper last week because I did not go for a service and I don’t know if I will be allowed in today either.” This statement has the effect that the student was not in fact aware of his suspension until he got to the exam hall. Since the students appear not to have been summoned before suspended, it is therefore safe to submit that the place of fair hearing is missing!

Fair hearing is a very sacrosanct provision of the Constitution that relates to administration of justice. Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution provided for the right to fair hearing or trial. Since the students are not summoned and interrogated formally before suspension, it will be trite to submit that this fundamental right has also been violated. It is a cardinal principle of Natural Justice that “nemo judex in causa sua”; no one must be a judge in his own cause. But here, the management of the Covenant University has assumed the role of the complainant and the judge which is against the above principle. The school authority has also failed to hear from the other side before meting out punishment since it is the law that “audi alteram partem” – both sides must be heard in determining cases.

Commenting on the sacrosanct nature of fair hearing, in OMOKHODION V. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA AND 6 OTHERS (2006) All FWLR 1, the court observed that a hearing can only be fair when all of the parties involved are heard. And so, without fair hearing or trial, the principles of Natural Justice, highlighted above, are out rightly abandoned and violated. See GARBA V. UNIVERSITY OF MAIDUDURI (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt 18) 550, OTAPO V. SUNMONU (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt. 58) 587, KOTOYE V. CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA AND OTHERS (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 98) 419

Having established the grave violations of the authority of the said school, it will be instructive to assert that the school should as a matter of urgency withdraw the suspension in order to promote rule of law in this country for the truth is that suspension as punishment in this kind of situation is too harsh a decision. Saying it is the height of cruelty and illegality is an understatement.

Relying on the above legal authorities and provisions, the school is therefore enjoined to recall the students and reinstate them and thereafter offer them public apology with immediate effect. Unconstitutionality shouldn’t be celebrated and overlooked in this country. We have laws in Nigeria which are above all of us and as such all citizens and authorities must abide by it, whatever the state of our temper.

Remember, this piece is not written to promote insubordination or indiscipline but to ensure justice is done to the poor students.

God bless Nigeria.

Source: http://www.opinions.ng/illegality-covenant-university-students-suspension-school-management/

stop quoting law like a false prophet. Even though i'm not a fan of the ridiculous suspension spree. the law is the law
section 38(3) states that
'No religious community or denomination shall be prevented from providing religious instruction for pupils of that community or denomination in any place of education maintained wholly by that community or denomination.'
CU has the constitutional right to provide religious instruction for its pupil of the Canaan land community in which CU students are a part of. since they signed up for it with and are aware of what they are to face.
why should you after sleeping on your right com back and cry foul.

Imstrong:
Every institution has its rules and regulations covenant university is faith based and well principled, it's also private, they have a standard governing its activities

let the OP be ranting there, it's a private institution. they did not force you to attend. since you have decided to attend, it implies that you must adhere with their rules since you voluntarily signed up for it. it is not illegal. The OP should go and represent them in court now.

drizslim:
Ok Buhari FYI This is the Fowl i was able to kill today

Chick abuse

CAN came to visit, what's with the imam f

HBD talented
Nneka - heartbeat ft. Nas
That year

He didn't win the election

Assembly of the Dumped

Goddys:
Please I need an advice of experienced peeps here.
A friend of mine working in Dubai wants to link me up with a factory job of 400k salary, and also I am due to partake in one year vocational training in Nigeria Law school that would enable me to practice as a lawyer in Nigeria.
Now I'm left in the dilemma of accepting his offer to link me up with the job or proceed to Nigeria Law School to qualify as a lawyer in Nigeria

Please what do I do?

Don't fall for Dubai slavery
It's a smarter move to complete ur legal education first

martineinstein:
when i tel my friends not to join military,dey will think i am joking.....i served in a cantonment in ibadan;i realised the xtent of sufferings those soldiers encounter,and i told myself that not even my enemy wll join the military.the segregation is too much,especially when u dont know a high ranking officer

Me that I and all my siblings went to military schools my dad us disappointed none of us joined the military
I'm like nigerian military is not worth one man's life. The seniority complex in nigerian military has to stop. That's my own beef with nigerian military

But Obama smokes too
So he shouldn't feel bad

lolawilliams:
Let the FEDS tell it. It really isn't his

Rick Ross fan spotted

The mainstream media would never say negative abt her so it's up to the other media outlets to be rational in exposing everyone's skeletons. American media sef puts their eye in our business so its fair if nigerian media puts eye in their matter too

Toeyoursea:


The banks violated the TSA agreement and they should be made to face the wrought of the law. The price hike is the price the government will have to pay for doing the right thing and I think it is worth it. They will learn to take Nigeria serious next time; THE ERA OF IMPUNITY IS OVER.

Fining them is a better punishment banning them is punishing them and innocent citizens that need Forex to do business.
This government needs to exit by 2019 for their insensitive and myopic view on governance

Toeyoursea:


The banks violated the TSA agreement and they should be made to face the wrought of the law. The price hike is the price the government will have to pay for doing the right thing and I think it is worth it. They will learn to take Nigeria serious next time; THE ERA OF IMPUNITY IS OVER.

But fining them is a better punishment banning them from forex is punishing them and punishing innocent citizens that need Forex to do business.
This government needs to exit by 2019
They are insensitive and dull

Hillary Clinton’s Connection To Nigerian Tyrant Sani Abacha

A senior official of the Clinton Foundation, the politically well-connected charity started by former US President Bill Clinton, sought State Department favors for Gilbert Chagoury, the Nigerian-Lebanese businessman convicted of helping former head of state Sani Abacha steal billions of public dollars. 
BY SAHARA REPORTERS, NEW YORKAUG 24, 2016

A senior official of the Clinton Foundation, the politically well-connected charity started by former US President Bill Clinton, sought State Department favors for Gilbert Chagoury, the Nigerian-Lebanese businessman convicted of helping former head of state Sani Abacha steal billions of public dollars. 


The revelations, contained in a 2009 exchange of emails between Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band and two senior State Department officials during Mrs. Clinton’s time as Secretary of State, raise new questions about the relationship between the Foundation and the Clinton State Department that is currently a subject of intense debate in the US presidential campaigns.

In this US presidential election year, these developments are fueling accusations by the opposition Republican party who claim that the Clintons abused their role as public servants, and worked against US interests, by granting favors to foreign interests through their Foundation.


Gilbert Chagoury and Bill Clinton together at an event
Reports Afrique
Chagoury a “key guy”

The emails, released by the conservative group Judicial Watch, reveal that on April 25th, 2009 Mr. Band, a former aide to US President Bill Clinton and a key figure at the Foundation, emailed Secretary of State Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills and deputy chief Huma Abedin with a request that they schedule a meeting between Mr. Chagoury and the key US “substance person” in Lebanon.  Mr. Band described Mr. Chagoury as a “key guy” for the foundation and said the meeting was “very important.”

Mrs. Abedin, a longtime personal aide to Mrs. Clinton, replied by agreeing to contact the US Ambassador to Lebanon, Jeffrey Feltman, on Mr. Chagoury’s behalf, prompting a final email from Mr. Band urging her to call the Ambassador immediately, reminding her again that Mr. Chagoury was “very important.”

What made Mr. Chagoury important to the Clinton Foundation?

Money.

According to Foundation records, Mr. Chagoury is one of its largest individual donors, contributing between $1 -$5 million to the charity. Mr. Chagoury has also reportedly pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative, a separate project of the Foundation.  In a press statement, Mr. Chagoury’s spokesman Mark Corallo denied wrongdoing and said that Mr. Chagoury had not seen the Clintons in years. Nor did he meet with Ambassador Feltman, although Mr. Corallo confirmed his client had sought a meeting.

In fact, Mr. Chagoury’s ties to the Clintons go back to the Abacha period. In a rare interview with the press, he told journalist Robin Urevich the Clintons were “friends,” and confirmed that he had donated $500,000 to an “independent” voter registration drive in 1996, during Bill Clinton’s re-election campaign. That contribution, which skirted the ban on foreign funding for US political campaigns, earned him an invitation to the White House and marked the beginning of his personal relationship with the Clintons.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Chagoury’s $500,000 donation followed a conversation with top Clinton aides on how to influence the Abacha regime. This donation comes months after Nigerian political activist, and rightful President, Moshood Abiola was assassinated by the Abacha regime in front of American diplomats escalating tensions between Washington and Abuja. Observers have noted that serious discussion of sanctioning the Nigerian government for human rights abuses, and the assassination of Mr. Abiola, dissipated following meetings with Mr. Chagoury and his generous donations.

Abacha’s “Gatekeeper”


Signed photo to Gilbery Chagoury from former President Bill Clinton
The National Review
Mr. Chagoury’s role as a go-between and bagman for the Abacha regime is well documented. In a documentary shown on American public television, he recalled that he first befriended Mr. Abacha when he was a young officer and Mr. Chagoury was an aspiring industrialist.  After Abacha seized power in 1993, investigators found, Mr. Chagoury designed a complex global network of shell companies, offshore bank accounts and fraudulent business deals that allowed Abacha and his family and cronies – including himself – to siphon off an estimated $4 billion in oil revenue and tax money.

A longtime observer of the Nigeria oil industry, African Energy Observer editor Philippe Vasset, told reporter Robin Urevich that any company wanting to do business in Abacha’s Nigeria had to go through Gilbert Chagoury.  "He was the gatekeeper to Abacha's presidency," Vasset noted, ensuring that Abacha and his inner circle always got their cut. 

Nuhu Ribadu, who investigated Mr. Chagoury when he headed the Nigeria’s anti-corruption agency, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, told Urevich in 2008: "You couldn't investigate corruption without looking at Chagoury."

In 2004, Ribadu said, he lured Mr. Chagoury to a remote airfield in northern Nigeria airport to arrest him. The plan was foiled when an airport official apparently alerted Chagoury’s pilot by radio. After touching down, the plane picked up speed and took off again, immediately leaving Nigerian airspace.

Convicted of corruption

Mr. Chagoury was less fortunate in Europe. In 2000, he was convicted of laundering stolen money in Switzerland, and returned $66 million to the Nigerian treasury. A year later, he admitted in a London court to having laundered $300 million for the Abacha family, and escaped prosecution by agreeing to return as much as $200 million to the Nigerian treasury.  Mr. Chagoury was also investigated by the US in connection with the Halliburton bribery scheme which funneled $180 million to Abacha, but escaped prosecution.

Clinton Foundation officials have failed to explain why they accepted donations from a convicted money launderer of Nigeria’s stolen wealth or why they intervened with the State Department on his behalf.

Neither the Foundation nor the Clinton presidential campaign responded to SaharaReporters’ request for comment.

According to an Associated Press report on Tuesday, over half the people outside the government who met with Hillary Clinton while she was secretary of state gave money — either personally or through companies or groups — to the Clinton Foundation, suggesting that “extraordinary proportion” indicates possible ethics challenges for her if elected president in November.

“At least 85 of 154 people from private interests who met or had phone conversations scheduled with Clinton while she led the State Department donated to her family charity or pledged commitments to its international programs,” AP said of its review of State Department calendars released to it.

“Combined, the 85 donors contributed as much as $156 million,” the report said.  “At least 40 donated more than $100,000 each, and 20 gave more than $1 million.”

The Clinton campaign immediately pushed back against the report.  “It cherry-picked a limited subset of Secretary Clinton’s schedule to give a distorted portrayal of how often she crossed paths with individuals connected to charitable donations to the Clinton Foundation,” campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement

http://saharareporters.com/2016/08/24/hillary-clinton%E2%80%99s-connection-nigerian-tyrant-sani-abacha

In this Buharific economy this guy is not happy with his jackpot, i'll buy it from him for 10K
And I'll sue from the retailer to Cway to NIS all of them will be codefendants for tort of negligence, breach of Contract and ill collect punitive damages general damages exemplary damages emotional truamatic and everything damages no time

[quote author=TunezMedia post=47999586]

Or Janet Ola[/quote
So u sef na BU student

mu2sa2:
Although sex stories of all sorts are common these days in churches, this one has many question marks. I am very reluctant to believe a woman who goes willingly to a man's abode to share time with him, then comes out to allege rape. You will often discover that the disagreement is not on the fact of penetration having taken place, but because the man failed to deliver on all, and sometimes none, of the things he promised the girl. And it is not rape in nigeria if a girl is over 18 years old and a man uses "sweet mouth" to get her to agree to have sex with him. Sorry, lady, if you agree to do it with a guy just because he says he is in Dangote's class, but after you discover he lied - no rape there.

Once a woman says no even if they had undressed It is rape. Rape can be defined as the penetration of a woman's private part without consent given or consent given due to use of force.
Even if it wasn't a rape the Law would be biased in favour of the woman.

I'm a BU student there is nothing like seniority in Babcock
But bullies are everywhere
If CC Nwosu sees this video
The bully is on some one year suspension dubs or expulsion

PEOPL DEMOCRATIC PARTY
YOUTH DEMOCRATIC PARTY
POWER TO THE PEOPLE
LIGHT TO THE PEOPLE

[img][/img]
Or is it just me

Rossikk:
Wakey wakey...! A US president DOES have the authority to unilaterally order a nuclear strike without recourse to congress. He has the nuclear codes on him at all times, which he can trigger whenever he likes. Donald Trump is the person you are willing to give that power? Trump, a two year old child in a man's body? It's the very height of madness.

But he is smarter and richer than all your ancestors and future generation till eternity

Human nature by MJ

Crixina:
Headlights by Eminem

Lovely song

False UI is no1 CU is no2
Get ur facts right

Congrats to my sec sch mate qudus aka Oscar wizzy blynxxx
Proud of u exnavy boy

Please mr boyo suggest solutions not doom

Na to buy fuel plenty before d price increases