₦airaland Forum

naijaking1:
You can still improve on your knowledge of 1960s Nigerian history without being so ridiculous. You could be pardoned for your subjective interpretations of events even when wrong, but the factual errors in your write are just too glaring.

please point them out  (with sources to back them up)

@dede1
U need to stop writing all those nonsense about the constitution as if it was the penal code.
Does the constitution describe the punishment for armed robbery? If no, can we then say that armed robbery in Nigeria is not punishable by life imprisonment? 
The constitution supersedes other laws when there is a conflict, but has no bearing on non-overlapping matters. As armed robbery is under the criminal code, so is mutiny under the armed forces act.
Even till today, mutiny in the Nigerian armed forces is punishable by death. From the Armed Forces Act

52.  (1)        A person subject to service law under this Act who—
(a)       takes part in a mutiny involving the use of violence or the threat of the use of violence or having as its object or one of its objects the refusal or avoidance of any duty or service against, or in connection with operations against the enemy, or the impeding of the performance of that duty or service; or
(b)       incites any other person subject to service law under this Act to take part in a mutiny, whether actual or intended,
is guilty of an offence under this subsection and liable, on conviction by a court-martial, to suffer death.

(2)        A person subject to service law under this Act who, in a case not falling within subsection (1) of this section, takes part in a mutiny, or incites any person subject to service law to take part in a mutiny, whether actual or intended, is guilty of an offence under this subsection and liable, on conviction by a court-martial, to life imprisonment.
(3)        In this section and other sections of this Act, “mutiny” means a combination between two or more persons subject to service law under this Act or between persons, two at least of whom are subject to service law under this Act—
(a)       to overthrow or resist lawful authority in the Federation or in any arm or service of the Armed Forces or in any force co-operating with the Armed Forces or in any part of those forces; or
(b)       to disobey the authority as is mentioned in paragraph (a) of this subsection in such circumstances as to make the disobedience subversive of discipline, or with the object of avoiding any duty or service against, or in connection with operations against the enemy; or
(c)        to impede the performance of any duty or service in the Federation or in any arm or service of the Armed Forces or in any force co-operating with the Armed Forces or in any part of those forces.

naijaking1:
I was going to shout at the top of my voice when I suddenly saw how ignorant you are about the events of that era.
FYI, Ironsi did not dethrone the civilian regime, the first coup plotters did. Your position is a false association of Ironsi(who was himself running for dear life) with the first coupist, many of who were Igbos.
Failure to execute the coup plotters? You should know that they had been arrested, detained and facing the judicial process when Ironsi himself was assasinated.

Lets get the sequence of events straight, then we will debate who is ignorant.

1. Tafa Balewa led government was in power till Jan 15, 1966
2. Nzeogwu & co, killed the prime minister, Sardauan, Akintola, etc.
3. The death of the prime minister, made Nwafor Orizu (then senate president and NCNC member) the acting president
4. 1960 Constitution dictated that the majority party, NPC, appoint as acting PM. Their candidate was Dipcharima
5. Orizu sort the approval of the NCNC members on the appointment (even though the choice was for the NPC to make) but the NCNC disagreed, instead nominating their own candidate in Mbadiwe.
6. During the debate, Ironsi arrived and discussed with Orizu in private. When Ironsi left, Orizu told the NPC and NCNC members that he couldn't grant their request.
7. Later that day, Ironsi summoned the Cabinet officers and told them (actually lied) that he was unable to suppress the mutineers, claiming the latter were in control of Kaduna, Kano and Ibadan. This was false as Ironsi had the support of Ojukwu in Kano, Nzefili in Ibadan, Njoku and Gowon in Lagos, Ejoor at Enugu, and Obienu  at Abeokuta. Ironsi himself said as much in his first broadcast.
8. When asked by the cabinet members if he wanted to take up the british offer of military assistance, he declined, saying that the rest of the army were adamant and anxious in pressurizing him to assume power and that it would be in the best interest of the cabinet members and the nation if he assumed power 'temporarily'. They agreed and he demand a written statement to that effect.
9. At 11:50pm on Jan 16, 1960, read a broadcast handing over power to Ironsi.
10. Ironsi made a follow up broadcast in which he suspended parts of the constitution and went on to constitute the first military regime.

So Nzeogwu and his crew killed the PM but did not overthrow the government. They were never in power.
Ironsi was the military personnel that took over from the civilian regime. You can argue on whether the cabinet members were intimidated or deceived into handing over, but the fact remains that Ironsi was the one who overthrew the civilian regime.

Feel free to tell us your own version of the story of how Nzeogwu & co assumed power 

George_D:
are you aware this guy has a case in court and could be re-instated if he wins?

and if he loses, we will have a convicted CIBN president.

daffidy:
Has anyone given thoughts to what foreign investors/banks would do? First there is sure to be a shake up in human capital and that means that quiet a number of people will lose their jobs .
We all know that almost every body has a brother, sister or close relative that work in these banks and are the ones paying the bills and sponsoring family to school etc.

Think like the white man who usually dont have any family or cultural values .

GOD HELP US

So what fraction of staff in Standard Chartered are foreigners?

Crude Oil:
The CBN did not follow the laws and prescription of the Company And Allied Matters Act, which supersedes the BOFIA act.

The Company and Allied Matters Act does not supersede the BOFIA. Section 53 of the BOFIA states

1. The provisions of this Decree shall apply without prejudice to the provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Decree, 1990 in so far as they relate to banks and to winding-up by the Federal High Court.
2. Where any of the provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Decree, 1990 are inconsistent with the provisions of this Decree, the provisions of this Decree shall prevail.