₦airaland Forum

LagosOrigin:
The same people insulting the sultan of sokoto will still go back on their kneels to beg him

Na their way

ahmedio2017:
Keep your mouth sh.ut, Sharia law isn't meant for the Christians how is that suppose to be a problem? You this illite.rate, always use your br.ain. we have christians and Muslims in southwest so live and let us live ode.

Xisnin:
Most of the aids are neither money nor received into government account.

Sheuns:


Yet we have some people saying USA should get out. Their masters (politicians) dare not say so because they’re the ones that enjoy these aids the most.

A large sum of these funds if investigated were looted.

CommonSense1967:
It's really pathetic..Muslims need to stand up and stop this nonsense. This is rhe result of having Christian Governors in all SW states. This had to change and change fast.

Gandollar:
This is the more reason why Sharia law is necessary.

Let Yoruba Muslims denounce Islam all together if they don't want sharia.

Sharia is a way of life for Muslims.

3ice9ce:
Do you know that if Sharia is allowed in the SW, it means the Sultan will be making laws for Yorubas.

Can the Ooni make laws for traditional worshippers in the North?

Aawizdom:
The events of Hijab and Shariah arbitration have exposed the level of intolerance of Yoruba Christians to their Muslim folks. When you objectively analyse the events, it's a pure hatred mix with sheer ignorance shown by Southern Christian.

MasterJayJay:
https://x.com/NSCIAng/status/1884589162214408592?t=oW33Ol_6p_RRWsTdzwaxNg&s=19[/quote]The sponsors of the move to install Sharia courts and system of government in the Southwest is manifesting now.

The Sultan of Sokoto and the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs is part of the plot. That plot will fail. Sharia is unwanted in the Southwest. There are courts in the southWest that can handle civil and criminal offences hence there is no place for the primitive Sharia rules and punishment.

Any body in the Southwest that is not comfortable can go to the North where Sharia is practiced to stay and reside.

mariovito:
Yoruba don enter one chance.

Very smart game being played here,

Use an igbo Muslim to write your letters and communique to make it seem democratic where as same igbo Muslim lawyer can't lead them pray.

NothingDoMe:
Staying there to constitute civil disobedience at the office is absurd. Sending mails to all the employees that the President didn't follow protocol to fire her so she won't leave.

She is daft. Period.

Ojuntana:
Oga all heads of agencies are political appointees regardless of whether they are career people or not. Trump fired James Comey who was a career FBI agent and now installing Kash Patel who has never worked in the FBI. Are you saying that is illegal?

Even in the Nigerian case, Hameed Ali was confirmed as Comptroller General of Customs. Stop typing rubbish abeg

There's nothing in your website that says IG's are not political appointees

Ojuntana:
Oga all heads of agencies are political appointees regardless of whether they are career people or not. Trump fired James Comey who was a career FBI agent and now installing Kash Patel who has never worked in the FBI. Are you saying that is illegal?

Even in the Nigerian case, Hameed Ali was confirmed as Comptroller General of Customs. Stop typing rubbish abeg

There's nothing in your website that says IG's are not political appointees

Ojuntana:
You are just copying and pasting blindly

How does all these negate the fact the IG is a political appointee

iwaeda:
https://punchng.com/lagos-butchers-lament-as-cow-prices-soar-to-n1-7m/

Ojuntana:
You are writing rubbish bro

Is there any appointment made with regard to political affiliation? Even the AG is expected to be made without regard to political affiliation. What that means is that it is not required that the appointee be a member of a political party or movement before he can be appointed.

It is obvious you misconstrue political appointment to mean an appointment based on political affiliation? No sir. Political appointment simply means an appointment made by a political office holder.

Below is the official definition of a political appointee according to the US government: According to the United States Office of Government Ethics, a political appointee is "any employee who is appointed by the President, the Vice President, or agency head".

Now check and see if the IG's office falls into that category or not

Ojuntana:
You are writing rubbish bro

Is there any appointment made with regard to political affiliation? Even the AG is expected to be made without regard to political affiliation. What that means is that it is not required that the appointee be a member of a political party or movement before he can be appointed.

It is obvious you misconstrue political appointment to mean an appointment based on political affiliation? No sir. Political appointment simply means an appointment made by a political office holder.

Below is the official definition of a political appointee according to the US government: According to the United States Office of Government Ethics, a political appointee is "any employee who is appointed by the President, the Vice President, or agency head".

Now check and see if the IG's office falls into that category or not

MadamExcellency:
Why was James Comey not reinstated? The precedence isn't there and as such what she should advocate is her settlement not disregarding presidential order.

Ojuntana:
Your position is wrong. The position of Inspector General in the US is a political appointment not a career appointment. There's nothing in the 1978 laws establishing it that says they must be career civil servants. Go and do your research and stop painting your bias as facts.

The Nigerian system is modelled after the US system and the US has only one AG who is also a political appointee. What exactly is the job of the Minister of Justice different from the Attorney General of the Federation? It is neither here nor there and splitting the offices will ultimately lead to conflict. Besides, if split, will the AGF still be a cabinet position or it will become autonomous? If so, how then will he be able to represent the interests of the government in court when he's not on the cabinet?

Islie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft83NLf0ge8


https://www.thecable.ng/even-if-tinubu-appeared-as-my-surety-i-would-have-rejected-him-says-sowore/

BondRiv:
There are divergent views in the legal profession. As a member, I'm not in support of that separation. It is an unwarranted duplication that will achieve nothing. Rather we should drop the title of Minister of Justice. One of the problems in Nigeria is this copy and paste syndrome. We don't tailor things to suit our peculiarities. We are practising a presidential system, not parliamentary. The President appoints the AGF, and other cabinet members. This is just a case of distrust in the system. Separation is not the solution, neither will it strengthen the system. You have people not appointed or elected in the civil service engaging in massive corruption. The position of a Minster of Justice is found in the UK, where they also have an Attorney General. In the U.S. there is no such duplication. We have better things to focus on, and shouldn't chase shadows.

Starzo:
Bottom line is she can be removed by the president. Only that he has to tell Congress why.

In this case her fate is sealed wether through Congress or executive order.... Republicans control both houses and even the supreme Court. So all that is formality.

And if she feels Trump has violated the law then she can seek justice the appropriate way.

P.S. Trump is not the first president doing this type of thing. Republican and democratic presidents in the past have removed numerous IG's during their time. It's only getting major publicity now because of who is in power.

Starzo:
Sorry I might have missed that part

But your argument has been centered on the point that she cannot be removed by the president. Not that due process must be followed

You've been arguing that she cannot be removed by the president hence my response to you

And yes the Congress being informed is mainly a formality... they don't usually turn down the president's request in this scenario.


If by chance they ever do, the supreme Court will ultimately have the final say

Ojuntana:
That is basically a lie. Where did you get that idea from. Any position that is for Presidential appointment, the President is at liberty to make it as he deems fit except in a situation where the law clearly spells out conditions.

An example is the AGF. In Nigeria, the AGF is the only Minister that the constitution prescribes the minimum qualification of 15 years legal practice for. The rest is at the President's discretion

So unless you can show that the law mandates that IGs should be appointed from career civil servants which is not so, you are simply lying.

The IG can be appointed from anywhere. No law says it must be a career civil servant and even if a career civil servant is appointed. He can be fired by the President and he will simply return to the civil service office he previously occupied just like that of Jack Smith

Ojuntana:
It's obvious you have issues with English comprehension

What does it mean to not follow proper procedures? How does that mean Trump does not have the power to fire her according to you?

Starzo:
You're still not getting it...yes Trump should have notified Congress...even that in itself is a formality

The issue here is her claiming 'the president cannot remove her'...He actually can. It's in the Constitution

There's a difference between saying 'i don't believe due process was followed in my removal and saying 'i cannot be removed by the president'

I nor dey explain again

Starzo:
You're still not getting it...yes Trump should have notified Congress...even that in itself is a formality

The issue here is her claiming 'the president cannot remove her'...He actually can. It's in the Constitution

There's a difference between saying 'i don't believe due process was followed in my removal and saying 'i cannot be removed by the president'

I nor dey explain again

Starzo:
You're the one not comprehending....

Can she be removed by the president?,yes...it's written in the Constitution

Only that Congress has to be notified...

She didn't say due process was not followed. She expressly said the president does not have the right to remove her.

Either she's ignorant or a terrible liar who feels uncountable to the presidency. Either of these two scenarios make her unfit to hold key govt position.

Ojuntana:
Just look at yourself. You are simpy disgracing your education
You posted a "research" that says the IG is appointed by the President and you are still saying rubbish that the IG is not a political appointment. Do you even know what a political appointment means. Abeg go and rest and stop typing nonsense

Ojuntana:
The office of inspector General is a political appointment not civil servant office

Stop typing from ignorance

Trump is not the first president to fire an ig

Even Reagan and Obama did

Starzo:
Stop saying what you don't know

How you people say ignorant things with so much confidence amuses me

NothingDoMe:
That's nonsense talk from her.

The president fired a government employee and the employee said the termination is not effective without justification and briefing the both houses in the Congress of the USA.

Now the government don use force remove her from their office her body don cool down.