Malabu OPL: EFCC Dismisses Prosecutor Amid Bribery Allegations

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has taken decisive action against one of its prominent prosecutors, Offem Uket, in response to allegations of bribery and misconduct linked to the Malabu OPL 245 oil block scam case. Following the dismissal of the case by Justice Abubakar Kutigi due to insufficient evidence, the EFCC opted to terminate Uket’s appointment. It’s alleged that Uket yielded to pressure from former Attorney General Bello Adoke and defense attorney Wole Olanipekun to undermine the trial. Despite the setback in court, the EFCC remains committed to challenging the ruling, citing substantial evidence against the accused parties. Expressing dismay over Uket’s purported actions, EFCC Chairman Mr. Ola Olukoyede reaffirmed the agency’s dedication to pursuing justice in the Malabu case. Uket, who has previously handled high-profile cases involving notable figures such as Stella Oduah and Sambo Dasuki, vehemently denies the bribery allegations. Nonetheless, his contract was not renewed amidst the controversy surrounding the Malabu proceedings. An internal investigation reportedly uncovered evidence suggesting Uket’s misconduct, prompting the decision to terminate his appointment. In response to the developments, Wole Olanipekun vehemently denied offering any bribes to Uket, dismissing the allegations as unfounded and irresponsible. He emphasized that investigations conducted by international authorities found no wrongdoing in connection to the Malabu transaction.

Supreme Court Dismisses Obi’s Appeal Against Tinubu

The Supreme Court of the nation has dismissed the appeal brought forth by Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the general election, challenging the victory of President Bola Tinubu.  Obi had alleged various issues, including Vice-President Kashim Shettima’s alleged double nomination, which he argued rendered Shettima unqualified to serve as Tinubu’s running mate. However, the Supreme Court ruled that the matter of double nomination had already been addressed in a prior judgment and could not be revisited.  The court stated, “This appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed.” The appeal by Obi consisted of seven issues, but the head of the seven-member panel of judges, Inyang Okoro, noted that issues 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 had already been addressed in a previous ruling related to Atiku Abubakar’s appeal.  Atiku Abubakar was the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and his appeal had also been dismissed by the court. As a result, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the tribunal, affirming the election of President Bola Tinubu.

Supreme Court Dismisses Atiku’s Plea To File Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu

The Supreme Court, on Thursday threw out the motion by former Vice President and candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, seeking leave of court to file fresh evidence in his appeal against the victory of President Bola Tinubu, in the February 25, presidential election. The Petitioner pleaded the apex court to grant him leave to bring in additional evidence by way of depositions on oath from the Chicago State University for use in his appeal to wit: the certified discovery deposition made by Caleb Westberg on behalf of Chicago State University on October 3, 2023, disclaiming the certificate presented by the 2nd respondent, Bola Ahmed Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission. The motion dated 5th October but filed on the 6th, contained a 32-page deposition  released to the former Vice President on the orders of Judge Nancy Maldonado of the District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division, Illinois, United States of America. Ruling on the motion, Justice John Inyang Okoro, held that a clinical look at the issues formulated by all the parties, it is clear that the argument is whether this court as presently constituted has the power to grant the motion.  According to the panel, out of the 7 issues distilled by Atiku for determination, none related or covered forgery, which the appellant is seeking to bring in. It maintained that the Constitution does not permit that, and this court has no jurisdiction to grant the filing of fresh evidence that was not pleaded at the PEPC.  It noted that Atiku did not even deem it fit to file for an amendment of his pleadings and for extension of time, since the 180 days allowed by the Constitution had elapsed since September 17, 2023.