Lottery Regulation Feud: Supreme Court Hears Lagos, Ekiti Suit Against FG, March

Fifteen years later, the Supreme Court on Monday, fixed March 13, 2024 to hear a suit filed in 2008, by the Attorney General of Lagos State against the Federal Government, in respect of who controls and regulates the gaming and lottery sector.  Ekiti state was joined as co-Plaintiff in the suit following an order of the court made on October 6, 2020. The Attorney General of the Federation is the 1st Defendant while the National Assembly is 2nd Defendant. The Attorneys General of 34 other States, were joined as defendants by the Supreme Court on November 15, 2022. A 7-man panel of the Supreme Court led by Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, fixed the date at a resumed sitting on Monday.  Bode Olanipekun SAN, announced appearance for Lagos State Government while Adetunji Osho appeared for Ekiti state. The Federal Government (1st Defendant) was represented by Innocent Daa’gba, while Ifeanyi Mrialike represented the National Assembly.  The Attorneys General of the 33 States were duly represented and announced appearances.  However, there was no legal representation for Kwara state despite being served with hearing notice. The Supreme Court ordered Jigawa and Kaduna State Governments to put their houses in order by resolving the issue of legal representation before the next hearing date.  Meanwhile, the apex court panel unanimously deemed all the processes filed out of time by the defendants as duly and properly filed, having been regularized. The application by the Attorney General of Oyo state to join as co- Plaintiff having been withdrawn, was struck out by panel.  Justice Kekere-Ekun advised that all the State Governments that are on one side in accordance with their respective interests should present a common argument in order to save the time of the court on the hearing date.  Speaking to judiciary correspondents at the Supreme Court, Innocent Daagba, said he had filed processes and submissions of the Federal Government since 2020, adding that the processes have been regularized by the court, which clears the coast for hearing of the matter.  Recall that on 15 August 2022, the Federal Government (the Nigerian Lottery Regulation commission and the Nigerian Lottery Trust fund) won against Lagos and other States, on the issue of multiple regulation in the gaming sector. The Bookmakers association of Nigeria had initiated the lawsuit to determine the legitimate regulators of gaming businesses because they complained about paying multiple taxes and licensing fees to States and the Federal Government. In the Suit NO: FHC/L/CS/15992020, filed before Hon. Justice I.N Oweibo of the Lagos High Court, the Judge declared that the Federal Government should be the sole regulator of gaming business in the country as the constitution is clear on the position of lottery in the exclusive list and the National Assembly can legislate on lottery matters. Despite the judgement, there is still not an end to the back and forth bickering between the bookmakers and State Governments on multiple taxation and regulation. On July 19, 2023, Justice Iniekenimi Oweibo of the Federal High Court (FHC) in Lagos State ruled that the Federal Government, through the National Assembly, had the exclusive right to legislate and control lottery activities in the country. Few months after the FHC judgement, a Lagos State High Court delivered another judgement holding that matters pertaining to lottery and one-chance betting were subjects under the residual list in the constitution. By this, the judge held that Lagos State had the right to regulate the sector.  However, by a further amended originating summons marked SC/1/2008, the Plaintiffs want the apex court to declare “that lottery is not one of the 68 items in respect of which the National Assembly has the Exclusive vires to make laws under Part 1 of the Second Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).  They are seeking a declaration that having regard to the clear provisions of Section 4(2) and (3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), the National Assembly lacks the vires to legally and constitutionally make any Law to regulate and control the operation of lottery in Nigeria.  “A declaration that having regard to the clear provision of Section 4(4)(a), (b) and Part ll of the Second Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), matters relating to lottery do not fall within items which the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly are concurrently empowered to make Laws with regard thereto.  “A declaration that having regard to the clear provisions of Section 4(7)(a) and (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), the Lagos State Government, vide the Lagos State House of Assembly has the power to the exclusion of the National Assembly, to make Laws to regulate and control the operation of lottery within Lagos State.  More so, the Plaintiffs are praying for, “A declaration that having regard to the clear provisions of Sections 4(4)(b), (7)(a) and 299(a) of the Constitution as amended, the power of the National Assembly to make Laws to regulate and control the operation of lottery is limited by the 1999 Constitution to only the Federal Capital Territory.  “A declaration that Sections 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the National Lottery Act CAP N145, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, made by the National Assembly are inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.  Further more, they want “A declaration that the National Lottery Act CAP N145, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria is inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution.  In addition, the Plaintiffs want “An order nullifying Sections 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the National Lottery Act CAP N145, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria as well as an order nullifying the entirety of the National Lottery Act CAP N145, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria.  Also, they are praying for “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st Defendant either by himself, agents’ privies, agencies of the Federal Government of Nigeria or Federation of

I’ll Appeal Tribunal Judgement Sacking Me, Says Gov Sule

Governor Abdullahi Sule of Nasarawa state says he will appeal the judgement of the Governorship Elections Petition Tribunal that invalidated his victory in the March 18 election on Monday. He acknowledged the tribunal’s decision as a temporary setback and expressed a commitment to learn from it and come back stronger. Governor Sule maintained that he remains in office until the Supreme Court decides otherwise, citing his legal right to appeal. He urged his supporters to remain calm and discouraged them from engaging in street protests or responding to opposition, especially on social media. The tribunal’s split judgment annulled Governor Sule’s election as a member of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and declared David Ombugadu of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as the rightful winner. Justice Ezekiel Ajayi, the tribunal’s chairman, read the majority judgment in favor of David Ombugadu. Justice Chiemelie Onaga, another panel member, supported the lead judgment. Justice Ibrahim Mashi delivered the dissenting judgment, dismissing the petition filed by the PDP candidate and upholding Governor Sule’s declaration by the INEC.

Atiku Approaches Supreme Court, Seeks Nullification Of Tribunal Verdict

Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, the presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), has escalated his legal battle by approaching the Supreme Court to challenge the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court. The move comes after the petition court, on September 6, upheld the victory of Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the presidential candidate of the All Progressive Congress (APC), in the 2023 presidential election. Atiku’s Notice of Appeal, consisting of 35 grounds, asserts that the tribunal’s judgment, delivered by Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani, was marred by serious errors and a miscarriage of justice. These errors and mis-judgments, according to Atiku’s lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, warrant the Supreme Court’s intervention to rectify the situation. The Notice of Appeal seeks to have the Supreme Court set aside the entire findings and conclusions of the tribunal, as Atiku believes they do not accurately represent the substance of his petition. One of the key arguments put forth by the former Vice President is that the Tribunal erred in law by failing to nullify the presidential election conducted on February 25, 2023. This non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, is alleged to be rooted in INEC’s conduct of the election, which, according to evidence presented to the tribunal, was characterized by grave and gross misrepresentation. This misrepresentation is deemed contrary to the principles outlined in the Electoral Act 2022 and runs counter to the “doctrine of legitimate expectation.” Atiku’s appeal to the Supreme Court signals his determination to exhaust all legal avenues available to challenge the tribunal’s judgment and contest the declaration of Tinubu as President by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Appeal Court restores Adebutu, PDP’s vote buying claims against Abiodun, APC

The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, on Wednesday restored the vote-buying allegations made by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)and its governorship candidate, Oladipupo Adebutu against Dapo Abiodun of the All Progressives Congress (APC). The appellate court gave the ruling in an appeal marked: CA/IB/EPT/GOV/OG/03/2023, filed by Adebutu and PDP on the 6th of July, 2023, which was heard on August 3, 2023. The appeal was against the ruling of Justice A.  Kanuza of the Ogun State Governorship Tribunal delivered on June 19, 2023, on vote buying during the March 18, Governorship election in Ogun State. The Tribunal had ruled in favour of the 2nd respondent and struck out the petitioner’s reply to the 2nd respondent’s reply to the petition. But on Wednesday, the Court of Appeal panel in a judgement written by Justice M. B Idris and read by Justice Aliyu Waziri, sustained paragraphs 2, 4,5,6,10,11,14,15,16 and 18 of Adebutu and PDP’s (Petitioners) reply to the 2nd respondent’s reply to the petition. The sustained paragraphs of the petitioners’ reply bother on the submission of forged certificate to the 1st respondent (INEC) by the 2nd respondent (Dapo Abiodun), violence and disruption of polling units by agents of the 2nd respondent and allegation of vote buying by the 2nd respondent. Also, the sustained paragraphs include the petitioners defence on the allegation of vote buying raised by the 2nd respondent in his reply to the petition. At the tribunal, Counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Gordy Uche, SAN had argued that the petitioners did not raise any new fact in their reply but gave a response to the new issue raised by the 2nd respondent in his reply which was not part of the issues raised in the petition.  Recall that in the ruling, the Chairman of the Ogun State Governorship Election Petition Tribunal, Justice Kunaza had, while delivering his ruling on a motion filed by the 2nd respondent, Dapo Abiodun seeking the tribunal to strike out the Petitioner’s reply to the 2nd Respondent’s reply to the petition on the grounds that the Petitioners (Ladi Adebutu & PDP) held that the Petitioners cannot raise new fact in their response to the reply of the 2nd respondent. Some details of the sustained paragraphs are as follows: “The Petitioners deny paragraph 4 of the 2nd Respondent’s Reply and state that the submission of a forged certificate to the 1st Respondent by the 2nd Respondent along with his Form EC9 can be lawfully challenged before this Honourable Tribunal under Section 134 (1) (a) of the Electoral Act, 2022 and the Petitioners and the said complaint is not statute barred. “The Petitioners in specific response to the above paragraphs state that it was rather the 2nd and 3rd Respondents, whose agents were captured on tape recording before and during the election distributing cash in Ogun State Government envelopes to entice voters to vote for the 2nd and 3rd Respondents. “The tape recording was widely distributed on social media and was publicly aired on Arise News Channel on February 19, 2023, and can be accessed via https//yout.be/CN19pKa3DVg. The Petitioners hereby plead and shall at the trial rely on the video clips and media reports of the and 3rd Respondents’ vote buying. “The 2nd and 3rd Respondents took advantage of the Naira redesign controversy and the prevailing cash crunch to offer Naira in cash to the electorate. The 2nd and 3rd Respondents shared old Naira notes and when some of the beneficiaries were worried that they were being given old notes, the agents of the 2nd Respondent assured them that the 2nd Respondent who is the Governor would compel the banks to accept them. “The Petitioners plead and shall rely on photographs and video recordings where the agents of the 2nd Respondent were caught on tape distributing Nara cash notes to the electorate. “Again, on March 18, 2023, when the Governorship and House of Assembly Elections were held across Ogun State, the 2nd and 3rd Respondents caused to be distributed to the electorate pre-loaded top-up gift cards of A5, 000 and N10, 000 to buy their votes to financially influence the 2nd Respondent to win the governorship election. “These Top up gift cards with PINS and Serial Numbers could either be used to buy airtime by dialling *979*PIN# or could be used to withdraw or transfer cash by dialling *979*SPID* ACCOUNT NUMBER* PIN#. These were deployed massively and widely on Election Day to buy votes. These cards were distributed on Election Day by APC agents who also had Point of Sale (POS) Machines which were used to either buy airtime and data, collect cash, or cause the amount preloaded in the accounts to be sent to voters’ accounts. The Petitioners plead and shall rely on these pre-loaded cards at the hearing of this Petition. “The Petitioners state that the 1st Petitioner’s Family only shared endowment cards at the burial ceremonies as burial ceremonial souvenirs of his philanthropic and benevolent mother, late Chief Mrs. Caroline Oladunni Adebutu, through her Endowment Schemes which were in existence in her lifetime and which she had utilized in mass empowerment programs. The 2nd Respondent is aware of this fact as he was personally in attendance during the said burial as a guest of the 1st Petitioner’s father, Chief Kessington Adebukunola Adebutu. The said cards had nothing whatsoever to do with vote buying or inducement of voters to vote for the Petitioners, and had nothing to do with the election. “The election in the polling units listed in paragraph 9 of the 2nd Respondent’s Reply to the Petition were cancelled due to violent disruptions by the agents of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents when the envisaged that the 2nd Respondent was not likely to win in those polling units and also due to over voting and not as a result of wilful disruption of election materials and resistance to the use of BVAS nor any act of the Petitioners. The Petitioners state that the allegation of wilful disruption of election materials and resistance