Connect with us

News

Tinubu revokes pardon for Sanda, 140 high-profile inmates

Published

on

President Bola Tinubu has withdrawn the pardon earlier granted to 175 convicts, including drug traffickers, kidnappers and fraudsters, following public outrage that trailed the initial clemency list released on October 11.

This came as the President ordered a review of the pardon granted at the National Council of State meeting on October 9, 2025.

A statement issued Wednesday by the President’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, said, “Consequently, certain persons convicted of serious crimes such as kidnapping, drug-related offences, human trafficking, fraud, unlawful possession of firearms/arms dealing, etc., were deleted from the list. Others who had been hitherto pardoned in the old list had their sentences commuted.”

According to the Presidency, the decision followed consultations with the Council of State and public feedback, undertaken “in furtherance of the President’s discretionary powers under Section 175(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”

“This action became necessary in view of the seriousness and security implications of some of the offences, the need to be sensitive to the feelings of the victims of the crimes and society in general, the need to boost the morale of law-enforcement agencies, and adherence to bilateral obligations,” the statement continued.

It further noted that “the concept of justice as a three-way traffic for the Accused, the Victim, and the State/Society also guided the review.”

Tinubu’s reversal comes three weeks after a storm of criticism greeted the inclusion of Maryam Sanda, convicted in 2020 and sentenced to death for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello, the son of a former PDP national chairman, on the original pardon list.

About 29.2 per cent of those pardoned had been convicted of drug-related offences, the largest category. Another 24 per cent were sentenced for illegal mining, followed by homicide, corruption, and human trafficking.

The Nigerian Bar Association’s Section on Public Interest and Development Law had urged the President to rescind what it called “a grave error of judgment,” warning that “granting mercy to a convicted murderer sends the wrong signal about accountability and deterrence.”

The Federal Government, through the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), said the earlier is being re-evaluated.

In an official gazette dated October 23, 2025, released by the AGF on Wednesday, the Presidency announced a revised set of instruments reducing the number of beneficiaries from 175 to 120, with several high-profile names, including convicted killer Maryam Sanda, reclassified under reduced terms of imprisonment.

Fagbemi explained that the exercise followed the President’s approval after a due-process review of the initial recommendations presented to him earlier by the Presidential Advisory Committee on Prerogative of Mercy.

He said the review became necessary after the President, upon consultations with the Council of State, received concerns about the initial list of beneficiaries and ordered a reassessment to ensure strict adherence to legal and procedural standards.

“During this final review, a few persons earlier recommended were found not to have met the requirements and were accordingly delisted, while in some other cases, sentences were reviewed and reduced to reflect fairness, justice, and the spirit of the exercise,” Fagbemi stated.

The President also directed the relocation of the Secretariat of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Prerogative of Mercy from the Ministry of Special Duties to the Federal Ministry of Justice.

He also instructed the Attorney-General of the Federation to issue new guidelines for exercising the prerogative of mercy, mandating “compulsory consultation with relevant prosecuting agencies” before any list is approved.

“This will ensure that only persons who fully meet the stipulated legal and procedural requirements will henceforth benefit from the issuance of instruments of release,” the Presidency said, adding that the approved list of eligible beneficiaries has been transmitted to the Nigerian Correctional Service for implementation.

Tinubu, who appreciated the constructive feedback and engagement from stakeholders and the general public, reaffirmed his administration’s broader commitment to judicial reforms and improving the administration of justice in Nigeria.

The review, contained in four separate documents obtained by The PUNCH, Pardon, Clemency, Reduced Terms of Imprisonment, and Commutation of Death Sentences, delisted individuals convicted of serious crimes such as drug trafficking, kidnapping, human trafficking and armed robbery from the original roll, while retaining only 15 full pardons largely confined to historic or non-violent cases.

Among those removed are Maryam Sanda, previously marked for a full pardon but now listed under a reduced term of 12 years imprisonment, and several drug convicts whose clemency was withdrawn entirely.

The final Presidential Pardon list contains 15 names, down from 82 previously. It retained four contemporary corruption-related beneficiaries: Anastasia Nwaobia, Hussaini Umar, Ayinla Alanamu and Farouk Lawan, alongside the historic cases of Herbert Macaulay, Maj.-Gen. Mamman Vatsa and the Ogoni Nine activists were executed in 1995. However, at least 55 recipients, including Nweke Chibueze, Dr. Nwogu Peters, and Abiodun Elemero, no longer appear in any of the four final lists. The individuals had previously been marked for pardon despite convictions for cocaine importation and fraud.

See also  Nigeria To Get Fresh $N500m World Bank Loan Amid Huge Debt Burden

Fifteen inmates serving various prison terms were granted clemency based on good conduct, remorse, and rehabilitation. They include Oroka Michael Chibueze, Adesanya Olufemi Paul, Daniel Bodunwa, Hamza Abubakar, Buhari Sani, Mohammed Musa, Muharazu Abubakar, Ibrahim Yusuf, Saad Ahmed Madaki, Ex-Corporal Michael Bawa, Richard Ayuba, Adam Abubakar, Emmanuel Yusuf, Chinedu Stanley, and Johnny Ntheru Udor. The Presidency said these individuals had either completed vocational training or demonstrated exceptional discipline during their incarceration, making them suitable for early release or reduced sentences.

In the category of death sentences commuted to life imprisonment, four inmates: Emmanuel Baba, Abubakar Usman, Khalifa Umar, and Mohammed Umar, were spared the death penalty. The Presidency explained that their sentences were reduced after a review of their records, which showed consistent good behaviour, remorse, and participation in rehabilitation programmes. This, it said, aligns with Nigeria’s gradual shift toward restorative justice rather than retributive punishment.

The Presidential Pardon (Grant of Pardon), 2025 category featured 15 names, including four living Nigerians and several posthumous cases regarded as symbolic redress for historical injustices. Among the living beneficiaries are former public officials Mrs. Anastasia Nwaobia, Hussaini Alhaji Umar, Ayinla Saadu Alanamu, and Farouk Lawan, all of whom were convicted for corruption-related offences but have served their sentences. Others on the pardon roll are Herbert Macaulay and Major-General Mamman Jiya Vatsa, both honoured posthumously, as well as the nine executed Ogoni activists: Ken Saro-Wiwa, Saturday Dobee, Nordu Eawo, Daniel Gbooko, Paul Levera, Felix Nuale, Baribor Bera, Barinem Kiobel, and John Kpuine.

Persons granted reduced terms of imprisonment and sentence include: Yusuf Owolabi, convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to life imprisonment, who had served 10 years. His sentence was reduced to 15 years based on educational improvement, remorsefulness, and the acquisition of vocational skills. Ifeanyi Eze, convicted for manslaughter and having served four years of a life sentence, had his term reduced to 15 years based on similar grounds. Malam Ibrahim Sulaiman, convicted of armed robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm, was sentenced to life imprisonment and had served two years and five months. His sentence was reduced to 15 years in recognition of his good conduct and remorse. Patrick Mensah, Obi Chukwu, Tunde Balogun, Lima Diego, Uchegbu Michael, Salawu Samsudeen, Napolo Osariemen, Odeyemi Omolara, and Dias Santos Christiana, all convicted for drug-related offences, had their sentences reduced on grounds of educational improvement, remorsefulness, acquisition of vocational skills, deportation consideration, and/or old age. Ibrahim Hameed, convicted for obtaining property under false pretence, was sentenced to seven years and had served three years. His sentence was reduced to five years based on remorsefulness and old age.

Isaac Justina, Aishat Kehinde, Helen Solomon, Okoye Tochukwu, and Ugwu Eze Paul, convicted for offences related to cannabis sativa, had their sentences reduced on grounds of remorsefulness and vocational training. Mustapha Ahmed, convicted of criminal breach of trust and sentenced to seven years without an option of fine, had served two years and ten months. His sentence was reduced to five years based on good conduct and remorsefulness.

Abubakar Mamman, sentenced to ten years for possession of firearms (AK-47), had served five years. His sentence was reduced to seven years for good conduct and remorsefulness. Muhammed Bello Musa, sentenced to ten years for possession of firearms, had served five years. His sentence was also reduced to seven years for good conduct. Nnamdi Anene, convicted for illegal dealing in firearms and sentenced to life imprisonment, had served 15 years. His sentence was reduced to 20 years based on remorsefulness, good conduct, and vocational skill acquisition. Abubakar Tanko, convicted of culpable homicide and sentenced to 30 years, had served seven years. His sentence was reduced to 20 years for good conduct and remorsefulness.

Innocent Brown Idiong, convicted for possession of 700 grams of Indian hemp, was sentenced to ten years and had served four years and three months. His sentence was reduced to six years due to remorse and old age. Iniobong Nuikidem, convicted for obtaining money by false pretence and sentenced to eight years, had served three years and four months. Her sentence was reduced to five years in recognition of her remorse. Ada Audu, convicted of fraud and sentenced to seven years, had served two years and seven months. Her sentence was reduced to four years on account of old age and remorsefulness.

Bula Adamu, convicted for advance fee fraud and sentenced to 20 years, had served five years and two months. His sentence was reduced to nine years based on good conduct and remorsefulness. Chukwuelu Sunday Calistus, convicted for drug offences and sentenced to life imprisonment, had his sentence reduced to 20 years for good conduct and remorsefulness. Markus Yusuf, convicted of culpable homicide and sentenced to 13 years, had his sentence reduced to nine years based on ill health. Samson Ajayi, convicted for drug offences and sentenced to 15 years, had his term reduced to ten years based on remorsefulness, vocational training, and good conduct.

See also  Oyo Abduction Update: CDS deploys spy aircraft, special forces

Rakiya Bleida, convicted of theft and cheating, was sentenced to seven years without an option of a fine. Her sentence was reduced to five years for good conduct. Jonathan Alatoru, convicted of conspiracy to cheat and sentenced to seven years, will now serve six years due to remorse and age. Seventy-year-old Umana Ekaette Umana, convicted of forgery, was sentenced to ten years. Utom Udoaka, convicted of obtaining money by false pretence and sentenced to seven years, had served four years and two months. Her sentence was reduced to six years on account of remorsefulness and old age. Frank Inshort Abaka, Sluna Aolo, David Akinseye, Ahmed Toyin, Shobojo Saheed, Adamoje Philip, Mathew Masi, Bright Ayedegyi, and Babangida Saliu were all convicted of conspiracy to hijack a fishing vessel and sentenced to 12 years and a N4m fine. Their sentences were reduced to eight years, and the fines were waived in recognition of their remorse and impecuniosity.

Thirty-nine-year-old Adamu Sanni was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for unlawful misappropriation and had served one year of that sentence. His sentence was reduced to two years based on remorsefulness, good conduct, and an undertaking signed on 2 April 2025 by Senator Ikran Bilbis for rehabilitation and empowerment after release. Thirty-year-old Abdulkareem Salisu was sentenced to three years for unlawful misappropriation and had served one year of that sentence. His term was also reduced to two years on similar grounds.

Abdulaziz Lawal, Abdulrahman Babangida, Muharazu Alidu, Zaharadeen Baliue, Babangida Usman, Zayyanu Abdullahi, Imam Suleman, Abbeeb Amisu, Lawani Lurwanu, Yusuf Alhassan, Abdullahi Isah, Zayanu Bello, Habeeb Suleman, Shefiu Umar, Seidu Abubakar, Haruna Abubakar, Rabiu Seidu, Macha Kuru, Zahraadeen Aminu, Nazipi Musa, Abdullahi Musa, Habibu Safiu, Husseini Sani, Musa Lawali, Suleiman Lawale, Yusuf Iliyasu, Sabiyu Aliyu, Haliru Sani, Shittu Aliyu, Sanusi Aminu, Isiaka Adamu, Mamman Ibrahim, Shaibu Abdullahi, Sanusi Adamu, Sadi Musa, and Haruna Isa, all convicted for unlawful mining, had their sentences reduced on grounds of remorsefulness, good conduct, and undertakings signed on 2 April 2025 by Senator Ikran Bilbis for rehabilitation and empowerment after release.

‘Tinubu encouraging criminals’

Reacting to Wednesday’s announcement, the Peoples Democratic Party accused President Tinubu of promoting impunity by favouring individuals with questionable records while neglecting patriotic Nigerians who have served the nation with integrity. It argued that the process exposes confusion within the administration.

The party’s Deputy National Youth Leader, Timothy Osadolor, told The PUNCH on Wednesday that the confusion over the list exposes the disorganisation within President Bola Tinubu’s administration.

Osadolor stated, “This back and forth over the list of pardoned offenders further amplifies the level of disorganisation within the ranks of the presidential aides and the government of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in general. These policy somersaults, which have continued to affect and turn the lives of ordinary Nigerians upside down, are also evident in the handling of this particular list.

“It is as though, one moment a decision is made in the morning, another is reversed in the afternoon, and by evening, the same decision is reviewed again. This back and forth is unacceptable. A well-thought-out policy process should not be subjected to such public ridicule and confusion as we are witnessing now.

“Again, this situation reflects where the steadfast loyalty of the President and his aides lies. It appears misplaced. While the government should be focusing on identifying and punishing hardened criminals, it seems instead to be protecting or rehabilitating them.

“Meanwhile, millions of soldiers who lost their lives defending Nigeria, and those who fought during the civil war, as well as nationalists and patriots such as environmentalist and humanitarian activists like Ken Saro-Wiwa, remain unrecognised and uncelebrated. Yet, known gunrunners, drug peddlers, murderers, and assassins are being pardoned or having their convictions reduced. The President is pardoning individuals previously convicted of heinous crimes, after initially granting them amnesty. Even with the outcry from well-meaning Nigerians, this would have been a disaster and a slap in the face of justice and national integrity.”

“These trends and misplaced priorities reflect a troubling regionalisation of governance and a disregard for national cohesion. One wonders where the loyalty of the President, his aides, and his government truly lies, is it to serve the Nigerian people or to protect elements working against the nation’s progress?”

The PDP Deputy National Youth Leader urged President Tinubu to resign if he cannot effectively manage the country’s affairs.

He continued, “Some of these individuals, rumoured to be his friends or associates from past affiliations, appear to benefit unduly from government decisions.

Nigeria is too great a country to be subjected to this kind of endless experimentation with the lives, emotions, and livelihoods of its people.

“Just as the government has wavered in addressing insecurity, food scarcity, and economic instability, its policies have remained inconsistent and ill-conceived. I would advise the President: it is neither a crime nor a shame to step aside. Even if he completes only one term, he will still be respected globally as a former President of Nigeria.

See also  Police disperse #ReleaseNnamdiKanuNow protesters after regrouping in Abuja

“On this note, I urge President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to search his conscience. If he truly means well for Nigerians, this is the time to step aside honourably. Let him not wait for Nigerians to vote him out of power, because by then, he may not even be in full control of the process.”

MOSOP links presidential pardon to planned oil resumption in Ogoniland

However, the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People has rejected the gesture, describing it as “not something to celebrate.”

In a statement by its Publicity Secretary, Imeabe Saviour, MOSOP said while it acknowledged that the President did not rescind the posthumous pardon for the Ogoni Nine, the group remains “unimpressed” by what it called a political ploy tied to oil resumption in Ogoniland.

“Yes, we heard that the names of some persons granted presidential pardon were dropped. Since I appreciate that the President did not reject those of the Ogoni in light of the recent pardon, we say the pardon is not something to celebrate.

“The people of Ogoni are not interested in the pardon. Our message to the President is that, inasmuch as we see this as a kangaroo step by him to talk about oil resumption in Ogoniland, we insist that the $300m belonging to the people of Ogoni and currently with the NNPC must be released,” MOSOP said.

The group demanded that, before any discussion on oil resumption can take place, the Federal Government must consider the creation of Bori State from the present Rivers State and ensure the Ogoni Clean-Up Project runs its full 30-year course.

Saviour continued, “As we speak, they are not close to that because the Federal Government has refused to pay its counterpart funding. Mr President must know that oil resumption in Ogoni is not something he should consider now, except he wants to cause another crisis in Ogoniland, the same way it was orchestrated by the then-military administration of the late Gen. Sani Abacha, who killed many Ogoni people.

‘Act of shame’

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar on berated President Tinubu over the controversial pardon and subsequent reversal granted to convicted husband-killer, Sanda, describing the move as “an act of shame” and evidence of a government that “thinks after it acts.”

In a statement signed by his aide, Phrank Shaibu, Atiku accused the administration of lacking foresight and moral consistency, following Tinubu’s decision to revoke the earlier pardon granted to Sanda and several other convicts.

“Once again, Nigerians have witnessed a government that doesn’t lead — it reacts,” Atiku said.

“President Bola Tinubu has ‘cancelled’ his own pardon for drug traffickers, kidnappers, and other hardened criminals — but only after Nigerians shouted loud enough to wake him from his moral slumber.

“Let’s be clear: this U-turn is not an act of wisdom, it’s an act of shame.”

He questioned the process that led to the initial inclusion of Sanda and other convicts on the list, demanding transparency from the presidency.

“Who compiled the list of beneficiaries? What criteria justified freeing kidnappers and drug offenders? Where was the Attorney-General when this absurdity was cooked up? And why does this government only ‘discover its conscience’ after Nigerians express outrage?” Atiku asked.

Describing the pardon saga as “a national embarrassment,” he added that the presidency’s frequent reversals on policy decisions showed Nigeria was being “governed without foresight, without empathy, and without shame.”

“If the President truly means well, let him publish the list of all those who were meant to benefit from this scandal. Until then, this cancellation is nothing but damage control — too little, too late,” he said.

The remarks came amid widespread reactions trailing Tinubu’s revocation of the earlier pardon granted to Sanda, who was sentenced to death in 2020 for murdering her husband, Bilyaminu Bello.

While the Labour Party commended the President for bowing to public pressure, the New Nigerian Peoples Party faulted the administration’s inconsistency.

NNPP spokesperson, Ladipo Johnson, said, “It is disgraceful that the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria will announce pardons and then the presidency will say they want to vet and go over it again.

“Given public opinion, it’s not a surprise that they have reversed it, but it just shows that the presidency needs to get its act together.”

However, Labour Party interim National Publicity Secretary, Tony Akeni, commended Tinubu’s decision to listen to public sentiment, saying, “What Tinubu has demonstrated is that he listened to the people of Nigeria. We commend him for that.”

He urged the President to extend such responsiveness to “issues that affect Nigerians,” including the nation’s debt profile and policies that “promote hunger and hardship.”

punch.ng

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

TUMBLR

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Germany deports 137 Nigerians in five chartered flights

Published

on

Germany deported at least 137 Nigerian citizens in five documented chartered operations between February and June 2026, according to reports sighted by The PUNCH.

The documented arrivals comprised 27 Nigerians deported in February, 37 deported directly by Germany as part of a 50-person joint European Union operation in March, and 24, 23 and 26 Nigerians deported in April, May and June, respectively, according to figures contained in reports monitored by the DERS Team and Refugees4refugees.org.

The figures indicate an increase in the use of chartered flights to return Nigerians from Germany and other European countries, with several of the operations involving cooperation among European states.

On February 18, 2026, a batch of 27 Nigerians arrived at the Lagos Cargo Airport following a deportation operation from Germany.

According to Refugees4refugees.org, the flight was operated by World2fly and departed Stuttgart before arriving in Lagos shortly before 2 pm.

The report said the operation was primarily enforced by Germany, although one person, described as severely ill and mentally unfit, was transferred from Slovakia to join the 26 people deported from Germany.

It also identified Baden-Württemberg as a major participant in the operation and said Stuttgart had hosted both the December 2025 and February 2026 deportation operations to Nigeria.

The report further alleged that while some of those deported had serious health conditions, others had lived and worked in Germany for several years.

It cited the case of a single mother and her three children who were deported from the Sindelfingen district in Stuttgart despite reportedly having documentation relating to their residence status.

See also  Tegbe denies promising to fix power grid in three months

According to the report, the family subsequently returned to Germany after intervention by a volunteer and confirmation from local foreign authorities that the deportation had been made in error.

Furthermore, the February deportation also coincided with Nigeria’s participation in preparations for the Voluntary National Review of the Global Compact for Migration ahead of the 2026 International Migration Review Forum in New York.

The DERS Team said that Nigerian government agencies did not send representatives to receive the deportees at the airport, adding that the returning Nigerians were subsequently transported away from the airport without adequate assistance.

On March 10, another 50 people were deported to Nigeria in a joint EU operation hosted by Germany in cooperation with Spain, Austria and Belgium.

Germany accounted directly for 37 of the deportations, according to the figures provided.

The operation was described as the largest single deportation involving Nigerians in the three years referenced in the report.

A further 24 Nigerians, including women and a minor, were deported on April 9 on a chartered flight from Frankfurt organised through Frontex and German authorities, according to the supplied data.

In May 2026, another batch of 23 deportees was returned to Nigeria, while 26 Nigerians arrived in Lagos on June 17 following another routine chartered deportation flight.

Taken together, the five documented batches amounted to 137 Nigerians returned to the country between February and June 2026.

The figures highlight the continued use of organised charter flights in the enforcement of migration decisions involving Nigerians in Europe.

Migration rights advocates have, however, continued to argue that deportation policies should be accompanied by adequate safeguards for vulnerable people and proper procedures to prevent wrongful removal.

See also  Nigeria To Get Fresh $N500m World Bank Loan Amid Huge Debt Burden

While migration is as old as time itself, identified underlying factors driving irregular migration include conflict, exploitation, climate-related pressures and economic inequality.

Migration is the permanent or temporary movement of people from one place to another, changing their home. It can happen within a country or across borders, shaping populations, cultures, and job markets.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

Adeyemi demands media, lawyers’ presence before Reps probe on PFIPC scandal

Published

on

The House of Representatives Ad Hoc Committee investigating the controversy surrounding the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council is yet to decide where it will question the council’s self-appointed Director-General, Adeniyi Adeyemi, a source familiar with the committee’s proceedings has disclosed.

The development comes as Adeyemi insisted that his lawyers and journalists must be present before he submits to questioning by the House committee.

The committee, chaired by the lawmaker representing Kanke/Kanam/Pankshin Federal Constituency of Plateau State, Yusuf Gagdi, is probing how the PFIPC secured official office accommodation within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja and received a budgetary allocation of more than N1.32bn in the 2026 Appropriation Act despite allegedly having no legal existence.

The investigation has attracted significant public attention following allegations that the council operated within government structures despite lacking legal recognition, raising concerns about possible lapses in public financial management and institutional oversight.

Adeyemi, who has been in police custody over the controversy surrounding the council, is expected to appear before the committee this week, following testimonies from several senior government officials.

However, as of Sunday, the venue for the much-anticipated session remained unsettled.

The source, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to discuss the committee’s proceedings with the media, confirmed the development in response to an inquiry by The PUNCH.

Asked whether the committee had chosen a venue for Adeyemi’s appearance, the source simply replied, “No decision yet.”

The development followed the committee’s hearings with key government officials, including the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack; the Director-General of the Budget Office of the Federation, Tanimu Yakubu; the Director of Banking Services at the Central Bank of Nigeria, Hamisu Abdullahi; and representatives of the Inspector-General of Police.

The officials’ testimonies reportedly raised questions about how Adeyemi allegedly presented himself as the head of the PFIPC and secured recognition and access within government circles.

Adeyemi had, through his lawyers, indicated his willingness to appear before the committee publicly and respond to questions concerning the allegations.

However, Gagdi said the committee would determine the venue for the session at a later date.

Meanwhile, the Coalition of United Political Parties has rejected the findings of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission on the PFIPC controversy, describing the investigation as inadequate and calling for a broader and transparent inquiry.

In an interview with our correspondent, CUPP spokesperson, Agu Bryan, said the ICPC’s report, which reportedly cleared the Presidency of wrongdoing while indicting Adeniyi Adeyemi, failed to answer critical questions about how an allegedly non-existent government agency was able to operate at such a high level.

“The ICPC probe of the Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council which exonerated the Presidency and indicted Adeniyi Adeyemi is nothing short of a charade,” Bryan said.

He argued that the report appeared to portray Adeyemi as having operated almost entirely alone, despite the scale of activities attributed to him.

See also  Labour gives FG Aug 11 ultimatum over wage award

According to Bryan, such an operation could not have continued without assistance or enabling actions by officials within government institutions.

“As Nigerians, we know that someone could not have operated an alleged high-profile agency of such magnitude without enablers, either within the Presidency or across the government agencies involved,” he said.

Bryan called for a broader examination of the roles allegedly played by government institutions referenced in Adeyemi’s correspondence, including the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation.

He particularly cited the testimony of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation, Didi Walson-Jack, that her office failed to conduct due diligence on some of the documents associated with the controversial council.

The coalition also questioned how the PFIPC allegedly found its way into the national budget if, as reported by the ICPC, it had no legal foundation.

CUPP said the National Assembly and relevant government ministries owed Nigerians an explanation over how funds were appropriated to an organisation whose legal status had allegedly not been established.

“The National Assembly, particularly the House of Representatives, which appropriated funds to an agency that, according to the investigation, never existed as a creation of law, also owes Nigerians an explanation,” Bryan said.

He asked who within the Ministry of Budget and National Planning processed the budget line attributed to the PFIPC and what verification mechanisms were applied before public funds were appropriated.

CUPP also raised questions about the alleged recruitment of hundreds of staff and the extent to which Adeyemi was granted access to official government activities.

Bryan said the issues went beyond determining whether Adeyemi forged documents, arguing that investigators should establish how he allegedly gained access to government processes and institutions.

The controversy escalated after investigators reportedly established that a signature attributed to the Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, was forged.

CUPP said the finding should prompt investigators to examine other official documents and correspondence allegedly used by Adeyemi.

“It is commendable that the House and the Police have established that the signature of the Chief of Staff to the President was allegedly forged. But that raises another critical question: how many other documents, official correspondences and signatures allegedly used by Adeyemi were also forged?” Bryan asked.

He said Nigerians deserved to know the full extent of the alleged deception and whether officials responsible for verifying the credentials of individuals dealing with public institutions failed in their duties.

The coalition further questioned how the PFIPC allegedly acquired sufficient official recognition to participate in government processes and appear in the national budget.

“How did a supposedly non-existent agency attain such a level of official recognition and attention that it found its way into the national budget?” he asked.

CUPP also called for Adeyemi to be given a fair opportunity to defend himself before the House committee, arguing that a transparent confrontation with the evidence could help determine whether other individuals or institutions were involved.

See also  ASUU, VCs decry Profs’ N525,000 monthly pay - Strike Looms

“Was Adeyemi given fair hearing thus far? Has he been given the privilege to appear before the Yusuf Gagdi-led Ad hoc Committee of the House of Representatives probing the matter to be interrogated and directly answer questions?” Bryan said.

He invoked the legal principle nemo judex in causa sua—that no person should be a judge in his own cause—in arguing that the investigation should be conducted independently and transparently.

Bryan said anything short of an open and impartial investigation would fail to satisfy public expectations.

He also criticised the ICPC’s handling of the matter and called for independent professional bodies to be considered if the Federal Government was genuinely interested in establishing the facts.

“If President Tinubu is determined to unravel the truth, independent organisations or bodies like the NBA, West African Bar Association or international or private investigators should be allowed to come in and take over the investigation,” Bryan said.

He accused federal security and anti-corruption agencies of lacking sufficient independence to investigate the controversy objectively, a claim the agencies have not accepted.

The House committee’s inquiry follows mounting concerns over how Adeyemi allegedly operated the PFIPC, secured government recognition and participated in official engagements despite questions over the organisation’s legal status.

The controversy has also drawn attention to the roles of several government institutions whose officials allegedly interacted with Adeyemi or processed documents connected to the council.

The committee is expected to hear directly from Adeyemi as it seeks to establish how the PFIPC was created, how it operated, who recognised it and whether public funds were allocated or expended in connection with its activities.

 

 

His appearance before the committee could therefore prove significant in determining whether the alleged scheme was the work of an individual or involved officials and institutions within government.

Adeyemi demands media

Adeyemi, through his lawyer, Ademola Oyedokun, had on Wednesday rejected the House committee’s decision to question him at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

The committee subsequently attempted to question him on Thursday, but Adeyemi declined to respond to its questions, prompting the lawmakers to reschedule the interrogation for Monday.

However, a family source said Adeyemi had informed the committee that he would only submit to questioning if journalists and his legal representatives were allowed to be present.

“They eventually rescheduled to Monday and my brother told them that when they are coming, they should come with the media, otherwise he will not grant them audience.

“Initially, they agreed to come with the media, but later they said they would not be coming with any media. They said if he refuses to grant them audience, they will go ahead and conclude their investigation and it will be said that he was the one who failed to grant them audience,” the source said.

The development came a day after Adeyemi’s family raised concerns over an attempt by members of the House committee to question him in police custody without his lawyers present.

Adeyemi’s brother, Peter, alleged that the detained promoter declined to answer questions because his legal representatives were absent.

“The Reps committee came and wanted to interrogate him, but he refused. They are still there trying to make him talk without any of his lawyers being present. We are crying out loud so that the right thing would be done.

“He has stated that he wants to be quizzed the same way others who have accused him have spoken. It’s not that he is not willing to state his side of the story,” he said.

When contacted on whether the police were aware of the committee’s proposed visit and whether the lawmakers would be granted access to Adeyemi, the police spokesperson, Ani Ineidu, said visitors would be allowed provided they met the necessary requirements.

“Yes, if they have necessary documents. I’m not aware if they have relevant documents or authorisation, but if they fulfil the conditions, everybody who is under police custody has a right to visitors.

“So, in a case like this, if they have that right, they will be granted access,” Ineidu said.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, Oyedokun said his client welcomed the House investigation into the alleged establishment and operations of the PFIPC but opposed what he described as a closed-door interrogation.

“We have read that the committee intends to interview our client at an undisclosed date and place. We ask it, respectfully, to think again.

“Everyone else in this matter has been heard in public, and what has been said about our client was said in public. He should be allowed to answer in the same place it was said,” the lawyer stated.

The committee had on Tuesday announced that it would question Adeyemi at an undisclosed location while he remains in police custody.

The Chairman of the committee, Yusuf Gagdi, said the arrangement was necessary to avoid interfering with ongoing investigations by the Nigeria Police Force, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.

Gagdi said the committee had invited Adeyemi but was informed by the police that he remained in custody pursuant to a court order.

He added that the National Assembly would not act in a manner that undermined the judiciary or violated the principle of separation of powers, stressing that lawmakers lacked the authority to override an existing court order directing Adeyemi’s detention.

 

 

The committee is investigating allegations surrounding the creation and operations of the PFIPC, including claims of impersonation, forgery, financial impropriety and the unlawful use of government facilities and official insignia.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

News

PHOTOS: Osun-Osogbo: Priestess defends 10-year-old Arugba, dismisses child abuse claims

Published

on

The Araba of Osogbo, Ifáyemí Elébuibón, has defended the tradition of selecting a young maiden as the Arugba of the Osun-Osogbo Festival, describing the role as a privilege rather than child abuse.

This is as a priestess and custodian of Osun Osogbo also defended the practice, saying the Arugba was selected through Ifa divination from the royal lineage.


Osun-Osogbo: Priestess

Elébuibón spoke in a video interview posted on Sunday by Yoruba cultural content creator, Wàá Ṣeré, amid discussions surrounding the age and responsibilities of the 10-year-old Arugba, Princess Alimot Osunbunmi.

Arugba is the young maiden chosen to carry the sacred calabash during the annual Osun-Osogbo Festival procession to the Osun Sacred Grove.

Alimot, a member of the royal family of the Ataoja of Osogbo, was selected through traditional Ifa divination in March 2025.

She carried the sacred calabash for the first time during this year’s procession to the Osun Sacred Grove on Friday, after she was unable to do so during the 2025 festival because of her young age.


10-year-old Arugba of the Osun-Osogbo Festival, Princess Alimot Osunbunmi carries the sacred calabash at Osun Osogbo festival…Photo Credit: Dewunmi Lagos

Explaining the role and its benefit, Elébuibón said the Arugba served as a spiritual intermediary between the Osun deity and the people.

He added that the responsibility was not determined by biological age.

“You see those people saying all that? They lack understanding. They don’t know. Whoever says the Arugba is too young—this one is ten years old, but some started at five!

See also  Tinubu nominates Bernard Doro as minister

“The role the Arugba plays is a role of spiritual maturity, not about physical age. What the Arugba does for the town and the community is what the white man calls a ‘medium’—an intermediary between the Orisa and the people,” he said.

Elébuibón said the young maiden could communicate the wishes of the deity to the people because of the spiritual significance attached to the position.

“As young as she is, provided she remains pure and undefiled by any man, she can wake up one morning and say, ‘Mother Osun said this and that, do this, do that, don’t do this.’”

He added that the Arugba’s spiritual development was not necessarily tied to her physical age.

“Very soon, she will mature spiritually far beyond her biological age because the Orisa themselves nourish and care for them. Her role is not about age; what she does is not about age.”


FILE: Ifayemi Elebuibon

A female priestess and culture custodian, in another video posted by culture content creator Olamide Oseyifunmii, also defended the practice, saying the Arugba was selected through Ifa divination from the royal lineage.

According to her, the chosen maiden must be a virgin and is expected to observe certain taboos associated with the role.

“Whomever Ifa chooses becomes the Arugba. The Arugba must be a girl who remains untouched, pure, and a virgin. That is strictly what the Arugba must be,” she said.

She rejected the description of the practice as child abuse, saying the young girls selected for the role were traditionally protected and treated with care.

See also  US defence chief asks FG to be decisive on Insecurity

“Being selected as the Arugba carries taboos and honours; it is not what Westerners label as ‘child abuse’.”

The priestess said the Arugba was not expected to carry heavy loads apart from the sacred calabash during the annual procession.

She also explained the spiritual significance attached to the young maiden, saying devotees who bow before the Arugba were not worshipping the child but honouring the Osun deity believed to be represented through her.

“They were bowing to the divine spirit of Osun Ewuji inside her and upon her head,” she said.

The 2026 Osun-Osogbo Festival, which began on August 7, is being held at the Osun Sacred Grove in Osogbo, Osun State, and will run until August 19.

The annual festival, centred on the Osun deity, is one of Nigeria’s major traditional and cultural festivals and attracts worshippers, tourists and cultural enthusiasts from Nigeria and beyond.

Source: punchng.com

FOLLOW US ON:

FACEBOOK

TWITTER

PINTEREST

TIKTOK

YOUTUBE

LINKEDIN

INSTAGRAM

Continue Reading

Trending