News
Electoral Act: Reps to override Buhari’s veto on statutory delegates
The House of Representatives has concluded plans to override the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), on Section 84(8) of the Electoral Act 2022 which seeks to provide for statutory delegates at the meetings, congresses and conventions of political parties.
To achieve this, Speaker of the House, Femi Gbajabiamila, called on members willing to move a motion for the chamber to override Buhari’s veto to do so anytime from Thursday.
Two members of the Peoples Democratic Party – the Deputy Minority Leader, Toby Okechukwu and Ben Igbakpa – who failed to get tickets to seek reelection at the recently concluded primaries, had protested on the floor of the House on Wednesday.
Okechukwu backed Gbajabiamila on the comments made by the Speaker earlier on Tuesday, faulting the way political parties conducted primaries leading to the failure of members of the National Assembly to get tickets of their respective parties to seek reelection in the 2023 general elections.
Gbajabiamila had particularly criticised the failure of the parties to allow statutory delegates to vote for candidates at the primaries, as the National Assembly proposed in the amendment to Section 84(8) of the Electoral Act 2022, which the President has yet to assent to.
It was reported that the National Assembly, on May 13, transmitted the bill to the President for assent. However, Buhari had yet to sign the amendment bill into law as of Tuesday.
It is now over 30 days after the National Assembly passed and transmitted the legislation to the Presidency, the window within which the parliament can veto the bill should the President fails to assent to it.
On Wednesday, Okechukwu said, “I want to take notice regarding the very copious and auspicious comments you (Gbajabiamila) made yesterday regarding the Electoral Act where, in the circumstances, it has been weaponised; where as a matter of fact, there was an aspiration to make the law a more perfect law to remove every ambiguity; and where there isn’t any material difference between the 2010 Act and that of 2022. And suddenly, the majority of members, where it has been weaponised, have become victims.
“Something is wrong in an environment – in an institution – where the two (Majority and Minority) Leaders of the Senate would have to cross to other parties because of inherent inclement conditions. Anything that occasions it, anything that warrants it, if it is our Electoral Act, if it is our politics, if it is the environment where we operate, we need to retool. And like you said, we have to do better work and we have to fight on.
“For me, it is just a battle that is lost, the war is on and we should go ahead to make sure that that law is retooled, made clear. And if it requires this parliament to take action to override what has not been signed, we should be willing to do so.”
Shortly after, Igbakpa decried that lawmakers were recalled from recess to quickly consider and pass the amendment to Section 84(8) and it was transmitted to the President for assent.
He said, “Mr President did not just ignore (the amendment bill), he travelled out of the country on a condolence visit to Dubai and that created a lot of problems for the country. There was tension and many of our political parties, out of the tension, created what will now be for us in the 2023-2027 electoral process.
“Nigerians are crying for good leadership and the leadership recruitment process starts with our primaries. You have worked hard and that is why I took us to Section 58 (of the Constitution). We are to make laws and present to Mr President and where he does not sign (a bill into law), that same 58 gives us the powers to make sure that we pass that law without Mr President’s assent.
“There is nowhere in the Constitution that says that one arm of the government is subservient to the other.”
The lawmaker noted that Gbajabiamila, despite showing good leadership of the House, would only be judged by Nigerians based on the laws passed that better their lot. “And that is why we cannot continue to act as if we are under the Executive arm of government,” he said.
Igbakpa added, “This Constitution gave us the powers, just as it gave to them. We must wake up as a parliament. When we pass laws and we are sure that we have done the right thing, we should start overriding Mr President, because this is just the beginning.
“Today, the NDDC Act is in force because the parliament, which you were part of, did it. Why are we afraid? Mr President has not committed any offence. What he has done is the rule of law and the Constitution, and I believe by the time we do our own by overriding his veto, we would not have committed any offence. We would be working according to the Constitution and the rule of law.
“I think it is time for us, before some of us leave, if we manage to come back, that this parliament must stamp its feet and tell Nigerians that we are working for them and not for any party or any individual.
“Mr Speaker, I implore you as a great leader, to please, it is time, if we are sure we have done what is right to the Electoral Act 2022, rise up, take our pens, collect signatures and by the grace of God, override Mr President and give Nigerians the enabling electoral law that will stand the test of time.”
While responding, Gbajabiamila listed the conditions under which the lawmakers could override a veto successfully.
The Speaker said, “Clearly, the Constitution says he has 30 days leeway and we have since gone beyond the 30 days. But the Constitution also says it is not automatic that you override, it is if you are convinced as a House that that amendment must stand. If you are not convinced with the arguments advanced by the president, or in this case there is really no argument advanced, then you can override.
“For us to override, I believe we require two-thirds majority and it cannot be by voice vote neither can it be by way of signatures unless, of course, you have enough two-thirds by signatures what I will suggest is that you bring the application – a formal motion on notice – perhaps tomorrow or whenever you are able to do that and we will determine whether or not this House is ready to override or not.
“I think that is the way to go. That is the proper procedure. I appreciate your comments and I believe you are talking about the provision of statutory delegates which Honourable Toby alluded to earlier. We will go ahead. You can file your motion and hopefully we will be able to list it tomorrow or whenever the calendar permits.”
PUNCH
When the Enugu State House of Assembly adopted the report of its Special Committee on Land Matters and Disputes in 2024, many observers described it as a watershed moment in the long-running controversy surrounding the Centenary City land in Amechi and Obeagu communities.
The report attracted national attention because it tackled a dispute that had generated numerous court cases, allegations of intimidation, destruction of property, community unrest, and claims involving some of the most influential figures in the state.
For many residents of Amechi and Obeagu, the Assembly’s intervention provided the first official platform where their grievances appeared to receive impartial consideration. The committee’s findings were widely commended for their detailed examination of the circumstances surrounding the acquisition and development of over 1,097 hectares of ancestral land.
At the heart of the controversy was the allegation that Private Estates International West Africa Limited (PEIWA), operating under a development agreement with the Enugu State Government, relied on questionable documents to assert rights over vast portions of land originally linked to a proposed university project initiated during the administration of former Anambra State Governor, Dr. Jim Nwobodo.
After reviewing submissions from the parties, the Assembly committee identified several inconsistencies in documents connected with the acquisition process. Among its findings were concerns regarding the authenticity of a survey plan purportedly prepared for the “Permanent Site of Enugu State University of Science and Technology” in 1985, despite the fact that Enugu State had not yet been created at that time.
Controversial Enugu Centenary Land: A Daniel Has Come To Judgement
The committee also questioned the authenticity of signatures and official endorsements appearing on key documents, including survey records, gazette notices, and correspondences allegedly executed on behalf of traditional authorities in Amechi and Obeagu communities.
Based on these findings, the committee concluded that the host communities had established that they were not properly carried along in the acquisition process and recommended dialogue, compensation, government intervention, and a comprehensive audit of lands developed under the Centenary City project.
At the time, many hailed the report as evidence that the legislature was willing to confront powerful interests in defence of justice and accountability.
Two years later, events appear to have given fresh significance to those findings.
Today, Kingsley Eze, Chamberlin Mbachu and Private Estates International (W.A.) Limited are facing criminal charges before the Federal High Court, Enugu, in connection with the alleged forgery of a survey plan linked to the disputed acquisition of ancestral lands in Amechi and Obeagu communities.
According to the charge sheet in Charge No. FHC/EN/CR/84/2025, the defendants are accused of conspiring to forge a survey plan titled “Permanent Site of Enugu State University of Science and Technology” purportedly dated 1985.
The prosecution alleges that the defendants knowingly made or uttered the survey plan as a genuine document despite its alleged falsity. The offences are said to be punishable under relevant provisions of the Miscellaneous Offences Act.
The criminal charges have drawn renewed attention to the conclusions reached by the Enugu State House of Assembly in 2024, particularly its observations regarding inconsistencies surrounding the same survey plan and related acquisition documents.
The developments have also prompted further advocacy from civil society organisations. The Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) has called on the Inspector-General of Police to direct the Police Monitoring Unit to take over investigations and prosecutions connected with the dispute, investigate allegations of misconduct against certain police officers, and review criminal proceedings allegedly used for harassment and intimidation.
In a separate petition dated May 28, 2026, RULAAC also urged the Inspector-General of Police to intervene in two criminal cases pending before the Federal High Court, Enugu, citing repeated failures by law enforcement authorities to produce defendants for arraignment.
The cases include Charge No. FHC/EN/CR/84/2025, IGP v. Kingsley Eze & 2 Others, and Charge No. FHC/EN/CR/222/2024, IGP v. Alex Ifeadi & 2 Others.
As the criminal proceedings continue, many observers believe the matter has entered a decisive phase. The allegations that were once the subject of community petitions, legislative inquiries and public debate are now before a court of law for determination.
Whether the Assembly’s 2024 report marked the beginning of accountability or merely one chapter in a much longer struggle remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that the issues raised by the Amechi and Obeagu communities have not faded away. Instead, they have evolved into a legal test that could shape public confidence in land administration, governance and the rule of law in Enugu State for years to come.
If the legislative findings, criminal investigations and court proceedings ultimately converge on the truth, then many residents may indeed conclude that, at long last, a Daniel has come to judgment.
Son of the late head of state and former Minister of Defence, Chief Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, in a letter of remembrance and solidarity written on behalf of the Aguiyi-Ironsi family to the Fajuyi family, marking the 60th anniversary of his death, said July 29, 2026, will be a solemn occasion to honour a soldier they described as “a war hero who offered himself as a sacrificial lamb for the unity and integrity of the nation.”
The family recalled that Lt Col Fajuyi, then Military Governor of the Western Region, made the ultimate sacrifice in 1966 when mutinous soldiers abducted him alongside Maj Gen Aguiyi-Ironsi in Ibadan during the military counter-coup.
They stated that Fajuyi, in a defining moment of conscience, chose honour over personal safety and refused to abandon his guest and superior, a decision the family said reflected the highest ideals of loyalty, integrity, and military brotherhood.
According to the statement, his action transformed him into a national martyr whose legacy continued to inspire unity, courage, and selfless service.
The Aguiyi-Ironsi family also expressed sympathy with the Fajuyi family, acknowledging the enduring pain of their loss, while praying for continued strength, comfort, and peace.
The statement further stated, “He did not run. He did not hide. He chose to stand. In that sacrificial decision lay the essence of his greatness.”
The family called on government institutions, military authorities, and custodians of national memory to ensure sustained recognition and support for the Fajuyi family, stressing that his sacrifice remained a national responsibility to remember and honour.
It urged Nigerians to draw inspiration from his life and death, noting that his legacy continues to challenge the nation to uphold unity, courage, honour, and selfless service.
Fajuyi was killed on July 29, 1966, during the military counter-coup in Ibadan alongside Aguiyi-Ironsi.
By Okey Maduforo Awka
The emergence of Chief Ikeagwuonu Ugochinyere as the Minority Leader of the Federal House of Representatives has been described as a vindication of the fact that the Action People’s Party (APP ) represents the collective interests of the Nigerian masses.
Recall that recently, Ugochinyere was elected as the Minority Leader of the party in a keenly contested election of the Federal House of Representatives.
According to a statement by the Chairman Anambra state chapter of the APP Chief Chijioke Okeke, Ugochinyere had been consistent in offering himself as the voice of the people and that of the voiceless.
“It did not come to us as a surprise that our great leader High Chief Ugochinyere became the Minority leader of the Federal House of Representatives because he has always been consistent and focus towards providing himself as the only vent for the masses at the Green Chambers”
“We know his pedegre as a politician as well as a leader and he has remained focus in ensuring that the voiceless are heard and this is also a vindication of our party’s unflinching desire to provide a veritable platform in a democratic process”
Okeke further stated that the fifth columnists who had attempted to deregister the party have been put to shame adding that the party shall continue to champion the interests of the Nigerian people.
“They made failed attempt at deregistering our great party but they lost sight of the fact that the APP is firmely rooted on ground and has all that it takes to drive the wishes and aspirations of the Nigerian populace and with this recent development our traducers have been put to shame and our party is on the path of further greatness “. Okeke noted .
By Okey Maduforo Awka
Six members of the Indigenous People Of Biafra IPOB have been declared wanted by the Nigerian Police .
The six persons led by Mr Chukwuebuka Ohaechesi, include Emma Okonkwo, Jude Uwa, Gentle Okoro, Uchenna Dike, and Emmanuel Nwankwo who are said to be at large.
The were said to have fled to neighboring states in the South East hence signaling the other four Police Commands in the geopolitical zone to assist in the manhunt for them
The Police accused them of executing protests against the detaintion of the leader of IPOB Mazi Nnamdi Kanu who is currently serving jail terms in Sokoto Correction Center.
According to a statement issued by the Abia Police Public Relations Officer of the Command, ASP Eguavon Omokaro, the individuals are suspected members of IPOB who have allegedly participated in protests at various times and locations within the state.
The statement alleged that the protests were organised in connection with the continued detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and demands for justice through the judicial process.
The Police Command further stated that these protests have allegedly resulted in breaches of peace and disruptions to law and order in Abia State. Consequently, the Police Intelligence Department reportedly concluded that the named individuals were among the principal organisers and coordinators of the demonstrations.
The statement further alleged that; ;
“It should be noted that on every 30th day of May, these men and their cohorts convene for the so-called remembrance of Biafra, holding clandestine meetings at various locations in the name of the emancipation of the Biafran Republic and the release of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.”
According to the police, the six individuals were invited on several occasions for questioning in relation to the allegations against them.
The statement indicated that the first invitation was issued on 18 December 2025, followed by a second invitation on 7 February 2026, and a third invitation on 3 March 2026.
The police alleged that the individuals failed to honour all three invitations.
The statement further asserted:
“These individuals were invited by the police on several occasions. Firstly, on 18 December 2025, they failed to honour the invitation. Again, they were invited on 7th February 2026 and failed to appear. Finally, they were invited on 3 March 2026, and they also failed to present themselves before the police.” It stated.
As a result, the Abia State Police Command announced that all six individuals had been formally declared wanted.
The police appealed to members of the public to provide any reliable information that could lead to their arrest and prosecution, stating that informants would be suitably rewarded.
The declaration of the six individuals as wanted persons is linked to allegations of their participation in pro-Biafra activities, demonstrations concerning the detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, and their alleged association with IPOB, an organisation that has been the subject of extensive scrutiny and security operations by Nigerian authorities.
-
Crime5 days agoOyo abduction: Teachers begin strike as Tinubu sends 1,000 forest guards to rescue victims
-
Education5 days agoEnugu East Chairman Celebrates Children’s Day with St. Ann’s College, Reaffirms Commitment to Education
-
News5 days agoDSS Detains Novelist Okey Ndibe at Lagos Airport, Awaits Clearance from Abuja
-
Crime5 days agoUS Announces $3.5m Religious Freedom Initiative, Questions Nigeria’s Response to Attacks
-
Crime4 days ago2 Police Officers Shot Dead as Gunmen Attack Anambra Chief of Staff’s Convoy
-
News3 days agoPower Doesn’t Last Forever, It Has Expiry Date — VeryDarkMan Warns Wike
-
Politics3 days agoSpeaker suspended over anti-party activities
-
Crime4 days agoAbducted Army General: Gunmen Make Demands, Contact Family