Connect with us
Maduka University Advert

Opinion

May 29: Why Tinubu should not be sworn-in – Lawyer

Published

on

Maduka University
By ALOY EJIMAKOR
Yesterday (May 4, 2023), I tweeted on my Twitter handle that “Given that the FINALITY of election result is decided by the Court, except where the INEC-declared result is uncontested, it’s unconstitutional to swear-in a winner whose victory has not been affirmed by the Court. Where’s the law that says such a winner must be sworn-in? None!”
Since then, I have received a barrage of direct messages and requests to publicly speak more on this. So, to those who asked me and in the public interest, below are the short answers to your many questions:
Yes, inauguration of a new President on May 29 is not absolute, neither by the provisions of the Constitution, the Electoral Act or any other written law.
And no, there won’t be any VACUUM if a new President is not sworn-in on May 29. The Constitution envisaged such an anomalous situation and thus copiously provided for the rainy day, as follows:
First, Section 135(1)(a) of the Constitution says that “Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, a person shall hold the office of President UNTIL when his successor in office takes the oath of that office”.
If you pay close attention to above provisions, you will notice that the Constitution never said “until May 29” and it used the word ‘shall’ which – by settled legal interpretation – means ‘must’. That means that the incumbent President, despite exhausting his eight years, is not going anywhere until his successor is sworn-in and such a date could overshot May 29.
Now, you can see that this is not about Tinubu, because, if you strictly follow the Constitution, neither Atiku, nor Obi (in addition to Tinubu) would be inaugurated as President on May 29 and Nigeria will still have a constitutional President.
You will also notice that since 1999, a lot of ‘successors’ or winners of elections, mostly of the gubernatorial kind, had taken their oaths of office AFTER May 29. So, where did this widespread notion that May 29 is sacrosanct or absolute come from? It came from mere custom or political expediency, not from any known black letter law.
Second, Section 136(2) of the Constitution says that “Where the persons duly elected as President and Vice President die or are UNABLE for ANY REASON whatsoever to assume office before the inauguration of the National Assembly, the Independent National Electoral Commission shall immediately conduct an election for a President and the Vice-President”.
In plain terms, what the preceding Section 136 is saying is that, apart from death, there are myriad reasons that could prevent or imperil the President-elect and the Vice, standing together, from assuming office on May 29 and heavens won’t fall.
One of such other reasons that easily comes to mind is a Court order, usually of an Interlocutory kind, emanating from the Tribunal on a Motion; or from an Originating Summons (not an election petition) succeeding before a Federal High Court on interpretation of the pertinent constitutional provisions on point, including particularly the said Sections 135, 136, in addition to Section 1(2) of the Constitution vis-a-vis the absolutism or otherwise of May 29.
To be clear, the Section 1(2) of the Constitution that is pertinent to this discourse provides that “The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall not be governed, nor shall any persons or group of persons take control of the Government of Nigeria or any part thereof, except in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.”
In my view, both the Tribunal (under the Electoral Act) and the Federal High Court (under Section 6 of the Constitution) have concurrent jurisdiction to delve in the interpretation of these Sections as they impact on May 29.
Anybody saying that it is only the Election Tribunal that possesses an exclusive jurisdiction on this matter or that simultaneously and separately initiating such a Suit before the Federal High Court will abuse the process of the Election Tribunal is wrong, because the fundamental business of interpreting the Constitution (the organic law) is independent of, and should have primacy over everything else, including particularly a mere election petition before a narrowly-constituted ad hoc Tribunal.
Now, ponder this: If the result declared by INEC does not accord with the Electoral Act, it then follows that such result does not, ipso facto, accord with the Constitution, because the Electoral Act is a product of (and subservient to) the Constitution – the grundnorm. The river never flows backwards. Thus, any repugnancy in the Electoral Act must yield to the demands of the Constitution.
Thus, by virtue of the preceding Section 1(2) of the Constitution, inaugurating a new President on May 29 while the Court (as the final umpire) is yet to call the final result would mean that persons (or a group of persons) have taken control of the Government of Nigeria in a manner that does not accord with the Constitution.
The clearer and obvious way of understanding this conundrum is to think of it this way: If a new President is sworn-in on May 29 and subsequently, the Tribunal or the Supreme Court (again: the final umpire) invalidates the election, what would you say happened to the Government of Nigeria during the period the sacked President held office before the final judgment?
Unarguably, what happened is that, during such period, the Federal Republic of Nigeria and her government were taken control of in a manner that did not accord with the Constitution. This is a grave constitutional injustice that can never be undone. So, by all means, it should be avoided as the Constitution has enabled such under Sections 135 and 136.
While you ponder this, keep in mind that there is no express provision in the Constitution, the Electoral Act (the law that enables elections and transitions) or any other written law that strictly requires that a challenged winner of an election must be sworn-in on May 29.
Don’t get me wrong. I have no personal or political animus against any election winner. An election winner surely deserves the fruits of his victory but it must not be on May 29. It can be later or even not at all, if the Court – which is the final electoral umpire – fails to affirm his INEC-victory.
In the unique legal framework of Nigeria’s elections, INEC is not the end but the means to the end. That end is the Court (the judiciary) which alone possesses all the judicial powers of the Federation, including the final powers to declare winners of elections.
So, the smart framers of the Constitution, having figured that, some day, an occasion will surely arise where a winner may be unable for ANY REASON to be sworn-in on May 29, they inserted the implicit ‘tenure elongation’ in Section 135 but limited it by the provisions of Section 136 that requires INEC to ‘immediately’ conduct another Presidential election. If the intendment of this creative Constitution-making was not to ensure there’s no VACUUM, what then is its intendment?
Thus, in the clear absence of any law mandating that a swearing-in must proceed apace on May 29, the only reason (or justification) Nigeria had indulged in such crass unconstitutionality (or extra-constitutionality) since 1999 was political CUSTOM, and that’s because the country or the political class was desperate and thus minded to avoid anything that the military can latch on to continue in power.
Today, that custom, even though initially convenient and compelling is retrograde and can no longer stand because it is repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience. Above all, it is – by hindsight – incompatible with the Constitution and Laws of the Federation of Nigeria in several ramifications.
And mark my word: This thesis does not apply to the office of the President ALONE. It applies across the board. And until Nigeria gets its elections right or purges itself through a popular REFERENDUM, the judiciary should ensure that winners of disputed elections must not take power until the declaration of the final result by the last Court.
If politicians are made aware that power can only come after the courts (not INEC) have decided the result, it will work wonders in getting the greatest number of contestants and even INEC and political partisans to keep in line, play fair and desist from this mantra of ‘go to court’ which is a subliminal insult on the Constitution and the judiciary.
Aloy Ejimakor, a constitutional lawyer, wrote from Abuja.
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Ebonyi 2027: Why Anyichuks Odii Is Being Positioned as the Alternative

Published

on

Maduka University

The 2027 governorship election in Ebonyi State must not be viewed as just another political contest. For many Ndi Ebonyi, it represents a defining moment — an opportunity to reflect on the direction of the state and make a decisive choice about the kind of leadership they want for the future.

Across the vast lands of Ebonyi, there is a growing sense of frustration and uncertainty. Many citizens are asking difficult questions about security, youth empowerment, employment opportunities, poverty alleviation and the welfare of vulnerable groups, particularly women and young girls.

The concerns are real, and they deserve serious political attention.

A state blessed with human and natural resources should be one where young people can look to the future with confidence, where women have meaningful opportunities to thrive, and where government policies translate into tangible improvements in the lives of ordinary citizens.

It is against this backdrop that Anyichuks Odii has emerged as a political figure attracting growing attention among those seeking a different direction for Ebonyi.

Advertisement

To his supporters, Anyichuks Odii represents a combination of experience, vision, capacity and determination — qualities they believe are necessary to reposition the state and restore hope among its people.

The argument is straightforward: Ebonyi needs leadership that does not merely administer the state but actively creates opportunities for its people.

The youths need more than political promises. They need practical skills, access to opportunities, entrepreneurship support, employment pathways and an environment where their talents can translate into sustainable livelihoods.

Women need more than symbolic representation. They need economic empowerment, access to finance, skills development, education and policies that enable them to become stronger contributors to their families and communities.

And every citizen deserves to feel secure enough to live, work and pursue legitimate aspirations without fear.

Advertisement

The 2027 election therefore provides Ndi Ebonyi with an opportunity to critically assess the records, ideas and capacity of every candidate seeking their mandate.

Democracy ultimately belongs to the people. Their voter cards are their instruments of choice, and their votes should reflect their aspirations for a better Ebonyi.

Already, political conversations are intensifying across the state. One of the songs gaining attention among supporters captures the mood of those calling for a change in political direction:

“Nwifuru kwakoro naba, onye ndozi abiago, naba, onye ndozi abiago, naba… Ka Anyichuks bata.”

For the supporters of Anyichuks Odii, the message is clear: they believe a new chapter is possible and that the 2027 governorship election could be the moment when Ndi Ebonyi choose the leadership they believe can deliver that change.

Advertisement

But beyond slogans and political songs, the real test will be the issues.

Ebonyi deserves a serious conversation about security, economic development, infrastructure, education, healthcare, youth employment, women’s empowerment and inclusive governance.

The people must demand clear plans, measurable commitments and accountability from all contenders.

If 2027 is indeed to become a moment of redemption, it must ultimately be a redemption achieved through the informed choice of the people.

And for those who believe Anyichuks Odii embodies the leadership Ebonyi needs, the journey to 2027 has already begun.

Advertisement

The message from his supporters is unmistakable:

Ebonyi is ready for a new conversation. Ebonyi is ready to choose. Ebonyi is ready for a new direction.

By Dr. Kenneth Anozie, Political Strategist

Continue Reading

Opinion

Why Umahi Has Every Reason to Seek Compensation Over Alleged Defamatory Publications

Published

on

Maduka University

By Emma Igwe
The decision by the Minister of Works, Engr. David Umahi, to institute a defamation action against Linda Ikeji, Linda Ikeji TV Limited and Stella Ifeoma Okengwu should not be dismissed as an attempt to silence criticism.
At the heart of the case is a much more fundamental question: how far can individuals and media platforms go in publishing serious allegations against a person’s character and reputation without being held accountable if those allegations are found to be false?
Umahi has approached the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, with suit No. GWD/CV/264/26, filed on August 24, 2026. He alleges that publications and videos circulated between March 2025 and March 2026 contained allegations of bribery, corruption, intimidation, sexual misconduct, land grabbing, sexual harassment and claims that he was unfit for public office. He maintains that the allegations were false, malicious and calculated to damage his reputation.
These are not minor accusations.
A public official can be criticised over policies, projects, political decisions and performance. That is an essential part of democracy. But allegations of corruption, bribery and sexual misconduct are qualitatively different. If such allegations are published without adequate factual foundation and are ultimately found to be false and defamatory, the damage to the subject’s reputation can be enormous.
THE SCALE OF PUBLICATION MATTERS
Another important consideration is the alleged reach of the publications.
According to the reports on the suit, Umahi alleges that material posted by Stella Okengwu was subsequently amplified through Linda Ikeji’s media platforms, including Linda Ikeji TV and its Instagram platform.
That distinction matters.
An allegation whispered privately to a few people is one thing. An allegation disseminated through platforms with substantial online audiences is another.
If the court ultimately finds that defamatory statements were repeatedly disseminated to a large audience, the extent of publication would naturally become relevant when assessing the injury allegedly suffered by the claimant.
UMAHI SAYS HE DID NOT RUSH TO COURT
The minister also says that his lawyers first demanded that the alleged publications be removed, that an unreserved apology be issued and that the defendants undertake not to repeat similar allegations.
He alleges that those demands were not complied with.
If that account is established before the court, it strengthens the argument that litigation was not necessarily his first response, but followed an alleged failure to resolve the dispute through a demand for correction and retraction.
WHY THE CLAIM FOR DAMAGES IS SIGNIFICANT
Umahi is seeking ₦500 million in general damages and ₦2 billion in exemplary damages, making ₦2.5 billion in damages. He is separately seeking ₦500 million as costs of the action and 10 percent post-judgment interest.
The amount claimed should not, however, be confused with an amount already awarded by a court.
It is a claim that must be proved.
And that is precisely why the court process is important.
If Umahi can establish that the publications were false and defamatory, that they caused serious injury to his reputation and that the defendants were legally responsible for their publication or republication, then compensation would serve more than a personal purpose.
It would reinforce the principle that freedom of expression does not automatically translate into freedom from responsibility for demonstrably false and defamatory statements.
THIS IS NOT ABOUT PROTECTING POLITICIANS FROM CRITICISM
There is a dangerous tendency in Nigeria to treat every defamation action involving a politician as an attempt to suppress free speech.
That approach is too simplistic.
Democracy requires vigorous criticism of public officials. Journalists, bloggers and citizens must remain free to investigate government and expose genuine wrongdoing.
But democracy also requires accountability for what is published.
If a journalist has evidence of corruption, the appropriate response is to present the evidence and defend the publication in court. If a person makes an allegation and can prove its substantial truth, that too is a legitimate defence.
But if a court eventually determines that serious allegations were knowingly or recklessly published without justification and caused reputational damage, the law must provide a remedy.
THE COURT SHOULD DECIDE — NOT SOCIAL MEDIA
This is perhaps the most important aspect of the Umahi case.
At present, the allegations made by Umahi in his Statement of Claim remain allegations before the court. The defendants had not, according to reports available as of August 25, been served with the writ, and no hearing date had been fixed. They will have the opportunity to present their defence.
Therefore, neither Umahi nor his opponents should declare victory prematurely.
The proper question is not whether Umahi is powerful enough to sue.
The proper question is whether the publications complained of were true, substantially true, fair comment, privileged, or defamatory and unjustified.
That is what evidence and the judicial process should determine.
THE REAL TEST
Umahi deserves compensation if he proves his case.
If the court establishes that he was falsely accused of serious criminal, corrupt or sexually improper conduct; that the allegations were defamatory; that the defendants were legally responsible for the publications; and that he suffered compensable injury, then a substantial award would not be an attack on journalism.
It would be an application of the law.
Conversely, if the defendants can substantiate their allegations or establish a recognised legal defence, the court should equally protect their right to publish matters of legitimate public interest.
That is the essence of the rule of law.
The court — not social media, not political supporters, and not bloggers — should have the final word.

Continue Reading

Opinion

NDI EBONYI; DON’T SLEEP, DON’T SLUMBER: ANYICHUKS ODII IS HERE

Published

on

Maduka University

In life, evil never lasts forever. *Change must always come*! Many believe today that 2027 is *FREEDOM TIME FOR EBONYI PEOPLE*

In the midst of these cacophonic political noise, a man of the people has arisen to clean the tears that Ebonyi has suffered under an *ifuru* guy whose legendary for corruption and sleaze is unquantifiable..

*DR. ANYICHUKS ODII IS FINALLY HERE*! The people are excited. The vision is classic which will turn Ebonyi around.

1. Infrastructure.
2. Industrialization.
3. Farming improvement
4. ICT development
5. Youth empowerments
6. Government restructuring.
7. Securing lives and property
8. Expanded governance to touch all parts of Ebonyi
9. Education expansion and offer of scholarships to indigent students & pupils.

More will come with a leader who, as a private businessman made all these possible, as well as developed sporting activities around Ebonyi State.

Advertisement

Ndi Ebonyi, look at the man; *ANYICHUKS ODII*

Dr. Kenneth Anozie
Political Analyst

Continue Reading

Opinion

EBONYI; LET’S STAND ON A BETTER, MORE PROGRESSIVE MANDATE; PDP ANYICHUKS ODII

Published

on

Maduka University

Kenneth Anozie

Soon, the INEC regulations will lift the lid on campaigns to start. In Ebonyi state, there will be a lot of political noise. The political timberlines will be sounding cacophonously. The noise will be unbearable.

However, only one campaign, the Governorship candidate of People’s Democratic Party, PDP, *DR. ANYICHUKS ODII* will be the only mandate the good people of Ebonyi need to be hearing and standing on. His mandate merits all the noise because he has served the people and has been a source of succour for thousands of families in many aspects.

The vision of Anyichuks Odii on health care, education, social safety, security and agriculture/industrialization as well as youth empowerments are all top notch. They are all well spelt out, which will be released as his manifesto will be released soon.

Already, we have seen a glimpse of it in our previous revelations and analysis. As it stands today, only on the mandate of Anyichuks Odii as the governorship candidate of PDP are people expected to stand on.

Advertisement

The mandate has character, capacity, compassion and great vision.

*EBONYI PEOPLE, BLIGHT ANY OTHER MANDATE, ANYICHUKS ODII IS THE MANDATE WE SHALL ALL STAND ON*

Dr. Kenneth Anozie
Political Analyst

Continue Reading

Opinion

SEYI TINUBU AND THE CITY BOYS MOVEMENT: Building A New Architecture For Nigerian Youth In Politics And Nation-Building

Published

on

Maduka University

When history records the political organizing of Nigeria in the 2020s, the name Seyi Tinubu will feature prominently not just as the son of a president, but as the convener who gave structure to youthful energy through the City Boys Movement.

What began as a campaign vehicle in 2022 has since evolved. Seyi Tinubu himself described it at the movement’s national retreat in Abuja as “more than just the opening of a retreat. It is the beginning of a movement” dedicated to service and the Renewed Hope vision.

That evolution matters. For too long, youth engagement in Nigeria oscillated between protest and apathy. The City Boys Movement offers a third lane: organized, institutional, and solution-driven participation.

On youth advocacy, the CBM has redefined what advocacy can look like. Instead of shouting from the sidelines, its members are being trained to enter rooms, ask questions, and propose answers.

Seyi Tinubu challenged the movement to move beyond defending government to “reconnecting Nigerians with government.” That is advocacy with responsibility — explaining policy, listening to feedback, and carrying both back to Abuja.

Advertisement

In governance communication, the gap between policy makers and citizens has been Nigeria’s oldest problem. CBM is attempting to close it by deploying young people as policy translators.

With reforms like subsidy removal and naira floatation straining households, the movement positioned itself as a buffer — not to deny the pain, but to explain the purpose with facts and empathy.

The directive from its Patron was clear: engagement must be “responsible, factual and compassionate.” That is a maturity we rarely demand of youth politics, and it is changing the tone of conversations in markets, campuses, and wards.

Visible participation is where the theory meets the street. CBM has deliberately taken its meetings out of Abuja hotels and into communities across the 36 states and FCT.

From free medical outreaches to campus visits, members are showing up where government is felt most — in clinics, in schools, in queues.

Advertisement

That visibility sends a message to young Nigerians: politics is not a distant game. It is something you can touch, join, and shape.

Perhaps the most consequential shift is institutionalization. The movement has moved from a loose WhatsApp group to a formal structure with a National Working Committee, State Directors, and representation down to Zonal, LGA and Ward levels.

This matters because structure creates accountability. It creates a ladder for a 24-year-old in Oron, a 28-year-old in Kano, or a 30-year-old in Enugu to rise through service, not just slogans.

The stated target of mobilizing 10 million youth votes for 2027 is ambitious, but the method is instructive: “real people, real members, real engagement and hard work at the grassroots,” according to the Director-General.

On relief and welfare, the City Boys Movement has chosen to lead with service. Nationwide food distribution during Ramadan and Lent, medical missions, and direct support to vulnerable households have become part of its brand.

Advertisement

These are not photo ops. In a season of economic adjustment, relief builds trust. Trust is the currency of governance, and youth are spending it in their communities.

Direct empowerment is the next pillar. Through programs tied to Seyi Tinubu’s initiatives, thousands have received grants, business support, and tools to start or scale.

In Ogun State alone, the model included ₦500,000 grants for 50 SMEs, ₦200,000 for 100 micro-businesses, and up to ₦5m for tech innovation winners.

Furniture donations to primary schools and cash grants to market women show the movement understands that empowerment must be both aspirational and immediate.

This is advocacy that pays school fees, stocks a shop, and buys drugs. It tells a young person: your government sees you, and your peers are in the room making it happen.

Advertisement

Geopolitical outreach is another area where CBM is breaking new ground. By appointing high-profile regional directors and pushing into the South-East, the movement is testing whether youthful messaging can transcend old party lines.

The goal is not to erase differences, but to create a national conversation where youth in every zone see themselves in the same project.

That is nation-building work. It is slow, unglamorous, and necessary.

The movement also offers a critical safety valve: channeling youthful frustration into structured civic engagement rather than into street confrontations.

That is not about silencing dissent. It is about giving dissent an address, a process, and a path to influence.

Advertisement

Critics will argue that youth groups tied to power risk becoming echo chambers. The test for CBM will be whether it can carry hard feedback upward as boldly as it carries policy downward.

Early signs suggest the leadership knows this. The repeated calls for empathy, for listening, and for “scratching only the surface” of what can be accomplished point to an awareness that legitimacy must be earned daily.

Seyi Tinubu’s role has been to provide patronage without suffocation — to fund, to convene, and then to step back enough for members to own the work.

If the City Boys Movement sustains this model, it could leave behind more than votes. It could leave behind a template: how to institutionalize youth energy, communicate governance honestly, and turn relief into resilience.

Nigeria does not need more spectators. It needs more builders. In Seyi Tinubu and the City Boys Movement, we are watching an experiment to see if Nigerian youth can be organized not just to win elections, but to govern, to serve, and to stay. The early chapters suggest it is possible.

Advertisement

CHINEDUM ENYINNAYA ORJI writes from Amaokwe Ugba, Umuahia Ibeku, Abia State.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending