News
China issues guideline to ensure use of science and technology for good purposes
By Wu Yuehui, People’s Daily
To better ensure the use of science and technology for good purposes and standardize scientific and technological innovation activities, China recently issued a guideline on strengthening the governance over ethics in science and technology.
The document, which is the country’s first national-level guideline of its kind, made systematic deployment regarding science and technology ethics governance for the first time.
In recent years, China has witnessed rapid development of scientific and technological innovation and achieved major breakthroughs in cutting-edge technologies in such fields as artificial intelligence (AI), gene editing and assisted reproduction.
As new trails are blazed in more and more frontier fields, challenges facing ethics in science and technology have also increased.
The guideline specified the ethical principles that scientific and technological activities should follow, stipulated the requirements for governance over ethics in science and technology, and demonstrated China’s stance on and attitude toward strengthening governance over ethics in the field of the science and technology, according to Xiang Libin, vice-minister of science and technology.
It established the country’s basic ethics governance system for science and technology and clarified the responsibilities of and specific requirements for the government, innovation entities, science and technology associations and personnel in governance over ethics in the field, Xiang pointed out.
The document also provided top-level design for the construction of the ethics governance system, specifying tasks involving such aspects as norms and standards, regulatory systems, as well as laws and regulations, Xiang noted.
Besides, it proposed systematic measures for ethics review and supervision, including strengthening the early warning, prevention and control of ethical risks and strictly investigating and punishing activities that violate the requirements of science and technology ethics in accordance with laws and regulations, Xiang said.
The document stressed that scientific and technological activities should follow five ethical principles, including serving the well-being of humanity, respecting people’s right to life, adhering to fairness and justice, controlling risks in an appropriate way, and maintaining openness and transparency.
“These five principles are not only the values and norms that should be followed in scientific and technological activities in China, but also the basis of a common context for dialogue between China and the international science community,” noted Zhai Xiaomei, a member of China’s national science and technology ethics committee.
Zhai explained that the guideline made “serving the well-being of humanity” the primary ethical principle in science and technology because it is the prime driving force behind technological advances and the core requirement for the use of science and technology for good purposes.
In human subject research, it is necessary for researchers to follow through the commitment of “respecting people’s right to life” to ensure the research is conducted ethically, respects the subjects’ right to privacy, and protects their right to know and choose, Zhai stressed.
When it comes to experiments involving animals, researchers are obliged to treat the animals well and make sure that their scientific research activities meet the requirements of “reduction, replacement, and refinement”, Zhai added.
As frontier technologies are developing rapidly, it is necessary to pay attention to the problems caused by people’s differences based on ethical concepts besides the risks in technical security, Zhai said, who considers it important to reflect on the functions of frontier technologies comprehensively and prudently, especially those highly controversial technologies that could have a significant impact on humanity.
Highlighting problem-oriented governance over science and technology ethics, the guideline set five requirements for the governance, including “ethics first, compliance with laws and regulations, agile governance, suitability for national conditions, and openness and cooperation”.
“‘Ethics first’ requires focusing on ethical risk prevention and control, moving ahead the risk preparedness threshold, and adopting the ethics requirements throughout the whole process of scientific and technological activities and in all fields of scientific and technological innovation,” said Feng Chujian, deputy director-general of the Department of Supervision and Scientific Integrity at the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST).
Research institutes and researchers shouldn’t carry out scientific and technological activities without thinking about ethical standards or generalize the ethics in science and technology; instead, they have to actively assess the ethical risks before conducting research, and investigate in a timely manner scientific and technological activities involving ethical risks and falling into the categories of activities required to go through ethics review, Feng pointed out.
China will also establish specialized and regional ethics review centers, and set up a certification mechanism for the country’s ethics review committee to improve its capacity, according to Dai Guoqing, director-general of the Department of Supervision and Scientific Integrity under the MOST.
To facilitate the oversight of research in frontier fields, the guideline proposed making a list of scientific and technological activities involving high risks related to ethics in science and technology and rechecking the results of their ethics review.
The national science and technology ethics committee is drafting such a list, with medicine, life sciences and AI being key fields of relevant activities on the list, Dai noted, adding that great progress has been achieved in making the list, which will be released within the year.
News
The Most Shocking A/Court ‘Judgment’ in Nigerian History: An unfortunate precedent that should not be allowed to stand
The last is yet to be heard of wide ranging ex-parte orders as this time around, the charade has moved to the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division. In the case of FBN Quest & Another vs. Nestoil & Others, the Court of Appeal’s ex parte orders are not only egregious but a chilling sign of judicial capture, smacking of dirty practices at best and corruption at worst.
On Thursday, 27th November 2025, at exactly 2:00pm, Justice Yargata Nimpar delivered a ‘ruling ’ that appeared like a thief in the night, a ghost and unscheduled, the said decision came upon a Motion Ex-parte which was not heard not argued in open court, yet it surfaced, fully written, signed, stamped, and delivered as though it had lived a full life on the Court of Appeal docket.
For many Nigerians, the judiciary has again weathered the storms. Veterans of the legal system describe this episode as “a daylight heist… a judicial armed robbery without guns.”
The controversies over wide ranging ex-parte applications, it would seem, has found its way to the Court of appeal, an intermediate court with limited original jurisdiction as donated to it by statute.
In this instance, barely two weeks ago, we reported the ex-parte orders against NESTOIL and the other defendants listed in the suit before the Federal High Court which led to the transfer of the suit to another judge.
The said interim orders were vacated by effluxion of time, being that ex-parte orders last for only 14 days.
The court however ordered parties to maintain status quo and adjourned the Motion on Notice for hearing by the consent of the parties. That Motion is still pending before the Federal High Court.
It would seem that in order to frustrate that pending Motion, the Plaintiffs somehow filed a similar application to the Court of Appeal which was granted an order ex-parte directing the Lower Court not to take any further steps, including determining the pending application filed by Plaintiffs (now Appellants).
This magically resurrected, fast-tracked application seem to have been rubber-stamped at the fictional “Appeal Bench of Shadows,” as insiders have begun calling it.
A CASE THAT NEVER EXISTED — YET RECEIVED A JUDGMENT
Our Judiciary correspondent gathered that when the court’s official list for the day was released, nothing seemed amiss. No controversial cases. No unexpected hearings.
But somewhere inside the dusty chambers of bureaucracy, a secret file was already being prepared and by 2pm, a judgment carrying the signatures of an entire appeal panel had surfaced — even though none of them had appeared in open court and when the case itself had never been argued before any High Court, making an appellate ruling legally impossible.
By evening, whispers had turned into rumblings. Court workers who handled the mysterious document reported unusual instructions: No public sitting; No mention on the court list; No access to case filings; No digital record and No audio recording of proceedings. Yet an order was made retrospectively to undo a completed act! which is yet another impossibility in law, because the exparte order cannot restore what has been already executed.
“It was like dealing with a ghost file,” one clerk said. “It appeared from nowhere and disappeared into official archives as though it had always existed.”
This judgment, once delivered, spread like wildfire, with legal scholars calling it “a constitutional impossibility.” Veterans said they had never seen anything similar since the 1970s.
Enquiries from our judiciary correspondents indicate that an application can only be hinged upon a valid Notice of Appeal against a decision of a lower court before any application can be entertained at the Court of Appeal.
Further Investigations by our judiciary correspondent reveals that no such Notice of Appeal has been filed nor served on the respondents; no parties have been invited to Settle Records and no Records of Appeal have been transmitted.
One wonders the platform or upon which grounds the ex-parte order was made, observed one senior lawyer, especially as a similar pending application filed by the Appellants has been adjourned for Hearing by the Federal High Court.
Furthermore, the case at the trial court before Justice Osiagor has not been heard on its merits, which documents was placed before the appellate court and all applications before the judge has not been heard or is the court of appeal now a trial court.
A JUDICIARY AT A CROSSROADS
Public outrage rose quickly. Lawyers described the situation as “a hijacking of justice by shadowy interests.” Civil society groups demanded explanations.
A Judiciary where justice can be manufactured behind closed doors…a legal system where influence not merit, decides outcomes…and an institution tested by the weight of powerful external forces, et cetera should not be allowed to thrive.
AN ERA-DEFINING SCANDAL
This judgement will stand as one of the most dramatic challenges ever faced by Nigeria’s justice system. The shockwaves has rippled far beyond the courtroom — touching politics, business, security agencies, and public trust.
One thing is clear: This is the kind of judicial earthquake that rewrites history, shakes institutions, and forces a nation to confront the truths it fears the most. Our judicial correspondences were able to get an incline of the ex-parte orders made by the Court of Appeal as follows:
- AN ORDER of interim restorative injunction reversing all steps taken by the Respondents and/or persons purporting to act on the instructions of the Respondents and which steps or actions were taken pursuant to the order of the Federal High Court coram Osiagor, J made on the 20th day of November 2025 pending the hearing and determination of the Appellants’ Motion on Notice filed on the 26th day of November 2025.
- AN ORDER of interim injunction restraining the Respondents, their agents, servants, affiliates, and privies from interfering with and interrupting the Receiver/Manager in the performance of his duties pending the hearing and determination of the Appellants’ Motion on Notice filed on 26th November 2025.
- AN ORDER staying further proceedings at the lower court pending the hearing and determination of the Appellants’ Motion on Notice filed on the 26th November 2025.
A SHOCKING DEPARTURE FROM JUDICIAL NORMS
Therefore, the Lagos Court of Appeal’s decision to grant ex parte orders in FBN Quest & Another vs. Nestoil & Others stunned the legal community as ex-parte rulings are meant for rare emergencies and hardly exercised by appellate courts. By acting without hearing both sides, while the matter was already before the Federal High Court, the Court of Appeal has undermined the principle of natural justice and distorted its own role.
NIGERIAN IMAGE AT RISK
At a time when Nigeria is striving to reposition its global reputation, this case sends the wrong message. It portrays the country as one where courts can be hijacked by private interests, where fairness is discarded, and where corruption lurks behind judicial robes. For investors and international partners, it reinforces damaging stereotypes of weak institutions and compromised justice.
AN URGENT CALL FOR INVESTIGATION
These orders are not just irregular — they are evidence of judicial capture. They must be investigated urgently. The Chief Justice of Nigeria, the National Judicial Council, the President of the Court of Appeal and the Nigerian Bar Association cannot remain silent. If appellate courts become arenas for ex-parte adventures, Nigeria’s justice system risks collapse under the weight of manipulation.
CLOSING NOTE
The Court of Appeal’s conduct in FBN Quest & Another vs. Nestoil & Others is more than a misstep, it is a warning sign of judicial capture. If Nigeria is serious about restoring its image and strengthening democracy, this case must be investigated, accountability enforced, and reforms implemented. Anything less would be an abdication of the judiciary’s sacred duty to uphold justice. We must not allow that to happen.
A very Senior lawyer emphasize that the exparte order of the court of appeal lagos division in Nestoil has the possibility of eroding administrative control of Heads of superior Court from assigning or re assigning matters within their respective courts. Furthermore both the President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Justice of Nigeria may not have the authority to disband a panel and re- constitute another panel over any matter in their respective courts. This decision is a total anarchy to the judiciary and urgent steps must be taken to vacate the strange Court of appeal exparte order.
The conduct of the court of appeal justices is not excusable anywhere in the world and it’s indeed has brought the court of Appeal justices who constituted the panel to ridicule
News
Pius Akutah’s Alleged Fraud at Nigerian Shippers Council Uncovered
Investigations by Nigerian Concord Newspaper reveal that the Executive Secretary of the Nigerian Shippers Council, Mr. Pius Akutah, has allegedly misappropriated public funds for a lavish lifestyle.
According to our findings, within months of assuming office, Akutah allegedly purchased a bulletproof SUV valued at approximately N850 million. In addition, he is reported to have acquired over twenty exotic SUVs for use as a convoy.
Akutah is also said to have acquired multiple high-value properties, including three in Abuja’s Maitama and Asokoro districts worth over N2 billion, and two in Lagos’ Banana Island valued at N1.8 billion. These acquisitions appear far beyond the scope of his official salary and allowances.
Further investigation suggests that Akutah may be using public funds to support political ambitions, including allegedly grooming militants across 23 local government areas in Benue State for a potential 2027 gubernatorial bid.
Staff of the Shippers Council reportedly claim that Akutah frequently accesses the council’s treasury without proper authorization. Some insiders have indicated that a petition will soon be filed with the EFCC, ICPC, and the Presidency to report his alleged misconduct.
*
News
Pius Akutah’s Alleged Fraud at Nigerian Shippers Council Uncovered
Investigations by Nigerian Concord Newspaper reveal that the Executive Secretary of the Nigerian Shippers Council, Mr. Pius Akutah, has allegedly misappropriated public funds for a lavish lifestyle.
According to our findings, within months of assuming office, Akutah allegedly purchased a bulletproof SUV valued at approximately N850 million. In addition, he is reported to have acquired over twenty exotic SUVs for use as a convoy.
Akutah is also said to have acquired multiple high-value properties, including three in Abuja’s Maitama and Asokoro districts worth over N2 billion, and two in Lagos’ Banana Island valued at N1.8 billion. These acquisitions appear far beyond the scope of his official salary and allowances.
Further investigation suggests that Akutah may be using public funds to support political ambitions, including allegedly grooming militants across 23 local government areas in Benue State for a potential 2027 gubernatorial bid.
Staff of the Shippers Council reportedly claim that Akutah frequently accesses the council’s treasury without proper authorization. Some insiders have indicated that a petition will soon be filed with the EFCC, ICPC, and the Presidency to report his alleged misconduct.
*
-
Uncategorized5 years agoFG, states urged to harness flooding for ranching, others with technology – Agbaje
-
Headlines10 years agoBreaking: EFCC seals Borno House of Assembly, as Hon members take to their heels
-
News11 years agoNigeria Security Operatives Stage Manhunt For Homosexual Perpetrator
-
News9 years agoHow 21-year-old Girl fled community over accusation of lesbianism
-
News10 years agoYobe Gov Moves Against Deputy
-
Opinion7 years ago7 signs she has friend zoned you
-
Technology4 years ago
Online job placement company headhunts women
-
Headlines10 years agoBorno Dep Gov Abducts Another Church Leader
