News
Japan must not take IAEA report to shield its ocean discharge
By Zhong Sheng, People’s Daily
The Japanese government obviously got excited after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a comprehensive report on the disposal of nuclear-contaminated water at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, taking the report as a shield that keeps off opposing voices against its plan to discharge nuclear-contaminated water into the sea.
However, this carefully worded report failed to fully reflect views from experts that participated in the review. The conclusion was not shared by all experts and failed to review the justification and legitimacy of Japan’s ocean discharge plan. The attempt of the Japanese side is doomed to end up in vain.
The report cannot give legitimacy to Japan’s plan of discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.
Japan’s unilateral decision to dump nuclear-contaminated water into the Pacific is based entirely on minimizing economic cost, and will transfer risks to the whole world. Japan is the only beneficiary of the decision, while other countries in and near the Pacific will be forced to shoulder risks and spend huge amount of resources in coping with possible negative situations.
When the Japanese side requested the IAEA to review its discharge plan two years ago, it has excluded other safer and better plans. The IAEA only reviewed the plan that the Japanese side submitted.
The report said that the responsibility for justifying the decision to discharge the treated water falls to the Japanese government, which is significantly important for stakeholders. Japan’s discharge plan was not recommended or endorsed by the IAEA.
The report cannot fully prove that it’s safe and harmless to discharge nuclear-contaminated water at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station to the ocean.
The nuclear-contaminated water contains over 60 radionuclides, and there is not yet effective technology to treat many of those radionuclides. The effectiveness and maturity of Japan’s Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) has not been evaluated or certified by a third party, and the facility has repeatedly malfunctioned.
According to data released by Japan, over 70 percent of ALPS-treated nuclear-contaminated water failed to meet the discharge standards. Japan’s discharge of the nuclear-contaminated water will last as long as 30 years or even longer. How can it prove the long-term reliability of the ALPS? Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has a record of manipulating data and concealing accidents. How can the review based on statistics and information provided by this company assure the international community? The report said that the conclusions on safety was reached based on Japan’s discharge plan and will establish a long-term mechanism that monitors the discharge, which exactly proves the long-term risks of discharging the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.
The report cannot exempt the Japanese side from its due responsibilities and obligations under international law.
The international community is concerned about Japan’s discharge plan because it fears that Japan would transfer the risks of nuclear contamination to the rest of humanity, which is inconsistent with Japan’s obligations under the international law.
Some long-lived radionuclides may spread with the ocean currents. What impacts will they have on the ecological balance of coastal waters of Japan’s neighboring countries? Whether will they form a bio-concentration and pose potential hazards to food safety and human health with the mitigation of marine species and the food chain? No one has given convincing answers to these questions, be it the Japanese side or the IAEA.
Besides, such discharge violates Japan’s obligations to protect and preserve the marine environment as outlined in United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and other international law and the provisions against dumping radioactive wastes from man-made structures at sea in the London Convention. The Japanese side cannot deny the fact that such discharge is suspected of violating its international obligations no matter how it whitewashes its intention.
The Japanese side is trying to hype the voice that distrusting the report is harming the authoritativeness of the IAEA. However, the biggest harm to the organization’s authoritativeness came from Japan’s efforts to limit the organization’s authorization in reviewing the discharge plan, which finally led to incomplete and conditional conclusions of the report.
A recent poll in Japan shows that 40 percent of the respondents oppose discharging the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean. A joint survey by South Korean newspaper Hankook Ilbo and Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun also revealed that more than 80 percent of South Koreans disagree with Japan’s discharge plan.
Experts and citizens from Pacific island countries, the Philippines, Indonesia, South Africa and Peru have staged frequent protests against the discharge plan, and the Chinese people are strongly opposing Japan’s practice.
Regrettably, Japan has turned a blind eye to this and stubbornly announced that it would start discharging the nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean as scheduled this summer. It slandered other countries’ legitimate concerns and even mentioned water discharge from normal operation of nuclear power plants and dumping nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean in the same breath. This clearly is not what a responsible country does.
Japan has the responsibility and obligation to offer an explanation to the world on its discharge plan, which is a major issue that concerns the public interests of the international community.
It should be clear that the IAEA report cannot quiet the doubts of the world about its discharge plan, or become a “shield” or “greenlight” for the plan.
The country should faithfully fulfill its moral responsibility and obligations under international law, stop pushing forward the ocean discharge plan, fully study alternatives to the ocean discharge, carry out full consultation with neighboring countries and other stakeholders, and earnestly dispose of the nuclear-contaminated water in a science-based, safe and transparent manner.
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
