Politics
Alleged Defamation: NASS Member demands apology from Sahara Reporters
Stephen Olufemi Oni, Ilorin
A member of the House of Representatives, representing Edu/Moro/Patigi of Kwara State in the National Assembly, Hon. Dr. Adamu Ahmed Saba, has decried the “defamatory and malicious” publication against him by the Sahara Reporters, demanding a
public apology and retraction of the story within seven days or face legal action.
His counsel, Mohammed Ndayako SAN & Co in a letter dated 22nd September 2025 signed by S.S Jipan esq, addressed to the Managing Director of Sahara Reporters, and made available to journalists in Ilorin, the state capital, accused the medium of failure to get response of the lawmaker to the story published on September 18, 2025.
The action, according to the lawmaker’s counsel, constituted a deliberate ploy to smear the good image the lawmaker had built both in Nigeria and beyond.
Contrary to the publication that the lawmaker defrauded one of his Legislative Aides, Ahmed Kabir, of N5m fake job appointment, the lawmaker’s Counsel confirmed, with necessary documents, that the complainant is indeed one of his legitimate staff.
The letter reads in part that: “It is our Client’s brief that on the 18th day of September, 2025, without verifying or affording him the opportunity of responding to the allegations as is expected of a responsible media like Sahara Reporters, you made a scandalous and defamatory publication against the person of our Client with the caption: “House of Reps Member Adamu Saba Accused of Defrauding Constituent of N5 million in Fake Job Appointment.”
It also stated that: “Contrary to the above, and if your Sahara Reporters cares to find out to balance its story, public records in the National Assembly will show to a neutral journalist that the supposed Constituent, Kabir Ahmed, was actually appointed as a Legislative Aide to our client by the National Assembly Service Commission on 22nd January, 2025, which appointment was at the pleasure of our Client.
“Copies of his Appointment letter, Staff Identification card and Salary Pay Slip are hereby attached and marked as Annexure A, B and C respectively.
“That documents from the National Assembly and from the office of Our Client, which your Sahara Reporters did not bother to verify, would also show that the said Constituent, Kabir Ahmed, enjoyed the benefit and privileges of his appointment as a Legislative Aide to our client, including accompanying our Client to carry out some of his legislative oversight functions.” the letter also stated.
“It is instructive for you to note that the appointment of a Legislative Aide of the National Assembly is always at the pleasure of the Legislature concern and the aide will be expected to keep such appointment if, and only if, they are not found wanting in character and conduct expected of the aide of a legislature that is representing a constitutional constituency.” the letter further stated.
“Sequel to the above, it is our contention that your publication dated the 18th day of September, 2025 is not only scandalous and defamatory against the person of Our Client, it is also a calculated attempt to smear our client’s long standing and hard earned political reputation within and outside Nigeria, especially that you did not take any reasonable steps to verify the allegations before going to press.
“It is against this backdrop that we demand you to retract the defamatory Publication made against our Client with immediate effect and tender an unreserved public apology within Seven (7) days which must be published in at least two (2) National dailies one of which must be widely read in Abuja, FCT and Northern Part of Nigeria and the other, in the Southern Part of Nigeria.
“Take further notice that you are required to retract the defamatory Publication and tender public apology to Our Client within seven (7) clear days commencing from the date of receipt of this letter or the date of posting by courier service, the failure of which will leave us with no options other than to employ every legal apparatus available to us against you. A stitch in time saves nine.” Adamu Ahmed Saba’s counsel demanded in the letter.
Ends
An independent investigation by Nigerian Concord Newspaper has found no evidence linking a former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Michael Kaase Aondoakaa, SAN, to the Utan Bran compensation case or other alleged scandals at the Federal Ministry of Justice.
The investigation, conducted at the Federal Ministry of Justice, followed reports in sections of the media alleging misconduct by the former chief law officer of the federation.
Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act indicate that Chief Aondoakaa was not involved in the legal firms that handled the Utan Bran compensation matter. Findings further show that the judgement debt related to the case was reportedly paid in 2006 under the tenure of a former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Bayo Ojo, SAN, during the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Multiple officials at the Federal Ministry of Justice, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described Chief Aondoakaa’s tenure as one marked by adherence to the rule of law. The sources said court orders were generally complied with during his time in office.
They also questioned claims portraying the former Attorney General as emblematic of alleged institutional failings within the legal system, stating that no specific instance had been cited in which he abused public office or undermined court judgements.
Regarding reports suggesting that Chief Aondoakaa interfered with court processes during the post-election period of the 2007 National Assembly elections, sources within the ministry said available records do not support claims that he acted to obstruct court orders or delay the swearing-in of elected officials.
On questions surrounding eligibility to hold public office, legal practitioners pointed to established Supreme Court jurisprudence, which holds that concurrent judgements carry equal legal weight with lead judgements. A concurring opinion by Justice Mary Odili, JSC, was cited as stating that the issue of disqualification from public office did not arise in the matter concerning Aondoakaa.
The case is reportedly the subject of further judicial proceedings, following claims that earlier judgements were obtained through misrepresentation. The matter remains pending before the courts.
Sources also said documents generated during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, and signed by senior officials of the Ministry of Justice, support the position that Chief Aondoakaa was not implicated in the Utan Bran case. Nigerian Concord Newspaper said it would publish the documents after concluding its investigation.
Further findings indicate that the former Attorney General was not linked to major cases such as the Halliburton scandal, the OPL 245 (Malabu) oil deal, or the recovery of Abacha-era assets.
Supporters of Aondoakaa also note that he was cleared by his party to participate in the 2023 governorship primary election, arguing that this further demonstrates that no court order barred him from holding public office.
Legal experts reaffirm that qualifications and disqualifications for elective office are constitutionally defined, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Attorney-General of Abia State v. Attorney-General of the Federation, which established that constitutional provisions on eligibility cannot be expanded or restricted by implication.
An independent investigation by Nigerian Concord Newspaper has found no evidence linking a former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Michael Kaase Aondoakaa, SAN, to the Utan Bran compensation case or other alleged scandals at the Federal Ministry of Justice.
The investigation, conducted at the Federal Ministry of Justice, followed reports in sections of the media alleging misconduct by the former chief law officer of the federation.
Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act indicate that Chief Aondoakaa was not involved in the legal firms that handled the Utan Bran compensation matter. Findings further show that the judgement debt related to the case was reportedly paid in 2006 under the tenure of a former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Bayo Ojo, SAN, during the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Multiple officials at the Federal Ministry of Justice, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described Chief Aondoakaa’s tenure as one marked by adherence to the rule of law. The sources said court orders were generally complied with during his time in office.
They also questioned claims portraying the former Attorney General as emblematic of alleged institutional failings within the legal system, stating that no specific instance had been cited in which he abused public office or undermined court judgements.
Regarding reports suggesting that Chief Aondoakaa interfered with court processes during the post-election period of the 2007 National Assembly elections, sources within the ministry said available records do not support claims that he acted to obstruct court orders or delay the swearing-in of elected officials.
On questions surrounding eligibility to hold public office, legal practitioners pointed to established Supreme Court jurisprudence, which holds that concurrent judgements carry equal legal weight with lead judgements. A concurring opinion by Justice Mary Odili, JSC, was cited as stating that the issue of disqualification from public office did not arise in the matter concerning Aondoakaa.
The case is reportedly the subject of further judicial proceedings, following claims that earlier judgements were obtained through misrepresentation. The matter remains pending before the courts.
Sources also said documents generated during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, and signed by senior officials of the Ministry of Justice, support the position that Chief Aondoakaa was not implicated in the Utan Bran case. Nigerian Concord Newspaper said it would publish the documents after concluding its investigation.
Further findings indicate that the former Attorney General was not linked to major cases such as the Halliburton scandal, the OPL 245 (Malabu) oil deal, or the recovery of Abacha-era assets.
Supporters of Aondoakaa also note that he was cleared by his party to participate in the 2023 governorship primary election, arguing that this further demonstrates that no court order barred him from holding public office.
Legal experts reaffirm that qualifications and disqualifications for elective office are constitutionally defined, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Attorney-General of Abia State v. Attorney-General of the Federation, which established that constitutional provisions on eligibility cannot be expanded or restricted by implication.
An independent investigation by Nigerian Concord Newspaper has found no evidence linking a former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Michael Kaase Aondoakaa, SAN, to the Utan Bran compensation case or other alleged scandals at the Federal Ministry of Justice.
The investigation, conducted at the Federal Ministry of Justice, followed reports in sections of the media alleging misconduct by the former chief law officer of the federation.
Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act indicate that Chief Aondoakaa was not involved in the legal firms that handled the Utan Bran compensation matter. Findings further show that the judgement debt related to the case was reportedly paid in 2006 under the tenure of a former Attorney General of the Federation, Chief Bayo Ojo, SAN, during the administration of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.
Multiple officials at the Federal Ministry of Justice, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described Chief Aondoakaa’s tenure as one marked by adherence to the rule of law. The sources said court orders were generally complied with during his time in office.
They also questioned claims portraying the former Attorney General as emblematic of alleged institutional failings within the legal system, stating that no specific instance had been cited in which he abused public office or undermined court judgements.
Regarding reports suggesting that Chief Aondoakaa interfered with court processes during the post-election period of the 2007 National Assembly elections, sources within the ministry said available records do not support claims that he acted to obstruct court orders or delay the swearing-in of elected officials.
On questions surrounding eligibility to hold public office, legal practitioners pointed to established Supreme Court jurisprudence, which holds that concurrent judgements carry equal legal weight with lead judgements. A concurring opinion by Justice Mary Odili, JSC, was cited as stating that the issue of disqualification from public office did not arise in the matter concerning Aondoakaa.
The case is reportedly the subject of further judicial proceedings, following claims that earlier judgements were obtained through misrepresentation. The matter remains pending before the courts.
Sources also said documents generated during the administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, and signed by senior officials of the Ministry of Justice, support the position that Chief Aondoakaa was not implicated in the Utan Bran case. Nigerian Concord Newspaper said it would publish the documents after concluding its investigation.
Further findings indicate that the former Attorney General was not linked to major cases such as the Halliburton scandal, the OPL 245 (Malabu) oil deal, or the recovery of Abacha-era assets.
Supporters of Aondoakaa also note that he was cleared by his party to participate in the 2023 governorship primary election, arguing that this further demonstrates that no court order barred him from holding public office.
Legal experts reaffirm that qualifications and disqualifications for elective office are constitutionally defined, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Attorney-General of Abia State v. Attorney-General of the Federation, which established that constitutional provisions on eligibility cannot be expanded or restricted by implication.
Audi: Trajectory of Success and Changing the Narrative
We’ve Known Each Other Since the 90s; I’m Qualified to Call Him a Scumbag – El-Rufai
Electronic Transmission: This Is Just a Warning Protest, We’ll Wait Till Tomorrow – Isaac Fayose
-
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
-
News12 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