Politics
ABSF to KWSG: Don’t mix community devt initiatives with politics
Stephen Olufemi Oni, Ilorin
The Abubakar Bukola Saraki Foundation (ABSF) has decried a statement reportedly credited to the Kwara State Commissioner for Water Resources, Hon. Usman Yunusa Lade, warning “residents against tampering with any state-owned water facilities”, while also stating that “anyone who tampers with the state-owned water facilities without prior approval by the designated authority will be dealt with according to law”
A statement by Dr. Audu Musa Idowu, Director, ABS Foundation, said: “While the Commissioner has not defined what constitutes ‘tampering with state water facilities’ and also failed to clarify if repair of moribund, disused, and non-functional boreholes based on requests from affected communities, also constitutes ‘tampering with the water facilities’.
ABS Foundation frowned at the statement, believing it was targeted at the recent initiative of the ABS Foundation “in which we just completed the training and equipping of 25 youths across the State with tools to enable them continuously and seamlessly repair boreholes and maintain water system across the State”.
Dr. Idowu said: “We believe the Kwara State Government made the statement to halt and frustrate the Foundation’s initiative to create Water Champions across various communities. The water champions have acquired skills and equipment during their sponsored training that they can deploy in helping various communities that face problems of water supply due to the poor maintenance of boreholes. The repair of boreholes by these water champions is therefore no false promise. It is a reality that the people have found extremely useful.
“The idea of training and equipping water champions to help in the repair, maintenance, and installation of boreholes came up after we received several written requests from various community development associations about the need to repair, rehabilitate, and replace boreholes serving the people’s water needs.
“The training of the water champions is therefore an initiative that is a direct response to the wishes of the people. It should also be noted that the people from the communities have been responding positively by sending letters of gratitude to the Foundation based on the positive interventions of the Water Champions in repairing boreholes in the communities.
“Again, we would like to put it on record that the successful training of the Water Champions is also serving the additional purpose of employing the beneficiaries. With the newly acquired skill and equipment, the Water Champions can now earn a legitimate income while providing quality service to the people. Thus, it is a surprise that instead of looking at the employment, health, and social service benefits of this initiative by the ABSF, the state government is plotting to sabotage it.
“The Foundation would like to put it on record that it is purely a philanthropic and community development-based organisation and has no link with politics, even though its Founder, is a politician. The Foundation has no link with politics and therefore takes objection to the part of the commissioner’s statement in which he insinuated that “some people, believed to be politically inclined and seeking to gain unnecessary political attention, are going round Ilorin Metropolis deceiving residents with false promises to repair faulty water facilities”.
“The Foundation would like to advise the government of Kwara State not to frustrate a clear community development initiative with dirty politics. The ABS Foundation does not want to be dragged into partisan politics. Rather, it has since its foundation been making solid contributions in various spheres of life towards improving the standard of living of the people. Its initiatives, like the ones embarked upon by other similar not-for-profit organisations, have been making positive impacts.
“Also, the ABS Foundation would like to make it clear that it will continue to serve the people, particularly those in the communities, and will not be deterred by any antic, intrigue, or mischief from an individual, organization, or corporate body. We therefore will continue to think out of the box and come out with initiatives that can help us serve the people and their communities better.”
End
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