Politics
MINILS DG: Management Denies Issa Aremu’s re-appointment claim
- Says Aremu’s assertions are false, baseless, intentionally misleading
Stephen Olufemi Oni, Ilorin
The Management of the Michael Imoudu National Institute for Labour Studies (MINILS) has expressed deep concern over series of misleading claims made in the media by the former Director-General of the institute, Mr. Issa Aremu, regarding his purported re-appointment and the state of affairs at the Institute.
To set the record straight, the management in a statement on Friday in Ilorin, the Kwara State capital said: “We categorically state that Mr. Aremu’s assertions are false, baseless, and intentionally misleading. These claims appear to be a deliberate attempt to damage the image and integrity of the Institute and its dedicated workforce.
“Mr. Aremu duly completed his statutory four-year tenure on 17th May 2025 and handed over, albeit reluctantly, to the most senior Director in accordance with public service regulations. Contrary to these regulations, Mr. Aremu publicly declared he was merely “stepping aside” and has since been presenting himself as the reappointed Director-General.
“This is entirely inaccurate. The Federal Ministry of Labour and Employment, under whose purview the Institute operates, has not communicated any formal reappointment or new leadership directive to the Institute.”
The management added that despite Mr. Aremu’s continued media appearances and assertions of a phantom reappointment, they remain confident that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, in his steadfast commitment to the rule of law and due process, will act in accordance with the provisions of the National Institute for Labour Studies Act regarding the appointment of the Director/Chief Executive Officer.
The management has described as entirely false and fictitious Mr. Aremu’s recent allegations, ranging from claims of religiously motivated agitations to criticisms of his performance, absenteeism, and workplace conduct, saying that “these
narratives are a desperate bid to garner public sympathy and obscure the reality of his tenure, which was marred by incompetence, authoritarianism, and disregard for institutional norms”.
“Despite the challenges imposed by outdated facilities, insufficient resources, and lack of motivation during Mr. Aremu’s administration, MINILS has exceeded the Federal Government’s training targets. This achievement stands as a testament to the resilience, professionalism, and commitment of our workforce, who continue to uphold the Institute’s mandate with dedication.
“We urge the general public to disregard these fabrications in their entirety and to seek information only from official and verifiable sources. Additionally, we caution all stakeholders against engaging in any financial transactions or commitments with Mr. Aremu under the pretext of representing the Institute. The Management will not be held responsible for any such dealings.
“MINILS remains steadfast in its mission to become a regional centre of excellence in labour studies and a globally renowned labour institution,” the statement added.
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.
JUST IN: Plane Crash Averted as PH-Bound Arik Aircraft Develops Engine Fault Mid-Air
Nationwide Blackout Looms as Electricity Workers Issue 21-Day Strike Notice to FG
BREAKING: Explosion Rocks Bayelsa State Secretariat Complex
-
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