Home Cover

State of the Nation: Soyinka backs Bishops on Buhari

April 19, 2022

in Cover

VIEWS

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Even Buhari’s wife faults his policies, Bishop Kukah replies Presidency

The war of words between the presidency and Catholic Bishop of Sokoto Diocese, Matthew Kukah, has said that Aisha Buhari, has continued to rage on as the Catholic clergy has stated that even the wife of the President Muhammadu Buhari also agrees with what he said about her husband.

Kukah, who spoke in an interview on Arise TV on Tuesday morning monitored by our correspondent, emphasized that he had nothing personal against the President but his policies which his wife, Aisha, also disagrees with.

Kukah said, “All those saying I attacked the President, I have never attacked his person. All I have spoken about is his inability to manage diversities effectively and efficiently. I have studied diversity as a subject and I know what I am talking about.

“Those who think these things are personal would see that I have never talked about his person or character; I believe he is a gentleman but as far as being the President is concerned, he has done a bad job, even his wife has also disagreed with his policies.

“So, those guys should not sit in their air-conditioned office drinking coffee and thinking everything is honky-donkey. Let them disagree with the text of my message.”

He expressed his great respect for the President and his person who he considers a gentleman but when he assesses him as a President, he has failed woefully in the delivery of his job.

“Let me set the record straight, I delivered my sermon to my congregation and the message. The bearers of the message are directed primarily to the good people of Sokoto dioceses.

“For a Muslim (Garba Shehu) to sit down and tell me what an Easter message should contain is something.

“The President knows that I have great respect for him and he is a gentleman, but he has done a terribly bad job as the President of Nigeria.

“There is nothing I am saying that is new; all the pastors who preached yesterday during the Easter service said the same thing. Tell me one thing about the message that I preached that you disagree with and let’s discuss.”

Kukah who affirms that he speaks directly with the President said that his criticism of the government is nothing personal but the zeal to see things get better in the country.

“Buhari himself knows that there is nothing personal in what I say. One thing the President has said that humbled me is that he told me, ‘Bishop Kukah, I know where you stand on any issue that has to do with Nigeria.’

“What connected me with Buhari and a lot of Muslims is not the Catholic Church, it is my public position on a lot of things. And I am not saying it so that you must agree with me. But Nigerians have been extraordinarily magnanimous because I have not had many people saying we disagree with you and I have not spoken because I know the issue.

“The primary beneficiary of what I say is me and I speak for myself. If you have any issues with me, let’s clarify the issue.”

State of the Nation: Soyinka backs Bishops on Buhari

I won’t allow anybody destabilise Nigeria, Buhari vows

Opinion

Suspension of Mike Ozekhome SAN: A Hasty Decision By The LPPC And The Prejudicial Effect Of Same

by Newsdesk Africa

June 26, 2026

By Sheriff. C. ADELE, Esq On June 23, 2026, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC), at its 173rd General Meeting, approved the suspension of Chief Mike Ozekhome from the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). The suspension, announced pursuant to Paragraph 26(6) of the Guidelines for the Conferment of the Rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, is to remain in force pending the final determination of disciplinary proceedings before the LPPC’s Disciplinary and Ethics Sub-Committee. While the LPPC asserts that the suspension is intended to "safeguard the integrity, dignity and prestige of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria", this decision raises profound concerns about procedural propriety, jurisdictional overreach, and the prejudicial effect it portends for both the legal profession and the administration of justice. This article critically examines the hasty decision of the LPPC, its implications, and why it constitutes a premature verdict that undermines the very principles of natural justice the legal profession is sworn to uphold. Chief Mike Ozekhome, a prominent constitutional lawyer and human rights advocate, is currently facing disciplinary proceedings before the LPPC’s Disciplinary and Ethics Sub-Committee. The proceedings relate to his involvement in a controversial property dispute in the United Kingdom concerning a property located at 79 Randall Avenue, London. Chief Ozekhome is also standing trial before an FCT High Court in Maitama, Abuja, on a 12-count charge, to which he has pleaded not guilty. What is particularly significant and troubling is that the same issues before the LPPC are also pending before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), the body statutorily charged with the responsibility of sanctioning legal practitioners for professional misconduct. The LPDC is yet to make any determination on the substantive allegations against chief Ozekhome. Yet, the LPPC has proceeded to impose a suspension that, in practical effect, constitutes a pre-determinative sanction. The Distinct Jurisdictions of the LPPC and LPDC To appreciate the gravity of the LPPC’s decision, it is essential to understand the distinct and separate roles of the LPPC and the LPDC under Nigerian law. The LPPC is a statutory body established under Section 5 of the Legal Practitioners Act. Its primary function is to consider and determine eligible applicants for the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. Chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, the LPPC is also empowered to make rules as to the privileges to be accorded to Senior Advocates of Nigeria. While the LPPC has disciplinary powers over SAN holders, these powers are ancillary to its primary function of conferring and regulating the rank. The LPPC's disciplinary authority is derived from its guidelines, including Paragraph 26(6) of the Guidelines for the Conferment of the Rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. However, this authority is limited to matters pertaining to the rank itself and the privileges associated with it. The LPDC, by contrast, is a committee of the Body of Benchers established under Section 10 of the Legal Practitioners Act. Its mandate is far broader and more fundamental: it is the primary disciplinary body for all legal practitioners in Nigeria. The LPDC exercises jurisdiction over all lawyers called to the Nigerian Bar and is empowered to investigate allegations of professional misconduct and impose sanctions ranging from admonition to suspension and disbarment. The Critical Distinction The distinction between these two bodies is not merely academic, it is fundamental to the proper administration of justice in the legal profession. The LPPC is primarily a conferring and privilege-regulating body. The LPDC is the disciplinary body par excellence. While the LPPC may have incidental disciplinary powers over SAN holders, these powers cannot supplant or pre-empt the primary disciplinary jurisdiction of the LPDC. When the same issues are pending before both bodies, as they are in chief Ozekhome’s case, the LPDC’s determination on professional misconduct must logically precede any disciplinary sanction from the LPPC. The LPPC cannot independently determine facts of professional misconduct that are the exclusive province of the LPDC. The Hasty Decision: A Premature Verdict The LPPC’s decision to suspend chief Ozekhome from the rank of SAN pending the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings is, with respect, a hasty and premature verdict that suffers from several fundamental flaws. Procedural Impropriety ...