Home Cover

Insecurity: OBIDatti Media Office carpets Oshiomhole

September 19, 2022

in Cover

VIEWS

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

*Says attack dogs like him always stand truth on its head

The Media Office of Obi-Datti Campaign has lampoon’s for erstwhile national chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Mr. Adams Oshiohmole, for casting unfounded aspersions on the Labour Party’s presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi.

Oshimhole on Sunday has has no capacity to tackle security citing his tenure in Anambra state as an instance.

But the ObiDatti Media Office dismissed Oshiohmole’s claims as baseless and unfounded.

The campaign office stated: “The attention of the Media Office of Obi-Datti Campaign was drawn on Sunday to a baseless claim by the former Governor of Edo State, Comrade Adams Oshiohmole that the Labour Party Presidential Candidate, Peter Obi has no capacity to tackle security as his tenure in Anambra proved so.

“The former Edo Governor also in his groundless outburst to satisfy his audience claimed that it was Obi’s successor, Willie Obiano who was able to solve some security challenges that Obi could not tackle.

“When the LP candidate told Nigerians severally to go and verify his past, he knew what the outcome of such verification would be, in his favor, except for attack dogs like Oshiohmole who would always stand truth on its head, fabricate tales ostensibly to satisfy his pay master who incontrovertibly is not verifiable.

“If Comrade Oshiohmole had bordered to verify Obi’s security records as Anambra state governor, he would have found what the Inspector General of Police in 2014, Abubakar Mohammad said in Awka, Anambra state capital on April 10, 2014 shortly after Obi left office that was copiously captured by many mainstream and social media establishments on April 11, 2014.

“Oshiohmole, but for mischief, would also have found that Obi is on record to have been one of the most ruthless state Governors in tackling the kidnap menace in the country.

“It’s still green in everybody’s memory how Obi personally supervised the sealing off and demolition of hotels and buildings used by Kidnappers and other criminal gangs in the state”.

They noted that crime record in Anambra state under Obi was outstanding and security leadership never failed to appreciate this feat.

They referred him to a news story as published by the Nation Newspaper on April 11, 2014 captioned “IG declares Anambra safest since five years” advising him to refresh his memories with the contents of the story.

According to the Media Office, “The Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Abubakar Mohammed, had declared that Anambra State remained the safest state in the last (then) five years, according to police records”.

They told Oshiohmole that Abubakar made the statements at the Women Development Centre, Awka, at the state’s Stakeholders’ Summit, announcing that “there was no bank robbery in the state in the last five years during former Governor Peter Obi. He urged Governor Willie Obiano to emulate his predecessor by sustaining the security situation in the state”.

The IGP had equally hailed the relationship between the police and the government under Peter Obi, which contributed to the improved security, and reassured Governor Obiano that the police would give him a 100 per cent support to rid the state of kidnappers and robbers.

The Obi-Datti Media Office therefore urged members of the public to be vigilant and resist any attempt to foist proxy Presidents on them with lies and they should repel any fraudulent try to frustrate the Movement’s goal of taking back our beloved country battered by corrupt and greedy leaders.

“Let’s always remain Obidient and focused for a new Nigeria whose time has come, they advised.

Shock in Nasarawa community as dead man walks out of casket at point of burial

Those perpetrating violence in Anambra are Igbo

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 ...