Reprieve came the way of Hadi Sirika, former Minister of Aviation and his daughter Fatima, who secured the nod of Justice Sylvester Oriji, of the Federal High Court Abuja, to go home on a bail bond of N100 after pleading not guilty to fraud charges involving about N2.7 billion brought against him by the Federal Government.

Also involved in the matter were Jalal Sule Hamma, the son-in-law to the former Minister under the government of President Muhammadu Buhari, who exited power on May 29, 2023 and a firm – Al Buraq Global Investment Limited, who also pleaded not guilty to the six-count charges when read to them.

But there was a proviso, before Oriji, granted the Minister bail after denying the fraud charges – he must not only provide the ₦100m bond and two sureties each in the like sum, who must be responsible citizens with verifiable home addresses while one of them must have landed property with a certificate of occupancy signed by the FCT Minister, but not attempt to travel outside the country without express permission of the court.

The trial judge before adjourning the matter for June 10 to commence trial, ordered the Minister and the two others to be remanded in prison custody till the time of perfection of bail conditions.

Advertisement

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which had on Wednesday, given indications of Thursday’s arraignment of Sirika and the three others, accused of using his position to fraudulently award contracts to his daughter, son-in-law, and associates, had in February arrested Abubakar Sirika, the Minister’s brother over an alleged contract fraud in the aviation ministry.

During his tenure as minister, Sirika faced allegations including conspiracy, abuse of office, diversion of public funds, contract inflation, criminal breach of trust, and money laundering totaling N8,069,176,864.

The EFCC had revealed that the funds in dispute related to four aviation contracts awarded by the former minister to a company called Engirios Nigeria Limited, which is owned by his younger brother.

Advertisement

For Ogechi Emmanuel, nothing could be worse that the ordeal she has been through in the last 24 hours including virtually sleeping in her car with three of her children and remaining in the same clothes since Wednesday, after she was thrown out by soldiers of the 82 Division of the Nigerian Army.

Narrating her ordeal, she told Whirlwindnews.com that she has been prevented from even having a change of clothes by officers at the command, who she ran to on Thursday morning to plead for mercy to open her apartment for her, while her children had not had real food, but relying on snacks, adding that they went to school in the same clothes they came back with on Wednesday.

She said that the military officers handling her case, who simply sent her away after long hours of pleading for mercy, told her that the only condition for allowing her access into the apartment, was if she was ready to evacuate her properties, warning that even at that she only had a grace of seven days after which they would be thrown out into the street.

Pleading for the authorities to come to an aid, the highly distraught mother of three, who also disclosed that she lived alone in the compound, as her husband, a businessman in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, was not home to share the ordeal, argued that even if those the military men were after committed any offence, there was no way she should be made to suffer.

Advertisement

Hear her: “I’ve been outside with my children since yesterday. I slept in the car with them and I have not been allowed to enter the house since they locked it up. I have been in their office since morning without any positive result. Please, plead with them to come and open my house. We have not eaten any proper food. My children did not also have a change of clothes. They went to school in the same clothes they came back with yesterday.

“They said the only condition they will give to me for unlocking the door is that when they do so, they would supervise me packing out my property. They even said this would happen during the seven-day grace period and after that they will throw my things out. Else, they said I will never have access to that place again. Even to allow me go and collect my clothes and those of my children was denied

“My husband is a businessman. He is in Uyo. He is not here to share in this ordeal. Please let people plead with them to come and open the door. To lock somebody out since yesterday is too much for a woman with children. I didn’t go to my business today. I sell tailoring materials. I have no hope again. Please help me.”

The distressed mother, is a major victim in the current crossfire between Nana Ogbodo, a businessman and politician in Enugu State and the Nigerian Army, over the ownership of a piece of land carved out of property in question situates behind No.7, Abakaliki Lane, GRA, Enugu, which both are laying claims.

In a petition, Civil Rights Realisation and Advancement Network (CRRAN), early in the week, appealed to the Minister of Defence, Muhammed Badaru, to intervene in the saga, alleging that the army authorities at the 82 Division, in defiance to the letter from the office of the Chief of Army Staff that the matter was under investigation by his office, decided to take the law into their hands by supplanting the law.

Advertisement

Giving summary details of the case, the group’s petition, signed by Olu Omotayo, President stated narrated how the piece of land was given to him by Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, former governor of the state, to compensate him for his property that was illegally demolished in 2004 by the administration of Chimaroke Nnamani former governor between 1999 and 2007.

Part of the statement read: “In the quest to uphold justice by the former governor of Enugu State Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi, vis a vis the Suit No. E/925/2005, filed by citizen Nana Ogbodo, at the State High Court in 2005, his administration gave a COMPENSATORY PLOT of land for the unlawful demolition of Ogbodo’s home by the past administration.

“The property is situated behind No.7, Abakaliki Lane, GRA, Enugu. The property was duly registered and Certificate of Occupancy duly granted to the beneficiary by the state government in January 2022. Mr. Ogbodo, fenced the property round and built a bungalow apartment on the property. The said apartment currently has a tenant occupying it.”

“Trouble he said started on May 1, 2023, when some military officers from the 82 Division of the Nigeria Army visited the property and said the property belongs to the Army that it was among the properties they were holding in trust for the state government, and consequently directed that the landlord should furnish the Nigerian Army 82 Division, with all the documents relating to his ownership of the property.

“Mr. Ogbodo, in response vide a letter dated 1st May 2023, duly furnished the General Officer Commanding (GOC), with all his title documents including the Certificate of Occupancy duly issued by the government. Thereafter, there was no further response to the letter by the military authorities until February 2024, when 82 Division of the Nigerian Army directed occupant of the property to vacate within 7 days.

Advertisement

“Immediately, sequel to the vacation notice, Mr Ogbodo, visited the 82, Division of the Nigerian Army and met the then Garrison Commander and showed him all his documents including the Certificate of Occupancy (C of O), but the Army authorities only claimed that the property belong to it without showing any document of ownership.

“On that occasion one of the officers told him that the property was one of the properties captured by the army during the civil war. Mr. Ogbodo thereafter got a lawyer to serve the Chief of Army Staff a “Pre Action Notice” informing the army authorities of his intention to file an action against it in the court of law. The office of the Chief of Army Staff in response vide a letter dated 26 March 2024, stated that it has commenced investigation into the matter and will revert back on its’ findings.

“Regrettably, it was surprising that in a clear act of insubordination, one Major H.Y. Shehu, wrote on behalf of the GOC 82, Division of the Nigerian Army , vide a letter dated 30th April 2024, directed Mrs. Roseline Okoye the tenant on the property to vacate the property within 7 days.

“The hallmark of democracy is the observance of the Rule of Law by the citizenry and all the institutions in the polity, noting that the Army in its’ civil transactions and relationship are bound by the law of the land. The fact that while the office of the Chief of Army Staff is still looking into a matter, an officer of the rank of a Major is threatening to throw out the lawful occupant of the property. This is a grave act of lawlessness and insubordination.

“It should be noted that by virtue of the Land Use Act, the Governor is vested with the sole authority over all state land and not by conquest. The only way the military can claim ownership of the property is to show documentary evidence and not rely on the ridiculous claim of the property being among the ones captured by the Army duringthey the Civil war which took place over 50 years ago.

Advertisement

“We urge you to in the interest of justice and Rule of Law directs the army authorities particularly the GOC 82 Division, to allow the conclusion of the due process initiated by the Chief of Army Staff and also submit to the jurisdiction of the court of competent jurisdiction which is now seized of the matter.”

But in defence, the army dismissed the petition, insisting that the property in question belonged to them and therefore, there was no question of forceful or unlawful acquisition, adding that one Colonel Emeka Ugwuoke, one of their officers, who was allocated the building had to be forcefully removed from it in April 2023 to underscore its ownership.

Signed by Onyema Nwachukwu, a Brigadier General and Director, Army Public Relations, said in a statement on Thursday: “The Nigerian Army (NA) has been notified of a viral petition written by the Civil Rights Realisation and Advancement Network (CRRAN) alleging that 82 Division of the NA is threatening to forcefully and unlawfully take over a property situated at Plot 30, Abakaliki Road, Enugu, which includes No. 7 Abakaliki Lane in the Government Residential Area (GRA) of Enugu State.

“The NA wishes to state that the petition, which also posits that 82 Division, in defiance to a letter from the Office of the Chief of Army Staff decided to take the law into its hand and supplant the rule of law, is completely unfounded and intended to tarnish the ongoing efforts of the NA to restore peace and tranquility in the South East Region.

It is therefore necessary to set the record straight in order not to mislead the public. The said property is the NA property that was last occupied by Col Emeka Ugwuoke Rtd during his service. The senior officer who was allocated the quarter during his service was removed therefrom by the NA in April 2023, when he tried to convert the quarter to his private property after his retirement. Surprisingly, it is on one corner of the property from where the NA ejected the retired senior officer that the trespassers invaded.

Advertisement

“The NA is a disciplined institution that respects human rights and the rule of law. We urge the public to disregard the narrative that suggests the NA is acting unlawfully or without respect for due process. The NA’s position is that the property remains under its ownership, until proven otherwise through appropriate legal channels, and any claims to the contrary are based on misinformation.

“Consequently the NA calls for a thorough investigation and due process to resolve the matter, and it stands ready to present its evidence of ownership to the competent authorities. We also wish to reaffirm our commitment to the rule of law and the proper resolution of this dispute in accordance with Nigerian legal standards and provisions.”

Advertisement

Except there is another quick intervention similar to the one initiated by President Bola Tinubu in December last year, Rivers State may be on the political broil once again, as the members of the state House of Assembly chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC), are about to pick up the impeachment gauntlet against Siminalayi Fubara once again.

The 27 members of the assembly, who seem to have been spoiling for the last battle, regardless of the truce, by overriding the governor’s veto on some of their decisions, finally got the all-clear signal on Tuesday from the APC to which they defected last year to move against the governor.

Led by Martin Amaewhule, they had initially held fire after Tinubu intervened in a political war in the state, fist prompted by the attempt to impeach Fubara, in November last year, which was followed by an immediate clapback by the governor, who declared the seats of the lawmakers vacant on the ground that they defected to the APC from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) from which they were initially elected.

The faceoff between the governor and the lawmakers, is believed to be an extension of the political war between Fubara and Nyesom Wike, his predecessor, now Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), over the struggle for the political structure in the state.

Advertisement

The order to commence the impeachment of the governor, suggesting that the resumption of hostilities, had gone full-blast, came from Tony Okocha, the Rivers State Chairman of the APC Caretaker Committee (CTC), in apparent quick riposte less than 24 hours after Fubara, declared the assembly as non-existent in the eyes of the law.

Fubara, an Ijaw man, spoke on Monday when former Governor, Seriake Dickson, now a Senator, and Alfred Diette Spiff, Chairman of the traditional rulers council and former Military Governor of old Rivers State, led a delegation of political leaders and traditional rulers from Bayelsa State to visit him at the Government House in Port Harcourt, the state capital.

His words: “Those group of men who claim that are our assembly members are not assembly members — they are not existing. I want it to be on record. I accepted that peace accord to give them a floating. That is the truth. There was nothing in that peace accord that is a constitutional issue.

“It is a political solution to a problem. It has gotten to a time when I have to make a statement that they are not existing. Their existence is me allowing them to exist. If I de-recognise them, they are nowhere.”

Advertisement