Dave Umahi said his mother was selling Akara.
Yet he became a billionaire at 25.
We have to stop this type of our politics. It's too lucrative.
That's why they don't like Peter Obi.
Why are you people saying that Adeniyi Adeyemi, who is the DG of Presidential Economic Advisory Council (PEAC) is fake.
How can an office that existed before him be fake?
He was appointed DG in 2026 meanwhile in 2021, the office was already collecting funds up to 500 MILLION NAIRA?
#GbajaGate
They actually shot at the guy to silence him? Like, you sent assassins against a man who accused you of bribery? Aren’t you supposed to ensure he’s safe so he can be made to clear your name with his mouth?
Unless you’re GUILTY! And yes, you freaking are!
The first thing Singapore did was to educate its people.
This journey is not even going to be long.
Nigerians are already very smart people.
Give quality primary and secondary education.
Bring in companies that can employ thousands of people.
Set them up in several states. See this mining situation. Get a hold of it and make it a very formal sector.
Allow the people who want to sell Akara and other things access to soft loans. Create a structure with every bank to help them be accountable. Like a credit score.
Fix electricity.
If it’s too hard to change all the lines, create solar plants for different clusters while you take a few years to fix power lines to be efficient.
Step by step, country will be better.
I don’t know why we don’t have a leader that wants to do this.
It’s not rocket science.
The Governor (a public servant), could not find a suitable location in his state to celebrate his birthday.
He took the birthday celebration to a working society outside the country.
To know that Alex Otti has only done just 3Years and Abia State has already been moved from the very back of the queue to the front of Nigerian States.
A Prove that 4 years can actually change the narrative of any State or Country.
Just get a good leader. 🔥
“You arrested my men, and I asked for their release. You refused. I promised that I would @bduct many people, and I already have targ£ts.
“I asked why my men and Aminu were arr£sted. Since they were not released, I don’t care if they send thousands of soldiers. I am not tired, and I will not stop until I leav£ th!s world. I can k**!dn@p top government officials, even a state governor.
“I sw£@r to Almighty God that all the security forces sent to att*a**ck my camp are my boys. They inform me whenever they are coming. I receive information about security strategies, including those involving the President. It is only because I allow them to operate. Otherwise, they would not even be able to use the roads......"
– A b@ndit leader identified as Kachalla Maha has claimed he has the capability to abduct high-ranking government officials, including state governors.
Shehu Sani was quiet when some Yoruba Obas were killed by Fulani terrorists. He was quiet when Fulani terrorists killed Hausa traditional ruler in Sokoto. But quickly found his voice when Miyati Allah leader was killed in Benue state. All killings should be condemned because all lives matter. Calling for justice for one, and ignoring others is hypocrisy
I really like Pst. Adeboye.
He's always bold and outspoken about his support for Tinubu. Very convinced and can go any length to defend the administration.
Today, in the US, when he was asked Tinubu's performance on security, Adeboye confidently said that Tinubu is doing his bit.
Adeboye is saying that Tinubu cannot go to the frontline and he has sent soldiers to the job. So, any terrorism and insecurity are not Tinubu's fault.
I'm very proud of Adeboye's courage.
I have resisted the urge to comment on the ruling of Hon Mr Justice Dashen of the Federal High Court sitting in Lokoja on the NDC matter until I read the judgement. Having read the judgement I am just wondering why the learned trial judge agreed to set the judgement his lordship gave in December 2025 wherein INEC the only Defendant in that case was ordered to register NDC as a political party.
That order was obeyed and NDC registered as a political party. Now an association known as Peace Movement Party PMP was never a party to that judgement. So when an application was filed on the 5th May 2026, the application had two prayers. Praye on3 was for extension of time to apply to set aside the said judgement and an order setting aside the said judgment.
The learned trial judge in the ruling under review set out the two prayers in the motion in the ruling but his lordship did not consider at all prayer one that deals with extension of time to apply to have the judgment set aside. Why. Nobody can hadzard a guess. But was his lordship right. I do not think so. The principle of law is well established that where a person seeks extension of time within which to apply to set aside a judgment entered in his absence, the applicant must satisfy two conditions, namely good and substantial reasons for the failure to appear or defend the action; and show that there is a prima facie defence on the merits, usually by exhibiting a proposed statement of defence disclosing triable issues.
These two conditions are conjunctive, not disjunctive. In other words, both conditions must co-exist before the court can exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. Failure to satisfy either is fatal. The Supreme Court in Williams vs Hope Rising Voluntary Funds Society held that an applicant seeking to set aside a judgment entered in default must: show good reasons for the default; and disclose a defence on the merits.
In fact the first hurdle must be crossed before a consideration can be given to the second question. The discretion of the court is exercised only where both requirements are met. In Nalsa & Team Associates vs. NNPC, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the applicant must satisfy the court as to:
the reason for the default; and
the existence of a defence raising triable issues. In Skenconsult (Nig.) Ltd. vs Ukey,
even though principally dealing with judgments entered without jurisdiction or without service, the Supreme Court also distinguished cases where the court's discretion to set aside a regular judgment depends upon the applicant satisfying the recognised conditions.
In A.C.B. Plc vs Losada (Nig.) Ltd, the Supreme Court reiterated that a party seeking to set aside a regular judgment must explain the default and show a defence on the merits. In Macaulay vs. NAL Merchant Bank Ltd the court emphasized that both conditions are prerequisites before discretion can be exercised. Are these conditions conjunctive or disjunctive? The authorities consistently state that the conditions are conjunctive, not disjunctive.
The applicant must establish both: good and substantial reasons for the failure to appear; and a defence on the merits. The use of the word "and" in the Supreme Court decisions is deliberate. The courts have repeatedly refused applications where only one condition was established.A commonly quoted statement of the law is that the applicant must show good reasons for his absence and disclose a defence on the merits before the court can exercise its discretion in his favour.
In this ruling, his lordship left out most fundamental judicial function and did not interrogate the reason for failure to apply to have the judgment set aside before INEC obey it. The court did not give us the opportunity what informed its reasons to set aside the judgment when there is no finding on the point why the applicants waited till 4th May 2026 before they apply to set aside the judgment. It appears there are more the public did not know.