Business

The Business News

Ad example

Inquirer Online

Appeal Court annuls APC’s governorship primaries in several local governments

by

The Court of Appeal in Makurdi has ordered the All Progressives Congress, APC, to conduct a fresh primary election in 11 out of the 23 local government areas of Benue State for the nomination of its gubernatorial candidate.

The affected local governments are, Gboko, Gwer- East, Gwer-West, Guma, Katsina-Ala, Logo, Makurdi, Otukpo, Ukum, Tarka and Vandeikya.

The court also asked that APC conduct the primaries within 14 days and that INEC recognize the winner after adding election results from the 12 local government areas.

The development is coming barely 33 days before the 2023 general elections.

The judgement followed an appeal filed by one of the aspirants on the platform of the APC, Professor Terhemba Shija, arguing that there was no valid primary election held on 27th May 2022 by APC for the nomination of its gubernatorial candidate to warrant Fr Alia emerging as the winner.

The court, after examining the evidence submitted by Professor Shija, agreed with his submissions.

The Court agreed with APC on the rerun of 9th June 2022, which took part in 12 local governments of the states, saying it was valid and still stands.

The court dismissed Senator Barnabas Gemade’s appeal and upheld the judgement of the Federal High Court, which dismissed his suit against Fr Alia for being statute-barred.

How Atiku will become the next president By Dele Momodu

by

I have read with bemusement many of the polls about the forthcoming Presidential election on February 25, 2023, and have come to the conclusion that the elitist polls have failed monumentally due to the over-reliance on technology in a largely illiterate population.

I have decided to help situate the forecasts based on the established polical history of Nigeria and empirical data.

A Presidential candidate cannot depend totally on votes from outside his home base to win this election. It is a fact of history that whenever the South produced two strong candidates, the dominant Nothern candidate won, such as in 1979 and 1983, Obafemi Awolowo and Nnamdi Azikiwe versus Shehu Shagari.

Bola Tinubu is far weaker today in the South West and Awolowo was by far more formidable, while Obi is the new Azikiwe (the first Governor General and President of Nigeria) in the South East, and Kwankwaso is the current Aminu Kano.

Atiku Abubakar will dominate the North East, North West, North Central and South South. Tinubu may pick a few states in the North and South West but won’t have enough to win. The bridges required to cross to victory has taken Atiku 30 years to build. Tinubu has not been able to lock down the entire South West not to talk of the whole of Nigeria. Over-reliance on bribing the electorates will fail. Hoping to rig brazenly will also fail spectacularly. I repeat, the entire North and the South South will make Atiku the next President. Atiku will still be competitive in the South East and South West. Wherever Obi is number one in the East, Atiku will be number two. Wherever Tinubu is number one in the South West, Atiku will be number two or vice versa. Atiku will be the first to cross the line of recording 25 percent in 24 states. He will get 25 percent automatically in the 19 states of Northern Regions and will pick six in South South automatically. He will pick more 25 percent in all of the five states in the South East, a traditional base of PDP, and same in the South West. Wherever Obi is number one, Atiku will be number two or vice versa. I do not know of any state PDP will not record 25 percent and eventually win the overall popular votes. Nigeria has become so polarizingly divided (pardon my tautology) that the “peoples” are going to vote majorly along ethnic lines as well as primordial sentiments. The North will not vote a “fake Muslim” in the name of a pretentious and mischievous Muslim/Muslim ticket. The scam is dead on arrival. The North East will never vote for a number two position when they’ve been chasing the number one since 1966. The North West will not abandon an Atiku for a Tinubu who’s well known for his iron grip on Lagos State since 1999. The South West itself knows it has the most controversial and palpably weakest candidate in this race this time and would humbly and readily accept its fate with equanimity. It will also dawn on the South East that Obi’s raving popularity alone cannot carry him across the winning line and many of their traditional voters will willingly settle for ATIKU ABUBAKAR and IFEANYICHUKWU OKOWA, the cerebral man and gentle giant of Igbo ancestry. I predict that former President Atiku Abubakar will be the next President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. He is the most prepared, experienced candidate in the race who’s ready to hit the ground running from day one…
Nigerians will experience real politicking in the days ahead.

Dele Momodu is the Director of Strategic Communications PDP Presidential Campaign Council

PDP remains the best option for Igbos, says Chidoka

by

Osita Chidoka, achieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, and former minister of aviation, has said the South-East geo-political zone should back the party in the 2023 elections, claiming that it would be unwise for Igbos to desert a political party they have supported since 1999.

Chidioka also claimed that the Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, who is from the zone, will disrupt PDP’s dominance in the South East.

Mr Chidoka said this on Sunday while fielding questions on the Channels Television’s Sunday Politics programme.

“The Igbo position for me is that our significant investment in the PDP for 24 years cannot be thrown away overnight. I remain in the PDP, and many Igbos remain in the PDP,” Chidoka said.

He said that supporters of an Igbo presidency outside the PDP are not wrong, but maintained that the main opposition party is the shortest route for the Igbos to clinch the presidency.

Atiku says he will complete Niger’s Baro Inland Port

by

The Presidential Candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, has promised to complete the Baro inland seaport in Niger.

Abubakar also pledged to tackle insecurity across the country, if elected in the upcoming general elections.

He made the promises on Saturday in Minna, while inaugurating his presidential campaign in the state.

“I promise to tackle insecurity and complete the uncompleted Baro inland seaport in Niger state, if you vote for me in the presidential election,” he said.

The Baro seaport in Agaie Local Government Area of the state started under the PDP administration of late President Umaru Yar’adua from 2007 to 2010, but has not been completed.

Besides, Abubakar promised to accord priority to federal road infrastructure and education sector of the country, if given the mandate.

Similarly, Sen. Iyorcha Ayu, the PDP National Chairman, urged the people of the state to vote for the party in the polls based on the developmental strides of the former PDP governors of the state; late Alhaji Abdulkadir Kure and Dr Babangida Aliyu.

“You have to call the people of Niger state to come out en masse and vote for the PDP because of the massive development you witnessed under past administrations of our party,” he said.

Also, Alhaji Liman Kantigi, the PDP governorship flag-bearer in the state, promised to tackle insecurity and give priority to the education sector of the state.

Dr Babangida Aliyu, a former governor of the state, said that a vote for Abubakar in the presidential election is a vote for a better Nigeria.

Aliyu, therefore, appealed to the people of the state to vote for the PDP in the elections in order to ensure a secure, united, and prosperous Nigeria.

Earlier, Mr Tanko Beji, the state PDP Chairman, assured the party that the people of the state would vote for the PDP in the general elections.

EFCC has no power to investigate taxes, says court

by

Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court in Lagos has declared that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) lacked the authority to assume the statutory powers for the assessment, collection and enforcement of payment of taxes in Nigeria.

Specifically, the court held that the Federal Internal Revenue Service (FIRS) is the only body empowered and vested with statutory duty for assessment, collection and enforcement of company tax in Nigeria.

Justice Aluko stated this while delivering judgement in a suit marked FHC/L/CS/244/21, filed by a firm, Wheatbaker Investment and Properties Limited (operator of Wheatbaker Hotel) against the EFCC and FIRS respectively.

The plaintiff had through its lawyer, Williams Bello, approached the court for the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2007 and the Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act, 1998.

The plaintiff asked for the court to determine “Whether having regard to the provision of Section 8 of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2007 and Section 2(1) Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act, 1998, it is the legal and statutory responsibility of the EFCC to undertake the assessment, enforcement and collection of taxes on behalf of the government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“A declaration that it is illegal for the EFCC to assume the statutory powers for the assessment, collection and enforcement of payment of taxes in Nigeria contrary to the combined provisions and effects of Section 8 of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2007 and Section 2(1) of the Taxes under Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act, 1998.

“A declaration that any attempt by EFCC to subject the plaintiff to any form of tax assessment for the purpose of computing and enforcing payment of tax is ultra vires its powers under the relevant laws of State in Nigeria.

“A declaration that the EFCC’s interrogation of the plaintiff’s representatives, on January 13 and 27, 2021, and the subsequent unilateral assessment and computation of new and/or additional tax against the plaintiff for any period whatsoever is illegal and unconstitutional.

“An Order of injunction restraining the EFCC and its agents, privies and representatives from any further interrogation, harassment, intimidation or coercion of the plaintiff and its agents into accepting (the EFCC) unilateral assessment and enforcement of tax after the plaintiff has complied with its tax obligations through the FIRS. And the sum of N10 million against the EFCC as general damages.

But, EFCC in opposition to the suit, through its lawyer, Mr. T. O. Banjo, filed a 29-paragraph counter-affidavit, and a further affidavit of 10 paragraphs.

In the counter-affidavit and further affidavit, the EFCC maintained that it is statutorily empowered to conduct investigation and prosecute all economic and financial crimes with a view to identifying individuals, corporate bodies or group involved and determine the extent of financial loss and such other losses by the government, private individuals or organisations.

It also contended that ‘being a special creation of the law’, it’s given statutory powers to investigate economic and financial crimes, arrest and apprehend perpetrators of such crimes.

The anti-graft agency also argued that it received intelligence alleging economic sabotage and tax evasion and found the same worthy of investigation. It said that the plaintiff filed the suit to shield itself against investigation and a possible prosecution, and urged the court not to give judicial support to the plaintiff.

Also, the second respondent, FIRS, in its counter-affidavit to the suit filed by its lawyer, Adeniyi Alli, argued that it is the statutory body charged with the responsibility among others to assess and collect taxes on behalf of the government of the federation.

FIRS also stated that by the law establishing it, it is vested with the exclusive and sole responsibility over tax matters (especially the assessment and enforcement of same) stressing that no other agency of government is empowered or entitled to undertake the same functions.

In determining issues raised, Justice Aluko held “I have examined the affidavit evidence and documentary exhibits before the court. What is in contention is the correct and true interpretation of the provisions of Section 8 of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2007 and section 2(1) of the Taxes and Levies (Approved List for Collection) Act, 1998 over who between the first and second defendants, has the statutory mandate and responsibility to undertake the assessment, enforcement and collection of taxes on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria.

“The exhibits attest to the claim of the plaintiff that the commission unilaterally assessed and computed the taxes solely with the sole aim of causing or coercing the plaintiff to pay such additional taxes as unilaterally assessed and calculated by the commission.

“Besides, the second defendant who has the statutory mandate and responsibility for the assessment, collection and enforcement of payment of taxes on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria stated in its counter affidavit that it had extensively dealt with and audited the financial documents of the plaintiff and that it did not delegate or donate its powers of assessment and enforcement of collection/payment of taxes to the Commission.

“Apart from the established evidence before the court that the first defendant went outside its statutory mandate usurped the statutory powers and responsibility of the second defendant, it has also failed to lay before the court any evidence or complaint to show that the plaintiff was involved in any tax evasion or fraud to have prompted its letter of invitation and interrogation of the plaintiff’s staff and the call for the physical presence of the plaintiffs managing director.

“There is nothing before the court to suggest that anyone ever made an allegation of tax fraud/evasion against the plaintiff or that there is any reasonable ground justifying the commission harassment of the plaintiff’s officials.

“Going by the evidence before the court, I hold that the first defendant engaged in assessment of taxes based on cash flow into the plaintiffs accounts to compute, assessed additional taxes and deplored its coercive powers to compel the plaintiffs representatives and its managing director to pay its unilaterally assessed new additional taxes under the guise of investigative activities in violation of Section(s) 8 of FIRS (Establishment) Act and section 2(1) of the Taxes and levies (Approved List for Collection) Act, 1998 and therefore acted illegally without any lawful basis.

“I have seen, read and thoroughly gone through the provision of Section 8 of the FIRS Act. It is true and correct that by the provisions of Section 8 (e) of the Act, the 2nd defendant is empowered by the Act to work in collaboration with the relevant law enforcement agencies like the 1st defendant for the purpose of carrying out examination and investigation with a view to enforcing compliance with the provisions of the Act.

“There is however nothing before the court showing that the second defendant ever called the commission for the purpose of any collaboration.

“I hold the view that the acts and decision of the first defendant to subject the plaintiff to second and another tax assessment and auditing unilaterally covering substantially the same period which the second defendant admitted the plaintiff had already complied with payment of its taxes amount to double jeopardy, unfair, illegal and unconscionable. It is trite law that a public body like the EFCC invested with statutory powers must take care not to exceed or abuse its powers. It must keep within the limits of the authority committed to it.

“Consequently, there is merit and substance in the instant case and judgement is accordingly entered for the plaintiff as follows:

“That the declarations in reliefs (a) (b) (c) and (d) in the originating summons are hereby made.

“That an Order of injunction against the first defendant in relief (e) is hereby granted.

“That general damages assessed in the sum of N500,000 is hereby awarded in favour of the plaintiff against the first defendant.

“That cost of the action assessed in the sum of N200,000 is awarded in favour of the plaintiff against the first defendant.”