The Supreme Court has affirmed the June 18 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja, upholding the nomination of Governor Abiodun Oyebanji as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the June 20 governorship election in Ekiti State.

A five-member panel of the apex court held, in a unanimous judgment on Friday, that the appeal filed by an aggrieved governorship aspirant of the APC, Mrs. Abimbola Olawumi, was unmeritorious and proceeded to dismiss it.

In its judgment,the Supreme Court, among others, faulted the competence of the appeal filed by Mrs. Olawumi and concluded that the reliefs she sought could not be granted.

Mrs. Olawumi had, among others, queried the process leading to Oyebanji’s nomination and prayed the court to void the outcome of the APC’s governorship primary on the grounds that she was allegedly prevented from participating as an aspirant.

Justice Mohammed Idris, who prepared and read the lead judgment of the Supreme Court upheld the objections raised against the competence of some applications filed by the appellant on July 16 and 23 to regularise her notice of appeal and the appellant’s brief of arguments.

Justice Idris found that the written address accompanying the application of July 16 was not signed and that its pagination also exceeded the number allowed under Order 4 Rule 1 of the Supreme Court’s Rules.

The judge proceeded to strike out both applications and the accompanying written addresses.

He also found that grounds one, two and three of the appeal are incompetent having not emanate from the decision of the lower court.

Justice Idris held that since the three grounds were incompetent, the issues distilled from them were also incompetent and are liable to be struck out.

In determining the surviving grounds four, five and six and issues three and four distilled from them, Justice Idris held that the lower court was not in error when it held that Mrs. Olawumi’s brief was incompetent despite a pending application to regularise it.

He also upheld the lower court’s decision in refusing to invoke its power under Section 15 of the Court of Appeal Act to hearing Mrs. Olawumi’s originating summons as a court of first instance as sought by the appellant.

The judge said the lower court could not have invoked its powers under Section 15 of its Act to hear the hear the substantive originating summons having affirmed the finding of the Federal High Court that the suit was statute barred.

Justice Idris further held that the Supreme Court could not also invoke its power under Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act to hear the substantive originating summons as sought by the appellant because the 180 days provided in the Constitution for the determination of pre-election cases has lapsed.

The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Prof. Joash Amupitan, has declared that the electoral umpire cannot be truly independent without financial autonomy, warning that continued dependence on the normal budgetary process weakens its operational independence and could undermine efforts to deliver free, fair and credible elections in 2027.

His remarks shifted attention from the familiar debate over electoral reforms to a more fundamental question: whether an election management body expected to inspire public confidence can effectively do so while relying on other institutions for its funding and operations

Delivering the keynote address at the public presentation of ‘Shadows: Protest Essays on Africa’s Most Consequential Country (1999–2023)’, authored by THISDAY Managing Director, Mr Eniola Bello, at the Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Centre, Abuja, Amupitan argued that while INEC remains central to the electoral process, the responsibility for credible elections extends to political parties, security agencies, the media, civil society organisations and Nigerians themselves.

“Can INEC truly be independent without financial autonomy? If we are serious about strengthening our institutions and conducting free, fair and credible elections, then financial autonomy is essential,” Amupitan declared.

He maintained that although the Constitution places INEC’s funding on the Consolidated Revenue Fund, practical experience has shown that the arrangement falls short of guaranteeing genuine independence because the Commission still passes through the normal appropriation process.

“The Constitution places INEC’s funding on the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and many believe that is sufficient. However, experience has shown that as long as INEC remains subject to the normal appropriation process and depends on budgetary approvals by other institutions, genuine financial independence remains difficult,” he said.

The INEC chairman noted that the commission’s responsibilities go far beyond organising elections, pointing out that it conducts federal and state elections; supports local government polls in some respects; registers voters and political parties; monitors political parties; and maintains the national voter register used across the federation.

“For these reasons, there is a strong case for giving INEC greater operational and financial autonomy to improve efficiency and strengthen public confidence in the electoral process,” he added.

Amupitan also stressed that strengthening Nigeria’s electoral process requires collective responsibility rather than focusing solely on the electoral commission.

Former Lagos State Governor and immediate past Minister of Works and Housing, Babatunde Fashola, has said he would rather offer advice to President Bola Tinubu privately than publicly critique his administration, stressing that he enjoys direct access to the President and prefers to keep that line of communication open.

Fashola made the remarks during an interview on TVC News on Wednesday when he was asked why he had largely refrained from commenting publicly on the performance of the Tinubu administration.

According to him, President Tinubu regularly seeks his views on governance and areas that require improvement as the administration prepares for the 2027 general elections.

Explaining why he avoids discussing such matters on television, Fashola said he considered it more appropriate to communicate his views directly to the President.

“He calls me today, and he says, ‘Today, identify one area where my administration must improve as we count down to 2027. What would you advise me?’ So, I will speak to the President on TV? I’ve told myself I would not do that,” Fashola said.

The former minister said he had already offered advice to the President on several issues, adding that preserving that private channel of engagement was more valuable than making public pronouncements.

“I have his ears, and when I need to see him, I’ve advised on a few things. I think that we must keep that channel open. It’s not my intention to advise him on television,” he said.

When asked whether the administration had developed any blind spots after about three years in office, Fashola rejected the suggestion, saying his direct access to the President made public criticism unnecessary.

“There are no blind spots in this administration. You can’t be shouting at somebody whose ear you have,” he said.

The interviewer noted that many Nigerians had expected Fashola to become more outspoken on national issues after leaving public office, but the former Lagos governor maintained that his approach had not changed.

Fashola also dismissed suggestions that he might contest the presidency in the future, saying he had no such ambition.

Responding to a question on whether he would run for president, he replied, “No.”

When the interviewer pressed further, Fashola responded with a smile, “President of what? I’m president at home.”

Reflecting on his public service career spanning more than two decades, Fashola described the opportunity to serve as an honour and expressed hope that his journey would inspire younger Nigerians to pursue public service.

He also declined to comment on long-standing speculation over whether he had preferred Obafemi Hamzat or Olasupo Sasore as his successor ahead of the 2015 Lagos State governorship election.

Fashola, who confirmed that he remains a member of the Lagos State Governance Advisory Council (GAC), said the council’s role was advisory, stressing that there was a clear distinction between providing guidance and interfering in the affairs of government.

“There is a thin line between intervention and interference,” he said.