 Welcome back to the run-up. Well joining us to discuss the issues that I mentioned earlier, Upunabor Inkotaria, he's a public affairs analyst and Johnson Argo, legal practitioner. Thank you gentlemen for joining me. Yeah, it's my pleasure. Good morning, good morning, good morning. You're welcome. Well, they'll be joining me virtually as you can see. However, that doesn't affect anything. Okay, so let's just go straight to it. I think we should start with Festus K. Amos' petition against the Labour Party presidential candidate and his deputy, Baba Dati Ahmed. The former minister of education, Obie Zequisely, has dismissed that and called it a ludicrous piece of nonsense. Upunabor, hello, Upunabor. Yeah, I can hear you. All right, respond to that. Respond to the call, the petition by K. Amos and Obie Zequisely's reaction to it. Well, first I think K. Amos is just to me just a question of Bravo Rao because I'm concerned the petition is completely moved. It's worth not to look at K. Amos' petition as the destructive gender against it. Gender against it, brother. First and foremost, K. Amos was himself guilty of the very allegations leveled against Dati Ahmed and K. Amos. Excuse me, I have a question. Sorry. Leveled against Dati Ahmed and K. Amos. Because he didn't want trying to accuse them of treason. He went ahead to live well then, call their names, and he didn't attempt it. It doesn't seem like they could have done that. Who also attempted, not to be attempted, he also attempted to take human rights as they love and which is really wrong because it is subdued. Where was K. Amos when M. Shio Luma, that was his name, threatened non-egos and made us. Where was K. Amos when even the president-elect made some inflammatory statements? Where was K. Amos? So I think it's all about trying to retain his position in the federal executive camps. And so he's doing everything possible to ingratiate himself with the president-elect. And that is why he's coming up to defend what ought not to be defended in the process. Now, let us also take on the advisement, the issues raised by Dati Ahmed. This is an aggrieved message. If today I'm putting you to court, my brother, I think John said, will also attest or elucidate for that. If today I'm putting you to court, my charge will be your teeth. I cannot put you to court to say, I think you're a teeth. I will put you to court to say, I suspect you're a teeth. Then in that case, it is business. They should have the mission of the business. If I'm putting you to court, I'll see you're a criminal and that's why I'm putting you to court. So if today, Dati Ahmed said, the electors are now free and fair and he doesn't recognize the president-elect as the winner of the 23 presidential elections. He has not said anything that is reasonable. To start it, it cannot be the accused of treason because he said the constituted authority and not because I watched that in the sister station, precisely on channels. And he said, you're talking about the president-elect. A president-elect is not yet the president. He's only a president-elect. God forbid, if today anything happens to Balaamati, if he closes his eyes to me, he can never be given a president not taking the oath of office. It is after taking the oath of office that you can now say president and you say certain things and you say the astute. But then, right now, he's a president-elect. So you cannot, because of what he said. This is an ugly fact. Who feels he has been robbed? I don't know that the election was savage and even Nigerians were savage. The voters were savage. So you cannot go up to say, come up to say, ah, he's been a kid or kid in the book column. How? Nevertheless, that was not the fact from the fact that whether you are talking about a city president or you are talking about, there are certain statements you make, especially when the statements are incendiary and have the propelled city to elicit reactions or stimulate actions against a constitutional policy. I agree with you. But that does not fall within that range. And so, as far as I'm concerned, he's just a busybody trying to impress Balaamati so as to retain his seat in the federal executive council. He's attempting to be a rabble riser but in a very negative sense because all what he said and the allegations prepared against that, damn it, and we told you, as far as I am concerned, they all suffer from episodes of reason and purposeful terms of argument and the terms of trying to substantiate those facts. Okay, well, thank you for now. Well, John Senaogo, you are a legal practitioner. Come in here and tell us whether what your legal colleague has said makes any sense. I'm talking about... I agree with him absolutely. I agree with him absolutely. Actually, the question whether someone has committed an offense or not is to be interpreted by reference to the particular statute against which the person's conduct is said to have contravened. Let me put it slightly more straightforward. Before you say I have committed an offense, you should be pointing at the particular law my conduct is against. So in this instance, I would have been happy to read the particular section of the particular act which Mr. Dati Ames statements contraven. Secondly, I also read with amusements the part of Mr. Keyamo's left side alleging that P2B has committed the offense through Dati Ames. I was thinking that crimes are not exactly vicarious. People should be held accountable for their own particular conduct. The individual that Ames said in his own opinion when he was saying his statements, he didn't say in the opinion of himself and P2B. So I was wondering the motivation that Keyamo would have to take away from the person who said, quote me, this is what I'm saying and that reboots the person who didn't say the same. That shows to me that he was just playing to the gallery as opposed to analyzing or discussing legal issues. So in my view, he has said nothing other than making noise. And it would be curious to see if the DSS has on noise making. No one should expect this to become a backing dog for P2S Keyamo. They are an institution established by law and the scope of their functions are enumerated. It's not meant to become a backing dog for any politician at all. They are an established institution. DSS is supposed to be very respected. They should know the limits of their law and the limits of their powers. And I believe it does not include gargling people. If you analyze what Mr. Datiamet had said, it's quite clear he says, I am aggrieved. This is the cause of my grievance. I have taken it to court. That's the summary of what Mr. Datiamet said. And he goes for that to explain that the reason why he's aggrieved is that the constitution of Nigeria is not being followed and in his view, the constitution of Nigeria is the only means through which any person can seize power as in any person can come to government in Nigeria. And that's clearly what the constitution of Nigeria say, that no part of Nigeria can be governed except in such a way as has been prescribed by the constitution of Nigeria. So if you attempt to govern Nigeria except in a way that has been prescribed by the constitution of Nigeria or a part of Nigeria, except in the way that has been prescribed by the constitution of Nigeria, you are infringing the constitution. In other words, you are governing outside the constitution. And what exactly is cool? A cool is simply what they normally call revolution. It's so-called an attempt to govern a state outside the school, outside the prescription of the constitutive document, in which case the constitution. So Mr. Kayamo should be worried. He should in fact be talking about fast-tracking the legal dispute as opposed to asking people not to discuss their condition. It's just like, if you don't want us to discuss our condition, don't give us the conditions to, don't put us in the condition at all. So what Mr. Datiamet has just done is to exercise a right that is very fundamental. And I believe section 39 of the Nigerian constitution allows people to express their opinions on what they think about their condition. So Mr. Datiamet has just discussed his condition. And this section and other sections of the Nigerian constitution building on fundamental rights are so fundamental that even DSS is not permitted to derogate from it. And Nigeria cannot even make laws to derogate from such fundamental rights. Assuming there is any power in the DSS in any way at all to pretend that it is keeping peace and gagging people. Nigeria cannot make such laws. And if Nigeria makes such laws, some of the international rights instruments that Nigeria is signatory to, does not permit that. And Nigeria cannot be pleading its local law arrangements as an excuse to derogate from such international obligations. So by Faisal's scheme, Kayamu's letter is setting Nigeria up for not just unlawful acts, but for international ridicule. People are watching us. They are seeing what we are doing. They are seeing, okay, some of these are legend that you have picked an election and you do not just want to listen to the person's complaints. You also want to intimidate the person with the instruments of the state. The DSS, the DSS, a special instrument of the state and any acts of the DSS in this particular circumstances are looked upon with suspicion. So it's better, Mr. Kayamu talks about peace, talk about addressing the grievances of the people who are complaining instead of trying to intimidate and shut them up. That's the way I see it. All right, how do you respond to the coloration that these gives to the APC as a party? Because just as Mr. Poonabo alluded, members of their party had made comments that were even worse. And we didn't see, other than the fact that Faisal's scheme will tweeted cautioning Bayo Nanuga against his comment and he retweeted and retweeted more. We didn't see strong actions from their camp. The case with Kayamu himself is guilty of what Mr. Bayo Nanuga is doing. He has been doing a technique of whistling all along through the campaign that Mr. Bayo Nanuga took his own step forward, does not change what the nature of what Mr. Kayamu has been doing all along. Who has he been describing as well and well as? All right. Have you not read that kind of tweet before? Was he not sectional ethnic? Should a government functionary in the first place be this brazenly partisan? We are faced with Kayamu's salary as a minister of state or what, for labor. So he should have dedicated his gold time serving the Nigerian people in the ministry of labor and productivity. But we saw him very active in the campaign council of the presidential candidates of APC. So who is going to pay us back for the money for the time he's still campaigning for APC? That is a good question. That is a good question. And you've been a legal practitioner. Should there not be some sort of petitions against him by Nigerians? I think Nigeria is... To ask this very question that you're asking. Yes. Nigeria is actually, should be able to take that profession be in the course of powers to punish or restrain him from doing such or making him to at least account to the Nigerian people. I believe that in the APC presidential council he's meant to have received some reward or he's hoping to receive some reward. So it's the question of conflict of interest. He's conflicting his private interest at the citizen of Nigeria entitled to participate in politics with his office as a minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. All right, Apunabo, please come in here. How do you respond to some statements in some quarters that APC, especially through their spokesperson, Keiamo, makes it look like others who are not members of the APC are second-class citizens in this country because they are of the ruling party? No, the fact is that if I go into that, let me add to what my brother has said because even in the United States of America, which is supposed to be the death list of the no-person, when the American president is running for a second term, any time he moves or applies the presidential term, he pays for it. Unlike in Nigeria, we are the state base for presidential jet that the president is in for the music during elections. The American president pays for it because that is your private business. And in the interest of equity, definitely there must not be any form of discrimination within the Congress of the United States. So just like a private man who flies private jet or fly a jet and fly, the same way the president, who eventually becomes the presidential candidate for somebody running for a second, also pays for the jet. It could be, there could be a soft form of subsidy but he has to pay for that jet. So in now you're talking of Justice Guillermo and the PDB. It is so sad if federal and high-liberal that a city minister who, originally, like my brother rightly says, come on there, we'll have the box to come on there, openly campaign, some forget it is, appointment as a minister for states. Now, first of all, in fact acknowledge that fact and that is why he observed, this time he spoke, he said, in my capacity, as first of Guillermo, how do you distinguish that? You're a city minister and you say, in your capacity. And you find in delegating, discriminating, castigating other members why your language should be language of reconciliation. I tell you why. First of Guillermo is doing that because that is what even the president elects, so. Before the elections, during the elections and even after the elections. I've always been in the parliament. The point really got frustrated so I started attacking the president himself. And you know most times these followers, they watch the body language, actions, the deeds of their people. And that's what the government is trying to do. Now, every other party, in fact I listened to his analysis yesterday and I was ashamed of myself that that is a member of the NABAR that a man, a member of the NABAR, there's somebody this morning on the sister's teacher in criticizing him, find posted most of his maficent acts in the past and said they were better than surprised. First of Guillermo himself was the same person who yesterday, the interview I was talking about was he was yesterday on the sister's side. Who yesterday said they should wait for the courts to decide. You say you're waiting for the courts to decide and you're interpreting section 299. All expected the self to do was to say it is subject. I will not be want to be as guilty as those I am accused. But he's guilty as those he's accused. And if you can't tell if you do, you must come clean her. We don't have to beat her, we don't have to beat her. You'll leave your mouth and must not be dripping with words of nullification and interposition. So if you talk of the other parties, I can tell you that doesn't stress this. If you're the president in left, it is a question of I am the victor and I take it all. It's not a question of no victor, no bankers. You see let me tell you more. That's why I said we're in a worst situation. Like in the Bible, they say, I forgot to do, I think it has to do with Asalaam, my father loved you with games and so on. I will use copy on something. Mark what I'm saying and posterity will indicate that is what we are going to see. Should Bola made remain because it is now subject to the political purposes of the little land. So we are waiting for the Supreme Court justices to give their judgment for now, make a pronouncement. But should that happen, Nigerians will pray for the man, what was his name, the president, sorry, with your respect. Who? All right, a bit of connectivity problem there, but Johnson Argo, let me come back to you. You have said what he said that Festus Keamo subject is already. What is the input of that on the position of the president-elect, Bola Tinnubu Ahmed? Since he is a spokesperson. I do not know if I should hold Bola Tinnubu responsible for what Festus Keamo said that he is saying in his own capacity as Festus Keamo. But if we should do things according to Festus Keamo standards, then Bola Tinnubu will be liable as much as B2B is liable for what any other person has said or done in which will not include Festus Keamo himself. So to the extent that Festus Keamo has insulted or assaulted the sacred legal principles, we should now also say that Bola Ahmed Tinnubu is responsible for such assaults on the sacred legal principles. For example, when a matter is said to be in the court, it is expected that all parties respect the fact that it is in the court and restrict the depth of their commentary on the matter. This does not mean that parties cannot say they have gone to court or cannot say the subject that they have submitted to the court as in the case of Ahmed that Ahmed. But passing judgment or reaching conclusions are supposed to be reserved for the court. If you have reached conclusions on the outcome of the case, why are you in court? But if you believe that the court still have a room, you can still present your case. As in this case that Ahmed has said, this is the subject I took to the court. Festus Keamo can say, this is our response to it and leave it there. And we now will expect the court to say, I have seen the petition. I have seen the response to the petition and this is my verdict. So a situation where we see or we hear Mrs. Keamo reaching conclusions on behalf of the court. For example, telling us that the court will throw away the thing. This much to be desired. Is he suggesting that he has seen a copy of the judgment even before the case started? That is a question. I'm not suggesting that. Don't forget my brother. Okay, I'm going to ask. I also interpreted the issue of the FCG if it's a state or not. And so that is a question. Exactly, that's this old argument line of argument. It's not the Supreme Court will say. And it's been shown to watch out, which means already the judgment has been procured. And that is a question. If that's the case. So even if the judgment is given in favor of FCG, the one who says it has been procured, if it's a tandem of FCG, I was argument on telling you. I'm telling you. How would you have thought that it was theoretical? Clearly, I said that it was theoretical. For radical? So he would have heard of FCG. He would have heard of FCG. He just, I don't want to say the particular word, but I am telling you, he's not annoyingly jealous, trying to ingratiate, trying to please the masters and wanting to give me just the impression and his master that he's more important or most important to me. So that I must be rewarded for the role I have played. But I honestly, being myself, I am this. When I listened to, I remember when he said, but I think I'm a timid, was not convicted. He only paid money because the court asked him to pay. Before the court, when my other you to pay, definitely what led to that? There is a coronary. What led to it? Definitely you were guilty. And the service is so absent. Is that not a penalty? He said it was not a penalty. He said it's on record. You can't do it. He said it was not a penalty. So they asked you to make a payment and you say it is no penalty? I am sad that. All in interest because this is second, this basic element, year one law. Penalty. Penalty means you are being punished from acts that is the wrong in the eyes of the law. Okay. We won't go to $15,000. We wouldn't want to go deep into that matter. No, no, no, no, no. First and foremost, you have to look at the credibility of the media. That's what I'm trying to establish. You look at the credibility of the media. And that's why even in the first letter to DSM, it was dismissed. They never acted on it. And I believe there are lots of dismissals. But it lacks any form of intelligence. No system of intelligence. What's the reasonableness in that? You're equally guilty of what you accuse in the next month. Why not concentrate? You said, ah, I'll come in tonight. I'll dust my weekend back. I'm so bloody, what? He's gone to Potamata as I've lost how many minutes? All right, so. Is that it? The petition is out there. He's written it. So, mandatorily, the SSS is supposed to respond, right? Am I correct in saying that? It is written, it is written, the bias of the SSS. It's written the bad. They are not allowed to sit. If they don't see anything, then they say, you cannot go past the SSS. It's supposed to be independent and not partisan. Because the ruling APC is the ruling party. So he thinks he can ride on that back. But you cannot go past the SSS. If you have an SSS, digital is what is on the ethical question. So I don't think the SSS will respond to that. And what he did on Charlie was to tell Nigeria and to also indirectly compare the SSS to act on that. I mean, it's just unfortunate that most people have lost confidence in our judicial system. Otherwise, I can tell you that I will not mention the name of two names of persons that the Supreme Court disgraced and gave it all they did to, withdraw their suggestions. No, this issue. So come to court to present all kinds of frivolous, sorry. Go ahead, go ahead. Go ahead. Okay. So this matter is, I don't think it is illegal to talk. I pray it goes to court and let us hear what the Supreme Court justice is to say. Because these are very baseless. What are his standards? On what grounds are you saying? What are the incendiary states? What are the inflammatory states that you consider to be? What are they? Meanwhile, you are guilty of the same offense that you have treated those other ones, is not more. So why not concentrate on your court justice, on your court process? If the judge means fine. I, I also do not have to settle conviction that the elections were rigged. But the matter is before the court, and if they say I have more than enough proof to show that the elections were rigged, more than enough. More than enough, more than enough. It is before the court. Yeah, it is before the court. So we don't want to be subject to this. That only comment, when the matter is before the court, you can only comment on it contemporary. Yeah. That, that not, that is to be subject to. That's why you don't do what I do. Now it is in court. But that is what I expect of questions behind me. Who, as a self, has to be a role model when it comes to the legal process? Okay, don't say. And you hear him every time he's done that. Don't forget, I remember the NAPA. Don't forget that I am this. Are you trying to intervene there? The system has to be over-cited, but it's best to try to intimidate the anchored and the presenters and what have you. Who can say, what's about, what is it? You can go to court and be flawed by someone who doesn't call you, but just see it as it is. A good way, you can be flawed by this. Because it happened between what should be Williams after how many years at the bar. So they just no longer move by those things. Let him live, by example, and not come on air to make unfounded claims and threaten. And with the DSS you act on this, I cannot show you, it might stimulate, it might catalyze what you least expect. That's the truth about it. Yeah, Johnson, come in here. From the legal perspective, the response that may or may not come from the SSS. Actually, when a petition is brought to the attention of the SSS, we have two basic options. To think that the petition has substance on the one hand, or to say that a petition has no substance on the second hand. If the petition has no substance, no problem. That's the end. If they think it has some substance that requires further investigation, they have an option to invite the person who is the subject of the petition and hear that person's own side of the story to clarify whatever the person might have done or might have said. Because there is this concept in the Nigerian constitution that before any administrative or judicial or whatever powers are assessed against a citizen of the country, the person should be given an opportunity to be heard. That is what people normally call section Eddises of the Nigerian constitution, they're hearing. They're under investigation. Yes. In this instance, we will be expecting as soon as the SS think that there is a preliminary or pre-mafashek content in what Mr. Kayamu has written to them to invite the duo of Peter and Dati and them and hear them. After hearing them, the DSS might form an opinion that okay, whatever that we suspected before, there's no suspense in it. Go your way, don't mind the rabble rouser. They might also say, oh, actually I now see what the rabble rouser is saying more clearly. They will now exercise the powers in the act to procure court proceedings and prosecute according to the law, which they, in their view, have found that the Datiya Med and all Peter will be has breached. And the court will have the final say in determining whether DSS has proven that the conducts are alleged against Datiya Med and Peter will be contravened by law within the jurisdiction of DSS or not. But before the court will come to that conclusion, the court will also have to hear from each of people and all Datiya Med in a normal court proceeding. How long should we take before we get to hear the response from the SSS on this matter? How long will it take before they respond to this? They work at their pace. We can't, so there's no legal time frame for them to respond. I don't see any legal timeline. They're just personal. Yes, they can take forever if it's getting because they are obligated to do thorough jobs. If they take Peter will be and Datiya Med into custody hastily, he spells a lot of doom actually because Peter will be and Datiya Med are persons of public interest at the moment. So they, I don't see them, I don't see DSS who is empowered to seek security of the society acting to hastily because taking the dual of Peter will be and Datiya Med into custody hastily will endanger the peace of the society, the security of the society. I'm not saying this as a matter of pride. It is what I observe because Peter will be and Datiya Med interest the demography we call the youth. And we must accept that the youth are in majority in Nigeria, the statistical record says so. So I'm not saying that all these youths supported to be and Datiya Med, but a sizeable number, whom I think are more in number than the entire security apparatus of Nigeria. The Nigeria Army, we have their numbers. The DSS, we have the total number employed, the police, we have the total number. If you aggregate all of them, they are not as high in number as the group of Nigerians we call the youth. So you should imagine what the outcome will be if the group of Nigerians we call the youth feels so much aggrieved that they take to espride the issue met them to press their grievance. They all be killed. I mean, nobody should be in their home. And I did not announce it as an agenda to you. This is the movement you have to do. Okay. As an agenda to John, what John? You'll find out what's on this before we move to the next subject. All kinds of interpretations, what I'm about to be you, all kinds of interpretations will be moving into an arrest because a lot of people will believe that they have been intimidated into submission because the ruling party, because Bolan Metin would belong to the ruling party. So in addition to the issue of the youth, know that Nigeria, most Nigerians will believe that because the matter has been taken to court, they are trying to use extra deducial means to intimidate them into submission. And that will give rise to what the Pertis Kiyama is perpetually pushing in. I say perpetually, because that is not the intention of Pertis Kiyama, he's only doing what he's doing in order to satisfy his new, he's now going to be new master with Bolan Metin. Do you see this, I had said that would be a final word before we jump to the next subject of discussion. But do you see an invisible drum beating? Do you see and do you hear an invisible drum beating? With all that's playing out right now, would you say there's an invisible drum beating somewhere? Yes, before now, I heard the drums and trumpets, the beats of Easter Sunday that's before the election. Well, we all thought the Divas were going to be joyous, they did, that to put an end to the lungs, stopping the long political activity. But right now, I hear a different drum beating. I know Pertis Kiyama is listening, so I can also write the GSS. I hear different, and this is the drum of disintegration, the drum, you know, because our political engine is about to start, social climate, a sitting-in climate, and the economic side is about to start. So we are headless, slowly, but steadily, I mean, touch of sleep, we're in the mood, I'm at it. Never in the history of this country, have the tennis ligatures been so set we depend on the judiciary to serve justice and not give judgements. Once justice is served, it will placate even the agreements, you know, just like there are a lot of justices who have once said, justice must not only be done, but not be seen to have a man that has been done. Another worse, another one made this mistake, another worse, even the gay man, your gay man who is not learned, knows and is satisfied that, yes, justice will be built. So the almost is now on the judiciary to ensure that justice will be built, not just giving judgements, what I'm saying is that in the past, they've given judgements, law and space, and so many other cases, even in the case of the last 15,000 or 17 months. But I am not now saying it must be this way, depending on what history or thing that we know, let Nigeria be satisfied that justice is delivered. And once that is done, even the agreed, I will be convinced we'll try as much as we can to save up whatever crisis, impending crisis. But if Nigeria's believe that once they got on that, they were judgment and not justice, I can tell you, I built the fragile and tenuous negotiations will be broken. And that is where we're going to have a problem. So right now, the onus is on the Supreme Court. I don't like talking about the Court of Appeals because you see how the appellate for Supreme Court. The Court of Appeals can give a judgment as a bound of health by the Supreme Court. So I always talk of the Supreme Court, which is the final court. Let the Supreme Court ensure that justice is served and not just this judgment of the people. We're going to move now. Thank you so much, gentlemen, for all your insight on this very, very, very serious matter.