Senator Shehu Sani has appealed to President Bola Tinubu to pardon the young protesters arrested and still being detained over the #EndSARS protest in 2020.

In 2020, some Nigerian youths had taken to the streets to protest against police brutality and the situation in the country. The protest led to attacks on police stations, formations, and officers across the country.

READ ALSO: ‘Early This Morning, I had A Swagger’ – Tinubu Cracks Joke About His Fall [VIDEO]

While some of the arrested protesters were released, others are believed to continue being held up in various police stations.

While speaking at the Democracy day Presidential dinner held at the State House Conference Centre Abuja, Sani said those who took part in the protest should also be considered as champions of democracy.

Watch video below:

See more

The Ondo State House of Assembly has made a formal application to the Supreme Court to be included as defendants in the ongoing federal case concerning local government autonomy.

The application was filed on June 11, 2024, by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, on behalf of the Speaker of Ondo State House of Assembly, Olamide Oladiji, and the House of Assembly itself.

The suit, initiated by the Attorney-General of the Federation on May 20, 2024, named all 36 states as defendants.

The Ondo State Assembly seeks to be added as the 37th and 38th defendants, arguing that their legislative responsibilities are directly impacted by the case’s outcome.

READ ALSO: YouTube Star, Ben Potter Dies At 40 After ‘Unfortunate Accident’

In their affidavit, the Assembly emphasized their constitutional role in lawmaking for Ondo State, referencing Sections 4(7), 7, and 162 of the 1999 Constitution.

They cited existing state laws, such as the Local Government System, Establishment and Administration of Local Government Law of Ondo State, Cap. 87, Laws of Ondo State, 2006, and the Ondo State (Creation of Local Governments) Law, 2023, as evidence of their vested interest in the matter.

“The Applicants are seeking to join the suit as necessary parties in view of the peculiar reliefs being sought and as pertaining to the constitutional rights and functions of the Applicants,” the affidavit stated.

Speaker Olamide Oladiji, who elaborated on the necessity of their involvement, said: “The reliefs being sought in this case, if granted, would directly affect our constitutional functions and activities. It is only just and fair that we are involved and heard.”

READ ALSO: Guinness Announces Plan To Leave Nigeria After 75 Years

The assembly contended that the federal government’s reliefs could undermine their statutory duties, particularly regarding the allocation and distribution of public revenue to local councils.

“Our constitutional powers, rights, and duties must not be ousted without our input,” Oladiji added.

They argue that their participation will enable a more comprehensive resolution of the issues at hand.

“Joining the Applicants would enable an effective and effectual determination of the fundamental issues being raised in this case,” the affidavit asserts.

The application has been served to the Attorney-General of the Federation, and the Supreme Court is set to hear the case on June 14, 2024.

The Rivers State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Dagogo Iboroma, has said that the State High Court neither declared nor affirmed Martin Amaewhule as the Speaker of the House of Assembly.

He also stated that the certified true copy of the court judgment validates the government’s position and did not affirm them as members of the Peoples Democratic Party.

Iboroma, in a statement issued on Wednesday morning, also urged media practitioners to desist from giving interpretations to court judgments by fiat, emotional or other shades of persuasions.

Rather, he advised that they should first obtain the judgment in order to read it thoroughly to gain proper understanding or, at best, seek competent legal advice before going to press.

READ ALSO: INEC Vows Professionalism Ahead Of Edo, Ondo Gov Polls

Iboroma gave the advice after obtaining the certified true copy of the Monday court judgment in Port Harcourt, Rivers State Capital.

Iboroma said: “Yesterday, I briefed the press and made the point that there is a misrepresentation of the judgment of the High Court of Rivers State in Suit No. DHC/20/CS/2024 in social, print, and electronic media.

“My position has been confirmed and vindicated by the Certified True Copy of the court order in Suit No. DHC/20/CS/2024.”

Iboroma stated that a court order embodied the enforceable decisions of a court, adding that in this case in focus, the enforceable orders of the court will necessarily entail the specific pronouncements of the court.

READ ALSO: Tears As Plateau Pastor, Wife Killed By Gunmen Laid To Rest

He listed the three orders of the court in the judgement to include: “That this suit be and is hereby dismissed/struck out for want of jurisdiction.

“That the Peoples Democratic Party be and is hereby joined as 4th defendant. That the claimants’ case be and is hereby dismissed for lacking in merit.”

He added, “Contrary to the false claims and misrepresentation in social, print and electronic media, the court did not make a declaration that Martin Amaewhule is the Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, neither did it make a declaration that Martin Amaewhule and 26 others are members of the Rivers State House of Assembly and the Peoples Democratic Party.

READ ALSO: Israel Extends Ban On Al Jazeera For Another 45 Days, Cites Security Threats

“If it were so, it would have been embodied in the court orders which have been circulated to you all and displayed by me here for the purpose of clarity.”

Iboroma regretted that the deliberate ‘misrepresentation’ of Monday’s court ruling was painted in bad light, and the public was misled with such misinformation.

He said: “Whatever finding of fact that is not included in the court order is an Obiter Dictum, which has no binding force.

“Once again, I respectively urge the media to desist from giving any interpretation to any judgement without first reading the content of the judgement and seeking legal advice,” he added.