A professor of accounting and finance at Lead City University, Godwin Oyedokun, has said Edun Wale’s sack as minister of finance by President Bola Tinubu is linked to inadequate policy and reforms implementation.

He disclosed this in an interview with DAILY POST on Tuesday.

Tinubu relieved Edun of his duty on Tuesday in a memo by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, George Akume.

Taiwo Oyedele replaced Edun as substantive minister of finance.

READ ALSO:VIDEO: Tinubu Till 2031, City Boy Movement Members Declare At Bayelsa Rally

DAILY POST reports the Edun exit has left the country’s economy and investors in shock.

Opposition African Democratic Congress chieftain Dino Melaye alleged that Edun’s sack was linked to the N34 trillion hidden spending flagged recently by the World Bank in its Nigeria Development Update report.

Another report linked Edun’s sack to widespread complaints of inadequate capital budget releases since 2023.

Reacting, Oyedokun said, “The immediate temptation is to interpret the change as an admission that the reform agenda championed under Edun has failed or driven the economy into backwardness.

“The real critique lies in execution, sequencing and social cushioning, not necessarily the intent or logic of the reforms themselves.”

Former presidential candidate, Dr Gbenga Hashim, has vowed that pro-democracy groups across Nigeria will oppose any move to establish a one-party system.

According to a statement released on Wednesday, Hashim made the assertion after a meeting with a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana.

He noted that the engagement was part of ongoing consultations with key stakeholders to preserve Nigeria’s multi-party democratic framework.

“We resolved to sustain the multi-party structure of Nigeria’s democracy and resist one-party rule,” he stated.

He described Falana as a long-standing associate, saying their relationship spans more than four decades, anchored on activism, resistance, and a shared pursuit of justice.

READ ALSO:Falana Secures Release Of Abia Varsity Lecturer After Three Years Without Trial

Hashim recalled their joint involvement in the anti-apartheid struggle under the Nigeria–ANC Friendship and Cultural Association, including a protest on January 7, 1988, during the visit of former British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher.

According to him, he led a group of students who defied security restrictions to stage a protest at the airport tarmac, an action that resulted in the arrest of five activists.

He paid tribute to those involved, noting that only two are still alive, while Olaitan Oyerinde, Chris Ayaeze and Rotimi Ewebiyi have passed away.

Hashim also highlighted his history of legal resistance against military rule, including a 1988 suit challenging the Structural Adjustment Programme under the regime of Ibrahim Babangida, in which Falana served as his pro bono counsel.

READ ALSO:Falana Slams South-West Governors, Criticises Makinde’s N63bn Renovation

He further referenced his detention in 1989 during a constitutional case against the Attorney General of the Federation, handled by a legal team led by Alao Aka-Bashorun.

The former presidential candidate added that Falana played a significant role in his emergence as National Administrative Secretary of the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights, where he worked under the late Beko Ransome-Kuti.

Hashim stressed that their longstanding alliance remains committed to defending democratic principles, civil liberties and political plurality in the country.

He said the position reflects growing concerns among pro-democracy advocates over Nigeria’s political direction, adding that he is prepared to work with like-minded stakeholders to safeguard the nation’s democratic system.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved judgment in the appeal filed by the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, David Mark, challenging the jurisdiction of court to intervene in the internal affairs of the party.

A five-member panel of the apex court led by Justice Garba Mohammed reserved its verdict shortly after lawyers representing parties adopted their briefs of argument for and against the appeal.

Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, who represented David Mark, in urging the court to allow the appeal, submitted that the apex court had in a judgment on March 21, 2025 put an end to the issue before the court when it held that “no court has jurisdiction to entertain cases bordering on internal affairs of political parties”.

Okutepa therefore urged the apex court to allow the appeal and hold that the Abuja Federal High Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain a suit bordering on the ADC’s internal matters.

READ ALSO:ADC Convention: Chaos As Massive Crowd Struggles To Gain Entrance Into Congress [VIDEO]

Robert Emukpero, SAN, who represented the 1st respondent, Nafiu Gombe however, urged the apex court to reject the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court, which held that the case of the appellant was premature and dismissed it.

It will be recalled that a three-member panel of the appellate court had dismissed Mark’s appeal, challenging the jurisdiction of the Abuja Federal High Court presided by Justice Emeka Nwite, to entertain the suit filed by Bala against the leadership of the ADC.

The appellate court in its decision held that the appeal was not only premature but was brought without leave of the trial court.

The appellate court subsequently ordered that the matter be returned to the trial court for expeditious hearing, adding that parties should maintain status quo.

READ ALSO:INEC Chair Amupitan Must Be Removed, Prosecuted – ADC Reps

Following the order for status quo, the electoral umpire subsequently de-recognized the ADC leadership headed by Mark, pending the resolution of the matter by the court.

Dissatisfied, Mark approached the Supreme Court to challenge the ruling of the appellate court as well as an order staying the order for maintenance of status quo.

Rather than taking the motions filed in the appeal, the apex court directed parties to file their briefs for and against the appeal.

After taking arguments from the parties, Justice Garba announced that judgment is reserved to a date that would be communicated to parties.