Headline

Land Dispute: Malami Confirms Sending Policemen To Magodo, Slams S’West Govs

Published

4 years ago

January 5, 2022

The Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), on Wednesday, said policemen were dispatched to Magodo Phase 2 Estate area of Lagos State because the state government refused to implement a Supreme Court judgment.

Malami also faulted the criticism of the South-West governors, saying nothing was unruly about the operations of the police officers’ presence at the estate.

This was contained in a statement by Malami’s Special Assistant on Media and Public Relations, Umar Gwandu.

For days, policemen besieged the estate in the company of suspected land grabbers and members of a family who had planned to demolish property in the choice estate to execute a Supreme Court judgment. The development caused commotion at the estate as landlords and tenants panic over their fate.

Recall that a Chief Superintendent of Police, Abimbola Oyewole, on Tuesday openly defied the order of Lagos State Governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, to vacate the estate.

The CSP had told the governor that he and his armed colleagues were at the estate on the orders of the Inspector-General of Police, Usman Baba; and Malami.

The South-West governors had in a statement signed by Ondo State Governor, Rotimi Akeredolu, on Wednesday faulted the alleged roles of the IGP and the AGF.

“We condemn, very strongly, this brazen assault on decency. We call on the IGP to explain the justification for this intrusion. This is not acceptable. Any expectations of rapprochement between so-called federating units and federal security agencies are becoming forlorn, progressively, due to deliberate acts which mock our very avowal to ethics and professionalism.

“We condemn, in very clear terms, the role of the Attorney General of the Federation, Mr Abubakar Malami SAN in this act of gross moral turpitude,” the governors said.

But reacting in a statement Malami said, “It is important to state that the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation belongs to the Executive arm of the Government. The Supreme Court belongs to the Judiciary.

“The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice takes exception to the Southwest Governors unjustifiable insinuation of impunity against the office of the Attorney General over execution of a judgment of the Supreme Court.

“The role of the executive is, in this respect, simply to aide the maintenance of law and order in due compliance with rule of law arising from giving effect to the judgment of the apex court of the land.

“Let it be known that the issue is regarding a Supreme Court Judgement that was delivered in 2012 long before the coming of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration in office at a time when Malami was not a Minister.

“The judgment was a reaffirmation of the judgments of Court of Appeal and High Court delivered on 31st December, 1993.”

“It is widely reported in the papers that the Lagos state Governor was quoted to have said “I’ve spoken extensively with the Inspector-General of Police and the Honourable Attorney-General, and we’ve resolved all the issues”.

“The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, would appreciate if the coalition of the Governors will help to unravel the circumstances preventing the Lagos State Government from enforcing the court order despite several attempts from 2012- 2015 and so-called settlement initiative started in 2016.

“Some of the cardinal pillars of democratic Government are the doctrine of separation of powers and obedience to the rule of law inclusive of Court Orders.

“It is a common knowledge that execution of the judgment and orders of Courts of competent jurisdiction, and the Court of last resort in the circumstances remains a cardinal component of the rule of law and the office of the Attorney General wonders how maintenance of the law and orders in the course of execution of the judgment of the supreme can be adjudged by imagination of the governors to be unruly.

“We want restate that sanctity of the rule of law is not a matter of choice,” the statement added.

(PUNCH)

Related Topics:Magodo land Dispute Malami

Up Next

Why I’m Not Happy With State Of Electricity In Nigeria – Buhari

Don't Miss

Eight-year-old Girl Dies After Wind Blows Bouncy Castle Into Air

Comments

Headline

Antitrust Trial: US Asks Court To Break Up Google’s Ad Business

Published

7 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year, following a similar government demand to split up its empire that was shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.

Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

According to filings, the US government will argue that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations. The DOJ will also ask that after the divestitures are complete, Google be banned from operating an ad exchange for 10 years.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

“We’ve said from the start that DOJ’s case misunderstands how digital advertising works and ignores how the landscape has dramatically evolved, with increasing competition and new entrants,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.

Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

This remedy phase of the US trial follows a first trial that found Google operated an illegal monopoly. It is expected to last about a week, with the court set to meet again for closing arguments a few weeks later.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.

Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.

Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

AFP

Headline

Google Faces Court Battle Over Breakup Of Ad Tech Business

Published

8 hours ago

September 22, 2025

Editor

Google faces a fresh federal court test on Monday as US government lawyers ask a judge to order the breakup of the search engine giant’s ad technology business.

The lawsuit is Google’s second such test this year after the California-based tech juggernaut saw a similar government demand to split up its empire shot down by a judge earlier this month.

Monday’s case focuses specifically on Google’s ad tech “stack” — the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.

In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.
Monday’s trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.

Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court’s findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.

In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU’s antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.
Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.

The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.

That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.
Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.

The US government had pushed for Chrome’s divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.
Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.

Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.

These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world’s largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.

Headline

Peru Anti-government Protesters Clash With Police

Published

1 day ago

September 21, 2025

Editor

Hundreds of anti-government protesters clashed with police in the Peruvian capital Lima on Saturday, throwing stones and sticks as officers fired tear gas on the demonstrators, AFP journalists reported.

The protest, organized by a youth collective called “Generation Z”, is part of growing social unrest in Peru against organized crime, corruption in public office, and a recent pension reform.

“Today, there is less democracy than before. It’s getting worse… because of fear, because of extortion,” said 54-year-old protester Gladys, who declined to give her last name.

Around 500 people gathered in the city center, under heavy police presence.

“Congress has no credibility, it doesn’t even have the approval of the people… It is wreaking havoc in this country,” said protester Celene Amasifuen.

The clashes broke out as demonstrators tried to approach executive and congressional buildings in Lima.

The radio station Exitosa said that its reporter and a cameraman were hit by pellets, commonly fired by law enforcement.

Police said at least three officers were wounded.

Approval ratings for President Dina Boluarte, whose term ends next year, have plummeted amid rising extortion and organized crime cases.

Several opinion polls show the government and conservative-majority Congress are seen by many as corrupt institutions.

This week, the legislature passed a law requiring young adults to join a private pension fund, despite many facing a precarious working environment.