I like the Venezuelan opposition leader, Juan Guaidó. I am also opposed to communism.
But it is clear that the sanctions that the Trump administration imposed on Venezuela and the Maduro regime has impacted Venezuelans negatively. It has crumbled their economy.
Saab is being targeted by the US because he was doing a lot to undermine the sanctions. I don't have the facts of the money laundering allegations made by the US. It may well be true. What is certain is that he made it possible for Venezuela to avoid sanctions in a limited way.
The US knows that if they are able to incapacitate Alex Saab, the Maduro regime will suffer terribly. Saab was heading to Iran (anti-US country) to see how to secure humanitarian reliefs and facilitate crude oil export. He stopped over in Cape Verde to refuel and was arrested.
ECOWAS Court ordered his release but authorities in Cape Verde are still trying to extradite him as demanded by the US. How many countries can stand up to the US?
There's no extradition treaty between the US and Cape Verde.
But who cares about these details on Twitter Nigeria?
Switzerland also said that it had a case against Alex Saab, but it was later dropped due to lack of evidence. The US does not recognize the government of Nicolas Maduro. They rather recognized the opposition leader.
That is why I said people should read up on their own.
I have a feeling that the US sees 'the advocacy' as a stumbling block to their extradition request. It is a case of varying International interests.
But people are just interested in sensationalism. Even those who know nothing about the case are throwing baseless allegations.
Those who understand what is playing out will be laughing at us in Nigeria.
The US Government has always targeted those who undermine their sanctions or work against American interest.
Where does ECOWAS and the ordinary citizens of Venezuela stand in this diplomatic crisis?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Pro-government minions are in the habit of invoking the name of the Great Gani Fawehinmi in their desperation to scandalize other activists. The same Gani was despised by successive regimes. If Gani were still alive, these sycophants will abuse him. Gani was accused falsely too.
Dr. Olu Onagoruwa betrayed Gani, his friend, and accepted to serve as Attorney General to Gen. Abacha. When he opted out, Abacha junta murdered his son who was working with the NIA. Dr Onagoruwa falsely accused Gani of collecting money from Gen. Buhari to buy a house in London.
Chief Gani Fawehinmi refuted the allegation. On several times, Gani was arrested on trumped up charges, including affray, treasonable felony and so on. In the eyes of the corrupt regimes, he was a criminal. Gani was hated. Attempts were made to kill him. He was despised.
Someone drew my attention not long ago to the List. This is a List that was developed as a proposal before those listed in it were approached. I became interested in the Alex Saab's case due to the following reasons:
1. I have a close relationship with Saab's lawyer in Nigeria.
2. The case is of interest to me because of the legal and diplomatic issues at stake, particularly the ECOWAS Court involvement.
3. Someone that I know and worked with in the past spoke to me about it and requested that I offer legal hindsight on it and also tag some accounts.
4. I respect my relationship with people except where there is a clear indication of impropriety.
Ordinarily, there's no way that I will go on social media to speak against the interest of someone that is being represented by a lawyer that I have a close relationship with.
Another lawyer, Inibehe Effiong, described the appointment as an immoral attempt to convey diplomatic immunity on them so that they can evade the prosecutorial jurisdiction of the ICC.
“President Buhari has by this ignoble appointments reminded Nigerians that he is deaf to their cries and blind to their suffering. No leader in this country in my lifetime has exceeded Buhari’s parochialism and provocative indifference to public opinion.
“These former service chiefs were supposed to be fired long ago, but because we have a president who has an unbreakable covenant with failure, they were retained in defiance of the resolutions of the National Assembly and the opinion of most Nigerians.
I'm before the Lagos Judicial Panel of Inquiry with Olumide Fusika SAN (lead counsel) to represent some victims of the Lekki Toll Gate Incident.
We have objected to the appearance of the Army on the ground that the Rules of the Panel does not cover the Lekki Toll Gate Incident.
We have also raised the issue of the absence of an Instrument setting up the tribunal. How can we go ahead when we have not seen the Instrument setting up the panel? How can we go on when the Rules of the Panel does not cover the Lekki Toll Gate Incident? This is fundamental.
The Army is saying that no one except the panel can cross examine their witnesses because there is no petition as at today against them over their role in the Lekki Toll Gate Incident. This is why it is important to resolve the issues that we have raised.
GOVERNOR SANWO-OLU REPLIES LAWYER, SAYS HE WILL NOT RELEASE INSTRUMENT SETTING UP PANEL
I've received a response to the Freedom of Information request that I sent to governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu for the Certified True Copy of the Instrument setting up the Lagos Panel of Inquiry.
You will recall that on 26th October, 2020, I invoked the Freedom of Information Act 2011 and requested for the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the Instrument (official document) setting up the Lagos State Judicial Panel of Inquiry on SARS Abuses and Lekki Toll Gate Incident.
I also requested for the CTC of the Instrument, Executive Order or Directive under which curfew was imposed on the State from the hours of 9pm on 20th October.
In my FOI application, I equally requested for CCTV records showing the attack on protesters at the Lekki Toll Gate.
Section 3 (1) and (2) of the Tribunals of Inquiry Law of Lagos State is clear on the contents of the Oath of Members.
It provides thus:
3(1) "Every member of a Tribunal appointed under this Law shall, before entering upon his duties, make,
and subscribe to, an oath that he will faithfully, and impartially and to the best of his ability discharge the duties devolving upon him under the inquiry, and if the inquiry is not to be held in public, that he will not divulge the proceedings or the vote or opinion of the
members or any matter relevant to the inquiry."
3(2) "Such oath may be taken under the Oaths Law. In this Law "oath" includes affirmation and declaration."
From the foregoing provisions, the document purportedly containing an "Oath of Secrecy" which was to be sworn by members