Key Takeaways

1. Buba Galadima criticised ADC members over their alleged reaction to Justice Peter Lifu’s reported illness.

2. Galadima made the remarks while speaking on African Independent Television (AIT) on Wednesday.

3. He argued that the judge’s possible absence from Nigeria could create difficulties for the ADC’s appeal process.

4. He claimed that another judge could not sign the records of proceedings relating to Justice Lifu’s judgment.

5. Galadima accused some ADC members of failing to consider the possible legal consequences of the situation.

6. His comments represent his interpretation of the procedural implications, not an independently established legal ruling.

Buba Galadima, a chieftain of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), has criticised members of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) over their alleged reaction to the reported illness of Justice Peter Lifu, who delivered a judgment against the party.

Galadima questioned the party members’ understanding of the legal implications of the judge’s reported health situation, arguing that his possible absence from the country could create difficulties for the ADC in pursuing an appeal against the ruling.

What Galadima Said About ADC Members

The NDC chieftain made the remarks while appearing on African Independent Television (AIT) on Wednesday, where he discussed the court judgment involving the ADC.

During the programme, Galadima referred to comments about the judge’s reported illness and suggested that some ADC members were celebrating the development rather than considering its possible consequences for the party’s legal options.

He particularly questioned why the party would welcome news of the judge’s possible medical treatment abroad when, in his view, the situation could complicate the process of challenging the judgment.

Galadima expressed his position while responding to a discussion involving comments attributed to ADC chieftain Dino Melaye.

“You know there was a judgment against ADC, isn’t it? Yes. And I’ve just heard you read something that Dino Melaye said. They’ve got a true certified copy of the judgment, and I know some ADC people are jumping up and down that the judge (Peter Lifu) who gave a ruling against them has fallen ill and is supposed to be taken to hospital in Europe,”

Why Galadima Believes the Judge’s Absence Could Affect an Appeal

Beyond his criticism of the party members’ reaction, Galadima raised concerns about the possible consequences of Justice Lifu travelling outside Nigeria for medical treatment.

He argued that the judge’s absence could prevent the completion of an important procedural requirement because, according to him, another judge could not sign the records of proceedings relating to the judgment.

Galadima maintained that without the relevant records, the ADC could face difficulties in taking the necessary steps to challenge the ruling until Justice Lifu returned.

He therefore suggested that the party should concentrate on securing the documents required for its legal challenge rather than celebrating the judge’s reported illness.

Galadima Accuses ADC Members of Failing to Consider the Legal Implications

The NDC chieftain went further by questioning the party members’ understanding of the situation, describing their alleged reaction as a failure to recognise what he considered a possible obstacle to their appeal.

He argued that the judge’s absence could work against the party by delaying its ability to pursue the judgment through the appellate process.

Galadima also used the opportunity to criticise what he described as a lack of careful thinking among Nigerian politicians.

He said:

“I just found out that maybe there aren’t intelligent people in the ADC. They didn’t know that if that is true, it is deliberate to deny them appeal, because if the judge goes to London or Europe or anywhere and outside the country, the records of proceedings from his judgment cannot be signed by any judge.”

He continued:

“So no appeal could be had until he’s back. They didn’t know that they are playing on their intelligence, and that’s why Nigerian politicians are lazy. They don’t think,”

The Court Judgment Behind the Political Disagreement

The disagreement stems from a judgment delivered by Justice Peter Lifu against the ADC, which has become a subject of political and legal discussion involving the party.

Galadima’s comments focused particularly on the procedural issues he believes could arise if the judge is unavailable to complete or sign the relevant records of proceedings.

His argument was that the party should pay attention to the requirements involved in challenging the judgment, especially if the reported illness results in the judge travelling abroad.

However, the suggestion that the judge’s absence would prevent another judge from signing the records, and that an appeal could not proceed until his return, represents Galadima’s stated position in the interview. It should not be treated as an independently established legal determination.

Galadima’s Remarks Add to the Political Debate Surrounding ADC

Galadima’s comments have brought another political dimension to the dispute surrounding the ADC and the judgment delivered against the party.

While his criticism centred on what he described as the party members’ reaction to Justice Lifu’s reported illness, his broader argument was that political actors should consider the legal consequences of developments affecting their cases.

For Galadima, the priority should be understanding the procedural requirements for challenging the judgment rather than focusing on the judge’s health situation.

His remarks therefore combine a direct criticism of ADC members with a warning about what he believes could happen if the judge becomes unavailable during the appeal process.

Galadima Questions ADC’s Response to the Legal Challenge

The central issue raised by Galadima is whether the ADC has adequately considered the procedural implications of the judge’s reported illness while preparing to challenge the judgment.

Although he strongly criticised the party members’ alleged reaction, his main concern was the possibility that the judge’s absence could complicate the process of obtaining the records needed for an appeal.

His comments on AIT have consequently added to the political discussion surrounding the court ruling, with the legal implications of the judge’s reported absence remaining a central part of his argument.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

1. What did Buba Galadima say about the ADC?

Galadima criticised ADC members, suggesting that they lacked an understanding of the possible legal consequences of Justice Peter Lifu’s reported illness.

2. Why did Buba Galadima criticise the ADC?

He criticised the party over what he described as its members celebrating the judge’s reported illness instead of considering how his possible absence could affect their efforts to appeal the judgment.

3. Who is Justice Peter Lifu?

Justice Peter Lifu is the judge identified in the report as the person who delivered the judgment against the African Democratic Congress.

4. Where did Galadima make the comments?

He made the remarks while responding to questions on African Independent Television (AIT).

5. What legal concern did Galadima raise?

He argued that if Justice Lifu travelled abroad for medical treatment, his absence could affect the signing of the records of proceedings required by the ADC to pursue an appeal.

6. Did Galadima say the ADC could not appeal the judgment?

Yes. He argued that the party might be unable to proceed with an appeal until the judge returned, because he believed another judge could not sign the relevant records of proceedings. This was his argument during the interview, rather than an independently verified legal conclusion.