A Republican congressman has introduced a bill that would stop government paychecks for officials who have been found in contempt of Congress — a move that seems designed in the short term to go after Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.
Mr. Holder has refused to cooperate with House Republicans’ probe into the Fast & Furious gun-walking operation, and the House has voted to find him in contempt. Mr. Holder is challenging that vote in court.
Rep. Blake Farenthold, a Texas Republican who publicly excoriated Mr. Holder at a hearing last week, introduced the legislation just before Congress went on vacation, and announced it Tuesday.
“The American people should not be footing the bill for federal employees who stonewall Congress or rewarding government officials’ bad behavior,” Mr. Farenthold said.
Mr. Holder appeared before the House Judiciary Committee last week and faced harsh barbs over his defense of Obama administration policies. He bristled at having been held in contempt.
“You don’t want to go there, buddy, all right?” Mr. Holder barked at one congressman who speculated that the attorney general wasn’t taking the contempt accusation seriously. “I think that it was inappropriate. I think it was unjust. But never think that that was not a big deal to me. Don’t ever think that.”
When the time came for Mr. Farenthold to ask his questions, he demurred, saying he didn’t think the House should have even let Mr. Holder appear to testify, since he is actively being cited for contempt.
“I just don’t think it’s appropriate that Mr. Holder be here. If an American citizen had not complied with one of the Justice Department subpoenas, they would be in jail, not sitting here in front, testifying,” the congressman said.
It’s unclear whether the House will take up Mr. Farenthold’s new bill, and even less likely that the Senate, controlled by Democrats, would accept it.
But Mr. Farenthold hinted that Republicans could attach the paycheck denial to some of the annual spending bills.
His legislation would not apply to Lois G. Lerner, a former IRS official at the center of the agency’s tea party targeting scandal, who retired from government service in September.
Denying salaries for executive branch officials deemed in violation of congressional wishes is not new. For decades, Congress refused to pay salaries to officials who had been installed by recess appointments — a tool the president can use as an end-run around the Senate’s constitutional powers to confirm or reject nominees the White House sends over
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Sometimes a choice of words can be extremely revealing. That was the case with Kerry’s contentious testimony in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Under pressure, Kerry tends to slip and say revealing things. That was how the infamous, “for it and against it” clip was born.
Kerry dismissed breakout as “just having one bomb’s worth, conceivably, of material, but without any necessary capacity to put it in anything, to deliver it, to have any mechanism to do so, and otherwise.”
He then admitted that “our goal” is not eliminating nuclear capability as much as “proving that this is a peaceful program.”
The first part of that is a preview of the next stage of Obama Inc’s Iran argument. One bomb doesn’t matter. Wait until they have thirty.
The second part however is even more revealing.
“I talked with our team on the ground in Vienna yesterday,” Kerry said. “They are having serious, expert, in-depth, detailed conversations about what it takes to achieve our goal. I mean, of proving that this is a peaceful program.”
Proving the peacefulness of Iran’s program should be its responsibility. It’s not supposed to be our goal to prove that, but to find ways of confirming it.
But Kerry spoke truly. He is out to prove that it’s peaceful. Whom is he out to prove it to? To Americans.
Just as in Vietnam and Nicaragua, Kerry has once again adopted the viewpoint of the enemy and is using it to make the enemy’s argument to Americans.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
A Denver woman was allegedly shot to death by her own husband while on the phone with police after she said he consumed marijuana edibles and began hallucinating.
Kristine A. Kirk clung to her phone with a 911 dispatcher for nearly 15 minutes before her final scream was accompanied by a piercing gunshot late Monday night, NBC reported.
When officers arrived at the 44-year-old's home they reported finding the mother of three dead at the scene after suffering a gunshot wound to the head.
Her husband, Richard Kirk, 47, was taken into custody on suspicion of first-degree murder.
Richard Kirk had allegedly been "talking about the end of the world and [saying] he wanted her to shoot him," moments before she was killed, 9News reported.
Kristine Kirk allegedly told dispatch that her husband had consumed marijuana and was hallucinating while scaring their young children whom police confirmed to the Daily News were at the scene.
As she remained on the line with police her husband reportedly fetched a gun from a gun safe.
Authorities are now investigating whether Richard Kirk had indeed consumed some kind of drug, such as marijuana, prior to Monday night's shooting. They are also reportedly reviewing the length of time it took to respond to her 911 call.
9News reported that Richard Kirk has one prior arrest in Douglas County for driving under the influence and careless driving.
While in the backseat of a patrol car he allegedly confessed to shooting his wife.
He made his first court appearance Wednesday and is being held without bond
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Federal Land Retention and the Constitution’s Property Clause: The Original Understanding (Conclusion)
Robert G. Natelson*
Conclusion
Considered from the vantage point of original meaning, both the conservative and liberal interpretations of the “other Property” portion of the Property Clause are partly correct. The liberals are correct in that the Constitution – not just arguably, but clearly – authorizes permanent property ownership outside the Enclave Clause. The clarity of this result flows both from the text of the document and from comments made during ratification. Moreover, the liberals are correct in suggesting that those lands are subject to a public trust and cannot be ceded to the respective states without compensation. Federal land disposal, like federal land management, must serve the interest of the entire country.
On the other hand, the conservatives are correct about another aspect of original meaning. As understood at the time of ratification, the Constitution did not permit the federal government to retain and manage land indefinitely for unenumerated purposes. Massive, permanent federal land ownership would have been seen as subversive of the constitutional scheme. The federal government’s authority to dispose was unlimited (except for trust standards), but its authority to acquire, retain, and manage was not: all the latter functions could be exercised only to serve enumerated powers. To be sure, Congress would have considerable discretion as to how to effectuate enumerated powers, and reasonable exercises of discretion were not to be questioned. At the end of the day, however, all federal land not “necessary and proper” to execute an enumerated power was to be disposed of impartially and for the public good.
I should not be understood as saying that the framers and ratifiers meant to require sale on the open market or to the highest bidder as the only way of disposing land for the public good. That was the method appropriate in 1788, perhaps; but they would have understood that in later times the “proper” methods of disposition would vary according to the needs of the country and the nature of the land.223 In future years, the public interest might justify disposing of (on suitable terms) agricultural lands to homesteaders, mining lands to miners, and environmentally sensitive lands to other public entities or to nonprofit environmental trusts. Generally, though, the Constitution’s original meaning was that lands not dedicated to enumerated functions were to be privatized or otherwise devolved on terns that best served the general interest.
For the entire study go to link and then go to full screen.
*Professor of Law, University of Montana; Senior Fellow, the Goldwater Institute; Senior Fellow in Constitutional Jurisprudence, the Independence Institute; President, Montana Citizens for the Rule of Law. I am grateful the assistance of the following individuals: for review of the manuscript and helpful suggestions, Professor Jonathan H. Adler, Case Western Reserve University School of Law and Elizabeth J. Natelson; for secretarial assistance, Charlotte Wilmerton, University of Montana School of Law.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
An unsigned Wednesday article in the Military Times spotlighted how veteran groups have rebuked the New York Times for an opinion piece that played up the recent shootings at two Jewish community centers as apparent proof that white veterans are susceptible to joining hate groups. Paul Rieckhoff of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America hammered the liberal newspaper for its "sensational, slanderous and incredibly offensive" attack on his peers.
In the Wednesday op-ed, author Kathleen Belew cited a controversial 2009 Department of Homeland Security report that hyped the potential for "right-wing extremists…to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities," and targeted conservatives for their criticism of its findings. Belew even threw the race card into the mix:
…This short document outlined no specific threats, but rather a set of historical factors that had predicted white-supremacist activity in the past — like economic pressure, opposition to immigration and gun-control legislation — and a new factor, the election of a black president….The agency was "concerned that right-wing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities."
The report raised intense blowback from the American Legion, Fox News and conservative members of Congress. They demanded an apology and denounced the idea that any veteran could commit an act of domestic terrorism. The department shelved the report, removing it from its website. The threat, however, proved real….That Mr. Miller was able to carry out an act of domestic terror at two locations despite his history of violent behavior should alarm anyone concerned about public safety. Would he have received greater scrutiny had he been a Muslim, a foreigner, not white, not a veteran? The answer is clear, and alarming.
After summarizing the New York Times op-ed, the unnamed Military Times correspondent extensively quoted from Rieckhoff, who slammed the Times for including a editorial cartoon-style graphic with Belew's piece that shows a silhouette of a man in uniform raising his arm in a Nazi salute:
"Both the title — 'Veterans and White Supremacy' — and an accompanying graphic joining service members with KKK members are shameful," Rieckhoff said in a statement to Military Times on Wednesday. "And the piece relies on weak research and sweeping generalizations about veterans. Especially coming right after so much irresponsible journalism that surrounded the [April 2] Fort Hood shooting, this is stunning and sad to see."
"How could the New York Times publish such a hurtful piece?" Rieckhoff said. "Veterans deserve answers from the Times — and an apology. After more than a decade of sacrifice, no veteran should have to open the newspaper and read an op-ed linking them to hate groups. In contrast to this op-ed, we should focus on telling the story of veterans doing amazing, inspiring work across the country and addressing the real challenges veterans face, including high rates of suicide and unemployment."
The anonymous writer later cited several other veterans' critiques of the New York Times piece specifically, and the media's coverage of the military in general, and noted how left-of-center website The Huffington Post had to apologize after playing up acts of violence by veterans:
Kerry Patton, a former Air Force staff sergeant who writes for Ranger Up's blog "The Rhino Den," said stories like Belew's opinion piece are typical of how the media and academia view veterans.
"As veterans, we need to be concerned that this is unfolding, that people are talking like this, in this nature, about us when the great majority of us are the epitome of upstanding citizens," he said on Wednesday.
After the most recent shooting at Fort Hood, the Huffington Post ran a map showing where veterans had committed violent crimes in the U.S., but it took the graphic down and issued an apology after being lambasted by critics who argued the data was out of context….
Marine veteran Paul Szoldra, who writes for Business Insider, said he feels veterans are the last group in the U.S. that can be stereotyped.
"I think a lot of it has to do with misunderstanding," said Szoldra, who left the Marine Corps as a sergeant. "What's happening in these recent pieces is basically you have some journalists who aren't covering the beat; they don't really know what’s going on in the military; they just see a statistic and they are kind of like, 'Oh, there's something here; here's a story; it's a really interesting story.' They don't even realize just how terrible a story like that Huffington Post [story] looks."
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
About six in ten American voters think Barack Obama lies to the country on important matters some or most of the time, according to a Fox News poll released Wednesday.
Thirty-seven percent think Obama lies “most of the time,” while another 24 percent say he lies “some of the time.” Twenty percent of voters say “only now and then” and 15 percent “never.”
President Obama has been accused by political opponents and media fact-checkers alike of telling falsehoods. Frequently cited: His repeated claim that under Obamacare “If you like your plan, you can keep it” and his insistence that “the day after Benghazi happened, I acknowledged that this was an act of terrorism.”
The number of voters saying Obama lies “most of the time” includes 13 percent of Democrats. It also includes 12 percent of blacks, 16 percent of liberals, 31 percent of unmarried women and 34 percent of those under age 30 — all key Obama constituencies.
Yet some of those groups are also among those most likely to say Obama “never” lies to the country on important matters: blacks (37 percent), Democrats (31 percent), liberals (28 percent) and women (19 percent).
The poll also asks about the trustworthiness of a few possible 2016 presidential candidates. For comparison, about half of voters think former Sec. of State Hillary Clinton (54 percent) and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (49 percent) are honest and trustworthy, while fewer think the same of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (41 percent).
On a more positive note for the White House, Obama’s overall job performance rating has improved. The new poll finds that 42 percent of voters approve of the job he’s doing, while 51 percent disapprove. That means he’s underwater by nine percentage points.
Last month the president was in negative territory by 13 points with a 40-53 percent rating (March 23-25).
Approval of the president is up six points among independents and now stands at 32 percent. Obama was near record-low approval among independents last month (26 percent). He also improved four points among Democrats and now stands at 80 percent among his party faithful.
How voters feel about Obama as a person closely matches his job ratings: 45 percent have a favorable opinion of him, while 51 percent have an unfavorable view. A year ago those numbers were reversed: 52 percent favorable, 46 percent unfavorable (April 2013).
The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,012 randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R) from April 13-15, 2014. The full poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Elizabeth Warren: ‘I was hurt, and I was angry’ By: MJ Lee April 16, 2014 05:44 PM EDT
Elizabeth Warren “was hurt” and “angry” about attacks on her family and ancestry in the 2012 Senate race, she writes in a new book, defending at length her characterization of her background as rooted in Native American ancestry.
Warren, the first-term Massachusetts Democratic senator, details her campaign to unseat former GOP Sen. Scott Brown in a new book: “A Fighting Chance.” POLITICO obtained an early copy of the book, which is set to be released on April 22.
The book begins with some of her earliest childhood memories of growing up poor in Oklahoma, and reveals personal details about the senator’s life, including her first, failed marriage. It also dives into her views on the 2008 financial crisis and her role in building the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The book’s upcoming release has already created plenty of speculation about Warren’s potential 2016 aspirations — whether she may run or at least seek to shape the political debate surrounding the presidential race.
If there was one takeaway from her 2012 Senate race for Warren, it was that the campaign trail turned out to be more brutal than she could ever have expected. Republicans questioned her integrity, her family members were dragged through the mud and her opponent mocked her appearance in a radio interview.
“What really threw me, though, were the constant attacks from the other side,” she writes about the 2012 Senate campaign. “I would almost persuade myself that I was starting to get the hang of full-throttle campaigning and then — bam! Out of left field, the state Republican Party, or the Brown campaign, or some blogger, would launch a rocket at me.”
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Celebrity power couple Gwyenth Paltrow and Chris Martin are not merely divorcing; they are consciously uncoupling.
In a Tuesday night post announcing the end of their ten-year marriage, under the headline “Conscious Uncoupling” on Paltrow’s lifestyle blog Goop, the couple wrote that “it is with hearts full of sadness that we have decided to separate.” After “working hard for well over a year, some of it together, some of it separated, to see what might have been possible between us,” they “have come to the conclusion that while we love each other very much we will remain separate.” They will always be a family, though, and in some ways are “closer than we have ever been.” They conclude with a request for privacy as they “consciously uncouple and coparent.”
Consciously uncoupling certainly sounds much more amicable and orderly than breaking up or even unconsciously uncoupling. But what exactly does it mean?
Paltrow helpfully followed up her initial announcement by posting a 2,000-word treatise on conscious uncoupling from Habib Sadeghi and Sherry Sami, a married couple living in Los Angeles. (Dr. Sadeghi is an osteopathic doctor who runs an “integrative health center” called “Be Hive of Healing,” pun presumably intended, and whose book Within: A Spiritual Awakening to Love and Weight Loss contains a forward written by Paltrow. His wife is a dentist.)
Sadeghi and Sami begin by explaining that given rapidly accelerating life expectancy, these days it’s unrealistic to expect that we’ll be able to stick it out until death do us part, which suggests we “ought to redefine the construct” of marriage.
“Our biology and psychology aren’t set up to be with one person for four, five, or six decades,” they write. So there’s the science. Now for some New Agey jargon: “Life is a spiritual exercise in evolving from an exoskeleton for support and survival to an endoskeleton,” they write in a section entitled, “Intimacy & Insects.” They mean by this, basically, that you have to look within yourself for support and strength and healing, not to others, or, one can infer, to any kind of external deity.
Finally, they get to the part about how to uncouple consciously and “avoid the drama of divorce.” You shouldn’t think about it in terms of your marriage having failed, because (a) as we learned, the expectation that it would last was based on an outdated construct, and (b) this is actually going to be a positive experience if you just let go of old notions and approach it in terms of building up your partner’s spiritual endoskeleton. “To change the concept of divorce, we need to release the belief structures we have around marriage that create rigidity in our thought process,” they write. The “belief structure” that marriage should be for life “is too much pressure for anyone.”
Conscious uncoupling will bring “wholeness to the spirits of both people who choose to recognize each other as their teachers.” What’s more, conscious uncoupling “prevents families from being broken by divorce and creates expanded families that continue to function in a healthy way outside of traditional marriage.”
They conclude that by “choosing to handle your uncoupling in a conscious way . . . you’ll see that although it looks like everything is coming apart; it’s actually all coming back together.”
One anonymous source offered E! a more prosaic take on the end of the relationship. “They both really believed in the sanctity of marriage and the role model it provided for their kids,” the source said. “Both of their parents were married their entire lives, and they really wanted the same for their kids. They stuck it out for a long time.”
If that’s an accurate description, it sounds like Dr. Sadeghi has some work to do in helping the uncoupling couple to adjust their rigid belief structures.
— Katherine Connell is an associate editor atNational Review.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
It was the world acknowledged military strategist and former Prime Minsiter of Great Britain Winston Churchill, who stated that, ‘All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope’ while to Martin Luther King Jnr. ‘Law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress’. To the famous Malcolm X, ‘Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it’.
After critically examining the opinions of these great minds, it behoves on me to examine the political and legal struggles and the impact of the Judiciary as it relates to Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, who aptly fits into all the opinions of the above-quoted great minds.
For the avoidance of doubt, particularly in the case of non-Nigerians who may be reading this, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi is a Nigerian politician from Rivers State, a South-South State in Nigeria; a recipient of the national award of Commander of the Order of the Niger (CON). He was the first Nigerian to be the Speaker of a State House of Assembly for a whopping eight years and later became Chairman of the Conference of Speakers Forum, an umbrella body of all Speakers of State Houses of Assembly in Nigeria. He has been the Governor of Rivers State these past six years plus and currently the Chairman of the Nigeria Governors Forum. His unprecedented feats in the transformation of Rivers State have won him many international and local awards, as well as the respect of great leaders both locally and internationally.
THE MAIN THRUST OF THIS TREATISE
In the politics of Nigeria, apart from Alh. Atiku Abubakar (GCON), former Vice President, who utilised his knowledge of the power and impact of the Judiciary to exert his office in the hands of the very powerful President, General Olusegun Obasanjo who had wanted to remove him from office by any means as the then Vice-president of Nigeria, no other Nigerian politician can boast of using the Judiciary to the fullest to achieve his political mission like Rt. Hon. Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers State. To some schools of thought, Governor Amaechi is the creation of the judiciary and that is the main thrust of this attempt to unravel what role the judiciary may have played in the political struggles of this enigma of Nigerian politics.
In one of his public outings, Governor Amaechi stated that his politics is that of struggle and not an easy path. This is not only a truism but a statement of fact as his politics is riddled with struggles since he started real politicking from 1999.
EARLY POLITICAL CAREER
University of Port Harcourt in Rivers State was where Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi laid the foundation of his political life, participating actively in student union politics, especially in the National Union of Rivers State Students (NURSS) of which he was President, and the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS). He cut his teeth in politics as Secretary of the now defunct National Republican Convention (NRC) in Ikwerre Local Government Area of Rivers State between 1992-1994. He was Special Assistant to Dr. Peter Odili, the then Deputy Governor of Rivers State, and also a member of the Board of West Africa Glass Industry as well as Risonpalm Nigeria Limited. He was the Rivers State’s Secretary of the Democratic Party of Nigeria (DPN) caretaker committee after in 1996 during the transition programme of the General Sani Abacha junta.
SPEAKER (RIVERS STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY) 1999-2007
In 1999, he contested and won a seat to become a member of the Rivers State House of Assembly to represent his constituency. He was subsequently elected as the Speaker of the House of Assembly. Amaechi was elected the Chairman of Nigeria’s Conference of Speakers of State Assemblies. He was re-elected back into the State House of Assembly in May 2003 and was also re-elected as the Speaker.
AMAECHI’S POLITICAL STRUGGLES THROUGH THE COURTS
1. 1999 State House of Assembly Election
Signs of the mission of Governor Amaechi in the politics of Nigeria started when INEC announced Barr. Uche Okwukwu, then of the defunct APP, winner of the State House of Assembly election of the Ikwerre Constituency in place of Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi of PDP. He contested this at the then Election Tribunal and the Court of Appeal and won and was subsequently sworn-in as the member of State House of Assembly representing Ikwerre Constituency. This began his political struggles through the courts. Reacting to this, Barr. Uche Okwukwu stated: “Yes, I contested against the present Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi. Like I said, the Court of Appeal said I didn’t win and I should not be in the Rivers State House of Assembly. So, as a lawyer, by my training, I have since accepted the verdict of the court, particularly, when you do not have the right to appeal beyond that point.”
2. Fight over the control of the Local Government Affairs between the National Assembly and State House of Assembly
In 2003, Governor Amaechi came up with another feat through the courts. When the National Assembly moved to hijack the legislative functions of the State House of Assembly as enshrined in the constitution, he led his colleagues to take the matter to Nigeria’s Supreme Court and the court gave a judgment that the control and supervision of local government is the prerogative of the State House of Assembly.
3. PDP Leadership and its Undemocratic Suspension of Gov. Amaechi from the Party
When PDP National Leadership in its undemocratic exhibition decided to suspend Governor Amaechi from the party without any sound reason on 27th May, 2013 and was to follow it up with expulsion, he resorted to the courts once again to stop them from taking any further step on his case until he decided to join APC. The suspension of Amaechi from the party was agreed during an unscheduled and unusually early morning meeting of the National Working Committee, NWC, of the party at the residence of the then National Chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur. The meeting commenced at 8.00 a.m. and came two days ahead of the regular meeting of the NWC which normally holds on Wednesdays. It was also three days after Amaechi beat the odds with his re-election as chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, NGF. He had been allegedly opposed by the PDP Governors’ Forum, PDP-GF, ahead of the election.
The governor’s suspension was hinged on what the party described as his refusal to order the reinstatement of members of the Obio Akpor Local Government executive who were suspended from office on the orders of the Rivers State House of Assembly upon allegations of corruption raised against the LG executive.
Hours after the suspension was announced, the party at a press conference said that it had constituted a committee headed by Mr. Joe Gadzama, SAN, to probe allegations raised against Amaechi. Other members of the committee were PDP National Legal Adviser, Victor Kwon; Inalegwu Onche, Friday Nwosu, Udorji Amedu, Ola Kukuyi, Wakil Mohammed, Yusuf Jangwe, Mrs. Bola Doherty, Mr. Tanimu Adamson and Anicho Okoro as Secretary.
Reacting to his suspension during an interactive session with youths of the state, Amaechi asked: “Who has power to suspend Obio/Akpor council? Now you see political witch-hunting; it is so ridiculous, my party must rise above political witch-hunting. The Governor did not suspend Obio/Akpor council, I hope you know. My power is to dissolve and remit it to the House of Assembly, but I have not done that yet, what the Assembly has said is ‘we are investigating corruption’ then the party says we should not investigate corruption, is that fair?” He went further to state that the NWC issued a press statement to suspend me without any invitation and fair hearing. His words: “I was not invited by the National Working Committee of PDP, I was not given fair hearing. What I heard was ‘why did I refuse to reinstate the suspended Obio/Akpor Council executive? Who suspended them?’ His questions received the enthusiastic response of the youths who chorused: “The Rivers State House of Assembly.” Again the governor asked, ‘who has the power to investigate Obio/Akpor council executive?” The youths again replied: “The State Assembly.”
Why and How Amaechi joined APC
This unfortunate and wicked step by the PDP Leadership led to the departure of Governor Amaechi and six other PDP Governors to form the New PDP, with five of them later joining the mega opposition political party, APC.
Explaining why he joined APC, Governor Amaechi said: “Unfortunately, recent events within the PDP have given me reason to reconsider our collective interest as people of the South South and indeed as Rivers people. At various times, as the one whom you had gave your mandate, I had cause to complain about the marginalisation of our state and our people despite our huge contribution to the national coffers and our unflinching commitment and support for the ruling PDP. While the political and economic importance of Rivers State cannot be contested, we continue to hold the shorter end of the stick.
“A few instances may suffice: •Our demand that the Federal Government return oil wells belonging to Rivers State to us has gone unheeded and been treated with levity under this administration. Rather, our oil wells have been ceded to Bayelsa, Abia and Akwa Ibom states. Even after we got a judgment that the oil wells were wrongly ceded to Akwa Ibom State and should be returned to us, only dry wells that were no longer producing oil were returned.
“In the specific case of the Soku oil wells, despite a decision reached that the monies should remain in an escrow account till all matters concerning it are resolved, the Federal government continues to pay neighbouring Bayelsa State the revenues meant for Rivers State in a classic case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. It is indeed noteworthy that we have made several representations formally and informally on this matter.
“A second instance is the total absence of federal presence in Rivers State. The ‘National Good Governance Tour’ provided a good opportunity for the Federal Government to showcase its presence in Rivers State. The tour, if nothing else, was evident that there was not much to show for in a state that is the cash cow of the federation. The East-West road remains abandoned, work has been deliberately slow on the Port Harcourt International Airport, the third busiest airport in the country, while all airports started along with it have long been completed and commissioned. The Bonny-Bomu road that leads to the only functional liquefied natural gas project remains uncompleted. In the midst of all these, our administration went ahead to fix federal roads to the tune of N103 billion. Several representations and letters after, not one kobo has been repaid. The Federal Government is actively discouraging investments in Rivers State.
4. Amaechi Heads for the Supreme Court over Governorship Tenure
At a point it was becoming very obvious that PDP under the watch of President Jonathan intended to accord Governor Amaechi the type of treatment they accorded Governor Timpire Sylva of Bayelsa when they refused him the ticket of the party at the eleventh hour in his quest for a second tenure. Governor Amaechi in order to beat them at their own game decided to go to court to ask for the interpretation of when his tenure should end – whether on the 29th May, 2011 or 25th October, 2011 – four years after the Supreme Court declared him the Governor of Rivers State, instead of his cousin, Sir Celestine Omehia, who was mistakenly sworn-in as the Governor of Rivers State in his stead on 29th May, 2007.
The PDP Leadership had thought that the Court would rule that his tenure ended on 25th, October 2011 to enable them to ensure that the gubernatorial election in Rivers State is repeated so that he will be denied the ticket of the party to fly her flag in the illusory repeated gubernatorial election if it was to hold. All these were one of the ploys and plots to oust him from office before the expiration of his tenure. Again, Governor Amaechi floored these undemocratic minded false democrats in PDP when a Federal High Court Judge in Abuja through Justice Ibrahim Auta, ruled that Amaechi must leave the position of governor on May 29, 2011 and not 25th October, 2011 as envisaged by the PDP bigwigs. This judgement is another feat by Governor Amaechi to shame his detractors and political opponents who will prefer him out of the Government House before the end of his tenure
Reacting to this epochal judgement, the New Peoples Democratic Party (nPDP) said it received with joy the news of the Supreme Court’s dismissal of the suit instituted by Sir Celestine Omehia, seeking the ouster of Rivers State Governor Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi. According to the faction, “Omehia has been in court since the Supreme Court removed him shortly after he erroneously assumed office as Rivers State Governor in 2007, declaring Amaechi to be the rightful occupant of the Brick House Government House. Strangely, Omehia has refused to end the litigation process despite Amaechi having finished that tenure and winning a re-election thereafter.” Continuing, the splinter PDP in a release said: “We are, however, not surprised by his attitude, for apart from being desperate for power, Omehia has allowed himself to become a tool in the hands of the acting Minister of Education, Chief Nyesom Wike, who has devoted enormous resources towards the destabilization of the Amaechi administration just to please his paymasters in Abuja.”
5. THE INTRIGUES IN THE APPOINTMENT OF JUSTICE AGUMAGU AS THE CHIEF JUDGE OF RIVERS STATE
The indefatigable and indomitable Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi recently started another legal battle but this time with the National Judicial Council (NJC). Like other cases involving Governor Amaechi, this case is unprecedented in the annals of judicial adjudication and Nigerians are watching with keen interest on how he survives this.
Based on the Federal High Court ruling approving Justice Peter Nwoke Chukwuma Agumagu as the Chief Judge of Rivers State, Amaechi supervised his formal swearing-in ceremony. However, after few days, the NJC came up with a verdict suspending the newly appointed Chief Judge, this again is unprecedented in the history of appointment of Chief Judges in any other State in Nigeria.
Before his appointment as the State’s new Chief Judge, Justice P. N. C. Agumagu was the first ever President of the Rivers State Customary Court of Appeal. He is an administrator, a former state High Court Judge and the seventh the new Chief Judge of Rivers State.
On 27th March, 2014 to the shock of both the Governor and close watchers of events in Rivers State, the NJC suspended Justice P. N. C. Agumagu, from office, and directed that he should, within four days, explain in writing why he should not be sacked as a judicial officer. The Council, which took the decision at the end of an emergency meeting in Abuja, said it suspended the Rivers CJ over his failure to abide by the Oath of Office he took to uphold the Constitution and Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
According to Acting Director of Information at the NJC, Mr. Soji Oye, in a press statement: “At its 10th Emergency Meeting, which was held on March 26, 2014, the National Judicial Council under the Chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon. Justice Aloma Mariam Muktar (GCON), considered the purported appointment, confirmation and swearing-in of Hon. Justice P. N. C. Agumagu as the substantive Chief Judge of Rivers State on March 18, 2014.
“In the meantime, Council in exercise of its powers under Paragraph 21 (d) of Part 1 of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution has suspended Justice Agumagu from office as a judicial officer with immediate effect.”
Reacting to all the brouhaha, a UK-based Social Commentator, Emeka Reuben Okala, stated, and I quote: “I join other Nigerians to congratulate the articulate Governor of Rivers State, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, on the battle well fought and job well done on this issue. In all of these, Amaechi clearly stands on the pedestal of truth and that's the magic behind his countless victories. Keep the flag flying, Mr. Governor, you are clearly on the right side of history. Kudos! To Justice PNC Agumagu, I say congratulations! Your appointment as the Chief Judge of Rivers State is richly deserved. Knowing you as I do, the Judiciary under your leadership will have a lot to benefit. We look forward to your good services.”
On his part, Nebukadineze Adiele, a well respected online Social Commentator, stated as follows: “The idea that a customary court judge could not be appointed a Chief Judge of a state was thoughtlessness taken too far. The NJC shamed itself by practically dictating to the governor as to who to appoint CJ. Kudos to Amaechi for standing firm on his belief and for trusting the judiciary into resolving this matter. His tenacity over this matter is a public service to other governors and future governors. A timid governor would have buckled when pressured from all angles to not appoint Justice Agumagu as Chief Judge of Rivers state. I am both a fan and a critic of Chibuike Amaechi – I support him when he gets things right and I get on his case when he goofs. On the appointment of Justice Agumagu as Rivers state Chief Judge, Governor Chibuike Amaechi showed tremendous courage under fire and his action will remain as revolutionary (over judicial appointments in Nigeria) as the circumstances he overcame in becoming governor. That the most senior judge in the state should have been denied appointment into the Chief Judgeship, simply because he was a customary court judge, would have been blatantly discriminatory, stupid, and legally not justifiable. There are instances when one cannot help but admire Chibuike Amaechi’s confidence and convictions. This is one such instance.”
6. Challenge on the Transfer of Rivers State Oil Wells to Akwa Ibom State
As the serving Governor of Rivers State, Amaechi caused his Attorney-General to challenge the transfer of some oil wells from Rivers State to Akwa Ibom State. The Supreme Court eventually ruled in favour of Rivers State in that case.
7. The most celebrated Supreme Court ruling on Governor Amaechi
A lot of articles and statements were written following the K-legged episode that was the outright hijack of the 2007 PDP gubernatorial ticket from Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi ahead of the 14th April, 2007 election in Rivers State. This occurred despite his landslide victory at the primaries where he clinched 6,527 of the 6,575 possible votes while seven other aspirants that included political heavyweights like Hon. Chief Austin Okpara, a former Deputy Speaker of the Federal House of Representatives; late Senator Martin Yellowe; Pawariso Horsfall; and Mr. Chris Orji shared the remaining 48 votes amongst themselves. Amaechi’s name was subsequently forwarded to the Independent National Electoral Commission on December 14, 2006 in compliance with Section 32(1) & (2) of the Electoral Act 2006. INEC then duly published Amaechi’s name as the gubernatorial candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in Rivers State.
The story however took a different turn when, speaking at the presentation of the party flag to its gubernatorial candidate at the Liberation Stadium, Port Harcourt, former President and then “Emperor” of PDP, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, declared that Amaechi’s candidacy had “k-leg”. Following this outright abuse of office, the dreaded bulldog that was the Nuhu Ribadu-led Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was let loose on Rt. Hon. Chibuike Amaechi, resulting in his decision to seek legal redress for his travails. Suffice it to say, Amaechi went on self exile to Ghana and the powers that be further showed their contempt for him by selecting his cousin, Sir Celestine Omehia, who neither purchased nor filled a form, as PDP flagbearer in his stead.
Amaechi’s vindication came with the 25th October, 2007 landmark ruling by the Nigerian Supreme Court declaring him as not only the authentic flag-bearer of PDP but also ording that he be sworn-in immediately to replace Omehia, who had previously been sworn-in on May 29, 2007 as the Governor of Rivers State. Thus, Amaechi became the first person to occupy the office of governor in the country without standing for election. In explaining the ruling, the Supreme Court has since stated that it is the party that contests elections and that the PDP won the gubernatorial elections, and that, consequently, Amaechi, being the rightful candidate, should assume power as governor.
This epochal feat stands as Amaechi’s greatest input towards the growth of judiciary in the political life of Nigeria as it has become a reference case in determining similar cases in Nigeria today.
Conclusion
Governor Amaechi is, undoubtedly, one of the most visible governors in Nigeria today. His long-running feud with President Jonathan and his wife, Dame Patience, has earned him national and international media visibility. However, it is not just the poignant quarrel and concentrated animosity that exist between him and the First Family that have made him such a popular governor.
Governor Amaechi’s media visibility is essentially because of his statements and actions. In his own words: “If you know Baba very well, you will know that I am a smaller version of Baba”, situating himself and former President Olusegun Obasanjo who is also acclaimed for his no-holds-barred statements as well as the natural instincts that drive Obasanjo’s physical reactions which are most times suffused with comical dimensions.
To conclude this thesis, let me title the conclusion, “THE JUDICIARY AND INPUTS OF GOVERNOR AMAECHI”. My good friend, Ken O. Olumati, a legal counsel based in Port Harcourt, in an article he titled ‘Ameachi’s Debt to the Law’ captured what Amaechi has done to improve the judiciary. He stated that, “It is also noteworthy that the various decisions of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal in Governor Amaechi’s case were reported in Parts 1040 and 1065 of the Nigeria Weekly Law Reports. In Part 1065 alone contains six decisions on Amaechi’s case; three by the Supreme Court and three by the Court of Appeal. This in itself underscores the significance of Amaechi’s battles through the courts. Few cases have enjoyed similar attention in the annals of Nigeria’s legal history. Some of them include the case between Amodu Tijani V Secretary, Southern Nigeria, the late Oba Oyekan’s legal battle for the Obaship of Lagos in the 1950’s, which went as far as Her Majesty’s Privy Council before a clear winner was installed. In recent memory, the case of the late Chief Gani Fawehinmi against the Nigeria Bar Association as well as his numerous court battles against the Military Government of former President Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida.
Eze Chukwuemeka Eze is a Media Consultant based in Port Harcourt in Rivers State.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
Chinese President Xi Jinping on Monday said modernization and regularization in the air force should be accelerated to build a stronger military.
Xi, who is also chairman of the Central Military Commission, told troops to speed up airspace integration and sharpen their offensive and defensive capabilities while inspecting the air force's command headquarters.
During the visit, the president said efforts should not slacken in the search for the missing Malaysian plane MH370 while debriefing airmen in the mission via video link.
As a strategic military service, the air force plays a vital role in safeguarding national security, Xi said, urging the army to strengthen exercises and be prepared for combat, so as to quickly respond to emergencies.
He called on military leaders to run the military in accordance with the law and enforce strict discipline to improve scientific management of troops.
The Party's absolute leadership over troops should be unswervingly stuck to, Xi said.
He also urged further implementation of the "mass line" campaign in the army, which is targeted at cleaning up undesirable work styles — formalism, bureaucracy, hedonism and extravagance.
Anthony-Claret is a software Engineer, entrepreneur and the founder of Codewit INC. Mr. Claret publishes and manages the content on Codewit Word News website and associated websites. He's a writer, IT Expert, great administrator, technology enthusiast, social media lover and all around digital guy.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
