Troops under the Operation Whirl Punch have neutralised 14 bandits and recovered 422 cows and sheep between October and November, the acting Director of Defence Information (DDI), John Agim, said on Monday in Kaduna.

Mr Agim told a news conference on Operation 777 update, launched by the Defence Headquarters on October 8 to restructure and strengthen ongoing military operations nationwide.

According to him, operation Whirl Punch being conducted by troops of 1 Division of the Nigerian Army is part of Operation 777.

He said that “prior to the launch of Operation 777, terrorists and criminals devised different means of evading ongoing operations in different theatres.

“So far, however, troops have neutralised 14 notorious bandits, cattle rustlers and kidnappers.

“Likewise, several sophisticated arms, ammunition and large herds of cattle have been recovered from the bandits, kidnappers and cattle rustlers.

“The troops also recovered over 331 cows from rustlers in Birnin Gwari area and 132 cows in Birnin Yero areas of Kaduna State.

“A total of 49 cows and 42 sheep were also recovered on the Kaduna-Abuja Expressway: all recovered animals were handed over to
their owners after screening.”

The spokesman further disclosed that 31 persons (18 children and 13 adults) were rescued from kidnappers within the area of operation.

He said “during the period, five bandits and two informants were also arrested and they were currently assisting security agencies in ongoing investigation.

“Unfortunately, two soldiers were wounded and currently receiving treatment at military hospital in Kaduna.”

Mr Agim added that two civilian vigilance group members assisting troops in the operation were killed in action by bandits’ fire.

He said 18 AK47 rifles, two pistols, three mobile phones, one motorola, large cache of ammunition and 32 motorcycles were recovered from suspects.

He added that Operation Whirl Punch being conducted by the 1 Division was to provide security and restore normalcy on Kaduna-Abuja expressway, Birnin Gwari and its environs, as well as Niger.

He explained that those areas were once devastated by bandits, kidnappers, armed robbers and cattle rustlers.

The DDI said in preparation for the conduct of the operation, additional platforms, establishment of new military/police formations/units and injection of more troops were carried out by the defence headquarters to ensure the success of the operation.

“There is Nigerian Army Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Birnin Gwari, which will soon metamorphose into 98 Battalion in line with 2016 Nigeria Army Order Of Battle.’’

According to Mr Agim, the general areas where our troops operate are characterised by thick forests such as the Kamuku, Kuduru, Birnin Gwari and Alawa forests.

The areas, he said also had several high grounds, which bandits and kidnappers use as staging areas and camps to perpetrate their heinous acts.

He, however, said that to surmount those terrain challenges, the defence headquarters had devised ingenious ways of deploying troops and conducting operations.

“Through these special operations, relative peace has been restored and hence, the troops dominate the operating environment, thereby creating safe and conducive atmosphere for socio-economic activities to thrive.

“It is evident that, now the local traders, motorists, residents of villages/settlements in these general areas are conducting their businesses mostly unmolested.

“The returned of relative peace and security was made possible through joint operations and synergy of efforts by the security agencies and cooperative posture of the locals and vigilante groups.

Agim also spoke on the recent allegation of killing 74 cows belonging to Fulanis at Riyawa in Sabon Birni area.

“The Riyawa general area has been notorious as a den of bandits, cattle rustlers and kidnappers. Severally, troops had encounters with the bandits who use the difficult terrain and knowledge of the ground to escape.’’

He explained that on Nov 17, based on intelligence, troops conducted a raid on bandits’ camps in the area.

“The observed current practice of the bandits is to use their cows as shield to escape while firing at troops.

“This was the case on 17 November which was not a deliberate act by the troops to kill the cows.

He assured the law abiding citizens that the armed force and other security agencies would continue to ensure the protection of lives
and properties of Nigerians. (NAN)

Despite refusing to argue its case and also refusing to call any witnesses, the Nigerian Army on Monday convinced the National Industrial Court to suspend judgement in an application by an officer challenging his dismissal in 2016 without fair hearing.

The court took the decision after Micheal Owolabi, the counsel for the Nigerian Army and Chief of Army Staff, Tukur Buratai, accused it of bias, just before judgement on the application by Ijeoma Nwokolo, one of many senior officers retired by the army without facing a disciplinary panel in 2016.

Story So Far

PREMIUM TIMES reported how many officers were unjustly dismissed without reasons and contrary to Nigerian army rules.

Due the retirement, Mr Nwokolo challenged the decision of the army, accusing it of violating his rights of employment and demanding reinstatement in line with an order of the National Industrial Court.

After the applicants closed their case in May, the defence team elected to rest its case on that of the applicants, refusing to open defence or call any witnesses.

Following that decision, the court adjourned till June to allow parties file their written addresses.

But while the applicant filed a final written address, the defence team, comprising the Nigerian Army, Minister of Defence, Chief of Defence Staff and the Chief of Army Staff refused to do same after three adjournments at their instance, said the applicant’s lawyer Godwin Iyinbor on Monday.

Following the failure of the defence to produce its written address after the stipulated time, the judge, Judith Agbakoba, foreclosed the defence team, meaning that the court would no longer allow it to further delay judgement, which was expected to follow the submission of written addresses by parties.

After that decision of the court in October, the judge adjourned till November for judgement.

Defence introduces application, petition against Judge

At the opening of session on Monday, however, the defence lawyer, Michael Owolabi, asked the judge to recuse herself, accusing Ms Agbakoba of bias over the decision of the court to foreclose the defence team in October.

Mr Owolabi drew the attention of the court to an application he said the defence had filed at the Appeal Court, which required that the matter before the industrial court be suspended.

He also said a petition had been written against the judge and sent to the President of the National Industrial Court.

“Justice is rooted in confidence, My Lord. One of the parties appearing before Your Lordship has lost confidence,” Mr Owolabi said.

The lawyer further argued it would be in the interest of justice and fair play for the judge to hand over the matter, until the Industrial Court President transfers the case to another judge.

Mr Owolabi also asked for time to attend to their application for stay, if the court refuses to recuse herself from the matter

Applicant vehemently opposes request for stay and resignation of judge

Responding, Mr Iyinbor objected strongly to both applications, describing them as frivolous, vexatious and only intended to delay the proceedings of the court.

Mr Iyinbor said the rules of the industrial court allows for penalties to be awarded against applicants approaching the court with frivolous requests.

“The instant application is one of those applications regulated by order 38, rule 2 of this court, My Lord. It is frivolous and aimed at setting back the hands of time,” the lawyer stated.

“Where a court finds that a counsel has made a request that is considered frivolous and vexatious, the court should consider the petition frivolous and in line with the rules of the court, strike out same with punitive cost on the applicants and the counsel.”

Mr Iyinbor argued that the current stage of the matter did not allow for any unwarranted application by parties.

“When a matter has been adjourned for judgement, that application cannot be brought.”

In reaction to Mr Iyinbor’s request, Mr Owolabi raised an objection, saying Mr Iyinbor was already arguing what was contained in his counter affidavit before the court.

“My Lord, he is already arguing what he has written in his counter affidavit, My Lord.”

After the objection, Mr Iyinbor changed his line of argument but continued with the objection.

“The first and fourth defendant, with all due respect , are in flagrant disobedience of the court, until they have complied they should not be heard.”

Mr Iyinbor argued that the applicant delayed to serve them with the petition, dated October 30, till Monday November 19, in a deliberate attempt to delay the trial.

“He kept it, so as to prevent us from responding to this petition.

“The petition is addressed to the president of the court. It is not a process before the court. If the president has not given an order since it was served for something to be done, the court should discountenance it and proceed with the business of the day,” Mr Iyinbor said.

The lawyer cited a Supreme Court judgement from 2018, to support his claim that Mr Owolabi’s application ought not to be entertained.

“It is very important to note that the jurisdiction of the court to hear and determine a matter is invoked by the proper filing of the matter before the court.

“When a process is not duly filed before the court, the process in the eyes of the law does not exist before the court. It is an administrative process filed by the first and fourth defendant and it should not stop the proceedings of the day.

” We do not see any basis for this petition after the first and fourth defendant have appealed. It is approbating and reprobating. We are concerned to know our fate. We see the instant petition as an arrest of judgement,” Mr Iyinbor argued.

Defence counsel responds to allegation of disobedience

In a final reply, usually allowed for only the instant applicant, Mr Owolabi responded to the arguments by Mr Iyinbor that the defence team was in flagrant disobedience of the court.

“When the order of court is appealed against, there is no such thing as disobedience when the order is not carried out. All we are saying is that whether an application is not proper or it is, we should be heard.”

Ruling

In a brief ruling, Ms Agbakoba said the issue of bias raised against her was fundamental. She therefore announced her decision to hand over the matter to the president of the court.

Speaking after, Mr Owolabi confirmed the decision of the defence team to rest its case on that of the applicant’s.

“The rules of this court allows us to rest our case on that of the defendant and that was what we did.

“If you are having a case in court and the opposing counsel feels that you have not said anything that will warrant him to present his witnesses, he can rest his case on yours,” Mr Owolabi said.