Gospel is too Precious to be meddled with the Secular World - Bayo Adegbite
NNI: What inspired Aninilematanile?
NNI: Wow! Interesting. When did you start music?
Karimu Sunday v. The state
Judgement delivered by the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 5th of May, 2017.
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on criminal law and procedure.
FACTS:
This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Ibadan Division wherein the Court dismissed the appeal of the accused/appellant after his conviction and sentence by the High Court of Ogun State.
At the High Court of Ogun State, it was alleged that the appellant who was wearing a black cap, black goggles and a black handkerchief which covered his mouth, on 09/03/04, at about 5pm, went to a cement shop in Ijebu-Igbo, owned by one Ramotalai Alege (PW1), on a motorcycle. Upon arriving at the shop, the appellant alighted from the motorcycle and asked the rider, one Alaba Adesina, to wait for him. The appellant was alleged to have entered the shop on the pretext of purchasing 70 bags of cement from PW1. The appellant requested the cost of the bags of cement and as PW1 was about to take out a calculator from her bag, the appellant was alleged to have snatched her bag containing N3,600 and bolted out of the shop. The appellant then jumped onto a waiting motor cycle in a bid to escape with PW1 in pursuit. The appellant then threatened PW1 with a dagger which he pulled from his back pocket, but PW1 then began to shout for help, which attracted people to the scene. According to PW1, when people started coming to the scene, the person who was waiting with the motor cycle tried to move away with the appellant, but PW2 pulled down the motor cycle and the appellant jumped down and started running away. However, the appellant and the rider were eventually apprehended by concerned bystanders, including an off-duty policeman, who had been alerted by the alarm raised by PW1 and PW2. The rider was apprehended at the scene of the crime, while the appellant was arrested a short distance from the scene of the crime. Upon his arrest, the appellant was taken to the police station along with PW1 and PW2, and the rider of the motor cycle. At the station, the appellant made an extra judicial confessional statement.
At the trial, the appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. The appellant testified in his own defence but called no other witnesses in support of his case. The appellant however made a bare denial of the charge and sought to retract his extra-judicial confessional statements on the ground that he did not write it. The appellant however, admitted to appending his signature to the confessional statements after they had been read to him by the Police.
The learned trial judge held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and convicted the appellant and sentence him to death by handing. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, the appellant filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal seeking orders quashing his conviction and the sentence of death passed on him. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellant's appeal and affirmed his conviction and the sentence of death passed on him by the trial Court under Section 1(2) (a) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act. The appellant, aggrieved with this decision filed a Notice of Appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal.
ISSUES:
The appellant distilled four issues for determination. The respondent distilled a sole issue for the determination of the appeal. The Court noted that the single issue of the respondent clearly covers all aspects of questions that need be answered in the determination of the appeal and so the Court adopted the issues formulated by the respondent for the determination of the appeal.
SOLE ISSUE:
This raises the question whether the Court of Appeal or Court below rightly held that the prosecution proved the offence of armed robbery against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
DECISION/HELD:
On the whole, the Court held that the appeal lacks merit and it was thereby dismissed. The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal in its affirmation of the judgment, conviction and sentence of the Accused/Appellant.
OPINION
There issues in the above case will be considered.
1. Was the sentence proportionate to the offence?
2. Did the Courts apply any rule of interpretation to Section 1(2) of the Robbery and Firearms Act?
3. The appeal to the Supreme Court. The appeal against Conviction. Why not the sentence?
The Robbery and Firearms Act clearly specifies the penalty for armed robbery as death by hanging. However, the accused only brought a dagger. The Courts could have realised that no one was stabbed. He only threatened with a dagger and the full wrath of the law is on him. Nothing got spoilt and destroyed then life must go on. The writer opines that he could have gotten a lesser sentence.
On the rule of interpretation the Courts employed, it seems the literal rule. Juris novit curia- it is for the Courts to know the law. Apparently, the penalty for Armed Robbery is death but liniency is in the sceptre of the Courts. Flexibility and reformative justice must be behind every the dispensation of criminal justice. We must have in mind that other things would influence the decision of the Courts.
On the appeal against Conviction, it could have been better if the appeal was against the sentence. The confessional statement of the accused and other evidences pinpoint the fact that he was indeed guilty. Thus, an appeal should have been for mitigation of sentence.
This Post COVID-19 season has brought with it, really difficult growth businesses all over the world. While some are out of goods, some have not been able to operate wherever they are. This has taught business owners and the world at large a lot of things including Risk Management.
Risk Management is an important element in business that helps the business thrive and secure them during any unforeseen circumstances that might threaten to hold the business down. There are several ways by which your business can be taken care of in this season
At this point, brands should secure viable ways by which customers would still get products and services safely without starving them of what they've always had from you. Operate a delivery system where people can order and still get what they need and also plan well, how you want to get the product to them in this time.
At this time, a lot of businesses will collapse and close down because they would lose customers due to negligence. Your brand should not always ask all the time for patronage, they should also get to know how customers are doing and what they can do to serve them in this time.
This is also a time to recharge yourself as a CEO and also get your workers recharged so they do not lose the vibe to work and they also come up with great ideas even during this break. Chances are that a lot of workers would find it difficult to resume once all this is over and so a structure that helps them recharge and recreate would do a lot.
Imagine you resumed work and you found out that five of your workers had the virus and you never knew, how would you feel? Sad, yeah? That's it. You have to check up on your workers. How are they faring? What's their current situation? What if you just called or emailed them to let them know you care and wouldn't mind listening to them? This should just be an act of love but it's more than that— it would create a bond and also get you to become supportive.
In this article ,we look forward to WHO creating a week awareness for more people and their communities to know the importance and value of vaccines and immunization and to be protected from vaccine-preventable diseases. This article aims to highlight the collective action needed to promote the use of vaccines to protect people of all ages against disease and to ensure that governments obtain the necessary guidance and technical support to implement high-quality immunization programmes.
Immunization: This is a process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation.
As the crusade for better social Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) into the mainstream society continues to gain ground, there’s a need to guard against the green snakes in green grass phenomenon that might ultimately sabotage this laudable cause. To fail to do this is to settle for what may be called a “pseudo-inclusion” instead of the “full-inclusion” originally set out to achieve.
Pseudo simply means something fake. Therefore Pseudo-inclusion is fake inclusion. This type of inclusion subtly cheats Persons with Disabilities by appointing people outside it to decide for PWDs matters.Again, pseudo-inclusion is the direct and indirect barring of Persons with Disabilities (because of their disabilities) from specific leadership positions in the larger society. It’s an irony of the Inclusion crusade that insults the sensibilities and human intelligence of Persons with Disabilities.
For the avoidance of doubt, I will say it again with emphasis: “the claim to Inclusion is false when we have abled persons wanting to have deciding says in disability issues. And these same people would turn around to stop persons with disabilities from exercising leadership in mainstream matters.
These veiled opponents of full inclusion always have deceptive arguments to defend their hidden motives.
In this piece, we look at one side of the exclusionary-inclusion theory otherwise referred to as fake-inclusion.
It’s high time we become increasingly concerned about this ridiculous occurrence in its various hidden appearances.
In defiance to the age-long adage that it is the person wearing the shoe that knows where it pinches, PWDs are being treated to a shameful spectacle where a barefooted people either take it upon, or have it unjustly entrusted on them to tell the shoe-wearers where the shoe pinches. In other words, to determine their fate.
The discerning mind will readily see this contradictory situation whereby supposed beneficiaries of inclusion end up excluded where it matters most – namely, the decision/policy making process. I have been there.
As a person with disability, you can probably relate to instances when your complaints of discrimination, stigmatization, etc, were replied with typical: “we will look into it”, “we will see the pastor”, “we will talk to leadership and find a solution“ comments? The odd thing is that neither leadership or whoever is mandated to resolve the problem has any real disability experience.
And sure enough, they go ahead as promised, and without your active contribution find a solution to the complaint.
Now, you are happy that the matter is resolved.
But wait.
Did you consider that the solution could have been better had your opinions and those of others in same shoes been considered in the resolution process?
Did you realize that without your active involvement, a basic rule of thumb has been violated in the solution finding process? You may or may not realize it. The point is, time and again, we see this kind of unjust thing happen. It’s called Pseudo-inclusion – fake inclusion.
The concept of Pseudo-Inclusion reminds me of my campus experience. I remember advocating for, and offering possible solutions for better inclusion of the Deaf section on campus fellowship.
It was good that leadership saw reason and there were improvements. The unfortunate side was that I wasn’t properly involved in the decision making process. I still remember the indignant feelings then. I was like: “what were they thinking”? By the way, I am not alone in this experience.
Meanwhile, similar scenarios replay at secular level – this time on an even worse scale.
We find this thing in government, we see it in politics, we encounter it in the academia – it is present everywhere.
I love this slogan of the deaf cluster: “Nothing about us without us”.
The same holds true for all the disability clusters.
Now here’s the challenge before us – the very ones wearing the shoe. The challenge is in walking the tough talk – nothing about us without us. We need to ask ourselves how effectively we have been doing that – walking the talk.
There are two ways to go about this:
First, leadership and stakeholders of the various disability clusters must wake up to the necessity of standing up for this sacred task.
Secondly, a customized training/mentoring system must be conscientiously put in place to revive and perpetuate the leadership succession sequence by equipping upcoming talents among members for the task of carrying on the full inclusion crusade.
We need to devise a functional system for identifying, nurturing and bringing together a new breed of “justice-minded” PWDs to sustain the fight against pseudo-inclusion.
Agreed, this battle will not be conceded by opponents on a platter. Therefore, we must be ready to go all out using every legitimate means at our disposal to ensure there’s really nothing about us apart from us.
It begins with ourselves. Are we ready? We ought to be.
According to an earlier published biohraphy on the New Man Movement's website, Nosakhare Omoregie Shedrack commonly called Nosa by many, is a Nigerian based Contemporary Gospel Singer. Born on February 26th, 1981, into the family of Mr and Mrs Omoregie. He's among other children his parents have. He's from the Southern part of Nigeria (Benin, to be precise).
He gained his elementary education (both primary and secondary education) in Benin City. He didn't just stop at getting his elementary education, he furthered his education by getting a B.Sc in Electrical Engineering from the Prestigious University of Benin.
His career as a Gospel singer didn't just start as a grown up man. He has since (from childhood) been into Music, starting from his home church back then as a child.
Nosa served actively in his church music band then as a child. According to the singer, Brim Burrell among other successful people inspired him. Nosa has collaborated with Gospel artiste, the likes of Frank Edward, Sheyi Shay, to mention but few.
According to the talented gospel singer; music is one of his special ways of bringing people to Christ.
Over the years, he has delivered the good news of Christ via several powerful songs; few of such songs are listed below;
1. Dry Bones (2020)
2. God is Good (2016)
3. Open doors(2014)
4. Why you love me (2013) among others.
He also worked with Nokia about 8years back when he sang " Love is calling". This among few achievements Nosa has gained for himself.
As a talented and passionate Gospel singer, Nosa has been honored with several awards as well as Several Nominations, as a proof that hard work pays. Just one among several others is mentioned below;
Always pray for me ( one of his most popular songs) merited 2014 Song of the year.
Nosa is not only into songs, he's also a philanthropist. Although, his philanthropic works are not mentioned on social media.
Nosa is happily married to Deborah and they are blessed with beautiful children. However, his marital status is not known by many.
Nosa, aside singing and other studio duties reach out to many souls via his YouTube channel, where people are blessed through him. According to a recent report, his net-worth is over $900.