On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, the Nigerian Tribune reported that the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP) had given a seven day ultimatum to the Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Niyi Akintola to apologize for saying that the PDP "never won any election in the South.-West in 2007."
This warning was given by Chief Tajudeen Ladipo, the National Vice Chairman of the PDP in the South –West and the hatchet man for the former deposed usurper in Osun State, Prince Olagunsoye Oyinlola.
This story item might have gone-by without much attention being paid to it by the public and the oppressed people of Yorubaland as well as Nigeria. It is possible because this writer himself did not see the initial news report about the claim reportedly made by Chief Akintola about the robbery committed by the PDP in the South –West in 2007 Elections. The fact that Chief Ladipo has come out swinging at Chief Akintola underscores the significance of the statement credited to Chief Akintola about the legitimacy (or is it illegitimacy) of those usurpers ( one hates to call them "governors") who are still holding offices in Oyo and Ogun States.
Chief Ladipo's demand of apology, according to the report, was predicated on the fact that Chief Akintola was paid to defend the PDP's robbery in Ondo State, which led to the removal of Olusegun Agagu from office and the installation of Dr. Olusegun Mimiko as the rightful winner. The report had contended as follows:
" The party (PDP) said it was shocked to hear a man who was paid by the PDP to defend its interest in the Agagu/Mimiko case now repudiating the very essence of the case for which he was paid."
Chief Ladipo was very upset with Chief Akintola because the latter ought "to have turned down the offer to be PDP's counsel in Ondo State," since he knew that the PDP "never one any election" if the latter (Akintola) was "a (sic) honourable man."
In brief, Chief Ladipo and the PDP's case against Chief Akintola is as follows:
a. Chief Akintola has not right to reveal what he knows about the thievery of the PDP in Ondo State and the entire South-West in 2007 Elections.
b. Chief Akintola was not "a (sic) honourable man" for "repudiating the very essence of the case for which he was paid."
c. Chief Akintola, even though a lawyer who has to take all cases that he was interested in, ought not to have taken the PDP case when he suspected, believed or was convinced that PDP did not win any elections in the South – West in 2007 Elections.
d. That Chief Akintola could not be paid so much money and still have the temerity to confirm what the entire Yoruba Nation and the rest of Nigeria know – that the PDP "never won any elections" in the South – West in 2007.
e. For that revelation, he needs to apologize to the PDP within seven days
f. Or Chief Akintola would be reported to the Nigerian Bar Association's disciplinary committee.
While it would be a yeoman's task to try and fathom the motives for the squealing of Chief Akintola, one is suspecting that this must have been weighing on his mind for some time now. It seems he must have been greatly relieved to have unburdened his mind about what he knew to be the truth. It might also be that Chief Akintola obviously had been concerned by the attempt of the PDP to try and give the judiciary a bad name over their streak of losses in the Courts over the elections in Ondo, Ekiti and Osun States. Chief Akintola, being an officer of the Court, might have become uncomfortable with this and probably felt that it was important for him to come to the defense of the Courts for "doing the right thing."
As the attorney for the PDP, Chief Akintola was definitely privy to some facts during his defense of both the PDP and Olusegun Agagu. He had to cross examine witnesses and evaluate evidences presented to the Court in making his case. His privileged position, without any doubt, must have exposed him to certain facts that most member of the public would not be aware of or would not have considered very germane. His knowledge of the details of such evidences actually put him in a very strong position to be able to make that kind of statement that has now become controversial.
It is not rocket science to conclude that every Yoruba voter in 2007 was and still is very sure of whom he/she voted for in that year's elections. They are all aware that they did not vote for the PDP usurpers that paraded and are still parading themselves as "governors" in some of the South- Western states. Even, majority of the PDP members were aware that they all stole the elections. They knew they were living on borrowed times and never contested the fact that they were/are all impostors. Come to think of it, it is not as if Chief Akintola said anything new or that he had revealed something that the Yoruba people or other Nigerians did not know. It is not as if Nigerians and the international community have chronic amnesia about the elections of 2007. It is not as if the role of "do or die" that the disgraced president Olusegun Obasanjo played during that election has been forgotten. Even, Olagunsoye Oyinlola was reported to have admitted that he knew he did not win in Osun State.
The only reason this "revelation" by Chief Akintola was of great interest and importance is that he (Akintola) was their lawyer in one of those landmark cases seeking to restore justice. The tantrum being thrown by Chief Ladipo about the fact that he (Akintola) ought not to have accepted to defend them (PDP) when he knew that they did not win any of the elections in the South – West, to say the least, is redundant. Lawyers are expected to take any case and defend such with all the legal skills at their disposal. That is what they do and that is what they are expected to do. This has nothing to do with whether their clients actually committed the alleged offence or not. The job of a lawyer is to defend a client and that was what Chief Akintola did.
Chief Ladipo ought to have known that even though, Chief Akintola might have had his suspicions about the Electoral robberies of the PDP in the South-West, he probably did not have any way of proving such until he became their lawyer. As a result of this vantage position, Chief Akintola probably saw how the PDP manufactured evidences and perjured themselves over and over. He must have agonizingly observed a concocted trajectory of travesty as he laboriously strewn together aprons of incongruous evidences and inconsistent testimonies of hatchet hirelings to defend the perversion of the PDP. Probably, after several months of painful pulsation in his inner conscience and mental self torture, intermittently ameliorated but not completely cocooned, by the knowledge of large sums of money paid to him by the PDP, Chief Akintola must have heaved a sigh of relief when the Court decided against his criminal clients who were attempting to subvert the electoral process in Ondo State.
This could only be the logical antecedents of his desire to call the PDP to order and confess to the public that "the PDP did not win any elections" in the South – West in 2007. These antecedents apart, his desire to come clean and make this public confession might also have been further fueled, as pointed out above, by the diabolical attempt by the PDP to stigmatize, scapegoat, discredit and demonize the judiciary.
By Falolu Ogidan via SR (http://www.saharareporters.com/article/akintola-vs-ladipo-controversial-confessions-2007-elections)