Abdul-Ganiyu Obasa, son of the Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mudasiru Obasa, has been confirmed as the new Chairman of Agege Local Government. His emergence follows the resignation of the former council chairman, Tunde Azeez, who had been on medical leave since the inauguration of the current administration.

In a letter presented by the Leader of the House, Adeshina Haruna, Azeez formally resigned from his position, citing ongoing health issues that had hindered his ability to effectively perform his duties since taking office.

Following the reading and approval of the resignation letter during a council session on Wednesday, lawmakers unanimously voted Abdul-Ganiyu into office as the new Local Government Chairman.

According to the council lawmakers, the unanimous vote in his favour was based on his notable contributions to the development of Agege and the need to prevent a leadership vacuum within the local government.

More to come…

President Bola Tinubu on Tuesday held a meeting with the Catholic Archbishop of Abuja, Ignatius Kaigama, at the Presidential Villa in Abuja.

The purpose of the archbishop’s visit was not immediately disclosed, as officials close to the presidency had yet to comment on the engagement.

The meeting came days after United States President Donald Trump alleged persecution of Christians in Nigeria and threatened possible US military action if the violence continued.

Trump’s genocide allegation sparked public debate, with the Nigerian government rejecting the claims and maintaining that Christians and Muslims live peacefully in the country.

Last Friday, Trump announced that he had redesignated Nigeria as a “country of particular concern (CPC)” over alleged Christian genocide.

He further warned that the Nigerian government must “better move fast” or face the suspension of all US aid to the country.

The US President also threatened to deploy the “department of war” against terrorists “that attack our cherished Christians.”

In response, the Nigerian presidency stated that President Tinubu and Trump would engage on the issue of alleged Christian genocide in Nigeria.

Photographs released after Tuesday’s meeting showed Tinubu receiving Archbishop Kaigama at the Presidential Villa.

Justice Musa Kakaki of the Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered the interim forfeiture of Proxy Lagos Night Club, owned by Lagos socialite Mike Eze Nwalie Nwogu, popularly known as Pretty Mike, over allegations linked to drug-related offences.

The property, located at No. 7 Akin Adesola Street, Victoria Island, Lagos, was directed to be forfeited temporarily on Tuesday after the court considered an ex parte application moved by Barrister Buhari Abdullahi, counsel to the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA). The motion, marked FHC/L/MISC/1161/2025, sought the forfeiture order pending investigations.

Listed as respondents in the matter are Mike Nwalie, also known as Pretty Mike, and Joachim Hillary.

Barrister Abdullahi informed the court that the request was made under Sections 3 (c) & (f), 31(a), 32(a)(d), 33, 34 and 36 of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, Cap. N30, Laws of the Federation 2004; Section 44(2)(k) of the 1999 Constitution; and Order 26, Rules 8 of the Federal High Court Civil Procedure Rules 2009, as well as the court’s inherent jurisdiction.

He asked the court to grant “an order of interim forfeiture in favour of the Federal Government of Nigeria and in Custody of The National Drug Law Enforcement Agency of a property situates at No. 7 Akin Adesola Street, Victoria Island, Lagos (Proxy Lagos Night Club) used as an instrumentality of drug dealing and drug abuse of 169 cylinders (384. 662 kilograms) of Nitrous Oxide (Laughing Gas) a dangerous substance of abuse and 200 grams of Cannabis Sativa, narcotic drug pending the conclusion of investigation.”

He further requested “an order suspending all activities of Proxy Lagos Night Club situates at No. 7 Akin Adesola Street, Victoria Island, Logos, pending the conclusion of drug investigation. And for such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the Circumstances.”

The NDLEA counsel explained that the club was being used as a facility for storage, concealment, and abuse of 169 cylinders (384.662 kilograms) of Nitrous Oxide and 200 grams of Cannabis Sativa.

He also told the court that the substances were prepared for a large-scale drug-party event, which prompted the agency’s action. According to him, the club served as an instrumentality for drug crime and was therefore subject to forfeiture under existing laws.

Abdullahi stated that an interim forfeiture order was a statutory requirement to secure the property while investigation continued.

He added that the motion was supported by a 22-paragraph affidavit sworn to by Deputy Commander of Narcotics, Nasiru Garba Bungudu.

After reviewing the motion, affidavit, and legal argument, Justice Kakaki ruled that the application had merit and granted the interim forfeiture order. The matter was adjourned to January 28, 2026, for report on investigation progress.

Part of the affidavit stated that intelligence received in October 2025 revealed preparations for a large drug-related gathering at the club. Surveillance allegedly confirmed the plans, leading NDLEA operatives to storm the venue on October 26, 2025, at around midnight.

The affidavit noted that during the raid, “169 cylinders (384. 662 kilograms) of Nitrous Oxide (Laughing Gas) dangerous substance and 200 grams of Cannabis Sativa were recovered.” Over 200 individuals, including the first and second respondents, were arrested.

It was further alleged that the seized cannabis tested positive and weighed 200 grams, while the Nitrous Oxide weighed 384.662 kilograms. The affidavit stated that the second respondent had been involved in drug distribution at the club and acted with the knowledge of the club’s owner.

According to the affidavit, “the landed property, was being used as an instrumentality for committing drug offence is liable to forfeiture to the Federal Government of Nigeria.”

The document asserted that the respondents’ actions constituted offences under the NDLEA Act, adding that the interim attachment was necessary to secure the property and prevent continued illegal activities. It also claimed that granting the application would not prejudice any party and served the interest of justice.