Opinion
Should Lawbreakers Make Laws For You And I? | By Taiwo Adisa
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/39bcc/39bcc1ab869adcbd3307a9cd6859ea70d4b27818" alt="NASS712x401 MegaIcon Magazine"
In the aftermath of the national elections of 2023, a good number of political watchers in the country easily concluded that the much talked about “Third Force” in Nigeria’s political firmament had arrived the scene following the strong showing of the Labour Party (LP) in that election. The party’s presidential candidate, Mr. Peter Obi clinched the third position in the race for Aso Rock, coming bumper to bumper behind President Bola Tinubu and former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.
The LP also secured six seats in the Senate and 34 of 360 House of Representatives.
But not long after that historic electoral display by the LP, the Nigeria factor set into its operations as its leaders started deconstructing every hint of sanity that pervaded its operations hitherto. Everything that made the party the beautiful bride of the youth got torn into shreds, while its leaders engaged in naked dance in the village square. The endless court cases that ensued threatened the very existence of the LP, and it became obvious that the Peter Obi magic wand that secured for it the enviable national status was fast waning.
The flurry of defections that followed, particularly in the House of Representatives, were not unexpected. Between June and December last year, no fewer than six Rep members of the party had defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC) on account of “the crisis” that had engulfed the party. Four members defected on one day, another followed and yet another. The case of the member representing Jos South/Jos East Federal Constituency, Hon. Ajang Iliya who defected from the LP to the APC, citing, as usual, “the crisis in the leadership of the Labour Party,” particularly roused tension in the House on December 12, 2024, when the Minority Leader, Hon Kingsley Chinda objected to the letter of defection read on Iliya’s behalf. He claimed that Iliya’s letter failed to comply with the constitution. According to Chinda, a standing order had been given by the House that any member who intends to defect must first inform his constituents, and since Iliya could not show such proof, his letter should be rejected. Despite the commotion that erupted, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas overruled Chinda. Nobody needs a long guess to understand why Abbas did what he did. His party, the APC, was winning another soul, so he had no qualms, whether the new convert gained entry into the party through the window or the back door. It is obvious that the last has not been heard about defections in the Senate, the House of Representatives or even the Houses of Assembly in the states, because as I write, rumours of defection have enveloped many lawmakers.
A number of studies have attempted to proffered reasons for the jumpology that characterises the activities of the lawmakers in recent years. One of such is the lack of distinctive ideology separating the political parties and then the glaring lack of governance model within the political parties. Despite the vantage position, the constitution places them in the leadership recruitment process. The laissez faire mode of administration they often adopt denies them of their importance.
Nonetheless, whatever pushes a member to abandon the writ of the political party that got him into the chamber cannot justify that or enable him to eat his cake and have it. In clear words, Sections 68 (1) (g) as well as 109 (1) (g) of the 1999 Constitution affirm the time-honoured doctrine of equity, which states that “Who comes to equity must come with clean hands.” That doctrine is also emphasized by the Yoruba when they say A kii je meji ni aba Alade, a saying, which, translated into English language, would still sound like- ‘you can’t eat your cake and have it’.
But, legislators in Nigeria have been eating their cakes and still having it in full, especially since the return of democratic governance in 1999. The rule for them is, ‘just get elected first, you will cross the bridge of political correctness when you get there’. ‘If it is possible, you can even switch political party allegiance before the inauguration day’. That conduct, however, remains in violation of the dictates of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), which designates defections as one of the grounds a member can lose his seat.
Section 68 (1) (g) of the 1999 Constitution indicates that “A member of the Senate or of the House of Representatives shall vacate his seat in the House of which he is a member if –
(g) “Being a person whose election to the House was sponsored by
a political party, he becomes a member of another political party before the expiration of the period for which that House was elected;
“Provided that his membership of the latter political party is not as a result of a division in the political party of which he was previously a member or of a merger of two or more political parties or factions by one of which he was previously sponsored.”
The same provision applies to members of the House of Assembly of a state in Section 109 (1) (g).
When the above sections were tested in the courts in the case of Hon. Ifedayo Abegunde Vs Ondo State House of Assembly, the Court of Appeal held that defection involves “….factionalization, fragmentation, splintering or division,” which would make it impossible for the party to function as a body. Any other thing to the contrary would indicate that a lawmaker cannot eat his cake and have it. Such a member, if he must defect, must also abandon the mandate he has been given. The courts also held that the said “division” in the rank of the party must not only affect parts of the party or a state chapter. A division, in the estimation of the court does not also amount to a situation where a member goes to cause crisis in his state or local chapter of the party in order to use the same as spring board for defection.
It should be appalling to see a political party that was rejected in an election turn out to regain the seat through the back door. But that is what our legislators have been doing, each time they defect. It is like the case of the law breaker making the law for the law abiding; a convict standing in judgment against the just, in an Animal Farm scenario.
So, should the breakers of sections 68 (1) (g) and 109 (1) (g) continue to hold firm to their seats after defection? That is the question that should agitate the minds of the electorate. And that is the question members of the public should direct to the Presidents of the Senate and the Speakers of the respective houses, who are mandated by Sections 68 (2) and 109 (2) to declare the seat of a defecting lawmaker vacant.
Section 68 (2) provides that: “The President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, as the case may be, shall give effect to the provisions of subsection (1) of this section, so however that the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives or a member shall first present evidence satisfactory to the House concerned that any of the provisions of that subsection has become applicable in respect of that member.”
Perhaps the above subsection has, rather than helped the cause of the electorate, only provided a tent for the presiding officers to hide. Our elders say that even if you give a mad man a hoe, he would still draw things to himself. In a situation where politics is perpetually be at play, such a constitutional provision should not remain in our law books, because a Senate President or the Speaker may not feel obliged to send a member packing if such a one can become his loyalist.
Rather than seek political correctness as the end point of their service, rendering good service and the comfort of the constituents should remain the primary goal of a legislator. Where that is missing, the people must wield the big stick by applying the power of recall against an erring lawmaker who violates the “just cause,” proviso contained in Section 68 (3) of the 1999 Constitution.
Opinion
Bodija Explosion: Victims’ Hope Fades as Oyo Government’s Promised Support Remains Elusive
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/41922/41922aa9c0d616a0a5db39cbfa532e103f2de9f3" alt="121750x536 MegaIcon Magazine"
One month after the anniversary of the devastating Bodija explosion, victims are still waiting for the promised support from the Oyo State Government.
Despite initial assurances, the much-needed aid remains elusive, leaving affected individuals to wonder if they have been abandoned.
In a press release issued on January 16, 2025, the Oyo State Ministry of Information announced that Governor Seyi Makinde had received the report from the special committee led by the Deputy Governor.
The statement assured that disbursement of support would commence within two weeks. However, more than four weeks have passed, and victims insist they have yet to receive any assistance.
For many, this delay is not just an administrative lapse—it is a matter of survival. Some victims are still recovering from injuries and require ongoing medical care, while others have been rendered homeless, forced to rely on relatives or struggle to find shelter.
The Oyo State Government had previously positioned itself as transparent and responsive, with Governor Makinde providing regular updates on the explosion during the GSM Media Chat. Yet, the failure to deliver on these commitments has raised doubts about the administration’s resolve to see its promises through.
As frustration mounts, there is growing concern that the Bodija explosion might become yet another forgotten tragedy in Nigeria’s long list of unfulfilled governmental pledges. It is, therefore, imperative that the Oyo State Government acts swiftly to provide the necessary relief to those affected.
Adepegba sent this piece from Bodija, Ibadan.
Opinion
Tinubu’s Re-Election: Northern Support, a Sine- Qua-non | By Adeniyi Olowofela
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/00426/00426f39be7e1a8c0268fcf28b2b84cc461dfdfd" alt="image556 MegaIcon Magazine"
Politicians are restless ‘animals.’ President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is barely halfway through his tenure, yet neither he nor his cabinet members have openly advocated for his re-election. Instead, he remains focused on reengineering the Nigerian state.
Indian lawyer, anti-colonial nationalist, and political leader Mahatma Gandhi was once quoted as saying, “If Indians cannot clothe themselves, let them walk naked.” This statement rejuvenated the people, driving them to invest heavily in textile production, which has since blossomed into a thriving industry.
Tinubu’s Economic Reforms
Fundamentally, President Tinubu has declared a privatization policy in the oil industry, allowing market forces to determine prices based on the basic law of supply and demand.
For years, the Port Harcourt refinery had been plagued by unseen factors beyond the understanding of former President Olusegun Obasanjo. However, Tinubu and his team have resolved these longstanding issues. With oil being the lifeblood of Nigeria’s economy, its proper functioning is a commendable feat that deserves recognition.
Education and National Development
A former Nigerian minister once lamented, “What is this mad rush for education in the Southwest?” Today, that so-called “mad rush” has extended beyond the region, becoming a national priority.
To support this growing demand, President Tinubu has established the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) to provide financial aid to indigent but determined students seeking higher education. This initiative ensures that no willing student is left behind due to financial constraints.
Regional Development and National Unity
The Development Agenda for Western Nigeria (DAWN) has long-established policies for cooperation among states in the Southwest. Similarly, each geopolitical zone now has developmental frameworks tailored to its needs. For those agitating for the country’s balkanization—whether Biafra agitators, Yoruba Nation proponents, or others—these regional initiatives present an opportunity for meaningful progress within a united Nigeria.
The Political Reality: What’s in It for the North?
When the late Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola (MKO) won the June 12, 1993 election, ex-military President Ibrahim Babangida annulled it, plunging the nation into political chaos. In an attempt to stabilize the situation, Babangida hurriedly appointed Chief Ernest Shonekan—neither a politician nor a military general—as the head of an interim government.
With MKO Abiola placed under house arrest, the restless General Sani Abacha ousted Shonekan and assumed full military control. However, Abiola’s mandate remained a thorn in the nation’s political conscience. Under Abacha’s authoritarian rule, prominent figures like Olusegun Obasanjo and Shehu Yar’Adua were imprisoned, while the nation was gripped by fear and tension.
Years later, both Abacha and Abiola died under mysterious circumstances. General Abdulsalami Abubakar then became Head of State, promising a return to democracy. The anger in the South, particularly in the Southwest, remained intense. In response, Northern political leaders orchestrated a power-sharing arrangement, leading to both major political parties fielding Yoruba candidates—Olusegun Obasanjo (PDP) and Chief Olu Falae (APP/AD). Ultimately, Obasanjo won and governed for eight years.
His successor, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, couldn’t complete two terms due to illness and death. His deputy, Goodluck Jonathan, took over, finishing the remainder of the tenure and winning another full term. When the All Progressives Congress (APC) emerged from a merger of ACN, CPC, and a faction of PDP, it provided the platform for Muhammadu Buhari’s presidency, which lasted two terms.
A tradition has now been established: once elected, a sitting president is almost always re-elected. The North, known for its decisive voter base and political acumen, should consider exercising its franchise in favor of Tinubu’s re-election.
Beyond Economic Hardship: A Call for Patience
The economic challenges facing Nigeria today are the cumulative effects of past administrations, not solely the making of a man who has been in office for less than two years. President Tinubu has disrupted the status quo and is actively reengineering the nation. After darkness comes light—he deserves the chance to continue his reforms.
A Short-Term Sacrifice for Long-Term Stability
A four-year term—just 1,461 days—is a short political sacrifice for the North to make before power rotates again. Supporting President Tinubu for re-election is not just essential for the North but for all geopolitical zones in Nigeria.
Enough of the political blackmail. Let’s give Tinubu the chance to reorder the nation.
Professor Adeniyi Olowofela writes from Abuja, Nigeria’s capital.
Opinion
Bisi Akande, poverty and Ige’s death | By Festus Adedayo
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa3b6/fa3b654d3b257fae31366cb761f96fcb8ea0d8c7" alt="BolaIge MegaIcon Magazine"
In her biography of Ayo Rosiji, one of the key politicians of Nigeria’s first republic, entitled Man With Vision, Australia-born historian, Nina Mba, citing a Holmes, called biographers “People who knead people.” In other words, biographers knead their subjects from raw flour into edible form. You then wonder what the late lecturer in the History department of the University of Lagos would have called autobiographers. Self-conjurers, perhaps. For, in the process of piecing together bits about themselves, those who write their life histories have been accused of selfishly adding together a mish-mash of two unrelated traditional soup recipes, (lúrú and sápá) falsifying realities and mis-painting the picture of truth.
Last week, sidekick of the Nigerian president and former Chairman of the All Progressives Party, (APC) Chief Bisi Akande, chose to conjure the spirit of a dead dog. In a podcast interview with popular broadcaster, Edmund Obilo, which centered around his autobiography, My Paticipations, the 86-year old came under heavy shellacking on allegations of historical revisionism. The specifics were that he kneaded a wrong dough of history and made a wrong portrayal of himself. In that interview, Akande coasted home with a self portraiture as a man who sat by the edge of a smelly sewage but chose not to smell the rank odour of rot.
By the way, I passed Akande’s country-home, Ila-Orangun, Osun State, by about a week ago. I was on my way to the burial of the mother of Oba Adedokun Omoniyi Abolarin, the Orangun of Oke-Ila. You cannot fail to notice Akande’s house. Its arrogance and domineering spirit in the midst of abject poverty are worn on the mansion’s lapel. Architectured to sit imperially among natives’ poor houses, the mansion fittingly tells the story of a countryside-born boy made good. Don’t bother yourself with the architectural gaffe of such a mansion being surrounded with lock-up shops. It still doesn’t diminish the majesty you see in Akande’s home. Its outward finishing struck me as a repeat of same architecture of his house in Oluyole, Ibadan. Both bear similarities with the State Secretariat’s roofing and burnt brick finishing at Abere which I also saw. His government constructed the secretariat. So, when, in the Obilo interview, Akande kept referencing his retirement to his Ila country-home, planting pepper at his backyard and deliberately choosing not to live the posh life of a president’s consort in Abuja, do not be fooled to believe that the old man lives in less splendour.
Sorry, I digressed. Akande made two weighty assertions in his controversy-baiting interview. One is that the presidency under Olusegun Obasanjo allegedly killed Chief Bola Ige. The second was that the pan-Yoruba sociocultural group, Afenifere died with the assassination of the Attorney General of the Federation. As the Yoruba say of words in convoluted circumstances as this, they need to be surgically placed in their contexts (élá l’ọrọ ). In doing this, let me begin from Akande’s assertion on Afenifere’s purported death. There is no denying the fact that Chief Ige was the darling of Southwest Nigeria. At his death, the Yoruba lost its most valuable political leader who was famously referred to as Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s heir apparent. At campaign grounds, the evocative song sang to usher Ige into such arena was “Ige has arrived! Ige has arrived! Awolowo’s heir apparent has arrived!” (Ìgè dé, Ìgè dé o, Aróle Awolowo, Ìgè dé o!).
Ige was proud of his Yoruba heritage. He wasn’t one who prostrated on all fours to a cow for the sake of eating its protein. He never suffered fools gladly and belonged to the school of thought which says that every impulse a man strives to strangle broods in his mind and poisons him. So, he spoke his mind without caring whose ox was gored. A lawyer friend once told me of how Ige beckoned onto him and his friend at a public event and, in his usual lacerating words, tongue-lashed them for putting on other tribe’s cap, rather than the Yoruba’s. Though he spoke Hausa very fluently, having schooled in Kaduna, Ige took great pleasure in his mother tongue.
The truth however remains that the January 1999 D’Rovans hotel presidential primary election of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) which took place in Ibadan marked the beginning of the cracks in the wall of the AD and Afenifere. It has been alleged that Ige sponsored the creation of alternate sociocultural groups to get back at the so-called “Ijebu Mafia” who allegedly worked against his presidential aspiration. To that extent, Akande may be right that Ige saw the fractionalization of the original Afenifere. To however say that Afenifere died with Ige will be excessive hyperbole.
Again, after the death of Ige, there doesn’t seem to exist any group, apart from the two factions of the sociocultural group – either Chief Reuben Fasoranti or Ayo Adebanjo’s – who can surpass the duo in how they deify or factor in Yoruba’s recent ancestor, Chief Awolowo, in all they do. I am sure the man Chief Akande is his sidekick, Tinubu, in his closet or among his coterie of Yoruba hangers-on, gloats, like Obasanjo did in his autobiography, that the presidency which Awolowo couldn’t attain in his lifetime, was handed him on a platter. Since Tinubu became president, unless I missed it, I am yet to hear him pay tribute to Awolowo’s fabled sagacity in governance. I do not know if Bisi Akande, who is now mouthing Afenifere’s Catholicism, more than the Pope, has ever spoken to the president about this historical memory loss. It was good Obilo asked Akande if the Fasoranti who Tinubu visited in Akure as president wasn’t head of the same Afenifere he claimed was dead or if the members of the group Tinubu hosted in Aso Rock belonged to Ohanaeze Ndigbo. Such selective memory is said to be Akande’s stock-in-trade. When he engages in this kind of revisionism, his opponents remind us of his self-confession he made that he was never an Awoist until Chief SM Afolabi invited him to be a member of Awo’s Committee of Friends.
On the assassination of Ige in 2001, there is also no doubting the fact that the failure of the federal government to find the killers of this highly respected Nigerian is a blot on the Obasanjo government. On the list of assassins who possessed the raison d’être to kill Ige, the fact that the presidency ranks top is an unassailable fact. If you knew the awe with which Ige was held in Yorubaland, his resignation from the Obasanjo government would indeed have dented the Ota farmer’s second term presidential bid. However, with Ige’s obsession for his Yorubaness and the disdain and awe with which the north held an obsessive Yoruba in power at that time, Ige’s presidential aspiration could not have stopped Obasanjo’s second term bid. After all, even when the southwest refused to vote for him in the first term, Obasanjo still became president. If Akande was desirous of Ige’s killers being apprehended, why didn’t he factor in more theories on the assassination? For instance, could some persons, who nursed ambition to be Nigeria’s president someday, have stopped him, knowing that an Ige presidency in 2003 could put paid to their ambition? Yes, the theory of armed robbery has been eliminated due to the clinical planning of the assassination, but, is there any possibility that we cast our nets too narrowly?
It is of great importance for us to drill down further into Bisi Akande’s claim that the government headed by Senator Rashidi Ladoja, as Oyo State governor, demanded and got a nolle prosequi in the trial of alleged Ige murderers. Was it a deliberate attempt to play politics, attempt to even political score or share political banditry? Not only did Ladoja denounce this claim with facts, he went ahead to accuse Akande of a penchant for lying while threatening to drag Akande to court for defamation.
It should also be said that while Akande was enamoured of unraveling the killers of his mentor, Chief Ige, under his leadership and direction as governor of Osun State, his ‘boys’ supervised the impeachment of his deputy governor, Iyiola Omisore, allegedly so that the Ile-Ife-born politician could lose his immunity and be ready to face trial for the same murder. If I were Akande’s interviewer, I would have raised further question for his answer on what his government did to unravel the assassination, a few days before Ige’s murder, of an Osun State legislator, Odunayo Olagbaju. So, what moral right does he have to ask Obasanjo to find Ige’s killers when his own government equally looked the other way when Olagbaju was felled? In the interview, Akande made many other assertions on Ige’s death which should make the police ask him, instead of Ladoja, to come forward for interrogation so that the spirit of Bola Ige could get justice finally. He appeared to know more than he was telling the world, even by his own admission.
Let me go to another issue of importance in the Akande interview. Of recent, the power apparatchik that surrounds the Nigerian president must have discovered that the narrative that all his life, Bola Tinubu had wanted to become president, was flawed. At a meeting with some political operatives immediately after attending a Chatham House engagement in December, 2022, Tinubu was seen on video telling them that “Political power is not going to be served in a restaurant. They don’t serve it a la carte. At all cost, fight for it, grab it and run with it”. The vehemence with which then presidential aspirant Tinubu told these operatives of the cold-bloodedness of power had same cadence and grits with the vehemence with which a leopard pursues an impala. Tinubu sliced the words with his teeth with same clinical finish and precision with which the leopard slices the impala’s throat. So, when, a few weeks ago, some misguided fellows, without the president’s consent, impeached Mudashiru Obasa, erstwhile Lagos House Speaker who the Lagos Landlord installed by himself, they courted the wrath of a man who though shoulders the behemoth hunk of flesh of an elephant, is yet interested in the flesh of a grasshopper. Since 1999, Tinubu has held Lagos as a fief, his incisors tightened round the neck of the politics and economy of the state.
No political juggernaut in the Tinubu political clan had enough cognate sidekick ‘followership’ around the president to dissolve the above narrative in the minds of the world like Bisi Akande. Since they both left office as governors of Osun and Lagos in 2007, Akande has maintained his political ‘follow-follow’ role around Tinubu. He was the most qualified for the task. So, in the Obilo interview, Akande attempted to push a counter-narrative. Tinubu didn’t want to be president, he emphasized. There was a bedlam in the Tinubu camp when he told all the scroungers around him that he would not be contesting for the presidency, Akande said further. Pius Akinyelure attempted to convince him, yet he would not bulge. Akande then had to be enlisted to do the convincing. He then told Tinubu that his being Nigeria’s president was a clarion call which he must yield to. In other words, Tinubu was persuaded against his earlier wish to be Nigeria’s president.
But, as James Hadley Chase volunteered in one of his classics, a liar must have a very good memory. The interviewer then momentarily badged in. But, that same Tinubu told Nigerians it was his lifelong ambition to be Nigeria’s president? Obilo asked. In fact, at the famous but controversial Abeokuta campaign in June 2022 where it was believed he dared Muhammadu Buhari to do his worse, Tinubu actually told the world that he, the godfather, had come to take over a throne that rightly belonged to him. With that Emilokan pronouncement, Tinubu literally said he was tired of playing the second fiddle. When the interviewer confronted Akande with Tinubu’s claim of entitlement to the presidency, the Tinubu sidekick went into an incoherent waffle. With that Abeokuta speech whose summary was akin to “my feet are tired,” many of Tinubu’s followers have compared his audacity and self-entitlement mentality to the seat of Nigeria’s president to that of African-American rights activist, Rosa Parks, who refused to give up her seat on the American Montgomery City Lines on December 1, 1955.
As it is with politicians who play the ostrich with verifiable facts, in the interview, Akande also attempted to muffle the facts of Buhari’s opposition to Tinubu’s presidency. In the Abeokuta declaration, it was obvious that the “they” Tinubu knocked for putting barriers before his ambition were Buhari, Godwin Emefiele and their accomplices. So, why was Akande attempting to potato a glaring fact that is negative to his party, the APC?
The final issue of concern in the Akande interview is his claim that only lazy Nigerians are hungry. While the interviewer squared up with him admirably over this claim, Akande’s fabled gambit of playing the ostrich sprang up here. He couldn’t see hunger in the land, he claimed. To be fair to the ex-APC chairman, he may not see hunger if his impoverished kinsmen in Ila-Orangun have found him too insulated from their existential plights, so much that going to him for help is a waste. None of his children, it is obvious, with his role as consort of the Villa, would feel the hunger in the land. So, how could he see hunger? Even when confronted with palpable cases of hunger under the government of a man he claimed was next good news after the so-called discovery of River Niger by Mungo Park in 1795, he still defiantly claimed that the pepper he allegedly planted at his backyard was the antidote to the impoverishment sown by the Tinubu government. If I may ask, why did Chief Akande ask the president to put his daughter in charge of dollar-denominated National Agency for the Control of AIDS (NACA) and not ask that she heads Ogun Osun River Basin Authority so that she would plant “one grain of corn and reap a thousand cobs”?
All the above put together remind me that, in their daily fight for dominance and conquest, a fleeting nature of power and dominance exists among Nigerian politicians. It is the type of desperation found among the lion and a warthog. In Nigerian politics, there is an unending, constant and relentless struggle between preys and predators, with each seeking dominance and conquest. In doing this, politicians deploy worldly cunning to foist false narratives on the populace. Bisi Akande’s interview and a huge chunk of his autobiography are a further reinforcement of this frightening fight in the political wild.
-
Opinion3 days ago
Tinubu’s Re-Election: Northern Support, a Sine- Qua-non | By Adeniyi Olowofela
-
Politics5 days ago
Rep. Oseni Hails Oyo APC Leader, Chief Akin Oke, at 86
-
Politics5 days ago
Southern Kaduna PDP Stronghold Crumbles as 3 Lawmakers Join APC
-
News5 days ago
Afenifere Chieftain, Pa Ayo Adebanjo, Passes Away at 96