Tag:

hear

Man reportedly gifts nudist, Yahweh ₦1 million to hear her moan

by admin December 21, 2024

A Nigerian man has sparked widespread reactions online after reportedly gifting a nudist, Yahweh the sum of ₦1 million in exchange for hearing her moan.

The incident was revealed in a series of posts trending on X, formerly known as Twitter, where users shared details of the unusual interaction.

Man reportedly gifts nudist, Yahweh ₦1 million to hear her moan.

According to reports, the man allegedly paid the nudist ₦1 million for the act, sparking a mix of shock and curiosity across social media platforms.

A video circulating online captured their intimate conversation, during which the man urged the nudist to visualize the scene as she moaned.

The content of their exchange and the audacity of the payment have fueled discussions, drawing both criticism and fascination.

The viral post has drawn hundreds of comments, with concerned individuals flooding the thread to share their thoughts on the matter.

See some reactions below:

@provii8: “That guy get family wey Dey beg m for 1k.”

@Reubenofenugu: “This our generation don tune turn to something else.”

@phaarouq01: “omoh people life don spoil oo😭😭ahh 1m fit change my life as i dey like this.”

@cfc_phoenix: “Na now I understand why Sola dey charge 100k; abi wetin be him school fees that time?”

@VickiIzy: “Wahala dey oh. Shola go write another book.”

@ARCHangel0_1: “How would you pay a girl 1m just to hear her moan? Actually na we day spoil all these girls.”

@DavymartinCE0: “Na why politician for this country no send anybody papa. Dem no de see poor person.”

@IwuezeAmarachi: “Oh Waooo those people giving Yahweh money can’t even send their siblings 5k. Chai.”

@ayomicoder: “i doubt if he can give someone around him who really needs money 500k.”

@olamide_420: “That Yahweh girl go just dey laugh for background.”

WATCH VIDEO:

You gave Yahweh 1 million naira to hear her moan on space ke? Shola has a lot of work to do on these guys😭😭

— 𝔸b𝕒𝕫𝕫 (@abazwhyllzz) December 21, 2024

Source link

December 21, 2024 0 comment 8 views

World

Supreme Court Will Hear Arguments Over Potential TikTok Ban

by admin December 18, 2024

(WASHINGTON) — The Supreme Court on Wednesday said it will hear arguments next month over the constitutionality of the federal law that could ban TikTok in the United States if its Chinese parent company doesn’t sell it.

The justices will hear arguments Jan. 10 about whether the law impermissibly restricts speech in violation of the First Amendment.

The law, enacted in April, set a Jan. 19 deadline for TikTok to be sold or else face a ban in the United States. The popular social media platform has more than 170 million users in the U.S.

It’s unclear how quickly the high court might issue a decision.

Lawyers for the company and China-based ByteDance had urged the justices to step in before Jan. 19. The high court also will hear arguments from content creators who rely on the platform for income and some TikTok users.

The timing of the arguments means that the outgoing Biden administration’s Justice Department will make the case in defense of the law that passed Congress with bipartisan support and was signed by Democratic President Joe Biden in April.

The incoming Republican administration might not have the same view of the law.

President-elect Donald Trump, who once supported a ban but then pledged during the campaign to “save TikTok,” has said his administration would take a look at the situation. Trump met with TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club in Florida on Monday.

The companies have said that a shutdown lasting just a month would cause TikTok to lose about one-third of its daily users in the U.S. and significant advertising revenue.

The case pits free speech rights against the government’s stated aims of protecting national security, while raising novel issues about social media platforms.

A panel of federal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously upheld the law on Dec. 6, then denied an emergency plea to delay the law’s implementation.

Without court action, the law would take effect Jan. 19 and expose app stores that offer TikTok and internet hosting services that support it to potential fines.

It would be up to the Justice Department to enforce the law, investigating possible violations and seeking sanctions. But lawyers for TikTok and ByteDance have argued that Trump’s Justice Department might pause enforcement or otherwise seek to mitigate the law’s most severe consequences. Trump takes office a day after the law is supposed to go into effect.

Source link

December 18, 2024 0 comment 10 views

Nigeria

Court fixes Nov 8 to hear NNPCL Staff Cooperative Society leadership dispute

by admin October 17, 2024

A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory sitting at Maitama, on Thursday, shifted further hearing in the leadership crisis rocking the Staff Multipurpose Cooperative Society of the Nigeria National Petroleum Company, NNPC, Limited, till November 8.

Justice Charles Agbaza said that the court would on the next date, equally hear a motion that 15 staff members of the NNPCL who are defendants in the matter, filed to disqualify him from presiding over the case.

The defendants, through their team of lawyers led by Ibrahim Idris, SAN, is asking the judge to recuse himself, insisting they were not comfortable in his ability to resolve the leadership dispute, objectively.

They alleged that some of the interim orders the judge made in the matter reflected his bias against them.

“The defendants, on whose behalf the instant application is brought, have lost total and complete faith and confidence in the ability of the presiding judge in this matter to continue to entertain this suit and serve justice without bias.

“The conduct of the presiding judge during the hearing of this suit, and particularly judging from the nature of the orders of the presiding judge so far in the suit, it only points to one impeachable conclusion that the defendants are not likely to access justice in this honourable court hence the request that the presiding judge recuse himself from further presiding over this suit,” the 15 NNPCL staff members added.

The defendants, in the motion they predicated their motion on Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, noted that the court had on October 3, while there was a contention between two lawyers over who was validly briefed to represent the Cooperative Society (16th defendant), ordered one Mr. Lekan Ogunbayo to appear to clarify who he had instructed as the President of the Management Committee of the Cooperative, to defend it in the matter.

According to the defendants: “The fulcrum of the substantive suit principally revolves around whether the tenure of the Management Committee led by Ogunbayo (which had been removed by the Congress of the Association as at then) was subsisting.”

“The status quo ante bellum was that an interim Management Committee led by the 2nd and 3rd defendants as the President and Secretary, respectively, had been appointed by the Congress of the 16th defendant and indeed, had been performing the functions of their offices, hence the challenge of the said decision by Claimants before this honourable court.

“The decision of the Court ordering the appearance of the said Mr. Ogunbayo in the circumstance, had prejudged the suit at the interlocutory stage.

“Furthermore, the order made by the court on 10th October, 2024, directing that the interim order of injunction made on the 30th of May, 2024, shall abide pending the hearing of the consolidated applications and substantive suit without hearing the defendants on whether or not it is suitable to grant an injunction in the circumstance, amounts to a denial of fair hearing of the defendants.

“The decision of the honourable court to extend the interim order of injunction in the circumstance without hearing the other side, amounts to a perversion of justice,” they added.

Justice Agbaza, who acknowledged receipt of the motion, adjourned to hear all the pending applications in the matter.

The suit, marked FCTHC/ABJ/CV/260/2024, was brought before the court by four aggrieved members of the Cooperative- Eze Onwuneme, Chamberlin Ajagba, Alhaji Ibrahim Yakubu and Bello Mohammed Garba.

Cited as defendants in the matter, are; Engr Josiah Gbemi Omole, Udo Iboro, Ituah Aikhena, Osondu Ibeji, Farouk Achimugu, Prince Etuwewe, Nura Bello, Micheal Adejoh, Sambo Abdulaziz. Vincent Orji, Saint Kamvene, Braimoh Sunday Joseph and Galadima Immanuel.

Other defendants, are; Engr Iliya Yusuf, Musa Garba Abubakar and the NNPC Ltd Staff Multipurpose Cooperative Society itself.

Earlier in the proceeding on Thursday, counsel for the plaintiffs, Mr. George Ibrahim, SAN, indicated his readiness to withdraw a contempt charge his clients initiated against the Director in charge of Human Resources Department of the NNPCL, Mrs. Fatima Yakubu, over an allegation that she flouted the interim orders of the court with respect to the matter.

Source link

October 17, 2024 0 comment 32 views

Uncategorized

Edo Guber: Court fixes Sept 19 to hear APC suit seeking Ighodalo’s disqualification

by admin September 10, 2024

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Tuesday fixed September 19 to hear a suit filed by the All Progressives Congress, APC, seeking the disqualification of Asue Ighodalo, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, candidate for the September 21 governorship election in Edo State.

Justice Peter Lifu fixed the hearing of all pending applications after lawyers to the parties in the suit reached an agreement for the adjournment to allow PDP’s counsel, Oyetola Atoyebi, SAN, respond to the plaintiff’s amended originating summons.

The APC, in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1001/2024, had sued INEC, Ighodalo and PDP as 1st to 3rd defendants, respectively.

In the application filed by Prof J.O. Odion, the APC sought an order of mandatory injunction directing INEC to immediately remove from its online portal and ballot documents Ighodalo and his party’s names for alleged non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, among others.

On its part, INEC urged the court to dismiss the suit.

The electoral umpire, in its counter affidavit deposed to by Hussaini Abdullahi, a staff in the Legal Services Department, said Ighodalo is the PDP’s nominated candidate for the September 21 poll.

However, the APC, in a motion on notice filed on August 30, sought the leave of the court to amend its originating summons.

Part of the prayers sought was an order granting leave for the striking out of Ighodalo’s name from the suit.

The APC argued that the amendment was to remove irrelevant references and to meet the purpose of the suit which is to seek the determination of INEC’s statutory power to disqualify an erring political party under Section 84(13) of the Electoral Act, 2022, and in pursuance of the plaintiff’s right of action as guaranteed by Section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

But, in a preliminary objection filed by Ken Mozia, SAN, on Ighodalo’s behalf, the lawyer sought an order striking out the APC’s motion on notice.

Mozia, in his two-ground argument, said the court had no jurisdiction to hear the motion for amendment when there is a pending preliminary objection.

The lawyer also argued that the proposed reliefs sought to be introduced by the APC’s “application are statute-barred.”

In its proposed amended originating summons, the APC sought a declaration that Section 84(13) of the Electoral Act 2022, Section 285(14)(c) and Paragraph 15(a),(c) and (f) of Part 1 of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution (as amended) confers a statutory duty or power on INEC to disqualify from participating in an election the candidate of a political party that fails to comply with the provisions of the Electoral Act (as amended).

It also prayed the court for an order declaring the provision of Section 84(14) of the Electoral Act, 2022 as unconstitutional, null and void by virtue of its inconsistency with the provision of Section 285 (14) (c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), among others.

When the matter was called on Tuesday, Adaze Emwanta, who appeared for APC, informed the court that the matter was adjourned for hearing of all pending applications.

The lawyer said at the last adjourned date, he notified the court that the plaintiff would be amending their originating process.

“We have filed our motion for amendment and served same on the defendants. But unfortunately, we couldn’t serve the 3rd defendant (PDP) until this morning,” he said.

September 10, 2024 0 comment 30 views