Paul Ogwu

Nigerian-American engineer & Harvard grad Yinka Ogunbiyi built HaloBraid, the world's first braid-assist robot, easing strain on stylists & saving salons time. $7M raised, 7,000+ salons waitlisted. American innovation, global impact. #AmericanExcellence in action. Learn more: businessday.ng/bd-weekender/a…

I just randomly remembered when Olisa Agbakoba advanced one of the funniest arguments ever witnessed in criminal law. So on the 24th of August, 1981, in Yaba, Lagos State, a man called Onuoha Kalu was having a heated argument with Agbai Ezikpe. Out of excessive anger, Onuoha Kalu unlawfully st@bbed Agbai in the neck with the broken end of a Star Lager beer bottle. Eyewitnesses apprehended Kalu immediately after the att@ck and held him until the Police arrived at the scene. Kalu was later arrested and arraigned before the Lagos State High Court. The prosecution called six witnesses and closed its case. At the end of the trial, the Lagos State High Court convicted Kalu of mur.der and sentenced him to de@th under Section 319(1) of the Criminal Code of Lagos State. But that was not the end of the matter. Olisa Agbakoba took the case all the way to the Supreme Court, where he advanced one of the most interesting arguments ever made in a mur.der case. According to Agbakoba, the right to life is an absolute, fundamental right. He tried to convince the Supreme Court that any law permitting a court or the State to terminate the life of its citizens is inherently unconstitutional because it contradicts the primary purpose of constitutional protection of life by that same State. He focused heavily on the method of execution, particularly hanging, and the "death row phenomenon." His argument was that de@th penalty should be abolished. Why? Because it is degrading and inhumane for the State to keep a convict on de@th row for a prolonged period, combined with the inherent cruelty of hanging. He convinced the court that such an act offends the dignity of the person, which the State has a duty to protect. But after Justice Anthony Ikechukwu Iguh, who read the lead judgment, was done listening to the arguments, he rejected them. The Court held that the prohibition against "inhuman or degrading treatment" could not be read to invalidate the de@th penalty. Why? Because the same Constitution permitted the de@th penalty under Section 30 of the 1979 Constitution. Hence, the execution itself could not legally be defined as an unconstitutional form of torture or degradation. The Supreme Court emphasized that the abolition of the de@th penalty is a legislative responsibility. Its role, according to the Court, is to interpret the law as it stands. Any policy decision to abolish capital punishment must originate from the National Assembly through a constitutional amendment. In the end, Kalu's de@th sentence was affirmed by the Court. But imagine if Agbakoba had succeeded. Today, the doctrine of the de@th penalty for cases of mur.der could have been abolished in Nigeria. It would have been that one argument, one case and one Supreme Court decision that could have completely changed the face of criminal law in Nigeria. That case is still being cited by lawyers today as Onuoha Kalu v. The State (1998) 13 NWLR (Pt. 583) 531. I am Ekene Aninze, Esq.

The Igba Boi system is an apprenticeship model in which a young person trains under an experienced master for several years & is then set up with start-up capital to launch their business. It's been doing what biz schools charge 000s of dollars to attempt blogs.lse.ac.uk/africaatlse/20…

Nigeria’s president may be quietly constructing a diplomatic dossier that puts his country on the path to rediscovering its old identity, argues Ebenezer Obadare. foreignpolicy.com/2026/07/16/nig…