Controversial crossdresser, Bobrisky slams actress, Sonia Ogiri while defending his colleague, Jay Boogie, who is currently experiencing health complications following a botched surgery. It’s worth noting that Jay Boogie encountered severe medical issues after sustaining kidney damage during a Brazilian Butt Lift (BBL) surgery.
Bobrisky Sonia had blamed Bob for being a terrible role model to the likes of Jay Boogie who went under the knife for different body enhancement. Replying to the allegations, Bobrisky voiced his support for Jay Boogie, emphasizing that no one should be subjected to life-threatening situations based on their lifestyle choices. “Do you know you can make your valid point without mentioning my name? But if person wan chop ki for head, the head must surely scratch am. “Your write-up ain’t brilliant at all. You need to do better next time. Love and kindness have no boundaries. I will say this over and over again. No one deserves to die over how he or she chooses to live his or her life. Regardless, people who will still want to help her/him will stand up for him/her regardless. You are only in a position to control how you give your own money, not how others want to spend theirs.”
INEC Chairman, Mahmoud Yakubu Peter Obi, who accused the 2023 presidential election of being rigged, secured a subpoena through his legal team led by Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, to force the INEC Chairman to appear before the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja. Insisting that he wants the INEC boss to not only testify before the court as a witness but to equally produce and tender in evidence, some sensitive materials that were used for the conduct of the presidential election. While lamenting the inability of his client to effect service of the summon of Prof. Yakubu, Obi’s lead counsel, Dr. Uzoukwu, SAN, said: “My lords, I thought that by now, we would have been through with the stage of tendering of documents. “I have drawn the attention of the lead counsel to the INEC, Mr. Abubakar Mahmood, SAN, that the office of the Chairman of the Commission has consistently refused to accept subpoena to produce certain documents, inspite of efforts of Bailiffs of this court. “The counsel graciously asked me to give him a copy of the subpoena but I didn’t have an extra copy to give to him, so, he asked me to give it to any member of his team. “My lords, because I still do not have an extra copy, I intend to get it and send to him once the proceeding of today is over. “I am confident that he will do the needful for us to continue our case tomorrow,” he added. Kemi Pinhero, SAN while accusing Obi of always looking for who to blame for his failure said: “My lords should take note that it has become a habit for the Petitioners, that whenever they want to seek for an adjournment, they must look for someone to blame. “I was not privy to any discussion they had with our team leader because all the discussions have been open to members of our group. “However, it cannot be true that the Chairman of INEC refused to receive the subpoena. In PDP’s case, subpoenas were served, not only on the Chairman but also on some National Commissioners. “My lords should equally note that all the avalanche of documents they have tendered so far, some of them were certified as far back as in March. 
Mr Peter Obi “Yet, everytime, they keep complaining that INEC refused to release documents to them. “The submission that INEC refused to give documents to them, with due respect to the learned counsel, is not true. “If they want to ask for an adjournment, they should do so and not attempt to use the INEC as weeping board. “I want to say it for the records that it is not correct that INEC Chairman refused to receive subpoena. “The Chairman of INEC has no interest whatsoever. This allegation against him is most uncharitable,” Pinhero, SAN, added. Though counsel for the Petitioners, Uzoukwu, SAN, maintained his position and urged the court to verify from its Bailiffs, if the INEC Chairman did not refuse service of the subpoena, however, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel, urged restraint from both parties. “There is no need to quarrel over this issue. If subpoena was refused, counsel knows what to do. “We should remember that after this case, we will still see each other in court. “So, let us not allow issues like this to destroy bonds of friendship,” Chairman of the panel, Justice Tsammani cautioned the senior lawyers. Following a no objection stance by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, who appeared for President Tinubu, as well as by counsel for the APC, Mr. Afolabi Fashanu, SAN, the court adjourned further hearing on the matter till Thursday. 
