reports that the situation escalated after Roby Ekpo’s appearance on Daddy Freeze’s “Honest Punch” podcast, which triggered widespread reactions online. This led broadcaster Do2dtun to defend Roby, arguing that speaking out and prioritising mental health is better than enduring emotional distress in silence.

However, Yul Edochie disagreed with Do2dtun’s stance, criticising Roby Ekpo’s emotional expression about his failed marriage. He stated that crying over a relationship was inappropriate and suggested instead that Ekpo should move on by marrying multiple women and getting them pregnant at the same time.

He said, “My brother, speaking out is okay. Crying is totally unacceptable. Rather than cry for a woman, replace her with five new hot women and impregnate them all at once.”

Reacting to the comment, Daddy Freeze responded in a video shared on his Instagram page, where he questioned the actor’s reasoning and intelligence behind the statement.

He argued that Roby Ekpo’s reported struggles with sexual performance made such suggestions unrealistic, adding that only an extremely sexually active man would be capable of such claims.

He said, “I am seeing all sorts of comments. Yul Edochie said he should marry his second wife and impregnate them all the same day. Is he someone who can handle that? A man who is not sexually active like that cannot do such things. It doesn’t make sense.”

Delivering judgment, Justice Hauwa Yilwa held that while both agencies are empowered to enforce compliance with insurance laws, they cannot independently sanction offenders.

The court made a clear distinction between the duty to enforce regulations and the power to impose penalties.

The ruling arose from a lawsuit filed by activist and lawyer Deji Adeyanju against the Inspector-General of Police, the Attorney-General of the Federation, and the FRSC.

The suit sought legal clarification on whether security agencies could both enforce and penalise motorists under the Motor Vehicles (Third Party Insurance) Act and related legislation.

Counsel to the applicant, Marvin Omorogbe, said the court confirmed that while enforcement is permitted, the imposition of fines is beyond the agencies’ legal powers.

He stated that the ruling effectively restrains the police and FRSC from issuing fines to motorists or vehicle owners.

Adeyanju, reacting to the judgment, said the court had addressed the central issue of the case, noting that the decision affirmed that the agencies lack authority to impose fines independently.

He added that the ruling would help reduce arbitrary penalties imposed on motorists.

However, counsel to the defendants, Victor Okoye, described the judgment as partially favourable and indicated that an appeal may be filed, arguing that the case was incompetent and questioning the court’s jurisdiction.

Despite the restriction on fines, the court affirmed that both agencies retain the power to stop vehicles and verify compliance with third-party insurance requirements.

The judgment is expected to influence the enforcement of traffic and insurance regulations nationwide, particularly in relation to penalties imposed on road users.

The judgment followed a lawsuit instituted by Bello over alleged defamatory statements made by the senator during a television interview on ARISE Television.

According to a Certified True Copy of the ruling dated April 23, the court found in favour of the claimant after evaluating the evidence presented, stating that the balance of probability supported his case.

Delivering judgment in suit marked HCL/16/2023, Justice A. S. Ibrahim ruled that both issues raised for determination were resolved in favour of the former governor.

The court also issued a perpetual injunction restraining the senator, her agents, and associates from making further defamatory remarks against the claimant across television, radio, or any other media platform.

The judge held that an interview granted by the defendant on November 4, 2022, during “The Morning Show” on ARISE TV was defamatory to Bello’s character and reputation.

The court further stated that the comments in which the claimant was described as a “murderer, killer, perpetrator of evil acts, and a terror to the people of Kogi State” were unjustified.

As a result, the court awarded ₦1 billion in damages against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan in favour of Yahaya Bello.