Former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido has criticised former Minister of Communications and Digital Economy Isa Ali Pantami over his past description of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) as an “infidel party”, while reaffirming his long-standing loyalty to the opposition party.

Lamido made the remarks while receiving PDP governorship candidates from Gombe, Bauchi, Kano, Yobe and Jigawa states at his residence in Bamaina, Jigawa State, on Saturday.

Reflecting on the PDP’s years in power, Lamido said the party was repeatedly criticised by political opponents and some Islamic preachers.

“The PDP was labelled corrupt, and some even described it as an ‘infidel party.’ Despite all that, I remained in the party because it gave me the opportunity to serve Nigeria as Minister of Foreign Affairs and twice as Governor of Jigawa State,” he said.

The former governor disclosed that after the 2015 general elections, senior figures in the All Progressives Congress (APC), including former President Muhammadu Buhari, President Bola Tinubu and former Lagos State Governor Babatunde Fashola, visited him in Dutse to persuade him to join the ruling party.

“I told them I could not abandon the party that made me who I am. Instead, I challenged them to come and join the PDP,” Lamido stated.

He also recalled that Pantami, while serving as Chief Imam of the Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University Jumu’ah Mosque, allegedly delivered sermons in which he prayed against the PDP and referred to it as an “infidel party.”

According to Lamido, Pantami later joined the PDP after failing to secure the APC governorship ticket in Gombe State, a move that generated widespread public debate.

Pantami has not publicly responded to Lamido’s latest comments.

The exchange comes as political realignments and defections gather momentum ahead of the 2027 general elections.

As part of an ongoing legal dispute with three Hollywood studios, AI startup Midjourney is seeking to compel those studios to reveal how they use AI themselves.

Disney and Universal sued Midjourney for alleged copyright infringement last year, noting that the startup’s image-generation models could create images of characters, such as Bart Simpson and Darth Vader, who are owned by the studios. A few months later, Warner Bros. sued Midjourney as well.

The startup argues that training its AI models on images of copyrighted characters is permitted under fair use. 

The current dispute revolves around the documentation the studios will need to produce during the discovery process. A judge previously ruled that the studios would indeed have to provide information about their generative AI usage – but only when it led to “consumer-facing” videos and images.

In its latest filing, Midjourney seeks to overturn that limitation, arguing that it “unfairly” allows the studios “to cherry-pick only those documents they believe support their market harm claims while depriving Midjourney of documents that would support its defenses.”

Midjourney goes on to claim that the “documents [the studios] are withholding are precisely those that would reveal whether, behind closed doors, they are doing exactly what they are suing Midjourney for doing.”

For example, the startup says that if the studios are developing image-generating AI models  “for internal use in storyboarding or ideating content for film or TV, that evidence would equally demonstrate that it is an industry custom, even among the studios themselves, to download and train AI on unlicensed copyrighted content.”

In the filing, the startup also argues that the studios should reveal all the prompts they used in Midjourney, as well as the resulting outputs, not just the prompts that produced the allegedly infringing images.

The studios’ lead attorney David Singer previously claimed Midjourney was seeking this documentation as part of a “fishing expedition.” 

He also said the studios “do not seek to stop AI technology or even shut down Midjourney’s business,” but rather “simply want Midjourney to stop copying their movies and TV shows and to stop distributing, publicly displaying, publicly performing, and creating derivative works that include copies of [their] famous characters without authorization.”