The October 29, 2021 siege by security agents to No. 7 Imo River Street, Maitama, Abuja, residence of the second most-senior Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice Mary Odili, has continued to generate reactions, with stakeholders raising posers and suggesting how to avert a recurrence. ERIC IKHILAE reports
Before 2016, it would have been unimaginable that the residence of a Nigerian judicial officer would be invaded by state’s agents at peace time.
Since that first major incident in October 2016, when security operatives, apparently prodded by the Executive, engaged in pre-dawn raid on judges’ homes across the country, it is gradually becoming a tradition, the latest being the October 29 invasion of the Abuja residence of the second most-senior judge in the country, Justice Mary Odili of the Supreme Court
How it happened
A team of armed security personnel reportedly went to No. 7, Imo River Street, Maitama, Abuja where the judge and her husband Dr. Peter Odili live, at about 5pm on October 29. They demanded to be allowed to execute a search warrant.
It was a day before the national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) scheduled for Abuja on October 30.
However, the security team attached to the residence was said to have refused the request by the visiting security officials upon suspecting that something was amiss.
Not only was the supposed search warrant issued on No. 9 Imo Street, Maitama, Abuja as against No. 7 Imo River Street where the invaders had sought to execute the warrant, for a yet-to-be established reason, Chief Magistrate Emmanuel Iyanna of the Magistrates’ Court, Wuse Zone 6, Abuja, suddenly reversed himself.
Magistrate Iyanna allegedly issued the search warrant on October 29, 2021 but, upon learning of the trouble his warrant had created, promptly revoked it on the same day.
For a combination of factors, particularly the error in the house address and the vigilance on the part of the security agents on ground in the house, the planned “search,” which outcome only those behind it would know, was averted.
Application for search warrant
In the application, written by Chief Superintendent of Police (CSP), Lawrence F. Ajodo – who claimed to be the officer in charge of the Assets Recovery Investigation Team (ARIT) – for the issuance of the search warrant, it was clear that he knew the house he planned to search.
The application dated October 28, 2021 was written on a letterhead of a group identified as “Ghost’s Account for Local Whistle Blowers & Assets Tax Recovery Panel (Joint Panel Recovery under the Ministry of Justice).”
It was addressed to the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate Court, Zone 6, Wuse, Abuja.
It reads: “Application for your requisite consent and to issue to me, CSP Lawrence F. Ajodo, Force AP No; 20119 attached to Joint Panel Recovery Unit, Ministry of Justice, a search warrant to enable me carry out investigation of complaint on oath by Mr Aliyu Umar Ibrahim about illegal activities at No: 9 Imo Street, Maitama, FCT, Abuja.
“May I with due respect apply for the above document to enable me carry out my lawful duty aforesaid. I do hereby attach collectively for your perusal the nominal complainant affidavit and my own affidavit. We count on you. Yours faithfully, CSP Lawrence F. Ajodo, O/C Assets Recovery Investigation Team.”
Although the development has been roundly condemned, many have continued to ask questions and demand for an independent investigation to allow for a thorough understanding of what actually happened – whether it was an innocent error or a development actuated by a sinister motive.
Flurry of denials
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the State Security Service (SSS) and the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) denied being part of the botched expedition.
So did the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, who denied the existence of ARIT in the Federal Ministry of Justice. He said he had requested relevant security agencies to investigate the incident. Malami maintained his innocence when he received some members of the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) in his office on November 5.
Malami’s observations
Malami, in a statement by his media aide, Umar Gwandu, said there was no body called the “Joint Panel Recovery Under the Ministry of Justice” in the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, and, by extension, the entire Federal Ministry of Justice.
“What we have is ‘Assets Recovery and Management Unit’, the mandate of which does not include sting operations.”
He proceeded to fault the documents said to have emanated from Lawrence Ajodo and Chief Magistrate Iyanna, noting that “numerous incongruities in the documents being circulated in relation to the saga reveal traces of criminal actions with particular regards to:
- the name, as contained on the purported letterhead “Ghost’s Account For Local Whistle Blowers & Assets Tax Recovery Panel”;
- the ambiguous reference to “Ministry of Justice,” without clarifying as to whether it is Federal or State Ministry and of which State;
- the claimed office address which as revealed by the letter headed paper is not the address of the Federal Ministry of Justice; and the email address used on the letter –Agf.assesrsrecovery@gmail.com
“All these deductions would have assisted a discerning mind to arrive at a reasonable conclusion of criminal undertones associated with the court process on the basis of which the purported search warrant was procured.
“The office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice has since reached out to the relevant authorities for an intensified wider investigation on the matter for necessary actions leading to the prosecution of anyone involved in the matter in view of the fact that the only names on record from the process filed in court are a purported police officer who claimed to be “O/C Assets Recovery Team” and one Aliyu Umar a deponent in the affidavit.
“The claim of the Chief Magistrate as reported by a section of the media to the effect that he was being misled by office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice into the issuance of the search warrant is equally forwarded to the relevant investigation agencies to ascertain the veracity or otherwise of the purported association of the Attorney- General of the Federation and Minister of Justice and which officer if any in the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice is associated with such claimed misrepresentation.”
Further observations
Apart from the observations by the AGF, it was also noticed that No. 18 Tunis Street, Wuse Zone 6, Abuja, which is the address contained in the letter headed paper, on which CSP Ajodo’s application was written, is occupied by a law firm owned by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). Tunis Street was found to be the next street to the street on which the Magistrates’ Court, where Chief Magistrate Iyanna operates, is located. It was equally found that the whole of Imo River Street, Maitama, has only seven houses, without any house marked No. 9.
Counter arguments
Despite the denials by the security agents and the AGF, many, including the Supreme Court, the Government of Rivers State, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) have continued to point accusing fingers at the Executive arm, citing its antecedent in this regard.
The Supreme Court, in its reaction to the development, was unequivocal in putting the blame on the Executive and warned that it has had enough of such indignity.
It argued that the unwarranted and despicable raid on the official residence of one of its senior justices “in a Gestapo manner that unfortunately depicted a gory picture of war by some armed persons suspected to be security operatives, representing different agencies of government, who seemed to have come to kill and maim their target under the guise of undertaking a search whose warrant was questionable and baseless.
“We are deeply saddened and taken aback by this uncivilised and shameful show of primitive force on an innocent judicial officer that has so far spent several years of her productive life serving the country she calls her own.
“This incident brought back, rather painfully, the ugly memory of the October 2016 midnight invasion of the homes of our respected justices, with no satisfactory explanations as to the true motive behind such brazen assault on our collective sensibility.
“We wish to make it abundantly clear that the Nigerian Judiciary is the third arm of the government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and should be respected and treated as such. We have had a full dosage of this fusillade of unwarranted and unprovoked attacks on our judicial officers and even facilities across the country and we say it loudly now that enough is enough.”
Speaking for BOSAN, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) said: “This incident appears to be in isolation, but we cannot let it be swept under the carpet. The incident must be investigated and investigated thoroughly.
“Nigerians are interested in this matter. It should not be politicised. It is a matter of grave political and constitutional importance. There are three arms of government – the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. One is not supposed to ambush or override the other or threaten the other’s existence, otherwise democracy is at risk.”
Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike has also not spared the Executive in all this. He said: “We are taking steps as a government and people of the state to see that this matter is concluded and find out the perpetrators. We think that there is an attempt to assassinate Justice Mary Odili, the husband and members of the family, there are no two ways about it.
“If they had succeeded, all the Federal Government would have told us (is that) we will get to the bottom of the matter because that has always been the normal language. We are telling the world that if anything happens to the family of Dr. Peter Odili, the Federal Government should be held accountable because they have shown that there is something they are about carrying out.
“If anything happens to my Lord, Justice Mary Odili, the husband and the children, the Federal Government should be held responsible. That is the position of the Rivers State Government and Rivers people because enough is enough!”
Although the NBA was not categorical about the AGF’s involvement in the incident, it however expressed dissatisfaction with the investigation being planned by him.
NBA President Olumide Akpata addressed the issue at a meeting with journalists in Lagos last Friday.
Akpata said: “We are calling on the President, the head of the Executive arm of government, to set up an independent panel of inquiry, to look into this assault on the Judiciary, which is another arm of government because there is a dark cloud hanging and all fingers are pointing at the Executive as being behind this action.
“We note that the Attorney-General of the Federation has reportedly agreed to make himself available for investigation. This is consistent with the position of the National Executive Council (NEC) of the NBA, to the effect that the Attorney-General definitely has questions to answer.
“However, he cannot subject himself to a panel that he sets up. This is why the panel to be set up by the President is very necessary.
“If the Attorney-General is found culpable, then, as a lawyer, we will take him before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee and the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee; because if, indeed, he is found to have given the directives that led to the invasion of the home of the Justice of the Supreme Court, then he is not fit to hold the office he occupies presently and continue to be the recipient of the privileges the profession has accorded to him.
“It behoves Mr President to step in immediately, to set up this panel of inquiry, which, at the minimum, will have a judicial officer and the NBA involved so that we can get to the bottom of this issue and ask: who gave that instruction?”
Many unanswered questions
Apart from the many questions so far raised by observers, Akpata added that it was pertinent to ascertain what informed the decision by Chief Magistrate Iyanna, arguing that “questions must be asked of the quality and sufficiency of the materials placed before his worship before issuing the search warrant in the first place.
“The NBA National Executive Council believes that even on a cursory reading of the materials placed before his worship, there is a prima facie evidence that the search warrant ought not to have been issued in the circumstance,” he said.
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Musibau Adetunbi, was of the view that, not only was the siege condemnable, the development threw up questions that must be addressed, particularly relating to what informed the magistrate’s conduct and those behind the incident.
“Now, as we speak, who applied for this search warrant? Why? And how? These are still questions begging for answers. And, when it was set aside by the magistrate, who applied that same be set aside?
“Somebody must have applied for you to issue the search warrant. And, for you to set it aside, somebody must have applied. And, what were they actually looking for?
“If they were convinced that there was credible intelligence and that the warrant was legally obtained, why did they go back? The incident of the issuance and revocation of the search warrant goes to the root of the fundamental problem of Nigeria. We do things without following laid-down procedures. The magistrate said he issued the warrant. What and what did he see prior to issuing the warrant?” Adetunbi asked.
Blast from the past
The first major attack on judges in the country was in October 2016 when armed SSS officials carried out pre-dawn raids on the residences of about eight judges across the country. Some of the judges were arrested and later charged to court for alleged misconduct and corruption.
The cases were thrown out on the grounds that due process was not complied with, to the effect that allegations against the judges were not first referred to the National Judicial Council (NJC) as required.
Again, on February 21, 2020, a group of armed thugs and protesters invaded the residence of Justice Odili in Abuja following a Supreme Court decision, which voided the victory of the candidates of the All-Progressives Congress (APC) in the last governorship election in Bayelsa State.
Apart from these incidents that were directed solely at judges, there have also been cases where courts were invaded at the instigation of known politicians.
A ready example was on September 23, 2014 by some individuals, believed to be sympathetic to former Governor of Ekiti State, Ayodele Fayose.
A case was brought by 11 members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who were challenging the eligibility of the then governor-elect (Fayose), but before Justice Olusegun Ogunyemi of the High Court of Ekiti State could hear the substantive case, some persons descended on the court and disrupted the proceedings, with many sustaining various degrees of injury.
On May 12, 2018 some armed thugs, believed to be sympathetic to a faction of the APC in Rivers State, invaded the state High Court where a judge was set to hear an application by a chieftain of the party, Senator Magnus Abe, who had sought to restrain a faction of the party from holding Local Government Area congresses in the state.
How to prevent recurrence
Apart from the call for a thorough investigation of the latest incident at Justice Odili’s residence, many are of the view that the government’s failure to firmly address and penalise culprits in past attacks accounts for why more would be recorded in future.
Femi Falana (SAN) argued that those behind the October 29 invasion were encouraged by the fact that those who carried out the 2020 attack “were treated like sacred cows.”
He added that, “without prejudice to the official investigation, the Nigerian Bar Association should ensure that the members of the legal profession who took part in the execution of the illegal search warrant are reported to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee.
“Otherwise, such attacks will continue to be unleashed on judges, from time to time, by the sworn enemies of the Rule of Law in the corridors of power.”
Adetunbi, who sounded pessimistic that any investigation would yield anything meaningful, noted that those who went to Odili’s residence “could not have gone there on their own. They were not sent by bandits. Let us wait and see if anything will come out of the investigation. I can bet on it, nothing will come out.”
The senior lawyer blamed both the Bar and Bench for playing into the hands of the politicians, whom he noted, have become very desperate to always have their way.
He cited the removal of Justice Ayo Salami as the president of the Court of Appeal under ex-President Goodluck Jonathan and Justice Walter Onnoghen as the Chief Justice of Nigeria, under President Muhammadu Buhari.
“Politicians started the attack on the Judiciary with the Salami saga. Honourable Justice Salami was suspended from office, and for almost two or three years, he did not come back. His Lordship had not been tried nor was he found guilty of any offence.
“Whether we like to admit it or not, the NJC participated in his suspension. The constitutional provision is that you cannot remove a President of the Court of Appeal without going through the National Assembly. The law should always be complied with in every situation. We should ensure adherence to the rule of law
“The first case was by the PDP government, while the second was by the APC government. Who knows what to expect next? We need to think deeply. The Bar and the Bench must not shy away from sharing in this blame. Let us be sincere with ourselves. When you fail to protect your own dignity, the outsider may join you,” Adetunbi said.
Another lawyer, Tunde Falola was optimistic that an investigation would yield positive results.
Falola described the incident as shameful and commended the NBA leadership for its prompt intervention and steps taken “toward ensuring that all those who took part in this shameful act are identified and brought to book.”
He warned that “allowing this impunity and unwarranted attacks on the Judiciary to go on unpunished may spell doom for our collective being as a nation and, most especially, the administration of justice.
“On this note, I salute all members of the inner and outer Bar for their progressive stand on this matter,” Falola said.
On his part, Sylvester Udemezue of the Nigerian Law School (NLS), Abuja, cast most of the blame for the October 29 incident on the lawyers involved and the magistrate who granted the search warrant.
Udemezue argued that “a larger part of the blame still goes to both the lawyers, who had procured that strange, bizarre order, and to the magistrate, who had granted the order notwithstanding the obvious deficiencies, absurdities, fraud and illegalities seen in the processes placed before the magistrate.
“The search warrant should never have been issued in the first instance. And I submit that if the lawyers and the magistrate did not breach their respective professional duties, and (in the case of the magistrate, judicial duties) the blunder said to have been committed by the police officers during the execution would not arise.
“These lawyers, whoever they are, in addition to the chief/principal offender, and the presiding magistrate are the real culprits, who must be professionally disciplined to serve as a deterrent to others.
“Impunity in high places persists because no example has been set of anyone”.
