The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • ‘Fund Legal Aid Council’

    ‘Fund Legal Aid Council’

    Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) has been urged to provide funds for the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON) to enable it prosecute and defend the indigent in need of legal assistance.

    The Convener, Duty Solicitors Network (DSN) Bayo Akinlade, made the request on its WhatsApp social platform.

    While insisting on the need for the AGF to ensure that the Legal Aid Fund is set, Akinlade also appealed to well-meaning Nigerians and other human rights groups to demand that the Legal Aid Fund is activated and utilised.

    He further urged members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to ensure that they  earmark funds to the Legal Aid Fund that will be used to provide probono legal services to their respective constituencies.

     “The Legal Aid Act 2011, in line with international standards, provides for the establishment of the legal aid and access to justice fund into which financial assistance would be made available to the Legal Aid Council of Nigeria (LACON) on behalf of the indigent citizens to prosecute their claims in accordance with the Constitution and further to empower the existing Legal Aid Council to be responsible for the operation of a scheme for the grant of legal aid and access to justice in certain matters or proceedings to persons with inadequate resources in accordance with the provision of this Act.

    “The Legal Aid Council of Nigeria is no doubt well placed to deliver justice to the people and it is this belief that the Nigerian Law Society (NLS) in collaboration with DSN will initiate a campaign to establish this legal aid fund”, he said.

    Read Also: Sanwo-Olu gets kudos for prmoting unity

    Akinlade who contended that it is the duty of the National Assembly to set aside funds for the provision of Legal Aid to deserving citizens said the Nigerian Law Society (NLS) and DSN are ready to demand for what is due to the people and to ensure that they have access to justice.

    He lamented that due to the level of injustice and abuse of power in Nigeri today, many people are suffering and do not have access to justice through the courts, adding that the  situation has made the poor utterly helpless and even more vulnerable and leading to an increase in crime within our communities.

    “The courts being the last hope of the common man has become an illusion, nobody believes this anymore hence the new phrase “go to court” if you feel aggrieved because we know you may not even get through its gates talk less of walking within its corridors”, he lamented.

    He asked: “Is the National Assembly serious about letting the poor breathe? Is the Attorney General of the Federation going to live up to his reputation as a man of honour and a protector of the weak?”

  • Scaling election petition hurdles

    Scaling election petition hurdles

    The February 25 National Assembly election and the March 18 state assembly elections have been fought and won. Quite a number of aggrieved candidates petitioned the tribunals seeking to invalidate the election of their opponents, some of which are still in the special court. ADEBISI ONANUGA reviewed how some of these petitions were fought and won

    Twice, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate in the February 25, 2023 Senatorial election for Lagos Central challenged the election of All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Wasiu Eshinlokun-Sanni. Twice, Gomez lost.

    Eshinlokun, until the February 25, 2023 election for the Lagos Central Senatorial Constituency, was Lagos Deputy Speaker in the Lagos State House of Assembly (LAHA).

     Eshinlokun had defeated PDP’s Gomez to clinch the Lagos Central Senatorial District. Eshinlokun garnered 131,828 votes, while  Gomez polled 69,320 votes. OIadeji Blessing Tunde of the Young Progressives Party (YPP) scored 14, 941 votes to become the second runner-up in the February 25, 2023 election.

     Dissatisfied, Gomez approached the  National Assembly and State House of Assembly Election Tribunal sitting in Ikeja and sought  to invalidate the election of Senator Eshilokun, on grounds of irregularities in the February 25 Senatorial election.

    The 1st to 3rd respondents in the petition were  Independent Electoral Commission (INEC) , Senator Eshinlokun-Sanni and the APC.

    Read Also: Atiku gets knocks for press conference

    In its judgment, the tribunal  dismissed the petition filed by Adewale Gomez and the Peoples Democratic Party ( PDP) against the election of Senator Wasiu Eshinlokun-Sanni as senator for Lagos Central Senatorial District on the ticket of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

     The three-man tribunal led by Justice Faruku H. Bunza unanimously upheld the two reliefs sought by Sen. Eshinlokun-Sanni through his Counsel, Wahab Shittu (SAN).

    Other members of the tribunal are Justice L.T.C. Eruba and Kadi Mohammad B. Inuwa.

     Wahab Shittu (SAN), had through a Motion on Notice  sought an order of the tribunal dismissing the petition on ground of abandonment.

    Shittu submitted that the petition of the petitioner failed to comply with paragraph 18(1) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2022. He had also asked for further orders as the tribunal may deem fit to make in the circumstances.

    The motion on notice was brought pursuant to paragraph 18(1), (3), (4) of First Schedule of Electoral Act 2022.

    Shittu submitted for instance that “Paragraph 18(1) of First Schedule of Electoral Act 2022,  stipulates that a petitioner shall within seven days after filing and service of the petitioner’s reply on the respondent or seven days after the filing and service of the respondent’s reply, whichever is the case, the petitioner shall apply for the issuance of pre- hearing notice as in Form TF 007.”

    Shittu submitted that a violation of the mandatory provision of Paragraph 18(1) robs the tribunal of the jurisdiction to hear the petition of the petitioners at the pre-hearing session.

    He argued that the instant petition having run foul of section 18(1) of the First Schedule of Electoral Act “it is fatal, incompetent and ought to be dismissed.”

    Shittu in his written address in support of the motion on notice submitted one  issue for determination of the tribunal on “whether the tribunal ought not to dismiss the petition in its entirety for non-compliance with paragraph 18 (1) of the First Schedule of the Electoral Act. He submitted that section 18(1) of First Schedule of Electoral Act 2022 provided for the time within which a petitioner has to apply for the issuance of pre-hearing notice.

    He said non-compliance with this provisions hits the petitioner with a fatal blow.

    The tribunal upheld his submissions and dismissed Gomez’s petition. 

    Gomez off to Appeal court

    Dissatisfied with the ruling of the trial tribunal, Gomez approached the appellate court  by filing a-four-ground Notice of Appeal on August 11, 2023.

     In its appeal, Gomez and PDP, through their counsel, Joseph Daudu (SAN) raised two issues for determination of the Court of Appeal.

    They stated that: ” Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this appeal, particularly that parties had filed and exchanged pre-hearing question and answer sheets, whether the trial tribunal was right to have dismissed same as being abandoned?”

    They also asked the appellate court: “whether the trial tribunal was not in error when it failed to apply the provisions of section 285-(8) of the 1999 constitution (as amended) to defer the objection to the end of hearing the petition before determining same?”

     Daudu argued that the complaint of prematuredness alluded to the Petitioners Notice of Pre Hearing filed against the two parties who had joined issues with the petitioners by way of pleadings was a colossal error in law and on the facts as there was no error or irregularity in the latter’s application to the tribunal. 

    He stated that the tribunal was also in deep error, with respect to it, when it failed to be bound by the Supreme Court decisions in Saheed v Yakowa (Supra) and Sanwo-Olu v Awamaridi which clearly placed any such lapse (assuming they are true) as mere irregularities. 

    According to Daudu, the trial tribunal also failed to consider the overriding and overwhelming effect of the provisions of section 285-(8) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) which mandates the Tribunal to defer any Ruling on objection to Jurisdiction till the matter has been heard on the merits and judgment is to e delivered thereon. 

    He said even the appropriate schedule to the Electoral Act 2022 i.e., Paragraph 53 treats any such lapse, wherever it occurs as a mere irregularity, incapable of defeating the justice of the case. 

    In conclusion, Daudu urged the appellate court to allow the appeal and accordingly set aside the entire ruling of the trial tribunal dismissing the appellant’s petition as being abandoned.

     But the 2nd respondents, through their counsel, Wahab Shittu (SAN), raised two issues for determination by the appellate court. They asked the court to determine: “Whether a pre-hearing notice filed before the close of pleading in an election petition is of lawful validity?”

    They also urged the upper court to determine ‘Whether the tribunal was correct in law to have ruled on the application dismissing the petition without reserving the determination of same till the final judgment in compliance with section 2185(8) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended)? “

    The respondent argued that the principle behind the enactment of paragraph 18(1)(3)&(4) of the first schedule of the Electoral Act 2022 is without controversy. “It states clearly that within seven days after the filing and service of the Petitoner’s rely or seven days after the filing and service of the Respondent’s Reply whichever is the case, the Petitioner shall apply for the issuance of prehearing notice in Form TF007.”

     Shittu said where the petitioner and the respondent fail to bring the application, the tribunal or court shall dismiss the petition as an abandoned petition and no application for extension of time to take that step shalt be filed or entertained.

    He submitted that the draft person of the Electoral Act, 2011 (as amended), is aware of the obvious time constraints on the tribunals dealing with election matters in complying with timeframes therein, deliberately wove some new case management techniques into the Act with a view to empowering the tribunals to control and manage the proceedings expeditiously.

    He said the consequence is that if a petitioner fails to consummate the issuance of pre-hearing notice within seven days, he cannot fall back on paragraph 53(1) of the Electoral Act.

      Shittu, further submitted that the ruling of the tribunal treating the petition of the petitioners  as abandoned is consistent with settled principles on the subject as espoused  in decided cases and urge the upper court to so hold.

    Shittu also urged the appellate court to dismiss the appeal and uphold the entire ruling of the trial tribunal dismissing the appellant’s petition as being abandoned. He argued that the ruling of the trial tribunal court treating the petition of the petitioners herein as abandoned is consistent with settled principles on the subject as espoused.

     He urged the appellate court to resolve both issues two raised by the  appellant and the 2nd respondent in favour of the 2nd respondent.

    “The principle behind the enactment of paragraph 18(1)(3)&(4) of the first schedule of the Electoral Act 2022 is without controversy. It states clearly that within seven days after the filing and service of the petitioner’s rely or seven days after the filing and service of the Respondent’s Reply whichever is the case, the petitioner shall apply for the issuance of prehearing notice in Form TF007.

     “The respondent may bring the application where the Petitioner fails to do so or by motion which shall be served on the petitioner and returnable in three clear days, apply for an order to dismiss the Petition. “Where the petitioner and the respondent fail to bring the application, the Tribunal or Court shall dismiss the petition as an abandoned petition and no application for extension of time to take that step shalt be filed or entertained.

     “The draft person of the Electoral Act, 2011 (as amended), aware of the obvious time constraints on the tribunals dealing with election matters in complying with timeframes therein, deliberately wove some new case management techniques into the Act with a view to empowering the tribunals to control and manage the proceedings expeditiously.

    “The consequence is that if a petitioner fails to consummate the issuance of pre-hearing notice within seven days, he cannot fall back on paragraph 53(1) of  Electoral Act.”, he argued.

    In the  judgment delivered in the appeal by Justice Ridwan Abdullahi, the appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by Gomez and the PDP and classified it as “unmeritous”.

    It described the ruling of the tribunal as “unassailable”.

    It resolved  issue 2 in favour of the respondents and against the appellants,

    “The position taken by the tribunal in its ruling delivered  24th July, 2023 is therefore affirmed”, the appellate court held.

    Other members of the tribunal are Justice Obande Ogbuinya (Chairman) and Justice Elfrieda Oluwayemisi Williams-Dawodu endorsed the lead judgment and conclusion in it.

    Earlier, Arch. Abiodun Abubakar Dabiri and his party, Labour Party (LP), by a petition dated March 16, 2023 challenged the election of Senator Wasiu  Eshinlokun-Sanni for Lagos Central Senatorial district in the February 25 national election.

    The Independent National Election Commission (INEC), Senator Eshinlokun and the All Progressive Congress (APC) are 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents in the petition.

    The sole ground of the Petition filed by Dabiri through his lawyer, Ikechukwu Nwana, and his party, LP, is that “the Lagos Central Senatorial District of Lagos State election purportedly held on Saturday February 25, 2023 was invalid by reason of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act to wit, by the failure of the 1st respondent to include the symbol adopted by the 2nd petitioner (being the political party sponsoring the 1st Respondent) or other information relating to the 2nd petitioner on the ballot papers used for the conduct of the said Senatorial Elections for Lagos Central Senatorial District.

    During hearing, the 2nd respondent through his lawyer, Wahab Shittu (SAN) filed a Preliminary Objection dated May 8, 2023 for  “an order striking out and/or dismissing the petition for being incompetent and also another Notice of Preliminary Objection dated  May 18, 2023 for an ordering striking out the petitioner’s reply dated May  12, 2023 and filed on May 13, 2023.

    The grounds for the first application are: (1) the 1st petitioner has no locus to present this election petition being not a candidate in the election for Lagos Central Senatorial District held on the February 25, 2023.

    The 2nd respondent had also contended that the 1st petitioner is not entitled to present this petition for failure to comply with Section 133(1)(a) of the Electoral Act 2022. (3) The ground upon which the petition is predicated relates to sponsorship and nomination of candidate which is a pre-election matter and therefore invalid and unknown to the Elect oral Act 2022.

    Shittu stated that  the second application dated  May 18, 2023 is premised on the fact that the petitioners reply was an attempt to enlarge the petition contrary to paragraphs 14 (2)(a) and 16(1)(a) of the First Schedule to the Elector al Act 2022.

    According to him, paragraph 16(1(a) prohibit the petitioners from enlarging or and ending their petition by the use of their reply.

     Shittu urged the tribunal to pronounce on the two applications and resolve all issues raised in them in favour of the 2nd respondent.

     The 1st respondent in its defence against the petition made through its lawyer, Mrs Mary Aghahowa submitted that the petitioners are not questioning the qualification of the 2nd respondent to contest the election as stated under section 134(1)(a) of the Electoral Act.

    Secondly, she submitted the petitioners were not saying that the election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices being one of the grounds forming the basis of section 134(1)(b) of the Electoral Act and thirdly, that the petitioners are not contending that “the respondent was not duly elected by majority of lawful votes cast at the election as required under section 134 (1)(c) of the Electoral Act 2022.

    She said this clearly showed that the petitioners conceded that none of the above stated grounds applies to the petition under consideration. It can therefore be said that the petitioners concede that the 2nd respondent at the time of the election was qualified to contest the election; that the election was not invalid by reason of corrupt practices and that the 2nd respondent was duly elected by majority of votes cast at the election.

    On August 30, 2023, the National and state House of Assembly Election Tribunal dismissed the petition filed by the Labour Party candidate, Arch.  Dabiri. The trio of Justice Arum Ashom (chairman), Justic4e Mikhail Abdullahi and Justice Igho Braimoh upheld the election of Senator Wasiu  Eshinlokun-Sanni as the duly elected Senator of Lagos state central senatorial district.

     Agege Federal Constituency     

    In Agege Federal  Constituency, Sola Solana of the PDP challenged the election of Dr Wale Hameed of the APC at the National and state House of Assembly Election Petition Tribunal. Hameed had polled 27,445 to defeat Osolana who polled 13,376 votes in the election held March 15, 2023.

    Solana and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) are 1st and 2nd petitioners. While the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Hameed and the All Progressives Congress(APC) are 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents.

    In his petition numbered EPT/LAG/HR/17/2023, Solana, through his counsel, Akinwole Okenile, sought ten reliefs from the court on grounds that Hameed was not duly elected and did not score majority votes in the votes cast in Agege Federal constituency. The petitioners also sought three reliefs from the court, including   whether: the 2nd respondents whose election is being questioned was at the time of the election not qualified from being elected as a member of House of representatives; the election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices and / or non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act 2022 and that the 2qnd respondent was not duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast at the election.

    The petitioner urged the tribunal to hold that he was duly elected by majority of the lawful votes cast in at least ,two thirds of the 11wards in Agege Federal Constituency.

    Solana among others urged the tribunal to order INEC ( 1st Respondent) to issue a certificate of return to the petitioner as the duly elected member of the Federal House of Representstives; to declare the one issued to 2nd respondent null and void.

    In the alternative that the 1st respondent be directed to conduct fresh election within the constituency among other reliefs sought.

    The 1st and 2nd respondents, through their counsels, Idowu Olofinmoyin and Wahab Shittu (SAN) respectively, filed notice of preliminary objection, challenged the competence of the petition and called ten witnesses.

    The relief sought include an order of the honourable tribunal upholding the preliminary objection by striking out and or dismissing this petition being incompetent to invoke the jurisdiction of the tribunal.The objection was brought under four grounds.

    Shittu further challenged the grounds upon which the petition was brought as incompetent arguing among others that no facts were presented by the petitioners through the entire election petition in substantiation of this ground and as a result, he submitted that the same has been abandoned.

    Shittu submitted that the 11 witnesses called by petitioner amount to heresy and is forbidden by section 37 and 38 of the Evidence Act.

    The 3rd respondent through its counsel, Tukumbo Ajibulu also filed prelimnary objection seeking same reliefs on similar grounds.

    Delivering judgment in the petition, the tribunal led by Justice Faruku Bunza dismissed the petition for lacking merit.

    The tribunal noted that the thrust of the evidences of the respondents are that the election complained of was free, fair and peaceful and in accordance  with the Electoral Act and that the  2nd respondent was duly returned and declared winner of the election. That the election was not marred with corrupt practices or non compliance  with Electoral Act.

    “On the whole, this petition is without merit to the extent  that it will not be necessary to look at the defences of the respondents. The three issues raised by the respondents are here by resolved against them”, the tribunal held.

    The tribunal , citing several authoritues, further said that the petitioner cannot be declared duly elected by the majority of lawful votes cast at that election and cannot therefore be issued with a Certificate of returns.

    The panel of judges, including Justice L.T.C. Eruba and Kadi M,B, Inuwa, accordingly  dismissed relief (vi) and (vii,) sought by the petitioner.

    Surulere II Federal Constituency

    The election into the Membership of the House of Representative seat for Surulere II Federal Constituency of Lagos State was held on the February 25, 2023. The petition filed by Olatunji Shoyinka and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) arose from the said election.

    The winner, Lanre Okunola of the All Progressive Congress (APC) polled 27, 725 votes while the closest runners-up, Olatunji Shoyinka of the PDP polled 4,875 votes.

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) consequently declared Okunola the elected Representative of the Surulere Constituency II.

    Shoyinka and the PDP, not willing to accept the will of the electorates, through his lawyer, A. N. Kotoye (SAN) challenged the election of Okunola.

    Okunola, APC and INEC are 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents in the petition marked EPT/LAG/HR/03/2023                                                                                                                     His petition was brought on two grounds which included: “The declaration of the 1st and 2nd respondents declared as winner of the said election is invalid by reason of corrupt, illegal and wrongful practice perpetuated by the 3rd respondent, in connivance with the 1st and 2nd respondents, their agents as well as the glaring facts of falsification, manipulation and forgery of result done by the same 3rd respondent.

    The 1st petitioner’s second ground was that the “Election was invalid by reason of corrupt practices or noncompliance with the provisions of this Act.”

    They sought five reliefs from the court which included: that Okunola, APC were not duly elected and that the said declaration of the 1st respondent as the member to represent Surulere II Federal Constituency in the House of Representatives by the 3rd respondent in the election held on the February 25, 2023 is invalid, void/illegal and same ought to be set aside.

    It also include an order of this tribunal cancelling or otherwise invalidating the certificate of return or any other result issued by the 3rd respondent in favour of the 1st and 2nd  respondents purporting to return or declare the 1st respondent as the winner of the election held on February 25, 2023; an order of the tribunal mandating or otherwise compelling the 3rd respondent to conduct a fresh election into the seat of the Honourable member to represent Surulere Il Federal Constituency in the Federal House of Representative, Abuja; an order of the tribunal setting aside the results of some listed polling units, same not having been returned in substantial compliance with  the Electoral Act and an order of the tribunal  ordering a repeat election or re-run election into Surulere Il Federal Constituency in order to determine the person to represent the Constituency in the Federal House of Representatives.

    The respondents equally responded to the petition by filing their respective replies. The1st and 2nd respondents, through their counsels, Wahab Shittu (SAN) and Olufemi Oyewole respectively, replies attached with the Notices of Preliminary objection were filed on April 6, 2023, while the 3rd respondent’s reply was filed on April 8. 2023.

    In response to the 1st and 2nd respondent respective reply, the petitioners filed a joint reply on the April 15, 2023 while the petitioners’ reply on the 3rd respondent’s reply was filed on  April 21, 2023.

    During the pre-hearing session, counsels to the 1st respondent Wahab Shittu (SAN), brought two applications dated and filed on May 7, 2023 and sought for four reliefs, principally an order striking/dismissing the petition for being incompetent and defective vesting no jurisdiction on this court to adjudicate on it.

    The application was supported by eight paragraphs affidavit and accompanied with a written address and also a reply to the petitioners response to the application with an address, which counsel to 1st respondent,  Shittu (SAN ) adopted as his legal argument and urged the tribunal to grant the reliefs.

    On the part of the petitioners, they filed a counter affidavit on the May 13, 2023, attached with a written address which the petitioners adopted as their legal arguments and urged the tribunal to refuse the application.

    The second application as filed by the 1st respondent was on the May 9, 2023. The application  prays for the striking out of the petitioners’ reply to the petition filed on April 15, 2023 for being incompetent. It was supported by five paragraphs affidavit and a written address which he adopted and urged the tribunal to grant the application.

    On the part of the petitioners they filed a counter affidavit on May 15, 2023 with an attached written address which the learned counsel adopted as his legal argument and urged the tribunal to discountenance with it as it was not against their reply.

    On the part of the 2nd respondent, his application was filed through their lawyer, Olufemi Oyewole, on the May 13, 2023 for dismissal of the petition in limine and for being incompetent. The application is supported with seven paragraphs affidavit and accompanied with a written address which he adopted as his legal argument.

    In response to the application, the petitioners filed their counter affidavit to the application on the May 19, 2023 accompanied with a written address. He adopt same and urged the tribunal to dismiss the application filed by the respondents.

    The applications of the 1st  and 2nd respondents filed on the May 7, 2023 and May 13, 2023 respectively were principally seeking for the same reliefs, were therefore taken  together, likewise the petitioners response that is jointly written.

    The applications were seeking for the striking out/dismissing the petition for being incompetent and defective, vesting no jurisdiction on this court to adjudicate on it.

    The six grounds upon which the applications were made are:

    The petition does not contain any valid ground to sustain it, in compliance with section 134 of the Electoral Act 2022; that the petition is supported by incompetent reliefs that cannot be granted by this court; the petition is in its entirety academic and cannot confer any utilitarian value on the petitioners, same being grossly defective as to substance.

    They also submitted that paragraphs 9, 10; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 19; 20; 21 and 22 of the petition are vague, nebulous; imprecise and ought to be struck out and that the petition is frivolous, vexatious; academic; abusive and unsustainable adding that the  court lacks the jurisdiction to grant the reliefs claimed in this petition.

    During the pre-hearing session, counsels to the 1st  respondent brought two applications dated and filed on the 7/5/2023. The application sought for four reliefs, principally an order striking/dismissing the petition for being incompetent and defective vesting no jurisdiction on this court to adjudicate on it.

    The application is supported by eight paragraphs affidavit and accompanied with a written address and also a reply to the petitioners response to the application with an address, which the learned senior counsel, Shittu, adopted as his legal argument and urged the tribunal to grant the reliefs.

    On the part of the petitioners, they filed a counter affidavit on the 13/5/2023, attached with a written address which the petitioners adopted as their legal arguments and urged the tribunal to refuse the application.

    The second application as filed by the 1st respondent was on the 9/5/2023. It prays for the striking out of the petitioners’ reply to the petition filed on the 15/4/2023 for being incompetent. It is supported by five paragraphs affidavit and a written address which he adopted and urged the tribunal to grant the application.

    In response to the applications, the petitioners/respondents filed their counter affidavits to the 1st and  respondent’s objection on the 15/5/2023, accompanied with written addresses. He adopt same and urged the tribunal to dismiss the application.

     In view of the similarity of the application, the affidavits and the respective arguments canvassed therein by the petitioners, the two responses were  evaluated together.

    Delivering judgment in the matter, the chairman of the tribunal, Justice Ashu Ewah, citing several legal authorities dismissed the petition filed by Shoyinka and the PDP.

    Justice Ewah said the panel of judges were  in total agreement with the submissions of the respondents that, the petitioners have not put up required evidence to prove the allegations in the petition.

    “This petition No. EPT/LAG/HR/03/2023 is hereby dismissed with cost of N200,000  for each of the 1st and  2nd respondents against the petitioners.”

    Other members of the tribunal, Justice Abdullahi Ozegya and Justice M.A. Sambo were in agreement with the lead judgment.

  • Can Appellate Court rely on counsel’s personal record of proceedings?

    Can Appellate Court rely on counsel’s personal record of proceedings?

    Facts of the case:

    The Appellant was arraigned before the Federal High Court, Port Harcourt Court, on a 6 count charge of conspiracy, forgery; and Obtaining Money under False Pretense, in that between January and December 2006, the Appellant conspired with others (now at large), to obtain money under false Pretense, by collecting the sum of N25,356,000.00 (Twenty Five Million, Three Hundred and Fifty Six Thousand Naira) from commercial motorcycle operators (Okada), by holding out himself as the accredited revenue collector by the Rivers State Board of Internal Revenue; amongst other offences.

    He was alleged to have committed an offence contrary to, and punishable under Section 2 (a and b) of the Miscellaneous Offence Act, Cap. M17, Laws of Federation of Nigeria, 2006.

    The trial Court found the Appellant guilty and convicted him of the offences and sentenced him to 7 years imprisonment on each of the count, to run concurrently.

    ?Dissatisfied, the Appellant lodged an appeal to the Court of Appeal.

    Issue for determination:

    Whether failure of the trial Judge to include questions asked during Examination-in-Chief, Cross-Examination and Re-examination in the Record of Proceedings is a breach of Section 36(7) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and the Appellant’s right to fair hearing/trial, and if so, is the entire proceeding before the Court is a nullity?

    Counsel’s Argument:

    The Appellant answered this issue in the affirmative and argued that the Courts have a duty to record proceedings which is regarded as a right towards fair hearing as enshrined in Section 36(7) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

    Read Also: Sanwo-Olu gets kudos for prmoting unity

    It was the submission of the Appellant that the trial Judge failed to record all the questions asked during examination-in-chief and cross-examination during proceedings, the trial Judge only recorded answers to the questions asked, this the Appellant challenged by an affidavit filed on 24 August 2020.

    The Appellant also submitted that the trial Judge omitted significant answers given by PW2 at Pages 279 -280 and 355 of the Record of Appeal.

    The Appellant relied on Anyanwu v. State (2002) LPLER-517(SC), and Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, 7th Edition Page 1364 to define the word “Scrupulously”, which means careful about paying attention to every detail and careful to be honest and do what is right.

    He said it is clear that the trial Judge did not scrupulously keep record of the proceedings. Relying on Candide-Johnson v. Edigin (1990) LPELR-20108(CA), the Appellant submits that the failure of the trial Judge to include questions asked during examination-in-chief and cross- examination in the Record of Proceedings is a breach of Section 36 (7) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and the Appellant’s fair hearing and as such the entire proceeding before the Court is a nullity.

    The Appellant urged the Court to resolve this issue in his favour.

    Decision of the Court and

    reason:

    The court reiterated that the complaint of the Appellant is that what he took down in the course of the proceedings at the trial Court is not in the Record of Appeal.

    Does the Court work with Counsel Record or notes or what the Court below has in its record, which was duly transmitted by the Registrar of the Court? Their lordships relied on Yamo Nig Ltd v. Access Bank (2017) where the court had cause to say thusly: “Now, from the grounds supporting the application reproduced earlier, it is clear that the Applicants are challenging the Record of Proceedings. Parties are free to contend at one time or the other that the Record of Proceedings is not a true reflection of what actually transpired in Court.

    “This is usually referred to as a challenge to the Record of Proceedings and at that point, the party who raises such objection is duty bound to prove his contentions. It must however be noted that there exists in law, a presumption of regularity in favour of the Certified Record of Proceedings transmitted to this Court by the parties.

    “Any party challenging such Record of Proceedings is duty bound to prove such allegations. In other words, it is the sole duty of the party contending that the Record of Proceedings is not a fair record of what happened at the lower Court to formally impeach same.’’

    The Court was therefore reluctant to use the additional records which are simply the notes of Counsel as record in determining this appeal when the Record of Appeal has not been impeached according to law. And furthermore, the judgment cannot be a nullity on the basis of a record which has not been impugned and which is presumed correct and duly certified.

    Outrightly, the Appellant left out a significant step necessary in the process of challenging a Record of Appeal which is to serve the Court below.

    It was observed that the Appellant proceeded to compile and file Additional Record from his notes and not from the Registrar of the Court below. Even in doing so, he emphasised on the recording of questions asked as witnesses were taken.

    To learned Counsel, the trial Judge must record every question and answer given. The notes or recording of a Judge could be a summary of what transpired and not necessarily a word for word recording of the proceeding, the Court so held.

    The case of Udo v. State (2006) LPELR-3298 (SC), was relied upon, where the Apex Court in considering a similar complaint held: “A Judge is not enjoined to record every little detail of what transpires in a proceeding, whether criminal or civil.

    “The important thing is to record all those salient and relevant proceedings that are necessary to lead to a just determination of a case. The crucial requirement is substantial justice in the real sense of it, so much so that no miscarriage of justice is occasioned.

    “I agree that in a criminal case such as this, where the life of a human being is in jeopardy and at stake, a Judge cannot be too careful in his adjudication or compliance with the provisions of the law, but wasting time on procedure that does not lead to miscarriage of justice is not advocated.”

    This issue was resolved against the Appellant.

    Representation:

    Clifford N. Chuku – for the Appellant

    A.A. Ewas – for the Respondent

    Reported in (2021) Modern Weekly Law Reports (MWLR) pt 40, p 1681-1783. Modern Weekly Law Reports (MWLR is a publication of Doyen Law Publishers Limited.

  • Lagos Chief Judge pledges  support for DSVA

    Lagos Chief Judge pledges  support for DSVA

    • By Adams Oluwatosin

    The  Chief Judge (CJ) of Lagos State, Justice Kazeem Alogba, has urged  judicial officers in the state  to continue to support the crusade against Sexual and Gender Based Violence (SGBV) in the state.

    Justice Alogba stated this  when the Executive Secretary of the state’s Domestic and Sexual Violence Agency (DSVA), Mrs Titilayo Vivour-Adeniyi led members of the agency to adorn Judges and Magistrates of the Family Courts and the Domestic and Sexual offences Courts with purple ribbons, in commemoration of Lagos State Domestic and Sexual Violence  awareness month of September,  2023.

    The event held at the Lagos High Court, Osborne Road, Ikoyi.

    Justice Alogba said:  “I would like us to become apostles of this fight against this heinous crime because as I have always said,   once you debase a lady,  you have dehumanise society.  The scar will always be there . It will impact even to  children and the trend continues.

    “That is the more reason we must not relent in our efforts in fighting against this menace, not only in our official capacities,  but where we see something, please say something and encourage anyone experiencing Abuse in any form to speak out because these crimes thrive in the cover which we give it, in the name of cultural habits. Reporting perpetrators , and ensuring they are prosecuted and dealt with by the law is fundamental, and one of the sure ways of ensuring it is eradicated.”

    Justice Alogba thanked the Executive Secretary and the  DSVA team for doing so well in the fight against this menace, posterity will reward you for doing so much for humanity.

    Read Also: Atiku gets knocks for press conference

    Executive Secretary, DSVA,  Titilola Vivour- Adeniyi  thanked the  Judges and magistrates for the opportunity to adorn  judicial officers with purple crests which symbolise and depict domestic violence awareness.

    She said the event was symbolic and in commemoration of the Lagos State Domestic and Sexual Violence Awareness Month which is in September and in keeping up with the DSVA’s statutory mandate of heightening awareness and ensuring residents of Lagos are appropriately informed about the issues of SGBV, penalties when flouted and most importantly inform of free support services that exist that they can take advantage of.

    “We use this opportunity to appreciate the Lagos State Judiciary for remaining at the forefront, for being the pace setters for other State Judiciaries to emulate. It is undoubtedly on record that the Lagos State Judiciary is the first State in Nigeria to designate specialized courts for the adjudication of Domestic and Sexual Violence Offences.

    “This is just one of the many firsts of the Lagos State Judiciary”

    “We use this medium to however solicit for continuous support from the judiciary in ensuring that the relevant criminal laws on Sexual and Gender Based Violence are interpreted and applied with gender sensitivity and that SGBV cases are adjudicated upon swiftly.  Indeed, justice delayed is Justice denied” Vivour-Adeniyi added.

  • Experts dissect legal, regulatory framework for mobile virtual networks

    Experts dissect legal, regulatory framework for mobile virtual networks

    • Advocaat marks 15th anniversary with discourse

    Legal and regulatory experts have identified the requirements for operationalising mobile virtual networks in Nigeria.

    They spoke at a discourse series organised by a full-service commercial law firm, Advocaat Law Practice (ALP), to mark its 15th anniversary.

    The hybrid event had the theme: “Operationalising mobile virtual networks in Nigeria”.

    Speakers included lawyer and Executive Commissioner at the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), Adeleke Adewolu, who gave the keynote address.

    He was represented by the Head of Licensing and Authorisation at the NCC, Usman Mamman.

    The panellists comprised a partner at ALP, Rotimi Akapo; partner at Squire Patton and Boggs (UK) LLP, Francesco Liberatore; Managing Director of Systegra Technologies Limited, John Adams; and Head of BSS Products EngHpouse Networks, Nikolaj Jensen.

    The moderator was the Chief Executive Officer of Airbyte Solutions, Folabi Okubajo.

    The speakers explained that a mobile virtual network operator (MVNO) is a wireless communications services provider that does not own the wireless network infrastructure over which it provides services to its customers.

    According to them, an MVNO enters into a business agreement with a mobile network operator (MNO) to obtain bulk access to network services at wholesale rates and then sets retail prices independently.

    ALP Founder, Ola Alokolaro, said the theme was chosen to delve into a subject that carries substantial potential for the Nigerian telecoms sector.

    MVNOs, he said, represent a paradigm shift, offering new vistas in the telecommunications landscape and greater accessibility to consumers.

    He added that the discourse was a platform to dissect and understand the nuances of integrating MVNOs into the Nigerian market, thereby encouraging progress and growth in the telecoms sector.

    Alokolaro said: “The timing of this discourse aligns with the broader global trend towards a more inclusive and dynamic telecoms ecosystem.

    “Many countries have successfully integrated MVNOs, resulting in greater consumer choice, lower costs and improved services.

    Read Also: NCC licenses 25 for mobile virtual operations

    “Nigeria, as a leading economy in Africa, stands poised to leverage this model to spur innovation and expand telecommunication services to a broader cross-section of the population.”

    He believes that engaging in the conversation will foster a comprehensive understanding of the regulatory, technical and operational requirements of MVNOs in Nigeria.

    The ALP Founder added: “This understanding is essential, not only for prospective MVNO entrants but also for existing MNOs, regulators and stakeholders alike who are all integral in shaping the future of our telecoms sector.

    “For us, this discourse series is not just a discussion, but a crucial step towards harnessing the full potential of our telecommunications industry.

    “Through informed conversations and collaborative efforts, we can pave the way for a more dynamic, competitive and inclusive telecoms landscape.

    “Our collective efforts are not just about examining the potential of MVNOs, but about forging a path that could lead to a more vibrant and resilient telecoms sector – one that can navigate the challenges of today and emerge stronger for the future.”

    Alokolaro described the day as momentous for the law firm as it celebrates its 15th anniversary.

    He said the firm had been on a journey of unwavering commitment to best-in-class legal services across various sectors.

    Adewolu said the NCC Act 2003 empowers the commission to facilitate investment in mobile virtual networks.

    The objectives of the law, he said, include allowing providers of virtual mobile communication services to participate in Nigeria’s telecommunication market, with emphasis on improving output; ensuring that all stakeholders are adequately catered for; and allowing for virtual network service to contribute to the availability and expansion of quality mobile coverage.

    The commission, he added, provides guidelines under which mobile virtual network operations can flourish.

    Adewolu stressed that the licencing framework is designed to induce investment in the telecoms industry; enhance competition by service providers and choice by consumers; facilitate job creation; and enhance the contribution of the telecommunication industry to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

    Legal considerations

    Akapo, who heads the Telecommunications, Media and Technology Practice Group of Advocaat Law Practice, gave a breakdown of the licensing framework and legal considerations.

    He said: “The MVNOs need to ensure compliance with not only their specific licence obligations but the various regulations and guidelines that affect their operations on a day-to-day basis.”

    Licensees, he said, are to file the full contract agreement with the NCC and must obtain other licences to provide full services.

    Akapo noted that in line with the Executive Order regarding contracts and services, licensees should show proof of local content in their ownership and service delivery.

    He added: “The licensee must ensure that its services are rolled out within 12 months of obtaining its license.

    “A licensee must comply with the competitive practices regulation issued by the commission in delivering its services.”

    According to Akapo, interconnection agreements must be according to the Interconnection Regulation.

    Besides, the licensee must adhere to all obligations and must not engage in any anti-competitive conduct that places licensees from lower tiers in a disadvantaged position, he stressed.

    The law, Akapo said, provides that priority will be given to licensees that target markets that fall within the unserved and underserved regions.

    He also explained the contracting requirements, saying the tier, an MVNO operaterator, determines the contractual relationships.

    “Generally, the MVNO reaches a ‘wholesale agreement’ or ‘revenue sharing agreement’ with the MNO through negotiations,” he said.

    Jensen noted that planning, focus and execution were essential in running an MVNO.

    He urged operators to be specific about the market they operate in and understand the conditions.

    Jensen advised: “Know your critical mass and how to reach them.

    “Make a detailed description of your offering, the customer journey, and services you will be offering.

    “Set your price point based on your offering and test your offering with your target market.

    “Create a budget based on funding and forecasted revenue to plan for (phased) investments.

    “Work with partners to validate your approach and to get guidance designing and architecting the right solution.”

    Adams, who spoke on opportunities, noted that currency devaluation will increase the cost of sourcing technology, adding that talent exodus will pose challenges to sustainability.

    He, however, said the projection that there will be a billion interconnected machines and devices by the year 2050 underscores the opportunities for investments.

    ALP is a full-service commercial law firm with extensive experience in advising stakeholders of various sectors of the Nigerian economy.

    It is structured on a partnership basis, with the Energy and Infrastructure, Financing and Capital Markets, Corporate Commercial, Telecommunications, Media and Technology (TMT), Dispute Resolution, Shipping and International Trade, and Government Relations and Public Policy Groups as its core practice groups.

    With a strong and dedicated team of lawyers and support staff, as well as a global network of consultants, the firm provides legal advisory services to organisations and individuals with business interests in Nigeria and the sub-Saharan African region.

    ALP has been recognised both locally and internationally.

    In 2019, it was awarded Law Firm of the Year (mid-size practice) in Nigeria by ESQ.

    In 2017, the firm was voted the Law Firm of the Year (small practice) in Nigeria by ESQ.

    In 2016, it was recognised as the Emerging Law firm in Africa by the Law Digest Awards.

    The firm is ranked for its Energy and Infrastructure, Corporate Commercial and Banking and Finance mandates.

  • Ubani to NBA: boost public interest in litigation

    Ubani to NBA: boost public interest in litigation

    Former Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest  and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) Dr. Monday Ubani has urged the executive committee of the association to organise a town hall meeting to consider legal impediments bedeviling public interest litigations.

    Ubani lamented that the principle of locus standi is being used by the courts to bar public interest litigants seeking accountability, respect for rule of law and good governance and access to courts.

    He made the request in the chairman’s abridged report on the activities of NBA-SPIDEL from 2021 to 2023.

    The former Vice President of the NBA urged the leadership of the bar to hold regular townhall meetings to brainstorm on the issue and find meaningful solution.

    He said during a brainstorming event, it was generally accepted that for the human rights entrenched in the constitution to be meaningful, socio economic rights must enjoy the same legal recognition of justiciability as have been done in India and other Asian countries.

    He suggested that the townhall  meeting must have judges of the Federal High courts in large numbers as they remain the greatest culprits with this principle.

    Ubani regretted that despite the  magnanimity of the Supreme Court   to set a record of reversing the earlier rigid position as established in Abraham Adesanya’s case in the latest case of NNPC Vs Centre for Oil Pollution Watch, Nigerian courts at the lower levels are still stuck with the position that courts should interrogate the status of a messenger rather than the message.

    Read Also: Ex-NBA president Akpata: I’ll ensure good governance, as Edo governor

    “We need to stop the bad behaviour of our judges in this regard by the sensitisation that I recommend that NBA-SPIDEL should spearhead”, he emphasised.

    He recalled: “In 2022, we held a townhall meeting on the justiciability of Socioeconomic rights provided under Chaper Two of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    “The hybrid summit had the theme ‘Justiciability of Chapter Two of the 1999 Constitution, Pragmatic Measures  for Government Accountability.’ The event was chaired by Justice Helen Ogunwumiju of the Supreme Court. It had the then Chief Judge of Abia State, Justice Onuoha Ogwe, Luke Oniofok, Chairman House Committee on Judiciary, Suleiman Usman (SAN), Sokoto then AG, Olawale Fapohunda (SAN), the then Ekiti State AG.

    “The then President Mr Olumide Akpata was keen on this subject and did everything to ensure the success of the programme. Mr Femi Falana (SAN) again was the Lead Presenter on the topic.”, he added

    Ubani also recalled that NBA-SPIDEL held some important programmes for the entrenchment of proper enlightenment on public interest issues for good governance in NBA and the country generally.

    He said when ex parte orders and forum shopping became disturbing trend that painted the legal profession in bad light, the section rose to the occasion and held a Webinar in 2021 that had a retired Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice  Rhodes Vivour, former President of NBA Mr J.B. Daudu SAN, AGF Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), Justin Anayo Offiah (SAN), Olumide Akpata, Ondo State Governor Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN) in attendance.

    “They agreed that this abuse is usually rampant in election cases especially in pre election matters. They all condemned the abuse and variously prescribed punitive measures to stem the tide”, he said.

  • Out-of-court settlement should include lawyers’ fees, court rules

    Out-of-court settlement should include lawyers’ fees, court rules

    The National Industrial Court in Port-Harcourt Division has held that a lawyer is entitled to payment of professional fees even if parties settle out of court. 

    Justice Nelson Ogbuanya handed down the decision while delivering judgment in the case between Ajakaye Christopher and his erstwhile employer, Evomec Global Services Ltd (SuitNo.NICN/PHC/119/2021). 

    The judge held: “Issue of cost arises even when parties settle a litigated matter on their own in an out-of-court settlement deal, particularly if the professional fees of the counsel is not taken care of and factored in the course of the settlement. In other words, out-of-court settlement should include lawyers’ fees.

    “Ensuring payment of lawyers’ fees and cost of litigation in an out-of-court settlement deal, a variant of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) model, would encourage and sustain litigation lawyers’ interest and embrace of ADR, which they often shun and christen ‘Acute Dwindling of Revenue’ (ADR), for the simple reason that remuneration of lawyers in ADR practice has not been streamlined and integrated in the dispute resolution policy reforms heralding ADR practice in the Nigerian legal system, which hampers effective growth of ADR practice in Nigeria.”  

    The claimant in the case suffered a fatal injury while operating a heavy-duty machine on site.

    He sued his employer, claiming N80million compensation for permanent disability. 

    After the conclusion of the trial up to the filing of the address, the defendant got the claimant to agree to an out-of-court settlement.

    However, the claimant did not disclose to his counsel, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), that he had reached an agreement with his former employer.

    The SAN explained that he filed and prosecuted the case for the claimant out of pity, without the claimant making any initial deposit for his professional fees. 

    Read Also: Court discharges armed robbery suspect due to absence of witnesses

    Yet, the claimant agreed to be paid a lesser sum of N15million without informing his counsel or allowing him to participate in the discussion on the proposal for the out-of-settlement. 

    The SAN only got to know about the deal when payment was passed through his firm, but nothing was discussed or agreed to concerning his fees, and even the terms of settlement were not properly drawn, which was rejected by the court. 

    The court, however, awarded the N15million to the claimant and N5million as cost payable to the claimant’s counsel. 

    Justice Ogbuanya held: “From the record, I find no evidence that the said settlement brokered by the claimant and the defendant with its erstwhile counsel took care of the professional fees of the learned SAN, who filed and prosecuted the suit for the claimant and is entitled and expected to be remunerated, particularly in the light of the manner the matter ended. 

    “There is no evidence also that the claimant upon receiving payment which was remitted through his counsel’s law firm, did pay to his counsel any sum as remuneration for the legal services rendered to him at a time of distress and pitiful situation. 

    “In fact, he did not reimburse even bank charges for the transfer of the payment to his own account by his lawyer’s firm that received the payment. What an unconscionable way to treat a counsel!” 

    While condemning the claimant’s attitude towards his own counsel, the judge added: “Perhaps, the claimant by turning around in cohort with the defendant and its scurfy counsel would prefer to leave the learned SAN in the cold without any remuneration and make him regret the steps taken to pursue the cause of justice for the claimant in this suit.

    “That is certainly not the way to pay back good deeds! Gladly, this is a court of justice, and no injury deserving remedy will be left unhealed – Ibi jus ibi remedium!

    “In the circumstance, the relief (iv) succeeds to the extent that cost in the sum of N5million is hereby awarded against the defendant in favour of the claimant’s counsel, to be paid within two months of this judgment, otherwise 10 per cent interest per annum shall apply until fully liquidated.”

    Justice Ogbuanya had placed reliance on his earlier decision in the case of George Chinwo v. Port Harcourt Electricity Distribution Company & 2 Ors. (Suit No. NICN/PHC/89/2020, Judgment delivered on June 29 2021), which was challenged on appeal (Appeal No. CA/PH/128/2021), but which appeal was dismissed on June 21, 2023. 

    In that case, both parties had opted and settled their matter but failed to agree on the inclusion of payment of cost incurred by the claimant, especially cost arising from professional fees incurred by the hiring of a learned SAN by the claimant. 

    The court awarded a professional fee as cost in favour of the claimant’s counsel. The defendant appealed, but the appeal was dismissed.  

  • Wanted: legal framework on integration of ex-offenders

    Wanted: legal framework on integration of ex-offenders

    Stakeholders in the criminal justice sector have urged the National Assembly to enact a law to ensure proper re-integration of ex-offenders into the society.

    The request was made during a national webinar on the celebration of  the ‘Yellow Ribbon’ campaign 2023 to sensitise and create awareness on how ex-offenders can be properly re-integrated into the society.

    The webinar was organised by PRAWA in collaboration with the Nigerian Correctional Service (NCS).

    The  Executive Director of PRAWA, Dr. Uju Agomoh, said ex-offenders deserve a second chance, emphasising that effective reformation, rehabilitation and reintegration of ex-offenders cannot be achieved through hate and stigmatisation.

    Agomoh said that the idea on the yellow ribbon message is not for the country alone but an international message on the need to reform ex- offenders and what the community can do to assist them.

      “The motion of yellow ribbon is to make the community safer and give a second chance to offenders as well as removing bad stigmatisation.”

    According to her, ” it is important to know that, there are people in custody that are innocent, some who committed a lesser offence and do community service. It is a concept to engage those who are in conflict with the law.”

    Read Also: Bayelsa poll: We’re confident of victory despite legal setback, says APC

     Deputy Controller General of Corrections (DCG ), Non-Custodial, Nigerian Correctional Service (NCS) M. I Atta, assured PRAWA of the support of the service on the proposed bill on re-integration of the ex-offenders, noting that the bill is aimed at given hope to the hopeless.

    DCG Atta remarked that stigmatisation affects reintegration of ex-offenders into the society adding,  “a situation where people reject an ex-convict which makes them go back into crime.”

      He said apart from the skill acquisition which inmates are equipped with in the correctional centres, they also signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Open National University through which inmates get more education and obtained degrees that can make them useful to the society.

     Chairman, National Parole Board, Justice Suleman Galadima(rtd) said the cycle of correction  of offenders cannot be complete without a proper programme of getting them settled back into society.

      According to him: ” Experience has shown that the process of settling back into the society has always been hampered by the attitude of members of the society when they refused to forgive these ex-offenders, reject , stigmatise and make it difficult for them to find their feet again and provide for themselves.

     “The Yellow Ribbon project is a noble initiative because it is targeted at breaking barriers against ex-offenders, it preaches ‘second chance’, ‘non-stigmatisation’, unlocking of the ‘Second Prison’ and giving reformed ex-inmates opportunities to thrive.

    “A successfully re-integrated ex-offender can hardly go back to a life of crime and this is to the benefit of our society.

     “I consider this webinar a confirmation of the Controller General and in fact all officers of the Correctional Service’ commitment to the new approach of the ‘Service ‘ to corrections.

    “Leading on the Yellow Ribbon initiative and connecting to the society on this is one of the ways the Service has shown acknowledgment of the role of every member of the society in ensuring proper management of offenders”, he said

    Justice Galadima also noted that the campaign also supports deepening of the implementation of the innovative provisions of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act 2019  especially the Section 2 (1) (a-d).

    “The Yellow Ribbon Campaign speaks directly to the work of Parole Board Members. Section 468 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and relevant sections of the Laws of the different states of the federation provide that a deserving incarcerated person can be granted early release and Section 40 of the Nigerian Correctional Service Act 2019 empowers the Controller General to appoint  Parole Board Members for this purpose.

    “The laws provide for early supervised release of offenders on long term incarceration who are of good behaviour and have learned a skill or acquired education while in custody to enable them start the process of reintegration back into the society.

    “As Board members, we are interested in the message of non-stigmatisation, second chance and reintegration as this will benefit persons released on parole and other ex-offenders. The National Parole Board members of the 36 states and the FCT therefore stand with the Nigerian Correctional Service on this and are ever ready to support any progressive initiative of the Service”, he said

  • Judicial correspondents elect new leaders

    Judicial correspondents elect new leaders

    The National Association of Judicial Correspondents (NAJUC), Lagos Branch has elected executive council officers to run its affairs for the next three years.

    The new exco is led by Olugbenga Soyele of Leadership Newspaper as Chairman and Babajide Leigh of Silverbird Television as Vice Chairman, among other exco members.

    They were elected during polling last Friday, and sworn in by the Chairman of the association’s electoral committee, Wale Igbintade of the ThisDay  Newspaper.

    Speaking on behalf of the newly elected officials, Soyele thanked members for finding them worthy to serve. He assured that the new Exco will work hard to take the association to greater heights.

    The chairman promised to prioritise the welfare of all the members, as well as ensure that their interests are protected at all times.

    He further stated that the new executive officers were committed to upholding the objectives and ethics of journalism, and would stick to the media logic of social responsibility, ethics and values.

    He promised to improve on knowledge acquisition of members by organising workshops, seminars, and webinars.

    Read Also: ‘Preventing extra-judicial killing complex but achievable’

    Soyele further maintained that the executive council would effectively engage all stakeholders and build new relationships to make sure that their reportorial duties were carried out in a conducive environment devoid of fear and intimidation.

    He praised the immediate past chairman of the association, Peter Fowoyo of the DailyTimes, for his commitment and dedication to the general good of members of the association.

    The NAJUC Chairman praised Fowoyo  for giving his best to the association, saying “He has indeed done very well. We will continue to tap from his experience and vast connections.”

    Soyele added: “I also appreciate the Electoral Committee, led by Wale Igbintade of Thisday Newspaper, for putting in place a free, fair and credible process that guaranteed a peaceful and orderly transition of leadership.

    “I urge us to continue as one great family bound in unity and brotherhood. A united people cannot be defeated. When we all work together, the association will be formidable and respected. What we can achieve together will be bigger and better than what any individual can achieve.”

  • Court orders extension of time for meeting between council, traders

    Court orders extension of time for meeting between council, traders

    • By Adams Oluwatosin and Oluwatoyin Tajudeen

    Justice Idowu Akinkunmi of an Ikeja high court has ordered extension of time for the Lagos Mainland Local Government to hold a reconciliation meeting with aggrieved traders of White Sand Market, Otto, Oyingbo over alleged proposed market demolition.

    The judge order was sequel to the submission of counsels representing parties before the court, stating that they met on October  12, 2023 but yet to discuss term with their clients.

     Justice Akinkunmi said that extension was  expedient and to encourage amicable settlement between the parties.

    The judge thereafter, adjourned further hearing till October 23, 2023 for report of settlement.

    Earlier, when the case was called,  Mutiu Quadri, counsel to the claimants (the traders),  told the court that the counsel of both parties had a meeting and had reached a certain stage.

    “We are yet to discuss with our client, we will need more time to meet them. The lawyers have met but the parties involved have not met.”

    Counsel to the respondents counsel,  Tope Kolawole confirmed the position before the court.

    Kolawole  also told the court: “We had a fruitful discussion and we have come up with proposed terms. We prayed the court for a short date so that the parties can meet.”

    The court had on September 28, 2023 ordered that the Local government should  hold a reconciliation meeting with the aggrieved market traders over alleged plans to demolish the White Sand Market. Otto, Oyingbo by the Mainland Local Government.

    Read Also: Busted: Atiku signed his 1973 ‘Sadiq’ WAEC affidavit in court on a Saturday

    The market traders, through their representatives, Mrs Sherifat Abeke, Alhaji Garba Malam and Orji Onuoha, had alleged  that the local government threatened to take over the market from them on the pretext of demolishing and reconstructing it.

    The court had directed the parties to deliberate on issues regarding demolition and reconstruction of the market and also ordered acceleration hearing of the suit.

    The local government and Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice are the 1st and 2nd  second respondents in the suit respectively in the suit marked LD/70789CM/2022  filed by the traders.