The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Ending Electoral Amendment Bill controversy

    Ending Electoral Amendment Bill controversy

    The National Assembly addressed President Muhammadu Buhari’s concerns about direct primaries, insecurity, and other controversial clauses in the revised Electoral Act Amendment Bill it transmitted to him on January 31, 2022. But the lawmakers also inserted several controversial new clauses in the Bill. Governors and other stakeholders are mounting pressure on the President to – for the seventh time since 2018 – reject the bill, notwithstanding the potentially disastrous consequences that might have on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)’s preparations for next year’s general elections. What should the President do? Lawyers offer a way out. ADEBISI ONANUGA reports

    AFTER six failed attempts in seven years at passing the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, the National Assembly transmitted a reworked version of the Bill to President Muhammadu Buhari on January 31, 2022. Hope was high that this time, about a year to the 2023 general elections, the country would get a document that would help to fufil Nigerians’ yearning for a free and credible poll. This was because the new bill addressed the President’s reasons for rejecting the last amendments to the Bill last year.

    Buhari had via a December 13, 2021 letter read at the Senate on December 21, 2021 communicated his decision to withhold assent to the re-worked Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2021, passed by both chambers of the National Assembly.

    The President, in the letter, expressed concern about a number of issues in the document, particularly as contained in Clause 84.

    The clause deals with the mode of primary election to be used by political parties to select candidates for elective offices.

    Referencing the clause, the President cited insecurity, the cost of conducting direct primaries and infringement on the rights of Nigerians to participate in governance as his reasons for declining assent.

    In the bill earlier passed by the National Assembly in 2021, the lawmakers prescribed that political parties use only a direct mode of primary.

    The President promised to sign the bill if changes were made to the clause, to include the addition of consensus candidates and indirect primary options to the mode of selecting a candidate for an election.

    In a brief sitting on January 25, 2020, both the Senate and the House of Representatives gave in to the President’s demands and amended the controversial Clause 84 of the bill.

    But while the Senate allowed for direct or indirect primaries or consensus as procedures for selecting candidates for elective offices, the House of Representatives adopted only direct and indirect primaries.

    But in the harmonised version of the bill considered by the Senate, the lawmakers adopted all three modes of primaries, with a clear definition of “how parties can use consensus to elect candidates.”

     

     

    Past attempts to amend Electoral Act

    The amendments boosted optimism that perhaps, this time, the Presidnt would give the Bill the green light.

    This was because the Buhari administration has declined assent to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill six times in the last seven years, for a vairety of reasons.

    The President rejected the amendment bill for the first time in February 2018 due to provisions that reordered the sequence of elections.

    A second amendment bill passed by both chambers of the National Assembly and sent to him in June 2018 was not given any consideration.

    In July 2018, the President again refused to sign another version of the amendment bill transmitted to him by the National Assembly for the third time, citing concerns about the increased cost of conducting elections, among other issues.

    He declined assent to the amendment bill for the fourth time in December 2018, after the National Assembly addressed all of his previous reasons for refusing to sign.

    The President stated in his December 6, 2018 letter, addressed to then Senate President Bukola Saraki and Speaker of the House of Representatives Yakubu Dogara, that he would not sign the electoral bill while the country was preparing for the 2019 elections because doing so would cause confusion and uncertainty in the polity.

    He promised that he would sign the bill after the 2019 elections. But declined to do so in December 2021 – the seventh time.

    The amended electoral bill was passed by the National Assembly on January 25, 2022, and it provided political parties with three models of primary elections: direct, indirect, and consensus.

    The most recent transmission of the electoral bill to Buhari marks the sixth time he (Buhari) will be tasked with signing legislation aimed at reforming the country’s electoral system.

     

    Features of the reworked Bill

    The Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2021 contains many controversial clauses.

    Aside from mandatory direct primaries and electronic means of transmitting election results, there is also a clause requiring appointed political office holders, including ministers, commissioners and others to resign before 2023 election primaries.

    Governors, especially those of the All Progressives Congress (APC), and some political office holders are believed to be against the controversial clauses.

    It is common practice for appointed political office holders to remain in office while contesting in their party’s primaries.

    Furthermore, there is another clause recommending that before a consensus candidate of a party can emerge, all contestants must sign a written agreement that they have consented to the adoption of such an aspirant. If one of the contestants is dissenting, no one can become a consensus candidate. Instead, all the contestants will either go for direct or indirect primary election.

    “They inserted in the re-amended bill that if one of the contestants is dissenting, no one can become a consensus candidate. Instead, all the contestants will either go for direct or indirect primary election,” a source told The Nation.

    It was gathered that the Senators and the Representatives put the difficult clause on consensus to stop the governors from imposing any anointed aspirant.

    The Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice is also believed to be uncomfortable with the re-amended bill. It was gathered further that the two groups are mounting pressure on the President to withhold his assent until the controversial clauses are amended or dropped.

    Another, perhaps, less controversial clause is the one raising campaign spending by a presidential candidate from N1 billion to N5 billion among others.

    A  new amendment to the Electoral Act is believed to preclude the possibility of voters challenging credentials submitted to INEC by candidates.

    The proposal will allow only those who participated in the party primary to challenge in court, the school certificates, the birth certificate and other credentials of a co-contestant.

    Currently, Section 31(5) of the Electoral Act reads, “Any person who has reasonable grounds to believe that any information given by a candidate in the affidavit or any document submitted by that candidate is false may file a suit at the Federal High Court, High Court of a State or the FCT (Federal Capital Territory) against such a person seeking a declaration that the information contained in the affidavit is false.”

    But the new amendment reads, “Any aspirant who participated in the primaries of his political party who has reasonable grounds to believe that any information given by his political party’s candidate in the affidavit or any document submitted by that candidate in relation to his constitutional requirements to contest the election is false, may file a suit at the Federal High Court against that candidate seeking a declaration that the information contained in the affidavit is false.”

     

    Consequences of failure to assent

    What happens if the President – for the seventh time, withholds assent to the Bill? One of the major consequences would be its effect on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)’s preparations for the 2023 general election.

    INEC had previously stated that the timetable for the 2023 general election would not be released until the electoral bill was signed into law.

    Its Chairman, Mahmood Yakubu, stated at a consultative meeting with political parties in Abuja on January 19 that “as soon as it (the electoral bill) is signed into law, the Commission would quickly release the timetable and schedule of activities for the 2023 general election based on the new law.”

     

    Time running out

    The Convener, Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room and Country director, ActionAids Nigeria, Ene Obi, emphasised this last Wednesday in a Channels TV programme that:  “Time is running out….We urge him to sign the bill. We cannot wait again. The Independent National Electoral Commission is ready to move; timetable for the elections beginning from February next year has already been drawn.

    “Before then, we have the off-season gubernatorial elections in Ekiti and Osun. The INEC needs the document to make adequate preparations, but here we are waiting for the President.”

     

    What the President should do

    It is common knowledge that election matters are purely constitutional matters. It is against this background that lawyers versed in constitutional matters shared their informed views on the matter. They included a former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA),  Dr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), Chief Wale Taiwo (SAN), Secretary of the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) Mr. Seyi Sowemimo (SAN), Chief Wale Taiwo (SAN), Kunle Adegoke (SAN) and Chairman NBA Port-Harcourt branch Mr. Prince Nyekwere.

    Dr. Agbakoba was generally positive about the bill, new amendments notwithstanding.

    He said: “I broadly support the revised electoral Bill. The strict requirement that a consensus candidate may only be selected by the consent of other aspirants is a very important requirement.

    “It will ensure the consensus candidate is popular within the party and is acceptable.”

    On the matter of campaign funds, he reasoned that it could lead to monetisation of electioneering, but that there could be a way out.

    Agbakoba said: “The campaign funds authorised by the bill may have the unfortunate effect of monetising politics and it is hoped that a strong legal framework to scrutinise spendings will also be enacted including creating an electoral offences commission.

    “On the whole, the electoral bill is slowly and steadily moving towards a strong framework to ensure transparency in the electoral process.”

    Mr. Sowemimo believes that the new amendments were not enough reasons for the President to again deny assent to the bill.

    He, however, queried the basis for permitting presidential campaign funding to rise up to N5billion.

    “It gives me the impression that politics is being monitored at an alarming rate. Why would someone be using N5 billion to do an election? Maybe I’m surprised because I’m not a politician. Where will such money come from? How would the person recoup the money?”

    Taiwo  noted that  the major highlights of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2021, have been the issue of how political parties operate their internal processes for the emergence of candidates i.e. on whether it should be by direct or indirect primaries or by consensus.

    He reasoned that though some politicians insist that parties should be at liberty to determine their internal systems, “we must not lose sight of the fact that whatever be the system in use, it will end up affecting the political terrain generally.”

    He disapproved of the idea of consensus candidates, describing it as “distasteful”.

    He added: “It is abhorrent to democratic principles where dissents and differences in opinions is the hallmark with the majority having their way. No aspirant should be afraid of standing in his intra-party contest to emerge as the party’s candidate.”

    As for the clause on resignation before primaries, Taiwo saw nothing wrong with barring aspirants from clinging onto their appointed political offices while seeking elective positions.

    “I believe that is ideal. All those seeking elective offices must be made to resign and go into contest in their party primaries without having state resources at their disposals. This will allow for a fair playing field as no one will use their appointed role to further their political ambitions,” he said.

    Campaign funds limits necessary

    He argued that if INEC had not been up to the task of monitoring election campaign finance before this proposed amendment to N5billion for presidential candidates.

    Taiwo said: “Desirable as it is, I believe that the solution lies more in having a robust party system in the first place as recent experiences have shown that candidates become beholden to different interests and groups who support the candidates with their eyes set on having some returns.

    “I am of the view that the spending cap is necessary but as to how INEC would monitor it or aggrieved citizens approaching the courts for redress when infringement occurs, that is another thing on its own’’.

    Why President Buhari must assent the bill

    Controversial as some of the clauses in the amendment bill are, Taiwo was of the view that same should receive presidential assent without further delay.

    He said: “The 2023 General Elections are now just one year and one week away i.e. February 18, 2023 for the presidential and national assembly elections and the remaining elections following shortly after. The INEC chairman has expressed the position that detailed timeline will not be made public without a clear cut legislative position being put in place. That alone should give everyone concern and thus motivate President Buhari to act promptly.

    “I do not see why the President should delay assent since he is personally not a contestant and thus not so much in terms of personal interest. More so, delay will not be ideal given Nigeria’s position within the Ecowas sub-region which has in place the protocol on good governance and sustainable democracy.

    “At last count, democracy is under a stress test in the sub-region with military coup d’etats in at least four countries in the last 18 months and an attempted take-over in another just last week. To be able to command respect, Nigeria must take the lead and ensuring that our electoral system is on a sound footing is one way of showing leadership. Hence, assent to the bill is necessary”, he further stated.

    Adegoke also urged the President to go on and give his assent to the bill.

    He said: “I believe the President should proceed to assent to the Bill. The recognition of direct or indirect primary and the room for consensus is a recognition of what has always been part of our law.

    “The National Assembly has done well in listening to reason rather than making it an ego issue.

    “It is within the democratic rights of the political parties to determine the nature of primary elections they intend to have whether direct, indirect or by consensus.

    “It is also commendable that the National Assembly has provided an objective criterion for determining if there is a consensus which can only be the case where all contestants agree to the nomination of one of them as the standard-bearer of the party. Where there is a single dissent among tens of candidates, there is no consensus.

    “Consensus does not operate by the imposition of the strongman of the party. It must be a product of the agreement of all aspirants.

    “The best way to go about it is to ensure that there is a document signed by all aspirants agreeing that one of them should be the standard-bearer. This is an objective method of achieving consensus and not by the whims of a godfather.

    “Where there is dissent, the aspirants must go for primary election whether by direct or indirect method. This is commendable.”

    He, however, faulted the clause concerning resignation before party primaries.

    Adegoke said: “With respect to the clause requiring political appointees to resign before contesting an election, I believe it is an unnecessary provision.

    “If the essence is to prevent the use of state resources to finance the election of such a person, it should also be the case that elected officials too who are seeking re-election should be made to resign or step aside so as not to deploy state resources at their disposal to seek re-election.

    “I believe the President should not assent to this. It is not a necessary provision.”

    Nyekwere, however, differed on the N5b campaign spending ceiling.

    Nyekwere suggested that politicians, especially at the governorship  level spend over N1billion on electioneering, this the N5b was not shocking.

    To him, presidential campaigns cost over N5billion, adding that no matter the official spending cap, candidates would find ways to spend more, possibly through shell companies and other unofficial sources.

    He called for a way to check campaign spending.

  • Falana seeks enforcement of ECOWAS court judgments

    Falana seeks enforcement of ECOWAS court judgments

    Human rights lawyer Femi Falana SAN has urged the leaders of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to “take urgent and meaningful measures to improve the level of implementation of judgments of the ECOWAS Community Court of Justice to enhance access of victims to justice and effective remedies.”

    Falana stated this in a paper presented at the International Conference on the theme: ECOWAS Court: Achievements, Challenges and Prospects hosted by the ECOWAS Court of Justice at Lome, Togo which held November  22 to 24, last year.

    Falana said: “It is particularly worrisome to note that some of the member states that appointed competent national authority for the purpose of receipt and processing of the execution of judgments of the court have been accused of not complying with decisions of the court.”

    According to him, “It is common knowledge that the rate of compliance with the judgments of the court is embarrassingly low.”

    The paper titled: Twenty Years of ECOWAS Court of Justice: Achievements, Challenges And Prospects ding on the Member States, read in part: “Under ECOWAS Court protocols, the Member States shall determine the competent national authority for the purpose of receipt and processing of execution of the decisions of the Court and notify the Court accordingly.

    “So far, only six member states namely Burkina Faso, Guinea, Nigeria, Mali, Togo and Ghana have appointed the national authority for the enforcement of the decisions of the Court.

    “No doubt, the future of the Court is bright. There is however the fear that the Court may lose its relevance if its judgments are continuously treated with disdain by the member states of the ECOWAS.

    “The challenge can be seriously tackled with the establishment of the appellate division of the Court and the domestication of the Protocol on the Court by the parliaments of the member states of the ECOWAS.

    “Out of the total of 446 cases lodged with the ECOWAS Court of Justice since its establishment 20 years ago, 233 judgments, 117 rulings and 30 interim orders were delivered during the period.

    “The Court faces an ‘existential threat’ by the twin problems of the reduction in the number of the judges from seven to five and their tenure from five years renewable to four years non-renewable instead of the former practice of a staggered tenure.

    “Even the ECOWAS Commission has lamented the disrespect of the decisions of the Court by member states. But no concrete measures have been adopted by the Commission to ensure compliance with the judgments of the Court.

    “The Government of Cape Verde announced that the country is not bound by the judgment of the ECOWAS Court in the case of Alex Saab v Republic of Cape Verde delivered on March 15, 2021. The reason adduced for the defiance is that Cape Verde did not sign the 2005 Supplementary Protocol of the ECOWAS Court.

    “However, it is submitted that even though Cape Verde did not sign the Supplementary Protocol, it is bound by the judgment of the Court under the doctrine of estoppel.

    “Apart from the fact that Cape Verde took part in the drafting of the Supplementary Protocol in the meetings of the Council of Ministers and approval of same in the Summit of the Heads of State and Government of the member states, the Republic submitted to the jurisdiction of the ECOWAS Court in the case of Alex Saab.

    “Indeed, Cape Verde further submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court by filling two separate applications praying the Court to set the judgment aside on ground of lack of jurisdiction. It is hoped that ECOWAS leaders will address the defiance of Cape Verde to avoid setting a dangerous precedent in the community.”

    Falana urged Heads of Government of the member states of the ECOWAS to realise that “they may have cause to approach the Court for the protection of their threatened or abused human rights when they are out of office. He urged them to draw lessons from the experience of ex-presidents Mamoudu Tandja of Niger, Laurent Gbagbo of Cote divoire, Yaya Boni of Benin,  Charles Taylor of Liberia and Blaise Campaore of Burkina. These leaders were compelled to seek legal redress in the court even though they had treated the decisions of the Court with disdain when they were in power.

    “As the jurisdiction of the Court was limited to the resolution of disputes between the institutions and member states of the ECOWAS inter se, the two cases filed by individual community citizens were struck out for want of locus standi.

    “As the Court was becoming re    dundant a campaign was launched by the management of the Court and concerned civil society organisations for the expansion of the mandate of the Court to entertain cases of human rights violations.

    “Unlike municipal courts in the member states of the ECOWAS which usually restrict the observance of human rights to political and civil rights, the ECOWAS Court upholds the socio-economic and solidarity rights of community citizens including the right to environment and development.

    “In the Registered Trustees of the Socio Economic and Accountability Project (SERAP) v. Federal Republic of Nigeria the Court held that every Nigerian has a right to education in line with Article 17 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights.”

    “In SERAP v Nigeria the Court of Justice held that the Nigerian government was responsible for the abuse of the environment traceable to the oil companies operating in the Niger Delta region, in violation of Article 24 of the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights.

    “It is our submission that the judgments handed down by the Court in many cases have contributed to the rich human rights jurisprudence in Africa.

    “Apart from awarding damages to the next of kin and family members of community citizens who were unlawfully killed, the Court has established the principle that member states have a legal obligation to investigate the unlawful killing of community citizens and prosecute the culprits.”

  • Ogun strengthens machinery of justice

    Ogun strengthens machinery of justice

    The Ogun State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Oluwasina Ogungbade has said that the present administration has put enough measures in place to strengthen the machinery of justice dispensation.

    He said this was done to ensure members of the public and investors  have confidence in the state’s judicial system.

    Ogungbade stated this during a radio programme, “Sunday Morning Live” on OGBC II, FM Radio, in Abeokuta, the state capital.

    Ogungbade, represented by the Director of Public Prosecutions, (DPP), Ministry of Justice, Mr. Bamidele Adebayo, said that it was imperative for the state to make justice dispensation a priority, adding that people would not lose interest in seeking justice in the state’s judiciary.

    “Indeed, we believe that the key to thriving business is the primacy of the rule of law and quick dispensation of justice, so, officers and members in the temple of justice have greater role to play, especially with investors coming into our state”, Ogungbade said

    He said that administration of justice was the primary functions of the state, which generally divided into administration of civil justice and administration of criminal justice, noting that the purpose of administration of criminal justice was to punish the wrongdoers.

    He noted that justice was mainly for three reasons, justice for the accused/defendant, justice for the victims/complainants and justice for the society, saying once those applied, the people would no more shun or jettison the idea of pursing their right or seeking for justice.

    According to him, the state government had done tremendously well in putting machinery in place, especially in terms of digitalising the judicial system, upgrading and employment of more judiciary staff for efficient and effective service delivery.

    He added that the establishment of Multi-Door Courts, Alternative Dispute Resolution and others made the Ogun State judiciary system the best in Nigeria, saying that the government was really committed in the quick dispensation of justice.

    On ease of doing business, Ogungbade emphasised that the state government had strengthened the version of law that is poised to facilitate prompt action or resolution of all government transaction with efficiency, especially with small and medium enterprises in the state.

  • U.S, Ogun partner on justice administration

    U.S, Ogun partner on justice administration

    The United States has pledged to support the Ogun State Government in strengthening the administration of justice.

    Its Ambassador, Mary Beth Leonard joined Governor Dapo Abiodun,  and Chief Judge of Ogun State, Justice Mosunmola Dipeolu, for the launch of an electronic court scheduling and case management system for the state judiciary.

    Leonard noted that the U.S. Government-supported initiative would shorten court delays and case backlogs and deliver justice more efficiently.

    “The new case management system was developed as a solution to promote efficiency in the allocation of time and resources to court cases.

    “We have high hopes that the electronic court scheduling and case management system will help speed up the pace of criminal justice in Ogun State,” Leonard said.

    At the event were senior judicial officers, state legislators, law enforcement officers, civil society representatives and members of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA).

    The ambassador highlighted the positive trajectory of law enforcement cooperation between the U.S. Mission and the Ogun State Government.

    It includes support for the establishment of the Corrections Information Management System and the Court Attendance Endorsement Form.

    The Corrections Information Management System is deployed by the Ogun State Command of the Nigeria Correctional Services to record and monitor the length of time pre-trial suspects are kept in custody.

    The Court Attendance Endorsement Form enables correctional facilities and courts in Ogun State to track court attendance and case hearings for persons in custody.

    “The introduction of Corrections Information Management System and the Court Attendance Endorsement Form serve the key goals to decongest prisons, provide the necessary infrastructure to speed up the pace of criminal adjudication, and to ensure the creation of data that will document any delays,” Leonard added.

    Abiodun lauded the U.S. Government for the partnership that culminated in the introduction of the electronic court scheduling and case management system.

    He described it as a “trailblazing effort” in the administration of justice in the state.

    Justice Dipeolu urged judges, magistrates and other judicial officers to embrace the new electronic system.

    “Digitisation will aid quick dispensation of justice and make our job as judges easier with the ripple effect of attracting investors to the state,” said said.

    Through the support of the U.S. Mission’s Office of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), the Ogun State Government initiated a collaboration with a local law firm, Olaniwun Ajayi Legal Practitioners, to develop a manual detailing this new system.

    Following the U.S. Mission’s initial support, Olaniwun Ajayi Legal Practitioners and Ogun State authorities expanded on the project and digitiaed the process into a multi-user electronic system.

    INL works with partner governments to help reduce crime, promote public safety, and ensure that people have access to a functioning justice system that is fair, transparent, and accountable.

  • How to halt sexual, gender-based violence, by activists

    How to halt sexual, gender-based violence, by activists

    Lagos State has held a symposium on factors responsible for gender-based violence and how to end the vice. ADEBISI ONANUGA reports

    Activists and other stakeholders in the justice sector have converged in Lagos to consider factors and triggers of domestic and other forms of domestic violence.

    The occasion was a symposium organised by the Lagos State Domestic and Sexual Violence Agency (DSVA) at the MUSON Centre, Onikan, Lagos. The event held as part of the agency’s efforts to combat sexual and gender-based violence.

    The theme was ”Inter Generational Conversations; Factors & Triggers of Sexual and Gender Based Violence … Charting A way Forward.”

    The event had in attendance, faith based organisations, community leaders, community development associations (CDA), community development committees (CDC), non- governmental organisations (NGOs), students of the University of Lagos (Unilag) and members of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) amongst others.

    The participants agreed on the need to keep the conversations going about sexual and gender-based violence in order to eradicate the vice from the society.

    Dean Faculty of Sociology, Department of Sociology, Unilag, Prof Olufunlayo Bammeke, who was the keynote speaker, highlighted  the different triggers, causes as well as proffered solutions to them.

    To eradicate the vice, Bameke emphasised the need for empowerment for boys and girls, pre-marital counselling and life skills, enlightenment programmes aimed at behavioural  change, engagement of the private sector to embrace anti-GBV programmes among other suggestions.

    The Solicitor-General & Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice, Ms. Titilayo Shitta-Bey who was represented by the Director ,Citizen’s Mediation Centre (CMC) Mrs. Abiola Oseni, in a goodwill message, underscored the different efforts of the state government in providing holistic response to incidents of domestic and sexual violence.

    Ms. Shitta-Bey reiterated the need to offer real and practicable solutions in addressing the root causes of  sexual and gender-based violence which she noted would ultimately lead to the prevention of vice.

    Panelists at the concluded that there is a need to keep the conversations going about sexual and gender-based violence if there is desire to prevent and end the dastardly act.

    Panelists included the Chief Executive of Absolute Media, Mr. Victor Okpala, Ms. Halimat Oshun, Commissioner, Lagos State Audit Commission, Mrs. Kafilat Ogbara, a member of the Rotary Club Engr. Ajibade Oke and Mr. Micheal West.

    The panel discussion was moderated by Mrs. Nyma Akashat-Zibiri of “Your View “, a programme of the Television Continental (TVC).

    They recommended in addition that religious leaders, community leaders, gatekeepers and traditional rulers  must work hand in hand with government to prevent and respond to SGBV.

    DSVA Executive Secretary Mrs. Titilola Vivour-Adeniyi said the symposium’s objective was to provide a platform where both the young and old could engage in conversations on the causes, factors and triggers of SGBV.

    Vivour-Adeniyi added that the forum was an opportunity to interrogate sociocultural norms and other factors that encourage the perpetration of domestic and sexual violence.

    “At the end of the converstaions, it is our sincere hope that  both generations will be guided to chart a way forward in a bid to prevent the occurrence of sexual and gender-based violence”, she stated.

  • Ukrainian varsity confers doctorate on SAN

    Ukrainian varsity confers doctorate on SAN

    The Lviv University of Business and Law (LUBL), Ukraine, has conferred a honorary doctorate degree (honoris causa) on a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Reuben Atabo for his outstanding contributions to the promotion of justice in Nigeria.

    The school, in a letter signed by its Rector, Prof Gorbonos Fedor Vladimirovich, said the award was part of its “international collaborative programmes towards encouraging excellence, which involves acknowledging the contributions of respected and distinguished men and women worldwide.

    “It is my honour to inform you that your name was recommended as one of such personalities to be conferred with the award of Doctorate degree (honoris causa) in Public Administration and Management of our prestigious university.”

    It added that the choice of Atabo was because of his outstanding achievements in the administration of justice and having recorded many successes in the handling of several landmark cases in Nigeria.

    Atabo was formally decorated with the award along with others, at a ceremony held on January 29 in Abuja.

  • Court orders Customs Service to release five vehicles to owners

    Court orders Customs Service to release five vehicles to owners

    A Federal High Court sitting in Abeokuta, Ogun State has ordered the Nigeria Customs Service to release five vehicles classified as “condemnation and forfeiture” back to their owners.

    The vehicles included a Berliet Trailer Truck with registration No. AY 7203 RB (AX 7904 RB) Chasis No. MP 102180; Renault Trailer Truck with Registration No. BA 1600 RB (AB 6028 RB) Chasis No. RA03DIRN300172; Renault Trailer Truck with registration No. BN 7723 RB (AN 5660 RB) Chasis No. VF6RD04AIRE V00869; Renault Trailer Truck with registration No. BH 9263 RB (AR 3649 RB) Chasis No. CL 300334 and Renault Trailer Truck with registration No. AL 6130 RB (AB 3045 RB) Chasis No. VF6RA04AIREJ00931.

    Justice Oluremi Oguntoyinbo gave the order while ruling on an application by Yoyo Olowokere Limited and four others through their lawyer, George Oyeniyi.

    Other applicants in the matter are Mensar Sewlannou J. Joseph Joel, Akodegbe Basile, Koudjo Segbegnon and Ayivodji Sourou Pascal.

    The Nigeria Customs Service Board is the sole respondent in the matter.

    Justice Oguntoyinbo ordered “that the applicants’ vehicles listed as items 148, 366,367, 368 and 369 are hereby excluded from the list of the condemned items covered by the Exparte Order of  June 25, 2020.

    “That the vehicles are hereby released from the custody of the Ogun Custom Command, Idiroko, Ogun State to the applicants forthwith.”

    Justice Oguntoyinbo held that the respondent failed to prove that the goods carried by the trucks were prohibited items or that the items were to be exported illegally.

    The court also ordered in its January 18, 2022 ruling, a copy of which was obtained by The Nation, that “If the vehicles have been auctioned or sold, the respondent shall pay the  full monetary value of the goods and trucks within a period 30 days.”

    It emphasised that the respondent failed to prove that the goods carried by the trucks were prohibited items or that the items were to be exported illegally.

    “I have carefully perused the affidavit of the respondent as well as the exhibits attached, I say that the applicants have adduced sufficient material in proof of their case. The respondent on their part have failed to do likewise” the court held.

    The applicants, in their application, had approached the court and asked for an order setting aside and or varying the Order of Condemnation and Forfeiture made in relation to the applicants goods and vehicles listed as items 148, 366, 367, 368 and 369 in the schedule marked as Exhibit ‘D’ which formed part of the order made on June 25, 2020.

    The applicants prayed the court for an order setting aside the order authorising the respondents to auction, allocate or sell the applicants goods and vehicles.

    The applicants in addition urged court for an order for unconditional release of their vehicles.

    They contended that the respondent obtained the Order of “Condemnation and Forfeiture”  by misrepresentation and concealment of facts, without due process of law, the suit not properly constituted and consequently robbed the court of the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

    The respondents in their opposing application, filed an eight paragraph counter affidavit on December 24, 2020, and attached a written address stating that the court was not bound by a ruling cited by the applicants.

     

  • Alleged N13m theft: ex-manager, sales rep get N10m bail

    Alleged N13m theft: ex-manager, sales rep get N10m bail

    Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo of an Ikeja Special Offences Court has granted N10million bail each to two former staff of Westgate Lifecare Supermarket, Isheri, Lagos, Daniel Imoh and Ezeja Chibueze following their arraignment for alleged theft of N13 million property of their employer.

    Justice Taiwo remanded the duo in Correctional Services custody pending perfection of their bail conditions.

    Imoh, 30, a former manager and Chibueze, 38, a former sales rep, are facing a two-count charge bordering on ‘stealing and fraudulent conversion’.

    According to prosecution counsel Eric Tekenah, the offence was committed between 2018 and 2020 while they were in the company’s employment.

    Tekenah alleged that Imoh, “stole by dishonestly converting to his own use the sum of N8 million while Chibueze allegedly stole N5 million from same company

    Imoh and Chibueze denied the charge.

    Read Also:

    Following their not guilty plea, counsel to the first defendant Abraham Inetianbor told the court that he had filed bail applications  supported by a nine-paragraph affidavit and urged the court to grant them bail.

    But Tekenah opposed the application saying that it took the intervention of the Investigating Police Officer (IPO) to re-arrest the defendants.

    He was in turn opposed by counsel to 2nd defendant, Keneth Aghuta.

    Justice Taiwo granted the defendants bail and adjourned till March 1 for trial.

  • Judicial reforms: tough questions, tougher answers

    Judicial reforms: tough questions, tougher answers

    Bothered by the increasing inability of the judicial system to guarantee justice, stakeholders met in Abuja for the “Justice Sector Summit 2022” to assess the problems and suggest how best to address them. Eric Ikhilae reports

    President Muhammadu Buhari, while addressing the 2021 “All Judges’ Conference of the Superior Courts”  in Abuja on November 15 last year, drew participants’ attention to the consequences of a troubled judicial system in the life of a nation.

    The President noted that, aside the erosion of public confidence in its ability to administer justice, which could encourage resort to self-help, an ineffective judicial system that revels in delay, among other inadequacies, also affects a nation’s capacity to compete among its peers.

    “Nigeria is part of the global market place for investment and legal services, and the extent to which the country can attract business depends in part on investors’ perception of the quality of the justice delivery system … If we are seen as inefficient and ineffective, we would lose out to more efficient systems,” he said.

    President Buhari’s observation echoed the mind of many, who are familiar with the state of affairs in the nation’s justice system, and who have consistently called for reforms.

    The realisation of the urgent need for reforms in the justice sector informed the gathering of law experts and other stakeholders in Abuja last Tuesday to, among others, examine state of affairs in the sector and suggest ways to rejig the system for effective performance.

    Tagged: “Justice Sector Summit 2022,” the event, with the theme: “Devising practical solutions towards improved performance, enhanced accountability and independence in the justice sector,” put together by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), in collaboration with some local and foreign partners, provided a platform for a closer analysis of the challenges with the nation’s justice delivery system.

    NBA President, Olumide Akpata, in his opening remarks, touched on the reason for the gathering and declared: “I believe that our call to action must begin from our admission of the state of affairs of our administration of justice that we are thoroughly dissatisfied with. There is a convergence of opinion of both the Bar and the Bench that the Nigerian justice delivery system is not operating at its optimal best.

    “Our judges have in a number of cases decried the sorrowful state of administration of justice in our courts…We have come to a point where we must tell ourselves some plain truths. Our courts must be manned by, not just the best hands we can find, but also by incorruptible minds.”

    Other speakers, including the Vice President, Prof Yemi Osinbajo; the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila; the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Muhammad; Justice Amina Augie (of the Supreme Court); the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami; the Chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), Prof Bolaji Owasanoye  and an ex-NBA President, Olisa Agbakoba were unanimous that all was not well with the Judiciary.

    The one-day event, which featured four sessions, focused on certain key areas, seen as requiring urgent attention to ensure a justice system that guarantees an improved performance, enhanced accountability and judicial independence.

    They were : Judicial appointments/selection: current practices and challenges; rethinking judicial administration in terms of budgeting, funding, and accountability; and accelerating the speed of justice delivery in Nigeria.

    The opening plenary, moderated by Agbakoba, provided a broad picture of the problems and suggested general solutions, while the other three technical sessions afforded leading industry experts the opportunity for a robust interrogation of the problems, to which they also suggested solutions.

     

    Judicial appointments/selection: current practices and challenges

    Various speakers observed the inadequacy of the current judicial selection/appointment process, which they noted was not only less rigorous and competitive, but promotes mediocrity and denies the best hands the opportunity of being engaged.

    Agbakoba noted that the problem with the selection and appointment of judges relates to the inability of those managing the system to comply with existing guidelines and rules. He stated that certain provisions of the National Judicial Council (NJC) Rules (2014) meant to promote transparency in the process by requiring the publication of names of intending judges, among other measures, are ignored.

    He disagreed with Justice John Okoro (of the Supreme Court, who represented the CJN) on the need to broaden the scope of appointment into the bench, particularly at the appellate court level.

    Justice Okoro had argued in favour of elevating those already in the system rather than looking outside to the Bar to appoint justices for the appellate courts, a position Agbakoba countered, arguing that the current practice accounts for why there is no broad representation in the Supreme Court’s bench.

    “The rules that had been laid out are not quite being followed, because if they were, then the Bar would have had a representation in the Supreme Court as we had thought. There would be a better spread. The Bar had nominated a couple of people to go to the Supreme Court, but that was mightily resisted. I was one of them,” Agbakoba said.

    Malami also faulted the current appointment process of judges, arguing that existing guidelines put in place by the Judiciary is discriminatory and discourages competition, it negates the constitution. He added that to reform the process, existing bottlenecks must first be dismantled.

    “If you are considering appointment for example, the constitution is clear as to what is expected for appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court or other superior courts of record. But here we are faced with guidelines developed by the Judiciary.

    “As it is today, regardless of the capacity, competence and integrity of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria that is desirous of taking an appointment as a Justice of the Supreme Court, it is practically impossible on account of the guidelines that are designed to ensure that, at the end of the day, appointments are localised through the judicial process.

    “So, technically, merit is knocked out in the appointment to the Supreme Court. So, the first bottleneck in the appointment process is embedded in the guidelines associated with the appointment of judicial officers,” he said, adding that to introduce integrity into the system, a filtration system must be evolved to allow for a thorough scrutiny of the personality of those seeking appointment as judges.

    “So, for the perspective of appointment, if you want to enhance the quality of the system, there has to be some accommodation of merit as the basis for consideration, as against the provisions of the existing guidelines that will technically knockout all others from coming into the system,” Malami said.

    Akpata, who argued that the appointment process has a direct bearing on the efficiency of the system, gave a thumbs down to the current appointment/selection process of judicial officers, saying he was astonished on realising how relaxed it was when he first experienced the process as a new member of the NJC.

    He added that at the NJC level, no sufficient time is allowed for a thorough assessment of the would-be Justice (in the case of the Court of Appeal), because “at that particular instance, we had, maybe six minutes to talk to each applicant; some were told to take a bow and go, some would be asked what I consider to be perfunctory questions, because there is not enough time.

    “And then, that is how they would emerge. That has a direct bearing on efficiency. That has a direct bearing on how the courts would run.”

    Akpata, who noted that the situation was worse for appointment to the High Court bench, argued that the current process could no longer be sustained in view of existing realities.

    In his intervention, Osinbajo agreed that a lot must change in the appointment/selection process in the Judiciary, arguing that the practice of “bow and go” should be urgently discarded.

    “On the question of appointments, I think it is fair to say that for practically any job at all, no matter how menial or exalted, it is the norm that the applicant will go through some process of evaluation and interview.

    “The rigour of such processes usually depends on the enormity of the responsibility the applicant is to bear, and ultimately, the outcome considered reasonable from such an exercise is that it is the best from amongst the applicants that will emerge successful.

    ”This is why it is quite frankly stunning that the process for evaluation and interview of judges, men and women statutorily empowered to literally determine the lives and livelihoods of others is one of the least rigorous processes imaginable,” Osinbajo said.

    Citing the cases of the United Kingdom and the United States, the Vice President noted the judicial appointment/selection process ought to always be rigorous in view of the enormity of powers and responsibilities placed in the hands of judicial officers.

    He contended that “it shouldn’t be a ‘take a bow’ situation at all. It must be rigorous, because the moment the person is appointed into a high office of that sort, they are unleashed, as it were, on the rest of us.”

     

    Rethinking judicial administration in terms of budgeting, funding, and accountability

    Speakers all agreed that the Judiciary deserves to be well funded, its independence guaranteed, while the welfare of judicial officers and other support staff be improved upon. They however, demanded that the Judiciary should learn to be more open and transparent in its financial dealings.

    The CJN, represented by Justice John Okoro, spoke on the need for enhanced funding for the Judiciary, arguing that more funds were needed to enable the arm of government to meet its needs and function effectively.

    Osinbajo recalled his days as the Attorney-General in Lagos State and how, through the collective efforts of all stakeholders, the issues of remuneration and funding were addressed.

    “I recall that in Lagos State when we were considering the question of judicial remuneration, I had several sit-downs with senior judges of the High Court of Lagos State at the time.

    “We looked at in detail, questions of how much do we need to provide in order to make a judge comfortable? What are the issues we need to consider? We brought in Human Resource experts to look at it but first, the Judiciary had to open the books.

    “We are confronted with the same issues today; we must know exactly what is required and know what is happening with what has been provided already,” he said.

    Osinbajo, however, noted that while the society expects judicial officers to show more commitment, there was the need to ensure that the conditions under which they operate are not only befitting, but are good enough to attract the best minds in the profession.

    “Judicial remuneration and welfare are critical. Why should a judge earn so much less than a federal legislator?  There is no basis for it whatsoever. We should, in fact, benchmark without necessarily creating  new legislation because the Legislature doesn’t have any legislation about their own salaries.

    “The truth of the matter is that the responsibilities of the judge or justice of the Supreme Court/Court of Appeal are such that they must be well remunerated. They are such that when they retire, they must be able to go to homes that they own in decent places where they live.

    “That’s the way it should be. We shouldn’t have a situation where judges are anxious that when they retire, they won’t have homes to go to, because their salaries today can’t build anything decent.  We must ensure that these are the conditions that are met.

    “We must strengthen the processes of reviewing performance, incentivising excellence, and penalising misconduct,” Osinbajo added.

    Malami blamed the seeming opaqueness of the budgetary and financing processes of the Judiciary for the inability of the other arms of government to ascertain what amount was actually adequate to fund the Judiciary.

    “On the funding of the judiciary, the starting point is to invite the spirit of transparency and accountability. And, that we can achieve if the books are open.

    “For example, a budgetary provision of about N104 billion provided for the Judiciary in the national budget, less amount is provided for the legislature. But the National Assembly is living comfortably in terms of salaries, allowances and welfare of its members.

    “But, the issue is, why is the N104b provided in the budget not sufficient for the Judiciary? We are not in the position to answer. Why? Because the books are not open. Where the books of the Executive are open for scrutiny, the same is not obtainable as the Judiciary is concerned.

    “The fundamental question is: How much is provided to the judiciary? How is it applied and then, to what extent is the welfare of the judicial officers considered in the allocation in the judicial process? The Executive is not in a position to say.

    “Until and unless we allow the operation of an open government partnership arrangement that will allow the books of the Legislature, the books of the Judiciary and the books of the Executive to be open, we can never be in a position to identify to what extent the budgetary provisions made are adequate and to what extent they are applied for the purpose of ensuring that the welfare of the judges is adequately addressed,” Malami said.

    Gbajabiamila, who was represented by the Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary, Luke Onofiok, hinted at a plan to further strengthen judicial independence by ensuring that the Judiciary submits it annual budgetary estimate directly to the Legislature as against the current practice where it submits to the Executive for onward presentation to the Legislature.

    He, however, added his voice to the demand for transparency and accountability in the way the Judiciary handles its finances.

    ICPC Chairman Owasaonye said “ghost contracts and unretired funds” had tainted the judiciary’s financial records. He called for more transparent and credible funds allocation by the Judiciary.

     

    Accelerating the speed of justice delivery

    On the issue of delay, it was agreed that both the Bench and the Bar must work assiduously to address the various causes of delay in justice administration.

    Osinbajo warned that the justice system could no longer endure the serious issues that had over the years, continued to damage its credibility and fitness for purpose, adding that there was no question that the expeditious delivery of justice could no longer wait.

    “The reputation of our system for repeatedly resulting in what the UK Court of Appeal described as ‘catastrophic delays’ must be reversed. Everyone knows that these delays take far too long; everyone who has practised in our courts knows that delay as a strategy is one of the weapons that our colleagues deploy repeatedly.

    ”It is the responsibility of the bar and the bench, but I must say, especially with respect to delays, a lot depends on what counsel will do. In criminal cases, a lot depends on when you are able to conclude investigations, witnesses, especially those on the side of the prosecution.”

    Akpata recalled the observation of Justice Joseph Tine Tur of the Court of Appeal, who in a judgment in the case of Nwosu North and South International Limited & Anor v. Nigeria Trading and Industrial Corporation Limited (2014) LPELR 23425, lamented the slow pace of justice delivery by the country’s justice system.

    He quoted Justice Tur as saying: “Nwosu North and South International Limited … instituted a suit against Nigeria International Trading and Industrial Corporation … before the High Court of Justice, Jos, Plateau State on  January 28, 1975 when I was entering the university; 29 years have passed, and I am delivering judgment in the dispute. Meanwhile, Anthony Nwosu died in the course of the proceeding. He is not alive to know the outcome of the suit. What kind of judicial system is this? There has to be an improvement on the justice delivery system in Nigeria.”

    Akpata added: “That question that his Lordship asked, ‘what kind of judicial system is this?’ has been on the lips of the generality of Nigerians and it is directed at all of us stakeholders in the administration of justice.

    “Lawyers, as Ministers in the Temple of Justice; the Court and their administrative officers; the law enforcement agencies, our Ministries of Justice, we must all ask ourselves what kind of justice we dispense that the public appear to be so dissatisfied with our services.

    “What kind of justice is dispensed after 29 years? How can we explain to the layman that justice delayed is not justice denied when litigants enjoy the fruit of their litigations from the grave?

    ‘’The dissatisfaction of some with the obvious gaps in the administration of our justice system must spur us into fashioning out the direction that we must now turn,” Akpata said.

     

    Summit resolutions, recommendations

    (i) Measures must be considered to make the judicial selection, appointment and promotion system more transparent, including by a rigorous adherence to the provisions of the current rules stipulating the requirements for publication of vacancies.

    (ii) The most important criteria in the appointment of judicial officers is their character and reputation, and that this could only be ascertained by giving wide publicity to the names and identities of those seeking appointment as judicial officers and providing ample time and opportunity for members of the legal profession and society to comment on their character and reputation and suitability for high judicial office.

    (iii) The current practice by which certain states and appointing authorities in the exercise of their discretion, administer written tests and oral interviews to ascertain the proficiency of applicants for appointment to judicial officers to determine their knowledge of law and their experience with the practice and procedure of the courts to which they seek to be appointed, should be standardised and made mandatory.

    (iv) The conduct of these tests should be conducted by a central body, possibly the National Judicial Institute (“NJI”) and structured in such a manner as to insulate it from the possibility of being subverted.

    (v) The interview process for applicants who scale through the proficiency tests should not be perfunctory, but should be robust and designed to enable a thorough review of the applicant’s character and reputation and of any adverse comments that may have been received in relation to the applicant’s suitability for appointment.

    (vi) The provisions of the current rules, which anticipate that the pool from which appointments are to be made to the appellate courts would include persons other than serving judicial officers should be adhered to and that consideration should be given to establishing a fixed quota of such appointments from other sectors of the legal profession.

    (vii) The elevation of serving judicial officers to the appellate courts should be based on objective criteria, the most important of which should be the quality of their judgments in their existing court, followed by their character and reputation.

    (viii) While there might be a need for increased funding for the Judiciary, the basis for such need must be properly established and must be juxtaposed against the need for proper budgeting and full accountability with a responsibility on the Judiciary to account for any and all funds allocated to it, as is expected of all other arms of government.

    (ix) There is a need to strengthen the administration of the Judiciary by engaging professionals with the appropriate training and capacity for the management and administration of complex business organisations, while allowing judicial officers to focus on their primary responsibility of dispensing justice.

    (x) The objective of professionalising the administration of the courts must be carried out in such a manner that it addresses the legitimate concerns in relation to the accountability of the Judiciary for funds allocated to it inadequate budgetary skills and discipline and inappropriate prioritisation of needs; against the need to ensure that the independence of the Judiciary is not undermined or eroded.

    (xi) This can be achieved by ensuring that professionals to be engaged with the appropriate training in management and administration of the courts report to the Judiciary, but are accountable to the government as a whole.

    (xii) The funding of the superior courts of record should remain the responsibility of the Federal Government in order to limit the risks of political interference by state governments.

     

    approvals

    (i) It approved the NBA’s proposals to set up a comprehensive court monitoring scheme that would enable the profession determine with accuracy and generate statistics identifying the primary causes of delay in court proceedings and thus make remedial action more targeted and scientific. This would complement existing monitoring schemes such as the Administration of Criminal Justice Monitoring Committee created by the Administration of Criminal Justice Act/Law and the Corruption and Financial Crimes Cases Trial Monitoring Committee (COTRIMCO) set up by the NJC.

    (ii) It approved a shift of orientation that would require the Judiciary to exercise the power already provided to it in almost all the rules of court to award costs on a full indemnity basis to compensate parties who are the victim of lack of preparedness on the part of opposing counsel or litigants and to incentivise counsel to shun dilatory tactics.

    (iii) It approved a shift of orientation that would require the Judiciary to use the case management powers already provided to it in almost all the rules of court to ensure that the admissibility of documents to be relied on at the hearing / trial of matters are dealt with either as a pre-hearing / pre-trial issue, or as a post-hearing / post-trial issue to be dealt with in closing submissions, so as to ensure speedy conclusion of matters.

    (iv) It approved the proposal for the enactment of provisions that would abolish the right to stay proceedings in matters pending interlocutory appeals, except in very limited and narrowly drawn circumstances.

    (v) It endorsed the NBA’s proposals for a constitutional amendment that would enable all the superior courts of coordinate jurisdiction created pursuant to section 6 of the Constitution to exercise a power of transfer to the appropriate court, whenever their subject matter jurisdiction is successfully challenged, rather than striking the matter out as well as a proposal restricting the right of appeal against such determination.  Thus eliminating the phenomenon of lengthy litigation and appeals about which of the superior courts of record of coordinate jurisdiction is the appropriate court to hear a matter.

    (vi) It endorsed the enhanced use of virtual hearings for the disposal of paper applications that do not involve oral witness evidence; the scheduling of cases for specific times and duration; and the elimination of the “court is not sitting” phenomenon to the barest minimum.

     

  • ‘How I became first serving police SAN’

    ‘How I became first serving police SAN’

    Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Simon Asamber Lough made history on December 8, 2021 when he became the first police officer in Nigeria to be admitted to the Inner Bar as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). He enlisted in the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) as a Cadet Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) in 2000 and was called to Bar the following year. In this interview with ERIC IKHILAE, he spoke about his career, how he got the SAN rank on his first application and the problems with the nation’s criminal justice system.

    What informed your choice of  law as a field of study?

    When I was growing up, I read much of the Bible. That was my foundation in life. There was a book called ‘My Book of Bible Studies,’ with a lot of pictorial illustrations. I read that book from A to Z.

    I liked the roles Moses, Joshua and Elijah played in the Bible. By then, I was in primary school. I was yet to decide on anything. When I went to secondary school, I was groomed to be an accountant, because I was very good in mathematics. I represented the then Gongola State in mathematics competitions.

    So, my school’s principal encouraged me by always saying one day, you could become a bank manager or even grow to become the Governor of  the Central Bank.

    But, my love for the roles Moses, Joshua and Elijah played, as saviours, who were brought in to salvage situations, I thought as a bank manager, I may not be able to play such a role in life.

    For me, banking as a field appeared too restricted. So, along the line, the idea of  law came along. But, the problem was that I was not interested in English Literature. I only became interested when I learnt it was impossible to read Law without first passing English Literature in secondary school.

    I concluded that for me to play those roles like Moses, Joshua and Elijah, I had to read Law. I also concluded that it was through law that you could do justice to people the way I want.

    At that time, Gani Fawehinmi (SAN), now late, was just coming up. I became fascinated by his style of activism as a lawyer, and I said this is the type of role I want to play. I  wanted to be involved in advocacy for people for free, to ensure that you do justice to people. This was what informed my decision to read law.

    What about the choice of policing as a profession?

    The person who inspired me to become a policeman was a former Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Ogbonna Onovo. He came to our school when I was in secondary school. I was in form five. He was then a Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP). He dressed very neat. That is the neatest policeman I have ever seen. He remained neat until he retired. When he visited our school and addressed us, I made up my mind that day that I was going to become a policeman.

    What has the experience been so far?

    I  have served in many departments since I passed out of the Police Academy. But, in the Operations Department, we used to confront armed robbers and exchanged fire with them.

    When you arrest them, you hand them over to those who will prosecute them. But, at a point, I noticed  that these same armed robbers that we arrested were back in the society, they had been released.

    There was one particular incident that made me feel that this practice had to stop. We arrested a gang of armed robbers in Area Eight, Abuja. They attacked one lady and raped her two daughters.

    When we were alerted, we went there, confronted them and killed two of them there. The others were arrested and handed over to those who should prosecute.

    After some time, I went to do something in Wuse (Abuja) and somebody started shouting, “Oga! Oga! Oga!” I was surprised. I wondered who was calling me oga.

    I could not recognise him, but he knew me. I moved closer to him and asked what he wanted, and he said: “Oga, were you not among those who arrested us at Area Eight? Have you forgotten?”.

    When I asked how he got out, he said they were arraigned in court, remanded in Suleija Prison (Niger State) and, after some time, they were granted bail.

    He added that the prosecutor had stopped coming to court. He said he saw me and felt he should greet me. This was a person we arrested while committing armed robbery. I felt bad.

    So, when I got to the Legal Department, I made up my mind that I must ensure that people get justice. I could not just imagine how the lady, whose daughters were raped, would feel if she runs into that same man that called me in Wuse.

    I felt for her and other victims of crimes. At that point, I made up my mind that once I charge an armed robber to court, I will ensure you are diligently prosecuted until justice is served.

    That is why in all the armed robbery cases I prosecuted, the defendants were convicted. I have also done cases of murder and have secured a number of convictions.

    Which of the cases would you say tasked you most?

    I can recall many. There was one in which some priests were killed in Benue State. I prosecuted those involved. It took us just eight months. The current Chief Judge of Benue State was the presiding judge. After delivering judgment, the judge confessed that that was the fastest case ever prosecuted in his court and for all his years as a judge.

    There was also the case of a notorious pastor, who raped a lady. I also prosecuted him and secured conviction. I also prosecuted those behind the mass killing in Ife (Osun State) where over 40 persons were killed. I secured conviction. I have done many other cases in Bayelsa, Abia, Sokoto, among other places.

    What would you consider as the major challenges as a police prosecutor?

    One of our major challenges is the reluctance of victims to attend court to give evidence in the course of prosecution. A person will be robbed, his property would be recovered, but when he/she is invited to give evidence, to tell the court what happened, they will be so sceptical. And, I used to pay their transport with my money. But, for them to come to court testify, and for the court to know that they are the victims and the owners of the recovered property, they will be reluctant and sceptical.

    Could it be that they are afraid?

    Sure. Some of them claim to be afraid. But, I tell them these people (the defendants) are in prison, you have nothing to be scared of, since most of the armed robbery cases are not bailable. After much persuasion, some will agree to come to court

    I recall an armed robbery incident at an Anglican Church in Wuse Zone Five. Members were attending a conference and they were robbed. Four of the robbers were arrested, but I had to plead with them (the victims) before only two, including a naval officer (whose uniform and other personal items were stolen) agreed to give evidence in court. Out of the about 15 people that were robbed, only two agreed to come to court.

    Don’t you think this requires that people should be more sensitised about their civic responsibilities?

    I agree. I think we should always see it as our civic responsibility to give evidence if we have been robbed or become victims of any other crime.

    Without you coming to court to give evidence, how do you think the court would be convinced that the crime was actually committed or that the incident actually took place? Particularly in the case of robbery, the victim must come to court to give evidence, to tell the court that, yes, this was what happened.

    How do you respond to the argument that poor investigation affects the success of criminal prosecution?

    Actually, if a case is not properly investigated it will be difficult to secure conviction. So, as an intelligent prosecutor, when you go through a case file and you see that there are some gaps left, it is your duty to advise the Investigating Police Officer (IPO) on what gaps to close. That means, the IPO would have to conduct further investigation.

    For instance, if a defendant denies being present at the place where the crime was committed, he/she has raised a defence. It is the responsibility of the IPO to investigate and confirm whether that alibi is true of false.

    In most cases that I prosecuted, before I charged anybody to court, I must be sure that there were enough evidence linking the defendant to the offence. If the evidence is not enough, I would advise the IPO to investigate further. That is why, in most cases that I prosecuted, all of the defendants were convicted.

    You should also know that investigation involves a lot of things, including finance, training and cooperation from the members of the public. The major problem has been the uncooperative attitude of members of the public. Even if you are well trained and financed, if the victims are not willing to cooperate and provide the necessary information, there is little you can do.

    How do you handle rape cases where victims are always scared of stigmatisation?

    In most rape cases that I prosecuted, the victims were always reluctant to come forward, because they didn’t want people to know what happened to them. But, what I have always done is to assure them that we will make sure that there is nobody in the court. The law made provision for the court to be cleared, leaving only the prosecutor, the defendants, their lawyers and any other necessary party. So, we rely on such legal provisions to ensure that rape victims are protected from unnecessary and harmful publicity.

    What do you think accounts for delay in trials?

    There are lot of things involved in that. Sometimes the law itself contributes to delay. There is a procedure called trial-within-trial in law. Section 28 and 29 of the Evidence Act say if somebody makes a confessional statement, before the statement is admitted, the court must be satisfied that it was voluntarily made by the maker. So, to ensure that such statements are voluntarily made, the court normally conducts a mini-trial, called trial-within-trial if a defendant denies voluntarily making the said statement.

    Did you experience such mini-trials in the cases you prosecuted?

    Yes, there was a case I prosecuted. It   involved eight defendants, and, because the defence counsel wanted to delay, they challenged the voluntariness of their clients’ statements and we had to conduct trial-within-trial eight times for each of the defendants. So, an incident like this causes a lot of delay. Other causes of delay could be from the court, where the judge is indisposed or travelled for any reason. The court could also not be conducive for businesses on some occasions, where there is power outage. It could also be from the defence counsel, where he/she is trying to play pranks and deploy some dilatory tactics.

    Sometimes, it could be from the prison, where prison officials fail to produce the defendants who are in custody or where the defendant is sick, he/she would have to be made well before he/she could be brought to court for trial. It could also be on the part of the prosecutor, where his/her witnesses are not available. So, delay in criminal trial has so many dimensions. So many factors are responsible. It cannot be blamed on a party.

    How do we address the problem of delay?

    The major cause of delay on the part of the prosecution is the inability to produce witnesses when necessary. As a prosecutor who does not want his case delayed, the moment a case file is handed to you, you initiate communication with the witnesses. We call it witness tracking.

    So, once you track your witnesses, and they are always ready and with you, there is no way the trial will be delayed. But when you fail to track them and the matter begins to drag, they will lose interest and when you call them they will not respond.

    In developed societies, the docket of each court is not always as heavy as we have here. The number of cases assigned to each judge in those societies is not as much as we do here. There are some instances where a judge will have about 500 cases on his/her docket. How do you expect such a judge to be expeditious? Such a judge is expected to hear each of the cases, write ruling where required and write judgment. So, you can see that even the number of cases assigned to the judges accounts for delay. Where a court has five cases in a day, it could cope, but where it has 15 or more, it becomes a problem to go through all the cases in a single day and still be expected to resume the next day.

    How did you record the feat of getting the SAN rank at your first try?

    When you want something, you must prepare for it very well. I was qualified long ago. But, when I made up my mind to apply, I prayed to God and sought His permission on when to apply. So, when God asked me to apply, I picked the form and ensured that all that were needed were in place.

    There are certain basic requirements that you must meet. You must pay your practising fees as and when due for 10 years without break. You must pay your branch dues as and when due for 10 years without a break.

    You must have at least 20 cases which you did at the High Court from the beginning to the end, within 10 years. You must also have at least five at the Court of Appeal and four at the Supreme Court within the same 10 years. So, everything is within 10 years.

    Some people don’t check their cases properly, some cases have expired, yet they don’t know. But, in my case, because I have done so many cases, I was having over 100 judgments at the High Court; 32 judgments at the Court of Appeal and seven at the Supreme Court. So, I did not have any problem when I applied.

    When I went to submit my works, they were a pick-up load, and people were wondering how many people’s works they were.

    I packaged about 50 High Court cases. For the Court of Appeal judgments, I wanted to package 32, but it was getting too voluminous. So, I said when they said five, at least 22 should be sufficient.

    Before then, I had read the rules very well and understood what the requirements were and how to present your application. In fact, I read them (the rules) more than 10 times.

    So, when I was to submit, I arranged my works very well so that they were easy for those who were to scrutinise them.

    My application went through the first and second filtration with ease, without any query.

    At that stage, many people had queries and they had to go back to face a panel. Some were later cleared and some were not.

    What other thing do you think worked for you?

    Another important element has to do with your reputation. Your integrity is very important. It attracts 25 marks. For me, I have handled so many cases, with so many temptations. If I had succumbed to any of the temptations, like people coming to bribe you, it would have counted against me on such occasion. People will bring money to bribe me, but I will tell them that my conscience and God are the two things that guide me, not their money. That was what saved me.

    You know, I read law to do justice. That has always been at the back of my mind. People will bring money; big, big money and say ‘See, how do we handle this case?’ But, I will tell them to go with their money, that I was not interested.

    After the release of the first list and I went for the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) interview, one of the interviewers had held watching brief in one of the cases I prosecuted.

    In that case, the defence counsel offered me a bribe of N10 million. His client defrauded somebody of $4.6million. The defence counsel followed me to my hotel after the day’s proceedings and requested me to give his client soft landing.

    I told the lawyer to take the money he brought and add more to pay the victim of the crime, then ask the complainant to write the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) about the development, then we will know how to proceed from there.

    Eventually we concluded the case and the defendant was convicted and sentenced to two 10-year terms, to run consecutively, meaning that he will spend 20 years in prison.

    So, when I went for the NBA interview and the lawyer saw me, he told the Chairman of the panel that he knew me very well. I was taken aback. He said, “You see this Simon Lough, even the devil cannot bribe him.”

    He proceeded to recall what happened in that case and moved that I should be allowed to take a bow and go.

    When he finished, another member said  we should not only allow Simon Lough to go, we should encourage him not to change, because people like him are not many in the society.

    So, in essence, what I am saying is that in anything we do, our integrity matters. Whatever you are doing, you must think of tomorrow, it matters.

    How do you advise your colleagues and juniors who are willing to attain this height?

    My advice for my colleagues in the police and those outside is that they must work very hard if they want to attain the peak of their professions.

    You must work very hard, you must be focused, you must be consistent in what you are doing and you must not derail.

    Above all, you must have the fear of God in your mind. You should know that somebody up there is watching. The man up there is watching you.

    If He sees you dong well, He knows what to do, and if you are not doing well, He also knows what to do.