The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Wanted: Fearless judges to stop ‘tricky’ lawyers

    Wanted: Fearless judges to stop ‘tricky’ lawyers

    Why do cases still drag in court despite the coming of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015? The law is supposed to check delays, but it has not achieved that in its two-year existence. Stakeholders in the justice sector gathered in Abuja to ascertain where the problem lies. According to speakers, progress would be made if judges showed more courage, firmness and did not indulge “tricky” defence counsel. Keynote speaker Justice Helen Ogunwumiju of the Court of Appeal listed what judges must do to change the negative perception of the judiciary. JOSEPH JIBUEZE reports.

    The Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) of 2015 was enacted to address delays in criminal trials. Despite the law’s provisions, cases still drag in court.

    The target time frame to conclude a trial under the ACJA is 180 days.

    But, several cases that began since the law took effect are yet to be decided.

    Section 396 (3) of the ACJA provides that trial shall be day-to-day until judgment.

    Section 396 (4) says where day-to-day trial is not practicable, each party is entitled to five adjournments of not more than 14 working days interval.

    After exhausting the five adjournments, every other adjournment shall not exceed seven days interval.

    The overall objective is to ensure that a trial commences within 30 days of filing a charge and is completed within 180 days after arraignment.

    Speakers at a capacity building workshop organised for judges, magistrates, area court judges and registars in Abuja agreed that the courts must do more to enforce the ACJA.

    The workshop’s theme is: Application of Practice Directions on the Implementation of the ACJA 2015.

    It was organised by the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) in collaboration with the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory.

    Speakers said it required courage and firmness on judges’ part to enforce the ACJA.

    According to them, while defence counsel would seek adjournments at every opportunity in a bid to delay cases, using all manner of excuses, it behooves the judges to take control of their courts and not tolerate such shenanigans.

    The four-day workshop had 14 sessions featuring group presentations, training on case management and control of court and proceedings, role of judges and registrars, among others.

     

    Wanted: Stricter judges

    The keynote speaker, Justice Helen Ogunwumiju of the Court of Appeal, urged judges to take firm control of their courts so the judiciary does not become the weakest link in law enforcement.

    She said trials sometimes got so “complicated” and “hydra headed” because judges allowed lawyers “to run the show”.

    For instance, she suggested that a judge should not grant an adjournment on the basis that an absent Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) would prefer to handle a case himself.

    The SAN has juniors who are qualified lawyers, so they should handle the case on their principal’s absence, she said.

    She told judges: “Don’t allow anyone to abuse your leniency. Don’t be fearful. Part of being a SAN is to have a junior.”

    She noted that due to lack of firmness by judges, the trial process is sometimes hijacked and judges become helpless “in the face of various manoeuvres of the defendants and sometimes their high-powered expensive lawyers.”

    Most High Court judges, Justice Ogunwumiju said, have had to adjudicate on cases involving high-profile defendants who come up with “all manner of tricks” to avoid taking a plea at the arraignment stage.

    “All manner of objections are raised at this stage. There are such trials that are yet to leave the plea stage, some even into well over four years after they have been filed, which is contrary to the spirit of the constitutional mandate of Section 36 (1) for speedy trial and fair hearing,” she said.

    What should judges do in such circumstance? Justice Ogunwumiju recommended: “Some (defendants) say that they are physically unfit to stand trial. Remand them at the state hospital until a doctor gives them a clean bill of health.

    “If they claim to be mentally ill, remand them at a state mental institution. They will become well in a hurry. The panacea is to be firm.”

    In a situation where a defendant refuses to enter the dock on the excuse of challenging the charge, Justice Ogunwumiju said the court should refuse to entertain any application by the defendant.

    “It is not unusual to find that a defendant may, on the advice of his counsel, refuse to enter the dock, thereby refusing to submit to the jurisdiction of the court.

    “Order 3 Rule 3 of the Practice Directions provides that irrespective of any issues including but not limited to jurisdiction, bail, etc, the defendant shall be called upon to enter the dock and enter a plea.

    “Where the defendant refuses to enter the dock to plead to the charges, the court shall refuse to entertain any application and where the defendant refuses to enter a plea, the court shall enter a plea of not guilty for him,” she said.

    The Justice said an objection to the charge may be couched in terms of being invalid or disclosing no offence.

    Section 396 (2) of the ACJA, she said, gives judges the discretion to adjourn ruling on such application until judgment.

     

    ‘Don’t be taken for a ride’

    Justice Ogunwumiju emphasised that the fact that someone was granted bail is not a licence to allow a defendant and counsel to delay trial.

    She said: “A defendant who fails to appear in court for myriad of reasons or excuses should be decisively dealt with. It is not a valid excuse that a defendant had to go for medical treatment.

    “The medical appointment should not have been scheduled to clash with the court hearing.

    “Religious obligations and the whipping up of religious sentiments not to appear to continue trial should not be tolerated.”

    Justice Ogunwumiju recalled that she was a magistrate in Oyo, she would not hesitate in revoking bail when she felt that the defendant and his counsel “were trying to take the court for a ride”.

    According to her, where the prosecution was ready with their witnesses, courts should not let the issue of bail delay the commencement of trial.

    “Defence lawyers engage in all manner of tricks to delay trial. You are covered by Section 396 (2) of the ACJA. The court must stand its ground. Hear them but defer ruling till the end of trial,” she said.

     

    ‘Don’t grant stay of proceedings’

    Justice Ogunwumiju said in no circumstance should judges grant stay of proceedings pending appeal in criminal trial.

    According to her, the pace of appeal litigation is slow, arduous and discouraging.

    An interlocutory appeal, she said, could take two years at a minimum to be decided. It would take a further three years at least at the Supreme Court.

    Where a stay is granted, the defendant is assured of at least five years of breathing space, which she said has unfortunate consequences.

    Witnesses, she said, could have died, have relocated, retired or coerced into silence, even as their memory could fade.

    Investigating officers could also have relocated; exhibits could be lost. The judge may have retired, and trial may have to start all over before a new judge. The defendant would have had enough time to dissipate the proceeds of crime or cover his tracks.

    Also, during the period that trial is suspended, the defendant may have, according to Justice Ogunwumiju, blackmailed the system by claiming witch-hunt, negotiated with or frustrated the prosecution, peddled political influence, or secured an appointment or won an election.

    The solution? No granting of stay of proceedings, she said.

    “What the trial judge needs to bear in mind is that the fundamental rights are not necessarily infringed by his refusal to stay proceedings as the defendant still has the option of applying for stay at the Court of Appeal and even the Supreme Court.

    “The signs of the times dictate that absolutely NO STAY of proceedings should be granted pending the determination of the substantive matter.

    “Most important to note is that whether you are presiding in the area court or magistrate court, do not grant an application for stay of proceedings,” Justice Ogunwumiju said.

    The jurist said several trial-within-trials need not be conducted for several statements purportedly made by the defendants.

    To her, as long as each statement is subjected to its own peculiar trial, it is possible to conduct one trial for all the statements.

    “Your lordships should not stay proceedings if you overrule the objection of the defence to the voluntariness of the statement of the defendant even where the appellant goes on appeal,” she said.

    In no-case submissions, the Justice said there would likely be an appeal where a ruling goes against the defendant, adding that an appeal on a no-case submission is one of mixed facts and law which require the leave of the High Court or the Court of Appeal.

    “The High Court may refuse leave to appeal and proceed with the trial until or unless the Court of Appeal grants leave to appeal and stay proceedings. I recommend that the trial courts should give very short ruling on no case submission,” she said.

     

    Avoiding  frivolous injunctions

     

    According to Justice Ogunwumiju, judges must be careful not to be swayed by “brilliant” arguments of counsel to grant perpetual injunctions against prosecution.

    “Sometimes the arguments are ingenious and appear infallible and you are perhaps wont to be swayed by them. You must have at the back of your mind the need to do justice to the defendant, the victim and the state.

    “In cases of corruption, you and I are the victims and we are part of the state,” she said.

    She said granting an injunction stopping someone’s arrest or prosecution is like tying the hands of 180 million Nigerians from prosecuting one man.

    Justice Ogunwumiju recalled that in the case of FRN vs Igbinedion, she had to disagree with the trial judge by refusing a motion asking for perpetual injunction restraining anti-graft agencies, the police and the Attorney-General of the Federation.

    “I had at the back of my mind the seriousness of the offences and the implications of granting the outrageous prayers being sought by the defendants. I could not succumb to the very persuasive legal arguments of defence counsel.

    “I urge my Lords: Be careful in grating injunctions that appear to bind the hands of the executive. That would be threading dangerously on the executive arm of government whereas the judiciary is supposed to enforce the doctrine of separation of powers,” she said.

    The Court of Appeal Justice urged members of the Bench to always remember that justice is not just the application of bare law but an instrument of social justice and positive social change.

     

    Award punitive cost

    Section 396 (7) of the ACJA provides that “in all circumstances”, the court may award reasonable costs in order to discourage frivolous adjournments.

    “My humble interpretation is that where the court notices that the prosecution or the defence seeks frivolous adjournments, it may award costs against the state or prosecutorial authority.

    “Where the defendant is asking for adjournment for frivolous reasons, the court should revoke the bail and give good and lengthy reasons for doing so.

    “Let the defendant go on appeal before or after the trial because the court revoked bail for good reasons,” Justice Ogunwumiju said.

    She recommended that immediately a charge is brought before a judge, the court should build up a historical data, which would facilitate a periodic review of the court’s performance.

    Another means of ensuring speedy trials, she said, is for the judge to consolidate rulings as opposed to delivering several rulings in a case before the substantive matter has even been dealt with.

     

    ‘Be above board’

    The jurist urged judges to take firm control of their courts and constantly monitor staff to ensure that there are no corrupt activities.

    “Most of us are too trusting or our staff. It is imperative that the judge is not detached because of the likelihood of money being collected in the name of the judge…The ability to walk tall is priceless.

    “Judicial officers in this regard are expected to live above board and be free from undue political or monetary interference, remaining an unbiased arbiter.

    “It takes four parties to have a successful prosecution – the complainant, the prosecution, the defence and the judge.

    “As the judicial officer, we are to coordinate the other three. We have to be on top our game,” Justice Ogunwumiju said.

    The jurist said judges must “muster the courage and the will” to utilise the ACJA to dispense justice as quickly as possible.

    Judges, she said, should not be afraid of being overruled on appeal for standing firm.

    “My brothers and sisters, don’t be threatened by lawyers saying they are going on appeal. Do what you think is right.

    “If they don’t go on appeal, how will they know that you are busy sitting till 6 pm and burning the midnight oil writing judgments?” she said,

    Justice Ogunwumiju urged judges to be get very acquainted with the ACJA and other laws such as the Evidence Act, as according to her, “an ignorant judge is a calamity for the innocent”.

    “We must take back control of our courts. We are dominus litis (master of a suit) in our courtroom. I have never been able to understand how any court would allow counsel representing a client get the opportunity to dictate the tune in the courtroom.

    “The law has given the judge the power to dictate the tune for lawyers and litigants to dance to. The judiciary cannot afford to allow itself to become the weakest link in the enforcement of our laws because the wheels of justice grind so slowly.

    “It is my ardent hope that all chief judges will follow this laudable example and enact similar Practice Directions in their various jurisdictions,” she said.

    A legal expert, Austin Emumejakpor, who gave an overview of the FCT ACJA Practice Directions, noted that Order 14 of the Practice Direction likens a judge to a referee.

    The judge, he said, must take firm control of his court from the onset to set the tone of the trial.

    “Presiding judges should make counsel aware they are in charge of their courts. Where appropriate, remind counsel of their duty,” he said.

    Emumejakpor urged judges to use their powers to award costs so as to reduce delays and discourage frivolous applications for adjournments.

     

    CJ’s warning on remand order

    FCT High Court Chief Judge, Justice Ishaq Bello, said judges must not indulge prosecuting agencies who detain suspects while fishing for evidence.

    Before granting requests for extension of remand orders, there must be reasonable justification for the extension, he said.

    “I have observed that remand orders are just being granted as a matter of course when the provision is express. I think we should be more proactive, particularly when there is a second request.

    “We must be able to find reasons; legitimate grounds as to why the extension of the remand order earlier granted should be made. This will check the excesses of the remanding authority,” he said.

    The CJ said ‘de-clogging panels’ would be set up to review dormant criminal cases to be struck out.

    “Over six months ago, I sent out a circular to all the prosecuting agencies, that where they are aware of cases that cannot be prosecuted, they should compile and have them struck out. None of them responded.

    “As soon as we’re able to set up this panel, we’re going to strike out these cases. Judicial tolerance is being overstretched.

    “Because we keep on bending backwards on the ground that these are cases of armed robbery, murder, the investigating authorities tend to over-capitalise on that and keep seeking adjournments without completing investigations. Cases tend to stay in court unattended.

    “By the time we have this panel, I assure you, we’re going to throw out these cases, whether they’re armed robbery or murder cases.

    “If they choose to re-arrest, we’ll give them time-line to complete the prosecution, because we must rescue the integrity of the judiciary and the justice system. This we want to do,” he said.

     

    Challenges multi-dimensional

    A PACAC member Prof Femi Odekunle, who chaired the event, said as pervasive and institutionalised corruption is, and as damaging as it is to the country’s economic and social development, it can only be tackled within the bounds of rules, due process and fair hearing.

    Noting the fact that delayed justice means denied justice, Prof Odekunle said there tends to be a dominance of ‘technical’ justice over and above real justice.

    “Wrongly, the blame for these deficits is put on the judiciary: compromised, just lazy or incompetent.

    “Yet, the reality of the problem is not one-dimensional. Rather, it is multi-dimensional.

    “For instance, judges cannot be blamed for the following: archaic rules/regulations that literally ‘tie’ the hands of judges and give room for the God-forsaken shenanigans of defence lawyers; incompetent prosecutors further disabled by under-funding and under-staffing or inadequate logistics, and investigators who by default (and sometime by design) ignore to properly ‘service’ the ingredients to prove an offence,” he said.

    He said contrary to the perception “in certain quarters”, PACAC “is not against the judiciary, the legal profession or any set of judges or lawyers”.

    “Yes, PACAC is furious against a few judges, and a few lawyers who are sabotaging the anti-corruption fight – because the few not only frustrate the fight, they also damage the diligent and honest work of the so many good and hardworking judges of our judiciary.

    “Perhaps, needless to say, the conception and the enactment of ACJA 2015 is to mitigate the untoward consequences of the system I earlier highlighted.

    “I must reiterate that any indication of animus between PACAC and the judiciary is at the most charitable a ‘myth’ and at worst a perception being propagated by the enemies of the fight against corruption.

    “If you needed any proof of this position, the collaboration’ between PACAC and the FCT judiciary on the conception and execution of this workshop is proof-positive,” he said.

     

     

  • ‘NBA constitution amendment won’t affect election’

    ‘NBA constitution amendment won’t affect election’

    Any amendment of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) constitution will not affect its election next year, its President, Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), has said.

    The NBA proposed a review of the 2015 constitution to meet modern demands and to address issues of lawyers’ welfare.

    Speaking in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State capital, during the NBA National Executive Council (NEC) meeting, Mahmoud hinted that sections guiding election will remain as they are.

    He had set up a constitution review committee chaired by Mallam Yusuf Ali (SAN). The committee had since sent out request for memoranda from all NBA branches.

    Some regional fora, such as the Eastern Bar Forum (EBF) and the Mid-West Bar Forum opposed  the amendment.

    They feared any amendment may introduce provisions that may negatively impact the election.

    But, addressing NEC members, Mahmoud clarified that the proposed amendment would have no impact on the election.

    He also urged NEC members to support the amendment, which he said would enable NBA operate in line with  international best practices.

    The NBA Northeast Task Force Committee also presented its report at the meeting.

    Its Secretary Mr. Kunle  Adegoke said: “The original jurisdiction of the Task Force was limited to Adamawa, Borno and Yobe, but its was expanded to cover Bauchi and Gombe States.”

    He urged NEC to “mobilise members of the NBA from across the country to avail their expertise,  offer professional services and other forms of support to the states in the Northeast where Justice systems have been decimated by insurgency.”

     

     

  • ‘Bauchi set to amend tourism law’

    ‘Bauchi set to amend tourism law’

    Governor Mohammed Abubakar has said Bauchi State would amend its tourism law to attract more investment to the sector.

    He said the state’s aim is to make the Yankari Games Reserve a world-class tourism destination.

    Abubakar told The Nation that there was need to amend vital aspects of the law  to make the state a tourism centre of choice.

    He said: “I have been the number one marketer of Yankari. If you follow twitter, you will see that I have been trying my best to sell Yankari Games Reserve .

    “I follow all the current events in Nigeria, even the winner of the last Big Brother. Immediately he won, I sent him an invitation to come to Yankari Games Reserve free of charge. This is all part of the bid to advertise Yankari.

    “But Yankari Games Reserve is not the only tourist attraction that we. We have  a game park called  Sumu Games Park.

    “Sumu is a novelty in the sense that the animals found in Sumu Games Park  are not found anywhere else in the West African sub-region.

    “The reason is that we started Sumu in 2006 with the assistance of Namibia and Kenya. They donated species of animals that are not common to West Africa.

    “We went to the bush, caught the animals and brought them back to Nigeria. The moment they landed in Nigeria, they started breeding.

    “Now, if you go to Sumu Games Park which is about 48 kilometers from Bauchi  to Kano, you will see animals like giraffe, zebra, eland and others that are not common to West Africa.

    “In addition to all these, we have the tomb of the first and only prime minister of Nigeria and it is a must for any visitor who comes into Bauchi to go there.

    “We have various pre-historic rock paintings at Gaji, a small village on the way to Jos from Bauchi but off the main road and then at Shera, northern part of Bauchi State.

    “We have a series of annual festivals that will be attractive to visitors, especially foreign visitors. So, we are doing our best to improve tourism in the state.”

  • Fed Govt set to review anti-smuggling laws

    Fed Govt set to review anti-smuggling laws

    Some top government officials and public communicators have met in Abuja on the use of executive orders, reforms and development. ADEBISI ONANUGA reports.

    The Federal Government is set to amend anti-smuggling laws to make them more effective, Special Adviser to the Minister of  Industry, Trade and Investment, Ms Edirin Akemu, has said.

    According to her, the existing provisions on anti-smuggling were not stringent enough.

    She spoke in Abuja when stakeholders in the communication sector met to review the Federal Government’s initiatives and reforms on attaining economic development.

    It was at the Fourth Presidential Economic Communications Workshop.

    The interactive session between government officials and select group of editors and those from the communication sector was sponsored by Bank of Industry (BoI) and Nigerian Export Import Bank (NEXIM).

    The theme was: Budget, Presidential Executive Orders and Industrial Competiveness as Enablers of economic Growth.

    Akemu, who gave an overview of the Nigeria Industrial Recovery Policy (NIRP) and Competitiveness Advisory Council (“the Industrial Council”), disclosed that government has ambitious plans to drive industrialisation, noting that collaboration with the private sector was a key elements.

    According to her, the executive gave priorities to accelerated implementation of the NIRP through local and small business enterprises.

    She said it was the government’s vision to drive a process of intense industrialisation in sectors where Nigeria has comparative advantage.

    This approach, she said,  targeted sectorial initiatives and interventions that improve productivityand increase production output in the target sectors.

    According to her, the Federal Executive Council (FEC) approved the establishment of the Nigeria Industrial Policy and Competitiveness Advisory Council in March 2017 as a vehicle for partnering with the private sector on the industrialisation agenda.

    She said the objective was to boost the contribution of the manufacturing sector to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 250 per cent over the next five years.

    To achieve this, the council, she  said, was mandated to implement initiatives aimed at accelerating industrialisation by leveraging private sector expertise and capital.

    Akemu said focus areas were identified based on existing national plans and feedback from the private sector on cross-cutting issues that can be effectively addressed via collaboration between the public and private sectors.

    On policy and regulation, the special adviser disclosed that government was  updating the country’s anti-smuggling laws and that the new bill would be part of 2018 appropriation bills.

    Presently, the Customs and Excise Management Act prescribes penalties for good importation into the country through unapproved ports or approved routes.

    Akemu said the penalties were not sufficiently punitive and do not reflect current economic realities.

    In the 2018 appropriation for the department, Akemu said government would set up an anti-smuggling taskforce which would prevent the sales and distribution of smuggled  goods into the country.

    The law is intended to protect local industries and enable them develop and compete at international market, thereby contributing to economic growth.

    She said the task force would comprise the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC), Standards Organisation of Nigeria (SON), Consumer Protection Council (CPC), Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), Customs and the Trade Malpractices Commission.

    She said the task force, aside from preventing  the sale and distribution of smuggled goods into the country, would arrest persons in possession of smuggled goods.

    To achieve the objective, the Federal Government in May adopted the use of executive orders (EOs) as part of efforts to reform the economy.

    Senior  Special Assistant on Research, Legal and Compliance Matters to the Vice President, Dr Balkisu Saidu said the Federal Government would not rest on its oars.

    Saidu said the EOs were presidential policy directives, which, when made, were enforceable within the parameters set by the extant laws under which they are made.

    She explainedthat government uses EOs in four main areas: for promotion of transparency and efficiency in the business environment;  for submission of annual budgetary estimates by all statutory and non-statutory agencies, including Incorporated companies wholly owned by the Federal Government; support for local content in public procurements by ministries, departments and agencies and for voluntary assets and income declaration scheme.

    Saidu said EOs have the advantage of removing bottlenecks which hitherto have been hampering investments.

    This, according to her, was because  EOs save time and enable speedy implementation of a desired policy by obviating the long process of legislation.

    She said it is also used to avoid bureaucratic bottlenecks in the law making process;  adding that it ensures the implementation of extant laws by enabling the President to make further provisions to guide their implementation.

    Saidu said the use of EOs had aided the government’s quest to attain economic recovery.

    Though, the country has achieved tremendous successes since the EOs were introduced  on May 18, she said more still needed to be done.

    For instance, in the area of doing business, Saidu said the objectives of the orders was to eliminate bureaucratic bottlenecks in the operations of government Ministries, Departments and Agencies( MDAs) and ensure speedy service delivery.

    They are also aimed at reducing human contact in the provision of Government services thereby blocking opportunities for rent seeking;  ensuring effective and efficient collaboration between MDAs in the provision of services to end-users; ensuring the provision of clear, accurate and up-to-date information to end-users and enforcing timelines.

    She said through such order, all heads of MDAs that offer services such as issuance of clearance, certification, permits, licenses, waivers among others, were mandated to ensure that the clear and up-to-date requirements for obtaining their products or receiving their services were published conspicuously in their premises and on their websites, including timelines, conditions and fees.

    She said default approvals applied where there was failure to communicate rejection of applications in the stipulated time.  According to her, notification of acceptance or rejection shall be made through, at least, two media – letters, emails, publications on MDA website, among others.

    According to her, an applicant whose application is deemed granted or approved can apply, within 14 days, for the issuance of the document applied for. She said all notifications of rejection must indicate reason(s) for such rejection in accordance with the Executive Order.

    She said the order mandated a weekly submission of records of rejected applications to the Head of the MDA, adding that failure to act within the stipulated time amounts to misconduct by the officer concerned.

    An assistant to the Director-General, Budget Office, Mr Ben Akabueze, Mr Samuel Omenka, said spoke on Budget, Presidential Orders and Industrial Competitiveness as Economic Growth Enablers: an Overview of Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and 2018 Budget Proposals 

    Omenka said the MTEF was geared towards two main objectives: setting fiscal targets and allocating resources to strategic priorities within the targets.

    According to him, allocation to strategic priorities requires determination of government-wide priorities by the cabinet collectively, and portfolio-wide priorities by Ministries and Commissions individually.

    He said cabinet priorities are best explained in a Budget Policy Statement while priorities of line ministries and commission are explained in the plan.

    He listed key considerations in the design of a Fiscal Strategy Paper to include the economic context, usually influenced by global economic environment, domestic macro-environment, government’s development priorities, among others.

    According to Omenka, the 2018-2020 Medium-Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) and Fiscal Strategy Paper outlines governments  fiscal policies and macroeconomic projections for   2018– 2020, and provides the broad framework for annual budget and fiscal management in line with the FRA (2007).

    He said that the the key thrusts of the 2018 – 2020 MTEF/FSP were consistent with the goals of Government’s Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP) aimed at repositioning the economy on the path of  diversified, sustainable and  inclusive growth.

    He said that in line with the goals of the ERGP 2017-20, the medium term fiscal policies of Government would be directed at achieving macroeconomic stability; accelerating growth, intensifying economic diversification and promoting inclusiveness; enhancing oil revenues and accelerating non-oil revenues.

    Special Assistant on Micro, Small and Medium Scale Enterprises to the Vice President Mr. Tola Adekunle-Johnson said issue of the small scale industries were very close to Prof. Yemi Osinbajo’s heart.

    According to him, the Vice President has taken their problems upon himself and has been going round the states in partnership with state governments to find solutions to the challenges they face.

    At such clinics, he said small scale entrepreneurs in just one day can approach relevant agencies to get solutions that would otherwise have taken months to resolve.

    He said efforts were ongoing to enable SMEs secure loans at single digit interest rates from banks like BOI once they are able to provide guarantors.

  • Ruling on suit against bank, titles registrar for Dec 14

    Justice Beatrice Oke-Lawal of the Ikeja High Court, has fixed December 14 for ruling on a suit filed by the Administrators of the Estate of the late Samuel Iyiola Omotoso.

    The executors sued Ecobank Nigeria Ltd  and Lagos State Registrar of Titles over a property at 5, Oduduwa Street, GRA Ikeja, Lagos.

    They filed the suit through their counsel, Rotimi Aladesanmi.

    They are Mrs. Oluwafunmilayo Nwafor, Mrs. Omowumni Olugunja, Mr. Elijah Omotoso and Mr. Emmanuel Omotoso, who are the children of the deceased.

    The administrators are contending that the propriety of a Mortgage Deed dated August 24, 2001 and registered as No 14 at page 14 in volume 2044 at the Lagos State Land Registry in respect of the property, upon which a credit facility of N155 million was extended to JNC Limited by Ecobank could not have been signed by a dead person, two years after his demise as claimed by the respondent.

    The claimant also contended that there was no loan advanced to JNC Ltd by Ecobank pursuant to, or consequent upon the deed, adding that the company was not registered.

    Aladesanmi further told the court that the person who prepared and signed a document, which was attached to a counter-affidavit, meant to have been written by the morgaggor, Samuel Omotoso, an engineer,  was wrongly spelt , with the error occurring on the masthead.

    “We revealed in the document that the first defendant never sent any letter to demand any sum of money to the address of the purported mortgagor on the property at 5, Oduduwa Street, GRA Ikeja, Lagos.

    “The mortgagor, Iyiola Omotosho, had died before the first defendant allegedly forged a letter in 2009, a year the loan was purportedly approved.

    “We submit that,  a fundamental ingredient of a mortgage is the time by which the loan is to be refunded or become due,” he said.

    The claimants also stated that no amount was stated on the deed of tripartite legal mortgage as loan covered by the mortgage, and that neither is there any date for ‘repayment’ of any loan stated.

    The respondents, through their counsels, urged the court to strike out the claimants case on the basis that the court lacks the jurisdiction to hear the matter.

    “My Lord, we have taken time to go through the claimants case and we want to state before your lordship that they lack merit and we have replied them appropriately.

    “In a preliminary objection before the court, we seek that the matter of the claimant be quashed because this court lacks the jurisdiction to hear the matter.

    “On another ground, we also urge the court to strike out the matter because it is contentional,” the respondents lawyer…said.

    Justice Oke-Lawal adjourned till December 14 for ruling.

     

     

  • Group to judiciary: stage conferences during vacation

    A human rights group,  Access to Justice (A2Justice), has urged the judiciary to organise conferences for judges during vacation and holidays.

    It said to mitigate trial delays, the judiciary must address its role in causing them.

    The group noted that from November 20 to 24, judges had their bi-annual conference in Abuja.

    It said its representatives visited some courts and observed that there were cases listed for that week, but had to be adjourned because the judges were attending the conference.

    A2Justice­, in a statement by its Deputy Director Dr. Adenike Aiyedun, said neither litigants nor lawyers were informed that courts would not sit.

    “In the courts we surveyed, we also found that litigants/court users whose cases were scheduled to be heard this week were not informed beforehand that the courts would not be sitting.

    “Therefore, these court users would turn up and then be told that no business will or can be conducted by their respective courts because court judges are away on Conference. This, again, is not right.

    “There would be many litigants/witnesses who would have given up important commitments in order to come to court, and it is no comfort to them to be told that Judges are attending some Conference,” A2Justice said.

    The group said while it has no objection to judges holding conferences, they could be scheduled in a way that cases do not stall.

    A2Justice said in India, for instance, judicial conferences are held on Easter as well as on Independence Day.

    It added that such conferences could hold during vacations, just as the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) does, to minimise the negative impact on court business.

    “Once courts open for business, the time available to be applied towards adjudication of disputes technically belongs to court users and the satisfaction of their needs, and not the judges themselves, since it is to meet the needs of court users that the Judiciary owes its existence.

    “The Judiciary, therefore, is accountable to the public, particularly to court users, for the use of that time. It stands to reason that a Judge’s primary function and overarching responsibility is to attend to the business of the court,” the group said.

    A2Justice urged the judiciary to imitate other countries that hold such conferences on weekends or public holidays.

    “The Judiciary is interested in cutting trial delays but it must now walk the talk and introduce reforms that remove all the factors that occasion delays in the trial system.

    “Taking a stand that judicial conferences will no longer disrupt courts’ adjudicative functions will set a worthy example for every stakeholder in the justice system: it will amplify the message that it is no longer business as usual in our courtrooms, and that the Judiciary expects judges to no longer superimpose other responsibilities over their primary adjudicative duties.

    “If the National Judicial Council (NJC) fails to do this, the current paradigm of adjudicatory delays will not change and will continue to create unpleasant experiences for court users and an unfavourable perception of courts and justice in Nigeria.

    “It is instructive to note that at opening of the ongoing Judicial Conference, President Buhari himself lamented: ‘Regrettably, court cases can drag on for years and years, sometimes decades without resolution’.

    “We urge the National Judicial Institute, the organiser of these conferences, as well as the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) to review again the timing of these conferences in the interest of the timely administration of justice in Nigeria,” A2Justice said.

     

  • Court affirms NAFDAC’s power to regulate all chemicals

    The  National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC) has power to regulate all chemicals in Nigeria, the Federal High Court in Calabar, Cross River State, has declared.

    Justice E. A. Obile held that the importation, exportation and use of all chemicals are within NAFAC’s regulatory purview, including clinker, which is used in cement production.

    He was delivering  judgment on a suit filed by the United Cement Company of Nigeria Limited (UNICEM).

    The plaintiff contended in a suit filed on September 22, 2011 that NAFDAC lacked the power to regulate the import or export of Portland cement ‘clinker’ for not qualifying as a chemical as specified in NAFDAC Act.

    UNICEM argued that the word ‘chemical’ as stated in Section 5(a) of the NAFDAC Act refers only to pharmaceutical chemicals.

    It said any attempt by NAFDAC to regulate non-pharmaceutical chemicals would amount to usurping the functions of other regulatory agencies.

    But, NAFDAC’s lawyer Adedapo Tunde-Olowu argued that its power to regulate and control the business and use of ‘chemical’ was not limited to only pharmaceutical chemicals.

    Justice Obile held that based on Section 5(a) of the NAFDAC Act, the agency has powers to regulate use of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and chemicals.

    According to him, the section provides that the agency shall “regulate and control the importation, exportation, manufacture, advertisement, distribution, sale and use of food, drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, bottled water and chemicals.”

    The judge held that cement clinker was a chemical, adding that there was no ambiguity in Section 5(a) of the NAFDAC Act.

    Justice Obile said NAFDAC did not go beyond its powers and that any attempt by the court to state which chemical NAFDAC is to control or regulate would amount to amending the statute, which he said the court lacks the power to do.

    The judge, therefore, dismissed the plaintiff’s claims.

     

  • Institute urges INEC to obey Printers’ Act

    The Chartered Institute of Professional Printers of Nigeria (CIPPON) has urged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to obey the law on printing.

    The institute is established by an Act of Parliament, No. 24 of 2007. It is empowered to advise government and its agencies on printing.

    But, the institute said INEC does not consult it with regards to printing of electoral materials as required by the law.

    The institute has filed a suit at the Lagos State High Court seeking a declaration that no company can run a printing business in Nigeria without CIPPON license.

    Its President Mr Wahab Muhammed Lawal said CIPPON had written severally to INEC on the need to patronise licensed Nigerian printers, yet the commission prefers to take printing jobs abroad.

    He spoke on the sidelines of a two-day mandatory professional training for printers on Introduction to Costing and Estimating.

    “Up till now INEC chairman refused to meet with the institute. We see it as a contravention of an Act of Parliament. The law says we should advise government on any issue pertaining to printing.

    “If the stakeholders will imitate the late Gani Fawehinmi, who took government to court on several issues, we may borrow a leaf from him and enforce our right in court.”

    Lawal said government can help tackle the printing of fake documents by not patronising print companies not licensed by CIPPON.

    “Presently we have some cases in court against some printers who think they can continue operating without license. We are in court and very soon judgment will be delivered. CIPPON took them to court for contravening the Act of parliament,” he said.

    Lawal said it was not true that Nigerian printers lack the capacity to print sensitive electoral materials.

    “The claim that we don’t have the capacity is an excuse to enrich other countries at the expense of Nigerians and the country. They should entrust the printing of electoral materials into the hands of Nigerians through CIPPON which knows about printers’ capacity.

    “We’re not asking them to patronise certain printers, but to make sure they’re licensed with us. We can be held responsible if they fail to deliver. The naira is printed in Nigeria. Chequebooks are printed in Nigeria.

    “If any printer has failed to deliver, it is likely due to wrong award of contracts, not lack of capacity. Where we don’t have raw materials, so it is wrong for INEC or print buyers wait till it’s two weeks to the date before they award contracts,” he said.

    Lawal described as unfortunate the fact that Nigeria has no functional paper mill, with a lot of money spent on importation of printing materials.

    On why the training was organised, he said: “Due to lack of materials, profit has drastically reduced. Some presses are even closing down. That’s why the training is on costing and estimating for the purpose of cost recovery and cost control.”

    One of the facilitators, Mr Lai Bankole, also urged INEC to patronise local printers, saying it a way to boost the industry’s capacity and contribute to the country’s economy.

    CIPPON has also held this year’s Printers National Conference, which featured an annual general meeting and presentation of certificates to newly licenced printing firms.

     

  • Why Buhari should probe DSS / EFCC rivalry, by lawyers

    Why Buhari should probe DSS / EFCC rivalry, by lawyers

    In full public glare, operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission ( EFCC ) took on the Department of State Services ( DSS ) and the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) last Thursday. EFCC agents came for former DSS Director-General Ekpeyong Ita and former NIA Director-General Ambassador Ayo Oke, but they were prevented from arresting them. To lawyers, the face-off is a national embarrassment President Muhammadu Buhari, they say, should act fast to stop such lawlessness as no one is above the law. JOSEPH JIBUEZE sought their views.

    In what has been described as a national embarrassment, operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) last Tuesday engaged in a showdown for over 13 hours with their Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) counterparts. EFCC agents  stormed the home of the immediate past DSS Director-General, Ekpeyong Ita, to arrest him.

    It was learnt that the EFCC invited Ita for his alleged role in the arms scandal involving  former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col Sambo Dasuki (retd).

    Some former service chiefs are on trial over similar allegations, but efforts to question Ita, who served from 2010 to 2015, were unsuccessful, hence, the EFCC’s bid to arrest him.

    Armed with arrest and search warrants, EFCC operatives were said to have stormed Ita’s home as early as 4am, but when they presented the warrants, heavily-armed DSS operatives guarding the property, some of them masked, prevented them from gaining access. The DSS was said to have reinforced its security with about 30 armed operatives during the stand-off.

    The DSS operatives were said to have claimed to be acting on “orders from above” and threatened to open fire on the EFCC operatives if they attempted to force their way in.

    On the same day, the commission also failed in its bid to arrest former NIA Director-General Ambassador Ayo Oke. It was, however, learnt that Ekpeyong seemed to be the main target as about 80 per cent of the EFCC officials laid siege to his home.

    Ekpeyong and Oke live on Mamman Nasir Street, Asokoro, Abuja. Oke lives at Number 10; Ekpeyong, at 46.

    Despite being sacked by President Muhammadu Buhari for allegedly hiding hard currencies in his wife’s Osborne Towers, Ikoyi, Lagos apartmemt, Oke still has NIA officials protecting him.

    NIA reportedly claimed that Oke was assisting a presidential panel set up to reorganise the agencies. The EFCC had obtained search and arrest warrants for Oke and his wife, Folasade.

     

    Palpable rivalry

     

    The rivalry between the EFCC and DSS reared its ugly head during Acting EFCC chairman Ibrahim Magu’s Senate confirmation.

    Last December, the DSS, in a report sent to the Senate, said Magu failed an integrity test, warning that he would hinder President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-corruption war.

    The Senate subsequently rejected Magu, citing unfavourable “security reports” as the reason.

    The DSS letter, dated October 3, last year, was addressed to the Clerk of the Senate, in reference to a letter by the Senate, dated September 21, 2016, asking for Magu’s security check.

    The report, which listed several alleged malpractices against the EFCC boss, said his confirmation would frustrate the anti-graft crusade

    The DSS, among others, alleged that N40 million was paid for a rented apartment, which cost N20 million per annum, where the Acting EFCC chairman lives.

    The report, which cleared the other four EFCC appointees, said Magu flew a private jet owned by a retired military officer, who was once arrested by the service. Magu denied the allegations.

    The EFCC was said to have also faulted the DSS for the manner in which it raided the homes of some judges last October 8.

    It was learnt that DSS was initially mandated to work with the EFCC to do thorough investigations before a raid was carried out, but due to intra-agency rivalry, the DSS refused to hand over case information to the EFCC and hid their plans from the anti-corruption agency, preferring to work with the police.

    The rivalry between the two agencies manifested more recently when former Chairman of the defunct Presidential Task Force on Pension Reforms Abdulrasheed Maina was reinstated.

    He was sacked by the Goodluck Jonathan government in 2013 and was declared wanted by the EFCC.

    But, Maina was reinstated, promoted and was provided DSS security, as alleged by his family.

    Maina’s family’s spokesperson, Aliyu Maina, wondered why the government was denying their son, alleging that the DSS provided full security protection to him.

    Aliyu said: “He succumbed to the present administration and came back to Nigeria. He has been working with the DSS for quite some time and he was given necessary security. So, one wonders why all the agencies and various individuals responsible for his return are now denying.”

     

    Rivalry a security threat

     

    Legal and security experts have expressed concerns that the rivalry between the DSS and EFCC could pose national security threat if not quickly handled.

    Both agencies, as it is, cannot share intelligence, which can only undermine the anti-graft war, they said.

    Mr Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN) said of the inter-agency rivalry: “It’s a matter of grave security implication”

    He attributed the enmity to the damning DSS security report against Magu’s confirmation.

    According to Owonikoko, not only was it incumbent on the presidency to withdraw Magu’s nomination, it was also a danger to national security and stability of the polity not to shake up the DSS if the presidency had lost confidence in its leadership by the report.

    “We are now at a crossroads where arms bearing organs of government work in mutual disdain of each other and are actively working to undermine safety of the polity.

    “No one but the presidency as the sovereign can take the blame for this shame,” he said.

    The SAN said he could not imagine that EFCC, if competently led, would not have secured clearance from much higher authority to effect the arrests.

    To him, the resulting public shame and embarrassment that was staged by both agencies in the incident should have led to heads rolling by now.

    “If we have not been reduced to a nation of anything goes, heads should have started rolling in both agencies within 24 hours.

    “The presidency will do us well by taking a decisive remedial action that will restore professionalism and dignity to the two agencies which should be insulated from personal animosity and predilection of their operatives and leadership,” he said.

    But, Magu has said there is no going back on the planned arrest of  Ekpeyong and Oke.

    He said nobody, no matter how highly placed, was above the law.

    He claimed that the commission had concrete evidence against the former DSS and NIA heads.

    “There must be reasons, strong reasons before we go for an arrest. I am not discouraged at all, rather, it energises me to do more and I am telling you, nobody is above the law.

    “We are not discouraged at all. The law must take its course, nobody is above the law,” he said.

     

    Condemnation trails DSS action

     

    The Senate came hard on the DSS, NIA and the EFCC over last Tuesday’s clash. It described as “an unwarranted embarrassment to the country” the reported clash of the sister securities agencies.

    The lawmakers resolved to constitute an ad-hoc committee to investigate the circumstances that led to “the embarrassing situation and national disaster.”

    Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) chairman Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN urged the EFCC to refer the matter to the President.

    He said: “We all know that the law empowers the EFCC to investigate arrest and prosecute and they have the right to interrogate and invite you and if you refuse to come, they can arrest you.

    “So, anybody, who refuses, that is engaging in lawlessness and is trying to turn the country into a chaotic state of lawlessness which is certainly not good for the country.

    “No one is immune from arrest except the President, Vice-President, governor and deputy governor.”

    The Committee for the Defence of Human Rights said the clash was an embarrassment to the President.

    It described the clash as ugly and sickening, asking the DSS Director-General, Lawan Daura, to caution his men.

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) condemned the face-off, saying it could only be counter-productive to the anti-graft war. The group urged President Buhari to step in.

    “By moving speedily to stop this kind of behaviour by the SSS and NIA officials, Buhari would be making clear that under his watch those accused of grand corruption would not be allowed to circumvent the law no matter their status in the society.

    “Protecting suspected perpetrators from facing justice for corruption may suggest that officials of SSS and NIA are trying to cover up allegations of corruption against those involved,” it said.

    Activist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) described the face-off between the two agencies as a clash between impunity and the rule of law, and between legality and criminality.

    According to him, since the EFCC was to execute the warrant of arrest and search warrant validly issued by a Magistrate, it constituted an affront on the rule of law for the commission’s operatives to be denied access.

    He called for the prosecution of all the security personnel who prevented the arrest of the former security chiefs.

    “However, having refused to react to the allegations of economic and financial crimes against them the EFCC is at liberty to charge both suspects before a court of competent jurisdiction. In the alternative, the EFCC may wish to file a return before the Magistrate.

    “It is pertinent to point out that once a warrant of arrest or search warrant has been validly issued the suspect concerned is mandatorily required to cooperate with the police,” Falana said.

    The SAN said former or serving heads of DSS and NIA are not immune from giving account of how resources allocated to them are spent, just like other service chiefs.

    “For goodness sake, was the immunity of a former National Security Adviser put in abeyance when the SSS stormed his houses at Abuja and Sokoto in July 2016 and arrested him?

    “Why was the regulation not applied when the SSS dragged him before the Federal High Court for money laundering and illegal possession of firearms?

    “Why was the EFCC allowed to investigate and charge him with corruption and stealing at the Federal High Court of the Federal Capital Territory High Court?”

     

    A failure of leadership

     

    For some legal analysts, the inter-agency crisis is manifestation of leadership failure.

    Activist-lawyer Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) said the rivalry was in indictment on the Presidency.

    “The continued public rivalry and disgraceful tussles between the DSS and EFCC epitomises the shame of a nation, showing a rudderless, clueless, compass-less government where no one is in absolute control.

    “The government is one of cliquism, cabalism, sectionalism, nepotism, cronyism, favouritism and tribalism. The government has neither nerve nor verve to solve Nigeria’s problems. Nigeria is virtually on auto pilot,” Ozekhome said.

    Mr Seyi Sowemimo (SAN) also hinted at leadership failure, saying: “It sends a terrible message that the anti-corruption war is failling. Some people are above the law. Impunity still manifests in Nigeria.”

    Constitutional lawyer Ike Ofuokwu said the clash between the DSS and EFCC was “a national shame and embarrassment to the government and the people.”

    According to him, it was as if the agencies were accountable to different executives rather than to the same Presidency.

    “It portrays to the outside world and to those of us not in government that there is a disconnect in the Executive arm of government,” he said.

    He also called for a probe, saying: “The infantile behaviour of these two agencies of government is enough to set up a high panel enquiry with men/women of impeccable character to look into this anomaly and fire the head of the belligerent agency or the two agencies as the case may be depending on the findings of the panel.

    “For whatever reason, preventing the officers of the EFCC or any agency of government so empowered by law from carrying out their duty when there is a valid search and arrest warrant is a clog to the wheel of justice, a flagrant impunity to the rule of law and a brutal rape to the fight against corruption.

    “Everyone involved in this shameful conduct should be arrested and charged for obstruction of justice.

    “For crying out loud, a state of emergency should be declared in the security sector. We not too long ago saw this disconnect in the security agencies play out in the raid on the home of some Judges and in the Mainagate. It is prevalent now and for how long will this continue?,” Ofukwu wondered.

     

    ‘Buck stops at Buhari’s

    table’

     

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Chief Emeka Ngige said only the Presidency could explain the cause of the rivalry.

    “Both DSS and EFCC report directly to the Presidency and for both agencies to publicly undermine each other is an insult to the Presidency,” he said.

    According to him, the implications of the face-off were legion. Beside the image of the government being brought to disrepute, the country, he said, becomes a laughingstock among members of the international community who are watching “the ugly spectacle”.

    “The fight against corruption is undermined, culture of impunity goes unchallenged at all levels of governance, esprit de corps among members of the two sister agencies is greatly eroded, the government itself becomes vulnerable to external attacks and dangerous precedent is laid for emulation by other security agencies,” Ngige said.

    He urged the Presidency to probe the face-off to avoid a recurrence.

    “The only thing that can be done is for the Presidency to set up judicial panel inquiry to look into the matter and request for recommendations or suggestions on how restore normalcy in the relationship between the two or now three sister agencies and find ways to avert the recurrence of the show of shame,” Ngige said.

    For renowned author Mr Sebastine Hon (SAN), DSS and NIA officials have no right, moral or legal, to prevent the EFCC from performing its statutory functions.

    Their action, he said, amounts to a breach of their oaths of office and their avowed allegiance to the Constitution and the rule of law.

    “Officials of the security agencies involved in this ugly saga bear arms; and supposing the EFCC officials attempted to force their way into the residences of the indicted persons, what would have been the result?

    “If the indicted persons were still serving, one would have expected the EFCC, out of courtesy and not out any legal obligation, to have formally requested the DSS and the NIA to turn them in to the EFCC.

    “But the twosome is not in service again; and in the absence of constitutional or statutory immunity, there is nothing stopping the EFCC from inviting or even arresting them,” Hon said.

    The constitutional lawyer said only the President, as commander-in-chief, could end the rivalry.

    “The President of Nigeria who constitutionally doubles as the Commander-in-Chief of all the armed forces, including the DSS and the NIA, should weigh in immediately.

    “If he refuses, fails or neglects to do that, his already imperilled anti-corruption agenda will plunge further downhill. Mr. President should act immediately,” Hon added.

     

    Need for caution

     

    For Mr Ahmed Raji (SAN), the Presidency should be given time to resolve the issues.

    “These are very delicate and serious security matters. My humble take is that the operators of our security architecture are up to the task and the matter will be resolved soon. It is not a matter for just any member of public to be speculating about.

    “The DSS, NIA and EFCC are key departments in our security set up.  Luckily for us, our President is a General who knows his onions especially in security matters. I, will, therefore not engage in speculation on this matter as I am very confident it will be resolve,” Raji said.

     

     

  • Some young lawyers lack decorum, ethics of legal practice

    Some young lawyers lack decorum, ethics of legal practice

    Chief Chuks Muoma (SAN) is the legal adviser to Ohan’eze Ndigbo. In this interview, he speaks on justice sector reforms, anti-corruption war, the activities of the Indigenous People of Biafra ( IPOB), restructuring and national issues. Legal Editor John Austin Unachukwu met him

    How can the justice sector be reformed to fast-track the dispensation of justice?

     The dispensation of justice is a divine duty entrusted to man for peace and wellbeing of mankind. The hallmark, of justice are fair hearing and truth. The dispensation of justice must be fast and fearless, epitomised by the blind-folded Mother Nemesis with a scale in her left hand and a sword in her right hand. There is no more perfect symbolism. Unfortunately, Nigeria seems to be light years away from this laudable objective of speedy dispensation of justice. Nigeria needs to invest heavily in the justice system.

    Why did you say this?

    This is because our Judiciary is under-manned, ill-equipped and under-funded. Our magistrates, judges and justices are over-worked. Ninety per cent of the courtrooms in this country are most uncomfortable to work in, and are located in very dirty and unkempt environments. Except in a few states of the federation, most courts are bereft of basic amenities and comfort for the judicial personnel, legal practitioners and litigants and in some trial courts, there is no toilet facilities for lawyers, litigants and members of the public, who are needfully present in courts, during proceedings. Juxtapose this appalling conditions of the court with the billions of dollars and naira stolen by our politicians, bureaucrats and service chiefs/personnel. The newspapers are awash with the stories of this mass corruption in our society. Legal practitioners, magistrates, judges and justices are no longer what they were in days of yore.

    Can you give us examples?

    For instance, today, legal practitioners have become conduit pipes through which bribes are channelled to members of the Bench. Disrespect and lack of decorum by lawyers are now common in our courts. I am of the view that the governments (federal and states) should invest massively in the administration of justice, which is the only way of ensuring peace in the society. Justice and peace are potent weapons in fighting self-help, jungle justice, social/political rascality, so that constitutionality and the rule of law prevail. This country needs to employ more judicial officers and personnel; build better structural facilities and install electronic devices for the recording of judicial proceedings. By doing this, we will no longer have cases pending in the courts for 10 to 15 years, at the trial stage alone, in the High Courts. Legal practitioners have in some cases contributed to delays in trials with incessant letters of adjournment. Except in criminal matters and election matters, a civil litigation from the High Court to the Supreme Court may last for about 15  to 20 years. What kind of Justice is that? Justice delayed is justice denied. In the extreme scenario, of what use is a judgment to litigants and their lawyers who might have been dead at the time of the judgment? Come to think of it, the courts generate huge revenue for the governments. Financial autonomy for judiciary, both federal and state, is imperative.

    There are serious concerns about the declining standards of legal practice and ethics  how do  we address these challenges?

    I had earlier dealt with some points pertinent to this question. Our faculties of law and law schools are undoubtedly churning out law graduates and legal practitioners, brilliant in the letters of the law. Unfortunately, these graduates, and lawyers lack the decorum and ethics of the legal profession. They have little or no regard for  the dress code of the legal profession. They are rude and disrespectful to their colleagues and the Bench. The universities and law school should engage the services of senior practicing lawyers to give lectures to the students of the law faculties and law schools on decorum at the Bar. This is not an academic subject and does not need a masters or doctoral degree to qualify the lecturer for that assignment. A lawyer, who lacks professional ethics and decorum has no business at the Bar. Indecorum is unacceptable at the Bar. A Legal practitioner should not hide under his brief to launch unjustifiable attack on a judge or his colleague. Although a legal practitioner has a right and duty to present his client(s) case, he must do so within the bounds of professional ethics. The duty he owes his client is subject to a higher duty he owes to the cause of justice. He should resist being controlled and dictated to by his client(s). The rules of professional conduct for legal practitioners provide that “lawyers shall treat one another with respect, fairness, consideration and dignity, and shall not allow any ill-feeling between opposing clients to influence their conduct and demeanor towards one another or towards the opposing clients”. It is imperative that law undergraduates and students of the Nigerian Law School be properly groomed in ethics and decorum at the Bar by experienced practitioners. It is time we rid the Bar of rudeness, dirty shirts, collars, bibs, badly tailored pair of trousers, as well as grey green and brown jackets.

    Can you be specific?

    The appropriate colour for lawyers trousers and jackets is black,  morning trousers are the most preferred, shirts should be pure white or chancery shirts. Bad English and grammar are becoming very common, especially the new wigs. Spoken and written English should be made compulsory and should be thought as a subject in the law schools since judicial proceedings in Nigeria are conducted in English. A good lawyer is noted for his command of the English language, oral and written. Let the law schools do their duty and produce decorous members of the Bar, thoroughly groomed in the ethics of the Bar. It is decorum in dress, speech and conduct that make a lawyer outstanding in a society, or amongst people.

    Being a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) comes with  responsibilities for those who wear the rank, what is your message for the new SAN?

    My message to the new Senior Advocates of Nigeria, as well as the old ones, is to be decorus and polished in their conduct and speech. They should not encourage corruption in the administration of justice. They should counsel their juniors and clients, wisely. They should not instigate or encourage unnecessary litigations, just for the purpose of earning fees. They should not be parties to the corruption of our judges. They should neither intimidate their junior colleagues, nor the Bench. They should counsel others not to, delay court proceedings unnecessarily, through incessant letters of adjournment. They should be accommodating to their junior colleagues and, by example, encourage them to better conduct, in and out of the courtroom. It is trending now for legal practitioners to encourage and instigate “kill and share” litigations, savouring of champerty. Such litigations are clearly made manifest in the desperate advocacy and tactics of counsel, in and out of the court room.   A counsel should not conduct his case as if his life depends on it, all in the quest for riches and wealth.

    It has been alleged that senior lawyers are constituting a clog in the wheel of the anti-corruption fight of the Federal Government. What is your reaction to this?

    It is the constitutional right of a citizen of this country to hire and be defended by a counsel of his choice. An accused person should be prosecuted and not persecuted. What happened to the charges brought against some former governors for corruption while in office? The prosecuting authority suddenly lost the appetite to proceed and complete the prosecution of those charges, as soon as the accused persons (defendants) joined the “right party”. Are you blaming the lawyers for that? Some of those manifestly corrupt governors are now in the Senate. Are the lawyers to be blamed for the selective anti-corruption war of the government? Why were those charges against former governors abandoned? Was that on the advice of senior lawyers? A lawyer’s duty is to defend his client, to the best of his professional abilities, based on the evidence and the law relevant to the case. It is not for the lawyer to prove the innocence of his client (the accused person), since in our accusatorial system, an accused person is presumed innocent, until he is proved  guilty. The task of the prosecutor is to prove the accused guilty, beyond reasonable doubt.

     What do you mean by  this?

    The so called anti-corruption war is devoid of sincerity, it is selective. What about those public servants who amassed wealth, beyond their legitimate incomes? Are the senior lawyers responsible for their non-prosecution? All you have to do in this country is to steal public funds, be on the “right side” and you will remain a sacred cow, immune from prosecution. Kindly stop blaming lawyers for the manipulations of politicians. Let them prosecute, without exception, all the corrupt public officers, past and present, who are corrupt. If they have the sincerity to do that, it will be in the interest of the legal profession, in terms of a boom in legal business, with consequential enhanced income for lawyers. Do not mind them; the so-called anti-corruption agencies are not sincere in executing their anti-corruption assignments, which should be all inclusive and total.

    The judiciary has received serious bashing in recent times from law enforcement agencies of the Federal Government fighting corruption. What is your reaction to this?

    I had earlier dealt with apparent consciousness and philosophy of the anti-corruption agencies. The Judiciary is not more corrupt than the Ministries, Departments and Agencies of the government. The corruption in the Police goes on 24/7, simultaneously, all over the Federation, day and night. As I said before, let the law enforcement agencies of the Federal Government charge the anti-corruption cases to the courts, not-selectively and prosecute those cases diligently. Do not blame the Judiciary and the lawyers, when the anti-corruption agencies are selective in their operations. The anti-corruption agencies even abandon prosecutions initiated by them, without concluding them to judgment. The courts do not prosecute cases; no, that is not the constitutional function of the courts. Criminal cases are prosecuted by the Attorney-General or law enforcement agencies of the g overnment. It is a general knowledge that the law enforcement and anti-corruption agencies are very corrupt. I am not saying that the legal profession and the Judiciary are both manned by angels, but they are by no means worse than their accusers.

    The courts try cases duly initiated before them, through appropriate processes. The courts neither prosecute, nor defend cases. It was certainly in bad taste for the president to travel to foreign countries and while there, he castigated, denigrated and diminished his own Judiciary. What was that in aid of? One does not cut off his nose to spite his face!

    and criminal cases, amongst civilians.  May better political education and the Almighty God deliver this Country, Nigeria.  Leadership of crush him, crush her, crush this, crush that, crush them, crush everybody and everything that does not agree is notleadership but rulership  and anti-democratic.

    You were recently elected National Legal Adviser to the Ohanaeze Ndigbo how do you feel about this and what are the challenges you see in carrying out this responsibility?

     My election as the National Legal Adviser of Ohanaeze Ndigbo was an accident of fate, because from the suggestion to the actualization took less than fourteen (14) days. I saw it as a call to duty by my people and an expression of confidence in me. I was elected unopposed. As the office implies, I am an adviser in law; executive decisions are made by the President-General and the National Executive Council. It is not easy to mange the Igbo, because of their republican nature. The Igbo  are highly democratic and come to a decision after a long and protracted debate. Every opinion is meticulously considered, before a decision is reached, either through consensus, or voting process. Combining my duty in Ohanaeze Ndigbo and my private legal practice, which has spanned over forty-six (46) years has not been an easy task. But for the call of duty to serve my people, I do not envy myself. However, I have no regrets, in serving my people.

    At some point, you were involved in the defence of the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, in the alleged treason case. What really happened in that case and what is the position now?

    I was the lead counsel for Mazi Nnamdi Kanu in the alleged treason trial, until I become the National Legal Adviser of Ohanaeze Ndigbo. It was at that point that mistrust set in and I was quietly and silently edged out of the proceedings. A man/woman has the constitutional right of choice of counsel. The law does not allow or permit a lawyer to impose and perpetuate himself and services on a client. I have no regrets being out of the proceedings in that case, which I see more as a political than a criminal matter. At the age of seventy-seven (77) years and having practiced law for more than 46 years, I am still strong enough and ready to take on more responsibilities in selfless services to mankind. A lot of people did not believe that I was defending Nnamdi Kanu,pro bono. As I have earlier said, I have no regrets.

    It is generally believed that Mazi Kanu has breached almost all his bail conditions for which the Federal Government has indicated intention to rearrest and prosecute him. What is your reaction to this?

    Those bail conditions were deliberately designed to be obeyed more in breach than in compliance. They were impossible bail conditions and unconstitutional, because they breached his constitutional fundamental rights of freedom of association, freedom of movement and freedom of worship. It means that Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, after his release on bail could not and cannot go to church service(s), where there are more than ten (10) worshippers, travel in a public transport (including an aircraft) where there are more than ten (10) passengers, go to the market, walk in the high street, attend his town union and age grade meetings, cannot attend social functions, such as weddings, burials, parties and even nightclubs, where they may be more than ten (10) people. Who on earth, either in Nigeria, or other democratic countries, has/have been given such bail conditions. The bail conditions given to Nnamdi Kanu can only be obtainable in Nazi Germany, Joseph Stalin’s Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or other fundamental Muslim countries. As a lawyer, I contend that those bail conditions could be given by the presidency and not a court of Justice.

    As the Legal Adviser to Ohanaeze, what is the relationship between the Ohanaeze and its youth wing?

    The Youth Wing of Ohanaeze, as well as the women wing, are creations of the Imeobi and the Constitution of Ohanaeze. They are not independent bodies. They are under the executive control of the President-General and the National Executive Council of Ohanaeze. The relationship is that of co-operation and not confrontation. The wings are arms of Ohanaeze.

    Why do they speak in divergent tones on serious national issues that concern Ndigbo?

      You have not really presented to me instances of the youth wing speaking in divergent tones. I have already said that the Igbo are republican and democratic by nature. We listen to all shade of opinion, but the mouth piece of the Igbo is the President-General giving expression and effect to the decisions/resolutions of the National Executive Council. There are mechanisms for reining-in unruly horses. The branch cannot be stronger or bigger  than the trunk.

    Operation Python Dance 11 was conducted by the Nigerian Army in the South-East, what is your reaction to this?

    In my opinion that military exercise was an invasion of Igboland in  time of peace and in so-called democratic dispensation. That is why I said that Nigeria practices military democracy, like they have in Egypt. Internal policing is the legal responsibility of the Nigerian Police Force and that of the Armed Forces. Sections 214, 215 and 216 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) create and deal with the functions of the Nigeria Police Force. The creation of the armed forces and their functions are contained in Section 217-220 of the said Constitution. The question I often ask is this: if we are not in a military regime, why are the armed forces deployed to usurp the functions of the Police, amongst civilians? This is very reminiscent of Egyptian democracy. How can Egypt be our role model? Do we have more kidnappings in Abia than Abuja-Kaduna road, Lagos State, Cross Rivers State and Edo State, etc? Does the South-East have the highest crime rate in Nigeria, such that the Nigerian Police Force cannot handle? Are there more bank robberies, or other armed robberies in the South-East, more than all other political zones? They just called a dog a bad name inorder to kill it. The military has ruined our dear Country, Nigeria

    By how, they are checkmating crime and criminals?

    They kill a fly with a sledge hammer and call a dog a bad name, inorder to hang it. The South-East and South-South are infested with security operatives, crawling everywhere. The other day, on the so-called express way between Aba and Portharcourt, I counted about fifteen check-points, in some cases within a few metres apart, in an overall distance of forty miles, or fifty-seven kilometers, approximately. The army, police civil defense corps, navy and FRCS personnel are on South-East and South- South roads, simultaneously, all collecting their “tolls”. My opinion is that the South-East, in particular, is under siege and occupation by Abuja. A journey that normally took two (2) hours now takes four (4) hours within the South-East /South-South zones. The federal roads are disgraceful, and nobody cares.

    What actually do Igbos want in Nigeria? Separation, restructuring, confederation referendum or what?

    The Igbos demand equal citizenship rights to be given the same citizenship rights and privileges as the Fulani, Hausa and other privileged ethnic groups in Nigeria. All Nigerians should be equal, as provided by our Constitution, which does not contain provisions(s) for first class,  second class and third class citizenship. We believe that this should be better achieved, without bloodshed. True federalism is the answer, let us go back to the 1960 and 1963 Constitutions, let there be true fiscal and political federalism. Let Nigeria be restructured along these lines, so that each zone/region will lift itself by its bootstraps and develop at its own pace. The present 1999 Constitution, as foisted on Nigerians, is false and fraudulent; and it started with a false preamble. The present Constitution of 1999 was a fraudulent machination of the military ruling class. To save our dear country, Nigeria, she must be restructured by being returned to the golden era of 1960/1963 Constitutions.

    What is the legal/ constitutional foundation or basis for this demand? 

     I proffer this suggestion on the basis of fairness, fair play and expediency. A political solution that will enthrone progress, peace and unity should transcend legal arguments. Nigeria started in 1914, as a political arrangement of convenience. Whose convenience you may ask? The convenience of the British Empire! Nigeria was man-made for the economic wellbeing of Britain. God did not create Nigeria, from inception, till date, Nigeria, has been a manipulated contraption. Okay! Let’s maintain Nigeria as long as it is a land where no man is oppressed. It was when we abandoned the laudable anthem of “where no man is oppressed” to an anthem of arise “to battle”, in celebration of a perceived “conquest”, that things fell apart. The concept of slaves and slave masters will never endure in Nigeria. We must return to the ideals of the founding fathers of Nigeria. There must be justice for all.

     What is your opinion about the declaration of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) a terrorist organization by the Nigerian Army and the proscription of the activities of IPOB by the Governors of South-East?

    Both decisions were political, without any legal basis. It was not within the powers and functions of the army to make that declaration. That is what I have been saying: Nigeria is a military regime, camouflaging as a democracy. The political soldiers eventually realized that they goofed. I will not want to comment further on the said declaration, because the matter is now sub judice. As for the action of the South-East Governors, it was expedient to do what they did. It was also political; to be seen to be compliant and save their skins, motivated by instinct of self preservation, period