The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Independence Day: Abubakar preaches unity

    Bauchi State Governor Mohammed Abubakar has advocated the need to sustain Nigeria’s unity as the country marks its 57th independence anniversary.

    The chairman of Arewa Lawyers Forum was among eminent Nigerians who worshipped with President Mohammed Buhari at the Central Mosque in Abuja to celebrate Independence Day.

    Others at the mosque were Senate President Bukola Saraki, and former Vice-President Namadi Sambo, among others.

    The Governor, meanwhile, has approved the provision of uniforms to 5,238 cooks in the state to ensure that food prepared for school children meet global hygiene and quality standards.

    A statement by his Special Assistant on Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and Social Intervention Programmes (SIPs), Mansur Manu Soro, spoke at a one day stakeholders’ sensitisation workshop for cooks in Bauchi Local Government Area.

    He said: “In accordance with the provisions of implementation manual, the Governor Mohammed Abubakar has approved the provision of eight yards material for uniform and apron to all cooks of Bauchi State for free.

    “The central objective of the sensitization is mobilise the relevant stakeholders to take ownership of the programme to ensure its effective implementation and active community participation.”

    Members of the State School Feeding Multi-sectoral Team (SSFMT) discussed the need to enforce hygiene.

    Bauchi State Government, through its agency for the Control of HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria (BACATMA) had, has distributed 2,085 Long Lasting Insecticidal Mosquito Nets (LLINs) to students and staff of Government Girls College Sakwa and Government College, Azare.

    The exercise was part of Gov. Abubakar’s bid to rid the state of malaria, especially  in schools.

    BACATMA and Bauchi State Special Schools Management Board partnered for the programme.

  • Mobil’s failure to compile records stalls hearing of seven-year old appeal

    The Supreme Court refused  to hear the appeal filed in 2010 by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited owing to Mobil’s failure to have records of proceedings at the lower court compiled and transmitted to the apex court.

    At the proceedings on September 25, a five-man panel of the court, led by Justice Mary Odili, heard and granted an application by Mobil to regularise its appeal and deemed its processes filed out of time as properly filed.

    When it was time to hear the main appeal, marked: SC/33/2010, Justice Odili noted that a copy the record of appeal was missing in her file.

    Other members of the panel also did not have the record, prompting Justice Odili to ask Mobil’s lawyer, Rowland Obaji to furnish the court with a copy.

    Obaji handed a copy to an official of the court, but on a closer look at the record given to the court by Obaji, another member of the panel, Justice Kayode Ariwoola noticed that it was not the proper record for the court.

    Justice Ariwoola noted that the record retrieved from Obaji did not have the Supreme Court’s appeal number, as was the practice.

    Lawyers to the respondents – Femi Falana (SAN) and Sebastian Ozoama – also said they do not have the record.

    Falana said he was not served with the record by the appellant, as required; but that his clients went out of their way to obtain a copy from the Court of Appeal, Calabar, where the case was last decided. He said the record was not with him in court.

    Ozoama, who also filed a similar appeal (SC/378/2010), said he was not served with the record by the appellant.

    He said his client, the Inspector General of Police (IGP), needed not to compile a fresh record of appeal, because the court had on March 2011, granted the IGP leave to have his appeal prosecuted on the record compiled by Mobil, since both appeals were on the same judgment.

    At that point, Justice Odili announced that it was impossible for the court to proceed to hear the two appeals as earlier scheduled.

    She consequently adjourned to January 23, 2018 for hearing, and ordered the two appellants to ensure they come with the record of appeal on the next date.

    Mobil’s appeal is against the May 21, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeal, Calabar, Cross Rivers State.

    The court, in the judgment, held among others, that the about 859 Nigerians engaged as security guards sometime in1990 by Mobil, were its staff and that they were entitled to the same benefits as its other staff.

    The IGP’s appeal is also challenging the judgment on the grounds that the Court of Appeal was wrong to have held that the security guards, labelled as Supernumerary Police (SPY), were staff of Mobil.

    In 2000 a dispute arose about the status of the security guards, with Mobil claiming to have transferred their employment to the Nigeria Police Force (NPF).

    Mobil claimed it engaged them as SPY police personnel and not actual staff, a claim the affected workers, led by Okon Johnson, disputed in a suit they later instituted  at the Federal High Court, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State.

    The court in 2006 held in favour of Mobil, forcing the workers to appeal at the Court of Appeal, Calabar, Cross Rivers State.

    In a unanimous judgment on May 21, 2009 the Appeal Court held among others, that the Nigerians were Mobil’s employees, a decision both Mobil and the IGP separately appealed.

  • An employee’s appointment cannot be properly terminated over alleged criminal offence without trial

    An employee’s appointment cannot be properly terminated over alleged criminal offence without trial

    Summary of facts

    The Respondent (then Claimant) instituted the action leading to this appeal by a writ of summons against the Appellants (as Defendants) before the trial Court for wrongful termination of appointment, reinstatement and other ancillary orders. Parties duly filed and exchanged pleadings and after due consideration of facts and evidences before it, the trial Court entered judgment in favour of the Respondent to the effect that the purported termination of Respondent’s appointment with the Imo State Civil Service by a letter dated 13th February, 2002, Ref. No. CSC/P.248/1/5 written by the 1st Defendant is null, void, illegal and unconstitutional and therefore of no effect, same being a breach of contract. The court also ordered Respondent’s reinstatement as well as payment of Respondent’s salaries and all other entitlements due to him.

    The Appellants, being aggrieved with the whole of the judgment of the High Court of Imo State, initiated the instant Appeal.

     

    Issue(s) for determination

    The sole issue for determination as distilled by the Court for the just determination of the appeal is:

    “Whether the trial Court was right in its findings that the employment of the Respondent was wrongly terminated in the breach of his right to fair hearing”.

     

    Appellants’ argument

    The Appellants formulated two issues for the determination of the appeal viz: –

    “Issue No. 1: Whether (sic: from) the circumstances of this case there was fair hearing or the Respondent was accorded fair hearing by the Appellants or put broadly whether there was a breach of the provisions of Section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (Grounds 1 and 2).

    Issue No. 2: Whether the Claimant’s appointment was not properly determined by the Appellants.”

    While canvassing their issue one, Appellants submitted that fair hearing was accorded the Respondent. To them, having issued a query requiring the Respondent to give account of what happened and state his defence to an otherwise ignoble act, as well as constituting a staff audit panel which considered his response and also took into consideration the antecedent conducts of the Respondent before making recommendation to the Civil Service Commission before Respondent’s termination of employment, it cannot be said that the Respondent was not afforded the opportunity of being heard.

    Dwelling on their second issue, it is the position of the Appellants that the settled position of the law presently, is that an employer is not bound to keep an employee until he has successfully prosecuted the employee in a criminal Court. The Appellants said that in the instant case, what was alleged is a professional misconduct and not criminal offence, hence, the question of prosecution for a criminal offence does not arise. That the trial Court was therefore wrong to have held that the Respondent must first be prosecuted before his appointment could be terminated. He argued that this is not the position of the law and the case of Dangote v. CSC, Plateau State (1995) 7 NWLR (Pt. 408) 448 CA was cited in aid. It aslo referred to Chapter 4 Rules 04305 and 04306 of the Imo State Public Service Rules (Revised to 1st January, 2001) which provide that the CSC can implement the recommendation of a disciplinary nature made by a tribunal of inquiry set up by the Government and further pressed home their point by adding that “grave misconduct” which does not connote commission of crime, as in this case, was such that the CSC could dismiss the Respondent for without charging him to Court for prosecution.

    Placing reliance on the case of Abomeli v. N.R.C. (1995) 1 NWLR (Pt. 372) 451 CA which shows the various degrees of misconduct which give an employer liberty to dismiss an employee. They further argued that since there is no fixed rule of law defining the degree of misconduct which would justify a dismissal. That working against the deep interest of the employer clearly amounts to gross misconduct entitling the employer to peremptorily dismiss the employee, irrespective of the conditions of service and the case of A.C.B. Plc v. Nbisike (1995) 8 NWLR (Pt. 416) 725 CA was also cited in aid. The Appellants therefore submitted that the dismissal of the Respondent was proper.

     

    Respondent’s argument

    The Respondent on his own part formulated two issues for determination viz:

    “(1)Whether the termination of the respondent’s employment was in breach of his contract of service, the right of fair hearing and therefore illegal and unconstitutional. (This issue relates to ground 1).

    (2) Where the ground of termination of an employee who holds a contract with statutory flavour is a criminal allegation, whether the employer can rightly terminate him simply for grave misconduct without first prosecuting him in a criminal Court. (This issues (sic) relates to ground (sic) 2 and 3 and not 3 as stated by the appellants).”

    Before dwelling on the issues he formulated for the determination of the appeal the Respondent submitted that Appellants’ issue 2 should be struck out for being incompetent as it was not distilled from ground 3 in the notice of appeal and ground 3 from which the Appellants purported to have formulated the said issue 2, equally struck out as no issue has been formulated from it.

    On the first issue he formulated for the determination of the appeal, it is the Respondent’s stance that given the pleadings before the trial Court and the findings of the Court, both sides agreed that his (Respondent’s) appointment was an employment with statutory flavour, and is regulated by the Imo State Public Service Rules 2001 and the CSC Regulations 1994 of Imo State. He canvassed that by Rule 21 of the CSC Regulations 1994, the Personnel Management Board is the body empowered to consider appointments, promotions, and discipline of staff; while by Rule 04303 of the Public Service Rule 2001 and the procedure for the discipline of a staff as provided in Chapter 4 Rule 04303 is that where a recommendation of a disciplinary nature by a tribunal of inquiry set up by Government makes recommendation on an officer, the CSC shall not act on such recommendation until it has called upon the affected officer to reply to the allegation made against him by the tribunal of inquiry.

    It is the position of the Respondent that the fact that the State Staff Audit Panel (rather than the PMB as required by the terms of his employment) sat and moreso without hearing him and decided or recommended that his employment be terminated, coupled with the CSC’s implementation of the decision without calling on him to respond to the allegation in issue constituted lack of fair hearing. He canvassed further that statutory provisions in contract of employment are constructed strictly and that the effect of the nonobservance of the rules of natural justice or breach of the constitutional provision of fair hearing unequivocally is that the decision taken, is null and void, and unconstitutional and the cases of Olatunbosun v. NISER Council (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt. 80); FCSC v. Laoye (1989) 2 NWLR (Pt. 106) 652, 699 were cited in aid.

    Finally, the Respondent urged this Court to find the trial Court to be justified in nullifying the termination of his appointment on the ground of lack of fair hearing.

    In relation to the second issue he formulated for the determination of the appeal, the Respondent reinforced his position that he is not guilty of the offence/grave misconduct he is accused of, that his case is that no proper panel or body as far as his employment was concerned ever found him “guilty” or liable for any misconduct. That even where an employee was not charged to Court, but grave misconduct was alleged, the proper body must satisfy itself of the grave misconduct because the condition or contract of employment had stipulated that a PMB (and in his case) shall sit to hear the allegation.

    On Appellants’ position that no criminal trial is necessary before an employee could be terminated or dismissed, the Respondent submitted that this is not totally correct as it does not relate to instances where the employment is regulated by statutes or rules. That the applicable Public Service Rules required that he (Respondent) could be suspended, interdicted and charged to Court, before his appointment is terminated or he is dismissed therefrom. That a PMB has to sit to consider the matter and it is only when this had been done that the CSC will proceed to terminate or dismiss, as the case may be, if he was found guilty or culpable. That none of the procedures was complied with, in the instant case.

    It is also the position of the Respondent that the submission of the Appellants that the reason for the termination of his employment was not criminal but grave administrative wrong, is in itself wrong. This is because demanding and receiving gratification is an offence under Section 96 of the Criminal Code Law and by Section 36(4) of the CFRN 1999, it is only a Court that has jurisdiction to hear criminal allegations or charges; that can try him. That to rely on a criminal allegation and then terminate an employee’s employment without trial where the rules provide for such trial, in itself amounts to lack of fair hearing and the cases of Sofekun v. Akinyemi (1980) 5-7 SC 1; and Denloye v. Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (1968) 1 ALL NLR 306 amongst others were cited in aid.

    The Respondent concluded by urging the Court to resolve this issue in his favour.

     

    Court’s findings

    On Respondent’s contention that issue 2 formulated by the Appellants should be struck out since same does not flow from ground 3 in the notice of appeal from which the Appellants have formulated it; the Court held that Appellants’ issue 2, even though might appear not to have been well couched, flows from ground 3 in the notice of appeal inasmuch as the issue brings to the fore the correctness or otherwise of the decision of the trial Court hence, the issue 2 stands.

    Before going into the determination of the appeal proper, the court then went on to distill its own issue for determination to be: “Whether the trial Court was right in its findings that the employment of the Respondent was wrongly terminated in the breach of his right to fair hearing”.

    The Court explained an ‘appeal’ to be “an invitation to a higher Court to review the decision of a trial Court to find out whether on the proper consideration of the facts placed before it, and the applicable law, that Court arrived at a correct decision”.

    The Court correctly pointed out that in an appeal, it is the duty of an appellant not only to formulate grounds of appeal that explicitly flow or arise from the judgment appealed against; and issues equally flowing from the said grounds, but also to advance convincing argument showing the manner in which the decision appealed is wrong and requires to be inferred with by the appellate Court.

    Having said that, the Court observed that none of the three grounds in the notice of appeal expressed appellants’ grouse(s) with the findings of the trial Court especially its seventh finding which is “That the Civil Service Commission (CSC) did not comply with the provisions of Chapter 4 Rule 04303 of the Civil Service Rules”.

    The court then reiterated the long standing position of the law that any finding of a Court that is not appealed against must be deemed as accepted by the parties and particularly the Appellants that initiated it. The case of Comptroller General of Custom v. Gusau (2017) LPELR – 42081(SC) was cited.

    Consequently, the Court said that the Appellants, having simply appealed against the decision of the trial Court without seeking for a reversal of the findings that formed the basis of the said decision are therefore essentially appealing on the perceived misapplication of the principles of law to the facts the trial Court accepted.

    The Court, while lauding the trial Court’s  finding in respect of Respondent’s  employment that the failure of the Civil Service Commission to comply with the provisions of Chapter 4, Rule 04303 of the Civil Service Rules and Rule 21 of Imo State Civil Service Regulations of 1994 makes the termination of the appointment of the claimant unlawful, pointed out that the trial Court ideally needed not to have considered the other aspect of the Respondent’s case that dealt with the question as to whether or not his appointment was properly determined.

    The Court wasted no time in stating that Appellants’ submission to the effect that the law has obliterated the distinction between a contract of employment with statutory flavor and one of pure master and servant relationship is not the correct position. The cases of CBN V. Igwillo (2007) LPELR – 835 (SC), 14 NWLR (Pt. 1054) 393; and Longe v. First Bank of Nig. Plc (2010) LPELR – 1793 (SC), (2010) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1189) 1 Sofekun  v. Akinyemi (1980) 5-7 S.C 1, (1980) ANLR 153 were referenced and the correct position as adumbrated in these cases is that a civil servant’s employment cannot be properly determined on the basis of a misconduct amounting to a criminal offence without the prosecution of the erring civil servant, before a Court of competent jurisdiction.

     

    Held

    In the final analysis, this appeal is held to be totally unmeritorious and consequently fails. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The judgment of the trial Court was therefore affirmed.

     

    Copyright: Lawpavilion (2017) LPELR-42856(CA)

     

  • Lagos simplifies domestic violence reporting

    Lagos residents can report cases of sexual and gender based violence through a short message service, Governor Akinwunmi Ambode has said.

    He spoke at a Commendation Night/Launch of Domestic and Sexual Violence Trust Fund & Resource Book by the Domestic and Sexual Violence Response Team (DSVRT).

    The governor, represented  Secretary to the state government Mr Tunji Bello, said this would be done through sustained awareness initiatives and amplifying the usage of a “6820” service.

    He said the service provided by Airtel is a short message service code that can be used to report cases of sexual and gender based violence.

    Governor Ambode said DSVRT would be set up in all council secretariats.

    The governor said increase in DSVRT’s activities does not increase in cases of sexual and gender based violence.

    “It is actually a measure of growing confidence by victims to speak out and seek justice.

    “Our objective is to ensure that this criminal and reprehensible act is totally eliminated,” he said.

    Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Adeniji Kazeem, said a new-inaugurated DNA and Forensic Centre was a significant step in the fight against crime, including rape and domestic violence.

    He praised DSVRT members for their achievements.

    A Director in the Ministry of Justice, Mrs Omotola Rotimi, said DSVRT played active role in the formulation of a legal framework for combating the vice.

    She said anybody that comes in contact with a defiled child or attempts to shield an offender by not reporting it risks two years imprisonment.

    According to her, the new policy has been ratified into law by the state house of assembly through an executive order.

    She the team was also carrying out enlightenment programmes to sensitise the public and training students to make them aware of their rights.

     

  • Companies lack power to enforce Content Act, says court

    An Edo State High Court in Benin has held that Nigerian companies lack power to enforce the provisions of the Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act, 2010 against international petroleum producing companies operating in the country.

    The court ruled in a case brought by CMES Flange and Fittings Limited against three international oil producing companies – Shell, Chevron and Mobil.

    Chief Judge of the State, Justice Esohe Ikponwen, said the plaintiff had no locus standi to bring action against the companies for noncompliance with the provisions of the Act.

    He said the Act already provided for mechanism of supervision, coordination, monitoring and implementation  of its provisions  with the establishment of the Nigerian Content Monitoring Board in section 69 of the Act.

    Besides, he held that the power to institute a suit for breach of its provisions resides with the monitoring body only.

    The Court also agreed with the submission of the defendants’ counsel ,Dr Momodu Kassim-Momodu, that the plaintiff did not disclose any reasonable cause of action against the international petroleum companies.

    The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to determine the suit against the oil companies, especially as there was no evidence before the court that the indigenous company bided for any contract with any of the three petroleum companies; or that the international companies have been awarding  contracts to only foreign contractors.

    The court also agreed with the defendants that since none of them resides or does any business in Edo State, the High Court of Edo State was devoid of the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

    The court also upheld the defendants’ argument that the failure of the claimant to comply with the mandatory provisions of Section 97 of the Sheriff and Civil Processes Act by endorsing the Writ of Summons as specified in the law rendered the Writ of Summons fundamentally defective and therefore null and void.

    The judge frowned at the filing of the case in the State High Court instead of the Federal High Court, stating that it is the Federal High Court that has jurisdiction over oil and gas matters.

    A Benin based indigenous company -CMES Flanges and Fittings Limited, in a suit brought by its counsel, LI T Erhabor, claimed that Shell, Chevron, and Mobil did not comply with the Nigerian Content Act in respect of contracts for provision of flanges.

    The company alleged that the defendants are mandated to carry out all fabrication and welding activities in Nigeria, saying that they set up a factory in Benin City to produce flanges, yet the trio of Shell, Chevron and Mobil have refused to patronise the company.

  • Intersections of human rights and business

    Text of a paper delivered by Prof A. D. Badaiki at the African Bar Association (AFBA) yearly conference in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital.

    Moreover, by the principle of participation, transnational corporations are under an obligation to promote and respect citizens’ rights. These corporations intervene or legal entities as IMF and the World Bank intervened on their behalf in the affairs of other States.

    With respect to the second assumption, most nation states are parties to binding international treaties on human rights. Accordingly, states deny violating treaty-recognised international human rights, meaning denying contravening terms of the treaties, or customary international law or general state practice or the general principles of law recognised by civilised nations. To say therefore that the states or governments “remain the sole enforcer of human rights is spurious and disdainful”[25].

    It is clear from the legal framework, international, regional and domestic, that both States and non-state actors especially in this context, business enterprises, have a duty to protect, respect and fulfill or grant access to remedy in business – related human rights violations. It is true that most of the human rights instruments impose these duties on national governments. Some of these instruments address nation states and require national government to establish and enforce legal framework for the protection of human rights.[26]

     

    Conclusion

    Business enterprises profoundly impact on the human rights of various stakeholders including employees, consumers, communities, and even business owners, wherever they operate. These impacts may be positive, such as increasing access to employment, improving public services or boosting exploits, or negative, such as underpaying workers, polluting the environment, or forcibly evicting communities. This paper discussed the instruments that have been put in place by international institutions and national governments to ascribe responsibility to companies in managing these adverse effects in terms of violation of human rights. Both hard laws and non binding soft laws were discussed. The abidingness of the former on both States and business enterprises including corporations is not in doubt as to their obligations to protect, respect and fulfill human rights. It is in the case of the latter that the state and companies are not bound as such instruments are voluntary codes of conduct (VCCs) under the name of corporate – social responsibility. It is shown that the couching of the UN Guiding principles on Business and Human Rights somewhat evoke obligations of States and business enterprises to uphold human rights. The Guiding Principles clarify what is expected of business enterprises with regard to human rights and outline the process through which companies can identify their negative human rights impacts and demonstrate that their policies and procedures are adequate to address them. The Guiding Principles affirm that business enterprises must prevent, mitigate and, where appropriate, remedy human rights abuses that they cause or contribute to.

    On the whole, there is no denying the fact of intersection of business with human rights. The real challenge is how to align the actions of State and business enterprises with the obligations to protect, respect and fulfill human rights. It is recommended that a binding code in the form of the botched “UN norms on the Responsibility of the Transnational Corporations and Other Business Enterprises with regard to Human Rights” should be formulated and endorsed. Investment liberalisation should be accompanied by measures to balance State and investors interest with human rights bearers. Accordingly, the promotion and protection of human rights should be included among the objectives of investment or agreements. There should be regular assessment of the extent to which business enterprises are promoting and protecting human rights. States should recognise their rights and duties to regulate and exercise such even in the context of privatisation. There should also be increase in dialogue on human rights and business enterprises. The curriculum on, and indeed, the teaching of Human Rights Law should incorporate the all important topic of the intersections of human rights and business.

     

  • Hate speeches promote disunity, says Lalong

    Plateau State Governor Simon Lalong has urged Nigerians help sustain Nigeria’s unity by avoiding hate speeches.

    He expressed displeasure with what he called negative and retrogressive statements capable of destabilising the country.

    According to him, citizens must rise against hate speech and divisive utterances in the national discourse.

    He called on Nigerians to sustain the country’s unity and promote the ideals of oneness as envisioned by the founding fathers.

    Lalong stated this in his message on Nigeria’s 57th Independence anniversary.

    The governor noted that the country has scaled so many hurdles and survived many challenges in its 57 years of existence through the bond of brotherhood.

    He prayed for sustainable peace and security in the country.

    Lalong, meanwhile, has urged the Acting Chief Judge of Plateau State, Justice Yakubu Gyang Dakwak, to help rid the judiciary of corruption.

    The governor, who spoke while swearing Dakwak in Jos, urged him to comply urgently with the Chief Justice of Nigeria’s directive on creation of special courts for corruption cases.

    He said: “I have no doubt in my mind that the rich resumé of Justice Dakwak, given his wealth of experience in legal practice and the delivery of justice garnered in his over 30 years on the Bench, will be brought to bear in the administration of Justice in the State.

    “At this crucial time of our nation’s fight against corruption and all forms of maladministration and misappropriation of our commonwealth and corporate patrimony, all eyes are on you to do the needful as you join hands with all stakeholders in the judiciary and justice delivery system in our nation to sanitize our nation.

    “The judiciary has been under public scrutiny, this is so because it represents the hope of the groaning masses for a redeemable future for posterity. A clean judiciary is the altar for the sanitisation of our country.

    “Punishment for crime, remedy for injuries and the enthronement of respect for the rule of law, are sure panaceas to the reign of impunity, abuse of public trust and anarchy that are fast eating up sanity in our public space.”

    Lalong also urged the Bar to support justice sector reforms.

    “Where reforms in laws, practice direction and rules of court are complied with to improve the administration of Justice, the nation will be the better for it.

    “I am sure my Lord the Acting Chief Judge will desire out of conviction and compulsion of duty, to join the league of anti-corruption campaigners in our Nation. This will be done as you work hard to give the State a first in implementing the charge of my Lord the Chief Justice of the Federation.

    “On our part as a government, we will continue to do our best to provide the necessary support and statutory requirement of office, to enable the Judiciary to function effectively.

    “While doing this, we will ensure that the independence of the judiciary remains sacrosanct, so that we validate the fact that our democracy is founded on the tenets of the rule of law and clear separation of powers, with each arm of government being a critical part of the whole.

    “You have a duty to help ‘kill corruption or else corruption will kill Nigeria’ like President Muhammadu Buhari will always say. You must begin from the judiciary and then proceed to deal with the Public.

    “You have the capacity to do this. You, therefore, only need to have the courage to do it. As you do it, you will be making your country’s honour precious and sacred,” Lalong said.

  • Court summons Seplat’s chairman for alleged contempt

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has asked Chairman of Seplat Petroleum Development Company Plc, Dr Ambrose Orjiako, to appear before it for allegedly flouting its orders.

    Justice Hadiza Shagari gave the directive based on an application by a firm, AOS Orwell Ltd, through its lawyer Kunle Ogunba (SAN).

    The firm, which initiated contempt proceedings against Orjiakor, is praying the court for an order committing him to prison for his “willful, deliberate and orchestrated disobedience to the interim orders which metamorphosed into interlocutory orders of this honourable court”.

    The court had on May 4 ordered Orjiako to appear before it, but on the adjourned date, the court was informed that parties were exploring out of court settlement.

    Ogunba, at last Wednesday’s proceedings, applied to the court to order Orjiako to appear for the hearing of the contempt applications.

    He accused Orjiako of insincerity in the settlement process, saying: “The respondents are not sincere about the settlement. We have not heard anything from them. We did not hear from them throughout the vacation period despite the length of time afforded them. Until now, they have done nothing.

    “In May, My Lord did order that the alleged contemnor should appear. Since then, he has not been forthcoming. Your Lordship needs to send a message that this is a serious assembly, a solemn assembly. No party should hold the court to ransom.

    “I, therefore, urge your Lordship to renew the order and give them one last chance. The court has to show that it is not a circus show,” Ogunba said.

    The respondent’s counsel, Kami Dayo-Alade, said the talks were still on, and sought for more time.

    “We are still committed to settlement. There were a lot of banks and other parties that came up,” he said.

    Justice Shagari noted that contempt proceedings was “sui generis” (unique) and must be taken seriously.

    “We are not here to be too harsh on anybody. This case will be adjourned to the 16th of October for report of settlement, hearing of contempt proceedings, and for the alleged contemnor to be in court,” the judge said.

    According to the petitioner/applicant, the court made orders restraining the respondent (Shebah Exploration and Production Company Ltd) or its agents from dealing with or tampering with the company’s assets, funds, shares and equipment within and outside Nigeria.

    It said despite the service of the court orders on the company, Orjiako “proceeded to deal with, dissipate and/or alienate the shares/assets of the respondent contrary to the orders.”

    AOS Orwell said Orjiako “is the Managing Director, Chairman/alter ego and the Chief Executive Officer of Shebah Exploration and Production.”

    The petitioner, in a supporting affidavit deposed to by Hellen Atulukwu, a lawyer in Ogunba’s firm, Insolvency Forte, said Orjiako and the respondent “willfully disobeyed the extant orders of the Federal High Court made in this suit despite being fully aware” of them.

    AOS Orwell had obtained the interlocutory orders seeking to stop the respondent’s directors from dissipating its assets pending the hearing and determination of the application for the appointment of a provisional liquidator for Shebah Exploration and Production over an alleged multi-million naira debt.

    The petitioner said despite the orders, Orjiako allegedly sold Shebah Exploration and Production’s shares to Petrolin Trading Ltd on January 6 and refused to purge himself of the contempt by reversing the sale.

    Justice Shagari adjourned until October 16.

     

  • Lawyers disagree on spying on judges

    Lawyers have held divergent views over the plan by Acting Chief Judge of Cross River State Justice Michael Edem to covertly monitor judicial officers in the state for corrupt practices.

    Justice Edem pledged to clamp down on corruption, lateness and slow dispensation of justice on the Bench.

    He announced the creation of an agency to monitor judicial officers, at a church service in Calabar, to mark the beginning of the 2017/18 legal year.

    Edem said: “The prying eyes of the public are on us all because if one finger of any hand of the judiciary is soiled by oil, the oil shall spread and pollute the entire body.

    “The judiciary would not be a collective victim of an individual malfeasance and I will let go the axe ruthlessly on anyone who does that.

    “To this end, I have set up a secret monitoring agency to spy on and report to me all acts of corruption, no matter how slight.”

    Calabar-based Mr. Daniel Mgbe praised the Chief Judge’s will to tackle corruption.

    Mgbe, however, observed that mere monitoring was inadequate to stem the tide of corrupt practices.

    He suggested that the issue of judicial officers’ welfare be revisited.

    Mgbe said: “Once a covert operation is announced, it is no longer covert. The resolve by the CJ to monitor judges and magistrates to check corruption is welcome.

    “However, their welfare and security should be taken more seriously. I’ve observed two magistrates sharing a tiny cubicle without fans or air-conditioning in the name of an office. This can only lead to low productivity.

    “I was in court one day when two men standing trial for armed robbery startled the court by bolting throughthe window becausethe court windows were damaged. In spite of d commotion, themagistrate was brave enough to continue proceedings, but one could only wonder how insecure he felt. They will dispense justice without fear or favour if conditions improve.

    But Ogoja-based Mr. Igwe Lawson Nyebuchi pointed out that the ‘spies’ themselves were not insulated from corruption. He urged the Chief Judge to go further and boost judicial officers’ welfare.

    “I must appreciate the Acting Chief Judge of Cross River State for expressing his determination to get rid of judicial corruption in the state.It is true that the extent of corruption in the judiciary is on the increase and ought to be check-mated.

    “However, the fight against judicial corruption goes beyond the constitution of spies.In my opinion the use of spies is quite unhealthy to the system, even though we know that spies are not insulated against corruption.

    “They should take issues concerning the welfare of Judicial Officers so seriously as well as strengthen the institution against corruption.”

  • Falana’s wife advises govt on prisons reform

    WIFE of human rights activist Femi Falana (SAN), Funmi, has urged the Federal Government to ensure that the prisons serve as corrective centres and not a place for punishing offenders.

    She spoke at the ninth graduation for 45 inmates of the Kirikiri Prisons organised by the Prison Fellowship Nigeria (PFN), a non-governmental organisation (NGO).

    They were trained in soap making, paint making, tye and dye, among other vocational skills.

    Mrs Falana, a lawyer, who represented her husband as chairman, said since the bulk of those in prison were youths, it was imperative that the deviants should be rehabilitated so that they would become better citizens after serving their terms.

    She decried the state of the prisons, saying they were too congested. She cited the Kirikiri Medium  Security Prison meant for about 1,700 inmates, but which has about 3,800 on its roll. ‘’This is more than what the prison can cater for,’’ adding there would be a stress on its budget and facilities. ‘’We must decongest the prison. Let’s fast-track the judicial system, and allow the inmates some freedom, such as use of phones and conjugal relationship,’’ she added.

    She said it 90 per cent of prison inmates were those awaiting trial with some mistakenly brought there. She urged that the Chief Judge to grant amnesty to those who had over stayed at the prisons.

    Mrs Falana praised NGOs for their roles in the prisons. “The NGOs are doing very well to improve the place,’’ she added. ‘’Those graduating were not by government’s effort but the NGO.’’

    The event, organised by PFN’s arm – Life Recovery Pre-release Empowerment Programme, was supported by the Covenant University (CU) and the Small and Medium Enterprises Development Agency (SMEDAN).

    Its Project Coordinator Pastor Nelson Sule-Bamigbola thanked them for their continued support, adding that more donors were welcomed to enable the programme to get to other prisons outside Lagos.

    Beside the graduation, he said 50 inmates would matriculate at the ceremony.

    PFN’s Executive Director Benson Iwuagwu said the problem of congestion must stop, adding that the best way to know if country is doing is to check its prisons.

    He called for attudinal change towards ex-prisoners, saying it was wrong.

    He announced that PFN’s restorative justice centre would open next January.