The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • No hiding place for criminals in Osun

    No hiding place for criminals in Osun

    Dr. Ajibola Basiru is Osun State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice. In this interview, he discusses the strides taken by the Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola-led administration in judicial reforms, law and economic development. Legal Editor John Austin Unachukwu met him.

    A reformed, modernised legal and judicial sector is a sine qua non to socio-economic and democratic growth. What is the position in Osun State?

    Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola during his electioneering campaign published the ‘Green Book’ titled: ‘My pact with the people of Osun State.’ The Green Book is the manifesto of the Aregbesola administration and in it he made a documented promise that his government will ensure speedy access to justice for all individuals in Osun State by reforming the courts system and procedural rules, introducing alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms and free legal services.

    So, how has he addressed these promises?

    To address these electoral promises, the Aregbesola government has made legal and judicial sector reform critical aspects of governmental intervention. This is because development ought not to be at the pleasure of a benevolent leader; it must be institutionalised and made sustainable. It is also apposite to state that in order to galvanize the needed socio economic development of the State, his administration has no choice but to embark on aggressive legal reform initiative.

    Can you give us a sectoral break down of these legal reforms initiatives?

    The legal reform initiatives cut across key sectors, including public finance management, revenue generation, education and human capacity development, urban renewal and environment, governance and security, judicial sector reform, health, safety, agriculture and food security and the institutionalisation of social welfare schemes.

    What is the philosophy or principles behind these reforms?

    The objectives of the legal reform initiatives of the Aregbesola-led administration is to modernise governance, institutionalise good governance practices, facilitate and support investment, improve security and social welfare, promote public good and realise the Six-point Integral Action Plan of the Administration.

    Law is seen as a catalyst for economic development. The Nigerian legal regime seems to be different.

    The problems with the Nigerian legal regime for economic development are myriad and are indicated by archaic or multiple laws and regulations, overlaps in administrative and institutional structures, absence of laws in critical areas and a general state of confusion that is a disincentive to investment by local and international investors and entrepreneurs.

    How has Osun used laws to improve its peoples’ welfare?

    We have done this through a number of bills which we have passed into laws in the state. For instance, the State of Osun Bonds, Notes and other Security Insurance Law which came into force on   June 12, 2012, is intended to enable the state issue debt instruments, such as bonds, notes, and other securities and to establish the Consolidated Debt Service Account (CDSA) and Sinking Fund for the management of the debt. By section 1(1) of the Law, the CDSA shall be a Savings account to be fully funded from the 20 per cent appropriated in accordance with section 1 (2) of the Law, this provision authorizes the state to appropriate 20 per cent of the monthly Internally Generally Revenue (IGR) to the servicing of the state’s debt obligations arising pursuant to the Law. The CDSA shall be fully funded in cash equal to the maximum yearly debt service on the tranches series or issue of the debt instruments issued from time to time by the state.

    Other laws passed by the state include State of Osun (Omoluabi) Conservation Fund Law 2012,  State of Osun Debt Management Office Law 2012, the State of Osun  Fiscal Responsibility Law 2012, the State of Osun Revenue Administration Law 2012, Land use Charge Bill 2013, the State of Osun  Signage Hoarding and Advertisement Law 2012 and State of Osun Public Private Partnership Bill 2012.  All these laws were made to improve the quality of governance and the welfare of the people in the state.

    Security of life and property remains one of the country’s challenges. What is the situation in Osun?

    Osun is safe for all Nigerians. There is no place for cults and cultism. We have state of the art security surveillance both air and land so there is no place they can hide. We have also deployed enormous resources in ensuring that the police are well equipped and encouraged. On our part, our expert team of lawyers in the ministry of justice conduct their case in a timely and effective fashion to ensure that criminals are brought to book

    Many states have adopted the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) as their laws to combat crimes in the states. What is the position in Osun?

    We have already begun work on the laws of Osun, which was last reviewed in 2002. We have commissioned consultants and recently 44 new laws have been passed while about 20 are pending. Part of the pending laws is the Administration of Criminal Justice Law. Making law is always an ongoing process, what we are currently focusing on is developing capacity within the Judiciary for the speedier dispensation of Justice. We have to realise that the Police and the Nigerian Prison Service play a vital role in this regard and unfortunately we have no real say or authority over those institutions but we are trying our best to work with them to ensure that we decongest our prisons and prosecute the right people. The Chief Judge of Osun State is reviewing the Civil Procedure Rules which will further ensure that there is quick dispensation of Justice is both civil and criminal matters.

    Alternative Disputes Resolution (ADR) mechanisms seem to be gaining popularity, especially in commercial transactions. What is your view on this?

    Osun State has a mediation centre as well as an office of the public defender. The Mediation Centre has helped in reducing the amount of cases pending before the regular courts. This is a service that the government has provided at no cost to its people. Since 2012, over 250 cases have been resolved while another 120 are still ongoing.

    There have been calls for judicial autonomy. What is the position in Osun?

    There are serious infrastructural challenges that the Judiciary faces but we must look at it from the point of view that even though we have three arms of government, they are not totally independent of each other and they are there to complement each other. The Executive cannot give the Chief Judge allocation to build courts, it is the job of the executive to execute projects. So to give the Judiciary all it needs to build its infrastructures etc. is not the way it works. This is not to say that the Judiciary should not be well funded, on the contrary, the Judiciary should be well catered for as it will encourage more local and foreign investments and that is why we are working hard to ensure that the judiciary is restructured

    Many states have passed anti-open grazing laws to checkmate conflicts between cow breeders and local farmers. What is the position in  Osun?

    The issue of grazing is cultural. In Osun we have invested heavily in setting up a cow-fattening facility to maximise on the production of milk and cow flesh which is the real value in the feeding of these cows in the first place. We don’t want animals running around. That is not the way to go about it. We need to resolve this issue from a socio-economic point of view but if the National Assembly continues along this path we will have to test the constitutionality of the bill at the Supreme Court if the bill passes into law.

    Payment of civil servants is a major challenge for the Osun government. What is responsible for this?

    It is my sincere belief that this is a fallout of the declining economy, the fall in the price of crude oil and our inability to diversify our economy. We simply have too many bureaucracies, 38 states sharing meagre national resources. We have no viable industries or production capacity. Nigeria needs to radically restructure at the regional level otherwise we will continue to regress. We understand the problem we are having in paying our civil servants and we have called all the stakeholders together in a transparent manner. Each month we show them what we receive from the Federal Government and from our IGR. Armed with this information, the leaders of the various unions have agreed on a new salary scale that is reasonable and reflects the economic situation in the country.

     

  • Badagry Prison where children are dumped for minor offences

    Badagry Prison where children are dumped for minor offences

    Last Tuesday’s visit of the Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Olufunlayo Atilade, to Badagry Prison has brought to the fore the incidence of abuse by task force officials, ADEBISI ONANUGA reports

    Not much is heard about Badagry Prison compared to Ikoyi Prison and the Maximum, Medium and Women Prisons in Kirikiri, Lagos, where convicted criminals and those awaiting trials for criminal offences, are kept.

    But for providence, the 80 kids in the facility, who breathed the air of freedom last Tuesday, would still be languishing inside the prison located on Marina Street in the heart of Badagry. They were set free by Lagos State Chief Judge (CJ), Justice Olufunmilayo Atilade.

    A social worker, Mrs. Dupe Olubanwo, who has been monitoring activities at the institution, had brought their plight to the attention of the CJ and persuaded her to visit the place.

    The CJ obliged her and took time off the long vacation of the judiciary. She released about 28 inmates whose cases had been reviewed by the Prison Decongestion Committee headed by Justice Oluwatoyin Ipaye.

    But nothing prepared them for the unhygienic sight of the children they met in the hall of the prison when they arrived for the occasion.

    Over 100 of them looked unkempt. The underaged, who were between 12 and 17, were said to have been arrested and charged with offences ranging from breaching public peace, hawking and to having no means of livelihood.

    The teenagers, prison sources said, were arrested at various locations by the state Task Force on Environmental Sanitation and Special Offences and convicted by the special courts. Some were said to have become inmates of the prison owing to their inability to pay fines of N20,000 and N30,000 imposed on them.

    The prison cells, it was gathered, smells and are over -crowded such that the kids sleep sitting like vultures, adding that its facilities are over stretched by the 584 inmates.

    After speeches, Justice Atilade called on a Director in the Ministry of Youth and Social Development, Mr Odun Anjorin, to call out the 28 inmates, whose cases had been reviewed. As he did, it was discovered that most of them were not in the hall while the warders said they were in the kitchen. They quickly sent someone to call them. When the situation was becoming too many, suspicion arose and consequent upon which the director was asked to go into the cells and fetch them.

    Each time a child was brought from the cell, it was discovered that he looked frail, could bare walk nor stand, and needed the support of his cell mate. The common features among the kids were that they  were smelling,  emaciated and malnourished while their skins were covered with rashes and other skin diseases.

    When the meat pies were served, the children begged to be given some to quench their hunger. It was clear they way looked in their over sized prison uniform that most of them might not have had good meals for days.

    Others had wounds all over their bodies, which were alegedly inflicted on them by the police and task force personnel dumped in the prison. The wounds were not treated, hence they oozed.

    A prison source ascribed the development to the fact that the prison lacks potable water for bathing. The source said the prison authorities only managed to get a few of them cleaned up because of the CJ’s visit.

    After the cases of the initial 28 juveniles were treated, the hall was still full of many underaged children. At this stage, Justice Atilade detailed one Mr G. O. Okusanya to go into the cells and bring out all the children he could find while the prison warders were asked to bring their remand warrants. As they trooped into the hall, the stench coming from them became unbearable such that the CJ ordered for Tom Tom sweets for the judges, Ministry of justice officials and the social workers.

    When the prison officials brought the warrants, most of them contained names of the elderly inmates who were said to be sickly but the CJ disagreed with them and insisted on the children. Thus commenced a review, involving members of the Prison Decongestion Committee, Office of the Public Defender (OPD) officials led by their Director, Mrs Olubunkola Salami, the social workers, Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Youths and Social Development officials, that lasted till about 3.45 p.m. after which another set of 52 juveniles were recommended for release, bringing to total of children granted freedom to 80.

    As the CJ took her leave with her entourage, the remaining juveniles fell on top each other as they struggle to grab the meat pies and crumbs of other snacks left behind as they could not be eaten because of the stench.

    Earlier, Justice Atilade said the freedom granted the underaged inmates was in conformity with the resolution of the judiciary to protect the child rights and also decongest prisons nationwide.

    Justice Atilade, who was surprised by the high number of minors in the Badagry Prison, condemned the act of imprisoning underaged irrespective of their offences.

    While setting the inmates free, the CJ admonished them to be of good behaviour henceforth and to “go and sin no more”.

    “I pronounce, pursuant to the provisions of Sections 1(1) of the Criminal Justice (Release from Custody) Act, 2007 as well as Section 35 of the 1999 Constitution, you are all hereby released from custody,” Justice Atilade said.

    The CJ commended the various stakeholders, including Office Public Defendant (OPD), Prisons Decongestion Committee and numerous non-governmental organisations (NGO) that worked to ensure the freedom of the inmates.

    Justice Atilade thanked Mrs.  Olubanwo, who she said initiated the emergency prison visit due to her love for the underaged inmates.

    Justice Yetunde Idowu, the head of Family Court Division of the state Judiciary, also condemned the imprisonment of the underaged inmates.

    According to her, the state and the Judiciary have zero tolerance for child abuse.

    “Keeping a child in prison for more than 24 hours traumatises such child and such should not be condoned at all in the state. We don’t want to encourage delinquency.

    “The aim of the Criminal Justice System in respect of child offender is rehabilitatory and reformatory. We are urging everyone to quickly bring these kind of cases to our attention.

    The state Solicitor-General, Mrs. Funlola Odunlami, also said the state, especially Governor Akinwumi Ambode, frowned at child abuse and would not condone child imprisonment.

    Mrs Odunlami promised the prison authorities that the state would look into all their demands, notwithstanding that it is a federal institution.

    Earlier in his welcome address, the Deputy Controller of Badagry Prison, Mr. Oyeniran Famuwagun, decried the decongestion of the prison.

    He said the prison built to accommodate 320 at the moment hosts 584 inmates.

    He explained that the prison with about 70 staff has 195 inmates on its awaiting trial list, and 389 as convicts.

    Famuwagun also complained of inadequate funding, lack of potable water and overstretched infrastructure at the prison, particularly vehicles for conveying the inmates to courts.

  • ‘My principal, my best friend’

    ‘My principal, my best friend’

    Olasunkanmi Falade, a 2009 law graduate of the University of Ilorin (UNILORIN), is the chairman of the Young Lawyers’ Forum, Ikorodu Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). In this interview with ADEBISI ONANUGA, he shares his experience in legal practice.

    Background

    I am from Kwara State, though  born and brought up in Lagos State.

    Year of call to bar

    I was called to the Bar as a Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2010.

    Law Practice

    I practise in the law firm of Dotun Adetunji & Co. in Ikorodu, Lagos State, which I joined before I was called to Bar in 2009, and I am still with the firm.

    Practice experience

    Law practice has been so challenging and interesting. Challenging because it requires a practitioner’s all; interesting because each time a puzzle is solved one becomes satisfied and dares for more. Unfortunately, abject poverty is the order of the day among many young lawyers as many don’t even have a place to practise let alone being paid the usual peanuts having spent five years pursuing LLB and a mandatory one year at the Law School. As a matter of truth, very few of us are privileged to work in a firm that makes us feel like a practitioner and gives us the leverage to still do private practice (pp) knowing full well that same is very much needed in order for a man to truly and fully prove his worth at home.

    First day in court

    Well, my first appearance/day in court was like heaven coming into the earth; though elated, I was afraid because of the fear of unknown.

    Name of trial Judge

    I appeared before Hon. Justice Olayinka sitting at Ikorodu then.

    Nature of cause before the judge

    The matter bothers on trespass to land and despite the tutorials given to me by my learned principal to move an application for extension of time, claimant’s counsel actually didn’t object to it. He only asked for cost and I became worried on the response to profer as same was never contemplated. The court and law school attachment experiences i had acquired later came to mind. The court ruled in my favour and I returned to the office with great excitement.

    Challenges

    My challenge as a practitioner bothers on the administration and dispensation of justice in Nigeria. It is imperative to say that the delay in our justice system has affected so many things in the country and how do we manage the situation except the court dispenses justice within the shortest possible time.

    View of Specialisation

    Specialisation isn’t a bad idea as it encourages the practitioner to be more focused particularly on that area of his specialisation. Please note that as a practitioner, we are presumed to know all because we are learned but why I support specialisation is because it deepen one’s knowledge on those areas of specialisation and become master of it.

    Relationship with senior colleague

    My relationship with senior colleagues has been awesome as respect begets respect and what one does to seniors will be what one would get in return.

    Relationship with p rincipal

    Truly, my relationship with my principal is very cordial. I call him oga (boss) and I see him as my best friend when it comes to learning. Since I have been with him, he has been so understanding, supportive in all forms and accommodating. He gave me opportunities that he never got when he was under a principal.

    Complaints of poor remuneration for young lawyers

    For years, the situation has been like that, like some people would say “no senior lawyer can indeed pay any junior lawyer his/her worth” but they usually give token as an appreciation of what the junior has done for the month. The truth is if we set a scale for payment of young lawyers remuneration, majority would have no law firm to develop themselves but my take on this matter is that since majority of the senior lawyers fondly say that they cannot pay a junior his/her worth for job done in a month, seniors should at least apart from the monthly stipends allow the junior to do private practice and the juniors in the course of doing that are encouraged never to let conflict of interest be shown let alone occur to the principal.

    Sanitisation of the judiciary

    It is not out of place to say that there are bad eggs everywhere and they all need to be thrown out for our country to be able to move forward than ever before therefore, sanitising the judicial system in whatever form is imperative.

    How best to sanitise judiciary

    The judges do have a code of conduct, when anyone of them go contrary to any of the stipulations as contained in the code of conduct by reason of complaint made by anyone with an overwhelming evidence(s), appropriate sanctions as prescribed should be meted out to them without unnecessary delay whatsoever.

    Aspiration for next decade

    With the way the country is, nothing is certain or predictable but God helping me, in the next ten years, I hope to be in a satisfactory position with a good state of mind.

    Possibility of his children taking after him

    It is important to say that  it was passion for law as a course that made me to read law and as matter of truth, I had hoped that immediately I was called to bar, money would start coming in but I believe slow and steady wins the race. If any of my children desires to become a lawyer, I will not hesitate to encourag/motivate him or her.

  • As Akin Osinbajo takes silk

    As Akin Osinbajo takes silk

    ON September 18, when a former Attorney-General of Ogun State and younger brother of Acting President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, Akinlolu Osinbajo, is conferred with the prestigious title of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), it will be just and sweet reward for a journey that began well over 30 years ago.

    Having taken to heart the Biblical injunction, “no man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God,” Akin has remained steadfast in active legal practice since October 1986 when he was called to the bar.

    A highly experienced litigator and commercial law practitioner, chartered arbitrator and notary public of Nigeria,  the SAN-designate is a thorough professional who learnt from some of the best around to become the authority he is today.

    The Department of Civil Litigation, Kwara State Ministry of Justice was where the alumnus of Holborn College, London and the University College London first chose to hone his skills after he was called to the bar in 1986.  Later that year, he joined the chambers of eminent lawyer, Wole Olanipekun (SAN) as Associate Counsel and was there until 1987 before becoming Associate Counsel at Abdulai, Taiwo & Co. Solicitors where he is currently Joint Managing Partner. The firm is internationally acknowledged for its expertise on transactional matters relating to Nigeria.

    While making significant strides in his career, Akin, an enabler like his older brother, was also selflessly giving himself to the community and the church of God. He was appointed Registrar and General Legal Adviser, Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion, Remo Diocese in April 1996 and Legal Adviser and Member Board of Trustees, The Fountain of Life Church, Nigeria and Overseas in June 2001. This was after being appointed a notary public of Nigeria in July 2000.

    In 2003, the Osinbajo brothers made history by becoming the first siblings appointed Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justices in different states simultaneously. While Yemi was quietly but efficiently re-energising and remodelling the Lagos State judiciary, Akin was doing same in Ogun, their home state. His principal, Governor Gbenga Daniel, was sufficiently impressed by his transformational abilities and diligence that he retained him throughout his eight-year tenure. Commendably, Akin acquitted himself well and extensively reformed the administration of justice in the state.

    Some of his interventions and reforms in Ogun include provision of meaningful access to justice for indigent citizens of the state through the establishment of the Citizens Rights Department  that gave free legal advice and representation in court to poor people; reorganisation of the Ministry of Justice/ Chambers of the Attorney-General with over 80 law officers to function like a private law firm; the employment of over 40 lawyers; establishment of the Office of the Public Defender in 2004  and Alternative Dispute Resolution Centres (Citizens Mediation Centres).

    Akin also facilitated the creation of more judicial divisions of the High Court and Magisterial districts; a comprehensive revision and publishing in 2006 of all the Laws of Ogun State in six volumes; establishment of the Criminal Justice Fund to provide funds to witnesses in criminal trials to enable them attend court and for process servers to serve witness summons. Under his watch as leader of the judiciary, the welfare of judges and other legal officers was significantly boosted such that judges were given brand new vehicles on two occasions while houses were later provided for them. That’s not all. Akin also introduced and facilitated the regular payment of research/journal and other enhanced allowances to judges, magistrates and law officers in the state.

    Highly cerebral, Akin has not contented himself with practice alone. He has also done his bit in expanding the frontiers of the study of law in Nigeria with contributions to important law publications. He is a contributor to the Nigeria country report in the international compendium titled: ‘International Corporate Law’ published by Aspatore Books and also contributed to ‘Legal Aspects of Doing Business in Africa’ published by Yorkhill Law Publishers. The cleric and father of three children has an essay in ‘Perspectives on Contemporary Legal Issues: Essays in Honour of Hon. Justice Dolapo F. Akinsanya’ while he is co-author of ‘Establishing a Business in Nigeria’; ‘Registration and Regulation of Foreign Investments and Enterprises’; ‘Privatisation of Government Enterprises by Tender and Public Offer’ ‘Registration of Trademarks, Patents and Technology Transfer Licences ‘all published by Abdulai, Taiwo & Co.

    A member of professional associations including the NBA, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators UK, International Bar Association, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators of Nigeria, Equipment Leasing Association of Nigeria and the Diocesan Board, Cathedral Greater Chapter and Synod of Church of Nigeria Anglican Communion (Remo Diocese), Akin, has not shirked his responsibilities to the NBA. He served as a member of the body’s Special Task Force on Multidisciplinary Practices and Incursions into the Legal Profession and has been a member of Body of Benchers Nigeria since April 2017.

    Fittingly, Akin’s interventions in the praxis and theory of law as well as material assistances have not gone unnoticed by both the NBA and the Bench. He has consequently received several commendations amongst which are the Body of Benchers for facilitating the donation of N1million towards the building of the Body of Benchers Hall and the Court of Appeal, Ibadan for donating several sets of Revised Laws of the Federation (Volumes 1-6) for the Judges’ libraries.

    Given his immense contributions therefore, it came as no surprise that the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC), the conferring authority found Akin worthy to be admitted into the select rank of senior Nigerian lawyers. The 57-year-old, indeed, is a worthy addition to the 481 silks so far appointed in Nigeria since 1975.

     

    • Chief Ogummupe is a veteran journalist, economist and literary critic.

  • Lagos assures indigent residents of free legal service

    Indigent residents of Lagos State have been advised to take advantage of the free legal service offered by the government for resolution of their problems.

    Director, Public Advice Centre (PAC), Mrs Tola Akinyemi, gave the advice during a roadshow at Ikeja, Agege and Alimosho local government areas to sensitise Lagosians to the services of the centre.

    She disclosed that the agency handles an average of 8,000 complaints monthly which are referred to different agencies of the government for resolution.

    She cited the case of a lady who experienced acid bath from her boy friend for breaking their relationship.

    She said the centre got the police to investigate the matter and that the suspect would soon face trial at the Lagos High Court.

    Mrs Akinyemi stressed that PAC is the first port of call to the state government for those seeking solutions to problems confronting them, including domestic and sexual problems.

    He said the state is ready to give them assistance on any issue brought to the attention of the centre.

    The PAC chief, who said the roadshow was intended to sensitise the people to ensure equality of justice to all, also disclosed that the centre has a wide range of services to offer.

    She said: “PAC has jurisdiction on all matters. When you bring your  complaints, we advise and refer you to the agency that would better handle your complaints.’’

    She enjoined couples being violated by their spouse to bring their complaints to the centre for resolution.

    She listed other areas where the centre could be of assistance to the people to include family and inheritance, social exclusion and discrimination, works compensation, land matters, rights violation, social welfare and child rights among others.

    Vice chairmen, Ikeja and Agege council areas, Messrs Yomi Mayungbe and Abiodun Ogunji, praised the state government for the initiative which they said would make Lagos to work well.

    Since they are new in office, Mayungbe expressed conviction that the activities of the centre would assist them  to succeed in office.

    Ogunji on the other hand advised members of the Lagos communities to take advantage of the initiatives offered by the centre to improve their well being.

  • Why I won’t contest NBA presidency in 2018, by Ubani

    Second Vice-President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and former chairman of NBA Ikeja branch Mr. Monday Ubani has refuted reports that he will contest for the Presidency of the Bar at the end of the tenure of the Mahmoud Mogaji (SAN) inext year.

    Ubani said it would be ambitious for him to do so as he is serving the Bar as Second Vice-President.

    “I will not contest in 2018 because time is of essence. It will not make sense for me to just go into the contest immediately. That will look as if I have no other thing to do than the NBA.

    “After my tenure, I will face my practice and let God determine my next political move at the Bar at that appropriate time.

    “I will always support a candidate I believe in his vision, who will move the Bar forward and improve the welfare of Nigerian lawyers,” Ubani added.

  • The botched trial of Khilani, Chandra

    A defence counsel, Kate Onyema, in the alleged fraud case against two Britons explains why the charges failed

    Thursday July 13, a Lagos High Court presided over by Justice Oluwatoyin Ipaye struck out fraud charges brought against two British nationals, Deepak Khilnani and Sushil Chandra, by the Attorney- General of Lagos State. The decision of the court was sequel to a Notice of Discontinuance filed by the state Director of  Public Prosecutions, Mrs. Titi Shitta-Bey, praying the court to strike out the case in the light of a review of the case by the State Attorney-General, Mr. Kazeem Adeniji.

    It had been alleged by the prosecution team led by the then Director of Public Prosecution, Mrs. Idowu Alakija (now a serving judge of Lagos High Court) in a four-count criminal charge  that Deepak Khilnani and Sushil Chandra sometime in 2008 defrauded a Nigerian company, Green Fuels Limited of about $8.8million. However there was apparently no evidence to support such an allegation.

    When the case started in 2015, the media was awash with sensational headlines of how these British nationals allegedly defrauded their Nigerian business partners. The truth was that the allegations against the defendants were baseless and unsustainable before any law court in the country. Although the presiding judge during the early stages of the trial dismissed a motion seeking to quash the charges, the state prosecution team still could not make meaningful progress in the matter because there was simply no evidence to prove the allegation against the defendants.  This was evident at the proceedings of October 22, 2015 when the then DPP urged the court to adjourn the proceedings indefinitely to enable her amend the Proof of Evidence. The fact was simply that a non-existenctcriminal implication was being imported into a purely business disagreement between Deepak Khilnani and his Nigerian partners.

    The background to this civil dispute is that Ola Rosiji and Anil Ahluwalia, who had formed a company called Green Fuels Limited, approached Mr. Khilnani’s company in 2009 to join them in building a CNG gas distribution company. Clearly this is a very technical business and Mr. Khilnani’s company held experience and expertise in this area.

    After protracted negotiations and discussions Green Fuels entered into a contract with Mr. Khilnani’s Company Gentec Energy, a UK PLC company to build the plant, train their personnel and provide technical management support to the business. The contract was signed by Mr. Anil Ahluwalia on behalf of Green Fuels Limited and the funds for the project were initially provided by Ola Rosiji’s company, Nigerian Distillers Ltd.

    Mr. Khilnani was well known to Mr. Ahluwalia since 1997 and in fact Mr. Anil Ahluwalia’s son Arjun worked for Gentec Energy in the UK. Both Mr. Ola Rosiji and Mr. Anil Ahluwalia visited Mr. Khilnani at Gentec offices in the UK a number of times and at all times knew of his involvement in the Gentec UK business.

    Gentec executed its contract with Green Fuels in full and created a very successful business in Green Fuels. Furthermore, Mr. Khilnani facilitated an inward investment into Green Fuels which enabled it to grow its business to become the leading company in its field in Nigeria. The overseas investor Industrial Energy Africa Limited in fact invested and took a 75 per cent investment in the company providing the necessary capital to establish and grow the business. After this investment Ola Rosiji’s shares were a mere 25 per cent with 75 per cent being held by Industrial Energy. Mr. Ahluwalia relinquished his shareholding in the company. This investment and the subsequent changes in the shareholding were approved by the board of Green Fuels and duly filed at the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC).

    Whilst these matters were approved by the board, Mr. Ola Rosiji and Mr. Ahluwalia were both present and participated in implementing these decisions at the board. Green Fuels continued to operate successfully with high profit turn over until 2012 when a management dispute led to a court action instituted by Ola Rosiji and Anil Ahluwalia before a Federal High Court challenging the shareholding structure of the company. Rosiji and Ahluwalia in the suit number FHC/L/IKJ/CS/269/2012 are asking the court for rectification of the Register of Shareholding of GFL in such a way that would give Rosiji, 87 per cent shareholdings in Green Fuels. The matter is presently at the Court of Appeal, Lagos.

    In all of this time, Industrial Energy, the majority shareholder had been excluded from participation of the company.

    In 2014, Green Fuels under the chairmanship of Rosiji again filed another suit before the Federal High Court, Lagos claiming refund from Gentec for an alleged over invoicing of equipment supplied in pursuant of the agreement of 2008. Green Fuels also asked for damages against Deepak for breach of his fiduciary duty as a director in GFL. The matter is also still pending before the Federal High Court, Lagos.

    While these two matters were pending in court, a petition by Ola Rosiji was forwarded to the Nigeria Police, Zone 2 Lagos to investigate the allegation of over invoicing and forgery against Deepak in respect of the supply of equipment by Gentec Energy Plc.  At the commencement of the investigation, Deepak was interrogated by the police in relation to his involvement in the transactions that culminated to the complaint.

    The police team led by ACP Onaade S. Awoniyi (now a DCP) began its investigation in 2014 and after months of examining the company’s records of Green Fuels, invited parties in the matter for arbitration. An audit firm, KPMG was also engaged by the Police to look into the company’s activities. Deepak did not participate in this audit exercise because of a pending ruling before the Federal High Court, Lagos in Suit No. FHC/L/IKJ/269/12 whereupon the application of Green Fuels and on the objection of Deepak and Industrial Energy solely against the nomination of KPMG on the ground of an earlier biased briefing given to it by a personal staff of Rosiji. The court had heard arguments and adjourned the matter for ruling to let it determine the appropriate firm to conduct the forensic audit on Green Fuels. Indeed, in deference to the pending matter and the ruling before the court, Delloitte had turned down the request by the police to conduct the audit exercise.

    It is now clear that the audit exercise was flawed from the start and in fact the report issued by KPMG confirms that the only information they relied on to generate the report was provided by Ola Rosiji and his associates.

    At some point during the police investigation, Deepak’s lawyers sensing foul play, challenged the move by the police to initiate an arbitration process which was outrightly one-sided and skewed in favour of Ola Rosiji, who proposed some egregious conditions as the basis for agreeing to a truce with Deepak. Consequently, an application to enforce Deepak’s fundamental human right was initiated on behalf of Deepak at the High Court of Lagos State. Irked by the pre-emptive action of Deepak’s lawyers, the police hurriedly filed a charge before the Magistrates’ Court against Deepak and Sushil Chandra.  However the Magistrate, Mrs. I. O. Omotosho after seeing the information had no option but to adjourn the matter since there was no proof that the defendants and their lawyers had been duly served with the charges.

    While this was on, Deepak’s lawyers, Chris O. Okunowo & Co through a petition drew the attention of the then Inspector-General of Police (IGP) to the perceived bias of his officers at Zone 2, Lagos. This prompted the IGP to set up another investigative team headed by DSP Yusufu Data and under the supervision of the Commissioner of Police in charge of the Special Fraud Unit (SFU), Milverton, Lagos.

    An intrigue was introduced into the scene at this point when lawyers representing Ola Rosiji petitioned the then Lagos Attorney-General, Mr. Ade Ipaye, asking that the matter before the magistrate court be taken over by the state Directorate of Public Prosecution. Notwithstanding the ongoing investigation by the new team appointed by the IGP, the Lagos State Government took over the matter and subsequently filed charges against  Deepak and Sushil before Justice Oluwatoyin Ipaye.

    After a detailed investigation the IGP’s investigation team issued a report dated May 4, 2015, asking parties involved in the case, that is Deepak, Ola Rosiji and Green Fuels Limited officials, to pursue their civil matter which is already at the Federal High Court, Lagos. An excerpt from the letter reads:  ”I refer to the Deputy Inspector-General of Police Intelligence and Investigation Department letter No. CR:  3000/FHQ/ ABJ/VOL. 182/ 137 dated 21st April, 2015. He directed this office to inform all the parties to pursue their civil matter that is already in the Federal High Court of Lagos.”

    With this letter, Deepak’s legal team wrote to the Attorney-General asking for the review of his trial insisting that the issues which erroneously led to the charges being filed in the first place were contractual disputes which parties have already taken to the appropriate civil court for resolution. They also pointed out to the DPP that the allegation of filing wrong statement at the CAC lacked any basis on the ground that the company secretary of Green Fuels had in a statement to the police admitted to filing and making all entries on behalf of the company at the CAC. The then DPP however remained adamant and continued with the shoddy prosecution which even attracted some uncomplimentary remarks from the trial judge.

    At some point in the trial, the court was erroneously misled into issuing a bench warrant against Deepak and his co-defendant despite the fact that their counsel on record, Kayode Ajekigbe was not served with the Hearing Notice of the proceedings where the warrant was purportedly issued. Although there was a pending application by Deepak’s lawyers challenging the warrant on the grounds that the requisite hearing notices were not served on them, some persons with vested interest continued to sponsor media reports which portrayed the defendants as fugitives of the law. Even when the motion challenging the warrant was still pending, newspaper advertisements were used to publish the warrants by persons who were not parties to the case but with less than noble intentions.

    Mr. Khilnani has been a frequent visitor to Nigeria throughout this period and has never shied away from his legal obligations and has never at any time been a fugitive.  In fact throughout these years his companies have continued to bring substantial overseas investments into the Nigerian power sector, an area of critical importance to the development of Nigeria. Deepak is on record as stating that he has full faith in the Nigerian economy and her judicial system and will abide by the decision of its court which he has submitted himself to without reservation.

    Knowing that the trial was a pure waste of the precious time of the court and the resources of the state, formal requests were forwarded to the new Attorney-General for a proper review of the case and the basis upon which the charges were predicated. The state on June 29, 2017 filed a Notice of Intention to discontinue the case. But those adamant on persecuting the innocent investors continued their intrigues by mobilizing over 23 junior lawyers and rented crowds to protest and challenge the statutory powers of the Attorney-General to institute and withdraw criminal proceedings. Surprised by the request of the lawyers, the presiding judge simply asked them to look elsewhere as they cannot compel her to review the lawful powers of the Attorney-General to initiate and withdraw criminal matters before any court in Lagos State. She promptly struck out the matter and vacated the warrants initially issued against Deepak and Shushil.

    It is pertinent to note that several attempts were made through newspaper publications to portray Deepak as a fraudulent foreign investor. As a Chief Executive Officer of a leading company with interest in the Nigeria energy sector, Deepak could not have made so much significant impacts on the Nigerian economy for so many years through fraudulent means. The records of the impacts of his companies are there for everyone to see.

    Portraying Deepak as a fraudster in Nigeria is, therefore, a cheap blackmail and an act undeserving of the huge investments and contributions he and his companies have made in this country.

    That the Attorney-General of Lagos State took a firm position against using the instrumentality of the government through Ministry of Justice, Lagos to settle private causes and ensuring that persecution is not perpetrated in the name of prosecution, is an act that should be publicly applauded by all men of goodwill.  This, I believe, is another most welcoming development in the administration of justice in the state.

     

    • Onyema is a legal practitioner based in Lagos.

     

  • Defendants can’t be made to prove innocence if prosecution fails to establish prima facie case

    The Defendant or his legal Practitioner has the right to reply to any new point of law raised by the Prosecutor, after which, the Court shall give its ruling.

      (3). In considering the application of the Defendant under Section 303, the Court shall, in the exercise of its discretion, have regard to whether:

     (a). An essential element of the offence has been proved;

     (b). There is evidence linking the Defendant with the commission of the offence with which he is charged.

      (c). The evidence so far led is such that no reasonable Court  or Tribunal would convict on it; and

     (d).  Any other ground on which the Court may find that a  prima facie case has not been made out against the Defendant for him to be called upon to answer”.

    Section 357 on its part provides thus: –

    ”Where at the close of the evidence in support of the charge, it  appears to the Court that a case is not made out against the Defendant sufficiently to require him to make a defence, the Court  shall, as to that particular charge, discharge him being guided by the provision of Section 302 of this Act”.

    From the foregoing provisions of the ACJA 2015, it is apparent that the Court is essentially to be guided in determining whether or not to uphold the Defendant’s No Case to Answer Submission, by the guidelines set out under Section 303(3) of the ACJA.  In other words, the Court is to determined whether or not by the evidence adduced by the Prosecution witnesses, it can in the exercise of its discretion hold that the evidence discloses or has proved: –

    (1).   an essential element of the offence.

    (2).  link between the Defendant and the commission of the offence.

    (3).  the evidence is such that so reasonable Court or tribunal would convict on it; and

    (4).  any other ground upon which it may find that a prima facie case has  been made out against the Defendant for him to be called upon to   answer.

    Before the coming into effect of the ACJA in 2015, which has now codified the above guidelines, the Courts have in a plethora of cases held that a No Case to Answer submission shall be upheld where:-

    (1)  The Prosecution has failed to prove an essential element of the alleged offence

    (2).    The evidence adduced has been so discredited as a result of Cross  Examination or

    (3).  The evidence is so manifestly unreliable that no reasonable tribunal will convict on it.

    In IBEZIAKO V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (1963) 1 ALL NLR P. 61, the Court held that these conditions are not cumulative.  Once any one of these conditions exists, the Court on its volition or the defence can validly make a No Case to Answer Ruling or Submission of No Case to Answer.  In AJANI & ORS V R (1936) WACA P.3 the Court held that the submissions of No Case to Answer may be made in respect of one Count of offence of the entire Charge Sheet and where the Charge contain more than one Count of offence, the Court must make a finding on each Count of Offence separately.  Conclusively, the Supreme Court in DABOH V STATE (1977) 5 SC P. 197 held that at the time submission of no case to answer is made, what the Court considers is whether the Prosecution has made out a prima facie case to which the accused would be called to answer.  See also: AKPAN V STATE (1986) 5 SC P. 186.

    These said, what then does the phrase “prima facie case” mean?  The authors of the Black Law Dictionary (8th Edition), at page 1228 defines it as:

    ”The establishment of a legally required rebuttable presumption.  A party’s production of enough evidence to allow the fact trier to infer     the fact at issue and rule in the party’s favour”.

    In ABACHA V STATE (2002) 7 SCNJ P1, the Supreme Court explained it thus: – ”The evidence discloses a prima facie case when it is such that if   uncontradicted and if believed it will to be sufficient to prove the case against the accused”.

    In ONAGORUWA V THE STATE (1993) 7 NWLR (PT. 303) P. 49 the Court of Appeal explained it in these words:-  ”A prima facie case is a case where the Prosecution has presented   sufficient evidence to render reasonable a conclusion on the evidence that the accused is convictable, in the absence of contrary evidence”.

     Now under Section 135 of the Evidence Act 2011, it is provided that if the commission of crime by a party to any proceeding is directly in issue in any proceeding, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.  By Section 135(2), the burden of proving that any person has been guilty of a crime or wrongful action is on the person who asserts ie the Prosecution.

    In a submission of No Case to Answer however, though the burden of proof lies on the Prosecution which asserts the commission of the offence by the Defendant, the burden shall be deemed discharged if the Prosecution by its evidence establishes a prima facie case against the Defendant with regard to the Court of the Charge.  In other words, the Prosecution is not required at this stage to prove the commission of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.  An evidene by it which prima facie links the Defendant with the commission of the offence will suffice for the Defendant to be called upon to put his defence with regard to that Count of the Charge.  See: DABOH V STATE supra.  Section 303(3)(a) to (d) of ACJA.  The Proseuction must however establish each ingredient of the offence vide prima facie evidence against the Defendant failing which the Defendant’s No Case to Answer will be upheld.  The Court of Appeal made this point in RASAKI V THE STATE (2011) 16 NWLR (PT. 1273) P. 281 when it held thus: –

    ”Accordingly, where the evidence led by the Prosecution fails to establish a single element…the Prosecution would have failed in its  duty to prove the offence charged and the accused would be entitled   to an acquittal”.

    Having set out the basic legal frame work guiding No Case to Answer submission, the Court now proceeds to consider each Count of the Information in relation to the evidence adduced by the Prosecution witnesses to determine whether or not the evidence discloses a prima facie case against the relevant Defendant.  Put in another way, the Court proceeds to determine whether the evidence adduced by the Prosecution witnesses link(s) the relevant Defendant with the offence charged.

    In Count 1 of the information, the three Defendants are charged as follows:

    ”Adeniyi Francis Adetokunbo Ademola Adult “M”, Olabowale   Toluwatope Ademola “F” both of on 32 Samuel Ogbemudia Crescent,  Zone E, Apo Abuja and Joe Odey Agi “M” Principal Partner, Joe Agi & Associates of 1, Villa Street, Minister’s Hill, Maitama Abuja,  between 11th and 26th March 2015 in Abuja within the jurisdiction of  this Honourable Court conspired to influence Adeniyi Francis Ademola in the course of his official function as a Judge of the       Federal High Court with a sum of  N30, 000, 000.00 and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 97 of the Penal Code Law”.

    By these, the three Defendants are charged with Conspiracy to influence the 1st Defendant in his official functions as a Judge of Federal High Court with N30million and by so doing committed an offence contrary to Section 97 of the Penal Code Law. Section 97 of the Penal Code Act, Cap 532 Laws of the Federal Capital Territory (“Laws of FCT”) provides thus: –

    ”97(1). Whoever is a party to a Criminal Conspiracy to commit an   offence punishable with death or with imprisonment shall where no express provision is made in this Penal Code for the  punishment of such conspiracy, be punished in the same   manner as if he had abetted that offence.

    (2).  Whoever is a party to a Criminal Conspiracy other than a  criminal Conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as  aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment for a term not  exceeding six months or with fine or with both”.

    By the above provision, it is evident Section 97 of the Penal Code on which Count 1 of the Charge is predicated merely provides for punishment for the offence of Conspiracy.  It has not made provision for substantive offence of Conspiracy.  The learned 2nd Defendant’s Counsel made submissions in this regard.  He urged the Court that the implication of hinging that Count of Information on Section 97 of the Penal Code is that there is no charge disclosed in that Count and hence there is nothing for the 2nd Defendant to answer.  The Prosecution in its response (at page 6 paragraphs 2.04 of its Response to 2nd Defendant’s No Case to Answer submission) conceded that it “proceeded to charge the Defendants in this case for Conspiracy to influence the course of justice under Section 97 of the Penal Code because there is no express provision under the Penal Code for that genre of Conspiracy, Conspiracy to influence the course of justice.  Thus while Section 182 provides for the substantive offence of “influencing the course of justice”  there is no specific provision for Conspiracy to influence the course of justice hence the reliance on the omnibus provision in Section 97″.

    In his Reply on points of law, the learned 2nd Defendants Counsel referring to the above admission by the prosecution, urged the Court that in the circumstances the complainant lacks the vires to charge a Defendant for an offence that is not tied to any written law. That doing so contravenes the provision of Section 36(8) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria and decision of the Court in AOKO V FAGBEMI (1961) 1 ALL NLR P.400 and RODA V FRN (2015) 10 NWLR (PT. 1468) P. 427.  He contended that the issue goes to the competence of the charge and by the provision of Section 396(2) of ACJA.  The 2nd Defendant having taken a plea to the charge has not lost the right to raise an objection or contend she has been misled by the content of the charge contrary to the submissions of the Prosecution Counsel which postulates she cannot object to the charge by virtue of Sections 220 and 221 of ACJA.  The 2nd Defendant’s Counsel contended this is because the earliest opportunity available to the 2nd Defendant to contend she has been misled by this fundamental defect is at this stage of No Case Submission”.

    I have given due consideration to the foregoing contentions.  As aforesaid, Count 1 of the Charge is predicated on Section 97 of the Penal Code which has not provided for the substantive offence of Conspiracy to commit a Criminal Offence but rather the punishment for it.  Section 36(8) of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria provides thus: –

    ”No person shall be held to be guilty of a criminal offence on account        of any act or omission that did not, at the time it took place constitute          such an offence, and no penalty shall be imposed for any criminal    offence heavier than the penalty in force at the time the offence was committed”.

    By the clear words of Section 36(8) of the Constitution no person shall be held guilty of a criminal offence on account of any act or omission that did not at the time it took place constitute such an offence.  The case of AOKO V FAGBEMI supra relied upon by the learned 2nd Defendant’s Counsel held this much.

     

  • Make criminal, penal Codes relevant,says NBA president

    Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN) has urged the Criminal Justice Reform Committee of the association to reform the Criminal Code (CC) and Penal Code (PC) and make archaic provisions relevant to contemporary Nigeria.

    Mahmoud spoke at the weekend during the inauguration of the committee in Abuja.

    He tasked the Committee to ensure that “law enforcement policies and practices employed to investigate, charge and prosecute individuals are appropriate and accurate and to organise conferences, colloquium, workshops and roundtable that will ensure an effective system of criminal justice administration by making policy makers evaluate and propose recommendations for a better criminal justice system in Nigeria”.

    The mandate of the committee also include: “To study and come out with recommendations on the Administration of Criminal Justice Bill worked upon by the panel on Implementation of Justice Reform set up by the Attorney-General and Minister of Justice.

    “To redefine the roles of Security and Anti-Crime Agencies in the attainment of criminal Justice; To unify, harmonise and modernise the criminal code and the penal code, and keep them relevant to the needs of our contemporary society.

    “To identify obstacles in the apprehension and prompt prosecution of offenders and to formulate practice direction for prosecutors, a total revamp of criminal trials with a view to enhancing the speedy dispensation of justice.

    Mahmoud said the committee would also conduct audit of certain laws to identify those that should reform.

    He added: “So, law reform is a key part of this committee’s assignment. This committee is expected to work in consultation with government institutions and civil society organisations.”

    The committee has Chief Arthur Obi-Okafor (SAN) as chairman and Mr. Reuben James as alternate chairman. Its members are Aisha Ado Abdullahi, John Duru, Alfred Akinjo, Yakubu Orlando, Geraldine Wey, Tope Ogunrinde, Joy Gbanigo and Foluke Abaniwonda.

    Others are Gerty Nkechi Iloegbunam, Damien Nosike, E D Ukoh, Oge Eyindah, former chairman of Calabar branch of the NBA  Nkoyo Amah, Publicity Secretary of the Eastern Bar Forum ( EBF)  George Fortune,  Anthonia Eke, Philomena Omorodion, Samuel Etuk and immediate past Publicity Secretary NBA Lagos Mr. Emeka Nwadioke

  • Nurtw chief’s murder: Court orders closure of prosecution’s case

    An Ekiti State High Court in Ado-Ekiti has closed the case of the prosecution in the trial of seven persons accused of complicity in the murder of the former National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW) Chairman Omolafe Aderiye.

    Justice Adekanye Ogunmoye of High Court 6 ordered the prosecution’s case closed, following the failure of the counsel, Ahmed Tafa, to bring more witnesses to give evidence as promised on the last day of sitting.

    The seven persons standing trial are former Road Transport Employers Association (RTEAN) chairman, Adebayo Aderiye (1st), Oodua Peoples Congress (OPC) Leader, Adeniyi Adedipe (second), Sola Durodola (third), Ajayi Kayode (fourth), Oso Farotimi (fifth), Sola Adenijo (sixth) and another ex-RTEAN chair, Rotimi Olanbi-wonnu (seventh).

    There was drama at the sitting as Tafa, who had earlier appeared before the court and applied that the matter be stood down for two hours to enable him bring the witnesses, later sent a letter to that court claiming that he was on admission at the Ekiti State University Teaching Hospital (EKSUTH).

    The development angered defence counsel, Mr. Biodun Fasakin (1st-4th), Mr. Lekan Olatawura (fifth and seventh) and Mr. Tunji Oso (sixth), who described it as a ploy to keep the accused persons perpetually in prison custody.

    Fasakin urged the court to discountenance the letter, saying that Tafa was hale and hearty when he earlier came to court and drove himself out of the premises to bring the witnesses.

    Fasakin contended that the prosecution counsel had prepared the letter for seeking adjournment to prevent the defendants from opening their defence. He urged the court to close the prosecution’s case

    Olatawura argued that the prosecution breached the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) which provides for the daily trial of criminal cases.

    He urged the court to close the case  and allow defendants to open their defence or the court should grant them bail.

    Oso regretted that there had been five adjournments at the instance of the prosecution after the case had stalled at the Appeal Court for about one-and-half years in which only one witness was called.

    He pointed out that the contentious letter had no reference number and the letter did not state at what point Tafa was admitted. He prayed for the closure of the prosecution’s case or the admittance of his clients to bail.

    Justice Ogunmoye in his ruling noted that the case had suffered five adjournments after the Court of Appeal ordered the prosecution to open its case while it had only called one witness despite the fact that all the witnesses are resident in Ado-Ekiti.

    While ordering the prosecution’s case closed, Ogunmoye held that granting another adjournment at prosecution’s instance would defeat the purpose of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act which provides for speedy trial of criminal cases.

    He said: “He (Tafa) did not tell his colleagues that he was going to the hospital if he knew his condition was that bad. He should have asked one of his associates or juniors in the chambers to stand for him.

    “This matter has lingered for too long, adjourning it again will mean there will be no end to the case and justice demands that I close it.’’