The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Lawyers seek quick passage of Whistleblowing Bill

    Three Lawyers have urged the National Assembly to pass the Whistleblowing Bill forthwith, contending that it would be useful in fighting illegal acquisition of firearms.

    They include the Publicity Secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Ademola Adenaike, Lead Advocate, Constitutional Rights (and Peoples Development) Advocacy Initiative (CRAI), Mr Ikechukwu Ikeji and Lagos lawyer, Akintunde Iwilade.

    Adenaike remarked that extending the policy to other sectors will not only reveal age long rot and clandestine activities in the country but that it would also provide a robust direction and legal framework for the full operation of the policy.

    He emphasized that accelerated passage of the bill by the national assembly would  dispel, to a large extent,  the assertion that the legislature has been a clog in the wheel of the anti-corruption crusade in Nigeria.

    He contended that the effectiveness of the new policy of the government lies to a large extent in the provision of a legal framework for its operation. Another ingredient needed for the successful administration of the policy is transparency on the part of government. He advised government should ensure transparency in the disclosure of the sums recovered through the policy and apply the recovered loot for the benefits of all Nigerians through the provision of basic infrastructure and security.

    Ikeji  who agreed that the policy is not actually restricted to financial crimes posited that it would equally be effective in fighting illegal acquisition of firearms.

    He advised  that as a matter of good governance, the policy should be extended to all areas of the societal existence and should not be restricted to only financial crimes.                                    “Indeed, we have whistle blowing situations even before now. When you give information to the law enforcement agencies about the commission of any crime, what you have done is whistle blow on the culprits. It would be drug trafficking, child trafficking, arson, kidnapping just to name a few. Just so long as your information leads to the prevention of crime or the apprehension of criminals, you have engaged in whistle blowing. The old term used is police informants”, he argued..

    He said that the passage of the bill into law would mark the beginning of the fight against corruption noting that for now, “what we are operating has no legal backing and cannot result in creating a legal right in favour of the whistle blower”.

    Ikeji emphasized the need to get the National Assembly to immediately pass the Bill into law. It is imperative or else, we are engaging in illegality and unconstitutionality in sharing recovered money.

    He however remarked that whistle blowing on illegal fire arms acquisition is riskier than ordinary financial whistle blowing because those engaged in arms running could be deadlier and ready to kill.

    Iwilade remarked that when the enormous amount of arms surrendered at the inception of the Niger Delta Amnesty programme under President Yar’Adua, one can reasonably expect that the whistle blower policy can yield up so much helpful information on illegal arms and their movements. It is worth a try by the government.

    He however called for caution in implementation of the new policy stressing that care must be taken not to create an impression that patriotism should always be in expectation of material reward. Rather than throwing the whistle blower policy at every problem, he advised government to also look at strengthening security agencies and civil partnerships where patriotic citizens can feel safe to give information to security agencies without fear of any negative come back from exposed criminals.

    He remarked that greater successes should be expected when a legal framework is established to strengthen the whistle blower regime. He said in addition that the policy will be more effective if the code of secrecy and protection for whistle blowers remains unbroken. Rewards promised should also be provided to those who are deserving. The other arms of government should join the executive in decisively confronting corruption. The legislature especially, they need to pass the pending bill to enhance the anti-corruption war.

  • ‘How to sustain anti-graft war’

    A Professor of Law, Yemi Akinseye-George (SAN), has identified critical challenges that threaten the success of the war against corruption.

    He suggested ways to ensure a favourable outcome and how to sustain it beyond this administration.

    The eminent professor of law warned that President Muhammadu Buhari administration’s efforts at curbing corruption will remain a mere flash in the pan where necessary legal frameworks were not devised and put in place to ensure the anti-graft war is well rooted and institutionalised.

    Akinseye-George, who is the President of the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies (CSLS), spoke in Abuja on May 3 at the opening of a two-day workshop for judges and other critical stakeholders on the application of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, organised by CSLS.

    At the event were Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, senior officials of the court, including its Chief Registrar, Emmanuel Gakko; prosecutors and other lawyers from the Federal Ministry of Justice and other related government agencies.

    The workshop, he said, was aimed at receiving stakeholders’ inputs into “the draft annotations of the ACJA,” from which a well-structured training manual will be created, for building the capacity of all stakeholders in the application of the Act.

    Akinseye-George said it was distressing that the Buhari administration, whose main focus is on anti-corruption, has not been able to pass any major legislation to back its “Change Agenda”.

    He argued that the Federal Government urgently needs to put in place “several important laws” required to “support or consolidate the current anti-corruption campaign of this administration”.

    Akinseye-George identified some of the required legislations to included the Proceeds of Crime Act; Witness Protection Act; Whistleblowers Act; National Financial Intelligence Act; Cashless Economy Act; Commercial Credit Economy and Registry Act; Land and Corporate Registries Reform and Transparency Act; National Budget Act, among others.

    He said: “Without these and other supportive legislative instruments, the fight against corruption may not be sustainable in the long run.

    “While jailing corrupt people may be salacious and newsworthy in the short run, only a detailed and systematic reform of the society by consistently targeting the proceeds of crime and creating technologically-driven transparency and accountability system can counter the onslaught of treasury looters and political money bags in the long run.”

    Akinseye-George stressed the need for the Executive to “endeavour to secure a more cordial and productive working relationship with the National Assembly, without compromising the independence of each arm of the government.”

    He attributed the successes recorded in the prosecution of criminal cases involving prominent Nigerians to the ACJ Act, which he noted, has helped to end interlocutory injunctions, which had, for many years, stalled high profile corruption cases.

    On how to further derive the benefits inherent in the ACJA, Akinseye-Gorge urged the government to include, in the proposed constitutional amendments, all provisions targeted at minimising the abuse of interlocutory applications.

    He hailed some state governments that have taken the initiative to replicate the ACJA in their domain, but advised others yet to domesticate the law to urgently do so in view of its immense benefits.

    Akinseye-George expressed his preference for the creation of special courts to handle corruption cases, but said such arrangement must exist within the existing court system. He added that the prosecuting agencies and the court will function effectively where they are well funded and equipped.

    “The experiment with the specialised courts can then be replicated and extended to other courts over time, so that the efficiency and dynamism of the judicial system will improve generally.

    “This will boost commerce as investors will feel more confident to invest in the Nigerian economy. This is the nexus between the justice system and the Economic Recovery and Growth Plan (ERGP) of the Federal Government,” he said.

  • Season of forfeitures

    Season of forfeitures

    Billions of naira suspected to be ‘proceeds of crime’have been either forfeited temporarily or permanently to the Federal Government since January. How best should the cash, which forms part of the assets recovered so far by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), be managed? Are the laws on forfeiture adequate? JOSEPH JIBUEZE highlights some of the forfeited cash.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has obtained court orders for the forfeiture of money which it said is suspected to be proceeds of crime. Some have been permanently forfeited; others temporarily because the cases are ongoing.

    Some of the forfeited funds were those discovered through the whistle-blowing policy introduced last December. Last Thursday, EFCC’s Acting Chairman Ibrahim Magu said N17billion had been recovered through the policy alone.

    In obtaining the forfeiture orders, EFCC relied on Section 17 (1) of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act: Where any property has come into the possession of any officer of the Commission as unclaimed property, or any unclaimed property is found by any officer of the Commission to be in the possession of any other person, body corporate or financial institution, or any property in the possession of any person, body corporate or financial institution is reasonably suspected to be proceeds of some unlawful activity under this Act, the Money Laundering Act of 2004, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act of 2004 or any other law enforceable under the EFCC Act of 2004, the High Court shall upon application made by the Commission, its officers, or any other person authorised by it, and upon being reasonably satisfied that such property is an unclaimed property or proceeds of unlawful activity under the Acts stated in this subsection, make an order that the property or the proceeds from the sale of such property be forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    Sections 29 and 30 of the EFCC Act 2004 also gives the commission powers on forfeiture: Where the assets or properties of any person arrested for an offence under this Act has been seized or any assets or property has been seized by the commission under this Act, the commission shall cause an ex-parte application to be made to the court for an interim order forfeiting the property concerned to the Federal Government and the court shall, if satisfied that there is prima facie evidence that the property concerned is liable to forfeiture, make an interim order forfeiting the property to the Federal Government.

    Where a person is convicted of an offence under this Act, the commission or any authorised officer shall apply to the court for the order of confiscation and forfeiture of the convicted person’s assets and properties acquired or obtained as a result of the crime…

    But, are the provisions regulating forfeiture adequate? How is the govenment keeping track of the recoveries and forfeitures?

     

    Some permanent forfeitures

    Diezani’s $153m

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on February 16 ordered the final forfeiture of $153 million allegedly belonging to former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs Diezani Allison-Madueke, to the Federal Government.

    Justice Muslim Hassan ordered the forfeiture of unclaimed  N23.4 billion, $5 million as well as $40 million (the naira equivalent is N9.08 billion). The EFCC said the money was laundered for the former minster and was unclaimed.

     

    Ex-Naval chief’s N1.8b

    The Federal High Court in Lagos last April 6 ordered the forfeiture of N1.8billion recovered from a former Chief of Naval Staff, Dele Ezeoba.

    EFCC said the money was traced to the account of a company, Aquila Leasing Limited.

    It said Ezeoba allegedly used the name of Chukwuka Onwuchekwa to open a fraudulent account while he (Ezeoba) was the one who “truly” laundered the money.

    EFCC said the former Naval Chief stated in his statement that the account was opened with Onwuchekwa’s consent while he (Ezeoba) managed it.

    “The money is proceed of crime fraudulently diverted from the Nigerian Navy under the leadership of Dele Joseph Ezeoba.

    The commission said Ezeoba, in a bid to conceal the proceeds of crime, fraudulently opened an account in Zenith Bank Plc using Onwuchekwa’s name as the account owner while he (Ezeoba) “was the one who truly laundered the money”.

    “The same Dele Joseph Ezeoba has stated in his statement that he is in agreement with the first respondent (EFCC) that the sum of N2,378,000,000 be forfeited to the Federal Government of Nigeria,” EFCC said.

     

    Temporary forfeitures

    Ex-NAMA MD’s N3.5b

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on March 10 ordered the temporary forfeiture of N3.5bilion and $67,586.27 in the accounts of former Nigerian Airspace Management Agency (NAMA) Managing Director Ibrahim Abdulsalam and other officers.

    The others are former NAMA General Manager, Procurement, Olumuyiwa Adegorite, former General Manager, Finance, Segun Agbolad and former acting General Manager, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Bolaniran Akinribido.

    The rest are Director of Finance Clara Aliche, Adegorite’s wife co-director of Multeng Travels and Tours Ltd, Joy, Abiodun Sessebor, Randville Investment Ltd, Multeng Travels and Tours, Delosa Ltd, Airsea Delivery Ltd and Sea Schedule Systems Ltd.

    Also temporarily forfeited are a residential building at 5, Sobo Arobiodu Street, GRA, Ikeja, a petrol station at Egbeda-Idimu Road, by Faith Bus Stop, a filling station at Mushin, Idi-Oro, and a petrol station at Alakuko, the ownership of which EFCC said was yet to be determined.

    Abdulsalam, Olumuyiwa, Agbolade, Aliche, Adegorite, Randville Investment and Multeng Travels and Tours are on trial before Justice Babs Kuewumi of the same court.

    They pleaded not guilty to 21 counts of N2.8billion fraud.

    Justice Oluremi Oguntoyibo made the interim forfeiture order based on an ex-parte originating summons filed by EFCC.

    The commission sought an order that the bank accounts of the 12 persons and companies “currently being prosecuted for offences of conspiracy and obtaining money by false pretence be temporarily attached and taken over by EFCC” until trial is concluded.

    Among sums forfeited are N30,08million in Adegorite’s Stanbic IBTC account no. 9302194973; N8.7 million and N120 million in Randville Investment’s Stabic IBTC account (0001427188) and Unity Bank account (0025152223), and $42,386.27 in Adegorite’s First City Monument Bank (FCMB) account number 1546629019).

    Others are N2.8 million in Delosa’s GTBank account, N1.2 billion in Avesta Venture’s Electronics Nigeria Ltd’s Zenith Bank account; N985.6 million, N281 million, N681 million and N47 million in various Zenith Bank accounts of Merry Aviation Communication Electrical, among others.

    In a supporting affidavit, an EFCC investigating officer, Nuradeen Bello, said the commission caught wind of plans being made by the respondents to transfer funds out of their various accounts.

     

    N449m found in Lagos shop

    Justice Rilawan Aikawa of the Federal High Court in Lagos on April 19 ordered the temporary forfeiture of  N449,750,000 found in an abandoned Bureau de Change shop on Victoria Island in Lagos. He ordered the EFCC to advertise the order in a newspaper.

    The judge said anybody interested in the money should report in court to justify ownership.

    The interest party must appear before him within 14 days to show cause why the money should not be permanently forfeited to the Federal Government.

    An EFCC investigator, Moses Awolusi, in a supporting affidavit to a motion ex-parte, said the shop LS64 at Legico Shopping Plaza had not been opened for two years.

    He said the money was found on April 7 in several ‘Ghana Must Go’ bags.

    The EFCC, he said, recovered it after investigating intelligence about Mohammed Tauheed, who allegedly conspired with the owner of the abandoned shop to launder the money which he claimed he received in cash from a serving government official, whose name was not disclosed.

    Justice Aikawa adjourned until May 19.

     

    Patience Jonathan’s $5.8m

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on April 26 ordered the temporary forfeiture $5,842,316.66 belonging to wife of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s wife, Patience.

    The commission said it found the money in an account number 2110001712 with Skye Bank Plc in Mrs Jonathan’s name.

    The judge also ordered the forfeiture N2,421,953,522.78 found in an Ecobank Nigeria Ltd account number 2022000760 in the name of La Wari Furniture and Baths Ltd.

    EFCC said the sums were “reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities”.

    Justice Olatoregun directed the EFCC to publish the interim order in a national newspaper.

    An EFCC operative, Musbahu Yahaha Abubakar, said Mrs Jonathan opened the Skye Bank account on February 7, 2013, following which “several huge cash deposits in dollars were made to the account,” sometimes with fictitious names.

    The EFCC operative said the N2.4 billion “were substantially the naira equivalent of the United States Dollars given to one Chima Nwafor John of Ecobank Nigeria Ltd by one Esther Oba at the Aso Rock Villa.”

    Justice Mojisola Olatoregun adjourned until May 15.

     

    Ikoyi cash haul

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on April 13 ordered the temporary forfeiture of $43,449,947 (about N13billion), N23, 218,000 million and £27,800 (about N10.6 milion) cash found in Flat 7B, Osborne Towers, 16, Osborne Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

    Justice Hassan ordered that the money be temporarily forfeited to the Federal Government until the owner shows up.

    He directed EFCC to advertise the forfeiture order in a newspaper so that anybody who owns the money can claim it within 14 days.

    The case comes up before Justice Hassan on Friday.

     

    Yakubu’s $9.8m, £74,000

    The Federal High Court sitting in Kano on February 13 ordered the forfeiture of the sum $9,772,000 and £74,000 recovered from a former Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, NNPC, Mr. Andrew Yakubu to the Federal Government.

    EFCC recovered the cash which Yakubu kept in house in Sabon Tasha, Kano.

    Yakubu has, however, asked the court to discharge the order because, among others, it lacks the territorial jurisdiction to make it, the alleged offence having been committed in Abuja.

     

    A senator’s house

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on April 24 ordered the temporary forfeiture of a 12-storey building at 27, Marine Road, Apapa belonging to the senator representing Delta North Senatorial District, Peter Nwaoboshi, over an alleged contract scam of N1.5 billion.

    The EFCC told the judge that Nwaoboshi, through his company, Bilderberg Enterprises Limited, got a N1.580billion contract to supply some construction equipment to the Delta State Direct Labour Agency sometime in 2010.

    The anti-graft agency alleged that Nwaoboshi’s company supplied second-hand equipment to the agency, thereby short-changing it.

    The EFCC claimed that Nwaoboshi later used the proceeds of the alleged scam to bid for and purchase the building, formerly known as Guinea House, for N805 million in the name of his company, Golden Touch Construction Project Limited.

    The commission said it was in the interest of justice to order the temporary seizure pending the outcome of investigation and trial of Nwaoboshi and his companies.

    Nwaoboshi, however, said the order was not a temporary forfeiture but an “attachment”.

     

    Other recoveries

    Last year, the Federation Government published the assets recovered between May 2015 and last May. Cash recovers include N78.3billion, $185,119,584.61; 3,508,355.46 pounds, and 11,250 euros.

    Funds recovered under interim forfeiture include N126.6billion, $9,090,243,920.15; 2,484,441.55 pounds and 303,399.17 euros.

    Funds awaiting return from foreign jurisdictions include $321,316,726.1; 6,900,000 pounds and 11,826.11 euros.

    Non-cash recoveries include 22 farm lands, 182 completed buildings, five maritime vessels, among others.

     

    How should recovered assets be managed?

    Legal experts, at a National Stakeholders Workshop on Recovery and Management of Recovered Assets, organised by the Presidential Advisory Committee on Corruption (PACAC), had agreed that the practice of decentralised assets management regime by various law enforcement agencies and anti-corruption agencies has proved ineffective, wasteful and a distraction from the core or primary focus of the respective agencies concerned with the fight against corruption and money laundering.

    It was recommended that a law be enacted to provide for a centralised administrative agency to manage recovered assets. Pending when the law is passed, it was suggested that a multi-disciplinary Central Assets Management Committee should be created to centrally administer the recovered assets.

    It was suggested that the government must keep a record of all the restrained properties and maintain a database that will include description of assets, suspected source of funding, history of assets/timeline, beneficiaries of the assets, information of cases around the assets, classification of the assets (perishable and non-perishable), and value of the assets.

    It was also recommended that such asssets should have seizure numbers, accompanied with their pictures and videos , dates of civil and criminal cases to be linked to assets and their location.

    It was further recommended that some assets should be managed by a receiver/manager, including reputable stock broking firm where shares are involved.

    Rather than allowing some assets to waste or depreciate, it was recommended that seized vehicles, vessels and aircraft be sold once a restraining order has been issued to preserve their value.

    “Where possible, the defendant’s consent should be obtained to sell a vehicle. If that consent is not forthcoming, a court order should be obtained to require sale of the vehicle,” the stakeholders proposed.

    Where perishables goods, animals and fast depreciating assets are involved, the suggestion was that they could be left in control of the owner in the interim, or sold at the most reasonable price.

    There were three suggestions on where to keep recovered funds. The first is that income from recovered assets should be paid into a designated account, exclusively maintained for the recovered stolen assets. It could be called Recovered Assets Funds, to be held in trust for the victims, such as the Federal Government, state, local government, an institution or individuals.

    A second option would be for all funds realised from the sale of the recovered assets, regardless of its origin, to be paid into the federation account as revenue to fund special projects.

    A third recommendation was for such monies to be paid into a special fund to be managed by a Board of Trustees to be appropriated for legacy public utility projects.

     

    How govt handles recovered assets

    PACAC Executive Secretary Prof Bolaji Owasanoye said the Federal Government accepted the recommendations, with three major outcomes.

    He said as a result of the framework and the report, government decided to centralise the management of recovered stolen assets and to establish a system for constant monitoring.

    “In furtherance of this, an inter agency Central Assets Management Committee is being set up as recommended by the framework. The Committee should have its inaugural meeting soon.

    “Secondly, government set up an inter-agency asset tracing team to trace stolen assets generally

    “Thirdly, the government has started an initiative to collate government assets though establishment of an Assets Register. These three initiatives are on-going,” Owasanoye said.

     

    Are the laws/processes adequate?

    The EFCC has been accused of highhandedness and arm-twisting in some of the forfeitures.

    For instance, a bank chief in the Alison-Madueke laundering case claimed that EFCC coerced him into admitting receiving $40million, which was also forfeited, and that he had to raise the extra sum from friends to be allowed to leave the commission’s detention.

    EFCC, however, denied the allegation.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr Ahmed Raji, said laws on forfeiture need amendment to prevent abuses.

    He said: “There is a bit of disharmony in the law relating to forfeiture especially with respect to interim forfeiture ý. It is a contradiction in terms.

    “Forfeiture is meant to be an end result after a full procedure of inquiry and not during investigation or before trial. There can be interim attachment that may lead to forfeiture after trial.

    “But the term has been abused to such an extent that one keeps wondering whether the word has its origin in Nigeria.

    “And that is why the Court of Appeal in one of the cases struck down the provision of EFCC Act relating to forfeiture. In Wigwe vs FRN, S29 of the EFCC Act was struck down.

    “The entire Act and other similar laws should be reviewed urgently.”

    A Lagos based lawyer, Dr Chima Nnaji, believes interim forfeiture of monies suspected to be proceeds of crime were in order so long as they are court-backed.

    “There is temporary and final forfeiture, and both are in order. Once they go to court to ask for forfeiture they have to present an affidavit in support which the court looks at.

    “So each case must be treated on its own merit,” Nnaji said.

  • ‘Law and order our ultimate goal in Lagos’

    ‘Law and order our ultimate goal in Lagos’

    Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Mr Adeniji Kazeem has been striving to enthrone good governance, rule of law and constitutionalism in the state. Last week, he gave an account of his ministry’s activities to commemorate the second anniversary of Governor Akinwunmi Ambode’s administration, ADEBISI ONANUGA reports

    Lagos State has vowed to ensure the  the maintenance of law and order despite the challenges of its mega-status.

    Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Adeniji Kazeem, said the Ministry of Justice would not relent in its bid to help achieve a peaceful, secure state.

    He spoke when he gave an account of his stewardship in the last two years.

    Kazeem categorised the achievement of his ministry into four: legislative initiatives, law reforms, law and order initiatives and provision of legal services.

    He said his ministry, through  its Directorate of Legislative Drafting and the Law Reform Commission, was involved in the drafting, amendment and reforms of laws and regulations sponsored in collaboration with the House of Assembly and other ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs).

    During the period under review, he said 14 bills were passed into law while 12 are undergoing drafting.

    He said his ministry hosted the 2017 Lagos State Justice Stakeholders’ Summit from January 30 to 31.

    A 10-member Blueprint Implementation Committee worked on the communique, which has submitted its report, to be forwarded to the National Judicial Service Commission.

    According to him, the state House of Assembly last year approved the Yoruba translation of Laws of sate, adding that the Law Reform Commission has began the process of achieving this milestone which is the first indigenous initiative in Nigeria.

    The Tenancy Law, he said, is presently being reviewed by the Law Reform Commission.

    Questionnaires have been distributed to all stakeholders (judges, magistrates, legal Practitioners, landlords, tenants, estate surveyors among others) for their opinion, while a stakeholder’s meeting will be convened prior to the drafting of a revised Bill for Exco-approval before passage into law by the House of Assembly.

    In line with the drive to promote information technology, the Attorney- General said the Laws of the state, 2015 were uploaded online last year.

    According to him, the online platform provides worldwide accessibility to the laws and all laws subsequently passed by the House of Assembly.

    He urged members of the public to visit the site at www.laws .lagosstate.gov.ng to access and electronically purchase the Laws of state.

    Because Governor Ambode is resolute in his resolve to use all legal means to curb the nefarious activities of land grabbers and their collaborators in high and official places who have continuously enforced a reign of terror on the people of the state, he said government has approved the commissioning of the Permanent Office of the Special Task Force on Land Grabbers to further enhance its operations and bring succour to the people of Lagos.

    The new permanent Office for the state Special Task Force on Land Grabbing was formally commissioned in March to further enhance its operations and bring succor to the people.

    Since its inauguration in September 2016, the Task Force received 1,237 Petitions with about 250 cases resolved through various means including physical enforcement, mediation and conciliation.

    The Ministry provides free Legal Services to people of Lagos State as part of its mandate. He listed the cases successfully resolved by various Departments and Agencies of the ministry during the period under review.

    According to him, the Citizens’ Mediation Centre (CMC) resolved 11,813 adding that in a bid to further extend its free mediation service to the citizenry in the State, the government approved the opening of three additional offices in Epe, Eredo and Ikosi- Ejirin, bringing the number to 18 units.

    The Office of Public Defender (OPD) attended to 4,149  petitions and handled 5,400 cases in various courts; the Directorate of Citizens’ Rights (DCR) resolved 3,663 human rights cases; the Community Service Unit (CSU) resolved 2,837  cases; Directorate of Advisory Services and Judicial Liaison attended to 1,430 Petitions and has 32 cases pending at the National Industrial Court while the Public Advice Center attended to 1,022  petitions received.

    Kazeem said the Office of the Administrator General and Public Trustee  (AG&PT) which has 165 estates under its administration generated N7,655,387.16 as revenue; placed advertisements for over 300 unclaimed death benefits in all local governments and LCDAs to enable the next of kin of local government staff collect the unclaimed benefits.

    He said the Domestic and Sexual Violence Response Team (DSVRT) obtained judgments in defilement matters, ranging from seven to 15 years’ imprisonment.

    In addition, Engagement and Sensitisation campaigns for Army Personnel on Domestic Violence, Child Abuse and Rape were carried out while NURTW officials were conscripted as ambassadors in the fight against sexual and gender based violence.

    He said during the period, the team also handled 920 cases bordering on domestic violence, child abuse and exual violence.

    The team, he said, also assisted 20 survivors of defilement with sponsorship for their education, provided professional psycho social therapy for 20 rape and 60 domestic violence survivors, as well as 30 survivors of intimate partner violence.

    Kazeem said Ambode approved the Stamp Duties (Recovery and Collections) Regulations, 2016 pursuant to the powers conferred on him by the provisions of the Stamp Duty Act.

    To this end, the government has approached the Supreme Court for the interpretation of certain provisions of the Stamp Duty Act over the stamp duty deductions by the commercial banks, which he said, is revenue due to the state.

    He said 540 agreements were drafted for the state; 17 Bills of Sale and six Limited Partnerships registered, and N425,568,991:43 generated.

    According to him, his ministry visited the Ikoyi and Kirikiri Medium Security Prison in April to get a first-hand evaluation of the living conditions of the awaiting trial inmates to make appropriate recommendations to decongest the prisons through rapid prosecution and amnesty considerations.

    The government, he said, revived the crime data registry because of its  strong determination to combat crime.

    Through the participation of the state Judiciary, Ministry of Justice, the state Police Command and the Nigerian Prison Services, details of convicted offenders are registered to help successfully combat crime rate in the state.

    Kazeem said over 750,000 forms for recording of criminal suspects were handed over to the Lagos State Police Command.

    The Special Offences Court, according to him, contributed to the efforts of the state government by significantly reducing street trading, traffic congestion and unethical/anti-social conducts on the roads as well as environmental nuisance, thereby improving the socio-economic well-being of the residents.

    Since it began operations in March, last year, he said 4, 426 offenders had been arraigned before the Mobile Court and  enlightenment campaigns carried to make residents aware of the need to obey traffic rules and keep the environment safe and secure.

    He listed ongoing projects and targets before the end of the year to include inauguration of the magistrate courts at Badagry, Ajegunle; construction of OPD/CMC offices in more local government areas; opening of the DNA Forensic Centre; refurbishment of court rooms; improvement of magistrates’ welfare; review of Tenancy Law; translation of the Laws of Lagos State into Yoruba language and  official launch of the state Lis Pendens Registry.

    “Our ultimate mandate remains to ensure that the interests of the People of the state as well as the government are well protected.

    “We are unrelenting in delivering public legal service that promotes integrity; values innovation with a tradition where merit is the primary key to advancement.

    “In achieving this, we work together to serve the people by professional and ethical  standards that promote access to justice regardless of socio- economic class and to attract, develop, motivate and retain the best law officers within a supportive work environment,” he added.

  • Court adjourns businessman’s ‘forgery’suit till May 22

    AN Igbosere Magistrates’ Court has adjourned till May 22 the trial of businessman, Akindele Afolabi, for alleged forgery.

    Afolabi,  48, is the former holder of a power of attorney for the late Madam Efunroye-Tinubu family of Lagos.

    He was arraigned by the police on August 11, 2014, alongside Alhaji Adio Kazeem, 79, on an eight-count charge bordering on conspiracy, forcible entry, forcible possession, impersonation and breach of peace.

    The police also alleged that Afolabi impersonated “as the lawful attorney of Iyalode Efunroye Tinubu family, a representation you knew to be false.”

    According to the prosecutor, Inspector Haruna Ibrahim, the offences are punishable under sections 52, 126, 166(d), 300, 378(1)&(2) and ý410 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State, 2011.

    The defendants pleaded not guilty.

  •  African Bar to hold conference in Port Harcourt

    The African Bar Association (AFBA) has assured lawyers of a world-class international conference in Port Harcourt in August.

    Its President Mr. Hannibal Uwaifo said no no fewer than 2,500 lawyers are expected.

    He said judicial officers, lawmakers, businessmen and women, captains of industry and diverse interest groups from the continent and across the world.

    He said: “On behalf of the African Bar Association, we respectfully invite Nigerian lawyers to the 2017 Annual Conference of the Association holding in Port Harcourt, South Nigeria from August 6 to 10, 2017.”

    The theme is: Overcoming the legal challenges of doing business in Africa.

    Immediate past President of the Republic of Tanzania, Dr. Jakaya M. Kikwete, will be the keynote speaker.

    “The Annual Conference  provides a unique opportunity to meet and network with diverse Participants from all walks of life in Africa and across the globe and will focus on sectors relating to legal practice, cross boarder practice, immigration, cybercrime, economics, politics, governance, professional Etiquette, Environ-ment.

    “There will be Showcase Sessions and the African Business Roundtable where eminent African Business-men and Women will chart a veritable course for doing business in Africa the Legal way.

    “The conference will also deal with e-commerce, women, children and minority rights,” Uwaifo said.

     

  • NBA-SBL, Presidency partner on ease of business

    The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (SBL) has partnered with the Federal Government on ease of doing business.

    Its Chairman, Mr. Olumide Akpata, said SBL is collaborating  with the Presidential Enabling Business Environment Council  to implement policies that will facilitate the ease of doing business.

    He said: “The Joint Working Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (NBA-SBL) and members of the Enabling Business Environment Secretariat (EBES) met on March 7, at EBES office in Abuja, to begin deliberation on possible areas of collaboration between the two parties.

    “EBES is the Secretariat set up by the Presidential Enabling Business Environment Council (PEBEC) to drive implementation of reforms which are aimed at improving ease of doing business in Nigeria.

    “NBA-SBL pledged collaboration and support to PEBEC’s mandate towards achieving its objectives of removing critical bottlenecks and bureaucratic constraints to doing business in Nigeria, and make the country a progressively easier place for businesses to start and thrive.”

    The committee is co-chaired by Akpata and the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Industry, Trade & Investment, Office of the Vice President (Secretary of PEBEC & Co-ordinator of EBES), Dr. Jumoke Oduwole.

    Akpata said the committee articulated the specific support required from NBA-SBL towards the 60-Day National Action Plan.

    “NBA-SBL support will primarily center on issues around the ‘Starting a Business’ indicator, an area in which the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) has initiated a string of notable reforms in the past 30 days.

    “In addition, the NBA-SBL will provide pro bono (free) legal support and expertise to the CAC and PEBEC/EBES in the legislative review of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) and other legislations, as well as legislative advocacy at the National Assembly,” he said.

    According to Akpata, NBA-SBL has also partnered with the National Assembly and development agencies to promote the ease of doing business.

    Akpata said the section is also collaborating with the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG) and the National Assembly (NASS), through a working group called the National Assembly Business Environment Roundtable (NASSBER), which seeks to review all laws that affect business in Nigeria with a view to promoting the ease of doing Business.

    He said NASSBER was founded as a result of the ongoing collaboration between the National Assembly, the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG), the UK Department for International Development (DFID) through two of its developmental programs, namely, ENABLE II and GEMS 3, and the NBA-SBL.

    He described NASSBER as  a legislative/private sector initiative established to develop a framework for the improvement of the economic and business environment in Nigeria and, in particular, through law reform.

    Its objectives, he said, are facilitating and implementing legislative reform and, with respect to enhancing the ease of doing business in Nigeria, providing a platform for engagement and consultation with key stakeholders; proffering solutions/recommendations for enhancing the competiveness of “Made-in-Nigeria”; and advocating for the diversification of the Nigerian economy.

    “The NASSBER structure has a Steering Committee, Technical Committee and Working Groups.  The Steering Committee will comprise of the Leadership of the National Assembly and, in particular, the Senate President and Speaker of the House of Representatives, as well as very senior members of partner organisations.  The NBA-SBL Vice Chair, Seni Adio ( SAN) is our representative on the steering committee,” Akpata said.

    He said NBA-SBL also nominated lawyers into the CAC  ‘Mystery Shoppers’ as part of the partnership with PEBEC

    “As part of its collaboration with PEBEC, the Council of the NBA-SBL, working with the EBES has nominated 10 lawyers designated to be Mystery Shoppers. The  Committee was inaugurated in March in Abuja.

    “The CAC mystery shoppers are saddled with the responsibility of testing, mystery shopping & reporting the implementation of all CAC reforms.

    “This team reports to the trio of the EBES, the NBA-SBL and the CAC once every two weeks.

    “In line with its vision to promote and enhance business practices in Nigeria, the SBL agreed to support the EBES to ensure a favourable business environment.

    “The SBL has an existing partnership with the CAC following the establishment of an SBL-CAC Joint Working Committee in 2016.

    “Recent reforms at the CAC include: online upload of registration documents; improved reliability of CAC online portal (including uptime to 99 per cent); consolidation of incorporation documents from seven to one and integration FIRS e-payment solution into CAC online portal,” Akpata said.

     

  • Experts advocate stronger framework for public, private partnership

    Experts have called for stronger legal framework to make public, private partnership (PPP) more effective, especially in the development of infrastructure.

    According to them, the government needs to create an enabling environment to encourage private investment in infrastructure since it cannot do it alone.

    They spoke at the yearly lecture of the firm of Punuka Attorneys and Solicitors in Lagos, with the theme: The role of public-private partnership in infrastructural development.

    Senior Partner, Punuka Attorneys and Solicitors, Chief Anthony Idigbe (SAN), said government cannot be saddled with investing tax payers’ money in otherwise commercially viable infrastructure projects in the face of other social needs.

    “Consequently, private participation is needed for the enhancement of infrastructural development and indeed are required as, perhaps, a matter of social commitment, to step up their game to fill the infrastructural funding gap.

    “In addition, they can bring private sector experience to conceptualisation, design, execution, operation and maintenance of infrastructure,” Idigbe said.

    But, such partnership cannot work where there is lack of transparency and where corruption is rife, according to a Canada based lawyer, Anthony Ross (QC).

    Ross, founder of E. Anthony Professional Corporation, Canada, who was one of the guest speakers, said corruption remains a big impediment to the success of PPP.

    He said the framework on PPP must be strengthened, in additional to ensuring a transparent process.

    The second guest speaker, Partner at a Cananda-based law firm WeirFoulds LLP, Mr Frank Walwyn, said the government needs to build expertise in the agencies that award PPP contracts.

    Doing so, he said, would increase the government’s bargaining power.

    Citing the Canada, he said there was public buy-in because of transparency in the contract-awarding and agreement processes and the belief that public interest is always protected.

    There is also the need to determine what the infrastructure needs are before deciding on the PPP model to adopt, Walwyn said.

    “Government needs to invest resources in PPP to make it successful,” he said.

    Planet Projects Ltd Managing Director, Abiodun Otunola, said policy inconsistency by the government hampers the effectiveness of PPP.

    According to him, there is a lack of respect for rule of law and contracts, which he said needs to change if PPP must work better in Nigeria.

    Otunola also identified corruption and a weak judicial system as factors that work against private investment in infrastructure.

    Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode said more PPP in infrastructure funding, including the proposed Fourth Mainland Bridge, was needed to make the state a preferred destination for investment.

    He said the state was determined to explore the PPP model in areas such as road network expansion, transportation, housing and environment.

    “Some critical projects we have identified to be implemented through collaboration with the private sector include the Fourth Mainland Bridge, the Okokomaiko road expansion project, Oko-Oso-Itoikin road dualisation and the Ikorodu-Agbowa-Itoikin-Ijebu-Ode road project,” he said.

    The governor, represented by the Deputy, Dr Idiat Adebule, said the government was not abdicating its responsibilities but essentially releasing scarce resources for other important projects.

    He said an advantage of bringing the private section into governance was the efficiency it brings to project management, and minising the issues of waste, delayed delivery and abandonment associated with public projects.

    Ambode the said government revenue cannot be relied upon as the only source of funding for developmental projects.

    “The reality of this fact is becoming clearer as a result of reduction in government revenue occasioned by dwindling oil prices and increasing need of the people,” he said.

    The governor said the state has already effectively used the PPP model in the delivery of critical infrastructure, such as the Bus Rapid Transit system, the ongoing Eko Atlantic Project, the Lekki Free Trade Zone, among others.

    Other speakers at the event were Chief Executive Officer of Chapel Hill Denham, Mr Bolaji Balogun, Chairman, Nestle, David Ifezulike, who chaired the event, Managing Director, Infrastructure Bank Plc, Mr Adekunle A. Oyinlola, former Kogi State Commissioner for Lands, Housing and Urban Development, Stephen Mayaki and a senior associate at PUNUKA, Olapeju Anozi.

  • Time to adopt legislative impact assessment module

    It is fast becoming a requirement in advanced jurisdictions to carry out assessment of consequences and effects on proposed legislation. This is technically called ‘legislative impact assessment’. Legislative impact assessment is an ex-ante evaluation of a piece of prospective legislation, prior to its enactment. This is fast becoming an established rationalisation of legislative processes. New laws are usually expected to have particular effects and not some unwanted side effects. Given that society is always evolving, and that all the ramifications of any new set of provisions in statues, may not be apparent, it has become a necessary part of the legislative process to carry out a forensic evaluation of possible effects of any new set of regulations. Legislative impact assessment is a multi-disciplinary procedure involving lawyers, legal historians, sociologists, economists, etc.

    Some jurisdictions have developed templates and methodologies for legislative impact assessment with the full compliments of office and personnel. In the European Union, United Kingdom and the United States in particular, this procedure has become a mandatory part of the legislative process. Recently in the European Union, the research group for methodology of law and legal research at Tilburg University (Netherlands) has empanelled Europe’s top specialists in ex ante evaluation of legislation.

    Professor Jonathan Verschuuren, a member of the group and author of ‘The Impact of Legislation, A Critical Analysis of Ex ante evaluation’, praises the motive thus: “That the panelists with backgrounds in law, economics and the social and political sciences, the result of their corroborative effort shall be a comprehensive and critical documents on the pros and cons and on the opportunities, limitations and the challenges of ex ante assessment of legislation”.

    The UK, has long established templates for legislative impact assessment, and as earlier stated, it is a mandatory procedure, to the extent that for any legislative business to commence on any bill, a certificate of impact assessment must be annexed. The template summarily, raises and resolves such queries as: what is the problem under consideration? Why is government or legislative intervention necessary? What are the policy objectives and intended effects of the proposed legislation? What policy options have been considered? What are the justifications for the preferred legislative option?, etc. The analyses are evidence based, with costs and benefits projected, and assumptions, sensitivities and risks ‘X’ rayed. For an example of recommended procedure in conducting legislative impact assessment in the UK, see UK Government Impact Assessment Guidance (htt://www.ber. gov.uk/files/file4 4544.pdf).

    Legislative impact assessment is a policy procedure. The government policy is normally formulated within the responsible ministry. This may be by way of research and analysis within the ministry or by private sector sources commissioned by the ministry. It may also be by way of independent research and analysis brought to attention of the ministry. The trend in modern policy development is an impact assessment of the proposed policy and implementing legislation. Such assessment extends beyond apparent effects, implications and cost/benefit analysis, to its indirect economic consequences. Legislative impact assessment also transcends the ex ante era of a piece of legislation to the ex post era, in the form of reviews on the impact of the policies after implementation has begun. This procedure is useful to determine impact of existing legislation preparatory to considering a revision or amendment.

    The benefits of legislative impact assessment cannot be over emphasised. A critical forensic evaluation of the need, applicability, effects and consequences of a proposed legislative instrument, would no doubt, be helpful.

    Such deep searches would certainly reveal some not – so – apparent implications of a new regulation.

    This is more so, in Nigeria, with the verbiage of statutes and provisions, and the deluge of amendments and subsidiary instruments. The practice of conducting public hearing by relevant committees and stakeholders on bills, is by no means adequate and cannot take the place of a formal deliberative, deep assessment and analysis of impact of bills by a dedicated and insightful department of government. As explained above, legislative impact assessment is a core competence exercise, usually undertaken by skilled legislative advocates and analysts, drawn from diverse disciplines. Political biases on the part of the legislators and sponsoring departments would normally becloud judgments in public hearings and render the exercise unrealistic and superficial. It is therefore important that Nigerian government and legislative authorities in particular, put in place a structure for formal conduct of legislative impact assessments on proposed legislation. The United Kingdom’s templates as expounded above could be used as a model. It is only plausible that we begin to take steps to improve the quality of our legislation in terms of need and usefulness. Nigeria should adopt and develop templates for legislative impact assessment, in line with Global best practices.

    • Onwe, a UK trained legislative drafter and author of Groundwork of Legislative Drafting, works is Head, Tax Appeal Tribunal (TAT), Southwest Zone, Ibadan.

  • Court to hear ex-worker’s suit against bank Friday

    The National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) in Lagos will on Friday hear a suit by a former banker, Mrs Pauline Nsa, who is seeking N13,885,726.32 as outstanding terminal benefits from her former employer.

    The claimant said she was to retire at 60, but was “induced” to leave at 56.

    She is also claiming N139,014,632 which she said is the remuneration for the four years she would have worked before retirement.

    Nsa, through her lawyer Nnabuike Edechime, is also claiming N10million as general damages from the defendants for “cutting short her banking career, subjecting her severe embarrassment and indignities, and for emotional trauma”.

    But the defendants, FBN Holdings Plc and First Bank of Nigeria Ltd, have urged the court to dismiss the suit on the basis that they had paid the claimant all her entitlements.

    The claimant said the bank employed her as an Assistant General Manager on an initial salary of N12.7million per  year with effect from March 10, 2008 after leaving UBA as a Principal Manager.

    According to her, she was later seconded to a subsidiary company, FBN Microfinance Bank Ltd, as the pioneer Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer with effect from September 10, 2007, with a reviewed compensation package of N26.7million per year.

    Nsa said following a restructuring, her services were transferred to FBN Holdings.

    However, the defendants, she said, divested from FBN Microfinance Bank, which was acquired by Letshego Holdings of Botswana.

    The claimant said before the divestment, she took the company from an initial capital of N1billion in 2009 to N3.8billion when it was sold.

    Following the new management takeover, Nsa said she returned to FBN Holdings and requested for redeployment.

    “The first defendant failed to redeploy me as requested but rather advised me to apply for voluntary early retirement so that I could be paid all my entitlements.

    “Consequent upon the inducement of the first defendant, I had no choice than to apply for voluntary early retirement. The first defendant thereafter paid me N20,468,807.33.

    “I contend that I was short paid by the sum of N13,885,726.32 which is still outstanding and unpaid by the first defendant,” the claimant said.

    Nsa said based on the defendants’ employee handbook, she was supposed to retire at 60 or after 35 years of service, but was “compelled” to retire at 56.

    Therefore, she is demanding the outstanding payment, her remuneration for the remaining four years, as well as damages.

    But, the defendants denied being indebted to Nsa, saying she had been fully paid.

    According to them, the first defendant does not have any outstanding obligation or payment due the claimant.

    They urged the court to hold that the claimant was not entitled to any more compensation and to dismiss the suit.