The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Firm appoints new partners

    A law firm, Olisa Agbakoba Legal (OAL), has elevated Victor Akazue Nwakasi and Adebola Sobowale as Associate Partners with effect from April 4.

    They joined the firm in 2005 and 2008. Prior to their appointments, Nwakasi was the Head of Corporate and Commercial Practice Unit, while Debola was a senior associate in the firm’s Litigation Group with interest in commercial litigation.

    Nwakasi studied law at the University of Ibadan and obtained B.L. from the Nigeria Law School in 2003. He obtained an LL.M from University of Lagos (2008).

    He is a multi-skilled legal practitioner and has worked in Alternative Dispute Resolution, Training, Debt Recovery, Insolvency, Business Recovery, Legal Development Projects, and Commercial Advisory since joining the firm as a Trainee Associate.

    Sobowale attended the Olabisi Onabanjo University and the Nigerian Law School where he obtained his L.L.B and B. L. He was called to the Nigerian Bar in 2005.

    He handles the firm’s  Litigation, insolvency and Maritime practice.

     

    and has been involved in major Litigation cases and international arbitration.

    “Debola is hardworking, a team player and is noted for prompt delivery on assigned tasks. He demonstrates a high degree of responsibility and commitment towards achieving the firm’s overall objectives.

    “He is an Associate member of the Business Risk and Insolvency practitioners Association of Nigeria, member, Negotiation and Conflict Management Group, and the NBA Section on  Business Law,” a statement by the firm said.

  • Stakeholders seek new intellectual property laws

    Stakeholders have called for new laws on intellectual property (IP) because the extant ones, they said, have become archaic.

    They want IP laws that support innovation by rewarding creators and encouraging them to develop new ideas.

    They made the call at a briefing to mark the World Intellectual Property Day, which is observed every April 26.

    The conference was addressed by the Intellectual Property Committee (IPC) of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (NBA-SBL), the International Association for the Protection of Intellectual Property (AIPPI), Intellectual Property Law Association of Nigeria (IPLAN) and the Anti-Counterfeiting Collaboration (ACC).

    IPC chair, Mr Afam Nwokedi, believes new laws were needed to address latest and changing developments in IP.

    According to him, innovation cannot thrive where creativity and inventions are not well secured.

    Technology transfer, he said, will also be impossible without a strong IP regime.

    He said: “Our laws are obsolete and we’re playing catch-up in a lot of areas. A lot of treaties have not been domesticated. We don’t have an IP policy and we need one.

    “A lot of issues, dimensions, narratives and expressions have been added to intellectual property. It’s dynamic. It grows. As new technologies come out, laws are being made to regulate the narratives.

    “We haven’t done anything other than what we got from the 1938 British legislation. It’s not about amendment, we need new laws. We’ve gone beyond the state of amendment.

    “Our laws need to be put aside and draft new ones. We’ve gone beyond amendment at this stage.”

    Nwokedi said the private sector cannot battle piracy, adding that stakeholders must push for legislation that effectively addresses the problems.

    To him, there is need for more capacity, such as in patent claims writing, even as there is need for the National Assembly to pass bills to domesticate IP treaties.

    AIPPI Vice President Lara Kayode said IP laws “are more than archaic”, adding that a strong legal framework needs to be put in place to improve the lot of local inventors and creators.

    Kayode said practitioners have had to rely more on regulatory bodies to enforce IP rights because the existing laws “have no teeth”.

    “Knowledge is what drives the world, and better enforcement of IP rights can generate huge income for the government. We need to put an IP policy in place. We don’t have one,” she said.

    IPLAN Secretary, Otu Ukoyen, said although the Copyrights Act has been amended severally, the Trademarks Act “has never been amended since it was passed” despite its critical nature.

    “It’s very important to amend that law to provide for penalties and protective structures and  to ensure that administrative structures are better enhanced so that intellectual property owners are protected,” he said.

    Ukoyen called for the passage of the pending the Industrial Property Commission Bill, which he said has passed through first and second reading.

    “We hope to be there during the public hearing to make contributions,” he said.

    The World Intellectual Property Day was established by the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) in 2000 when its convention took effect.

    It is aimed at raising awareness about the importance of IP rights, such as trademarks, patents, industrial designs and copyright in the advancement of innovation and creativity.

    This year’s theme is: Innovation – Improving lives.

  • Court to rule on Ihunbo kinship tussle May 11

    An Ogun State High Court in Ipokia will on May 11 rule on a notice of preliminary objection filed by the Ministry of Justice on a suit over who should be the Onihunbo (king) of Ihunbo in Ipokia Local Government Area.

    The Agbotejoye Ruling House is challenging the installation of Oba Sunday Joseph of the Inakankan Ruling House as the new Onihunbo by Governor Ibikunle Amosun.

    Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Ipokia Local Government, three kingmakers and members of Inakankan ruling house are the other defendants/respondents.

    The Agbotejoye Ruling family claimed that after the death of Oba Jacob Fase Solagbade of Osupa ruling house in March 2014 after a 24-year reign, it was their turn to produce the next Onihunbo.

    According to them, the installation of Oba Joseph last March 18 was illegal as it was not yet the turn of his ruling house to ascend the throne.

    The government, in the preliminary objection, is challenging the competence of the suit.

    The case was to come up for hearing on April 27, but due to an administrative error, it was fixed for May 1.

    Justice S. M. Owodunni adjourned until May 11 for ruling.

  • Illegal arms and magic of whistle-blowing

    Illegal arms and magic of whistle-blowing

    Through whistle-blowing, the Federal Government has recovered billions of naira hidden in slums, ‘safe houses’ and shops. It is considering using the policy to track illegal weapons. Will it achieve the same result? ADEBISI ONANUGA asked lawyers

    NIGERIA, according to those who should know, is awash with illicit weapons. But they differ on the quantity.

    According to a report by the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa (UNREC), Nigeria accounts for about 350 million of the 500 million illegal small arms circulating in West Africa.

    UNREC director Olatokunbo Ige, made this known last year at the National Consultation on Physical Security and Stockpile Management (PSSM) in Abuja, organised by the Agency and Presidential Committee on Small Arms and Light Weapons (PRESCOM).

    Ms. Ige said the country was awash with illicit weapons which found their way into unauthorised hands that are threatening the country’s existence.

    She warned that if not checked, it would jeopardise the gains of the last 50 years and impede the nation’s capacity to achieve its targets.

    But last February 19, the Presidential Committee on Small Arms and Light Weapons, (PRESCOM), gave a lower figure.

    Its chairman, Ambassador Emmanuel Imohe, said there were over 1.3 million illicit weapons in the country.

    He spoke at the launch of the integration of Nigeria into the ECOWAS-EU small arms project, held at the ECOWAS Commission, Abuja.

     

    Deluge of illegal arms, ammunition

    Whatever the true figure, the claims of illegal weapons proliferation in Nigeria are difficult to controvert. For several years now, hardly a month passes without the security forces seizing large caches of arms.

    In 2010, the Department of State Services (DSS) intercepted 13 containers of weapons from Iran. Embedded in the consignment were rocket launchers, grenades and other explosives labelled as “building materials.”

    In 2013, Joint Task Force officers uncovered a trove of weapons linked to a Lebanese Hezbollah terror cell in Kano State. The bunker contained 17 AK-47 rifles, 44 magazines, four land mines, 12 RPG bombs, 11 66mm anti-tank weapons, one SMG, one pistol and magazine, 76 hand grenades, rocket propelled guns, 122 calibre artillery and 433 rounds of 7.26mm special.

    In December 2016, the Customs also intercepted a cache of arms, ammunition and military gadgets, smuggled into the country from the United States at the Tin Can Islands Port.

    The weapons include one Omin American Tactical Rifle, one Mossberg American Pump Action; Permier Hollow Point (air gun pallets) 7,500 pieces, nine pieces of military bullet proof vest, one piece of military helmet with rainproof, pistol punch, rifle punch and 26 packs of already made military food.

    Last January 30, the Nigeria Customs Service seized 661 pump action rifles imported into the country from China illegally.

    The weapons, which were packed in 49 boxes and concealed with steel doors and other merchandise goods in a 40ft container, had already been cleared at the Apapa Port before being intercepted at Mile 2 area of Lagos.

    These are just a few examples of illicit weaponry seized from unauthorised persons.

    It is also difficult to dispute that much of the illegal weapons have found their way into circulation.

    Hardly a week goes by without the involvement of gangs of heavily armed men posing as militants, herdsmen, or just plain armed robbers in killings and abductions of civilians and security forces across the country.

    According to information on the website of the Presidential Committee on Small and Light Weapons, illicit weapons have had a serious effect on the life and livelihood of Nigerians.

    It said by 2010, 24,794 lives and N13.2 billion were lost to kidnapping and hostage taking as well as illegal oil bunkering by attackers using these weapons.

     

    Govt’s response

     

    The Federal Government is obviously worried. So are many state governments affected by serious armed violence.

    On June 25, 2009, the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua initiated an amnesty programme through which many Niger Delta militants laid down their arms.

    However, soon after the President Muhammadu Buhari was sworn into office, armed violence in the region continued.

    In 2015, the president initiated a disarmament, demobilisation, and re-integration (DDR) programme for the Niger Delta.

    The approach appeared to record immediate success in that it forced a ceasefire, engaged militants in planned programmes to rehabilitate and reintegrate them into civilian society, and opened up the oil wells (many of which had been shut due to the crisis) with the effect of increasing government revenue.

    Also Benue State governor Samuel Ortom, whose state has been under the siege of violent clashes between Fulani herdsmen and the local farmers, introduced an illegal arms recovery initiative.

    He gave a deadline of three months for those in possession of illegal firearms to return them or face the wrath of government authorities.

    Last July 9, 700 illegal arms collected through the programme were destroyed. The exercise was carried out in partnership with the PRESCOM in commemoration of the United Nations’ Arms Destruction Day.

    Nevertheless, violence involving the use of illegal arms and ammunition still continues between herdsmen and farmers.

    On February 28, the Senate expressed concern over the proliferation of small arms and light weapons and called for urgent measures to stem the trend.

    In a motion moved by Senator Hope Uzodinma (Imo West), the Senate faulted the porous nature of Nigerian border, saying this signalled “grave security implications for the country.”

    “If this ugly trend of illegal importation of small arms and light weapons into the country is not checked, there won’t be an end to the menace of armed robbery, cultism, cattle rustling, kidnapping and even the deadly Boko Haram disturbing the peace of the country”, he added.

     

    Whistle-blowing for arms recovery?

     

    Encouraged by its success in the war against corruption, President Buhari is considering extending the whistle-blower policy to illegal firearms acquisition by powerful individuals and groups in the country.

    The Presidency on Sunday disclosed that the Federal Government was putting finishing touches to apply the whiste-blower policy to prevent illegal ownership of weapons in the country.

    The government in the past months has applied the policy in the Ministry of Finance, which has lead to discoveries of hidden looted funds across the country.

    According to a statement by the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) will soon release the Whistleblower Policy on Illegal Weapons.

    He said “In a bold move to prevent and eradicate illegal ownership of small arms and light weapons, the Presidency has started drawing up the rules of a whistleblower mechanism to throw a spotlight on the regime of gun ownership and control in the country.

    “In the last few days, we had discussed the efforts the administration is making to strengthen the whistle-blower mechanism in the Ministry of Finance which, to date has proved to be very effective in bringing the attention of the government to stolen assets and unexplained wealth.

    “In line with Presidential directives, the National Security Adviser, Maj-Gen. Babagana Munguno (rtd) has begun work on a template for the discovery and recovery of illegal weapons through a reward system following the success of the whistleblower policy under the Ministry of Finance.

    “The ONSA Initiative may be an independent line of inquiry or in active collaboration with what the government is doing in Finance. This will be a sort of searchlight on weapons ownership in the country. Whatever form or shape it takes, the administration wants to take a tough line to curtail the large number of illegal weapons in circulation used in intra and inter-communal conflicts. The aim is to disarm communities especially those with proclivity to violence.”

    He said that the ONSA, which already has a committee on the recovery of small arms and light weapons in the country, has decided to adopt the whistle-blower approach so as to eradicate mass shooting incidents and remove the harassment of law abiding citizens by holders of illegal weapons

    Observers, however, believe that the decision to extend it to other crimes may not be unconnected with the way Nigerians have embraced the whistle-blowing policy.

     

    Whistle-blowing policy, components

     

    Minister of Finance, Mrs. Kemi Adeosun, said the primary goal of the policy is to support the fight against financial crimes and corruption, by increasing exposure of financial crimes and rewarding whistle-blowers and that in order to promote such exposure, whistle-blowers would be encouraged and offered protection from harassment or intimidation by their bosses or employers.

     

    Policy selling points

     

    She listed the selling points of the policy to include: the possibility of increased accountability and transparency in the management of public funds and the possibility that more funds would be recovered that could be deployed in financing Nigeria’s infrastructural deficit.

    The minister also listed the three major components of the policy, to include: Channels for reporting information and the type of information to be reported.

    Anyone, said the minister, who has “authentic information about violation, misconduct, or improper activity which can impact negatively on the Nigerian people and government” should report it through one or the other of three channels: SMS:   09098067946; Email: whistle@ finance.gov.ng  and the Web:   http://whistle.finance.gov.ng

    The violations include, but are not limited to mismanagement or misappropriation of public funds and assets; financial malpractice or fraud; collecting/soliciting bribes; diversion of revenue; fraudulent and unapproved payments; and procurement fraud (notably, kickbacks and over-invoicing).

     

    The whistle-blowing policy

     

    The whistle-blowing policy is seen by observers as one of the several mechanisms of the Federal Government to fight corruption and mismanagement of public funds. The Federal Ministry of Finance has also launched an online whistle blowing portal to provide a platform for people who wanted to report and provide tip-off on cases of suspected abuse of public office. To ensure the success of the  policy, a bill, ‘Whistleblowers’ Protection Act, 2016’, sponsored by an anti-corruption crusader, Dr. George Uboh, is already receiving the  attention of the National Assembly and has passed through second reading.

     

    The whistle-blowing bill

     

    Although media reports have been scanty, it is said that the draft bill for Whistle-blowing in Nigeria is in seven parts. Part one is an interpretative section of the law; part two deals with protective disclosures which details disclosure of impropriety, persons qualified to make disclosures, persons to whom and institutions to which disclosures of impropriety must be made and compulsory receipt of disclosures; part three is on procedure for disclosure, and reduction of disclosures into writing; part four of the bill deals with action to be taken by persons who receive disclosures of impropriety while part five deals with protection of whistleblowers and other details such as state protection, protection from victimization, court action and others.

    Part six lists offences under the Act such as: disclosing the identity of a whistleblower, disclosing details of disclosure, victimisation of a whistleblower, and making false disclosures; part seven borders on the miscellaneous aspects of the Act such as failure to take action on disclosure, recoveries from whistleblowers and funding of the office of whistleblowers’ protection and annual returns to the National Assembly’s House and Senate Committees on Whistleblowers’ protection.

     

    Reactions to whistle-blowing

     

    Observers of political developments in the country are, however, wondering why there is no policy document for the implementation for this new policy of the government except for a document titled, “Federal Ministry of Finance (FMF)Whistle Blowing Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) which defines who a whistle blower is and answers other questions related to the operation of the policy. The most important provisions of the FMF FAQs are financial reward and protection for whistle blowers. They are calling for caution by would be whistle-blowers until the bill becomes a law and details becomes public.

     

    Lawyers’ position

     

    Will a Whistle-blower Bill be effective in fighting illegal acquisition of firearms and how can the policy be made more effective?

    Constitutional lawyers versed in the rule of law, including Mr. Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN), Mr Wahab Shittu, Second Vice President of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Monday Ubani, Former Chairman, Ikorodu NBA, Dotun Adetunji, Welfare Secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Adesina Adegbite,  Ikechukwu Ikeji, Publicity Secretary, NBA Ikorodu, AdemolaAdenaike and Lagos lawyer, Akintunde Iwilade suggested that the policy should cover all aspects of our national life to reduce corruption, crime and other forms of impunity.

    Owonikoko, while not opposing its extension to cover fire arms, pointed out whistle-blowing already has legislative backing under the ICPC Act in the context of anti-corruption. He also noted that it is part of the remit of the economic and financial crime fighting agency to contain terrorism.

    “That is heinous a crime as corruption if not more. They are indeed interconnected. One would however expect government to design a proper policy framework to prevent abuse of the facility with sufficiently deterrent sanction. In our country, it doesn’t take long before people bastardise otherwise laudable policies. We should watch out for unscrupulous elements that may seize the window for blackmail and extortionate racketeering. On the flip side, government has to support the initiative with effective information protection framework. That will be an added incentive for citizens to confidently participate . Only living informants can benefit from the promised financial reward of whistleblowing”, he advised.

    Chief Shittu remarked that beyond the policy however, there should be a legal framework detailing parameters and guidelines for its operation. This should cover scope, powers, limitations, protections, endorsement and remedies.

    Shittu described the whistleblowing policy as an excellent idea that should cover all aspects of our national life to reduce corruption, crime and other forms of impunity.

    Second Vice President of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Mr Monday Ubani remarked that for any government  policy to be effective, the peoples’  participation must be employed. Ubani noted that the whistle blowing policy has recorded a measured success in the anti corruption fight.

    Ubani, who was a former Chairman of Ikeja branch of the NBA said:” I have the belief that extending it to the issue of fighting illegal acquisition of firearms will also yield positive result. The point is that the whistleblowing policy should be enacted in a substantive law by the National Assembly. That law will extend the policy to all other sectors beside financial crime.

    According to him, a cursory look at the recoveries of illicit money after the introduction of the policy showcased the fact that it is very effective and should be extended to other sectors and we should be faithful in honoring those who give out the vital information that leads to success unless they opt out of being paid.

    He praised the present government for the introduction of what he described as a wonderful policy and that would go a long in reducing the crime  of corruption and other crimes(if included) in Nigeria provided it is enacted as a substantive law and there is faithfulness in the full implementation of the law.

    Adetunji agreed with the proposal to extend the whistle blower policy to cover issues of illegal weapons/firearms acquisition by powerful individuals and groups in the country.

    According to him, weapons in the hands of most citizens in the country are causing and had caused a lot of mayhem and that same were used to fuel intra and inter-communal violence, armed robbery, kidnapping and all sorts of vices.

    He pointed out that there are laws guiding acquisition of firearms but it seems the law is no more applicable in the country as same has been relegated to the background.

    He believed that Nigerians would be encouraged to expose the presence of illegal weapons in the homes of powerful politicians, other public figures, miscreants in the society etc who are using those deadly arms for sinister political agenda or other illegal purposes.

    He argued that the probability of whistle blowing working in fighting illegal acquisition of firearms is very high. Just like there is a high level of cooperation from Nigerians on exposing corruption, Nigerians will likely do better in whistle blowing illegal acquisition of firearms especially when the citizens have come to realize that they are the victims of such act.

    ‘’Passage of the whistle blower bill to me will be one the best things that would happen to Nigeria if and when same is passed. Absolute confidentiality of the blowers identity would make it effective and more effective when security of life, property etc of the blower is guaranteed.

    Adegbite described the new policy of the government as a good thing by the Federal Government pointing out that its efficacy in exposing corrupt practices is glaring for all to see.’’ I am more delighted that there’s now a Whistle-Blower Bill. I do not have facts about  the proposals in the bill but I hope the policy will cut across all crime heads not just corruption or firearms. It should be extended to Kidnapping, Terrorism, Militancy, Armed Robbery, Cyber Crimes and many more.

    “I have no doubt in my mind that the Whistle Blowing policy will enhance the fight against corruption and crimes in general, if it is extended to other sectors. The policy can only be effective and strengthened if supported by legislative enactment. With an enabling law which clearly states the security arrangements for the whistle blower, the effect of the policy will be beyond our imaginations”.

    Lead Advocate, Constitutional Rights (and Peoples Development) Advocacy Initiative (CRAI), Mr Ikechukwu Ikeji pointed out that Whistle blowing as a policy is not actually restricted to financial crimes and that it will be effective in fighting illegal acquisition of firearms.

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

    He said that as a matter of good governance, the policy should be extended to all areas of the societal existence. It 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..

  • Lagos seeks Fed Govt’s exclusion from stamp duty collection

    Lagos seeks Fed Govt’s exclusion from stamp duty collection

    The Lagos State government has asked the  Supreme Court for the interpretation of the provisions of the Stamp Duties Act, Laws of the Federation (LFN), 2004.

    In a suit filed by its Attorney-General, Mr. Adeniji Kazeem, the state wants the apex court to exclude the Federal Government from the collection and keeping of revenue realised from stamp duties.

    The Attorney-General of the Federation is joined as co-defendant in the suit alongside the Federal Government.

    In the originating summons, the state is asking the apex court to determine, among  other things, whether the Federal Government has any power to collect and keep money paid as stamp duties on behalf of federating units pursuant to sections 4(1) of the Stamp Duties Act, Cap S8 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

    The state also wants the apex court to determine whether, in view of the provisions of section 4(2) of the Stamp Duties Act, the defendant through its banker, Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), possesses the power and authority to collect and keep custody of the deducted sum remitted to it by commercial banks operating in the territory of Lagos State from January 15, 2016 till date with respect to the ¦ 50.00 deducted as stamp duty receipt on every deposit of N1,000.00 and above.

    It is also asking the court to determine whether in view of the provisions of section 4(2) of the Stamp Duties Act, Lagos State government is entitled to collect stamp duties on receipt with respect to deductions by banks of the sum of N50.00 on every transaction of N1,000.00 and above as deposit between persons or individual transaction within the territory of Lagos.

    On the determination of the issues raised in the suit, the plaintiff is praying the court to declare that the Lagos State government is entitled to duties in respect of deductions of N50.00 on every deposit of N1,000.00 and above by commercial banks between persons or individual transaction within the territory of the state.

    The state prayed the apex court for a declaration that the federal and state government are empowered through the president and governor, respectively, under Sections 115 and 116 of the Stamp Duties Act to issue regulations to bring into effect the provisions of the Act especially as it relates to the schedules of the Stamp Duties Act.

    Aside from asking the court to declare that the action of the Federal Government in collecting stamp duties within its territory without remittance as illegal, the state also wants the court to make an order compelling the Federal Government to remit all such monies it has already collected.

    The grounds on which the state is seeking the reliefs are that the provisions of sections 4(1) and (2) of the Stamp Duties Act empower the federal and state governments to impose, charge and collect stamp duties in different circumstances.

    It stated that while the Federal Government is the only competent authority to impose, charge and collect stamp duties between a company and an individual, group or body of individual, Lagos State government by virtue of section 163(b) of the constitution is entitled to the sum equal to the proportion of the net proceeds of the sum collected as duties on such transaction within the territory of the state.

    The state averred that by the provision of section 4(2) of the Stamp Duties Act, it has the exclusive preserve to collect duties on instrument executed between persons or individual transaction within the territory of Lagos State, including the deductions of N50.00 on every deposit of  N1,000.00 and above which serves as a receipt.

    It stated that by literal interpretation of the combined provisions of sections of the Stamp Duties (Recovery and Collection) Regulation, 2016, the state government is entitled to the deductions of N50.00 on every deposit of N1,000.00 and above as a form of receipt by the commercial banks which part of the sum is in the custody of CBN and commercial and banks.

    It submitted that the Lagos State Regulations 2016 made pursuant to the Stamp Duties Act, capture electronic transactions operational in the banks, which hitherto was not part of the schedule.

  • ‘States’ attorneys-general, police should prosecute crimes not contemplated by EFCC Act’

    ‘States’ attorneys-general, police should prosecute crimes not contemplated by EFCC Act’

    Mr Inuwa Abdulkadir was Sokoto State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice. He was national legal adviser of the new PDP but he is now National Vice-Chairman North West of the ruling All Progressives Congress ( APC). In this interview, he speaks on calls for special courts to handle corruption and constitutional cases, the crisis facing the ruling party, his face- off with Kaduna State governor, Nasir el Rufai among other issues with Legal Editor, JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU.

    WHAT is your view on the call for special courts to try corruption cases?

    Corruption to me is just like any other crime. If you are considering something in the public sphere, what people understand as corruption is when a public officer is involved in stealing government money or property, that is the understanding of corruption. The limitation is all about material things but it is more than that, even issues of Code of Conduct are criminal conducts like a situation where somebody uses his office and abuses his office, this is corruption. And he may not take away government money or property but in his conduct, he could exercise some powers through nepotism which in itself is higher than corruption in some cases. So there are so many spheres and facets of corruption if we look at the word. Whether you are charging  a public officer for corruption, negligence of duty or nepotism or looting the treasury or misapplication of government funds, all these are spheres of corruption and they are criminal, you don’t really need a special court  for that purpose.

    Who should prosecute corruption cases?

    Even police men that are not lawyers and who know of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission ( ICPC), for instance, charge people either under the Criminal Code or the Penal Code. They are just busy doing a very negligible aspect of the EFCC mandate

    What is EFCC’s mandate?

    My understanding of the mandate of the EFCC is for them to concentrate on financial crimes as it affects  money laundering, which is a specialised issue. They shouldn’t  bother much on public officers who have stolen public funds in a clear manner. This is what the states can handle, the states’ Attorneys-General are competent and  constitutionally  empowered to do so. Even the police can handle such minute issues like this, that is why the EFCC has become an institution that deals with high profile public officers from ministers to governors etc and politically exposed persons. But what of the other tiers of government, for instance the Local Government functionaries, whether you are  clerks or office attendants you can still commit such financial offences. The EFCC cannot cover the 774 Local Government Areas in the country. So, there should be deliberate efforts by all the Attorneys-General of the states and other departments of government to take charge of these. The Office of the Attorney-General  in collaboration with other departments of government should act in situations where there is any impropriety for him to initiate actions in these kinds of matters.  The police are there to assist, the EFCC ought to concentrate on financial crimes.

    What constitutes financial crimes?

    These financial crimes are more committed in the banks, but today  all what you hear is that governor XYZ  has to account for N10 billion after he left office, because when he was in office he had immunity and in all that you are talking about contracts, you are talking about just some things that are not significantly financial crimes as envisaged by the EFCC Act.

    What was envisaged by the EFCC Act?

    What was  envisaged in the Act is in the banks,  the EFCC should concern themselves with how banks are run in terms of their policies, whether they are in tandem with the monetary policies of the Federal Government and various rules issued by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) or other financial regulatory agencies like Nigerian Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) and others. They should find out if there is  any insider dealings in the loans syndicated by the banks and so on. It is common knowledge now in this country that most of these operatives of banks syndicate loans to themselves and that negatively affects the economy. That is a financial crime and it impacts the economy badly. If these are corrected, you’ll  have a healthy economy that is beneficial to everybody. I don’t know why if a governor finishes his tenure and a new administration comes in, governments are run through records, if an incoming administration notices something that is abnormal, I don’t know why the state Attorney-General cannot initiate anything to prosecute that former governor. Why should the Federal Government concern itself about that, having Abia State for instance? It should be the responsibility of the Abia State government to prosecute the ex governor because it is their money that was stolen, they have the records, they have the personnel, and all that. Why did the constitution create the office of the state Attorney-General, is it just for somebody to concern himself with the cases of homicide,  armed robbery only? No,  it is beyond that, he should look at all crimes committed in the state during his tenure of office. That is why the constitution lists crimes on Concurrent List  and these crimes cannot go unattended.

    What about constitutional courts?

    Why should we have Constitutional Courts, I think what we should do is not a matter of creating courts. There are better ways of doing this. That is what the Constitution did by giving the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to hear cases between Federal Government and states and state governments against the Federal Government. This is an attempt to resolve all disputes between these institutions. Maybe the appellate courts should exercise original jurisdictions in these constitutional matters not just  everybody going to Federal High Court, or everybody going to the special courts for resolving constitutional matters.

    And also the rules of procedure, the rules of courts should be couched in such a manner that improvements are easily made there,  nevertheless, there will always  be need to review them for further improvements to make the processes simpler and faster in terms of justice dispensation. Generally all of us need to have a change of attitude both those of us at the Bar and the Bench, and we have to resolve that we want a quicker dispensation of justice without compromising, without delay, it is not only delays that is injustice, injustice is also possible if you fast track, so there must be some moderation in all these things.

    It was recently reported that your house was demolished in Kaduna

    Ok, about my house that was demolished penultimate week Wednesday  in Kaduna, the story is simple. The whole story started sometime in 2014, precisely when I was elected as the national Vice-Chairman of the APC North West Zone. When I assumed office I met a pending problem with the Kaduna State chapter of the APC in terms of the leadership. They had protracted crises which made Kaduna State to be the last in the country to hold its congress to elect substantive officers

    Why did the state demolish your house?

    Because he (Nasir el Rufai) said that he would do this and that he was looking for how to get me, this house that was demolished is where I lived  for over 10 years, it is located  in an area that originally belonged to the Federal Government. I bought an already built house and did not construct any house there. As time passed by, because I was staying there and there are new developments in that neighborhood,  there  are new imposing structures and a hotel that are  rising there and because  I was staying for almost 10 years, my house was becoming like a boys quarter, so I felt that I should improve on the structure and I got some builders and asked them to advise me on how I could restructure the house. They just made a plan to that effect in sketches and drawings and  I contracted it out for somebody to do the contract for me to do the reconstruction, so we applied with the regulatory authority the Kaduna State Urban Development Authority (KASUDA), they gave the assessment and we paid the necessary fees, we submitted everything to them in April 2016.

    Didn’t the building have previous approvals?

    There was an earlier approval for me to build a fence round the property in the original house which was existing and in any case the whole job was finished by January 2017. I was to wind up work there by the end of January this year, what remained then was landscaping. And precisely on January 11, 2017, a stop work notice was pasted  on the premises,  that we should stop work, that  if we did not stop the house would  be demolished,  that we should go to the approving authority, KASUDA we had to pay penalties. So we stopped work and went to KASUDA and said, look we have done this,  this is our file.  They were  surprised and for the first time some of them  knew that we had a file there , because there were  changes there, there are new people there,  they told us that they were surprised that there was  stop notice on our site. But  to me,  at the back of my mind, I knew the reasons, so about a week later, they put another notice that we were given 21 days to demolish the house at my own expense.

    What was their reason for this?

    The reason they gave was that  because there was no clearance from the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing. I said well if that is the case let us go there, I went to where the Federal Ministry of Works and Housing has a zonal office in Kaduna and they brought out our file and showed us where they approved the structure. They even showed us the structure, they went and conducted an inspection and the engineers approved the structure to make sure that everything was  normal. They had no problem with the building, everything was in order and now they were going to award the contract, they charged us for coming late  and we paid everything and they wrote to KASUDA that everything was  ok, we were  allowed that to regularise everything. So KASUDA kept mute about it. And  I briefed my lawyer that something was fishing there and my lawyer wrote two letters which KASUD acknowledged the receipt, the engineers there were very pretentious and I concluded that they were up to something and on March 8, we filed at suit at the Kaduna State High Court together with an application to restrain them from tampering with the res. They have not filed anything in defense till this moment because nobody has served anything on  us in response to the writ of summons which we issued. In fact the time for them to respond has elapsed and there was no response from them. About two or three days after they put the stop work notice, they went and punched my fence.  Only on Wednesday penultimate week, Governor Nasir el Rufai sent a bulldozer to demolish the house. I have an inkling that this will happen but not that particular Wednesday because there were some people that met el Rufai on Saturday, they went  because they have their own clique there and he boasted that he was going to deal with me, that was not the first time. He granted interview to a national newspaper and told them that he had a problem with me and he was going to deal with me in the presence of credible witnesses so it is not a hidden thing and he is not denying it. 

    What is your reaction to these?

    I am not moved in any case because all these happened in the course of discharging my duty as a leader. It would have been sad if I got this treatment in the course of mischief making.

    Earlier you mentioned a problem with the Kaduna State chapter of the APC? What was the reason for this?

    If you look at the history of the APC, there was a merger of the All Nigerian Peoples’ Party (ANPP),  the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), and the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) plus a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA). The merger was between these three principal political parties, but a fraction of APGA came in to support the merger and the assemblage of political forces to fight the then ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP). Thereafter, the new PDP of which  I was the national legal adviser came in. So, it was right on time, reason being that at that time, the party only had an interim national executive committee . The state chapters had no structures in place at all, so it was at that time that the party was in the process of reintegration and gave a formula of how parties should harmonise at the state level through an interim committee arrangement so that there would be a temporary structure pending the congresses.

    What was  wrong with Kaduna State chapter?

    Because of the configuration of what was  in Kaduna, some people like Nasir el Rufai belonged to the CPC, there were others who belonged to ANPP, ACN and so forth. So they couldn’t harmonise quickly as in some other places, in fact there were difficulties. Toward the end of that exercise up to the period of the congresses that were earmarked for all the states, Kaduna was almost not harmonised but the party managed to have congresses in some Local Government Areas and  the state. So, substantially when it came for the state level to have an exco for the party, elections were held, because there were two alternate contending groups. Fortunately the group where Nasiru el Rufai was were successful in producing the party chairman in the name of Mr. Bala Bantex who is now the deputy governor of the state. After the elections, they realised that there were some offices that were critical to them like that of the deputy chairman, which they realized that they didn’t even have a candidate for but it is another person that won it. This thing was critical to them because they had an original plan for the chairman they produced to be deputy governor, because the whole idea of getting to hold on to the party, to control  the party was to make sure that they got nomination and after getting nomination, then they would go on to control the party at the same time, so that all other people will be excluded. So, when  I came in, I met this problem. We made efforts to harmonise it, to make them to understand, to come and work together. They should recognize that whatever it was, the party cannot go beyond the list we had  in the primaries. What is important to the party is to produce and present a candidate that will be acceptable to everybody and win elections beyond our party members. That instead of wasting time on this, we should consider the fact that we had a bigger challenge in fighting a sitting government of the PDP in Kaduna State and a sitting President of the country.

  • ‘I was paid N10,000 for one year’s work’

    ‘I was paid N10,000 for one year’s work’

    Daniel Owolagba was called to the Nigerian Bar in 2012. The University of Lagos alumnus shares his law journey with ROBERT EGBE

    What was your law school  experience like ?

    My law school experience was great. It was a whole new experience,                      very much different from that of the university. It had everything but it was a very challenging period: you just had to continue reading and working hard to make good grades and be called to theBar.

    How much was your first pay?

    My first pay in practice was N10,000 and I earned that for a whole year.

    N10,000? How did that make you feel about law practice?

    To be honest, I must say that it left me somewhat disillusioned with the profession, but I knew it wasn’t going to be that way forever, so I buckled up, made sure I learnt as much as I could and garnered vital experience most of which has helped me as I progress in the profession.

    You’re four years old at the bar. What have been your greatest challenges so far?

    I believe my challenges are same as those of every young lawyer out there. Firstly, remuneration for young lawyers is paltry; a lot of principals just exploit most young lawyers. Also it is difficult to get clients and even when you try and get a couple of clients they are always looking for ways to take advantage of you and make ridiculous offers to you all in the name of helping you. Finally, there is this wrong belief among members of the public that young lawyers do not understand the law properly and sometimes this belief is propounded by the senior lawyers.

    Young lawyers often have complaints about their relationship with their principals. What has been your experience?

    I have to be very honest to say that I have been very lucky to have worked with very good principals. In my brief legal career, I can say that I have only had issues with one of my principals and the moment I realized the kind of person he was, I walked away under two months. Away from that, I have had principals and senior colleagues who have made it their duty to groom me and equip me properly. This is very much evident in my day to day life as a lawyer as I always find one or two traits that I know I picked up from people I have worked with.

    You’re not married yet. Would you marry a lawyer?

    I am not married but I do not have a problem with marrying a lawyer. As a matter of fact I would like to marry a lawyer.

    Why?

    I don’t have a particular preference for any profession. It depends particularly on the person and not the work the person does. So, basically I am not against marrying a lawyer, doctor or accountant.

    What was your most memorable day in court?

    I have had so many great and memorable experiences in court in my few years at the Bar but if I am to pick one it has to be my first day in court. Incidentally, it was also my first day as a lawyer. It was the Monday after our Call to Bar and I was going to resume at my Primary Place of Attachment for the National Youth Service Corp (NYSC) exercise. I had already met my principal and the other associate in the chamber, who was heavily pregnant, the week before. I was going to the office to ask for some time off to get my stuff down from Lagos. On getting to work that day I got a call from my principal that she had gone for a matter in Oyo town and that the other associate had just gone into labour that morning. We had two other matters at the State High Court in Ibadan and she needed me to go and appear. I was so frightened and confused. I wasn’t prepared, didn’t know the facts of the cases and didn’t even have a court shirt to wear. I pulled my self together, got a shirt, dressed up in court, called some senior colleagues I knew, read the case files and I appeared in court without any fatality. In fact, I even got the court to strike out the claimant’s case in one of the matters and same was never re-filed. I took that as the first judgment I got and nobody can tell me otherwise. It was a very memorable day and I was very pleased, I still have that court shirt till today to serve as a memorabilia.

    Have you had any court experiences that you wish never happened?

    I have had some embarrassing moments in court but the one that stands out was when cost of N30,000 was awarded against me in the presence of one of my closest friends. The matter was coming up for trial and we wanted to amend our pleadings before we filed our application in June whilst the court was on vacation. But I inadvertently failed to serve the said application on both the court and other counsel until October when the matter came up. The Judge was livid and I got a comprehensive dressing down to go with the cost of N30,000.

    What’s your advice for new wigs to make their legal journey smoother?

    My advice to the new wigs is that they remember that they are lawyers and the court room is their place of work. Don’t shy away from litigation, no matter how little, try to have a proper litigation background because it would open doors for you in the nearest future. I am a living testament to this fact.

    What other business do you do other than law?

    I used to run a clothing line while I was at the university and it was successful. The business still exists but I have someone overseeing its day to day running. I do not have any direct involvement in the business any longer but it still belongs to me.

    Any plan to go into politics?

    I do not have intentions of joining the political scene for now but I am fascinated by the political terrain.

  • Respect rule of law, AFBA tells African leaders

    Respect rule of law, AFBA tells African leaders

    The African Bar Association (AFBA)  has urged the continent’s leaders to respect the rule of law and uphold democratic norms.

    It stated this on  Saturday at the end of its National Executive and Governing Council meeting in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital.

    AFBA president Mr. Hannibal Uwaifo told host Governor Nyesom Wike, who was decorated with the AFBA gown of excellence, that the association chose the state “in recognition of its peaceful nature and unusual transformation.”

    Declaring the session open, Wike called on AFBA to help deepen democracy and uphold the rule of law in the country.

    He promised to continue to provide basic amenities and dividends of democracy in the state and afterwards led the lawyers on an inspection tour of several developmental projects initiated by his administration.

    In a chat with The Nation, Uwaifor said: “We had representatives from different parts of the continent, and the difficulties we had was that the flight schedules could not be coordinated easily. We thank God that the two-day meeting was  successful, We thank J. B. Daudu (SAN) for presiding over the council meeting and I chaired the Executive Council meeting. I feel very  happy that the AFBA has reached the level it has reached at this time.

    Chairman of African Women Lawyers Forum of  AFBA,  Iyom Josepine Ananih said the meeting covered quite “a lot of areas” including human rights problems in different parts of Africa.

    She said: “We took very strong  positions about them because the AFBA is the voice of Africa and we have to be a credible and  an audible voice.

    “We need to speak out and I am happy that we were all together with one mind determined to speak and stand firmly for the less privileged in Africa and to stand against any government that is abusing human rights in Africa.

    Ananih said the theme of the conference concerned the ease of doing business in Africa and the meeting resolved to stand against exploitation of African business people.

    She said: “Africa has  the largest  market, Africa has a huge potential for prosperity but the way business is being done in Africa, people from outside come and exploit Africans and we are saying no, it should stop.

    “We need to also look at ways of doing business in Africa so that we can make it easy for people to come and do business in Africa  and for Africans to also benefit from those interrections.

    “As they are coming to do business to make profit, the people they are doing business with in Africa will also make something from those transactions.

    “They will also make sure that they also have confidence for those people who think that Africa is a dark continent filled by 419ers, who deceive prople.”

    Another participant and former minister for youths and development, Inuwa Abdulkadir said: “I feel delighted that these things are  happening after some  years of slumber of the AFBA which is really a sad experience.

    “I feel happy too that Nigeria is driving the process of resuscitating or  re-awakening the African Bar Association, because Nigeria is answering its name as the leader of Africa in all spheres of human endeavour.

    “The importance of having the AFBA cannot be overemphasised as there are a lot of efforts to integrate Africa in terms of social and economic challenges the continent is facing.”

    He stated that Africa “is the target of every investor in the world today and the African economy is key to other economies in the world. Even the so called developed countries are looking at Africa, because whether anybody likes it or not, because of the population we have in the continent, there is no doubt that  the market is here.

    “So, whatever is happening elsewhere in the world, whether by or among the so called super powers or biggest economies, you can’t do away with Africa as a  market,  as a source of raw materials and a source of labour in some instances.”

    Abdulkadir said the focus of  AFBA now is “to assist African governments and nations on how to do business in Africa, how to make it easy to come and invest in Africa in terms of the legal frameworks and to provide a the framework for safeguarding Africa’s interest as a continent”

    Council member, OkeyAkobundu stated that the meeting had provided Africans with a voice to champion their rights.

    He said: “With the attendance of former NBA president Chief Charles Idehen and his full participation at the meeting, lawyers in Africa and indeed all Africans could be said to now have a voice and champion for their rights in today’s Africa.

    “People within repressive governments can now have AFBA fight for it without fear of individual harassment. The future of enduring and deepened democracy and sustainable development of Africa has just begun.

    “Of course Nigerian lawyers are being offered another platform for cross border interactions and practice.

    “The expansion of learning and practice horizon is provided within this association. And with Nigerians in all parts of Africa the AFBA platform provides opportunity for cross border collaborations with a view to meeting clients’ needs outside Nigeria with minimal pressures.”

  • N150m suit: court urges businessman, International Breweries to reconcile

    Justice Sonia Akinbiyi of an Ogun State High Court in Ijebu-Ode has urged    a   businessman  Adeosun Adebayo and International Breweries Plc to explore an alternative resolution of their dispute.

    Adebayo is seeking N150 million from International Breweries as damages following ill-health he suffered after allegedly consuming contaminated Trophy beer produced by the company.

    Joined alongside International Breweries as second defendant is Managing Director Sharelink Proxy Service Ltd, Ijebu-Ode depot.

    At the last hearing on April 6, first defendant’s counsel Mr Omotayo Adetona said reconciliation attempts had stalled and that the firm had just appointed a new director who was the person authorisedto negotiate on its behalf.

    The judge advised the parties to consider Alternative to Dispute Resolution (ADR) and adjourned till May 17.

    The claimant, through his lawyer Wale Ajayi, said on July 20, 2015 he bought and consumed trophy beer produced by the first defendant but it caused him stomach pain, vomiting, stooling, shock, hypertension, amongst others, which landed himin hospital.

    He is seeking the sum of N100million, “being damages for shock, pain, agony discomfort and sundry inconveniences” as a result of “the defendants’ negligence on account of consumption of contaminated and harmful Trophy beer.”

    He is also asking for the sum of N1,676,000for medical expenses borne by him”as a result of negligent act of the defendants, bottling and selling contaminated and harmful trophy beer to the claimant.”

    The claimant is further asking for the sum of N50 million, “being damages for loss of life expectancy as a result of damages to the health of the claimant” and the sum of N5 million as professional fee of the claimant’s lawyer.

    In its statement of defence, the first defendant through its lawyer Mr OmotayoAdetona denied that the product that was consumed by the claimant was from its brewing facility.

    It contended that if it was from its facility, it must have been tampered with either by the claimant or any other person with a view to making phony claims against the first defendant.

  • Appeal Court upholds Tax Appeal Tribunal’s jurisdiction to determine tax disputes

    Appeal Court upholds Tax Appeal Tribunal’s jurisdiction to determine tax disputes

    Summary

    On March 10, 2017, the Court of Appeal in Appeal Nos CA/L/1144/2015 and CA/L/1145/2015 – CNOOC Exploration & Production Nigeria Ltd & Anor v. Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation & Anor, overturned the decisions of the Federal High Court and upheld the jurisdiction of the Tax Appeal Tribunal (TAT) established by the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act 2007, to determine tax disputes.

    These decisions are notable for being the first set of Court of Appeal decisions which specifically address the issue of the TAT having jurisdiction to determine tax matters. Indeed this issue was the climax of the appeals.

     

    Background

    The Appellants had prepared Petroleum Profits Tax (PPT) returns for the contract area and forwarded them to NNPC for onward transmission to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) as provided for under a Production Sharing Contract. NNPC however transmitted a different set of PPT returns which it had prepared. FIRS subsequently assessed the Appellants to additional Petroleum Profits Tax (PPT) and additional Tertiary Education Tax (EDT) based on the PPT returns prepared by NNPC.

    Dissatisfied with the additional PPT and EDT assessments of FIRS, the Appellants filed notices of objection.  Upon the issuance of notices of refusal to amend assessments by FIRS, the Appellants instituted separate appeals challenging the additional PPT and EDT assessments at the TAT.

    At the TAT, FIRS raised preliminary objections to the commencement of proceedings at the TAT, alleging that NNPC was a necessary party who ought to be joined as a party for the effectual resolution of the issues in dispute. The TAT agreed with FIRS and made orders joining NNPC as a party in the PPT and EDT appeals. Upon being joined as a party, NNPC raised preliminary objections to the TAT’s orders joining it as a party, and also challenged the jurisdiction of the TAT to hear the appeals on the ground that the subject matter of the dispute was within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court. NNPC also contended that the TAT did not have personal jurisdiction over it as it was not aggrieved by the tax assessments issued by FIRS and so was not a proper party in the appeals and ought not to be joined as a party.

    In its rulings on NNPC’s preliminary objections, the TAT although maintaining that NNPC was a necessary party, nonetheless struck out NNPC as a party on the basis that the rules of fair hearing require that a party must be given an opportunity to be heard. But such a party cannot be compelled to make any representation where it does not desire to do so.

    NNPC then appealed against the rulings of the TAT striking it out as a party, on the ground that the TAT could not determine the matters before it in its absence since the TAT had stated that NNPC was a necessary party; and that in any event, the TAT did not have jurisdiction to determine tax matters, as such matters were within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

    The Federal High Court in its judgments of  May 22, 2015, delivered by Hon. Justice M.B. Idris, held that the TAT lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the Appellants’ appeals because the purport of Section 251(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), was to vest the Federal High Court with exclusive jurisdiction in matters pertaining to the revenue of the federal government including taxation. Consequently, the TAT could not adjudicate on matters pertaining to taxation. The Federal High Court also held that the NNPC had the requisite locus standi to initiate the appeal before it, having already been held to be a necessary party by the TAT.

    Dissatisfied with the judgments of the Federal High Court in both the PPT and EDT appeals, the Appellants further appealed to the Court of Appeal vide notices of appeal dated August 21, 2015.

    At the Court of Appeal, the Appellants argued that the NNPC was not a necessary party to the underlying actions at the TAT because it was not a party aggrieved by the tax assessments of the TAT since the decision of the TAT on the amount of tax liability payable by the Appellants did not in any way affect NNPC. The Appellants’ position was that the only parties aggrieved by the tax assessments issued by FIRS were the Appellants, who were the tax payers; and not NNPC. The Appellants further contended that NNPC did not have the locusstandi to institute the appeals at the Federal High Court having elected to be struck out as a party at the TAT. To permit NNPC to turn around to argue that it was a necessary party before the TAT would be tantamount to permitting it to approbate and reprobate. The Appellants also argued that even if NNPC was a necessary party (although vehemently denying this), non-joinder or mis-joinder of a party would not defeat an action. The Appellants further argued that the TAT’s jurisdiction to determine tax disputes did not encroach upon the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court as conferred on it by section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). The Appellants explained that institution of tax appeals at the TAT before approaching the Federal High Court was merely an administrative condition precedent to approaching the Federal High Court and that in any event, the decisions of the TAT could be reviewed and quashed by the Federal High Court upon an application for judicial review or appeal to that Court.

    On its part, NNPC argued that having affirmed that it was a necessary party, the TAT could not determine the appeals in its absence. NNPC also argued that it was the Federal High Court that was vested with exclusive jurisdiction over tax matters. Therefore, no other judicial body could exercise original jurisdiction in respect of tax matters.  NNPC also argued that the clear purport of paragraph 20(3) of the Fifth Schedule to the FIRS Act was that the TAT was to be treated as a civil court for the purposes of exercising jurisdiction in respect of disputes arising out of taxation.

    NNPC concluded by arguing that the provisions of the FIRS Act, no matter how laudable and practicable, could not override the provisions of the Constitution  which vested exclusive juridiction on the Federal High Court in respect of the revenue of the Federal Government, taxation of companies and issues involving Federal Government agencies.

    In its decisions in the PPT and EDT appeals, the Court of Appeal restated the principle that a necessary party is one whose presence is necessary for the effectual and complete determination of the issues in a suit. Following this principle, the Court of Appeal held that NNPC was not a necessary party to the tax dispute at the TAT as it was not aggrieved by the tax assessments and there was nothing on record to show that the reliefs sought by the Appellants at the TAT had any bearing or impact on the rights or obligations of NNPC. Consequently, the Court of Appeal was of the viewthat the dispute could be effectually and completely determined in NNPC’s absence.

    As regards whether or not NNPC had the locus standi to institute the appeal at the Federal High Court, the Court of Appeal held that in determining whether a person had locus standi, such a person must be able to show that the action of the other party had adversely affected his right or interest in the subject matter of the claim. The Court of Appeal then stated that from NNPC’s own admissions and assertions that it was not aggrieved by the decisions of the TAT, it was clear that NNPC did not have the locusstandi to institute the appeals at the Federal High Court.

    On the issue of whether the TAT’s jurisdiction to hear tax appeals is unconstitutional and an infringement of the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court in tax matters, the Court of Appeal made reference to its dicta in two of its previous decisions. In Shell Nigerian Exploration and Production & Ors. v. FIRS & Anor. (Unreported judgment, Appeal No. CA/A/208/2012 delivered on 31st August 2016) at page 38, the Court of Appeal had stated that:

    “The procedure for resolving claims and objections such as in the instant matter, are spelt out. When an assessment is made and the party is not satisfied, it can serve a Notice of Objection with the FIRS. It can also file a Notice of refusal to amend the assessment as desired where it disagrees with FIRS. The party may also then appeal against the assessment to the Tax Appeal Tribunal. If the party is still dissatisfied with the decision of the Tax Appeal Tribunal, then it can approach the Federal High Court, The Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.”

    The Court of Appeal also quoted with approval, its dictum in Esso Exploration and Production Nig. Ltd & Anor. v. NNPC (Unreported judgment, Appeal No. person under the provisions of the Act or of any subsidiary legislation made there under. The procedure includes:  i. Notice of objection to review and revise assessment made of the objector/applicant (section 38(2); ii. Notice of refusal to amend the assessment as desired by applicant where the applicant where the applicant fails to agree with the Federal Board of Inland Revenue (Section 38(6);  iii. Appeal against the assessment to the appropriate Appeal Commissioners (now the Tax Appeal Tribunal established pursuant to section 50(1) of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2007, (Section 41);  iv. Appeal to the Federal High Court where the party is aggrieved by the decision of the Appeal Commissioners or the Tax Appeal Tribunal (Section 42(i) and (ii). v.  An appeal to the Court of Appeal. (Section 42(14).