The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Court resolves 10-year-old land dispute

    Justice Kazeem Alogba of the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja has restrained one Bamidele Jemiyo, the claimant in a land suit, from trespassing on the property along the Lagos-Epe Expressway, close to Chevron Headquarters, Ibeju Lekki.

    Justice Alogba declared the defendants, Mr. Atiku Abogun and Chief Semiu Abogun, as the persons entitled to the right of occupancy of the  disputed two plots of land measuring approximately 1385.629 square metres.

    He held that the defendants, through their counsel, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, proved their case beyond reasonable doubt.

    The judge said the claimant through her counsel, Mr. I. Takuro, failed to prove that she was the rightful owner of the land.

    Jemiyo instituted the case in July 2007 seeking a declaration that she was entitled to the right of occupancy to the two plots.

    Among other reliefs, she sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, either by themselves, their servants or agents from trespassing or further trespassing on the disputed land.

    During trial, the claimant testified for herself and laid claim to ownership of the land delineated in Survey Plan No ISO/LA/42B.83 of November 18, 1983.

    The land originally belonged to Justice Anthony Aina Michael Ekundayo and Mrs. Margaret Modupe Ekundayo by virtue of a Deed of Assignment of March 21, 1992 and executed in their favour by the accredited representatives of the Ojomu Chieftaincy Family of Ajiran.

    She testified that the said family had from time immemorial been in exclusive possession and control as owners of the said land and had “exercised maximum act of ownership without let or hindrance from anyone in respect of the entire area at Igbo Efon in the Etiosa Local Government Area of Lagos State, which titled had been confirmed by several judgments and the Lagos Offical Gazette No. 24 Vol. 27 date June 23, 1994.”

    The claimant said upon purchase of the two plots, she was issued a Purchase Receipt of May 22, 1995 by Justice and Mrs. Ekundayo.

    According to her, she took possession of the land, erected a fence round it with two big gates and remained in undisturbed possession until sometimes in 2005 when the 1st defendant, Atiku Abogun encroached on the land which she reported to the second defendant, Chief Semiu Abogun, who was the village head of the area then.

    The claimant averred that the second defendant perused her title documents, confirmed same but still requested that she paid the first defendant some money to allow peace to reign. She added that she also paid another N100,000 to the Land Administrator of the Ojomu Family.

    Atiku stated that neither the claimant nor her predecessors in title had ever exercised any right of ownership or been in possession of the land.

    The defendant also explained that he never broke into or destroyed any fence or gate on any land of the claimant.

    Atiku also debunked the sale of any land in Igbo Efon to the claimant or her vendors, as well as any title of the Ojomu Chieftaincy Family over any land in igbo-Efon as the family had no land there.

    But Justice Alogba in his judgment said the claimant failed to prove that the defendants were customary tenants of Igbo-Efon land or that same was owned by the Ojomu Chieftaincy Family.

    The judge said he observed that none of the exhibits tendered by the claimant showed that the land in dispute and being claimed by her was purchased from the Ojomu Cheftaincy Family as she could not show any grant from the Ojomu chieftaincy Family or one to her vendors.

    “Having failed to prove her root of title, the identity of the land she’s claming, the claimant failed to prove any entitlement to the declaration of title she sought in the case.

    “Her claims for perpetual injunction and damages must also crumble being consequential reliefs that can only be granted if her claim for declaration of the title succeeded.

    “All the clams of the claimant are hereby dismissed in their entirety for lack of proof as required by law,” the judge held.

  • Court dismisses airline’s, officials’ submission on alleged $1.63m theft

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has directed Emirates Airlines and four airport officials to open their defence in a $1.63 million theft charged filed against them by the Federal Government.

    Justice Mohammed Idris dismissed the no-case submission filed by the airline and Abayomi Abiola, Isiaka Adedeji, Awonubi Abayomi and George Ikpekhia.

    He also dismissed the no-case submission made by two companies named in the charge – Pathfinder International Ltd and Nigeria Aviation Handling Company Plc.

    They were charged in 2009 with alleged theft of $1.63million belonging to a businessman, Prince Ikem Orji.

    The Federal Government alleged that the defendants conspired among themselves to steal the money while pretending that they would help him deliver it to him at Ghuangzhou, China.

    The defendants were said to have committed the offence on December 19, 2007 at the Murtala Muhammed Airport, Ikeja, Lagos.

    The four airport officials also charged with “failure to report an international transfer of the sum of $1.63million belonging to Prince Chu Ikem Orji, a sum above $10,000 required to be reported to the Central Bank of Nigeria by virtue of Section 2 (1) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act”.

    The alleged offence is contrary to Section 390(9) of the Criminal Code Act, Cap C38 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and punishable under Section 422.

    The four officials were alleged to have violated Section 15(1)(e) of the Money Laundering Act Cap N30, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, punishable under Section 15(2)(b) and (3).

    The defendants pleaded not guilty to the charge, following which the prosecution opened its case, calling three witnesses and tendering some exhibits.

    When the prosecution closed its case last October 18, the defendants filed no-case submissions rather that opening their defence.

    They argued that the prosecution failed to make out a prima facie case against them and urged the court to dismiss the charge.

    Ruling, Justice Idris held that the defendants have some explanations to give.

    “The prosecution called witnesses and tendered a number of exhibits, which I have thoroughly examined. Going through the evidence of these witnesses, it appears that if taken as unchallenged and uncontroverted, some link might be established between the defendants and some of the content of exhibits A1, A2, A3, A4 and A5.

    “For the reasons contained herein, I am of the view that the defendants have some explanations to make. The no-case submission is, therefore, overruled.”

    Justice Idris adjourned until June 21, 22 and 23.

  • Supreme Court to determine Industrial Court’s powers

    The Supreme Court will on June 30 decide whether the decisions of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) are appealable to the Court of Appeal.

    Besides, it will determine whether such appeals are restricted to only issues of fundamental rights as contained in Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    It fixed the date after a full panel of justices presided over by Justice Mary Peter-Odili heard arguments from parties.

    The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division had in 2014 referred to the Supreme Court the appeal in Mainstreet Bank Ltd  (now Skye Bank Plc) vs Victor Anaemen Iwu  seeking a resolution of the substantial question of law on finality of decisions of NIC.

    The Skye Bank appeal was consolidated with another related appeal – Coca-Cola Nigeria Limited VS Mrs. Titilayo Akinsanya in which the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, in 2013 – held that there was no general right of appeal for a litigant against the decision of the NICN except as limited in Section 243(2)-(4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    It is believed that the Supreme Court decision will resolve the controversy and conflicting decisions by the Court of Appeal in various divisions.

    It was learnt that no fewer than 100 appeals are awaiting the Supreme Court decision.

    The conflicting decisions of the Court of Appeal arose mainly in their interpretation of Sections 240 and 243 (1-4) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) by the Third Alteration Act of 2010.

    The Third Alteration had promoted the National Industrial Court (NIC) from the status of an inferior court to a superior court of records having the same powers as a high court.

    Section 240 of the Constitution (as amended) listed the NIC as one of the courts from which an appeal can lie from their decisions to the Court of Appeal.

    Section 243(2) granted a right of appeal to litigants in matters relating to fundamental rights connected to the jurisdiction of NIC as of right, but section 243(3) provides that “An appeal shall only lie from the decision of the National Industrial Court to the Court of Appeal as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly …” while Section 243(4) then provides that “…the decisions of the Court of Appeal on appeals on the civil jurisdiction of the National Industrial Court shall be final”.

    On February 13 and 15, 2013, the Court of Appeal sitting at Ado-Ekiti Division decided four cases in which it held that the NICN is not a final court and that its decisions were appealable to the Court of Appeal.

    However, the Court of Appeal Lagos Division, in a July 4, 2013 judgment in the case of Coco-Cola (Nig) Ltd vs. Akinsanya (2013) 18 NWLR (pt. 1386) 225 held that until the National Assembly passes a law granting  litigants right of appeal with leave, that the right does not exist.

  • Judges’ appointment: Group accuses NJC of violating guidelines

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has been accused of violating its guidelines for appointment of high court judges. Among others, the NJC Judicial Appointment Guidelines 2014 provides that available vacancies be published before any judge is appointed.

    A human rights group, the Access to Justice (A2J), said the guidelines were not complied with in the appointment of three new judges of the Lagos State High Court.

    “Our research showed that the Lagos State Judicial Service Commission failed to publicise the the judicial vacancies on notice boards of both the High Courts and Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) branches, and on its website.

    “There was no call or public notice whatsoever requesting an expression of interest from suitable candidates on the Lagos State Judiciary’s website, on the notice boards of high court divisions, or on the notice boards of the NBA branches,” the group said.

    It added that there was no letter to NBA chairmen calling for candidates’ nomination, nor were the names of those nominated sent to NBA for comments as provided in the Guidelines.

    “Access to Justice now invites the NJC to independently investigate claims suggesting that the Guidelines were flouted in the recruitment of new judges of the Lagos State High Court, and insists on the observance of due diligence in future judicial appointments at both state and Federal levels,” the group said.

    A2J, through its Executive Director Joseph Otteh, urged NJC to be more thorough to ensure that the standards it set were met and that it did not shoot itself in the foot.

    On Judges’ appointment, it said: ‘’We didn’t violate NJC guidelines, says Lagos

    But, the Lagos State Judicial Service Commission denied breaching the guidelines.

    In a statement by its Executive Secretary, Mrs. Ayodele Odugbesan, the commission said it was impossible for it to appoint any judge without the supervision of the NJC.

    “For the avoidance of doubt, the Judicial Service Commission does not appoint but recommends to the NJC suitable persons for nomination to the position of judges of the state high court in line with the Third Schedule Part II(c) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.

    “To the best of our knowledge, the NJC does not only issue guidelines but also supervises compliance to the letter and no judge would have eventually emerged except the said guidelines are strictly followed.

    “Hence, the procedure that led to the appointment of the judges was in strict compliance with the guidelines as laid down by the NJC,” the statement said.

  • Towards strengthening legislative drafting practice

    • Continued last week

    IF we desire a change in the status quo, we must cast some attention on the infrastructures, personnel and rewards for legislative drafting at the different levels of government. If we desire that the quality of enactments churned out by our Legislative authorities must improve, we have to make visible commitmentstowards improving the practice of legislative drafting.The question may be, how do we go about this?

    First, Nigeria has to get down to the basics by establishing a Central Legislative Drafting Office.

    This office shall be administered by a seasoned, highly exposed, resourcefullegislative drafter.

    Specifically, the candidate for the leadership of the office should be well at home with the comparative drafting styles and approaches of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth, the European Union and the United States of America. Such office should coordinate drafting of principal and subordinate legislation at the Federal Level of Government, using approved, uniform templates. This will cure the present malaise in maintaining scattered drafting pools at the ministries, in the different chambers of the National Assembly, which is only a precursor of chaos. Same should go for the states, although, ought to be a miniature of the federal office.

    The second step should be to embark onaccelerated capacity building of the available legislative drafters.Most of the Legal or Legislative drafters in the Ministries and Legislative Houses are evidently poorly trained, miserably equipped and ill motivated. This explains the apparent lack of zeal and non commitment to effective drafting by the Legislative drafters. The picture will be clearer for anyone who had had to observe our publicly employed legislative drafters alongside legislative drafters from even other African countries, such as Ghana, South Africa or Gabon, not to talk of the United Kingdom, USA or Canada, at international conferences.Legislative drafters are usually well composed, highflying legal professionals, remunerated almost at the bench mark of high Court Judges. This avails the aura, confidence and carriage of proud professionals, ever willing and seeking to perform effectively.

    The next important step towards enhanced legislative drafting practice in Nigeria, is for government to encourage the formation and sustenance of a viable professional union of lawyers in the legislative drafting specialty. Legislative or legal drafting, though still an emerging sublegal discipline in our clime, has long been established as a faculty in the legal profession, with some visible structures, in most advanced jurisdictions. There is the Hong Kong Society of Legislative drafters; Canadian Association of Legislative attorneys; etc.In the United States of America, aside the Central body of legislative counsel, almost every state has a recognised body of legislative attorneys.

    There is the Commonwealth Association of Legislative Counsel (CALC), a regional body of legislative drafters for the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth. Such body of legislative drafting practitioners in Nigeria, will provide a platform for coordinating research, training, and facilitate professional intercourse among practitioners. It will also provide a database of legislative drafters in both public employment and private practice, for identification and easy reach.

    The fourth, and indeed, the most important step towards enhancing legislative drafting practice in Nigeria, is allocation of drafting jobs, assignments and consultancy, ONLY, to identified, ‘Certified’ Legislative Drafters. There is this trend in Nigeria, often referred to as the ‘Nigerian factor’, where patronage, jobs are awarded on the basis of who one knows or high network connections, rather than the merits of professional capabilities, record of performance and dexterity in a given line of trade. Instances of this absurdities abound in different fields of service.This is believed to be the bane of shoddy deliveries in infrastructures and the service areas. In the legal profession, there is hardly any form of specialization by practitioners in our space.An individual practitioner is a litigation attorney, company law expert, arbitration lawyer and legislative drafter. The very senior practitioners, some of whom have made fame in the profession; Senior Advocates of Nigeria, Professors of law, etc., are usually favored in legislative drafting assignments. Most times, they know next to nothing in legislative drafting. They pick the briefs and give to their juniors, who copy precedent books and lift foreign statutes without adaptations to make up drafts. This in my estimation, is a profound tragedy to the Nigerian Legal System. This is frequently the reason forsome bizarre provisions in our statute books.A situation where foreign provisions are transposed without modifications into our statutes, can only explain the mix ups and non practicable provisions that occupy spaces in our body of laws.

    The National Assembly, state Legislative Assemblies, Federal and State Ministries of Justice, Nigerian Institute of Legislative Studies and other relevant government agencies,are advised, as a matter of necessity to seek out and identify trained, experienced and exposed legislative drafters, for national patronage.Admittedly, indigenous experts in this field are few and most time silent in our midst, they are nevertheless available.

    Lawyers who are trained, experienced and internationally exposed in legislative drafting are highly treasured assets anywhere in the world, and are indeed in short supply. It is easily recognized, that it is a higher and harder task to prepare a piece of legislation which provisions are clear, precise, unambiguous and sitting in harmony with any other provisions in any other legislation in the jurisdiction, than the interpretation and application of provisions in statutes to given set of facts, which judges do. No wonder, good legislative drafters are high standing national personalities, and often, recipients of national awards, in civilized jurisdictions. Nigeria should seek outthese ‘treasures’, engage and motivate them to assist in preparing our laws, this is the panacea for improved quality in legislative instruments in Nigeria.

     

    • Onwe, author of Groundwork of Legislative Drafting is works as Head at TAT, Southwest Zone, Ibadan.
    • Concluded

  • Senator accuses EFCC of plotting to re-arrest him

    Senator Ayo Adeseun has petitioned the Zonal Director Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) over an alleged plot to re-arrest him and some other officials of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    His lawyer, Michael Lana, in the April 8 petition, alleged that an agent of the commission, Mr. Usman Zakari threatened to arrest Senator Adeseun’s surety if he fails to produce the senator in court.

    Adeseun, who was a senator between 2011 and 2015, was arrested last May 10 and kept in EFCC custody for 40 days during its investigation of N650million allegedly spent on behalf of the PDP to prosecute the 2015 presidential election in Oyo State.

    The petition was also copied to the Station Registrar of the Federal High Court, Ibadan and the Secretary-General of the Nigerian Bar Association, Abuja.

    The lawyer said there was a pending motion to restrain the anti-graft agency and its officers from arresting or tampering with the liberty of the defendants.

    Lana said there were also pending applications to strike out the charge for want of jurisdiction; for an order dispensing with the physical appearance of the defendant and an order of injunction restraining the complainant from arresting the defendants pending the determination of the applications.

    The lawyer said the threat to re-arrest Adeseun and his surety, Remi Adeseun, amounts “to abuse of office and an oppressive and reckless use of power as the law is trite that once a matter has been submitted to court, it is no longer within the power of either party to do anything in relation to it.”

  • Lawyers seek protection from EFCC

    Defence counsel in the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s (EFCC) fraud charge against a banker, Mr. Olufunmilayo Adenmosu, have sought the protection of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja from alleged harassment by the agency.

    The five-man defence team comprising Messrs Shina Fashugba, David Ogebe, Ndubuisi Ogbonnaya, Abraham Jighu and Emmanuel Abraye accused the commission of attempting to intimidate them from representing the defendant.

    They made the allegation last Thursday, while moving the defendant’s bail application before Justice Josephine Oyefeso.

    In countering the application, prosecution counsel Samuel Daji accused the defendant, who is standing trial for offences on obtaining under false pretence, of, among others, having procured a forged medical report to aid his bail application.

    “The defence counsel are even being investigated. They were invited to our office yesterday,” Daji said.

    He attempted to tender the said medical report from the bar.

    Objecting, lead defence counsel Fashugba questioned the motive behind the agency’s invitation, especially for allegedly keeping them for hours at the EFCC office a day before they were due in court for the bail hearing.

    He said: “What concerns counsel? The affidavit was not deposed to by any counsel on the defence team. We filed documents we were furnished with. The invitation itself was mischievous.

    “It was when I got to the EFCC office that I realised that they had invited all of the defence team of lawyers. We met there. They were asking us ‘what do you know about this medical report? What do you know about this document? Sit down, oya make statements.’

    “They have decided to employ what I would call Gestapo tactics reminiscent of the Nazi era to intimidate lawyers from the defence.

    “If they have any complaint about the medical report, they can prepare another charge. It will not affect this pending application. This development is an attempt to truncate the course of justice, to harass, intimidate and witch-hunt the defence team of lawyers.

    “Yesterday (Wednesday), we could not sit in our offices to even go through the case file and prepare a good argument for the bail application. We spent hours at their office.

    “We seek the protection of this court to enable us continue to represent the defendant in this matter.”

    Justice Oyefeso advised the prosecution to make an application if it intended to tender the document and adjourned till April 24 for ruling on the bail application.

  • Senate, Magu and anti-graft war

    Senate, Magu and anti-graft war

    The ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) could not have asked for more. With a majority in the National Assembly, getting what it wants from the legislature should not be a problem. So, many thought. But rather than work together, the Presidency and the Senate, especially, have been working at cross-purposes. 12 of the 109-member Senate are either being tried or investigated by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and other anti-graft agencies. Senate President Bukola Saraki is being tried by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) for alleged false assets declaration. The Senate’s rejection of Ibrahim Magu as EFCC Chairman, for the second time last month, has raised a question of how fair the upper chamber was to him. Can the Senate be trusted to help President Muhammadu Buhari in the ongoing anti-corruption war? ERIC IKHILAE sought lawyers’ views.

    ALMOST two years in the saddle, the Muhammadu Buhari-led government, whose policy thrust is anchored on the elimination of corruption has yet to make major breakthroughs and many are blaming the Senate for this.

    The government is finding it difficult to establish a robust legal framework to drive its anti-corruption efforts. Today, many bills sent to the Senate in this regard have been left unattended to.

    The executive resorted to an administrative policy when the Senate did not pass the Whistle-Blowing Bill, intended to provide legal backing for whistle-blowers and also protect them.

    Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami (SAN), in a television programme, expressed the executive’s frustration with the Legislature’s posture.

    Malami said the National Assembly’s failure to pass the Proceed of Crime Act (POCA) Bill pending before it accounts for the Federal Government’s inability to establish a body to manage recovered assets. He said: “If Proceed of Crimes Act had been promulgated, we would have had in place an agency that would formulate policy on the management of recovered loot”.

    There are many other similar bills pending before the Senate, some of which are the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Bill and Money Laundering (Prohibition and Prevention) Bill.

    To many, the Senate’s posture did not come as a surprise, because it has from inception, evinced traits that portray it as an institution averse to the Buhari government’s anti-corruption policy.

    This school of thought is quick to cite the Senate’s amendment of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Act amid the trial of its president Bukola Saraki.

    By the amendment, the Senate sought to subject the CCB/CCT to the control of the legislature and not of the Executive.

    The Senate ignored the agitation of all, including the CCT and the Judiciary, that, for effectiveness and independence, the CCT, in particular, must be severed from the executive and retained with the Judiciary.

    They also cited the Senate’s refusal to confirm the nomination of Ibrahim Magu as Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Chairman as another proof that it is working against the government.

    The Senate, observers noted, crossed the line, when its members asked the Federal Government to discontinue Saraki’s trial before the CCT, as a condition for it’s support for the government’s policies, including the war against corruption.

     

    How we got here

    Watchers believe that two factors are responsible for all this. First, they noted, was the process leading to the emergence of the Senate leadership. Second is the composition of the Senate.

    They argued that President Buhari’s seeming lack of interest in the choice of leadership of the Senate accounts for why the legislature and the executive now appear to be working apart.

    According to observers, the president should from the onset have shown interest in who leads the Senate, to ensure the success of the anti-corruption war.

    It may be difficult getting the Senate to key into the war because some of its members are either being tried or investigated for alleged corruption.

     

    Senators on trial or under probe for alleged corruption

    Investigation by The Nation revealed that major players in the 8th Senate are either being tried or investigated for corruption-related offences.

    Some of these senators were named in a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/102/2017 instituted at the Federal High Court, Abuja by businessman, Raji Oyewumi. According to Oyewunmi, they include the following:

    Saraki

    Oyewumi in a supporting affidavit, noted that Senate President Dr Bukola Saraki is being tried before the CCT on false assets declaration charges,

    Godswill Akpabio

    Senator Godswill Akpabio is being investigated on allegations of diversion and embezzlement of public funds while in office as Akwa Ibom State governor.

    Aliyu Wammako

    Senator Aliyu Wammako, he said, is being investigated by the EFCC in relation to alleged abuse of office, misappropriation of public funds and money laundering while in office as Sokoto State governor.

    Danjuma Goje

    Senator Danjuma Goje, a former governor of Gombe State, Oyewumi noted, is being tried by the EFCC for charges relating to corrupt practices and money laundering before a Federal High Court in Gombe, in a charge marked: FHC/GM/CR/33C)2011.

    Joshua Dariye

    Senator Joshua Dariye, Oyewumi said, is being tried by the EFCC on a charge marked: FCT/HC/81/2007 before Justice Bukola Banjoko of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Gudu. He is accused of embezzling public funds while in office as Plateau State governor.

    Adamu Abdullahi

    Senator Adamu Abdullahi, Oyewumi noted, is being prosecuted in charge No: FHC/LF/CR/8/2010 before the Federal High Court in Lafia, for alleged corrupt practices offences while in office as governor of Nasarawa State.

    Abdul-Aziz Nyako

    Senator Abdul-Aziz Nyako is being tried before the Federal High Court, Abuja, with his father, Murtala Nyako (a former governor of Adamawa State) on a 37-count charge of criminal conspiracy, stealing, abuse of office and money laundering to the tune of N29b.

    Jonah Jang

    Senator Jonah Jang, according to Oyewumi, is being investigated by the EFCC in relation to his activities as governor of Plateau State, particularly his handling of N2billion Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) loan given to the state by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

    Rabiu Kwankwaso

    Senator Rabiu Kwankwaso, Oyewumi noted, is being prosecuted by the EFCC on charges related to abuse of office and misappropriation of public funds during his tenure as governor of Kano State.

    Stella Oduah

    Senator Stella Oduah, he stated, is being investigated by the EFCC for a contract awarded while she was Aviation Minister to I-SEC Securities Nigeria Ltd, where public funds were allegedly diverted, according to a petition by Ken Asogwa.

    In October last year, Justice Adamu Kafarati of the Federal High Court, Abuja rejected Oduah’s prayer for among others, an order restraining the EFCC and other investigative agencies from arresting and prosecuting her over the controversial purchase of two armoured BMW vehicles at the cost of N255 million by the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCC) under her watch as the Aviation Minister in 2013.

    Theodore Orji

    Senator Theodore Orji is, according to Oyewumi, is being investigated by the EFCC in relation to the alleged misappropriation of public funds while he served as Abia State governor, including the N2 billion SME loan from CBN, as contained in a petition  of a group, Save Abia Initiative for Change.

    Ahmed Sani

    Senator Ahmed Sani, Oyewumi stated, is being investigated by the EFCC in relation to allegations of abuse of office and misappropriation of public funds while in office as Zamfara State governor.

    Beyond the question marks sorrounding the financial dealings of these lawmakers in those transactions, observers argued that the 8th Senate, since its inauguration in 2015, can hardly be associated with any noble deed.

    They noted that with the Senate, it has been one scandal or the other. The latest of such scandals, observers said, is the alleged importation of a bullet proof Sport Utility Vehicle (SUV) for the Senate President with forged documents.

    Lawyers, including Wahab Shittu, Abubakar Sani, Tosin Ojaomo, Dan Ikechukwu are worried by the Senate’s posture to the government’s anti-corruption efforts, particularly in relation to Magu’s confirmation.

     

    Senate, Magu and the courts

     

    At the last count, about three cases have been filed, challenging the Senate’s handling of the confirmation of Magu.

    In his suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/59/2017 filed on January 24, 2017 Ojaomo is contending, in the main, that the Senate President (by extension, the Senate) is without the powers to reject a nomination made by the President under Section 2(3) of the EFCC Act 2004.

    Ojaomo said his suit is intended mainly to shed light on the actual role of the Senate in the confirmation of a person appointed by the President as EFCC Chairman, argued that the Senate exceeded its powers when it rejected Magu’s appointment.

    “The only ground on which the Senate can reject a person appearing before it is when the person is nominated and recommended to the Senate for screening, vetting and subsequent confirmation, like a ministerial nominee.

    “In the instant case, the Senate is to confirm the qualification of the appointee as sent by the President. And, where the Senate is of the view that it requires additional information in accordance with the statutory requirements stipulated by the Act, with respect to the qualification of the appointee, it can refer to the President for further clarification, but not to reject a statutory appointment validly made by the President.

    “The role of the Senate in the confirmation of the appointment of a Chairman validly appointed by the President for the EFCC, according to the Act that created the commission, is to ensure that the requirements stipulated in Section 2(1)(a)(i)(ii)(iii) of the Act are duly complied with by the President in making the appointment,” Ojaomo said.

    The Act, in Section 2(1)(a) (i)(ii)(iii), provides: (I) The Commission shall consist of the following members (a) a Chairman, who shall (i) be the chief executive and accounting officer of the Commission; (ii) be a serving or retired member of any government security or law enforcement agency not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police or equivalent; and (iii) possess not less than 15 years’ cognate experience.

    Ojaomo argued that, where the necessary requirements were complied with, “the Senate is statute barred from rejecting the nominee for the office of the Chairman of the EFCC in the said Act or any law.”

    He contended that the Senate erred in law when it held a plenary session and decided to reject a valid nomination made by the President pursuant to his powers under a valid law.

    Ojaomo added that it was only the President that could decide who to appoint as the EFCC Chairman and not the Senate.

    He argued that, the President, having exercised his powers under the EFCC Act to appoint a qualified person for the office of the EFCC Chairman, in compliance with the provisions in sections 2(1)(a)(i)(ii)(iii) and 2(3) of the Act, the Senate has no further say on the choice of a person so appointed.

    Ojaomo wants the court to declare that the Senate has confirmed Magu’s appointment in accordance with the provisions of the EFCC Act 2004. He also seeks a declaration that the Senate lacks the statutory power to reject Magu’s appointment as the EFCC Chairman.

    He also wants an order, activating its statutory powers for the interpretation of the provisions of sections 2(1)(a)(i)(ii)(iii) and 2(3) of the EFCC Act in relation to appointment of EFCC Chairman and Senate’s confirmation of such appointment, within the dictates of the law.

    Infuriated by the Senate’s handling of Magu’ case  case, Abuja-based lawyer, Abubakar Sani has asked the Federal High Court to nullify the provision under Section 2(3) of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Act subjecting the nomination of the President for the Chairman of the EFCC to the confirmation of the Senate.

    In his suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/278/2017, filed on April 4, 2017 in Abuja, Sani wants the court to declare that, to the extent that Section 2(3) of the EFCC Act purports to subject the appointment of the EFCC Chair, by the President, to the confirmation of the Senate, the provision in the EFFC Act is ultra vires and invalid, on the ground that it is inconsistent with the spirit and intendment of the Constitution in Section 216 (2).

    Sani argued that the intention of the provision of Section 216(2) of the Constitution was to give the President a free hand in appointing the heads of law enforcement agencies, without such appointment being subject to confirmation by any person/authority.

    Oyewumi, in his suit filed on February 13, queried the moral standing of Saraki and other senators being investigated and tried for alleged corruption related offences as it relates to issues concerning the decision on whether or not to confirm Magu.

    The plaintiff’s contention is that, since the Senators are either being tried or investigated for economic and financial crimes by the EFCC, Magu will not be afforded fair hearing by the Senate.

    Shittu, a legal practitioner and Law teacher at the University of Lagos, noted that although the senators being investigated and prosecuted are presumed innocent until the contrary is proved, it is naturally impossible for Magu to receive fair hearing before the Senate headed by Saraki and composed of others being similarly tried and investigated.

    The solution

    A lawyer, Joel Chukwuma, argued that President Buhari possesses the capacity to overcome the challenge currently posed by the Senate to the success of his anti -graft war.

    “If the President is serious about achieving success in his fight against corruption, he needs to act. He cannot just sit there and pretend things will fall in place. In politics, particularly under our clime where it is seen as a game of life and death, things do not fall in place on their own.

    “Honestly, I am disappointed in the turn of events. It betrays the president’s political naivety. How did President Buhari expect a Senate, led by someone (whose name is associated in almost everything negative) and populated by individuals (who are either being probed or prosecuted) to support him in fighting corruption?

    “It is either the President learn to act appropriately, by taking the necessary measures, which I believe he knows, or we forget about the ant-graft war,” Chulwuma said.

  • Bar leader urges NBA trustees to comply with judgment

    Bar leader urges NBA trustees to comply with judgment

    A Bar leader, Chief Solomon Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), has warned the Registered Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) of the consequences of  the association’s failure to obey the Federal High Court judgment which nullified the 2014 and 2015 NBA constitutions.

    In a letter to the Trustees, Awomolo called for an “urgent meeting” to “save the Bar from disintegration and put to rest fractionalisation encouraged by the immediate leadership of the association.”

    The judgment delivered by Justice John Tsoho of Federal High Court, Abuja, on March 30, in a suit filed by Lagos lawyer, Mr. Supo Ojo, granted all the reliefs sought by the Plaintiff.

    It voided the 2015 amended Constitution of the NBA for non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA)  and also voided all actions howsoever described taken under the said constitution, amongst other reliefs.

    Awomolo said: “ I write respectfully to invite your attention to the judgement of the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, delivered on Friday, March  30,  2017.

    “The implication of this judgement is so grave that it will appear as if we have been drawn back to 1992 when the Bar Association went into crisis that nearly terminated its existence.

    “I recall that Chief F.R.A. Williams SAN (of Blessed Memory), Alhaji Abudullahi Ibrahim SAN CON, Chief Tony Mogboh SAN, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN and Alhaji Muritala Aminu OFR rose to support me and the Committee of Chairmen and Secretaries of the 44 branches of the NBA to bring it back us a body corporate. Chief T.J.O. Okpoko SAN was elected as President at the 1998 August Conference held here in Abuja.

    “It is very sad to note that the Trustees inadvertently, have left the Association in the hands of successive elected leaders, some of whom by omission or commission lost sense of history and abdicated their responsibilities.

    “It is unthinkable that an elementary thing like the registration of the amended constitution of the association can be left unregistered where Senior Advocates of Nigeria had led the elected Bar officials.

    “It is my humble view that your leadership of the association as Registered Trustees is now called upon to put right the Bar Association, failing which one can foresee the emergence of Regional Bar Associations and Law Societies.

    “The arguments put into public domain by elected officers of the Bar Association is very unfortunate. No legal argument or unauthorised appeal can save the failure, negligence and responsibilities of the management of the Bar. This is not the time for sophistry of the law and legal technicality to elongate the tenure of the present officials.

    “Their desire to secure or save their tenure at the detriment of the association is sad, selfish and should be condemned by all of us.

    “I wish to request that a meeting of the Board of Trustees be held very urgently to save the Bar from disintegration and put to rest fractionalisation encouraged by the immediate leadership of the association.

    “We think our labour to save the association should not be allowed to waste on the altar of negligence and irresponsible leadership,” Awomolo stated.

    The letter was addressed to Alhaji Abdulahi Ibrahim (SAN), Chief Anthony Mogboh (SAN), Chief T.J.O. Okpoko (SAN), Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Chief Mrs Prsicilia (Kuye), Alhaji Muritala Aminu, Registered Trustees of the NBA.

  • Lawyer petitions US embassy over Nigerian woman’s deportation

    Lawyer petitions US embassy over Nigerian woman’s deportation

    An Abuja-based lawyer, Babs Akinwumi, has faulted the deportation of Mrs. Olalere Comfort Kehinde from the United States (US), where her octogenarian husband, Mr. Olalere Joseph Olaleke, is being treated for cancer-related ailment.

    In a petition dated April 3, 2017, written for Mrs. Olalere, Akinwunmi described her deportation on March 17, as “unlawful, degrading and inhuman.”

    In the petition, Mrs. Olalere was said to have travelled on March 15 to care for her husband “who is undergoing cancer medical therapy in the US,’ but was subjected to “harrowing and unimaginable treatment” on arriving at the Los Angeles International Airport on March 17.

    Mrs. Olalere, Akinwumi said, was detained for five hours at the airport on the allegation that she had overstayed the six months allocated her when she last visited.

    He said officials of the US Customs and Border Protection, who detained her, ignored her explanation that she did not overstay during her previous visit, but only spent five out of the six months allocated her in the US.

    “One of the agents (of the Customs and Border Protection), who has been abusing her with racial slurs, later told her sternly, that she has an option to choose between spending five years in jail in the US or being deported for no criminality at all.

    “She was ultimately deported illegally to Nigeria. Her two-year valid visa, (Class B1/B2) No: K8005263, issued in Abuja on September 4, 2015 to expire on  September 2, 2017, was cancelled,” the lawyer said in the petition.

    Akinwumi, who faulted the US officials’ claim that Mrs. Olalere overstayed during her previous visit, said she last visited the US on November 29, 2015 and that, although she was given six months, she returned to Nigeria on April 26 2016. He exhibited copies of the stamped page of her passports as evidence.

    The lawyer wants the US Government to investigate the “unfortunate treatment” accorded Mrs. Olalere and ensure that the culprits are penalised to prevent further harassment of other visitors.

    Akinwumi also wants a fresh visa issued to Mrs. Olalere to enable her visit her ailing husband, who is a legal resident of the USA: the payment of travel expenses by the US Government, who must also offer an apology to be published in both print and online media.

    The lawyer said Mrs. Olalere will explore other appropriate diplomatic channels to register her displeasure and seek redress should the US authorities fail to address her complaints within 14 days.

    Copies of the petition have been sent to the US Secretary of State, Department of States; Nigerian Foreign Affairs Minister, Chairman, Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs, Country Representatives, United Nations Human Rights Council, the National Human Rights Commission (Nigeria) and the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Foreign Affairs and Diaspora Matters.