The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • OPD sensitises Badagry residents to free legal services

    Director, Lagos State Office of the Public Defender (OPD), Mrs Olubunkola Salami, has urged residents of Badagry to avail themselves of the free legal services provided by the government.

    Salami said the OPD’s core function was to render such services in criminal and civil cases to indigent and vulnerable residents of the state.

    Priority, she added, would be given to issues threatening the socio-economic rights of the poor as well as other disadvantaged groups like children and women.

    Salami stated this during a campaign tour in Badagry to create awareness on ‘Free Lawyer for Lagosians’.

    She said the essence of the campaign was to create awareness on the government’s efforts to eliminate all forms of criminality that undermine the citizens’ rights and privileges.

    “The essence of this campaign in the ancient town of Badagry, is to create awareness on the accessibility of OPD’s office in Badagry where the citizens can access justice when their right and privileges are trampled upon.

    “It is to also create awareness on the efforts of the government of Governor Akinwunmi Ambode to bring free legal assistance to the grassroots and the fact that OPD will also continue to attend to all residents of Badagry, irrespective of whether poor or oppressed, physically challenged, pensioners, widows and others that cannot afford the services of a legal practitioners.

    “OPD ensures high quality legal representation to clients through excellence and demonstration of compassion, loyalty, commitment and professionalism, irrespective of the opposing party. It has also made available provisions for the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), in settling cases for those with complaints but who do not want to go to court”, Salami said.

    She explained that the OPD handles and intervenes in family matters through a “Social Service Department team that is vested with the responsibility to investigate and intervene in family or domestic matters for peaceful resolution.”

    The OPD , she added, has jurisdiction to handle family matters, employer/employee matters, child’s rights custody and maintenance, civil matters, child abuse, sexual abuse and domestic violence.

    Others are recovery of possession, debt, landlord and tenant cases, unlawful detention, issues relating to bail in police stations and other human rights related cases.

  • NAPTIP convicts 316 human traffickers

    The National Agency for the Prohibition of Trafficking in Persons (NAPTIP) has secured the conviction of 316 human traffickers.

    Speaking at a workshop organised by the Conference of Western Attorneys-General (CWAG) in conjunction NAPTIP in Calabar, the Cross River State capital, the agency’s Chief Legal Officer, Ijeoma Amugo, said assets of the convicted traffickers have been forfeited to the Victims Trust Fund.

    Amugo, who said they have about 145 pending cases, pointed out that some of their challenges include insufficient funds, the clandestine nature of the crime, interagency rivalry, porous borders, relationship ties, tender age of victims, lack of training for investigators and prosecutors, unwillingness of victims to testify in court, oath taking in shrines and delay in the criminal justice system.

    Cross River State Commissioner of Justice and Attorney-General, Mr Joe Abang said the endemic nature of the menace in the state was of great concern.

    “It is reported that Calabar has become the transit haven for traffickers, who as a result of clampdown on their activities in neighbouring states like Edo have relocated to Calabar, taking advantage of the low crime rate to perpetrate their nefarious activities. They use the ports and various creeks in the area to transport their victims to countries, such as Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon, among others. But I have bad news for them. Cross River State has never been and will never be a hiding place for criminals. We will use every machinery of government at our new disposal to ensure that the long arm of the law catches up with them,” he said.

    He also commended NAPTIP for the efforts they were making to check the problem.

    Board Member of CWAG, African Alliance Partnership, Mr Markus Green, said more attention should be paid towards helping victims of human trafficking.

    “The whole issue is about the victim. The justice system serves to protect the victim. Punishment is important, but most important is to bring peace to the victim and protect the victim from harm,” Green said.

    Speaking on the relevance of the Victims of Trafficking Trust Fund, Chief Intelligence Assistance of NAPTIP, Mrs Odugbesan Tolulola, said they have, so far, received a total of 9, 453 victims who were provided with psychological counselling.

    She said the agency was able to empower 388 victims in various skills such as petty business, hairdressing, tailoring, hat making, knitting, catering, photography and education, among others.

  • Fusengbuwa ruling house: ‘How I knew ex-ICAN president’

    Secretary of the Fusengbuwa Ruling House, Prince Adeleke Adeyemi,  has told an Ijebu-Ode High Court in Ogun State, how he got to know that former National  President of the Institute of Chartered Accountant of Nigeria(ICAN), Otunba Abdul-Lateef Owoyemi, is a Prince and member of the Fusengbuwa Ruling House of Ijebu-Ode.

    Adeyemi, an economist, said his father, the late Chief Adebisi Adeyemi, told him through oral history.

    He said oral account is usually transmitted from one generation to another.

    He said the royal family also has a record-book concerning members.

    The Prince who identified himself as the Secretary of the Fusengbuwa Ruling house testified under cross-examination by defendants’ Counsel,Tunji Ayanlaja (SAN).

    The case is on a dispute over the headship (Olori-Ebi) of the Fusengbuwa Ruling House.

    The suit was filed by Otunba Abdul – Lateef Owoyemi, Prince Rasaq Akeju, Yisau Ajidagaba, Prince Adeleke Adeyemi and one other on behalf of themselves and Fusengbuwa Ruling House against the founder of the First City Monument Bank(FCMB),Otunba Subomi Balogun and others.

    The claimants are claiming that Otunba Abdul-Lateef Owoyemi is the right and legitimate person to occupy the position of the  Olori-Ebi of Fusengbuwa Ruling House and prayed the court to pronounce him as such.

    They had approached the court to challenge  Otunba Subomi Balogun who is a also member of  the Fusengbuwa Ruling House over the alleged manner he emerged as the head of the family after the demise of the former Olori-Ebi  of the Family, Chief Adebisi Adeyemi.

    Last January 24, at the resumed hearing of the matter before Justice Aderonke Asenuga, the court admitted five exhibits tendered by the claimants’ counsel, Chief Adesegun Adebayo, in furtherance of the claimants’ case.

    The exhibits consisted of letters written by the ruling house to Awujale and Paramount ruler of Ijebuland, Oba Sikiru Adetona, the Ijebu-Ode Local Government Area, letter to the Permanent Secretary, Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs –  all pertaining to the nomination of Owoyemi as the authentic head of the Ruling House.

    But Otunba Subomi Balogun has since filed counter-claims in support of his defence as the Olori – Ebi of the Ruling House.

    And at the resumed hearing of the case in February 13, Prince Adeleke while being cross-examined by Balogun’s counsel, Ayanlaja (SAN), also told the court further that he knew Owoyemi was a member of the Ruling House through the Awujale and Paramount ruler of Ijebuland (Oba Sikiru Adetona)

    He told  the court that the Paramount ruler bestowed on Owoyemi, the hereditary title of Otunba Jadiara in 2006, explaining that if the recipient was not a Prince and member of the Fusengbuwa family, the Oba would not have conferred that title on him.

    However, when further cross -examined, Adeleke admitted that the Awujale has the exclusive reserve to bestow chieftaincy title to any deserving Ijebu son, and that the Awujale is also better informed and knowledgeable about the Ijebu traditions, the royal families and chieftaincy matters than him(Prince Adeleke).

    He also admitted that he neither attended the regular meeting of the four Ruling Houses of Ijebu-Ode which the Awujale preside over nor knew the topic of conversation or discussion at such meetings.

    However, the case has been adjourned till March 7 for further hearing and cross-examination of the witness.

  • Community claims ownership of Obasanjo’s library land

    The Ijeun-Lukosi Community of Abeokuta, Ogun State has laid claim to an expanse of land on which the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidential Library (OOPL) is situated.

    The  land, measuring approximately 179.89 Hectares (444.52 acres), is now a subject of litigation at the Abeokuta High Court, Ogun State in suit No:AB/442/2016 before Justice O. Mabekoje.

    Justice Mabekoje on January 10 granted the community through their counsels Fatai Erewunmi and Chief Wakeel Olawale Liady, an interim injunction restraining the defendants, Chief Obasanjo, registered trustees of OOPL, beneficiaries of the Estate of the former Deputy Governor, the late Chief Sesan Soluade, among others, from destroying the claimants’ shrines on the land until the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

    Other respondents in the suit included Governor of Ogun State, Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Director-General, Bureau of Land and Survey, former Secretary to the State Government (SSG) Dr. Kunle Salako,  Dr. Adeleke Adedoyin, Chief Yomi Majekodunmi, Alhaji Layi Shobayo, among others.

    In a 50-paragraph affidavit, the Baale of Ijeun-Lukosi Community, Chief Benjamin Ogunbona, claimed that Ogun State Government compulsorily acquired the land in 1976 for the purpose of building the state secretariat complex.

    Ogunbona said the state government did not use the land for what it initially acquired it for but rather started re-allocating same to private individuals for private uses and that more than 100 individuals and corporate bodies, including Obasanjo’s Presidential Library, have now erected buildings on the land.

    Ogunbona disclosed that after the community mounted pressure on Ogun State government, it excised 33.253 hectares out of the land to the community in 2011.

    He emphasised that contrary to the law, government did not pay any compensation to the people of Ijeun-Lukosi community for the compulsory acquisition of their land and kept the them in the dark as to the size of the land so acquired from them until 2015 when hundreds of private individuals invaded the land, claiming they had been allocated parcels of land by the governor and the Bureau of Lands and Survey.

    He averred that according to the only gazette available relating to their land from 1967 to 2010, only 62.99 acres of the land was actually acquired as published on July 1, 1976 in gazette No 11 Vol. 1.

    Ogunbona and the entire Ijeun-Lukosi community are praying the court for the reversion of the land to the community as the bona fide owners, since it’s no longer used for the original purpose of the acquisition but shared to private individuals.

    The government in its response through Mr. Omilana Korede of the Bureau of Lands and Survey, confirmed the acquisition of the land by Ogun State Government in 1976.

    He however argued that the land was validly acquired, crops properly enumerated and the compensation deposited with the Bureau of Lands and Survey a long time ago.

    He also claimed that the 38.253 hectares the community said was returned to them in 2011 had also been cancelled by a panel of enquiry set up by the government.

    However, the first to third defendants, in a motion exparte filed through their counsel, Miss T. L. Lawal before the court on February 7, 2017 are now seeking an extension of time within which to file their response to the suit.

  • Should lawyers go straight to Supreme Court?

    Should lawyers go straight to Supreme Court?

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has nominated nine lawyers, including six Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), for appointment as Justices of the Supreme Court at the instance of Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen. However, some lawyers have called for the suspension of the process, claiming that it can kill the morale of judges. Others have hailed it, saying it will make the apex court vibrant. ADEBISI ONANUGA sought lawyers’ views.

    It is a rare occurence in the Judiciary. The late Dr    Taslim   Olawale Elias was ap-                        pointed from the university, where he was a Senior Lecturer, as Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) in 1973. Six years later, the late Dr Augustine Nnamani joined the Supreme Court from being Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice during the Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo military regime.

    The nation seems ready to tread that path again. Following the request of the Acting CJN, Walter Onnoghen, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has nominated nine lawyers, including six Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), for appointment as Justices of the Supreme Court (JSC). Who will make it among them? Will the process be seen through or aborted? These are some of the questions as lawyers are divided on the issue.

    Those who made the list are a former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) president Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), Chief Anthony Idigbe (SAN), Yunus Usman (SAN), Babatunde Fagbohunlu (SAN), Miannayaaja Essien (SAN), Prof Awa Kalu (SAN), Prof Awalu Yadudu, Tajudeen Oladoja and Ayuba Giwa.

    The Lagos Branch of the NBA had a stormy session at its monthly meeting over the matter on the ground that due process was not followed. It also alleged that NBA branches were not consulted before the nominations were made.

    Some members asked Justice Onnoghen to suspend the idea. Some stormed out when a motion moved on the issue was not voted on.

     

    Appointment procedure

    in the United Kingdom

     

    According to information on the website of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, the procedure for appointing a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, for instance, is governed by Sections 25 to 31 and Schedule 8, of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, as amended by the Crime and Courts Act 2013.

    Section 25 of the 2005 Act sets out the statutory qualifications for appointment. The qualifications are:  “Applicants must have held high judicial office for at least two years. (‘High judicial office’ is defined to include High Court Judges of England and Wales, and of Northern Ireland; Court of Appeal Judges of England and Wales, and of Northern Ireland; and Judges of the Court of Session).

    “Alternatively, applicants must satisfy the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 15-year basis, or have been a qualifying practitioner for at least 15 years.

    “A person satisfies the judicial-appointment eligibility condition on a 15-year basis if he has been a solicitor of the senior courts of England and Wales, or barrister in England and Wales, for at least 15 years; and has been gaining experience in law during the post-qualification period.

    “A person is a qualifying practitioner if he is an advocate in Scotland or a solicitor entitled to appear in the Court of Session and the High Court of Justiciary; or he is a member of the Bar of Northern Ireland or a solicitor of the Court of Judicature of Northern Ireland.

    “The meaning of ‘gaining experience in law’ is set out in Section 52(2) to (5) of the Tribunals and Enforcement Act 2007 and relates to a period engaged in law-related activities.”

     

    Constitutional requirements

     

    Section 230(2) of the 1999 Constitution stipulates that the Supreme Court shall consist of: (a) the Chief Justice of Nigeria; and (b) such number of Justices of the Supreme court, not exceding 21, as may be prescribed by an Act of the National Assembly.”

    Section 231 (1) stipulates: “The appointment of a person to the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council subject to confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.”

    Section 231 (2) states: “The appointment of a person to the office of a Justice of the Supreme Court shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council subject to confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.

    Section 231 (3) states: “a person shall not be qualified to hold the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria or of a Justice of the Supreme Court, unless he is qualified to practise as a legal practitioner in Nigeria and has been so qualified for a period of not less than 15 years.”

     

    Lawyers speak

     

    Some observers see the nomination of some lawyers for appointment as JSCs as a negation of the tradition of succession by seniority and one capable of causing latitude amongst senior members of the second level of the court system.

    Others see it as an attempt by Justice Onnoghen to reposition the Judiciary, having taken it over when its image has been battered, with the arrest of two serving justices and judges on allegation of corruption.

    Some analysts believe such appointments will add vibrancy to the Supreme Court.

    Those who spoke on the issue are Justice Ebenezer Adebajo (rtd), Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) chairman Prof Itse Sagay (SAN), Mr Sylva Ogwemoh (SAN, constitutional lawyer Sebastine Hon (SAN), Mr Kunle Ogunba (SAN) and Pa Tunji Gomez.

    Sagay supports the decision of the Acting CJN to appoint members of the Bar to the apex court.  According to him, a person can be appointed CJN or JSC directly from outside the Bench.

    To him, a law teacher or legal practitioner who had been called to the Bar for at least 15 years can be CJN under the Constitution.

    Sagay said it was wrong to say that “the Constitution made the CJN’s appointment a matter of seniority among the JSCs”.

    He argued that appointing JSCs on the basis of their seniority was not a constitutional requirement, pointing out that it was the NJC,  and before it,  the Federal Judicial Services Commission, that embraced the seniority syndrome.

    Sagay explained that appointment by seniority has been in practice since 1979, adding that the Constituttion gives the appointing authority the leeway to make appointments on merit rather than on mere seniority with all the baggages and negatives that could be attached to any particular, most senior Justice.

    Hon said the Constitution was clear on the baseline requirement: that a person would be qualified for appointment as a JSC if he has been qualified as a legal practitioner for at least 15 years.

    Therefore, there is no question of such person being on the Bench before he will be so qualified, he said.

    “I prefer to go with the Constitution than allow sentiments to becloud my sense of judgment. I also remember that Hon. Justice Augustine Nnamani was a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and he was appointed straight to the Supreme Court Bench.

    “So, even talking of precedents, we already have one there. And come to think of it, Justice Nnamani, now of blessed memory, remains one of the best brains on the Nigerian Bench.

    “I, therefore, go with the Acting CJN on this. Many previous CJNs, to my knowledge, toyed with this idea and even took unsuccessful steps in that direction. If this one succeeds, the Acting CJN would have achieved a great deal,” Hon said.

     

    Opposing views

     

    But, Justice Adebajo said there was no where in the world where lawyers were appointed from the Bar into the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal bench.

    The appellate courts are manned by people with substantial and adequate experience, he said.

    “The whole concept of inviting lawyers to the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal is an attempt to solve a problem by creating another problem. I do not see this beyond the confusion Prof Sagay is bringing into government.

    “I have said earlier on that the fight against corruption cannot be carried out in the way and manner the body appointed by the President is going about its job,” he said.

    Ogwemoh, who noted that one of the reasons for this recent agitation for direct appointment of practising lawyers to the Supreme Court is the public perception of corruption in the Judiciary,  sounded a note of caution. He said even though the constitutional requirement for eligibility is 15 years post-call, utmost care must be exercised.

    His words: “We must tread cautiously in the appointment of judicial officers, particularly as it affects direct appointment of practising lawyers to the Supreme Court.

    “I am aware of previous cases in Nigeria and even in England where Lord Jonathan Philip Chadwick Sumption was appointed Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom in 2012 from the practising bar rather than from prior service as a full time judicial officer. But these are clearly exceptional cases and have been so described.

    “As rightly pointed out, if not well managed, it could kill the morale of Judges who have carved a career path for themselves as full time judicial officers beginning from the High Court with the hope of gradually moving up the ladder to the apex Court.”

    Ogwemoh recalled that recently, professors of law, such as Chuka Obiozor, and some Ph.D holders, such as Nnamdi Dimgba, were appointed as judges of the Federal High Court.

    “These judges are hoping to build a career on the Bench and then you now have persons who may not be holding the same qualification as them being elevated straight to the Supreme Court from the practising Bar.

    “I recall the late eminent Jurist, the well respected Honourable Justice Niki Tobi, JSC of blessed memory who was a professor of law before he was appointed as a High Court Judge and eventually rose to become a JSC.”

    Ogwemoh said rather appointing lawyers straight to the Supreme Court in order to cure some ills, appointments at the High Court level must be based on merit.

    “What is in fact important is for us to make the procedure for appointment of judges as transparent as possible with merit being the key factor.

    “A situation where appointments are made to favour cronies and on the basis of political affiliations is dangerous for the judiciary as an institution.

    “The Judiciary is an important and sacred institution which regulates all other institutions in our democracy and we must not allow politics in whatever guise to creep into the process of appointment of judicial officers,” he said.

    Ogunba believes it can kill the morale of judges and justices of the Court of Appeal who had been working towards being elevated.

    He said: “I don’t think it’s good for the system to bring somebody from the outside who has never been a judge, and then he’s sitting at the uppermost echelon of the judiciary, just like that.

    “The problem of incompetence could be solved, not by a kneejerk reaction of bringing somebody from the outside, but to put a template by which justices are appraised.

    “It could be based on number of judgments. So if someone is junior to you in hierarchy surpasses you in terms of judgment output, ordinarily he should get it. When they do that, even the incompetent ones will sit up. The person you are bringing from outside who has not been tested on the job, are you sure of his output or quality?

    “To cure that evil of non-performance, it doesn’t necessarily mean you have to bring somebody from the outside.

    “Again is the effect it will have on morale of other justices. There are too many justices of the Court of Appeal eyeing the Supreme Court, where the slot is even limited to 21 slots.

    “If somebody has been deemed good enough to be appointed a judge, then he should be deemed good enough to be elevated.

    “The only thing you should do if you don’t want to elevate him is to tell him to his face that he has not performed. Then you appoint someone that is less in rank. That is the way to go,” he argued.

    Pa Tunji Gomez shared in the views expressed by Ogunba. Gomez described the development as demeaning and unfair treatment of the Apeal Court Justices.

    To him, it is wrong for lawyers who have not had any experience on the bench at lower levels to be appointed Justices at the apex level of the judicial system.

    “This is unfair, disheartening and a slur on the efficiency of the Appeal Court,” he said.

    He urged Justice Onnoghen to suspend the consideration of the lawyers so nominated until proper consultation of all stakeholders in the judicial sector is made.

    He contended that the nomination of lawyers for the post of Supreme Court justices raises vital fundamental questions affecting the profession and the judiciary.

    Gomez raised the following issues: “Whether the Court of Appeal Justices are not being condemned indirectly as unfit or unknowledgeable enough to be made Supreme Court Justices; that the nomination creates the impression that anybody who is a  SAN is better and more knowledgeable; that the decision might affect the dedication, morale and commitment of the Court of Appeal Justices in their work as there is now no guarantee of their promotion to the Supreme Court since any SAN from the bar can be appointed above them.”

     

    ‘Why appointments may not work’

     

    A former media aide to former CJNs Aloma Mukhtar and Justice Mahmud Mohammed , Issa Ahuraka, said it would take the camel to pass through the needle’s eye than for a lawyer to be appointed a JSC.

    Ahuraka said that shortly before her retirement on November 2014, Justice Mukhtar initiated and signed into law the ‘2014 Revised NJC Guidelines and Procedural Rules for the Appointment of Judicial Officers of all Superior Courts of Record in Nigeria.

    He said: “Rule 3 (6) of the Guidelines is unambiguous because it stipulated the judicial officer’s appointment to a higher bench to be determined among other requirements of the number of judgments delivered.

    “The provision states unequivocally that ‘in the case of appointment from the Bar, evidence of six contested cases in the last five years; (ii) sound knowledge of law, (iii) seniority at the Bar and or the Bench, (iv) Federal Character or geographical spread and where necessary and possible, without compromising the independence of the judiciary or allowing politics to permeate or influence the appointment.”

    He said the immediate past NBA President, Augustine Alegeh in 2015, during whose tenure the agitation started, nominated some senior lawyers to Justice Mohammed for appointment into the Supreme Court Bench but they did not meet the requirements.

    “The question is, can any Senior Advocate of Nigeria make it to the Supreme Court Bench even under the Revised Guidelines. Of course, the answer is no.

    “And there is no way the Guideline could be reviewed without considering the number of judgments delivered or secured by the applicants, be it a lawyer or Judicial Officer.”

  • Ecobank seeks to appeal ruling in bankruptcy case against Otudeko

    Ecobank seeks to appeal ruling in bankruptcy case against Otudeko

    • Honeywell Group chair opposes application

    Ecobank Nigeria Limited has asked the Court of Appeal for extension of time to enable it seek leave to appeal the Federal High Court’s ruling in a winding-up petition against chairman of Honeywell Group, Oba Otudeko.

    The bank initiated the bankruptcy proceedings against Otudeko over an alleged N5.5billion debt which arose from loans granted Honeywell Flour Mills Plc, Siloam Global Services Limited and Anchorage Leisures Limited, said to have been guaranteed by Otudeko.

    The appellant is seeking an order by the Appeal Court granting it leave to appeal the ruling delivered last February 19 by Justice Babs Kuewunmi.

    The ruling followed the winding-up petition filed by Ecobank on October 17, 2015, accompanied by  motion ex-parte and motion on notice.

    The bank said the petition was a bid to recover the money from Otudeko “considering  the looming and impending danger of having its banking licence withdrawn after the respondent failed to liquidate its indebtedness after several demands.”

    Justice Okon Abang, who first handled the case, asked the bank to put the respondent on notice to show cause. After being put on notice, Otudeko filed a motion on notice seeking to dismiss/strike out the petition.

    Justice Kuewumi, who took over from Justice Abang, ruled that he would accord higher priority to Otudeko’s motion on notice ahead of other pending applications.

    Dissatisfied with the ruling, Ecobank appealed. The Court of Appeal, last October 21, struck out the appeal on the basis that the appellant did not first obtain leave of the lower court before appealing.

    The bank is, therefore, seeking for reliefs to enable it invoke the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

    “The applicant (Ecobank) ran out of time to appeal as a result of the previous proceedings in suit no CA/L/227/16 which was not determined on the merit as a result of failure to procure the needed leave.

    “The leave of this court is required to extend time to obtain leave of court to appeal the ruling of lower court. It is in the interest of justice that this application be favourably considered and granted accordingly,” the bank prayed.

    The bank, through its lawyer Mr Kunle Ogunba (SAN) is seeking a receiving order against Otudeko’s estate, funds, investment and shares in Honeywell Group, Honeywell Flour Mills, among other companies, as well as an order declaring him bankrupt.

    Ecobank prayed for an order commanding Otudeko to immediately avail it the companies’ statement of affairs as well as net worth and other credible financial details as required by the Bankruptcy Act.

    It asked for a consequential order empowering the bank to sell Otudeko’s properties wherever they are situated, as well as an order enabling it to utilise the investments or shares in companies in which Otudeko has interest.

    In a motion on notice, Ecobank, among others, is also seeking an interlocutory order appointing a special manager and receiver over Otudeko’s assets.

    But, Otudeko, in its counter-affidavit sworn to by Omolade Adeyemi, has urged the Court of Appeal to refuse Ecobank’s application.

    He said the bank had prosecuted the subject-matter of the appeal and judgment had been given in which the Court of Appeal upheld his preliminary objection and struck out appeal.

    The respondent said the appellate court also attended to the appeal on its merits, considered arguments by parties and affirmed the correctness of Justice Kuewumi’s ruling.

    “It is in the interest of justice to refuse the applicant’s application,” Otudeko said.

    In the lower court, the Honeywell Group’s chairman said the alleged debt “is neither ascertained nor undisputed.”

    He added that Honeywell Flour Mills and its sister companies initiated a suit against the bank before another judge “owing to disagreements between it (Honeywell) and the respondent (Ekobank) as to the complete liquidation of their outstanding obligations to the respondent having regards to the terms and condition of the credit facility.”

  • Bar, Bench rise for Aiku at last sitting

    Bar, Bench rise for Aiku at last sitting

    Jurists gathered in Ibadan last week to hold a valedictory court session for the former chairman of the Body of Benchers, the late Chief Bandele Aiku (SAN). Legal Editor JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU reports.

    It was a harvest of tributes for the late chairman of the Body of Benchers, Chief Bandele Aiku (SAN), at the valedictory court session held for him at the High Court, Ibadan last week.

    He died in Ibadan last August 30. He was 80.

    Aiku served as Oyo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice from 1977 to 1979.

    Lawyers led by Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Abubakar Mahmoud, and members of the Bench, came in large numbers to pay last respects to him.

    Oyo State Chief Judge Justice M.L. Abimbola described Aiku as a legal  olympus, advocate extraordinaire, one-time politician and a righteous father.

    He said: “It can be never disputed; since death and birth are closely linked because one is a result of the other, dying on earth is in my view nothing, but birth in ethereal world as a process of birth in this earthy gross material world.

    “So be it with Chief Aiku. Death is a necessary end and will come when it will come. Nothing is more certain than death, and nothing is more uncertain than the time of death.

    “Also, his death is a fulfilment of the predictory words of the chorus in King Oedipus the King: ‘Count no man happy until he dies free of pain.’ Baba Aiku died a peacefully, happily, and very fulfilled man. I count him happy.

    “A great Senior Advocate, sober in language, temperate in reaction, reserved, methodical, philosophical and mostly, an historian.

    “Let us beat the drum to speak mournfully of this legal Olympus and good adviser to us his children. The posture of his blow is not known to me but for his words, they rob the Hybla bees and leave them honey less but not lesser stay stingless. When he advises, you listen and you benefit by it. I have done that severally.

    “A member of the National Executive of the NBA since 1972, Chief Aiku has served his profession as Chairman of the Disciplinary Committee of the NBA since 1998, Life member of the Body of Benchers, the highest policy making Body of the Law Profession, since 2006 and as member of the National Judicial Council (a constitutional Body) responsible for the appointment and discipline of Judges of Superior Courts) for two terms from 2004.

    “Before he passed on, he was Chairman of the Body of Benchers, the highest policy making body of the Law Profession in Nigeria, aforesaid.

    “Chief Aiku was the Leader of South West Lawyers Forum otherwise known as Egbe Amofin Yoruba,” Justice Abimbola said.

    Former chairman, Ibadan Branch of the NBA and Oyo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Mr. Oluwaseun Abimbola, who also represented Governor Abiola Ajimobi, said the late Aiku wouldbe missed.

    “The news of Chief Aiku’s demise was a rude shock, an irreparable loss, and has created a great vacuum in the legal profession in Nigeria as a whole.

    “Chief Aiku undoubtedly served the Bar, the legal profession, his country and his people with all his intellect, skill, grace and resources throughout his professional life, and was until his demise, the Chairman of the Body of Benchers, a distinguished Body he served diligently, and passionately throughout his years as a life bencher.

    “Right from his being called to the English Bar in 1963, to his enrolment in Nigeria in 1964 with Supreme Court enrolment number 073, Chief Aiku held faithfully to the lofty traditions and ethics of the legal profession, and passionately defended same with all his strength

    “He served the Western Region Government in Nigeria as Commissioner for Lands, and Commissioner for Works and housing from 1975 to 1977, and later as Attorney General of Old Oyo State from 1977 to 1979, laying the foundation for the office which I have the privilege to hold today, and established a legacy for others to build on

    “Chief Aiku, himself a former Chairman of this great branch over three decades ago, was always available to the Ibadan Bar to lead her cause, defend her pride, protect our profession and support our initiatives.

    “It was Chief Aiku who counseled us continually on proper behaviour as officers of the Bar, emphasised the importance of integrity as the foundational virtue of a lawyer deserving of respect, yet full of jokes and anecdotes about what makes a good lawyer

    “He was a noble and respectable leader of all. I commiserate with Ibadan Bar, for we have not only lost a Patron, but a father, confidant and pillar of support.

    “The honour and integrity with which Chief Aiku performed his duties as a public officer, as a private legal practitioner, as an officer of the Bar, and leader in the legal profession earned him the respect of all his professional colleagues, young and old.

    “Our duty as members of the legal profession is to ensure we carry the torch he has passed on, sustain the ethical revolution at the Bar which he lived for, and keep that fire burning,” Abimbola said.

    Mahmoud said the late Aiku was as constant as the northern star, and was always available at the National Executive Committee ( NEC)  meetings.

    “He represented all that we cared  for in the profession, ethics, disciplined and well respected,” the NBA president said.

    He  described the late Aiku as a pillar of support to the Bar and a pride of the legal profession who has left a vacuum that would be difficult to fill.

    “The NBA will take steps to immortalise him,” Mahmoud said.

    Former NBA President Okey Wali (SAN) described Aiku as “a democrat who would always ask the necessary questions: Is this the agreement of the house? And once he got the consensus of the House, he would stand on it.”

    Akin Dalano (SAN) described Aiku as a man of great courage and a professional to the core because they were together in England.

     

    Solanke: Trial of judicial officers a ‘calamity’

     

    The first woman SAN, Mrs. Folake Solanke, who paid tribute to Aiku, described the recent linking of  judges  and  senior lawyers  with corruption as a calamity for  the legal profession.

    She said:  “In my 54 years at the Bar, I could not have imagined that we would now have honourable judges and SANs in the dock answering to criminal charges.

    “Of course,  they are presumed innocent until proven guilty, but the present situation of charging judges, in indictments, is a legal calamity and opposed to the meaning of ‘Honourable Judges.’

    “The legal system in Nigeria is bleeding internally and we must stop the dangerous haemorrhage in order to clean the Augean stable,” she said.

    Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN) said he had a special relationship with the late Aiku.

    “Chief Aiku was a great economist, a stickler to the rules, principles and traditions of the profession. When he lost election at the NBA, he came back to us in Ibadan and never abandoned the Bar.

    “No one became a President of the NBA since 1999 without the support of chief Aiku. He was a success. No man is a success until his children are successful,” Akintola stated.

    Chief Arthur Obi Okafor (SAN) said Aiku was a quintessential advocate who lived his life for  his people and his profession.

    “He will be remembered as a man who made a lot of sacrifice to have a  professionalised  and ethical Bar in Nigeria. From the valedictory court session held in his honour, it was  obvious  that the legal profession in Nigeria appreciates  the enormous contributions he made for the development of  profession in the country as a thorough bred professional,” Okafor said.

    Dr. Babatunde Ajibade (SAN) said the late Aiku was like a father to him.

    “He was a well respected senior member of the bar and one of my mentors. I owe him a debt of gratitude for his support, nurturing and encouragement in my formative years at the bar and for coming to my aid on a particular occasion when my back was ‘literally’ to the wall in a contentious matter before the Benin Division of the Court of Appeal.

    “A consummate Bar Man, Chief Aiku’s dedication to the Bar was obvious and the NBA will not be the same without him.

    “ He will be sorely missed, but there is great consolation in the fact that he lived a fulfilled life and left his mark.  There are many who do not have this privilege.

    “I pray for the peaceful repose of his soul and for strength and fortitude for his family to bear the loss.

    “He was a listening leader, a father figure to all lawyers and a big believer in the unity of the Bar Association, through understanding, agreement, cooperation, mediation and cross regional accommodation,” Ajibade said.

    Former General Secretary  of the NBA, Mr. Olumuyiwa Akinboro (SAN) said: “He was a man of peace and one of the main pillars of harmony at the bar. As the Chairman of the Body of Benchers, he was firm and innovative. The Bar has really lost one of its stabilizing personalities, but we are only consoled by the immortality of his legacies.”

    Also at the event were former NBA Presidents Oluwarotimi Akeredolu (SAN),  and Augustin Alegeh (SAN), former General Secretaries Dele Adesina (SAN) and Lawal Rabana (SAN)  former Attorneys-General and Ministers  of  Justice, Chief Akin Olujimi (SAN),  Chief  Bayo Ojo (SAN),  former chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences  Commission (ICPC), Justice Emmanuel Ayoola (rtd), former President,  Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) Mrs Boma Ozobia, former  Oyo State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Mr. Adebayo Ojo, Chairman NBA Lagos, Mr. Martin Ogunleye, chairman of the NBA Section on Business Law (SBNL), Mr. Olu Apata , among others.

  • Appeal Court to hear Epe monarch’s case Nov 13

    The Court of Appeal, has fixed November 23, for hearing of the appeal filed by the monarch of  Igboyeland, Epe, Michael Gbadebo Onakoya on his deposition by a Lagos High Court.

    The appellate court presided over  by Justice Tijani Abubakar, fixed the new date for hearing of the appeal proper after taking the submission of all parties in the matter.

    Others on the panel are Justices Jamilu Yammama Tukur and A.O. Obaseki-Adejumo

    At resumed proceedings last week, counsel to the appellant, Mr T.J, Odesola informed the court that he has many application pending before the court.

    Odesola said one of the applications in particular filed March 24, 2010 sought to stay the judgement of Justice Habeeb Abiru (now a Justice of the Court of Appeal) delivered in 2008 which dethroned him as the traditional ruler of Igboyeland and another filed June, last year which sought to set aside an order by the state government which banned him from the town.

    The order by the Lagos State government issued on May 17, 2016,  which was to prevent any breakdown of law and order in the ancient town was sequel to three petitions submitted by members of the Ewade Ruling House through their counsel, Mr Trimidhi Dairo, dated March 9, April 22 and April 28, 2016 respectively, to the state governor, the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice and the Commissioner for Local Government and Community Affairs, Lagos State, complaining that the deposed Oba Onakoya has been parading himself as the Orijeru of Igbooye contrary to and in disobedience to the judgements Justice Abiru and another deposition judgement by Justice Justice Kasali delivered on the April 19, 2016.

    But the Justices of the Court of Appeal declined to consider the applications owing to the long delay by counsel to argue it at an appropriate time.

    The Court of Appeal however ruled to hear the main appeal and fixed November 23 for its hearing.

    Announcing the decision of the three man panel of the court, Justice Tijani  Abubakar ordered all parties to file their respective briefs, arguments and responses and to serve same as appropriate before the next adjourned date.

    The court also granted the request of the appellant to compile and transmit records of the appeal after counsels to parties took turns to tell the court that they were not opposed to his application.

    Other appellants in the matter are Chief Fatai Adewale Mustapha, Mr Olu Adebanko, Mr Galibu Sanni, Chief Oluwole Okoye, Chief Safiriyu Bakare, Alhaji Tamiriyu Bello and Venerable M.O. Odunlami.

    The respondents Chief Johnson Adenopo, Alhaji Sikiru Adesada, Lagos State Attornry General, Lagos State Government, Tribunal of Enquiry into Chieftaincy Matters, Lagos State, Otunba A.I. Adebamowo, Chief Dauda Kadiri, Chief Gbenro Otunnowo and Mr Taburaliyu Salam Hassan Adesada.

    The first to third and eleventh respondents were represented by Mr. Abass Banjo; fourth to sixth respondents were represented by Mr. A.O. Muheeb; the eighth respondent Otunba Abdul-Wasiu Musa Adebamowo appeared for his person while the ninth and tenth respondents were represented by Mr. Trimidhi Dairo

  • Court to hear winding-up suit against Guinness March 28

    •‘We’re not indebted’

    Justice Hadizat Rabiu-Shagari of the Federal High Court in Lagos will on March 28 hear a winding-up petition by a company, Pharma-Deko Plc, against Guinness Nigeria Plc over an alleged N175,699,317.99 debt.

    Pharma-Deko Plc is praying the court to wind-up Guinness Nigeria over its inability to pay the alleged debt, and to appoint a receiver for the drink company.

    The petitioner, in an affidavit deposed to by its production manager, Olukayode Isola, said it had a canning contract with Guinness Nigeria, which was allegedly breached.

    It said parties went to arbitration, at the end of which an award of the sum was made last July 1.

    Pharma-Deko said efforts to get the debt paid failed despite several demand notices to Guinness Nigeria.

    But, Guinness Nigeria has urged the court to strike out the suit in its entirety for want of jurisdiction.

    In a statement, the company said: “Guinness Nigeria denies that it is indebted to Pharma Deko Plc in the stated amount or any amount at all and its solicitors have filed a robust defence to Pharma Deko’s claims in court.

    “The amount claimed by Pharma Deko Plc in the court process is an insignificant amount when compared with the revenue, cashflow and balance sheet of the company and management is very confident of being able to repudiate the claims in court.

    “The management of Guinness Nigeria wishes to assure its employees, customers, shareholders and other stakeholders that it is capable of meeting its financial and other obligations to its various stakeholders and that it continues to operate as a going concern.”

  • ‘Make CJN’s appointment according to law, not seniority’

    A lawyer, Chuks Nsobundu, who was called to Bar 36 years ago, argues that the appointment of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) should be based on the Constitution and merit, not seniority.

    I have read the views canvassed by some legal practitioners and retired justices on the propriety of appointing the most Senior Justice of the Supreme Court as the next Chief Justice of Nigeria on the retirement of the incumbent in November 2016. My learned friends premised their arguments on tradition, seniority and ethnic balancing and not on the 1999 Constitution (as amended 2010).

    The Supreme Court of Nigeria and the office of the Chief Justice and Justices of the Supreme Court are created by section 230(1), (2)(a) and (b) of the 1999 Constitution.

    The appointment of Chief Justice of Nigeria is strictly governed by section 231(1) of the Constitution of wit “The appointment of a person to the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria shall be made by the President on the Recommendation of the National Judicial Council Subject to Confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.

    On the constitutional qualification to hold the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria Section 231(3) of the 1999 Constitution provides “A person shall not be qualified to hold the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria or of a Justice of the Supreme Court, unless he is qualified to practice as a legal practitioner in Nigeria and has been so qualified for a period of not less than 15 year”.

    Therefore, the only constitutional qualification for holding the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria is 15 years post call at the Bar. The makers of the constitution did not make seniority or tradition one of the qualifications for appointment of the CJN.

    Seniority can very easily enthrone mediocrity which breeds corruption and ineptitude. Infact any practicing lawyer with over fifteen years post call experience is constitutionally qualified to be appointed the Chief Justice of Nigeria.

    I am aware of one precedent. Dr. T.O. Elias was only a Senior Lecturer and not even a Professor of Law at UNILAG when he was appointed the Chief Justice of Nigeria in 1973 and he remains one of the best Chief Justices of Nigeria. Dr. T.O. Elias was appointed above serving Justices of the Supreme Court and Senior Judges of the High Courts. Dr. T.O. Elias was an academic. He was not a Queens Counsel (Q.C).

    Another example which I vividly remember was the case of Dr. Augustine Nnamani. Dr. Augustine Nnamani was an Enugu based private Legal Practitioner. He was never a magistrate nor a High Court Judge. From Attorney General and Minister of Justice in the Military Government of General Olusegun Obasanjo in 1979 Dr. Augustine Nnamani was appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria and he was one of the best Supreme Court Justices until his sudden death while still in service.

    It is only in the appointment of an acting Chief Justice of Nigeria that seniority is provided for in section 231(4) of the 1999 Constitution which reads “If the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria is vacant or if the person holding the office is for any reason unable to perform the functions of the office, then until a person has been appointed to and has resumed those functions the president shall appoint the most Senior Justice of the Supreme Court to perform those functions”.

    Elementary rule of interpretation of statutes make it abundantly clear that section 231(4) of the 1999 Constitution does not govern the appointment of a substantive Chief Justice.

    I submit very forcefully, that all the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, Federal and High Court Judges and Private Legal Practitioners of fifteen years post call are constitutionally qualified for appointment by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council and the confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.

    As lawyers we must always accept the Constitution as Supreme and subordinate ourselves to the mandatory provisions of the Constitution and avoid whipping up sentiments that tend to mislead the gullible and undiscerning public.

    On the appointment of the CJN the role of the NJC is advisory and therefore adjectival. The NJC must be guided by the Constitution and not seniority.

    To be fair to the President the N.J.C should recommend at least four persons from which the President may choose one or even return the list to the N.J.C because the power of the President to appoint or nominate any person for the office of the C.J.N is discretionary and subject to Senate confirmation by a simple majority.

    The office of C.J.N is not a promotional position which is usually based on seniority but strictly an appointive position which is based on section 231(1) of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended).

    I submit that to the extent that the appointment of the C.J.N by Mr. President is subject to Senate’s confirmation it has acquired a political or at least a quasi-political coloration.

    Any argument that Mr. President is bound to accept anyone recommended by the N.J.C is contrary to section 231(1) of the Constitution because the President ceases to be the appointor and becomes an errand boy to the N.J.C. The President is not a courier.

    The Senate is not a robot and may reject the person nominated C.J.N on the advice or recommendation of the N.J.C.

    One more precedent that the C.J.N can be appointed even from the Bar is the case of Hon. Justice Uloko. When the office of Chief Justice of Plateau State became vacant following the exit of Hon. Justice Alfred Obi-Okoye, the Attorney General of Plateau State Mr. Uloko was appointed the C.J of Plateau State.

    Therefore the three precedents of Dr. T.O Elias moving from a University Lecturer to Federal Attorney-General and became the C.J.N, Dr. Augustine Nnamani moving from private law practice to Federal Attorney-General and was appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court in 1979 and the case of Mr. Uloko who was appointed A.G. of Plateau State from the Bar and from that position was appointed the C.J. of Plateau State clearly amplify the spirit and letter of section 231(1) of the Constitution.

     

    Kayode Eso on seniority

    complex

     

    On the effect of the deadly virus of seniority which has afflicted the judiciary, the legal profession and the N.J.C I wish to reproduce Hon. Justice Kayode Eso JSC views on attributes for appointment to a high and to an appeal court at pages 169 – 171 of his book “The Mystery Gunman”. “One of the most unfortunate principles of appointment of judges from the High Court Bench to a Court of Appeal, be it the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court has been the basing of the elevation on the seniority of judges. I never suffered from this ill-system, for when I was appointed to the Western State Court of Appeal, I was the most junior in the State”.  (Underlining supplied for emphasis).

    “There is no time, unless the seniority syndrome is changed, that the adverse effect of “everything by seniority” will not show in the type of justice meted out by the courts”.

    “Civilized countries, or rather, advanced countries of the Commonwealth, and even in most of the emergent democracies except Nigeria, and a sprinkle of others have seen the wisdom in discarding the seniority complex. Whatever the sentiments attached to seniority as a yardstick for appointments to Courts of Appeal in this country, they are sentiments ruinous to true administration and obtaining of justice – justice should be according to the law and not mere seniority”.

    Therefore the present mass hysteria of canvassing or lobbying for appointment to the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria is odious, primordial and anachronistic.

    I remember vividly that many years ago Prof. Ben Nwabueze S.A.N was invited from the academia to be appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court but he politely rejected the offer.

    I am certainly not one of the fans of President Muhammadu Buhari and Professor Itse Sagay but I find myself on the same page with Prof. Sagay on this issue and I urge President Buhari to be guided strictly by the Constitution on the appointment of the next C.J.N. The President must not be an errand boy of the N.J.C and the cabal in the legal profession.

    Mr. President in exercising his discretionary power to appoint or nominate the next C.J.N for confirmation by the Senate must insist on due diligence by the N.J.C who must place all verifiable materials that influenced their recommendation before Mr. President, to enable him exercise his discretionary power of appointment under Section 231(1) of the Constitution. However, if the recommendation of the N.J.C is solely based on the seniority syndrome, I will urge Mr. President to reject the N.J.C recommendation as business as usual.

    I also remember that a Jamaican Hon. Justice Darnly Alexander was not a Supreme Court Justice when he was appointed the Chief Justice of Nigeria.

    I therefore urge the N.J.C, Mr. President and the Senate to be guided only by the 1999 Constitution (As Amended 2010) in the appointment and confirmation of the next Chief Justice of Nigeria. The process of appointing the next Chief Justice must include a thorough screening to ensure that the next C.J.N like Casser’s wife must be above suspicion. No person with a skeleton in his cupboard should be considered, seniority or no seniority.