The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • AGF, Kekere-Ekun, others seek improved justice delivery

    ATTORNEY-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Mr Abubakar Malami (SAN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun of the Supreme Court and former Solicitor-General Fola Arthur-Worrey have sought an improvement in the justice delivery system.

    The trio and others spoke at a public lecture organised by the United Action for Change.

    The lecture, with the theme Access to quality justice in Nigeria was held at Oranmiyan Hall, Lagos Airport Hotel, Ikeja

    Malami hailed the organisers’ foresight in taking steps to articulate the roadmap towards the improvement of access to justice for Nigerians.

    According to him, the justice sector over the years has been bedevilled with series of challenges, such as inadequate human resource, lack of funding, poor internal management, poor accountability mechanisms and lack of coordination across justice sector institutions and other arms of government.

    These challenges, he said, have made access to justice a herculean task to achieve.

    Access to justice, he added, goes beyond improving a citizen’s access to courts or guaranteeing legal representation.

    “It extends to the ability of formal or traditional justice institutions both at the local, state and federal levels to ensure that laws, rules of engagement and respect for human rights are upheld. It calls for a radical review of the way the justice system is structured. The quality and timeliness of justice delivered is what makes access to justice an effective instrument for the protection of rights of all citizens,” Malami said.

    Justice Kekere-Ekun said the apex court is open to suggestion on how to improve justice delivery system in the country.

    She said Nigerians must have a change of mind in the nation’s judiciary.

    She said from all indications, the nation’s judiciary is on trial.

    Arthur-Worrey blamed systemic failure for the crises in the judiciary.

    The convener of the group Dr Muiz Banire said the lecture was put in place for Nigerians to have a say in correcting the mistakes of the past in order to chart a way forward for the country.

    Banire, the All Progressives Congress (APC) National Legal Adviser, said the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court should be given a critical review such that only important constitutional cases would be subject of appeal to the Supreme Court, thereby making the Court of Appeal the final court in most contractual and tortuous cases.

    This, he said, would reduce the congestion of cases in the apex court such that cases spending decades before they are decided would become a thing of the past.

    He reiterated the need for financial autonomy for courts, saying: “Every court must control its administrative budget and not be subjected to financial control by the executives or any other arm of government as financial autonomy is critical to dispensation of justice.”

    The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) urged the National Judiciary Council (NJC) to put in place an internal monitoring system on judges and not wait for whistle blowers.

    “Bureaucracy must be eliminated in the administration and appointments of court registrars. There must be standard human resource procedures in the recruitment and appointment of judges,” Banire said.

  • LASU, OAU shine at moot court contest

    Lagos State University (LASU)  Law Faculty students have won the maiden Gbenga Ojo National Inter-University Moot Court, Counselling and Mock Competition” held last week  at  the institution.

    Adebanjo Fatai and Ayeyemi Taofeek appeared as counsel for Team LASU, while Ehinmosan Olukolade  and Tijani Taofeeq appeared for Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile Ife, Osun State, which came second at the  event.

    At the moot court session presided over by Justice Olugbenga Ogunfowora of the Ogun State High Court,  Team LASU defeated its counterpart from OAU, Ile-Ife.

    Aside from certificates, Team LASU got a N50,000 cash prize, OAU went home with N30, 000.

    Other universities that participated in the three-day programme include Ajayi Crowther University, Bowen University and National Open University ( NOUN).

    In the debate competition, which centered on contemporary issues and topics, such as  “State policing; to be or not to be?”; “Amnesty as a palliative measure to terrorism in Nigeria”; “The need for special courts in the fight against corruption in Nigeria”, OAU came first, ASU came and Ajayi Crowther University came third.  They went away with cash prizes of N30,000, N20,000 and N10,000.

    According to the President of the LASU LSS, Mr Kamilu Abdu-Ganiu, the students decided to honour Ojo because of his, “zeal, drive and determination to encourage the spirit of excellence amongst students.”­

    Also for his contributions to the Legal profession, both at practice and impartation of knowledge.”

    On the  objectives of the programme, Abdul-Ganiu said: “The moot court competition helps to introduce students and budding lawyers to the practical aspect of the study of law, as well as create a healthy rivalry amongst sister Faculties of Law from several institutions.”

    The honoree, Ojo, was given an award which was presented by the Dean, Faculty of Law, LASU, Prof Mike Ikhariale, for his support and contributions to the development of the faculty.

  • Ambode’s wife, monarchs seek end to gender violence

    Wife of Lagos State Governor Mrs Bolanle Ambode and tradi-tional rulers in Ikorodu have stressed the need to stop  gender-based violence forthwith.

    They spoke at a sensitisation programme, which had as its theme, “The role of the society in tackling sexual and gender based violence crimes”. It was organised by the Domestic and Sexual Violence Response Team (DSVRT) with the Ayangbure of Ikorodu, Oba Kabiru Sotobi.

    In an address delivered on her behalf by a member of the Committee of Wives of Senior Lagos State Officers (COWSLO), MrsTitilayo Ogunleye,  Mrs Ambode said the fight against sexual and domestic violence should not be left for the government alone, adding: “We cannot leave the whole assignment for government alone. If we are part of the problem, we should be part of the solution.”

    She added: ”Efforts to stop gender based violence must start from the homes. It must begin with how we treat our darling wives, our house helps, foster children, neighbour’s children, school pupils and other children in our care.

    “When we start treating them right and respecting their personal liberties, then it is a sweet good-bye to gender violence”, she said.

    In his address at the occasion, Oba Sotobi , leading other Ikorodu monarchs, Baales and chiefs, dismissed the claims that gender based violence may be as a result of tradition and culture emphasizing that  that  90 per cent of gender based violence are causes by ignorance, poverty related  and hard drug induced.

    The Ayangbure lamented that the weekly traditional Council meeting is bogged down with an avalanche  of complaints , allegation of abuse, deprivation of rights, defilement and stressed that “ the under current social issues leading to the violence seem deeper than the ordinary”.

    He said the violence was a deep social malaise that would require concerted effort, research and analysis to minimise the incidents in the society.

  • ‘Fed Govt can’t take state land without governor’s approval’

    Former Lagos State Solicitor-General Fola Arthur-Worrey has said the proposed Grazing Commission cannot vest the Federal Government with power to take over land in a state without the governor’s approval.

    Arthur-Worrey observed that the Bill, which has passed second reading at the House of Representatives, seeks to vest the proposed Commission with powers that appear to conflict with the Constitution and the Land Use Act of 1978.

    He said as the law stands, the Federal Government’s power is “reserved or limited to land acquired prior to 1978, such as land used for barracks or ports, etc. That’s essentially the legal structure. The bill seems to be in conflict with the existing state of the law.

    “The Federal Government can identify land that it desires and if it is outside of its own acquired land, it has to apply to the governor. The governor is at liberty to say yes, or no’’.

    Arthur-Worrey, former Executive Secretary, Lagos State Security Trust Fund (LSSTF), described as misinformed, fears that if the bill is passed by the National Assembly, it could be used by the Federal Government for ulterior motives.

    He said: “I think that the emotion does not rest on any legitimate fear. I get all manner of aggressive and emotive texts, for instance, that the Grazing Bill is a plan to Islamise Nigeria; most of them are misinformed.

    “I cannot make that connection; I just can’t make that connection, unless the Constitution is amended to remove the Land Use Act from its comforting embrace and unless the Land Use Act itself is then subsequently amended, I find it virtually impracticable for the Grazing Commission, as proposed, to exercise the powers that they put in it.’’

  • How will Abia stalemate end?

    How will Abia stalemate end?

    Since June 27, Abia State has not known rest, following the removal of Governor Okezie Ikpeazu by a Federal High Court in Abuja. Last week, the parties returned to court, but Justice Okon Abang sent the matter to the Court of Appeal for resolution since there was no longer anything to stay on his judgment which had been executed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Eric Ikhilae writes.

    The legal status of Okezie Ikpeazu as Abia State Governor became more intriguing last Friday. The problem arose from the orders and counter orders by three courts within a week.

    It all began with two judgments on June 27 by Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court in Abuja, sacking Ikpeazu from office and ordering that Sampson Ogah, who came second in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) primary election be sworn in as governor.

    In compliance with the judgments given in separate suits by Ogah and Uba Eleagbara (described as a member of the PDP) marked: FHC/ 2086/2014 and the consequential orders made by the judge, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) issued a certificate of return (COR) to Ogah.

    But, on June 30, before Ogah could be sworn in, Ikpeazu obtained an order from the Abia State High Court, Osisioma, restraining the  Chief Judge, Justice Theresa Uzokwe, or any judge from administering the oath of office on Ogah.

    Justice C. H. Ahuchaogu, in an ex-parte order, in a suit: HOS 52/2016,  ordered “that the third defendant (state CJ) or any other judge of the court or any judicial officer are hereby restrained from swearing in the first defendant (Ogah) while the claimant remains in office in accordance with Section 143(1) and (2) of the Electoral Act 2010”.

    This created a stalemate that could be resolved by the appellant courts, despite last Friday’s pronouncements by the trial courts.

     

    A slap in the court’s face

     

    Last Friday, while the Abia High Court, extended its order stopping Ogah’s swearing in, Justice Abang suspended proceedings on the pending applications in the Ogah case to await the decision of the appellate courts.

    His decision was informed by the parties’ agreement that since the appeal against the judgment has been entered and given a number at the Court of Appeal, it was tidy to await its outcome. But, in relation to the judgment in the suit by Eleagbara, against which there was no pending appeals, Justice Abang dismissed the applications for stay of execution by Ikpeazu and the PDP. He reaffirmed the orders in the judgment, noting that there was nothing to stay.

    The judge said: “The judgment of this court was given in favour of Dr. Sampson Ogah. One of the orders directed the PDP to forward the names of the person with the second highest votes at the PDP primary, Ikpeazu having been disqualified from contesting the primary, to INEC as the party’s candidate for the election.

    “The order made against Ikpeazu was rightly made. It subsists until it is set aside on appeal. There is no issue of stay of execution. The judgment having been enforced by INEC, there is nothing to stay.

    “The judgment has been executed; certificate of return has been issued in favour of Ogah as Governor of Abia State.

    “There is no evidence that the motion for stay was served on INEC before it issued the certificate of return. Therefore, INEC lawfully issued the certificate of return to Ogah, which was issued in compliance with the orders of the court.”

    The judge awarded N40,000 cost against PDP to be paid to Ogah before it could take any further steps in the case.

    Justice Abang, though refusing to vacate the order made by the Abia High Court, as prayed by Ogah’s lawyer, Alex Iziyon (SAN), came down hard on Ikpeazu.

    The judge noted that having taken steps to circumvent the execution of the court’s judgment, the court could no longer indulge him.

    “Dr. Ikpeazu slapped the court in the face, went to a different court that is of coordinate jurisdiction and obtained another ex-parte order that has the effect of neutralising the order of this court.

    “He slapped the court in the face; he cannot expect the court to grant him an indulgence. You cannot flout an order of court and expect the court to listen to you and grant you a discretionary indulgence. It is a serious matter to slap a court,” the judge said.

     

    Road to stalemate

     

    Upon suspicion that Ikpeazu, then a governorship aspirant, made a false claim in his tax information to his party prior to its primary on December 8, 2014, Eleagbala sued him at the Federal High Court and sought, among others, an order disqualifying Ikpeazu for allegedly violating his party’s Electoral Guidelines.

    Ogah subsequently filed a similar suit, which was initially assigned to Justice Adeniyi Ademola (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja).

    Ikpeazu objected to the suit by Eleagbara and challenged the court’s jurisdiction to hear it. While the issue of jurisdiction was pending at the appellate court, the respondents sought the transfer of the case before Justice Ademola, alleging bias.

    Earlier this year, the Supreme Court resolved the issue of jurisdiction raised against Eleagbara’s case by Ikpeazu. It ordered expeditious hearing of the case by the Federal High Court. The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, later reassigned the case taken from Justice Ademola to Justice Abang.

    On June 27, Justice Abang rendered his judgments in both cases. The judge, particularly, observed that Ikpeazu lied in his declaration to INEC that he fulfilled all requirements to stand for election, whereas he did not. He said the issue before the court was not about qualification as required under Section 177 of the Constitution or disqualification under Section 182 of the Constitution.

    “The issue before the court is disqualification to participate in the first defendant’s (PDP’s) primary election for Abia State. It is not whether he was qualified under Section 177 of the Constitution to contest the governorship election.

    “Since there is no provision for independent candidate, it is material that he must first meet the PDP requirement as stipulated in Article 14(a) of the PDP Electoral Guidelines,” the judge said.

    The judge noted that since Ikpeazu was not qualified to contest the PDP primary by making false claim in his tax information submitted to his party, and which his party later submitted to INEC, he breached Section 31 of the Constitution.

    Section 177 of the Constitution provides that a person shall be qualified for election to the office of Governor of a State if he is a citizen of Nigeria by birth; who is 35 years; he is a member of a political party and is sponsored by that political party; and he has been educated up to at least School Certificate level or its equivalent.

    Section 182 (1) of the Constitution listed condition under which a candidate could be disqualified to include: voluntary acquisition of citizenship of another country, being elected to such office at any two previous elections; being adjudged a lunatic, or a person of unsound mind, being under a sentence of death; or within 10 years before the election he has been convicted and sentenced for an offence involving dishonesty; or having been found guilty of the contravention of the code of Conduct and being an undischarged bankrupt.

    Others include that he has not resigned, withdrawn or retired from the employment of public service of the federation or a state at least thirty days to the date of the election; belonging to any secret society; or he has been indicted for embezzlement or fraud by a Judicial Commission of Inquiry or an Administrative Panel of Inquiry or a Tribunal, or if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.

     

    Third party interests

     

    Incidentally, the dispute has attracted third party interests, with some now seeking to benefit from the prevailing stalemate. One of such is Friday Nwosu, who said he was also a PDP governorship aspirant in the state.

    He went to a Federal High Court in Owerri, the Imo State capital, urging the court to, among others, declare him as the ‘lawful’ governor of Abia State and not Ogah. Nwosu who alleged that Ikpeazu forged his tax papers

    In a judgment last Friday, the trial judge, Justice A.I Allagoa, dismissed Nwosu’s suit on the grounds that he failed to discharge the burden of proof placed on him under the law to prove that the tax documents were, indeed, forged.

    The judge stated further that Ikpeazu could not have issued himself the said receipt which was alleged to be fraught with irregularities, noting that it was purely an internal PDP matter and that the party acted within its right in fielding Ikpeazu for the election.

    A candidate in the last governorship election in the state, Daniel Ikechukwu Onyeonagu, who contested under the banner of the Kowa Party, has also indicated interest in the case. He contended that Justice Abang was wrong for ordering that Ogah takes over from Ikpeazu as governor, but that the best decision would have been to order a fresh election.

    Onyeonagu has applied to the Federal High Court, Abuja, as an interested party, for leave to appeal the judgments in both cases decided by the Abuja court.

    One of the grounds of his appeal in his proposed notice of appeal, is that Justice Abang erred when he ordered that Ogah be sworn in, having not participated in the election as required under Section 141 of the Electoral Act.

    Relying on the provision of Section 31(6) of the Electoral Act, Onyeonagu also faulted Justice Abang, contending that by the provision of Section 31(6), the much the judge could have gone was to disqualify a candidate found to have supplied false information from contesting the election.

    “The powers of the court as envisaged under the provisions of Section 31(6) of the Electoral Act 2010 (as amended) do not extend to that of declaring a runner up  to a disqualified candidate of a political party in an intra-party  primary, winner  of an inter-party election conducted by INEC, when the runner up only participated in the intra-party primary of the concerned political party of the disqualified candidate and not the general election conducted by INEC in which the electorates are given room to vote for the candidate of their choice,” he said.

    Onyeonagu urged the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgments by Justice Abang and order INEC to conduct a fresh election for Abia State within 90 days from the day of its judgment, in which all political parties and Nigerian citizens, who vied for the governorship election of Abia State on April 11 and 25, this year are to participate to the exclusion of Ikpeazu, Ogah and their party.

     

  • Court adjourns Isara-Remo kingship case to October 25

    Justice A.  A. Babawale of  the Sagamu High Court  has  adjourned to October 25,   this year, the suit by Prince Adetayo Odunsi challenging the nomination of Albert Mayungbe by king makers for the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo, this year for hearing of the matter.

    Joined as second to ninth defendants are the Head of Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House, Prince Obafemi Awoyade (now deceased); Secretary, Remo North Local Government; Oliwo of Isara, Chief Ajibowu Ogunfowodu; Apena of Isara, Chief Jimoh Soyombo; Chief Ladipo Ogunyemi; Ogbeni Odi of Isara, Chief Olajubu Osibote; Ekeji Asipa Odi, Chief Tunde Kalejaiye; Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief  Owuye Logba as second to ninth defendants.

    Others are Ekeji Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief Efuwape Sotikare; Olori Emo of Isara, Chief Bashiru Awoniyi; Ekeji Olori Emo of Isara, Chief Korede Ogunwole; Asipa Emo of Isara, Chief Nosiru Sodipe; Ekeji Asipa Emo, Chief Adewole Sopitan; the Governor; Executive Council of Ogun State; the Commissioner for Chieftaincy and Local Government and the state Attorney-General/Commissioner for Justice as 10th to 18th defendants.

    At the resumed hearing of the matter last week, counsel to the claimant, Mr. Olumuyiwa Obanewa, told the court that he had an application dated June 23 served on all counsels.

    He said the application substitutes the deceased head of the Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House with the new head.

    He also sought the court’s permission to substitute one of their witnesses, the Akarigbo of Remo land, Oba Michael Sonariwo,  who he said, could not come to the court because of pressure of work.

    Counsel to the first, sixth to 10th and 14th defendants, Dr. Victor Odunaiya did not oppose the application.

    Principal State Counsel, Mrs. Olubukanla Adejumo, also the counsel to the 15th to 18th  defendants, agreed with the submission of Odunaiya.

    Obanewa said he was prepared to move the application, requesting for seven days to file the amended processes.

    Justice Babawale granted the request, urging the court to vacate the  adjourned date of July 6 in view of the long vacation of judges in high courts across the country.

    In his 32-point statement of claim, Prince Odunsi, who claimed to be a  descendant of the late Oba Oyemade Mayungbe and progenitor of Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House,  averred that he is entitled to the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.

    But Mayungbe insisted that he is the  “bonafide member  and descendant of the Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House’’.

     

  • Firm sues Air Force for N1b over land

    Firm sues Air Force for N1b over land

    A FIRM, BCL Limited, has sued the Nigerian Air Force (NAF) at the Federal High Court, Lagos, for N1billion over its continued occupation of a property at No. 13B Reeves Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, belonging to BCL Limited.

    Aside from NAF, other defendants in the suit include the Chief of Air Staff, NAF Investment Limited, Commander 107 NAF Camp, Victoria Island Lagos, Federal Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary, Presidential Implementation Committee on Federal Government Landed Property.

    BCL, in its statement of claim attached to the suit No: HC/LC/CS/1769/14, filed by its counsel, Abubakar Sheidu, before Justice Mohammed Idris, alleged that NAF  ejected its employees and prevented its agents from continuing with re-development of the property which it had already commenced.

    The  firm alleged that armed personnel of the Nigerian Air Force have continued to occupy the said property in total violation of the rights of the lawful owner.

    BCL claimed  that it obtained the property in 2008 without encumbrances based on a memorandum of understanding and developmental lease signed between the company and the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, acting for the Federal Government.

    The firm further claimed to have  paid N176,925,000 for the leasehold.

    “Despite several written proofs from the Presidential Implementation Committee of the White Paper on the Commission of Inquiry into the Alienation of Federal Government Landed Property, which handled the lease of the property on behalf of the Federal Government to support BCL’s claim, the NAF forcefully ejected BCL and stopped its agents from re-development of the property, which it had already commenced,” the company alleged.

    It said: “The NAF has continued to occupy the property refusing its lawful owner access in outright disregard of a letter by Secretary of the Presidential Implementation Committee part of which reads that, “the Federal Government property known as 13B Reeve Road was never at any time offered to the Nigerian Air Force. The  property was never an institutional property for the Nigerian Air Force.”

    The claimant sought several declarations and orders against the defendants.

    The firm through its counsel, Sheidu prayed the court for an  order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants collectively or severally by themselves or their agents from meddling with or purporting to sell, alienate or transfer the plaintiff’s title, rights or interest in No. 13B Reeve Road, Ikoyi-Lagos whether to themselves (jointly or severally) or any other person or persons.

    They also asked for N500 million as special damages and another N500million being general damages suffered by the plaintiff as a result of  the NAF, the Chief of Air Staff, NAF Investment Limited, Commander 107 NAF Camp, Victoria Island Lagos trespass, invasion and illegal seizure of the plaintiff’s property known as No. 13B Reeve Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

    In its statement of defence, NAF through its officers, Flying Officer Oluwaseun Afolabi and B. R. Ashiru, urged the  court to dismiss the suit.

    NAF also denied all the claims made by the claimant, BCL limited insisting that  there was no truth in them.

    NAF  claimed  that they are not aware of any development regarding the lease agreement between BCL Limited and the Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development.

    It also claimed that they were not aware of any sum paid and put the plaintiffs to the proof if any such payment was made.

    The NAF, insisting on having  been  in possession, said in 2004, it indicated interest in buying the Federal Government’s properties at Nos. 13A and 13B Reeve Road in Ikoyi Lagos during the Federal Government’s monetisation policy implementation.

    The organisation maintained that the plaintiff is not entitled to any of the prayers sought for and urged the court to discountenance such prayers as frivolous and baseless.

    Counsel to the Minister of Lands, Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary, Presidential Implementation Committee on Federal Government Landed Property, Chijioke Dike, in their response, stated that the said property was formally in the occupation of the NAF by its personnel and same was not at any time classified as an institutional property.

    According to him, the property was initially slated for redevelopment under the Public-private partnership of the Federal Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, but due to frustration and failure of redevelopment, the Federal Government cancelled the programme and the Secretary, Presidential Implementation Committee on Federal Government Landed Property was authorised to sell the property and since the property was not an institutional property it was never at any time offered to the NAF.

    He further said the property was not among those exempted from lease in the guidelines for the disposal or sale of Federal Government properties.

    Justice Idris has adjourned the case till October 24, this year for continuation of trial.

  • Olanipekun seeks constitutional role for monarchy

    Olanipekun seeks constitutional role for monarchy

    FORMER Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) president Wole Olanipekun (SAN) has canvassed statutory  role for monarchy in a democracy, saying it is vital to its survival.

    Olanipekun, who is the National President of Ikere Development Forum (IDF), spoke in Lagos at the weekend during an IDF-organised Special Interactive Forum of Ikere-Ekiti people with the Ogoga of  Ikere-Ekiti, Oba  Samuel Adejimi Adu.

    He argued for the celebration and preservation of the traditional kingship system, urging the Ogoga, who was installed last year, to brace to the task of leading a kingdom which has four SANs and over 70 professors, among others.

    He said: “The SANs are myself, Dayo Akinlaja, Dapo Olanipekun, my son and Ola Olanipekun, my cousin.

    “Before the colonial masters came, who were the people administering us? There was good governance. I salute the wisdom of our progenitors. The monarchy has a role to play in a Constitutional democracy such as ours. Take a monarch out of a town and you will have no one to chest out as its representative. In Ikere, for instance, the Ogoga is the representative of the people, the conscience of the town; whatever he says is binding.

    “If the Ogoga has no role to play in governance, then, who has? Who does the governor or president meet when he comes to a town? The monarch. When we speak of governance at the grassroots level, let us not deceive ourselves, it is the monarchs that manage the grassroots for the government. That doesn’t mean that they must be involved in partisan politics, no.”

    The event, which celebrated the Ogoga’s first anniversary as monarch, drew over 300 Ikere indigenes from all walks of life resident in Lagos, Ondo and the United States of America (USA).

    “The IDF organised this forum because we want to celebrate this monarch, within a short period he has transformed our town. Ikere palace has been there for over 200 years, but when he got there, he realised it was in a state of total disrepair. On his own, he pulled it down and rebuilt it within eight months,” Olanipekun said.

    He added that by his own conservative estimate, the king would so far have spent “not less than N200million” on rebuilding the palace gates, even though “he knows very well that the palace does not belong to him, but to the town”.

    The monarch hailed the IDF for the first forum in Ikere, promising to dedicate his life to srve the town.

    “I feel so proud, so honoured to be king over four SANs, medical doctors, professors, Generals, among other professionals,” he said.

    He listed projects being planned for Ikere to include a radio station, for which money has been provided, a hotel to be commissioned this year, and urged the people to submit entries for an Ikere anthem as well as symbol.

  • Quality of lawyers is low, says retired judge  

    Quality of lawyers is low, says retired judge  

    Justice Ebenezer Adebajo (rtd) had a low-key 67th birthday last Tuesday. The jurist, who retired from the High Court of Lagos about two years ago, during the birthday celebration, spoke with ADEBISI ONANUGA on Buhari Administration’s fight against corruption and other issues on the judiciary

    How do you see the war against corruption?

    I find this so-called war against corruption as a superficial exercise. I used the word superficial with reluctance and care because there are two professors in the committee or commission appointed by the President on corruption. Does the prosecution of a handful of high-ranking officials qualify as a fight against corruption? It does not. If you fight against corruption, it is to eliminate corruption in our body system. Corruption is a systemic thing. It is within the system of governance itself. That is where the fight against corruption should commence from. In ancient days, when a man has worked for 35 years, and he retires from public office or the civil service, and for the next three or four years, he is not going to be paid his pension, he would of course look for extra while he is in service to guarantee his days after retirement. It is when we correct these anomalies within the structures of the system that we can say we have started to fight corruption. But taking some people to court, no matter how high-ranking, you have not taken everybody to court. So, those who are coming behind can say that we might be able to get away with it too because when you take some to court, you did not did not take everybody to court.    That isn’t war against corruption. We have to look inside the system itself. We have an Air Marshall in court, we have an Army General in court, we have this, we have that. That isn’t a war against corruption. We must look inside the system itself and the anomalies within the system, we review them. Until we do that right, we are not going to put aside corruption.

     Some people have been taken to court and they entered into plea bargain and returned some of the money they stole. Are you saying that there is no war against corruption or that it will not be complete until there is a blockage of the system that encourages corruption?

    Yes. Until you address the issues within the system that makes people prepared to lose whatever it is to take care of tomorrow after their retirement, whether extravagantly or otherwise, it would be regarded as if you are not fighting corruption. Going to court with some people, yes, they are like thieves taken to court every day. There is nothing remarkable in that and in prosecuting a thief. We are talking about the corruption when a man or woman would come back after five years and be begging for money to buy medication because pension has not been paid or be begging for money to pay rent to his landlord because pension has not been paid. These are the things that are the cause of corruption. It is the cankerworm in the system. Let the system address itself. When the state governor is able to take out his security vote and the civil servants or the public officers have not been paid salaries and you are saying people should not take things! People will do those things outside the ordinary. When the governor lives life as if there is no difficulty and says that the state is broke, so the pensioners are going without their pensions. We are talking about pension arrears of about five years. Then, those who are still in service will say that their own lot will not be like that. They will start taking care of that tomorrow. Those are the issues that need to be addressed when we are talking about corruption, not taking some thieves to court. Every day we are prosecuting thieves but there is nothing extra-ordinary in it.

    Is it proper for EFCC to freeze the account of Ekiti State governor in view of his immunity?

    There is no immunity in Nigeria. We must, first of all, understand this that our laws do not grant immunity to anybody. Not even the President. What our law has done is to create specialised procedures. So bringing a person who sits in office as President or as Vice-President or as Governor or as Deputy Governor, the law has created a specialised procedures by which he would be brought to court. He must first of all, face the House of Assembly or the House of Representatives. That house will look into their matter and will bring out an indictment against them. That indictment is what we called the impeachment of the office bearer. That indictment, it is like a charge. When that indictment has come out, when the officer is impeached, then the whole place will sit like as a court and if they found the impeachment to be proper, they would by their decision remove him from office. When they remove him from office, he is now liable to face prosecution in the regular court. If you fail to prosecute him in the regular court. As was the case with Fayose, when he was impeached, there was no prosecution. So, the legal sequence did not come to its proper conclusion. So, there is no immunity. But in our situation, where we are governed by a sole party in each of our state, like in Lagos State, it is only APC in the House of Assembly, they would not impeach their governor. That is why the system we have adopted calls for multi-party governance, not a single party governance. What we are going through  is leaning towards a state of affairs that will lead and end us up with a state of dictatorship because we have broken up into a one party state.

    The Judiciary is often blamed for not doing enough in the fight against corruption.

    They will blame the judiciary when they have caused the mess among themselves and they couldn’t go forward or backward. The judiciary can only interfere in matters that are brought before it. The judiciary will not go out to look for a case for itself. That is the duty of the Police and in our system of administration of justice, the judge has a limited space to pro-activity. He can only be proactive to some extent, not in all extent as in some countries. In Spain, the judge can actually make an order that he wants to investigate into a particular state of affairs. But here we cannot do that. It is only the issue that is brought before the court that the judge can decide on. There is no fault in the judiciary. It wasn’t the judiciary that coined the phrase, “politically exposed person”. It wasn’t the judiciary. It was the politician. I discovered that from the EFCC when I was conducting EFCC trials. And EFCC, too, are limited by that phrase. They were not able to do their work. Even up till now, in spite of the high profile cases that we have in court, the EFCC knows much more than what is revealed to the public. I have attended their workshops and I know they have more than that. I know that they can be a very efficient organisation if only they would allow them to do so.

    What about the delay of these high profile cases, who is to blame? Is it the prosecution, the counsels or the judges, because some of these cases don’t always get to completion. They are usually bogged-down somehow?

    The judge will do his best to give everybody a fair chance. If a lawyer says I have headache, I would not be coming to court and he has written a polite letter, the judge would just say, well, may be the best thing is to allow him to have the day off and treat everything on the same level. But I believe it is the work of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). It is a question of ethics. When a lawyers purposely delay cases in court, I think it is a matter of professional ethics. It is not for the judge. If as a judge, I find that the lawyer is delaying the case in my court, what am I to do? In Britain, the judge will write to the Bar Association and that will lead to a disciplinary action. But in Nigeria, where do we write to? So, what do you do? You have to keep a balance between  keeping  your work going and be seen not to be bias. But if you take any harsh step, the next thing is accusation of bias. The bar association should be the body that is maintaining ethical discipline among the lawyers. But there is no ethical discipline in Nigeria.

    At the beginning of this administration, the Attorney-General  of the Federation said there would be no room for plea bargain but with the turn of events, we have seen a lot of people opting for plea bargain and returning some of the money stolen. Is that enough to solve corruption?

    When you enter into plea bargain, the attorney-general as the prosecutor, he is political person, he is holding a political office. If it is politically wise, whatever that might mean, he will decide somebody to enter into plea bargain with and who he will not enter into plea bargain with. But I believe that plea bargain, on this high profile cases is political. They are not judicial. I would ask Nigerians to appeal to the judges that they should impose their sentences and not the sentences agreed to by the parties in the plea bargain because it is the judges ‘decision what punishment or sentence to give.

    It is often said that judges are to be heard and not to be seen. How would you react to a situation where serving justices and judges are honoured with awards? Won’t such awards compromise their positions?

    I think this is a thing that the judges should ignore.Those to be given awards, on what basis are they  giving awards to them? Do you know how they put in their hours of work? I believe judges should just ignore such award, especially coming from that area, a private businessman, to say that he is giving award to judges!  If the bar association rises to the occasion, it would have put a stop to such thing. The only award judges are entitled to are national awards.

    How do you see the suggestion that the Chief Justice should be appointed  from outside the Supreme Court?

    It is a dangerous thing. It endangers the system and if you ask me, those who are flying the kite are flying their personal interest. There is a culture of the court and the culture of the court can only be assimilated by having been within the system of the court. From the High Court to the Court of Appeal, straight to the Supreme Court. I can understand if they want to replicate, thinking that they can replicate the likes of Late CJN, Justice Elias. But we should have no need to go looking for such trouble at this point in time. We have gone beyond that point. We have developed beyond that point. In England, when a lawyer takes on the office of a magistrate, that person as a magistrate, will end his or her career as a magistrate. They don’t transcend to the high court. You have taken a line in the profession and you go on through that line. You do not criss-cross the line. Some people had been able to do it. Nikky Tobi of blessed memory, a remarkable man in every way, had the opportunity to do it. He was made a professor, a law writer, a writer of legal books as well as a highly competent judicial officer. We do not need any one outside the system to come and say that I am the head of the system. The lines of the profession, judicial line and the advocacy line, are there and you take your line and follow it through and the position of the Chief Justice of Nigeria is the pinnacle of that line. Why you somebody come from the outside and say that I am taking over? Are you better than those who are there?

    Do you agree that judges specialise in an area of the legal system, such as criminal, maritime or family matters?

    It is right that you have special interest but to say that the only thing you can listen to for the rest of your life is just criminal cases or just husband and wife, I don’t think that is good enough. From what I have experienced, I think it would not be such a sweet mode of work for the judges. Your knowledge and ability to performing in the court room as a judge is not without the reflection of the quality of lawyers who appear before you. That is what we have to look at. The qualities in recent years are down to the extent that I think we can make a case for it that the NUC and the body of benchers should look again at the number of lawyers that we produced in our universities. It is too much. We have left quality aside. We are just producing quantities and we are producing quantities because of the school fees law students are paying. It doesn’t do our profession any good when a law graduate is looking for admission into the law school three years after graduation.

    At 67 years, how do you feel?

    It is pleasant. I am happy and I am a happy man. That is how I can put it.

    How have you kept yourself busy since your retirement two years ago?

    My mind is alive with my consultancy. I have been active, I have been up and doing. I have something doing every other day. That has kept me going and it is luck and grace of God.

  • Death penalty: Group hails Delta govt

    Death penalty: Group hails Delta govt

    A group, the Citizens United for the Rehabilitation of Errants (CURE-Nigeria), has praised the decision of the Delta State House of Assembly to abolish death penalty for convicted kidnappers in the state.

    The group’s Executive Director, Sylvester Uhaa, who described CURE-Nigeria as “a justice/prison reforms and human rights organisation,” called on the Senate and House of Representatives to take a cue from the state and drop the proposed legislation to impose capital punishment on kidnappers in the country.

    Uhaa, in a statement in Abuja, noted that available data and lessons from other jurisdiction show that the death penalty does not deter crime.

    “The death penalty is only an emotional and violent response to crime, which does not really solve crime, but perpetuate more violence and create more victims,” Uhaa, an advocate for the universal abolishment of the death penalty and a Commonwealth Scholar in International Human Rights Law at the University of Oxford, United Kingdom, “he said.

    Uhaa urged the Federal Government to expunge capital punishment from it laws in line with the call of the Secretary General of the United Nations (UN), Ban Ki-moon on all countries to abolish the death penalty.

    He called on stakeholders to address the causes of crime, such as unemployment, corruption, and exclusion of people as some of the ways to reduce the high rate of kidnapping and other crimes in the country.