The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • ‘Lawyers must join anti-corruption battle’

    ‘Lawyers must join anti-corruption battle’

    Adebisi Ogundipe, a Lagos-based lawyer, was installed the Agba Akin by the Adagba of Iyanfoworogi in Ile-Ife, Osun State. Ogundipe speaks on the ongoing anti-corruption battle, urging lawyers to join the crusade. ROBERT EGBE met him.

    The judiciary seems not to be playing the roles expected of it in the anti-corruption war. Isn’t this worrisome?

    Every Nigerian should have that apprehension. But, I want to believe that the law is certain. There are enough provisions in our laws to take care of corruption matters. What we need now is the commitment of all Nigerians and not just the lawyers to ensure that corruption cases are initiated and prosecuted to the fullest. What lawyers would always insist on is that the proceedings must follow the dictates of the rule of law. Lawyers won’t say that because we are fighting corruption and tolerate impunity all through. If we allow this, then we are sliding back into the old era of recklessness in using the law. I believe that all lawyers, both junior and senior lawyers are committed to the fight against corruption because corruption is the only thing that has bogged down development of this country. It has frustrated, stifled the socio-economic development of the country. And that also affects lawyers.

    Many are pushing for the establishment of special courts for electoral offences and financial crimes. Do you think this is necessary?

    I subscribe to the establishment of those courts. We already have a special court in the election petitions tribunal. And their assignments are time-bound. They have to take specific actions within a given period. And the law is strict. The same should happen on corruption matters.

    What role should the rule of law play in the crusade? Not a few believe it is slowing down the process.

    The rule of law issue is fantastic but what has happened in Nigeria shows clearly that many people, especially the elite don’t actually believe in it. Many of them – both in private and public sectors – have not conducted themselves properly. I specifically mentiond the private sector because we’ll be fooling ourselves to think that corruption thrives only in the public sector. The private sector is an active collaborator in corrupt practices. Many companies have been ruined because of sharp practices of some private sector operators. So, the private sector is as guilty as the public sector.

    What role should Nigerians play?

    The solution is for us to go back to those old values that emphasise sincerity, civility, decency, honesty and service. If we fail to do this, we might not get it right as a nation. And that also means that the law as it is now, must be reworked because of the fundamental human rights issue. A lot of people hide under this clause to frustrate the system. It is the responsibility of lawyers and every good citizen to stand up and arrest this debacle.

    The opposition says the war against corruption is targeted at political enemies. Is the anti-corruption war really selective?

    I don’t subscribe to that claim. I believe the law has no regard for any person. It is to protect every law-abiding citizen. If you have not violated any law, nobody can come after you or arrest you because there are procedures and there are special sections of the law for this purpose. So, to say that the crusade is targeted at political opponents is being encouraged economical with the truth. That is not the issue and I completely disagree with those holding such views.

    The euphoria that greeted the election of President Muhammadu Buhari is waning. What is responsible for this frustration?

    My advice to Nigerians is that we should exercise a lot of patience. It is easy to destroy but very difficult and complex to build. We are talking about a government that came on board less than a year ago. We know the price of oil under the previous admini-strations and we know what it is today. We also know that Nigeria runs a mono-product economy. The Buhari administration is just settling down to lay a good foundation. The admini-stration has immense resources (human and material). What we had in the past is that the selfish individuals were in charge of the economy, those with genuine interest to serve were never allowed. But, we now have what we can call our First Eleven assembled with the President as the captain. I feel this team should be given the opportunity to rebuild the system from its base that had suffered eternal collapse over the years. The result of misgovernance and executive nativity is confronting the country today. The spendthrift attitude, the recklessness and the overbearing power of those who believed that power is for nothing but self aggrandisement, those are the people who held this country hostage and in shackles for years. But we have a different people at the helms now, we must give them the opportunity to lay a solid foundation and rebuild the economy. With time, the people’s confidence will be restored in governance.

    What is your chieftaincy title all about?

    I am being honoured with the Agba Akin of Iyanfoworogi chieftaincy title. Iyanfoworogi is a town in Ife kingdom, made up of 23 communities. Obama Adebolu Fatunmise, the Adagba of Iyanfoworogi is installing me as the first Agba Akin. By the title, I will be advising the council of chiefs and indigenes of the communities on developmental issues and cultural promotion. As an ambassador of culture, I will use my position to promote not just Ife culture but the culture of the York back race. I will partner with all cultural icons including the Ooni of Ife, Obama Enitan Ogunwusi in his drive to restore the pride of Yoruba land. I see the honour as a call to service and not for personal aggrandisement.

  • Were Supreme Court ’s verdicts on polls influenced?

    Since the Supreme Court heard and delivered judgments in the governorship election petition appeals, especially from Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Abia states, there have been scathing remarks, most often with more syllables than sense, often low on logical or legal reasoning. But were the verdicts influenced?

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed has had cause to condemn openly and loudly, the conflicting judgments being delivered by various Court of Appeal divisions; most especially on the governorship election appeals with similar facts and point of law.

    When appeals on the same matters were brought before the Supreme Court, the CJN, in his own wisdom, gave case files on each appeal to ten or all the Justices in some instances, to study.

    Thereafter, the CJN constituted seven-man panel out of the 16 Justices that went through the case files of the appeals. The panels heard and decided the appeals the same day. In other words, the Justices sitting on a particular appeal don’t even know he will sit on it; and invariably don’t know other Justices in the panel prior to the day set for hearing and determination of the appeal.

    Of course, the CJN took all these measures to avoid collusion or collaboration, in order to frustrate, make it difficult or impossible for politicians with dubious intentions to bungle cases in the courts.

    Even on the day of hearing on the appeals, the panel members stayed together and ate together; when the lawyers finished their arguments, or when the cases were closed, the panel members sat in conferences, with every member sharing what they felt are the facts, issues and the laws in the appeal just heard.

    These collective submissions formed the decision of the panel in the appeal; either to uphold the appeal or throw it out. In a situation where a panel member or few members dissent, a dissenting judgment would have been concurrently read after majority decision was read.

    The question is, in a human setting, could all the 16 Justices have collectively and/or severally received bribes to deliver judgments unanimously in all the governorship election petition appeals?

    Even the avid antagonists in this argument would say “not likely”.  Even if the answer is yes, can the bribe items defy all security radars without traces, or could all the Justices have possibly dug up the soil in their abodes or caused the bribe items to vanish into the air?

    The Supreme Court Justices appear to be giving credence to Verse 81 of Dhamapada, a collection of  the sayings of Buddha; otherwise known as Buddhist Scriptures; which says that ‘’Just as a solid rock is not shaken by the storm, even so the wise are not affected by praise or blame.”

    The Supreme Court maintained its cool while heaps of insults, intimidation and disrespectful attacks were launched even from some unexpected quarters. In any case, this would be left for another day’s discussion.

    Of course, in other climes, the Judiciary could have docked some people for contempt of court, or the offence of being disrespectful towards a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies authority, justice, and dignity of the court of law.

    Perhaps, the Judiciary felt that by so doing may, it might be taken as an attempt to scare those with real evidence of bribery from coming forward to lodge it against them; hence it is waiting for those properly charged with responsibility to clear the air to do its job.

    Generally, the courts have the last and the most authoritative say in the determination and pronouncement of what justice demands in every situation involving claims and counter-claims to legal rights and duties, but the justice meted out by her is human and not divine.

    It usually depends upon the parties to a dispute to prove their cases by furnishing it with all the facts in issue which it weighs and sifts, identifying and declaring those of them it has accepted to be true, material, and relevant.

    The Supreme Court reiterated the proper function of courts in Sagay v Sajere (2000) 4 SC (Part 1) 187 at 193 where it held that the decision of a court must be based on the evidence and on reason. It should not be based on the intuition of the judge or conjecture, or what the judge, untrammelled by the evidence, conceives to be a fair conclusion.

    For instance, on Friday, January 18, 2008, the Supreme Court gave its reasons for its earlier judgment on October 25, 2007, in the phenomenal case of Amaechi v. Omehia. It was a judgment which sent shocks and reverberations across the country, warning particularly, the political class that the days of crass irresponsibility and lawlessness were over; thereby forcing constitutionality and civilised conduct upon the political class.

    The verdict of the Supreme Court did not only expose the shortcomings in our laws, but also the shortcoming in our understanding of our laws. While we may not necessarily agree with the court’s decision, we must nevertheless respect it as being the result of measured, considered thought; the sum total of vast intellect and the product of conscientious erudition.

    Perhaps, this is why our Chief Justice was at pains to state publicly the famous words of Thomas Aquinas that  “Every judgment of conscience, be it right or wrong, be it about things evil in themselves or morally indifferent, is obligatory, in such wise that he who acts against his conscience always sins.”

     

    • Isah writes from Abuja 

  • Supreme Court reverses firm’s $5m damages

    The Supreme Court has set aside a $5million damages awarded to a firm, Q Oil and Gas Services Limited against GE International Operations (Nig) Limited by a Rivers State High Court.

    It held that the money amounted to double compensation to the respondent.

    The plaintiff, Q Oil and Gas Services (respondent in the appeal), had sought a declaration that the Master Services Agreement between it and the defendant, GE International Operations (appellant), was still valid and subsisting.

    The plaintiff said it was asked to provide a contract worker to the defendant, which it did by bringing an Indian expert, Mr Raja Kumar. But the defendant rejected the Indian which according to the plaintiff was in breach of the contract.

    The plaintiff, through its lawyer Femi Falana (SAN), said the defendant’s refusal to allow it fill the vacant slot/position following its rejection of Kumar as provided in the agreement was illegal and breached the contract.

    It sought $20,000 being money spent to bring Kumar to Nigeria to work for GE International; $500,000 being payment due to the claimant for five years of the contract of skilled labour provided for the defendant, and general damages in the sum of $5million for breach of contract.

    On June 8, 2010, the plaintiff urged the court to enter judgment in its favour since the defendant failed to file its statement of defence and other processes within the time allowed by the court’s rules.

    On September 29, 2010, the High Court granted the application and awarded all the monies the plaintiff prayed, including N35,000 as cost of the suit.

    Dissatisfied, GE International, through its lawyer Tunde Olowu, appealed to the Court of Appeal, Port Harcourt Division. The appellate court, on April 16, 2014, struck out the appeal for being incompetent “as there was no evidence that the appellant paid any fee for the filing of the appeal.”

    Aggrieved by the judgment, the appellant, on June 10, 2015, appealed to the Supreme Court on seven grounds. Among the four issues raised for determination were whether the Court of Appeal was right to strike out the appeal suo moto on the ground of non-payment of filing fees; whether the lower court was right to grant the default judgment and whether the damages amounts to double compensation to the respondent.

    Resolving the issues, Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, in the lead judgment, held that not all the grounds of appeal were incompetent. “One competent ground can save the appeal from being struck out as incompetent,” he held.

    The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal was wrong to struck out the appeal due to non-payment of filing fees.

    “I think it is mechanical justice to strike out an appeal on the mere fact that on the face of the process there is no endorsement relating to payment of fees. It would have been more in tune with justice to enquire from the registry whether or not the fees were paid and the appeallant could be asked to satisfy the Court that the fees were paid, especially when it applied to validate the appeal, perhaps by showing evidence that the fees were paid,” Justice Ngwuta said.

    According to him, the Court of Appeal could have compelled the appellant to pay the fees if it did not. “On no account should a litigant be made to suffer for the mistake of the registry as is apparent in this appeal. The order striking out the appeal is hereby set aside,” the Supreme Court held.

    On the award of $5million as general damages in addition to the $520,000, the Supreme Court said the principle of restitution “is not meant to give a windfall to the respondent.”

    Justice Ngwuta held that the two heads of claim ($20,000 spent to bring Kumar and $500,000 for the five-year contract) were what would restore the respondent to the position it would have been if there was no breach of contract.

    “That is all the respondent is entitled to and not general damages. The $5million damages awarded to the respondent as general damages cannot stand as the respondent cannot be awarded both special and general damages for the same set of facts.

    ”The $20,000 awarded as claimed ‘being money spent by the claimant in bringing Mr Raja Kumar to Nigeria to work for the dendant’ includes all the expenses in bringing the expert to Nigeria. It includes the immigration requirements.

    “In conclusion, the appeal succeeds in part. I set aside the $5million awarded as general damages to the respondent. On the facts of the case, the award amounts to double compensation.”

    Other justices on the panel – Mahmud Mohammed, Suleiman Galadima, Olabode Rhodes-Vivour and Musa Muhammed, all agreed with the lead judgment, which was delivered on March 18.

  • Commission seeks support for bill against unsolicited text messages

    The Federal Public Complaints Commission (FPCC) has urged Nigerians to support a Bill in the Federal House of Representatives seeking to discourage unsolicited text messages from network providers.

    The advice was contained in a statement issued last week by the Lagos State Federal Public Complaints Commissioner, Funso Olukoga.

    The Bill being sponsored by Hon. Ali Madaki from Kano aims at sanctioning any GSM service provider sending unsolicited SMS to subscribers.

    Olukoga expressed delight at the effort of the law makers to come to the aid of the mobile phone users in the country.

    He said the Public Complaints Commission had been in the fore front of the campaign to protect the public against the menace of unsolicited text messages.

    The campaign, he said, had been based on the high volume of complaints received from the public on the stress experienced in dealing with unsolicited text messages.

    The Commissioner pointed out that many of the cases in fact turned out to be acts undertaken to defraud mobile phone service subscribers.

    According to the Commissioner, the law makers and regulatory agencies have to come to a point where priority has to be placed on the protection of the fundamental rights of Nigerians on privacy as enshrined in the constitution.

    He said commercial activities that seek to invade their enjoyment of such rights is a violation of their rights under the constitutionm

    Nigerians, he said would be delighted to learn that they would be able to file civil claims against any erring GSM service providers.

    On his part, the commissioner pledged the commitment of the Public Complaints Commission in helping to create enlightenment with the general public regarding their rights under the Bill.

  • EBF to locate secretariat in Enugu

    The Eastern Bar Forum (EBF) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has resolved to set up its secretariat  in Enugu.

    It said it chose Enugu due to its historical relevance in the Southeast.

    Enugu State Governor, Ifeanyi  Ugwuanyi, represented by the Deputy Governor, Priscilla  Ezeilo,  urged lawyers to join hands with Southeast governors to tackle the  region’s socio- economic and political problems such as kidnapping, armed robbery and thuggery.

    “Our governors need support from all of you. The government will support any association, especially  those  related to  law which is  the pillar of the rule of law. The State Government will continue to partner with the NBA for the benefit of all citizens of Enugu State. The EBF should always promote peace, harmony and socio- economic and political development in the country,” Ezeilo said.

    The forum resolved to merge the EBF yearly seminar with  the second quarterly meeting, which will hold from June 23 to 25.

    The meeting also directed all EBF members who intend to contest  for offices in the forthcoming NBA elections to submit their letters of intention, letter of good standing from their branch Chairmen and letter of allegiance to the Forum.

    Renowned lawyer and EBF member, Chief Mike Okoye urged the forum’s leadership to intervene in the face off between a lawyer in Enugu State and the State Chief Judge ( CJ).

    “Lawyers should not quarrel with judges. It is indeed a very bad development. The EBF should intervene to bring sanity to Enugu State Bar. If they fail to do this, it will be fatal but I know that they should  not fail under the able leadership of  Elder E. O. E. Ekong.

    “We should learn to encourage the young ones because they are the leaders of tomorrow,” Okoye said.

  • ‘Judiciary needs surgical operation’

    ‘Judiciary needs surgical operation’

    Dafe Akpedeye (SAN) was Delta State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice from 2007 to 2009. A law graduate of the University of Lagos (UNILAG), he obtained his Masters from the Harvard Law School in the United States, before returning to UNILAG as a lecturer. Akpedeye is chairman, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Election Working Group. In this interview with JOSEPH JIBUEZE, he speaks on corruption and why a special court for electoral offences is needed.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Chairman, Ibrahim Magu, accused lawyers of collecting ‘stolen money’ from the corrupt to defend them. Should lawyers question the source of a client’s money?

    While I concede to the fact that one has to be careful with some clients and their illicit activities, I must also add that it is not in the place of lawyers to investigate their source of wealth. That is the duty of the security officials and anti-corruption agencies. Lawyers are not trained to be investigators neither are they paid to do so. A lawyer who embarks on that voyage of discovery will end up scaring off clients from his office. Besides, no matter the crimes allegedly committed by these clients, they are citizens of Nigeria who enjoy the right of fair hearing and competent representation in court. Asking lawyers to screen these clients’ source of wealth in terms of professional fees is an uphill task that needs to be jettisoned. The security agencies should do this job, not legal practitioners.

    Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami (SAN) reportedly said corrupt judges will face trial. Do you agree with him?

    A judge who is corrupt has breached the Code of Conduct of Judicial Officers on the one hand and has also committed a crime against the state on the other. NJC’s power is limited to disciplining a judge by either recommending his dismissal or compulsory retirement, after setting up a panel/committee to investigate and adjudicate on the petition against the Judge. After the recommendation to the President or governor, as the case may be, the powers of the NJC in that regard, expiates. After the dismissal from judicial service the prosecutorial duties of the anti-corruption agencies kick-start. If they think they have enough evidence to secure a conviction, these prosecutors can arraign the judge for any crime perceived to have been committed.

    Why has that not being the case with corrupt judges?

    This has not being the case in Nigeria over the years because being a nation caught up in the web of encouragement and promotion of corruption, when the NJC manages to reluctantly dismiss a judge, everybody feels it is enough punishment. And so no further step is taken by the executive. However, with the new Sheriff in town, President Buhari, it is quite obvious that things are changing. If feelers are anything to go by, dismissed judges may also be prosecuted for crimes against the state.

    With so many corruption-related cases in court, how can speedy trial be ensured?

    The need for an effective and efficient legal framework for speedy resolution of corruption trials is one of the fundamental reasons why the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, (ACJA) 2015 was enacted. There are stipulated time-frames for these cases to be heard. The Act provides for the maximum number of adjournments that can be granted per party. It now beholds on the judge to enforce these provisions of the Act by taking charge of his court. Lawyers will always be lawyers, especially defence counsel who are aware of the inadequacy of their defence. If given the opportunity they will continue the old practice of delaying proceedings so as to wane the zeal of the prosecution and their witnesses.

    What is your assessment of ongoing corruption cases?

    A careful observation of the prosecution in the on-going anti-corruption trials indicates that the proceedings are going on timeously, with no delay whatsoever. A case in point is the trial of Chief Olisa Metuh which commenced in January this year and as at the end of February, the prosecution had fielded 10 witnesses. The trial is now at defence stage. Another example is the trial of the former Director-General of NIMASA, Patrick Akpobolokemi, which is also moving in a fast pace. Same goes for the trial of Senator Joshua Dariye, the former Governor of Plateau State. The stages of these matters viz-a-viz when they were commenced clearly shows a pace of proceedings which is a departure from the past practice of deliberate delays.

    What are your views on the trial of a Senior Advocate, Mr. Rickey Tarfa?

    With all due respect to my Brother Silk, Rickey Tarfa, nobody is above the law and this is the rule of law which we as lawyers have sworn to uphold. The security agencies have a duty and right to prevent or investigate crime. If any citizen feels he has been unlawfully arrested, he has a right to sue for damages. Besides, the matter is in court, as per Tarfa’s action for fundamental rights enforcement pending before Justice Idris of the Ikoyi Division of Federal High Court. As an officer of the courts, I should not be seen or heard commenting on a matter that is sub-judice.

    Do you think the judiciary is prepared for the corruption war?

    It is my opinion that the judiciary needs to undergo a surgical operation to place it on a pedestal for the needed recovery it needs. Over the years, there have been stories of corruption stemming from the hallowed chambers. A lot of judges have been dismissed from the Bench. However, while admitting that our judges are humans and hence not infallible, we cannot deny that the judiciary is making tremendous progress as an institution under this present dispensation. We might not have gotten it entirely right with the judicial system, but I believe we are certainly on the right track.

    Do you agree that NBA is no longer as vocal on national issues as it used to be?

    I am a member of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). Whatever it is I say here may be from a bias point. Nonetheless, I can tell you for free that the NBA is indeed engaging the relevant government agencies on policies that directly affect the people. Interestingly, a number of the federal cabinet members are lawyers, hence we have our own unique but effective way of ensuring that they act in the interest of the citizenry at all times in the discharge of their duties and be good ambassadors of the NBA. In my view, we must not cry about every government policy on the pages of newspapers for the entire world to know that we stand with the people if we can engage the government by some other civil means.

    Do you subscribe to the establishment of an electoral offences commission to deal with violations of the Electoral Act?

    The calls for the establishment of an Electoral Offences Commission are borne out of the need to see electoral offenders punished. Nigeria must begin to hold people accountable for crimes committed and punish those who commit electoral violence. In past elections, there were reports of electoral offences. In most cases, after the announcement of the arrest of suspected electoral offenders, there was hardly any information on what became of them. It is evident that none of the accused was ever prosecuted for the electoral offences let alone being convicted. In effect, these offenders soon find their way back to the polling centres each time elections are billed to take place in the country or in any state of the federation.

    What about INEC staff indicted in electoral malpractices?

    It is common knowledge that some ad hoc and permanent staff of the electoral body have been caught working in connivance with politicians to influence and rig elections in favour of these persons. These staffers should be publicly tried with their trial and eventual conviction given massive publicity so as to serve as a deterrent to other potential criminal-minded staffers and their conniving politicians. The Justice Uwais Panel had proposed the constitution of an electoral offences tribunal where electoral offenders are quickly tried and convicted. This fundamental recommendation should be sent to the National Assembly for quick passage. The specialty of this tribunal is good for our legal system being that the regular courts are already over-loaded with cases.

    Is there need for further electoral reform?

    The need for electoral reform has become absolutely necessary against the backdrop of election rigging, widespread rejection of declared results, as well as loss of lives and property. More importantly, our electoral laws appear to be ill-equipped to adequately address these concerns.  We needs to put in place a democratic process that maintains accurate list of citizens who are eligible to vote and encourages every eligible voter to participate effectively in the process.  There is a need to improve the voting system and enhance ballot security. Most importantly, the political class must have respect for the rule of law while we must reject the pervasive culture of corruption in our body polity and be prepared to hold our elected officers accountable for their actions.

    What are your views on the situation in Rivers State?

    The killings in Rivers State is condemnable. President Buhari should order an independent enquiry on the violence and anyone found culpable must be prosecuted. More is also expected of the police and other security agencies in protecting lives and property. Lives cannot continue to be wasted.

    You proposed that the burden of proof should lie with the umpire. Why?

    It is my recommendation that in order to make the electoral body more driven to conduct free and credible elections, they should be made to bear the burden of proof in court to show the elections they conducted were credible, free and fair, while the petitioner would have to disprove that assertion by proving instances and conducts of their officials that negate the credible conduct of the electoral polls. As it stands presently, the Evidence Act places the burden of proof on he who asserts – the petitioner.

     

     

     

     

  • Supreme Court judgments: A cobweb of intrigues?

    A legal expert, Joseph Uwua, argues that the Supreme Court can redeem itself by ensuring that justice is done in Ekiti State in view of fresh evidence that the last election was rigged.

    There is no doubt that the Supreme Court is the Apex Court in Nigeria with the last say on any judicial matter. It is composed of experienced justices who have undergone the crucibles of legal drilling from the lower courts to Court of Appeal and finally to the Supreme Court. These jurists are the custodians of justice and they can safely and truly be referred to as Alase Ekeji Orisa (very powerful second in command to the gods or representatives of the gods on earth).

    Constitutionally, the Supreme Court is so powerful that it can give judgment in a case and give reasons for the judgment later. It can also aprobate and reprobate, reverse itself and even contradict itself in some cases, yet, it is the final court. However, just as the justices are Supreme in delivering judgments, they can equally commit supreme or extreme errors. This was put more succinctly in the famous quote of the respected late Justice Chukwudifu Oputa who said: “We are final not because we are infallible but rather infallible because we are final. Justices of this court are human beings capable of errors.”

    With the above background, it is safe to assume that not all judgments of the Supreme Court could be taken to be fair even though it may be final. Therefore, one can comment and ask questions even if that will not change anything. This is why I  express doubts about recent developments in the Supreme Court concerning some of its recent decisions on some election petition matters.

     

    Verdicts on Rivers, Akwa Ibom

     I am, particularly, worried about the Supreme Court judgment upholding the elections of Nyeson Wike as Governor of Rivers State, Ayodele Fayose as Governor of Ekiti State and Udom Emannuel as Governor of Akwa Ibom State.

    I will start with the elections of Rivers and Akwa Ibom states that were conducted in gross violation of the electoral act as pronounced by the tribunals and Appeal Courts. It is like dismissing the judges of the tribunals and Courts of Appeal as if they don’t know law at all!

    Despite Wike’s sack by the tribunal and Court of Appeal because of over-voting and widespread violence leading to many deaths, the Supreme Court set aside the judgments of the tribunal and that of the Appeal Court and affirmed his victory as declared by INEC.

    International observers returned a damning verdict that there was no election so properly called in Rivers State but allocation of figures with total neglect of the card reader provided by INEC, but the Supreme Court in its wisdom might have de-emphasised the use of card readers judging by the reason it gave in the case of Ebonyi governorship appeal where it affirmed the victory of Governor Dave Omahi when it held that, card readers cannot be a substitute for manual accreditation but a supplement to it.

    The reasons given for the Rivers and Akwa Ibom governorship  judgments are not  different. In the case of Rivers gubernatorial petition, INEC head of election monitoring testified that the election conducted by his commission was done in violation of the Electoral Act and that was the most important testimony that made the Court of Appeal cancel the election. If this testimony can come from the organiser, that is INEC, then no further evidence is needed.

    Some have argued that the Supreme Court is conservative, but I disagree because it was the same Supreme Court in a radical decision that made Amaechi who didn’t contest an election governor just to teach Obasanjo a lesson that impunity does not pay. It was the same Supreme court that gave judgment to Atiku against Obasanjo 13 times also to send a message to Obasanjo that he was not above the law as a President. In an ironic twist of fate, Amaechi may have brought what happened in Rivers upon himself.

    Despite being a beneficiary of an unprecedented Supreme Court ruling, Amaechi locked up the judiciary for months by not allowing the Chief Judge preferred by the Nigeria Judicial Council (NJC) to assume that position in Rivers State and don’t forget that the CJN is the head of the NJC.

    However,Wike immediately reinstated the preferred judge of the NJC when he assumed office. Observers say Amaechi may have been punished while Wike was rewarded. There is also the argument that since Amaechi is not in good terms with his estranged political mentor, Peter Odili, whose wife is a Supreme Court justice, the Rivers judgment is a pay back time for him.

    The Rivers judgment may have been  a political judgment just like the Buhari vs. Obasanjo in 2005, where despite overwhelming evidence of mass rigging across the states, the victory of Obasanjo was upheld by the Supreme Court ostensibly because it was already three years into the administration and sending him packing might threaten national security.

    In the Buhari vs Yar’Adua judgment of 2008, despite the massively rigged election as admitted by Yar’Adua himself, the Supreme Court in a split decision, ruled in favour of Yar’Adua. It was the first time the Supreme Court justices were sharply divided on a sensitive Presidential judgment, 4-3 in favour of Yar’ Adua.

    The human element is also a factor in Supreme Court judgments. Judges are humans and when they are not happy with you, you cannot get justice from them as I have explained in Obasanjo/Atiku and Amaechi cases. There is also another suspicion along this line of thought. Some have concluded that the Supreme Court justices are angry with Buhari for complaining about them publicly. Buhari recently said that his major headache in his fight against corruption is the judiciary and that is why the Chief Justice of Nigeria at every forum has always tried to defend the integrity of the judiciary after the President made the remark. The Rivers and Akwa-Ibom judgments may be the Supreme Court’s  way of getting back at the President and his party.

    There is yet another reason adduced by the analysts for the judgment of the Supreme Court and this is about the necessity for peace in the Niger Delta.They argued that if the judgments had gone otherwise, it could spark off protests in the already restive region whose politicians just smarting from the loss of the Presidential election, daily complain of marginalisation. Wike alluded to this when he said blood would have flowed if the judgment had gone otherwise.

    Another boiling issue is the Biafran agitation which is also linked with marginalisation. They argue that if the judgment had gone otherwise, the losers will team up with the Biafran agitators to further  heat up the Niger Delta area and the Federal Government will find it difficult to contain another insurgency while it is still battling with Boko Haram. As a result,  the Rivers and Akwa Ibom judgments may be political. A noticeable trend in the judgment is that all are unanimous.

    The judgment affirming the victory of Governor Okezie Ikpeazu of Abia State and quashing the judgment of Appeal Court which declared Alex Otti Governor-Elect is different because INEC joined Ikpeazu against Alex Otti to appeal  to the Supreme Court. This is why I didn’t dwell much on the Abia judgment.

     

    Verdict on Ekiti

     The Supreme Court judgment upholding the election of Ayodele Fayose as Governor of Ekiti State is another judgment that attracted murmurs from legal pundits. The APC had approached the Supreme Court having lost the case at the tribunal and the appeal court  on the grounds of non eligibility and militarisation of the polity but Fayose’s victory was affirmed.

    Curiously, the Supreme Court against all odds and normal legal doctrine, granted Fayose a relief he didn’t seek by quashing his impeachment done by the State House of Assembly in 2006. The Supreme Court ruled that Fayose was illegally impeached even though that was not before the Supreme Court. Many legal minds questioned that decision, wondering  when it has become the norm for courts to grant reliefs not sought before them! However, the last may not have been heard about the Ekiti judgment in the face of recent confession by the PDP’s State Secretary, Dr. Tope Aluko, who said the PDP rigged the election and he was an active participant.

    Opinions have been divided on whether or not the case could be revisited by the Supreme Court since it comes under ‘issue estoppel’ (a matter that is already settled) which has made the court a functus officio. But other legal minds are of the opinion that the case could be revisited if only to restore the integrity of the judiciary and the sanctity of the constitution as no time can bar this important restitution.

    They cited the popular saying of the late Justice Oputa who said: “It is also true that this court can do incalculable harm through its mistakes. When therefore it appears to learned counsels that any decision of this court has been given per incuriam, such decision shall be overruled. This court has the power to overrule itself and it has done so in the past for it gladly accepts that it is far better to admit error than to persevere in error”.

    It is common knowledge that judges are indeed capable of writing two sets of judgments on the same matter and this tends to confirm the rumours which made the rounds after the Supreme Court affirmed the victory of Fayose and gave him a relief he did not seek that that was not the original judgment and we equally heard huge sums of money exchanged hands.

    Unfortunately, there was no proof of this and so it remained at the level of rumour, but in every rumour, there may be an element of truth. As Charles Dickens noted, ‘Lawyers are a society of people who have the capacity to argue that black is white according  as they are paid’. This confirms that judges are also capable of writing two sets of contrasting judgments on the same matter.

    Now let’s take a look at some intrigues in the Supreme Court in the recent past to show that these judges are after all humans.The case of the Sokoto gubernatorial judgment of 2010 which was arrested by the then CJN, Aloysious Katsina-Alu, comes to mind.

    The judgment would have gone against then Governor Wamako and the Sultan would not be happy so Katsina-Alu arrested the judgment that was about to be delivered by the then President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami, on  the request of Justice Dahiru Musdapher who was next in line as the succeeding CJN.

    When Justice Musdapha became CJN and was troubled by his conscience and went to Jonathan to reinstate Salami, he was told to put it in writing to explain what has changed and how Justice Salami who had been accused of perjury was suddenly given a clean bill of health, Musdapher who didn’t want anything to cost him his new position as the CJN couldn’t do so. That was how Salami was sacrificed by his colleagues. Salami remained on suspension until he reached the mandatory retirement age. These are the Justices of the Supreme Court!

    Another worrisome trend about the judgments of the Supreme Court is inconsistency. The Supreme Court as at today, has contradicted its own judgments. For instance, it said in a judgment in favour of Rotimi Amaechi in 2007, that it is not the candidate that people voted for but the party but in another judgment involving CPC Vs PDP candidate in 2013, the Supreme Court reversed itself and said parties are inanimate objects and that it is human beings people voted for.

    The implication of the latest Supreme Court judgment on Rivers and Akwa-Ibom gubernatorial elections and that of Ekiti State delivered in 2015 is that the Supreme Court has encouraged electoral violence in future elections. It seems to be telling future electoral contenders to go ahead and kill as many people as possible to win as this shall be stamped and sealed at the Apex court. The Supreme Court ought to have cancelled the Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Ekiti elections. Their decisions go beyond law no doubt, it includes political, and socio- economic considerations even personal biases in some cases. The international community will take our judicial system to the cleaners with these strange judgments.

    Reacting to the Supreme Court judgment of Rivers and Akwa Ibom states, a foremost Observer organisation,  The Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) wrote: “As the foremost election observation coalition in the country, we see the Supreme Court judgments as a clear cut attempts at legalising electoral robberies. These judgments, particularly on Rivers and Akwa Ibom states, have merely given judicial imprimatur to the damaging mind set of rapacious politicians who would stop at nothing in their bid to subvert the will of the people. Beyond the justice of the Supreme Court; there is the justice of the Almighty.”

    Akwa-Ibom and Rivers have been settled by the Supreme Court even though it may be a supreme error of judgment but the Supreme Court can still redeem itself and correct the error of Ekiti State with the avalanche of new evidence including graphic confession by one of the principal actors. In matters concerning the  protection of the integrity of the judiciary and the sanctity of the constitution, no time can bar the restitution of these fundamental attributes.

    I will end this piece by again going back to another quote of justice Oputa, “… therefore, as a court of justice, the Supreme Court has the power to control its own procedure so as to prevent its being used to achieve injustice. It is no exaggeration to say, yet again, that the Justices of the Supreme Court are responsive to the call of justice and ever sensitive to the realistic perception of the stresses and strains of the contemporary Nigerian soci-ety. Indeed, the fact that the Supreme Court can overrule or explain away its earlier decisions is an indication that the law is a living idea that is concerned not so much with the logic of words but with the logic of realities.”

    If the apex court does not give the right judgment, where else can the common man go?

     

    • Uwua is based in Warri

  • Activists demand envoy’s recall

    A group, Africa Arise for Change (AAFC), has asked the Federal Government to prevail on the Iranian government to recall its ambassador to Nigeria, Saeed Koozechi.

    Koozechi condemned the continued incarceration of Shi’ite leader Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, describing it as unconstitutional.

    He said El-Zakzaky, who suffered gunshot wounds during the  Army’s clash with the Shi’ite sect last December, should not be kept in detention for long.  He, therefore, asked President Muhammadu Buhari to facilitate his release.

    He said: “The official position of the Islamic Republic of Iran is that El-Zakzaky, who suffered gunshot wounds during the Nigerian Army’s clash with the Shi’ite sect in December 2015, should not be kept in detention for a long time.

    “The Shi’ite is a small minority group in Nigeria; they engage in peaceful religious activities, they are not harmful to anyone. We have never heard of unrest and extremism from the Shi’ite followers in Nigeria.”

    Koozechi described the Zaria incident as unfortunate and regrettable, saying his country expects the investigation into the clash to be fair and transparent.

    But AAFC demanded the ambassador’s immediate recall.

    Its Executive Director, Comrade Comfort Solape who led other members to Lagos State Governor Akinwunmi Ambode, asked him to use his good offices to prevail on President Buhari to facilitate the recall of the Iranian Ambassador as he had obviously shown that there was an alleged link between the Shi’ite sect and the Iranian government.

    According to Solape, unless the Ambassador was recalled following his comment viewed as a threat to the nation’s corporate existence, the war against terrorism may not achieve the desired results.

    The group alleged that there was a link between the Iranian Ambassador and one Islamic Movement of Nigeria which activities it said was suspect.

    Besides, Solape and his group accused the Ambassador of making utterances viewed as a threat to the country for arresting and detaining those behind the alleged attempt on the life of the Chief of Army staff, Gen. Tukur Burutai.

    She urged government to investigate the link behind foreign interference and the recent security incidents in several parts of the country.

    AAFC condemned Mile 12 market riot, saying: “That such ethnic oriented strife could surface in Lagos speaks volume of how an era of intolerance rapidly crept upon us without us realising it.

    “The foregoing paint a scary scenerio but nothing is more frightening than the knowledge that as a country, we must fight these cases of violence in addition to the threat of sectarianism that came to the fore when members of the Shi’ite sect attempted to assassinate the Chief of Army Staff, General Tukur Burutai.”

  • NHRC boss, ex-Lagos CJ to Buhari: respect human rights

    The Chairman, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), Prof Chidi Odinkalu and a former Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Omotunde Ilori, have urged President Muhammadu Buhari to show respect for human rights in the fight against corruption.

    They spoke at a seminar organised by the Human Right Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association, Ikeja branch.

    It had as theme: War against corruption and observance of constitutional rights: Striking a balance.

    Odinkalu noted that President Buhari had shown strong political will to fight corruption, but that he could not do it without Nigerians’ support.

    ”Nigeria does not have a choice between fighting corruption and respecting human rights. We must do both. The government has a responsibility to ensure that it does not throw legality overboard in its drive for accountability for grand corruption.

    “Allegations of disobedience of court orders have been well founded in some cases. This is unnecessary and counter-productive. The tendency to arrest first before investigating, which is prevalent in police operations, appears also evident in some of the work of the anti-corruption agencies.

    “One thing that appears to have changed since the inauguration of the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari in May 2015 is the appearance of a firm will to address the problem of impunity for widespread corruption in Nigeria.

    “So far, some leading members of the legal profession appear also to have been at the receiving end of some of the more high profile ‘invites’ by anti-corruption agencies. This has been disquieting to many at the Bar,” Odinkalu said.

    Justice Ilori warned against violating human right in the fight against corruption.

    “The President has been fighting corruption and impunity since the beginning of this administration but he must do so within the confinement of the law and respect human rights,” Ilori said.

  • Should states have their police

    Should states have their police

    A fresh wave of violence has hit parts of Rivers State, with 35 persons killed in the last two months. Many of the victims were beheaded. The police appear incapable of dealing with the problem. The affected communities live in fear of attacks. Is state police the solution? ADEBISI ONANUGA asks.

    In the past two months, there have been killings in Rivers State. Hardly a day passes without people being killed. Life has become so cheap in some parts of the state as  people are being decapitated and their heads taken away.

    Thirty-five people have been killed in some communities. Eleven days ago, masked gunmen invaded Omoku, headquarters of Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni Local Government, and beheaded the All Progressives Congress (APC) Ward 4 Chairman Franklin Obi. They took his head away.

    His wife and 18-year-old son, Bestman, were also killed. The killings are coming ahead of Saturday’s legislative rerun.

    Also last month, 25 persons were killed in Omoku, 10 of them beheaded and their heads taken away by masked gun men.

    Rivers State Police Commissioner Musa Kimo said the police will arrest those behind the dastardly acts and prosecute them to deter others. On March 8, there was tension in Buguma following the killing of an APC member, Ofinijite Amachree.

    Amachree was burnt alive in Buguma in Asari-Toru Local Government Area of Rivers State. Between March 5 and 6, five persons were clubbed to death.

    Amachree’s murder took place barely 48 hours after Obi was beheaded.

    Four APC members were killed in Obibi, Etche Local Government, while Gabriel Cookey was clubbed to death in Opobo, headquarters of Opobo/Nkoro.  A man, popularly known as Kpom Kpom, was killed and burnt.

    The killings in Rivers State communities are not limited to politicians.

    On February 14, a fight between rival cult groups left no fewer than 18 persons dead in Omoku. According to eye witnesses, a cult group, the Icelanders invaded the community around 11.00 p.m, killing and injuring others. Among those killed, according to eye witnesses, were a couple and two brothers of the same parents.

    It was learnt that many of those killed were beheaded, with the killers allegedly making away with their heads.

    One Elder John Awo, who hails from the community, said that the killers operated freely, despite the presence of security operatives and check points on major junctions.

    On Ndoni Street, an eye witness, Benedict Ajie, said he heard gunshots on the street at about 9 pm, and by dawn he found that at a house opposite his own, two of his kinsmen, two young brothers, had been shot dead.

    He said on Ndoni Street alone, eight persons were shot dead that night.

    Days after the Omoku killings, a former member of the Rivers House of Assembly, Monday Eleanya, who represented Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni Constituency on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was shot dead as he was driving out of his residence on Ada-George Road in Port-Harcourt. The deceased had just defected to the APC.

    On January 5, masked gunmen invaded Elibrada Carnival and killed two suspected cultists.

    It was gathered that after the unidentified gunmen laid siege to the community, one of the boys that had been terrorising Emohua was picked.

    His remains were discovered later, at Elibrada Junction, his head was  severed from his body and placed separately on a clean George wrapper. His body was found in the bush.

    The killings followed the Supreme Court’s pronouncement upholding the governor’s election. Observers are worried that the police appear incapacitated to check the increasing violence and the beheading in some of the communities. Are the police helpless?

     

    Lawyers’ views

     

     A former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), believes a centralised police cannot enforce law and order adequately everywhere.

    “I can’t see how just (Inspector-General of Police) Solomon Arase can be expected to guarantee the safety of all Nigerians. It makes no sense.

    “Whereas you could remove police from the exclusive list, enable the 774 Local Governments – not even states – to have authority over municipal policing, and then define what each person can do.

    “In America, the FBI deals with Federal cases. Other police, such as the famous New York Police Department (NYPD) deals with New York issues,” he said.

    Agbakoba said without state police, even governors have no control over law enforcement in their domains as the police do not take orders from governors.

    “As we stand today, the only responsible sovereign is President Buhari and the ministers. I was at a conference where Adams Oshiomhole (Edo State governor) was also speaking and I told him that he’s not a sovereign.

    “I reminded him that former Rivers State Governor Rotimi Amaechi was not allowed to get into his house by Joseph Mbu (former Rivers Commissioner of Police). This shows that a Commissioner of Police can actually be the sovereign of the state.

    “If the Commissioner of Police of Lagos State wishes to arrest the governor, he can do so. You can then talk about immunity, but the commissioner can do so.

    “When Asiwaju Bola Tinubu wanted to remove the market in Falomo, rightly or wrongly, the police put two tanks there. So, a country where sovereignty is only in the Federal Government is problematic.

    “They (Federal police) can’t see everything. The nature of our federalism creates a lot of inefficiency. “

    A member of the Ogun State Judiciary Service Commission, Abayomi Omoyinmi argued that the Police have failes on several occassions.

    “The confidence is low and the urge to serve is lacking,” he said.

    He said officers’ welfare should be addressed and the government should recruit more hands.

    Former Chairman, NBA, Ikeja Branch, Monday Ubani said the recent killings in Rivers State attest to the fact that matters have snowballed out of the hands of the security forces.

    He added that rerun election taking place next week has added more impetus for anticipated violence and killings.

    Ubani regretted that Rivers State has become a theatre of the absurd.

    “The killings and the frequent eruptions of violence all over the state has made that state the unsafest  for now unless something drastic is done to change that negative perception,” he said..

    “Can we safely conclude that the security agencies in Nigeria have failed to tackle the spate of grievous insecurity in Rivers State? One is clearly tempted to shout ‘yes’.

    “What more evidence should we demand when on daily basis lives are lost, properties destroyed, communities sacked and people are scattered all over the place,” he asked.

     

    The way out

     

    Agbakoba said not only is state police required, but that there should be municipal policing.

    He believes the police should be removed from the exclusive legislative list and placed in the concurrent list so that states can have their own police.

    Said he: “They (Federal police) can’t see everything. The nature of our federalism creates a lot of inefficiency.” He added that country where sovereignty resides only in the Federal Government is problematic.

    Omoyinmi said state policing may be the solution.

    “In any case some states in the country have taken full responsibilities financially in making sure that the police in their state are not neglected in the performance of their duties of preventing crimes and providing security for life and properties.

    “I will ultimately support the regional policing to be experimented for sometime and may be state police after about a decade of regional police,” he said.

    Ubani said state police can be the panacea for insecurity.

    “State police is desirable in a multi cultural and multi religious country like Nigeria but one must be careful to qualify it to be that the State Police Force must be neutral, patriotic and selfless not under the whims and caprices of the governor or party in power.

    “If these measures cannot be guaranteed it may be more dangerous and deadly than what we are witnessing presently. State Police can work in a country where institutions that will checkmate the excesses of the governor are very independent and effective. Can this ideal situation be guaranteed?

    “There is no space here to enumerate what we as a nation stands to gain in having an impartial, independent and highly monitored State Police that will serve generally the interests of citizens and the State. A trial may convince us.”

    In the short run, the former NBA Ikeja branch Chairman advised that the Nigerian police must demonstrate capacity immediately as there is evidence that they have not tackled this graven insecurity appropriately and effectively.

    “In addition to the Police to man Rivers State, the Nigerian  Army must be deployed  in the interim to curtail this present madness otherwise all the citizens in Rivers will become endangered specie, if they are not already.

    “If these measures are not deployed promptly to stem this insecurity it may spiral into a full blown state of lawlessness and war that may necessitate the declaration of state of emergency which may not be in the interest of the citizens and the state,” he stated.