A former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) has advocated a law to recognise a union of peoples and nationalities of Nigeria. This, he said, would address agitations for cessation.
Agbakoba said the country may consider adopting a new name-the ‘Union of Nigeria’.
The former NBA boss, who spoke in his Ikoyi office, warned on what he called a conspiracy of the elite and its resolve to frustrate the reform agenda.
The ‘elite’, he said, includes people in high positions in the churches, traditional institutions, professions and businesses, etc.
“They represent a small per cent of Nigerians, but exert tremendous influence, with a view to capture the state. This class is very dissatisfied with the ideological change of your government.
“They see new agenda as a threat to their privileges. As set out below, they are the greatest roadblocks to your economic and political policy agenda,” he said.
He praised the Buhari administration, saying it has created an ideological shift to the left (pro-people).
He continued: “I am not sure that this shift has been well communicated. Nigeria can now be classified as a country advancing towards social democracy. This is the first time in the history of our country that such a major shift has occurred.
“Evidence of this shift includes Treasury Single Account, which needs redefinition; quality of ministers; generally blocking finance leaks; social regulations; benefits and stimulus strategy, like paying employment benefits and keeping the oil subsidy, at least, in the short term and zero tolerance to corruption.”
On political governance Agbakoba said: “It is clear that Nigeria’s political landscape is very problematic. We are still not a nation. Many Nigerians feel alienated and disconnected. The consequences are all too clear. The situation is made worse by the powerful elite class, controlling the system.”
He then suggested that the government must avoid communication lethargy in 2016. “I suggest that government create an Office for Strategic Communication to link government with the people. There is no need to have two press secretaries. One may be assigned to the Office of Strategic Communication.
“On political governance, I suggest that you build a grand alliance of pro people institutions, like Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and labour unions. I also suggest that you set up a small technical committee on national order.
“The first and urgent task of this committee is to work on a bill for an Act of the Union of Peoples and Nationalities of Nigeria. The Bill must resolve the Nigerian fault lines and contradictions. We may consider adopting a new name the ‘Union of Nigeria’.
‘’In conclusion, I endorse the change agenda represented by the ideological shift in creation of structures for social benefits and inclusive political architecture.”
Justice A. A. Babawale of an Ogun State High Court, sitting in Sagamu, has fixed January 20 for the pre-trial conference (PTC) in a suit filed by Prince Adetayo Odunsi challenging the nomination of Albert Mayungbe for the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.
The co-defendants in the suit: HCS/158/2013, are the head of the ruling house, Prince Obafemi Awoyade; 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 and Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief Owuye Logba.
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; Governor of Ogun State; Executive Council of Ogun State; Commissioner for Chieftaincy and Local Government and the state Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice as second to 18th defendants respectively.
The claimant’s counsel, Muyiwa Obanewa told the court that he had filed issues for determination.
Obanewa also confirmed that the state government had responded, while the third and fifth defendants, who have no counsel, have not despite being served.
Babawale confirmed the documents and ordered that the other defendants not represented in court were adequately briefed on the date fixed for the conference.
In his 32-point statements of claim, Prince Odunsi , a direct descendant of the late Oba Oyemade Mayungbe and progenitor of Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House, averred that he is the one lawfully entitled to the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.
Giving a historical order of the monarchs produced so far by the ruling house, he averred that their progenitor, Rosanlu, also known as Erinsiba, “begat Oyetade, who in turn begat Oyemade, also known as Mayungbe alias Ayoledoye”, adding that, Mayungbe had four wives of which Arobo was the third.
The claimant said as at the time Mayungbe (alias Ayoledoye), married Arobo, who hailed from Akure, she came with a male child named Ogunsakin from her earlier marriage and that when he later became king,he accommodated Ogunsakin in the palace in his lifetime.
The claimant averred that when Oba Oyetade Mayungbe ascended the throne, and ”in order to differentiate Ogunsakin, his stepson, from other children in the palace, he made Ogunsakin an “Odi” meaning a servant to the king.
He averred that under Yoruba custom and tradition applicable in Isara-Remo, an “Odi” is not a member of a ruling house and can never qualify for nomination for the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo” and that Ogunsakin also served as “Odi” to Oba Poke, the successor to Oba Oyetade Mayungbe. In their statement of defence and counter claim, the first, second, sixth to 10th and 14thdefendants admitted some of the averments of the claimant and denied others.
The first defendant, Albert Mayungbe, insisted on being a “bonafide member and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling House and that the late Oba Mayungbe, aside from being a trader, met and married Arobo in Akure where Ogunsakin, his grandfather, was born.
They prayed the court for an order of mandamus compelling the 15th and 16thdefendants to give approval to the appointment of the first defendant as the new Odemo-elect of Isara-Remo.
But the claimant, in his reply to the statement of defence and counter claim of the first, second, sixth to 10th and 14thdefendants contended that the first defendant is not a bonafide member and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling house
He, therefore, prayed the court to dismiss the counter claim of the defendants with punitive costs.
How to improve justice delivery at the grassroots was the thrust of the yearly retreat/workshop for customary court presidents and judges by the Lagos State Judicial Service Commission, reports ADEBISI ONANUGA
The need to protect our customs came to the fore as stakeholders in the justice sector converged on Lagos to re-appraise procedures in the customary courts.
The occasion was a retreat/workshop by the Lagos State Judicial Service Commission for Presidents and judges of customary courts, which had as theme, “The role of Customary Court Judges in the nation’s judicial system”.
The participants counselled the Commission to establish a Customary Court of Appeal to strengthen the system.
Ondo State President, Customary Court of Appeal, Justice C.T. Adesola-Ikpatt, who delivered the lead paper titled: “Jurisdiction of Customary Courts in Lagos State”, stressed the need for the Commission to develop customary court laws and preserve it for posterity.
She advised the Lagos Judiciary to establish the Customary Court of Appeal to provide access, in a familiar environment, for those dissatisfied with the decisions of the customary courts.
Justice Adesola-Ikpatt noted that the indigenous system of adjudication of disputes, which the customary courts administer has remained relevant over the years in maintaining peace and social order among a vast majority of the people. She pointed out that those subject to the system, identified with and accepted it as regulating their relationship.
“The colonialists saw the good in our indigenous laws and system of adjudication; they respected and preserved it. True, times are changing, but the wise must do the needful to protect their customs and ways of life as depicted by our indigenous laws and system of court”, she emphasised.
Chief Magistrate Y. O. Aje-Afunwa, whose paper dwelt on “Ethics, decorum and comportment” counselled the presidents and judges of the customary courts to be above board. “Judges are expected to rise above common heads in society, not only in our moral and social perfection and behaviour but in our intellectual performance,” she said.
Aje-Afunwa advised the customary court judges that they and their family members “shall neither ask for nor accept gifts, bequests, favours, or loans on account of anything done or omitted to be done in the discharge of their duties”.
She urged them to shun nepotism and favouritism, disqualify themselves in a proceeding where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned and requlate their ex-parte judicial activities to minimise the risk of conflict with judicial duties.
Aje-Afunwa, however, said: “Judicial officers shall be free to join associations of judges or other organisations to represent their interest to promote professional training and protect their judicial independence.”
The Executive Secretary, Judicial Service Commission, Ayodele Odugbesan, appealed to the Attorney-General to ensure that the proposed amendments to the Customary Courts Law 2011 are effected as soon as possible.
“We believe that the amendments will be beneficial to us and spur local government authorities to meet their obligations especially since they requested that these courts be established in their communities,” she said.
Lagos Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Adeniji Kazeem, who delivered the keynote address, promised to review the Customary Court Law 2011 to increase the jurisdiction of the courts in criminal matters.
Kazeem, who was represented by the Solicitor-General, Funmi Odunlami, gave an indication that the Lagos House of Assembly was reviewing the law.
He told them that for now, they would have to continue to dispense justice under the Customary Courts Law 2011, which earlier increased the jurisdiction of the customary courts in respect of administration of estates of persons who died interstate to N500,000, while the jurisdiction of the courts was limited only to contempt of court committed in the face of the court in criminal aspect.
The Chief Judge of the State, Justice Olufunmilayo Atilade, who was represented by Justice Taofikat Oyekan-Abdulai, said the state has been a pacesetter in the administration of justice and urged them to always uphold the truth.
Justice Atilade advised that the tradition of the people in their locality should guide them when dispensing justice, adding that they should not apply common law in all cases.
A careful application of rel-evant international law principles can aid Nigeria’s quest for rapid economic growth, a former Nigerian permanent envoy to the United Nations, Ambassador Ayoola Olukanni, has said.
Olukanni, who delivered a speech titled ‘International law and development process in developing countries: reflections on Nigeria’s experience’ at the 30th anniversary of the Masters of International Law and Diplomacy (MILD) programme of the Faculty of Law, University of Lagos (UNILAG), said some of the policies implemented by past governments in the country are based on international law principles.
He said: “Nigeria has benefitted from the international development process and also relied on international law, norms and soft laws to advance its quest for development. Take for example the Better life for Rural Women programme; it was inspired by the International Conference on Women and Development in Nairobi in 1985.
“The establishment of the ministry of environment is a function of the international processes so far as the environment is concerned. The creation of the ministry of women affairs was also a function of the issue of gender and development of within the United Nation.”
One of the organisers of the event, Mr. Wahab Shittu, said President Muhammadu Buhari’s uncompromising anti-corruption reputation had made him the right person to launder Nigeria’s image using international law.
Shittu said: “President Buhari seems to have started well by trying to shore up the international image of Nigeria, and his track record of discipline, integrity and anti-corruption is working very highly for Nigeria now.
“So, we can say that we have the appropriate foundation to build on by virtue of the international recognition that the president presently enjoys. But you know international respect, credibility and recognition is not hinged on just one man alone, we need to change our attitudinal chemistry; the negative image about Nigeria must change.
The Head of the Department of Jurisprudence and International Law, UNILAG, Dr. Ayoade Adedayo said when it was introduced three decades ago, the MILD programme was truly revolutionary.
“We are proud that in 30 years, this programme has changed the face of the nation in many ways. The MILD programme has always driven very quietly international law processes. What we want to do more of by early next year is to have roundtables that will consider issues in international law, thrash it out and give our position to the government.”
lagos State Public Complaints Commission (PCC) has prom-ised to make local governments accountable to the people.
Its Federal Commissioner in Lagos State, Funso Olukoga, made the promise while presenting the commission’s annual report at a press briefing at its office at the old National Assembly Complex in Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS), Lagos.
Olukoga, who gave an insight into future activities of the commission, said: “As the Ombudsman’s office, we have resolved to work harder in the coming year in the area of governance at the grassroots level. We shall be focusing more on how to ensure that local government activities touch the lives of ordinary citizens and residents of Lagos.”
He added: “We are collaborating with other organisations in the private sector to monitor performance at the local government level with the overall objective of holding each local council accountable to the people.”
He said there has been an upward trend in the number of people making use of the service of the commission, stating that the commission received 1,067 complaints for the outgoing year alone, compared to 354, 338, 803 complaints received in 2012, 2013 and 2014 respectively.
The commission, he said, concluded 691, 350, 262 and 255 cases in 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012 respectively, emphasising that the number of complaints received and concluded “is a good indicator that the people are getting more aware of our services and are becoming more confident in patronising us”.
He blamed most of the incidences of building collapse in the state for the outgoing year on the negligence and compromise of the regulatory agencies set up by the state. They, according to him, include the Lagos State Building Control Agency (LSBCA); Lagos State Urban Renewal Authority (LASURA); Lagos State Physical Planning Permit Authority; Lagos State Material Testing Laboratory and Lagos State Planning and Environment Monitoring Authority.
He said: “Our preliminary investigations revealed that most of the buildings had actually become weak over time due to structural defects, owing to poor construction work, including the use of substandard building materials.
“In almost all the cases, failure of the regulatory and control agencies charged with the responsibility for building in Lagos State was heavily underscored.
“It is the commission’s belief that effective and proactive regulatory and control activities on the part of the agencies listed above will go a long way in guaranteeing the safety of residential structures in the state.”
Olukoga urged Governor Akinwunmi Ambode to closely monitor the said agencies, adding: “It is the commission’s belief that effective and proactive regulatory control activities on the part of the agencies will go a long way in guaranteeing the safety of residential structures in the state”.
The commission, however, praised the Lagos State Emergency Management Authority(LASEMA) and the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) for what it described as a “display of high level of professionalism and passion” in handling the cases of building collapse.
The commission expressed satisfaction that its activities were becoming more popular with the members of the public as many people have now developed confidence in its ability to get them justice.
Lawyers have hailed the Federal Government for resorting to the Public Procurement Act (PPA) in the trial of some individuals accused of diverting funds meant for arms procurement under the President Goodluck Jonathan administration. They argue that the application of the law will strengthen it. Eric Ikhilae reports
• Dasuki
The fight against corruption has truly begun. Those who have cases to asnwer are being hauled to court. So far, charges have been filed against former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki; ex-Minister of State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda, former Sokoto State governor, Attahiru Dalhatu Bafarawa and his son, Sagir Attahiru, among others.
Emeritus Chairman of Daar Communications, Chief Raymond Dokpesi and his firm were charged under the Public Procurement Act (PPA).
Others were charged under the Penal Code. And, of the six counts contained in the charge against Dokpesi and his firm, four were brought under the PPA. Offences under the Act carry a minimum of five and maximum of 10 years with no option of fine.
• Dokpesi
In count one, Dokpesi and his company were accused of conducting “procurement fraud by means of fraudulent and corrupt act, to wit: receipt of payment into the account of Daar Investment and Holding Company Limited with First Bank of Nigeria Plc, of public funds in the sum of N2,120,000,000 from the account of the office of National Security Adviser with the Central Bank of Nigeria for the funding of media activities for the 2015 presidential election for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP),” an offence contrary to Section 58(4)(b) of the PPA and punishable under 58(6) and (7) of the Act.
The PPA
The PPA serves a response by the Federal Government to the clamour for transparency in government’s procurement process. Steps leading to the birth of the law in 2007 began in 1999 when the former President Olusegun Obasanjo inaugurated the Country Procurement Assessment field work.
• Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami
The outcome of the field work produced the Country Procurement Assessment Report (CPAR), which recommended the establishment of Bureau of Price Monitoring and Intelligence Unit (BMPIU), among others, to address the shortcomings of the observed inadequacies in the country’s public procurement process.
But the Federal Government went further by initiating move to institutionalise the operations of the BMPIU. It evolved a Bill to that effect – the Public Procurement Bill – which it sent to the National Assembly in 2003/2004. The National Assembly passed it into Law on May 31, 2007 and was subsequently signed into law on June 4, 2007, by late President Umaru Yar’Adua.
The Act requires public institutions and other relevant parties to ensure that all public procurements are conducted in a manner that is transparent, timely and equitable and based on the guidelines, thresholds and standards.
The National Council on Public Procurement (NCPP), headed by the Minister of Finance, and which supervises the Bureau of Public Procurement (BPP), which oversees the procurement activities of all the procuring entities (and indirectly, oversees all public procurement affected by the provisions of the Procurement Act) and is responsible for the issuance of procurement “Certificates of No Objection.”
A “Certificate of No Objection” is the document that confirms that due process was followed in the conduct of a procurement process and authorises the procuring entity to enter into the relevant contract.
Before PPA, public procurement in the country was haphazardly handled based on the Treasury Circulars of 1958, which provided only guidelines on public expenditure management.
The PPA, as enacted by the National Assembly is only applicable to federal institutions. However, states like Edo, Delta and Rivers have taken steps to enact their own versions of the law while a few others are in the process of doing so.
What constitutes legitimate contract under the PPA
The procedure for the award of contract under the Act is explicitly captured in Section 16, Part 4.
Section 16(1) provides: Subject to any exemption allowed by this Act, all public procurement shall be conducted: (a) subject to the prior review thresholds as may from time to time be set by the Bureau pursuant to Section 7(1) (a)-(b); (b) based only on procurement plans supported by prior budgetary appropriations and no procurement proceedings shall be formalised until the procuring entity has ensured that funds are available to meet the obligations and subject to the threshold in the regulations made by the Bureau, has obtained a “Certificate of ‘ No Objection’ to Contract Award” from the Bureau; (c) by open competitive bidding ; (d ) in a manner which is transparent, timely, equitable for ensuring accountability and conformity with this Act and regulations deriving therefrom ; (e) with the aim of achieving value for money and fitness for purpose ; (f) in a manner which promotes competition, economy and efficiency; and (g) in accordance with the procedures and time-line laid down in this Act and as may be specified by the Bureau from time to time.
Punishment for infraction
Under the Act, any breach of its provisions constitutes an offence. And, punishment for offences relating to public procurement, the court with jurisdiction to try such offences, and who should prosecute offender are stipulated in Part 7, Section 58 of the Act.
In the case of a natural person, Section 58(1) states: “Any natural person not being a public officer who contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not less than 5 calendar years but not exceeding 10 calendar years without an option.
In the case of a public officer, Section 58(5) states: “Any person who while carrying out his duties as an officer of the Bureau, or any procuring entity who contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a cumulative punishment of:(a) a term of imprisonment of not less than 5 calendar years without any option of fine; and (b) summary dismissal from government services.
Where it is a company that violates provisions of the law, Section 58(6) provides: “Any legal person that contravenes any provision of this Act commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a cumulative penalty of: (a) debarment from all public procurements for a period not less than five calendar years; and (b) a fine equivalent to 25 per cent of the value of the procurement in issue.
Where a company is convicted, the law also provides punishment for its directors in Section 58(7) which states that: “Where any legal person shall be convicted pursuant to subsection (4) of this Section, every director of the company as listed on its records at the Corporate Affairs Commission shall be guilty of an offence and is liable on conviction to a term of imprisonment not less than three calendar years but not exceeding five calendar years without an option of fine.
Exceptional cases
However, the law, in Part 3, Section 15(2) provides for exception as it relates to procurements carried out under national security or defence. But, such exemption must be with the consent of the President.
Section 15(2) states: “The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the procurement of special goods; works and services involving national defence or national security unless the President’s express approval has been first sought and obtained.
Notable cases before now
Notable individuals, who have, before now, been subjected to trial under the law include former directors of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) – Olabode George (ex-Chairman), Aminu Dabo (ex-Managing Director), Abdullahi Aminu Tafida, Oluwasegun Abidoye, Zanna Maidaribe and Sule Aliyu and former Director-General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA),Temisan Omatseye.
George and other directors of the NPA, who served between 2001 and 2003, were convicted and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment on October 26, 2009 by a Lagos High Court. The Court of Appeal, Lagos affirmed the trial court’s decision in its January 21, 2011 judgment.
But the Supreme Court, in a unanimous judgment by a five-man panel head by the now retired Justice John Afolabi Fabiyi, in a judgment delivered in December 2013, voided George’s and others’ conviction on the ground they were charged under a a law that was not in existence when the alleged offences were committed.
Omatseye, who was arraigned sometime in 2010, is being tried under the Act for alleged “contract rigging.” He is conducting his defence.
Experts said though no substantial success has been recorded in the prosecution of violators of the Act since its enactment in 2007, the decision by the new government to charge notable individuals under the Act will provide an opportunity to further test its workability.
Lawyers, including Dr. Abdulkair Lawan, Adekeke Abegunde and Jude Nwanchukwu of the Centre for Public Accountability (CPA) are of the view that it would be premature and prejudicial to begin to examine the chances of both the defendant and prosecution in the current cases.
Lawan said the success of the prosecution is dependent on the quality of evidence he presents before the court. He added that “barring no extraneous influences, the prosecution, with compelling evidence, should be able to wrap up these cases in record time.I wish them good luck.”
Abegunde said the PPA remains the only law guiding public procurement in the country, and trial for any perceived crime committed in relation to public procurement must be brought under the Act.
“We are not saying the law is perfect, having been enacted almost over eight years ago. But I think we should continue to apply it to enable us understand its shortcomings and move for amendment when necessary.
“I recall that public procurement practice in the country before the enactment of the PPA, was done unprofessionally, inefficiently and ineffectively as it was based on the Treasury Circulars of 1958, which provided only guidelines on public expenditure management.
“The guidelines of these circulars on public procurement practice were grossly inadequate and created rooms for malpractices and high level corruption in contract management,” Abegunde said.
Nwanchukwu noted that the defendants could only be successful by the strength of the defence they put up. He argued that there is hardly any law without its loopholes. He noted that the defence could explore these loopholes, where they exist, and puncture the case of the prosecution.
“I do not know the facts of these cases now, but if they are in relation with the arms contracts, which has to do with national security or defence, the defendants could rely on the provision of Section 15(2) of the PPA in their defence,” he said.
A Federal High Court in Abuja will on December 17 deliver judgment in a suit on whether Senator Ben Murray Bruce, having sworn an oath of allegiance to the United States, is qualified to occupy the office of a Senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Justice Abdul Kafarati, in an originating summons filed by one of the contestants in the Bayelsa East Senatorial District election, Chief Anthony George-Ikoli (SAN), has been asked to determine whether a man with a dual citizenship, who swore to an oath repudiating his citizenship can aspire to become a Senator of the same country.
George-Ikoli approached the court to determine the issue of Bruce’s dual citizenship and the naturalisation oath of allegiance he swore to the US. George-Ikoli is the first Senior Advocate of Nigeria from Bayelsa State as well as the grandson of foremost nationalist, Ernest Ikoli, and the immediate past Attorney-General of the state under the governorship of Timipre Sylva.
In his Originating Summons, he asked the court to determine: Whether having regard to the combined provisions of Sections 66(1)(a) and 28(1) of the 1999 Constitution, an aspirant for the elective office of Senator, who whilst voluntarily acquiring the citizenship of another country (that is the United States of America) and in the process of which he (the aspirant) declares on oath, the absolute and entire renunciation of citizenship of and allegiance and fidelity to Nigeria can without more be eligible and seek election to the office of Senator.
This column had sometime in the past canvassed for the establishment of an International Economic Crimes Court, modelled after the International Criminal Court (ICC), in Hague. The idea behind the proposition, is because many unstable nation-states like ours, may lack the capacity, to successfully bring to account, VIP treasury looters, without upending the state, itself. Alternatively is a territorially determined, International Criminal Tribunal, like that for Rwandan, established by United Nations Security Council, by Resolution 955, and the Yugoslavia Tribunal, established by Resolution 827. The ICC was established in 2002,as complimentary to national courts, to exercise jurisdiction, where local courts are unable or unwilling, to genuinely prosecute major crimes against humanity, like genocide.
For our bleeding country, the recent barrage of criminal information, and the legion of VIPs, who have been mentioned, with regards to serious allegations of economic crime, against Nigeria, leaves one wondering, whether our country is trulyable, willing and capable of prosecuting these crimes, against these VIPs. As Nigerians know, there has been several allegations of economic crimes, in recent years; but the hottest in town now, is what is commonly referred to, as the armsgate or Dasukigate. For me, the share possibility and audacity, of a few Nigerians, to share among themselves and their accomplices, a humongous 2 billion dollars, on spurious sub-heads, as alleged; beggars the belief, that we are a potent nation-state, with an efficient criminal justice system, that can effectively punish serious economic criminals.
Perhaps, President Muhammadu Buhari’s regime, will make a dent? That will be miraculous. For I ask, where will he begin, with the daily expansion of the list of treasury looters, spanning the media, military, judiciary, prosecutor agencies, legal giants, elder statesmen, indeed the major national arteries and nerve centres. To worsen a really bad situation, there are potent threats to the corporate existence of our country, and the innumerable gang of unemployed youths, available for easy recruitment, as armed brigands.
But as PMB usually say, ‘if Nigeria don’t kill corruption, corruption will kill Nigeria’. Helpfully, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJN), 2015, offers some hope in the criminal prosecution of these ‘very important’ Nigerians, entrusted with the management of our affairs, but who instead, decided to betray the trust, by helping themselves and their accomplices, with as much of the resources, as caught their fancy. The easy way out, for both the prosecution and the defence, would be the provisions on Plea Bargain, in section 270, of the ACJN, 2015.
By section 270(2) “The prosecution may enter into plea bargaining with the defendant, with the consent of the victim or his representatives … provided all the following conditions are present: the evidence of the prosecution is insufficient to prove the offence… where the defendant has agreed to return the proceeds of the crime or make restitution… or, where the defendant in a case of conspiracy has fully cooperated with the investigation and prosecution of the crime by providing relevant information for the successful prosecution of other offenders”.
Another helpful provision, in the ACJN Act, 2015, is Section 306, which provides: “An application for stay of proceedings in respect of a criminal matter before the court shall not be entertained”. The purport of this section is that the troubling experience of the trial of politically exposed persons, lasting for years, due to technical manoeuvrability by the defence, using interlocutory applications, should seize; as such applications would not lead to any stay of proceedings by the trial courts, or the appellate courts.
A further provision that could aid the prosecution of those who allegedly opened the floodgate of the Central Bank of Nigeria, into their private estate, is section 321. In section 321(a), the ACJN, 2015, provides: “A court after conviction may adjourn proceedings to consider and determine sentence appropriate for each convict: in addition to or in lieu of any other penalty authorised by law, order the convict to make restitution or pay compensation to any victim of crime for which the offender was convicted, or to the victim’s estate”. By this provision, and the other subsections, the courts could in addition to the sentencing of convicts to terms of imprisonment, recover as much of the loot as is possible, for our dear country.
The power of court to order payment of expenses or compensation, in Section 319, and the power to allow time for payment of fine; to direct that the fine be paid by instalments, among other provisions, in Section 327, could make the option of fine, attractive, particularly for the high net worth individuals, accused of looting our treasury. With PMB recently affirming that some of the looters have returned part of the loot, many more should be encouraged, to save themselves and our country, the agony of a prolonged criminal trial.
Former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) president Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) has advocated a law to recognise a Union of Peoples and Nationalities of Nigeria.
This, he said, would address agitations for cessation.
Agbakoba said the country may consider adopting a new name – the ‘Union of Nigeria’.
The former NBA boss, who spoke in his Ikoyi office, warned about what he called a conspiracy of the elite and its resolve to frustrate the reform agenda.
The ‘elite’, he said, includes people in high positions in the churches, traditional institutions, professions and businesses, etc.
“They represent a small percent of Nigerians but exert tremendous influence, with a view to state capture. This class is very dissatisfied about the ideological change of your government.
“They see new agenda as a threat to their privileges. As set out below, they are the greatest roadblocks to your economic and political policy agenda.”
He praised the Buhari administration, saying it has created an ideological shift to the left (pro-people).
“I am not sure that this shift has been well communicated. Nigeria can now be classified as a country advancing towards social democracy. This is the first time in the history of our country that such a major shift has occurred.
“Evidence of this shift includes Treasury Single Account which needs redefinition, quality of ministers, generally, blocking finance leaks, social regulations, benefits and stimulus strategy, like paying employment benefits and keeping the oil subsidy, at least in the short term, zero tolerance to corruption.”
On political governance Agbakoba said: “It is clear that Nigeria’s political landscape is very problematic. We are still not a nation. Many Nigerians feel alienated and disconnected. The consequences are all too clear. The situation is made worse by the powerful elite class, controlling the system.”
Agbakoba suggested that the government must avoid communication lethargy in 2016.
“I suggest that government create an Office for Strategic Communication to link government with the people. There is no need to have two press secretaries. One may be assigned to the Office of Strategic Communication.
“On political governance, I suggest that you build a grand alliance of pro people institutions, like Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and labour Unions. I also suggest that you set up a small technical committee on national order.
“The first and urgent task of this committee is to work on a bill for An Act of the Union of Peoples and Nationalities of Nigeria. The Bill must resolve the Nigerian fault lines and contradictions. We may consider adopting a new name the ‘Union of Nigeria’.
‘’In conclusion, I endorse the change agenda represented by the ideological shift in creation of structures for social benefits and inclusive political architecture”.
Justice A. A. Babawale of an Ogun State High Court sitting in Saamu, has fixed January 20 for the pretrial conference (PTC) in a suit filed by Prince Adetayo Odunsi challenging the nomination of Albert Mayungbe to the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.
The co-defendants in the suit numbered HCS/158/2013 are the head of the ruling house, Prince Obafemi Awoyade; 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.
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; Governor of Ogun State; Executive Council of Ogun State; the State Commissioner for Chieftaincy and Local Government and the state Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice as second to 18th defendants respectively.
The claimant’s counsel, Muyiwa Obanewa told the court that he had filed issues for determination.
Obanewa also confirmed that the state government had responded, while the third and fifth defendants, who have no counsel, have not despite being served.
Babawale confirmed the documents and ordered that the other defendants not represented in court are adequately briefed on the date fixed for the conference.
In his 32 points statement of claim, Prince Odunsi , a direct descendant of the late Oba Oyemade Mayungbe and progenitor of Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House, averred that he is the one lawfully entitled to the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.
Giving a historical order of the obas so far produced by the ruling house, he averred that their progenitor, Rosanlu, who was also known as Erinsiba, “begat Oyetade who in turn begat Oyemade, also known as Mayungbe alias Ayoledoye” adding that Mayungbe had four wives of which Arobo was the third.
The claimant said as at the time Mayungbe (alias Ayoledoye), married Arobo, who hailed from Akure, she came with a male child named Ogunsakin from her earlier marriage and that when he later became king,he accommoda-ted Ogunsakin in the palace in his lifetime.
The claimant averred that when Oba Oyetade Mayungbe ascended the throne, and ”in order to differentiate Ogunsakin, his stepson and an outsider, from other children in the palace, he made Ogunsakin an “Odi” meaning a servant to the king.
He averred that under Yoruba custom and tradition applicable in Isara-Remo, an “Odi” is not a member of a ruling house and can never qualify for nomination into the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo” and that Ogunsakin also served as “Odi” to Oba Poke, the successor to Oba Oyetade Mayungbe. In their statement of defence and counter claim, the first, second, sixth to 10th and 14thdefendants admitted some of the averments of the claimant and deny others.
The first defendant, Albert Mayungbe, insisted on being a “bonafide member and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling House and that the late Oba Mayungbe, aside from being a trader, met and married Arobo in Akure where Ogunsakin, his grandfather, was born.
They prayed the court for an order of mandamus compelling the 15th and 16thdefendants to give approval to the appointment of the first defendant as the new Odemo-elect of Isara-Remo.
But the claimant, in his reply to the statement of defence and counter claim of the first, second, sixth to 10th and 14thdefendants had contended that the first defendant is not a bonafide member and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling house
He, therefore, prayed the court to dismiss the counter claim of the defendants with punitive costs.
