The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Stakeholders seek legal backing for Benue amnesty programme

    Stakeholders have called for a legal framework for the amnesty programme of Governor Samuel Ortom.

    A statement by the Governors’ Special Assistant on Media and ICT, Mr. Tahav Agerzua said: “Stakeholders rose from a three–day workshop for amnesty beneficiaries organised by the Benue State government calling for legal backing of the program.

    “The call was contained in a 10-point communiqué issued at the end of the workshop. The stakeholders appealed to government to establish amnesty offices as well as skill acquisition centers in the three senatorial zones of the state.

    “They also called for the setting up of farm centers and drug free clubs in collaboration with the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency, NDLEA, for the beneficiaries. The communiqué suggested the recruitment of the beneficiaries into Civilian Joint Task Force, CJTF, even as it advised the state government to put in place measures to avert spillover effects of cross border crimes.

    “The stakeholders urged the state government to approach bilateral and multilateral agencies for collaboration in the implementation of the amnesty program. According to the communiqué, 556 people across the three senatorial districts of the state embraced the amnesty program and surrendered over 400 assorted arms and thousands of ammunitions.

    “The stakeholders appreciated the State Governor, Samuel Ortom for fulfilling the amnesty promise they said he made during his inauguration.”

     

  • Amnesty: Don’t extend immunity to Senate President, deputy

    The anti-corruption crusade by President Muhammadu Buhari is at risk if the immunity clause is extended to the Senate President and his deputy, Legal dviser at Amnesty International, London, Kolawole Olaniyan, has said.

    He urged the President to move swiftly to dissuade members of the eighth National Assembly from taking forward the immunity initiative if his vision “to be remembered as a Nigerian president who fought corruption to a standstill” is to be effectively realised.

    Olaniyan, who gave the advice in a statement issued last week in London and titled, “Why Buhari can’t be tight-lipped over immunity proposal by the 8thNational Assembly” argued that it amounted to double standard for the lawmakers to make laws to regulate others while tearing up the constitution to be free of regulation themselves.

    Olaniyan,  who noted that the immunity initiative is coming on the heels of the trial of the Senate President, Dr. Bukola Saraki who is facing a 13 count charge of false assets declaration before the Code of Conduct Tribunal, argued that the proposal by the Senate is against United Nations (UN) convention on corruption and of which Nigeria is a signatory.

    “Extending rather than limiting immunity from prosecution for corruption involving parliamentarians is a licence to impunity and lawbreaking, which clearly isn’t compatible with good governance.

    “Parliamentarians promoting and granting immunity to themselves can only serve to launder the rule of the powerful rather than the rule of law. And it’s patently inconsistent with the United Nations Convention against Corruption to which Nigeria is a state party. The convention in fact requires Nigeria to achieve “appropriate balance between any immunities” and to “ensure effective investigation, prosecution and adjudication of corruption offences”.

    He explained  that part of making laws for good governance of the country is to serve the desire of victims of corruption for accountability, for justice, for dignity, and stressed that the members of the 8th National Assembly will be fulfilling their constitutional role by addressing as a central priority, the situation of victims of corruption including clearing the way through public hearings and progressive legislation that can provide legal standing and access to effective remedies for victims of corruption.

    “It is not by clinging to whatever will shield them from their perceived political foes that members of the 8th National Assembly will better perform their law-making role. And it doesn’t have to be at the expense of the fight against corruption. After all, there is always the judiciary and due process of law to take care of any perceived abuse of anti-corruption laws by the authorities.

    “If only members of the 8th National Assembly can grasp the thinnest slice of what victims of corruption experience they will re-think their proposal to grant their leaders immunity from prosecution for corruption.

    “As a law-making body whose primary duty it is to make laws for good governance, its purpose ought to be to rid the country of impunity for those who will commit high level official corruption, with a philosophy that doesn’t recognise immunity or give leeway to the most powerful or influential.

    “The 1999 Constitution (as amended) recognises the role of the National Assembly to “make laws for the peace, order and good governance of the Federation.” This suggests that when it comes to issue of corruption, members of the 8th National Assembly should worry less about their own interest and more about the citizens who are the real victims of corruption”, he posited.

    Olaniyan contended,  “what the National Assembly is doing is patently at odds with the ‘anti-corruption agenda’ of President Muhammadu Buhari and the ‘political change’ that Nigerians voted for. This is like taking Nigeria back to the middle ages. And it clearly undermines the rule of law as it portrays the lawmakers as being above the law”.

    Olaniyan argued that the immunity initiative looks like a revenge job, and one for self-aggrandisement stressing, “this is undoubtedly a low period in public esteem for our ‘lawmakers.’

    He emphasised that the success of President Muhammadu Buhari’s proclaimed fight against corruption hinges not only on his ‘integrity record’ or members of his cabinet but also the collective involvement of all branches of government, in particular the National Assembly and the judiciary

     

     

  • Between the Presidency and National Assembly

    The Presidency and the National Assembly appear to operate in contrasts with regards to the austere times we are in. While President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB) is threatening to downsize the federal ministries, and to have honourable ministers without portfolio to save costs, the Senate and the House of Representatives have both increased the number of their standing committees, and there is an ongoing schism over who gets the juicier of the committees. Perhaps, it is a reflection of the stability and confidence that PMB enjoys, as against the tenuous tenure of particularly Bukola Saraki, as senate president.

    So, while PMB is issuing stringent terms and conditions of employment to his ministers; Saraki, and the House Speaker Yakubu Dogara, are ‘bribing’ their colleagues with chairmanship of juicy committees, to starve the lurking threats to their own juicy position.The scenario in the Senate is particularly interesting. Out of 109 senators, the Senate President created 65 standing committees. The direct implication for the national economy will be the budgetary provision for the paraphernalia of office for the 65 chairmen and their deputies; while the indirect consequence is the atomised pressure for patronage from ministries, departments and agencies of government, under the guise of oversight functions.

    Comparatively, in the United States, a country of over 318 million people (2014), which has the biggest economy in the world; their 100-man Senate has 16 standing committees, 67 sub-committees and five non-standing committees. An interesting angle to the composition of their committees is that all the chairmen of the committees are members of the majority party in parliament. In Nigeria, apparently as a survivalist plan, the Senate committee chairs were shared between the parties.  While the majority party, the All Progressives Congress has 41, the minority Peoples Democratic Party, got 24 committee chairs.

    In the House of Representatives, the Speaker who had managed to tamper the anger of his party men following his tumultuous emergence; is on the boiler again, for giving what is considered juicy committee chairs to his PDP collaborators. Out of the 96 committees announced by the lower house, the ruling APC has 48 committees, while the leading opposition party, the PDP has 46 chairmen, and the other two smaller parties, one chairman each. There, Dogara’s intra-party opponents led by Femi Gbajabiamila, are fuming that not only did he give his compatriots just half of the committee chairs available, the Speaker had the temerity to give away what they consider the ‘juicy committees’ to the opposition legislators.

    Unfortunately for  Saraki, the fire this time is from the outside. Unlike his intrigue laden ascendency to the senate presidency, cunning and subterfuge have not yielded any positive result in his numerous fights in the court. His legal team are presently in quandary, and are running from pillar to post, desperately clutching at anything in sight to save their drowning principal. The famed PMB’S body language, which influence is degrading in other respects, still invokes the feeling that the president will not trade in, a save-saraki-interference in the judicial process, for legislative support.

    As we await the denouement of the power play between the Buhari and the Saraki tendencies in APC, I recommend to PMB and our political leaders, Lee Kuan  Yew’s famous book: From Third World To First – The Singapore Story: 1965 – 2000. I will now quote extensively from the book. At page 199-200, the man highly regarded as the father of Singapore, wrote: “Running a government is not unlike conducting an orchestra. No prime minister can achieve much without an able team. While he himself need not be a great player, he has to know enough of the principal instruments from the violin to the French horn and the flute, or he would not know what he can expect from each of them.”

    He went further: “My style was to appoint the best man I had to be in charge of the most important ministry at the period, usually finance, except at independence when defense (sic) became urgent…. The next best would get the next most important portfolio”. Expatiating further, he wrote: “I will tell the minister what I wanted him to achieve, and leave him to get on with the task; it was management by objective. It worked best when the minister was resourceful and could innovate when faced with new, unexpected problems. My involvement in their ministries would be only on questions of policy.”

    In an earlier chapter, at page 95, on building A fair, Not Welfare, Society,Lee Kuan Yew, wrote: “A competitive, winner-takes-all society… would not be acceptable in Singapore…. To even out the extreme results of free-market competition, we had to redistribute the national income through subsidies on things that improved the earning power of citizens, such as education. Housing and public health were also obviously desirable. But finding the correct solution for personal medical care, pensions, or retirement benefits was not easy. We decided each matter in a pragmatic way, always mindful of possible abuse and waste. If we over-re-distribute by higher taxation, the high performers would cease to strive. Our difficulty was to strike the right balance”.

    In his closing remarks, reflecting on his many years in power, Lee wrote at page 663: “My experience of developments in Asia has led me to conclude that we need good people to have good government. However good the system of government, bad leaders will bring harm to their people”. Reflecting on the challenges of a multi-ethnic country and democratic governance, he said at page 664: “In a new country where loyalties are to tribal leaders, they (the leaders) must be honest and not self-serving or the country is likely to fail whatever the constitutional safeguards.”

     

  • Wanted: laws to regulate social media

    Wanted: laws to regulate social media

    Bauchi State Governor Mohammed A. Abubakar is the Chairman of Arewa Lawyers Forum (ALF) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA).  He was in Vienna, Austria for the just concluded International Bar Association (IBA) Conference where he spoke to select journalists, including Legal Editor JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU. 

    Bar leaders at the African Regional Forum of the International Bar Association (IBA) conference in Vienna, Austria, called on African lawyers to upgrade their skills to enable them compete favourably in a globalised world. What is your view about this?

    Well, there are international best practices in all facets of life, particularly in the legal profession. All we need to do is to adopt them and abide by these international best practices, that is the best thing to do and the way forward.  Just like the Nigerian Bar Association has started some years ago, the issue of continuing legal education, I believe that is the way forward. There is a need for us to be abreast of developments in in law all over the world, that is the only way we can be international  players in the legal profession.

    The IBA as an organisation is known for quality programmes and sessions  in all their conferences. Which  of these sessions was more interested to you?

    You know that when individual lawyers join the IBA, they have the opportunity of belonging to different sections and  the  sections you belong to are determined by your interest. The areas of  your practice. Primarily, I have been attending public interest sessions. For instance, yesterday  m,orning we attended the session on judicial corruption. This is a problem that is endemic in most developing countries and it behoves any lawyer who is attending the conference from these jurisdictions to be abreast with what is happening internationally in that respect. Other sessions that interested me include the session on international commercial arbitration because that is the trend all over the world now. In the legal profession now, we tilt more to Alternative Disputes Resolution (ADR)  because of its manifest and obvious advantages over litigation. I have interest in arbitration particularly. I am an associate member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, UK and of course a member of the Nigerian branch and for that reason, I pay special attention to these areas  whenever I come to this kind of conferences.

    What do you think Nigerian delegates can take home from  this conference in terms of the organisation,  resource persons , materials and delivery?

    Well, if you  heard the Secretary of the IBA on the opening ceremony, he said that there were well over 6,000 lawyers  attending  the conference . That is a very huge number for somebody to manage. And if you notice at the very beginning when you go to register  you will notice that things have been well arranged, particularly  if  you registered for the conference  on time and they had  sent you the  voucher for fast track, the moment you use that voucher, you will not spend  more than two minutes at the counter  and you will collect all the conference materials.  This is what gives us trouble  back at home. We have to find a way of arranging our launches that are offered at our conference venues. These are areas  that give us  problems at home, we are always in  a hurry but we can still improve on these and take things easy when issues like that are involved but we can still improve on that and do better in this respect.

    As a lawyer and a Bar leader, how do you think your knowledge of the law and experiences from  international conferences like this will impact the justice delivery  in your state?

    I have a general belief not only in the justice sector, I have this  belief that the major players in the government of a State, the  players I expect to come on board in Bauchi State,  the Attorney-General, the Commissioners and Advisers. What I intend to do is to make it possible in a legal manner for this people to own decent accommodation and decent  means of transportation while they are in office. After doing that then I will challenge them, they  must deliver and they cannot touch public money. I believe that we can extend this to the judiciary. These are  usually  some  of the traps we fall into in public service in Nigeria, when one looks at when one will retire and then you retire without a decent accommodation, then you retire without a good car, so if we take it as a government policy to make sure that high ranking public officers are taken care of in this respect, then I think we can reduce this incidence of corruption in high public offices.

    How do you intend to achieve this in Bauchi State?

    I have a choice piece  of real property in Bauchi State. We had an old airport in the GRA, a new airport has been built, so recently the Federal Ministry of Aviation released this choice real property to me. And  what I intend to do is to develop  a new modern neighbourhood  at that place. I have already started discussing with entrepreneurs who are interested in investing, I told that that I will purchase some of the houses they will build in that place and I intend to use it for this purpose. If you are a commissioner in Bauchi State, we will make it possible for you to own one house there so that we can deducting  the money from your salary so that by the time you finish your tenure, you will have a decent house in the State. The same thing with transportation, so this is my plan.

    You have been in charge as the governor of Bauchi State for almost six months now. Wwhat has the experience been like?

    I must confess that the experience has been very very challenging though I knew before I ventured into the project that it is not going to  be a tea party.  Because everybody knows the situation in Nigeria, Nigeria is a country that depends so much on oil, as a means of its revenue and we are all aware the oil price has been dwindling in international market. Therefore the Federal Government of Nigeria gets little revenue from that and by implication, the States and Local Government Areas too get very little revenue. And most of the States over the years  have been depending on the revenue from the federation accounts to run the States, only   few States in Nigeria generate enough internal revenue to run their states without the Federation account, this is a big challenge for  us. For some of us, even if you want to, there is a limit to which you can increase your internally generated revenue

    It is the turn of Arewa to give produce the next  NBA President. What steps are you taking?

    Well, let me assure the legal community that the Arewa Lawyers Forum has already started meeting plans. On  October 31,  I  am going to call  a meeting of Arewa Lawyers Forum in Bauchi. At that meeting we intend to call on all sons  and daughters of that association who have aspirations for any office n the Nigerian Bar Association ( NBA ) to write us   formally and tell us. This will enable us to determine whether we have a multiplicity of aspirants in any particular office or not. Where we do, we will then sit down and look at the amicable ways of settling that issue so that we do not go through the unnecessary bickering of tearing ourselves apart through elections with more than one candidate vying for one particular office. I am assuring you that e will do this and we will do it successfully.

    What are your plans for justice sector reforms?

    Well, we have in fact at the Northern Governor Forum kick started  the issue of Judicial reforms.  There was a meeting of the Attorneys General f the Northern States in Boronu, to now kik start this process, we took the decision at the last  meeting of the Northern Governors Forum. What we are envisaging is that these groups of experts, our  law officers will now sit down and fashion for us the parameters for this justice sector reforms in the north. You know that we have a uniform  criminal code in the northern States, the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code before the newly enacted Administration of Criminal Justice Act. So, there is need for whatever reform you intend to embark upon to commence from those  documents. You will be surprised see  that some of those documents still contain provisions that were borrowed from India and Pakistan in the 50s,  they are still prevalent in those books and there is a need for us the sit down and critically look at them with a view reviewing them to meet the challenges of  modern Northern Nigeria.

    Now that some States in the federation are yet to constitute their cabinets, who attends the meetings of the body of Attorney’s –General for them?

    Yes, some states like  Bauchi do not have Attorney’s–General  in place now, but the solicitors General are there to fill in the gap. Though we have zeroed in on someone who will be the Attorney-General in Bauchi State. He is a very senior lawyer who has been in practice for long, from the 80s to date.

    Generally Nigeria is going through a period of development, I am particularly concerned about the advent of the social media in the country. Before  the operations of the social media gets out of hand, there is a need for some form of regulation in that sector. Journalists who run online publications, I do not know who regulates them because they jettison all the ethics of Journalism profession in their practice. Somebody somewhere will get up one morning because  they don’t like your face, they fabricate one whatever unfounded story about you, publish  and propagate same through the online media without making any attempt to verify such stories. They have done this to me and  I am considering a law suit against one or two of them involved in this in the country were their domain name is domiciled. It is indeed a very serious problem. For instance, a small boy will look for something unreasonable in government and if you don’t give him, the next thing he will tell you is that he will go to the social media and slander you. He will tell you this to your face and he will do it and the moment this enters this domain, it will be propagated all over  the world so something has to be done about this.

     

  • Prison fellowship meets

    A NON-Governmental Organisation, Prison Fellowship Nigeria (PFN), Lagos State chapter will hold its yearly Family Week and General Meeting at the Redemption Camp of The Redeemed Christian Church of God at Mowe in Ogun State from Thursday to Saturday.

    Speaking at a briefing, its Chairman, Chaplain John Olawepo said no fewer than 400 participants were being expected from the group’s 26 chapters across the country. He said the three-day events, among others, would feature interactive sessions. “Yearly, we meet and hold family weeks, pray and build ourselves  up physically an spiritually,’’ adding that they would also use the time to do stocktaking of the outgoing year.

    Chairman, Planning Committee/State Special Adviser Operations Pastor Alfred Ogene; Head, Protocol, Mrs Mobolaji Soleje and Head, Corporate Strategy, Soji Aelore, said issues concerning inmates and ex-inmates would be tackled at the events to enable them prepare well for their upkeep next year. They listed the achievements of the association as the betterment of the lots of inmates and ex-inmates, restoring their hopes and building the public’s confidence in them.

    They said, however, that finance and non-acceptance of ex-inmates into the society were some of their major challenges.

     

     

  • Awards’ll boost legal profession, says ex-minister Ojo

    Giving awards to lawyers and law firms that have excelled in their areas of specialty is one way to stimulate the growth of the legal profession in Nigeria, Chief Bayo Ojo has said.

    Ojo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and a former Attorney-General of Nigeria, made the remarks when he spoke to the press during the 2015 Law Digest Africa Awards (LDAA) presentation ceremony which held on Friday at the Oriental Hotels in Lekki, Lagos.

    He said:  “The Law Digest put together this event to identify law firms that that have excelled in their various areas of specialty, that is what this is all about.

    “It’s innovative, it’s good; it’s to recognise hard work and diligence in the legal industry, the legal firmament.

    “It will promote the growth of the legal profession in the sense that it’ll be an ideal to aspire to, other law firms will be inspired to be diligent and hope to win in the future and some other time. This will increase capacity and be something to look forward to.”

    The Law Digest Africa Awards is organised by Law Digest magazine and it recognises Managing Partners, firms, general counsels and in-house teams of African firms and companies that have made outstanding contributions to the development of the African legal services market and the economy generally.

    One of the recipients of the award, Gbenga Oyebode (MFR), said it was the first time that a Nigeria-oriented magazine has decided to celebrate African lawyers and this will spur him on.

    He said: “I feel particularly proud, I’ve been chosen for the law achievement award, it’s a lifetime achievement. What this proves for me is that the last 35 years of practicing law have not been in vain and it also galvanises me to do more in future.

    “Typically we have all these western publishers celebrating themselves and celebrating primarily Southern African law firms, so, it’s a great opportunity for us to have someone who takes a look at the best law firms on the continent but again focuses on the Nigerian law firms that have done extremely well and chooses to celebrate us.

    Oyebode, whose firm, Aluko & Oyebode, confirmed its position as the leading law firm in Africa by winning the most contested, Law Firm of the Year award, said the award “is a very great thing.”

    He added: “It’s all about service, it’s all about developing our profession, it’s all about giving back and I suspect that that’s why I have been awarded the high honour today.”

    Seyi Clement, the publisher and editor of Law Digest, said the award is designed to reward excellence in the practice of law across Africa.

    He said: “We gave awards to about 17 law firms and individuals, so it’s not just lawyers alone. Law firms, individuals, in-house practice and also those who provide support services to lawyers, such as IT services providers to lawyers.”

    He added that both big and small lawyers have equal opportunity to be recognised.

    “We look at the quality of work they do, not really the size. We’re looking at what they do, what people say about them, what their colleagues, clients say about them,” Clement said.

    “This is the third year the Law Digest journal has been in existence and the vision is to promote African legal practice through articles.

    The Law Digest is currently in nine countries across the world: Nigeria, Ghana, South Africa, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Australia, The USA and The UK.

    We’re going to launch a francophone version in Cameroon very soon, so that both Anglo and Francophone Cameroonians will be able to enjoy and contribute to the journal.

    Stephen Akinsanya, the Chairman of the British-Nigerian Lawyers’ Forum said the awards will raise the profile of Nigerian and African lawyers

    “We want to obviously celebrate Nigerian and African lawyers who have achieved a sense of excellence in their professions and their chosen fields and also to highlight the legal fraternity in Africa and Nigeria.

    “The awards will also let people know that just as Africa is developing, there are law firms with Nigerian lawyers who are more than able to deal with the issues that crop up in the commercial world of developing the economy in Nigeria

    Bebe Clement, the Business Development Director for Law Digest said it’s a magazine behind African lawyers globally, “so that they can compete on the international stage and to raise the profile of African law firms.”

    She disclosed that the awards is going to be an annual event and it is prompted by the need to recognise and reward the hard work of those who are making waves in the legal profession in Africa.

    “Law Digest is distributed in six countries in the world including The UK and America, and then the West is trying to get into Africa, particularly in the area of law.

    “They have their skills, they have the money and if we’re not careful, they will come in and take the big, lucrative jobs. This is something that we’re already seeing.

    “So, what we try to do at Law Digest is to make our local firms partner with international firms, they raise them, they share their skills, they share their expertise and they raise the standards within the African legal profession.”

    For Professor Kanyi Ajayi (SAN), the awards came at the right time.

    Ajayi, a guest at the event, said: “I think it’s a great initiative by the Law Digest to begin to grant recognition to the role lawyers play in economic development, particularly now that the country is going through challenging times both in terms of security and the economy.”

    Several Nigerian law firms that emerged victorious when the 2015 Law Digest Africa Awards winners were announced in July, received their awards last Friday.

    The key awards category include: Life time achievement award, Managing Partner of the Year, Female Managing Partner of the Year, Young Managing Partner of the Year (under 40), Law Firm of the Year, Litigation and Dispute Resolution Team of the Year, M&A Team of the Year, Banking & Finance Team of the Year, Capital Market Team of the Year, Media and Telecom Legal Department of the Year, Support Services Provider of the Year and General Counsel of the Year

     

  • ‘Supreme Court must be consistent’

    ‘Supreme Court must be consistent’

    Decisions of the Supreme Court of Nigeria should as much as possible not conflict with one another, says Prof Koyinsola Ajayi (SAN).

    Ajayi, who spoke against the backdrop of the court’s two recent decisions on the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)’s Stamp and Seal Policy, said for Nigeria’s judicial system to catch up with that of the rest of the world, there must be consistency of judicial decisions.

    He said: “When you consider what two full panels of the Supreme Court in a period of two weeks said about the stamp and seal policy of the Nigerian Bar Association, it certainly leaves cause for great concern, because I believe on October 15, in a political case, a full panel of the Supreme Court said failure to have a seal on a court process doesn’t matter and on October 27, it said it is fatal.

    “Now, clearly, one of the reasons why we have the courts is so that we can have certainty and predictability in what we do, and where our courts are inconsistent, and not just inconsistent but clearly inconsistent within a period of two weeks in a calendar month in respect of political cases, then we need to begin to speak to ourselves.

    “And it’s not just the judges, it’s also the lawyers because obviously it’s lawyers that proffer these arguments before the courts. Good practice requires lawyers to be faithful to their calling, they are called learned and noble, therefore lawyers should always do what they can to aid the court to achieve justice.”

    The latter of the two decisions that the learned silk referred to is the judgment delivered on October 27, 2015 in Appeal No. SC/722/15 All Progressives Congress (APC) V. General Bello Sarkin Yaki, where the Supreme Court declared that lawyers in the country must affix the NBA Stamp and Seal on any legal document that they intend to tender for legal transactions.

    By this decision the court affirmed that “If without complying with the mandatory provision of Rule 10(1) Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007 which requires a lawyer acting in his capacity as a legal practitioner, legal officer or adviser of any government department or ministry or any corporation, who signs or files a legal document to affix on any such document a seal and stamp approved by the Nigerian Bar Association, the document so signed or filed shall be deemed not to have been properly signed or filed.”

    The court, therefore, declared that the signing and or filing of a legal document will be incompetent.

    On which of the two decisions lower courts should follow, Professor Ajayi said: “The problem is, this is two full panels of the Supreme Court within a period of two weeks. The problem here is that the Supreme Court itself has no controlling authority on what to do.

    “We have Supreme Court decisions that say if you have two of its conflicting decisions, one says follow the one that is later in time, another one more or less says take the one you like. So, we have a problem. Someone has to create clarity as to which way to go.”

     

  • ‘Are governors right to decry ‘judicial corruption?’

    ‘Are governors right to decry ‘judicial corruption?’

    It is an ageless belief that a city where dogs eat dogs is a dangerous one. Perhaps, this explains why it is rather improbable to tackle corruption in Nigeria, except where the anti-corruption commander is courageous and determined to fight on, irrespective of the noise and protest; before sanity can be registered.

    This is because so many would stay atop his or her mountain of corruption to decry the mole-hill of others’ or bring in ethnic, religious and political differences to divert attention or justify one’s fault.

    Sometimes, like fabled Aare Ona Kakanfo, the generalissimo or war general during the Old Oyo Empire who, when his head was cut off at the war front, simply held the head of the next person with him, then cut it off and tucked it to his trunk and continued fighting until nature took its toll on him.

    On 20 October 2015, Ekiti State Governor, Mr Ayodele Fayose had during the church service held at the Cathedral Church of Emmanuel, Ado Ekiti to mark the 2015/2016 legal year said that for the battle against corruption to be successful, there is the need for a complete and total over hauling of the nation’s judiciary.

    Fayose alleged that getting a just judgment from the Nigeria judiciary has become a scarce commodity, “due to the cancer of financial inducement that has eaten deep into the fabric of our judicial system. When there are glaring facts on the table of anti-corruption agencies, they will pretend not to see or look the other way  especially if the culprit is a member of their political party or under the directive of power that be. That is why some judges are timid in giving judgments against the ruling party of the day’’.

    Lest we forget, just on 14 April this year, the Supreme Court affirmed Fayose as the duly elected governor of Ekiti State in the June 21, 2014 election.

    In a unanimous decision by the seven-man panel led by Justice John Fabiyi, the apex court upheld the earlier decisions of the Court of Appeal and the Ekiti State Governorship Election Tribunal, which had both earlier ruled that the All Progressive Congress’ petition challenging Fayose’s victory lacked merit.

    Also dismissed was the claim that Fayose was not qualified to stand election because he was impeached in October 2006 by the Ekiti State House of Assembly for official misconduct, adding that the illegal Ekiti Acting Chief Judge, who presided over the impeachment panel, had been dismissed.

    The apex court also affirmed the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of the appellant’s argument that Fayose was not qualified to contest the election because he filled his INEC application form with a forged HND Certificate from the Polytechnic, Ibadan.

    A new dimension in the art of delaying criminal cases was witnessed in Ekiti State prior to the swearing in of Fayose, who was facing a 27-count charge of conversion of about N400 million public funds to private use during his first term as governor between 2003 and 2006.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had also told the court that Fayose lied in his asset declaration form when he claimed that he had only two buildings in Iyaganku area of Ibadan, Oyo State.

    Prior to Fayose’s swearing-in, a group, E-11 and others challenged his eligibility to contest the election.

    But, in a determined bid to stop the case from being heard, some group of thugs reportedly loyal to Fayose’s party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) invaded the court on September 22 and 25 in 2014 and assaulted judges, lawyers, court officials, and journalists,

    Judges’ suits and court records were also torn into shreds, while the invaders also smashed windows and furniture of the courts.

    Perhaps, Fayose got erroneous impression that judges are timid and weak from the resolve of the Ekiti State’s Chief Judge to display professionalism by agreeing to administer the oath of office on him, and the subsequently judgements given in his favour despite his alleged complicity in the invasion of the court and assault on judges.

    The Ondo State governor and Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Governors Forum, Dr Olusegun Mimiko, on 26 October 2015 also condemned the Judiciary and described the tribunal judgement, which nullified the election of Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State as an embarrassment and a call for concern.

    This is the same Mimiko, who became governor through the effort of the Judiciary.

    On August 25,  2008 the Ondo State Elections Petitions Tribunal nullified the election of Governor Olusegun Agagu (now late) and declared  Olusegun Mimiko, then candidate of the Labour Party in the 14 April, 2007 election, winner.

    The five-man tribunal led by Garba Nabaruma, in its one hour, 15 minutes judgement, also ordered that Mimiko should be sworn in immediately as the governor of the state because he won the valid votes in 12 out of the 18 local governments in the state.

    On 23 February 2009, a panel of five justices led by the then President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Umaru Abdullahi at the Benin Court of Appeal confirmed Mimiko as governor of Ondo State.

    Even the Supreme Court in 2013 recalled some justices from their vacation to sit in the panel that subsequently confirmed him (Mimiko) as governor for his second term in office.

    ”Et tu, Brute?”; no, et tu Mimiko? (Even you, Mimiko?)

    Crying blue murder following the verdict of the Supreme Court on the jurisdiction of the Rivers State Election Petitions Tribunal, governor of Rivers State Nyesom Wike said the apex court decision was part of the gang-up against him. Of course, it was barely 36 hours after the tribunal annulled Wike’s election and ordered a re-run within 90 days that the apex court unleashed the ‘’last straw’’ on Wike’s back.

    Although, it’s rather inhuman to pile pain on somebody and at the same time insist he should not cry, but if at all the judiciary must gang-up against anybody in Rivers, it can’t be Wike but the immediate past governor, Rotimi Amaechi who held the same institution that made him a governor hostage for over eight months. The judiciary would rather be sympathetic to Wike because he opened the courtrooms that were locked up by Amaechi for close to a year; but the law he knows as a lawyer as well as his wife on the Bench, is always blind and its application is contrary to common sense. Otherwise, people like Fayose of this world won’t have respite in the courts too. Perhaps, all Wike needs to do is to re-direct his energy and re-examine his facts and the laws he placed before the courts to reap the rich values of the judiciary. After all, the Supreme Court verdict as well as Tribunal decision is not a death penalty for Wike to continue to demand for the sky to come down on the judiciary.

    Former governor of Anambra State, Dr. Chris Ngige, was the first governor to be removed through the judicial process in the Fourth Republic. After his removal in March 2006 by the appeal court, other governors similarly ousted include Senator Liyel Imoke (Cross River); Ibrahim Idris (Kogi); Sir Celestine Omehia (Rivers); Mr. Andy Uba (Anambra); Murtala Nyako (Adamawa); Mr. Segun Oni (Ekiti); Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor (Edo).

    However, Imoke, Nyako and Idris returned to office after winning the rerun elections in their states, as ordered by the appeal court. Omehia was removed by the Supreme Court and replaced with Mr. Chibuike Amaechi, whom the apex court said was wrongly substituted as the PDP’s governorship candidate.

    The Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) on 5 January 2014 declared strike to get the executive to comply with the Federal High Court judgment on the financial autonomy for the judiciary as clearly provided under Section I62 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    The trial court declared that “the failure, neglect and refusal to pay the funds/amount standing to the credit of the states’ judiciary in the federation/ consolidated revenue funds directly to the heads of courts in the various states’ judiciary was a constitutional breach, which had to be stopped.” He therefore ordered that the funds in the revenue account of the federation, due to the judiciary, should be paid to the heads of court as envisaged by the provision of Section 81 (3) of the 1999 Constitution.

    Most regrettably, the strike went on as long as 18 months, with some states calling it off when their government started the purported process of implementing the judgment.  Despite the call for strike by JUSUN in all the states of the federation, the strike has not brought the needed succor to the anticipated fiscal autonomy being canvassed for the judiciary in those states.

    He that is without sin, let him cast the first stone.

     

    Ahuraka is the Media Aide to the CJN

     

  • Akwa Ibom: Judiciary on trial?

    Akwa Ibom: Judiciary on trial?

    Nigerians are waiting, with baited breath, to see whether the democracy which they fought and toiled for, will be deepened or truncated after 16 years of experiment. The only institution which shoulders this wondrous task is the judiciary.

    Why do I say so? The Judiciary, being one of the legs of the government institutional tripod, is saddled with the responsibility of interpreting the laws to regulate the operations of other institutions of government. And that responsibility is on trial in the on-going election litigations across the country, and is threatening our long march to have an electoral system that guarantees the freedom to choose those who should run our daily lives.

    So, the disparate, confusing and shocking judgements in the various election tribunals are not giving us, the citizens, who fought hard to enthrone a credible and civilized electoral system, any cause to cheer. We are daily witnessing or hearing judgements that are twisted and leaving the people confused. Pray, can anybody make any meaning as to the import of a judgement involving the Akwa Ibom elections? An election, adjudged by both local and international observers to be fraudulent; lacking in every known measurement for credible poll; cancelled in 18 out of 31 local government areas of the state; and which forensic report on the ballot papers saw mostly ‘ghost’ thumbprints, was  not good enough for cancellation? And did meet substantial non compliance, as stipulated in the electoral laws?

    This is the dilemma in which the Election Tribunals, and indeed the Judiciary has thrown the citizens into. Apart from the Rivers state elections which have a clear-cut pronouncement, the one in Akwa Ibom state saw both parties in the dispute in jubilation and mourning moods at the same time. But, a more cursory look at the Akwa Ibom elections tribunal verdict revealed a pattern that would hurt our electoral system and erode the gains which, Prof Athahiru Jega, erstwhile INEC chairman and his team worked so hard to enthrone.

    It was the hope of every Nigerian that election tribunals would, in helping to deepen our democracy, promote those things or give judgements based on merits or demerits of cases before it rather than dwelling on technicalities. If I were a Tribunal judge, and as once expounded by the Chief Judge of the federation, I would have concerned myself more on whether the processes and guidelines of elections were followed rather than duel on whether dates were signed in the right columns. I would look at the video and oral evidences, exhibits, qualities and relevance of witnesses rather than looked for regularities in an election marred by irregularities. My court would be more concerned with whether the elections fulfil the basic ingredient of processes like accreditation, voting, collation and whether they met the requirements of the electoral law.

    These were the points in which the written addresses of the lawyer to the Petitioner to the Akwa Ibom state Governorship election tribunal, Wole Olanipekun dwelt on, as captured on pages 8 – 14 of the address. But, the argument by the Tribunal for not calling for a total rerun of the election in Akwa Ibom state was more on the admissibility or otherwise of the card reader in determining whether the elections were flawed or not. Interestingly, the argument was not whether the use of card reader served a useful purpose in determining the identity of the voter or not, or the fact the it an instrument designed by INEC to help in checking over voting, or the fact that INEC, as an institution has the right to set its internal rules to effectively do its job, or even the fact that, prior to the 2015 general elections, some misguided fellows had gone to the court to stop the use of card reader without success. The Tribunal, in a rather bizarre judgement merely saw the card reader as a device not captured by the provisions of the constitution. The question one would ask is: Is the colouring of the finger to avoid over voting, anywhere in the constitution? Or, is the use of election observers enshrined in the constitution?

    I think that, the preponderance of opinion favoured the use of card readers to check the unfortunate but criminal issue of over voting and ballot stuffing. It was also meant to authenticate the voting population and give the electoral system a high level of credibility. But, our Tribunals, except Justice Ambrosa’s verdict in the Rivers state elections, have resorted to castigate this highly recommended device, citing its non inclusion in the Electoral Act. But, one is wont to ask: if the card reader is a device designed by the electoral body to achieve a near electoral correctness, why should anybody have anything against? The answer is obvious. Those who kicked against it are not doing so out of altruistic reasons, they want to subvert the electoral system and get to power through the backdoor.

    Sadly and ironically, those who attacked the card reader device were not limited to the politicians or the partisan colouration it took, alone. Listening to some INEC staff, at the Akwa Ibom elections tribunal, come up to denounce the card reader, was to say the least debilitating. In this land of the absurd, how can a staff of an organisation come up to vilify a very critical policy of that organisation and still walked back to his job? In sane climes, the likes of Austin Okojie, the Resident Electoral Commissioner in Akwa Ibom state and some staff of the legal department of the state who tried hard to water down the use of this device during the trials would have earned themselves an instant sack and other punitive measures taken against them. It was convenient for them to deny knowledge of the directive by Secretary of INEC, Mrs  Augusta Ogakwu on the use of card reader and the Incidence Form, because they found a lacuna in the way the country’s legal system and tried to pander to whims of those they served (obviously not the Nigerian people).

    The kernel of this conversation is that if we have had a pro-active Elections Tribunal across the states and worthy rulings given, the electoral system and, indeed, the Nigerian people would have been the ultimate beneficiaries. How? A credible electoral process would ensure that credible Nigerians are allowed within the political space. Again, the cruel act of impunity and flawed elections would have been eliminated, and issues-oriented politics enthroned in our politics. Nigerians, the butt of electoral malfeasance would have been saved the trauma of watching their only claim to electoral participation, which is voting for candidates of their choice, being eroded by the political vampires. And, ultimately, a credible electoral system and the resolution of conflict resulting thereof, through a believable justice system would have brought about a Nigeria where ideas and selflessness would turn the wheels of our polity.

    Unfortunately, there is no cheery news from tribunals who are wrapping up their sittings across literal states. Nigerians are concerned that the efforts of Jega’s team in putting together a framework that could address the inadequacies in our electoral systems would be eroded by the activities of the tribunals and bring back the infamous ‘carry go’ electoral conduct. Apart from complacency which would be the ultimate result, and understandably so, I want somebody to convince me that Nigerians in subsequent elections would want to waste their time and go through the rigours of identification through card readers, knowing that , in event of litigation, it won’t amount to anything.

    Welcome back to impunity and self help in our electoral system. My consolation is that a window has opened through appeals at the appellate courts. I hope this opportunity would be used by our learned judges to right the wrongs, wrought on Nigerians at the tribunals. The judges at the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, I am sure would use the opportunity to give judgements that will deepen our democracy.

    In achieving this, the learned judges should treat every case on its merit and not decided on technicalities. Answers should be sought for questions such like: did the elections conform with the processes? Did the votes of the electorates count during the exercise? Were there incidences of over voting and ballot snatching? Were there situations of intimidation, killings and unruly conduct during the voting exercise? What were the views of those who were accredited to monitor the elections both locally and internationally? Were the results signed by party agents pasted in every ward or local government headquarters as demanded by the Electoral Act? If not, why not? Among many other questions which should probe the credibility or otherwise of the process.

    In fact, I expect our revered judges at the Appellate courts to scrutinise the testimonies of witnesses through their statements and contrast same with oral testimonies. Unfortunately they were not at the tribunals to see how their tutored testimonies and body language could have played a major role in determining the truthfulness or otherwise of testimonies. I totally disagree that the law is an ass because the truth has no edges. It is only falsehood that struggles to hide its inadequacies to take the toga of truth.

    The Judiciary, in conclusion, is therefore on trial. We are at a threshold of either deepening our democracy or truncating it. We would deepen it by giving judgements in the pending appeals that will mitigate the anger of voiceless majority who are made to believe that the judiciary is their last hope to right wrongs done on them. The judgement should rely primarily on the merits of the cases before them and not on technicalities. On the flipsides, any judgement at the Appellate courts on the elections that goes contrary to the expectation of the people would just be the tonic that will create complacency, rules of the thump and electoral lethargy on the people.

     

    • Uwem-Obong Ankak, a journalist and Public Analyst lives in Lagos

     

  • Ex-NBA chair to bury mum

    Former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Lagos Branch Chairman and foremost lawyer, Mr. Chijioke Okoli will on November 26, 2015 join the Okoli clan of Otoli Nnewi, Anambra State to pay last respects to their departed matriarch and community leader, Mrs. Sophia Nwanyiafor Okoli.

    Born on September 22, 1935 to Chukwuanu and Amana Monica Okeke of the Ezeugboghalu kindred in the legendary Umuezeagha clan of Otolo, Nnewi, the deceased  was 80 years. She had her elementary education at New Bethel School, Onitsha before proceeding to St. Monica’s College, Ogbunike for her secondary education. She later married Fred Amadi  Okoli.

    She is survived by four sons, a daughter, several grandchildren, and a great grandchild among others including leading lawyer and litigator, Mr. Chijioke Okoli and K. C. Okoli, the Dean of Nigerian lawyers in New York. She will be buried at her residence in Okofia Village, Otolo, Nnewi, Anambra State.