The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Should govt negotiate with Boko Haram?

    Since President Muhammadu Buhari spoke about his administration’s talks with Boko Haram, many Nigerians have been wondering how the dialogue will end. They recall that the Jonathan administration burnt its fingers negotiating with the sect. But lawyers endorse the talks since, according to them, they are all about getting back the Chibok girls. Precious Igbonwelundu reports.  

    President Muhammadu Buhari said the Federal Government was talking with Boko Haram on the release of the over 200 girls abducted at the Government Secondary School, Chibok, Borno State, on April 14, last year.

    He was responding to questions from members of Nigerians In Diaspora Organisation (NIDO), France. The President told his audience that the sect was demanding the release of its Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) strategist in exchange for the girls.

    The kidnap of the girls from on their school remains a big blow to the nation, especially because the insurgents, dressed in military camouflage, were said to have conveyed them in seven lorries. Their school was razed.

    Unable to withstand the emotional and psychological trauma of having their children with the group, which alleged that it had married them off, some of the parents died. Others are yet to recover from strange illness.

    Despite efforts by the multinational joint security team and experts from other parts of the world, the girls have not been rescued.

    The military has combed every area, including the Sambisa Forest where it is believed the girls are being held.

    There is a clamour for the girls’ return, which President Buhari noted during his France trip.

    Buhari said: ‘‘The issue of Chibok girls has occupied our minds and because of the international attention it drew and the sympathy throughout the country and the world, the government is negotiating with some of the Boko Haram leadership.

    ‘‘They wanted us to release one of their leaders, who is a strategic person in developing and making IEDs that is causing a lot of havoc in the country by blowing people in Churches, Mosques, market places, motor parks and others. But it is very important that if we are going to talk to anybody, we have to know how much he is worth.

    Belgore
    Belgore

    “Let them bring all the girls and then, we will be prepared to negotiate. I will allow them to come back to Nigeria or to be absolved in the community. We have to be very careful, the concern we have for the Chibok girls, one only imagine if they got a daughter there between 14 and 18 and for more than one year and a half year, a lot of the parents, who have died would rather see the graves of their daughters than the condition they imagine they are in.

    “This has drawn a lot of sympathy throughout the world, that is why this government is getting very hard in negotiating and getting the balance of those who are alive.’’

    Although Buhari’s disclosure was to reassure the people of government’s commitment to rescuing the girls as promised, critics have described the negotiation as an acknowledgment of weakness by the Federal Government.

    They condemned the government’s move on the grounds that the sect has killed over 20 thousand people in very gruesome ways since 2009; kidnapped hundreds, including women and children, some of whom have been used as suicide bombers; razed public and private property; made millions fugitives as well as taking up arms against the state.

    According to them, the terrorists should have been flushed out by the military, which is already winning the battle, or arrested alive and prosecuted for treason and war crimes.

    The critics believe that the negotiation will not yield any positive outcome, especially because the previous administration tried negotiating with the sect without success.

    To them, it will be impossible to negotiate with a sect whose purpose for fighting is to islamise the country, and which has various factions, is faceless and has pledged loyalty to the Islamic State (IS).

    Agbaje
    Agbaje

    However, many Nigerians, including the Centre for Crisis Communication, see nothing wrong in exploring and exploiting every opportunity that will lead to freeing all Boko Haram captives and ending terrorism.

    But they argue that the issue must be thoroughly debated to ensure a practical and enduring end to the menace if the government was considering amnesty for the insurgents.

    To this group, dialogue should be open for genuine leaders of the sect who are committed to keeping their side of the bargain, with the interest of humanity at heart, just as they noted that every conflict or  crisis usually ends on the negotiation table.

    They insisted that the government must ensure it negotiates from a point of strength by ensuring that the terrorists surrender their arms and promise never to engage in such activities again. It must also ensure that they are rehabilitated before being absorbed into society.

    The supporters argued that the terrorists were feeling the heat of the seriousness of the current government to nib terrorism in the bud, and have as such, reached out for negotiations in order to embrace peace, which the government should consider.

    Lawyers, who shared their view on the issue, said there was nothing wrong with negotiating with the terrorists, as long as the government got the girls back and put an end to the menace. They advised the government to ensure a comprehensive list of the abducted girls is available, before starting the negotiations, to avoid being fooled by the insurgents.

    Those, who spoke on the issue include professor of law, Itse Sagay (SAN); constitutional lawyers, Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN), Dele Belgore (SAN), Dr. Fred Agbaje and former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Ikeja Branch Chairman, Monday Ubani.

     

    sagay
    sagay

    Sagay said the government is right to negotiate because of the girls, whose situation has left a void in the heart of the country and the world.

    “Each side has to give something. I thought the terrorists will seek to surrender without grievous consequences since many of them have committed treason and war crimes. But with their demand that their bomb maker be released, it is left for the government to consider the consequences of releasing the suspect.

    “If the government can ensure that they can no longer assemble these explosives to continue killing people. It will be a bitter pill to swallow if that should happen. If that is taken care of, there is nothing wrong with the swap.

    “Government will be given a list of the number of persons in the terrorists’ net that they are willing to release. I think the action that will be taken at the end will be based on the number of people available, alive and whom the terrorists are willing to release.’’

    Akintola said it was a great idea and practised globally.

    “There is nothing wrong with negotiation as long as the government is not blackmailed. There is  nowhere in the world

    Niyi Akintola
    Niyi Akintola

    where crisis does not end on the negotiation table. I do not see anything wrong with it, but government must negotiate from a point of strength, so that new groups are not motivated to pick up arms against the state.

    Belgore criticised the fact that the planned negotiation was publicised.

    “The classical view in this kind of engagement is that you don’t negotiate with terrorists, but we all know that even countries who proclaim this view do negotiate through the backdoor where the situation demands.

    “We live in an imperfect world and ideological or policy positions frequently have to give way to practicalities.

    “Bringing back our girls would in itself be a victory in the war against Boko Haram, even if  it’s a negotiated release. What I don’t understand is why it has to be announced before hand,” Belgore said.

    Similarly, Agbaje supported the moves on grounds that the insurgents must release all the girls, including pregnant ones, if there are any.

    He said: ‘‘Initially, I was adamant about negotiation with terrorists, but now, in view of the fact that the girls have suffered alot, as well as their parents, I do not think any sacrifice is too much.

    “But the terrorists must release all the girls whether pregnant or not, in exchange for the bomb maker; they must assure Nigerians that the truce will be the end of Boko Haram, or any other terrorist group, any of their members might want to start.’’

    To Ubani, the government should be cautious in negotiating and swapping the suspect for the girls if their intentions are genuine.

    “I think that negotiation with caution should be advised in the situation. The government is advised to discuss with genuine and credible leaders of the terrorists. If the terms include an honest swap with our stolen girls, I will support such negotiation that will lead to the release of our girls without any harm.

    “Should their leaders be swapped? Yes, if they will honestly release all our girls complete and intact! Should they be exonerated? Very serious question that requires wise and careful answer. If they will stop the killings, repent of their evil ways and undertake never to disturb the peace of the country, then we can take a look at them with some level of forgiveness.

    “Remember I said with some level of forgiveness, they must not be forgiven totally.  However, the government must, as of necessity, pay heavy compensation to families that lost lives and properties as a result of the madness of these fellows, who took up arms against their country and against their fellow citizens.

    “The country must, in addition, institute a strong panel to unravel the genesis of this madness, what precipitated it, the quantum of loss of lives and properties and what should be done to ensure that never again should we as a nation pass through this inglorious road of shedding of blood and wanton destruction of properties of the country and that of fellow citizens by any group whatsoever.

    “The country must be sincere to itself by agreeing to ask all the ethnic groups in Nigeria whether we want to stay together as one indivisible nation? If the answer is in the affirmative, the terms and conditions of staying together should be well spelt out in a constitution drawn and affirmed to by the people of Nigeria.

    “If the answer is resounding “NO”, then the process for separation should be worked out peacefully to enable the separation take place without loss of lives or properties. Unity is not forced, it is earned, we must not continue to endure this forced marriage if it is not working out.

    “If it must work out, the ingredients of justice and equity must be brought in generously to ensure the happiness of all ethnic groups in the union. The present leadership at the centre possess all it takes to bring in these ingredients to make Nigeria work and live in peace again; yes they can.’’ he said.

     

     

     

  • SAN, others seek end insurgency

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Oladipo Okpeseyi, has said the fight against terrorism can not be left to the government alone.

    Speaking at the Public Interest Symposium organised by the Island Club in Lagos, he said the government needs more backing from the international community.

    Okpeseyi, who is the club’s president, said part of its objective is to assist government in conceptualising people oriented policies.

    He said through the symposium series, the club is contributing it’s quota to intellectual discourse and issues of governance.

    The guest lecturer, Maj. Gen Adewunmi Ajibade (rtd), said insurgents must be defeated for there to be meaningful development.

    According to him, if the fight against terror is to be won, there must be full implementation of anti-terror laws.

    He said there should be an Office of National Security Strategy which will be tasked with designing and modifying strategies to combat insurgency.

    “We must continue to define our strategies,” Ajibade, who served as Commander, Nigerian Army Intelligence Corps, said.

    Besides, he said the government must deepen democracy and end corruption so as to stop looting which leads to poverty.

    He said if the country’s wealth is well distributed, the poverty rate will reduce and will make it more difficult to manipulate the poor for evil ends.

    Ajibade said the Strategic Counter Terrorism (CT) Policy must also be fully implemented and reviewed perodically.

    He added: “The fight against terrorism must be carried out through a multi-dimensional approach using all instruments of the state, power diplomacy, economic action, law enforcement, financial action, intelligence action, psychological operations and military action, where and when necessary.

    “Cooperation among the military and other security forces must be enforced, while competition among the security forces must be reduced to the barest minimum.

    “Actions of the security forces must be steadfast and determined; it must obey rules of engagements, rules of war and the Geneva conventions.

    “Actions and measures taken by security forces must be humane to win the hearts and minds of the people, and be able to guarantee their full support and provide the forces with the needed information voluntarily.

    “Nigeria must explore to the fullest the exploitation of psychological operations/warfare, as part of the propaganda/counter propaganda war against terrorists organisations,” he said.

     

  • Expectant mother arraigned for alleged burglary

    A 25-year-old pregnant woman, Wunmi Malik, has  been arraigned before an Ogba Chief Magistrate Court sitting in Ikeja, for allegedly breaking into a house.

    Malik, who was accused of unlawfully entering the residence of one Mrs. Florence Adeto Olatosi and carting away jewellery worth N30,000, is facing a two-count charge bordering on burglary and stealing.

    The prosecutor, Inspector Uche Simon, told the court that the accused, who lives in Ogun State, had no relationship with the complainant and committed the offence on September 14, 2015, at 12:45pm at No. 4, Olagoke Street, Oke-Oba, Agege, Lagos.

    He added that the offence was contrary to and punishable under Sections 305(a) and 285 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State of Nigeria, 2011.

    The accused pleaded not guilty to both charges and trial magistrate, Chief Mrs Y.R. Pinero granted her bail in the sum of N20,000 and one responsible surety in the like sum.

    The matter was adjourned to October 12.

     

     

  • Wanted: Open assets declaration model

    Wanted: Open assets declaration model

    In providing a framework for guiding public
    officers to carry out proper public behaviour, means are used. Value falls under the means as they are to encourage public officer to the ideals of the public service and irreproachable behaviour. The code of conduct for public officers outlines desirable values and spells out the consequences of not complying.

    One of these values is an assets declaration exercise contained in both theConstitution of Nigeria 1999 and Code of Conduct Bureau Tribunal Act of 1990. There is Freedom of Information Act 2011, which pushes the Code of Conduct Bureau under a legal obligation to make public the assets declared       by a public officer. These laws require public officers to declare both their assets and liabilities on assumption of office and every four years after the initial declaration.

    Assets declaration is a globally trusted standard, which not only lifts the ban on public trust, but decreases the incidence of corruption. It also restores hope and confidence of the public towards their servants because a public officer is a public delegate and a trustee of the commonwealth of the people. With assets declaration, it is relatively easy to identify corrupt public officers, making a comparative analysis of assets declared on assumption of office and on exit, so as to observe or detect ostentatious accumulation. This cannot be identified where the public officer declares an asset that is unidentifiable like an unidentified or missing land.

    Assets declaration is a traditional exercise in public service and the page we are now in our democratic experiment is assets publication. The Freedom of Information Act 2011 (FOIA) compels the disclosure of records in the custody of the Bureau to any interested party. The FOIA creates a duty on the part of the Bureau to maintain public register of assets disclosures of public officers to enable public access on application.

    The content of a declaration with the bureau is a public document and should be accessible to members of the public on payment of reasonable fees. Assets publication is part of stewardship to the public for the authority held on their behalf. It might be the most difficult case under a privacy exemption, since there is not only a strong right of privacy involved, but sturdy public need to know what material possession is owned by public officers before commencement of duty and some moment thereafter. Privacy of personal information of public officers in all commanding heights of leadership yawns at globally acclaimed open public administration sustained by Nigeria public law. Assets declaration devoid of publication has no relevance for the citizens and declaration without verification on the part of the bureau is a constitutional breach.

    The omnibus privity in the declaration and litigation process encourages the bureau to bureaucratize the process of investigation cum publication by effectively frustratingthird party intervention. Good enough, where applicants can establish public interest in their request, by the provision of the Freedom of Information Act 2011, access may be allowed to assets declared.

    The refusal of public officers to publish assets is far more injustice than privacy invasion. An effective assets declaration must be reduced to periodic publication. In a ubiquitous search for good leadership, the government must guarantee freedom to examine the record of officials, encourage investigation and make public a report or comments. On the part of the governed, they must ensure that they complement the government in verification of assets declared and also ensure that trustee lives within a genuine means of livelihood as required by law so as to enhance the overall development of the state.

    For assets declaration to be accessed easily it must be codified in digital form. This means that information can be accessed not just on manual record but also on digital or electronic templatewith unique identifying number. Officers of iniquity are ahead of the analogue assets declaration mechanism.

    By section 2 of Freedom of Information Act 2011, public institutions are to maintain information about public officials working with them. Files are sometimes lost in the registry of the code of conduct bureau and staff may find it cumbersome to sort out files in their custody for verification. The reporting system is the starting point for a case of breach of the code and the procedure needs to be simplified. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) is required to regulate assets declaration for easy publication. Electronic declaration of assets will effortlessly aid request.

    This will enable the assets of public officers to be posted on the Bureau’s website. Critics may suggest that applicants can handle files without even knowing the address or visiting the bureau, meaning assets publication may compromise confidentiality of information. There may also be the threat of creating phony e-declarations. ICT goes with its attendant benefits in time and money alongside the threat of manipulation. The threats can be overpowered, after all, a record of accounts and payroll for various public officers are managed on the computer. Electronic declaration of assets may be the best highlight for assets publication because it will assist complainant reporting system which is the starting point for a case of breach of the code.

    The bureau is under a constitutional duty to release contents of assets declaration formsof public officers’ including the one of the new sheriff in town without a prior authourisation of the declarant. In the year 2011, the constitutional Tribunal of Peru expanded public access to the assets declaration of government officials. The court stated that upon request by the public, assets declaration should be disclosed.

    The court added that any person in a public office has lost his right to privacy in transit. Similarly, the timing of disclosure is immediately the declaration is made and when the bureau or the public officer deems fit. In the United States for instance, public gets access to the document of declaration within 30 days of receipt of the declaration.

    In Latvia, all information about high ranking officials including the chief judge, speaker is published in the official gazette without request. Taking a cue from other countries where public access to assets declaration is allowed on fulfilling some conditions like paying a reasonable fee in processing or a reproduction of the report or for mailing it. Assets declaration should be published voluntarily in national dailies, especially as regards the assets of senior members of the executive, legislative and the Judiciary.

    The overriding allegation of corruption should pacify the definition of public interest. There should be an official mandate to invade privacy of an official tainted with corruption. Public officers must give account to the people. The peoples’ assessment is on service above self. The nexus is adopting an ethical process in an official decision-making circle of governance.

    A private individual that has a service or representative contract with the government has a moral and legal duty to publish his asset profile for the benefit of the public. No public officer is paid to act of his/her personal agenda. The court as a public institution must assist public interest to outweigh mere courtesy.

    The Code of Conduct Tribunal should be renamed Anti-Corruption Court and upgraded to the status of a superior court of record with the responsibility of handling only corruption cases from the proposed merger of investigative bodies like EFCC, ICPC and the Code of Conduct Bureau. There is a need for a special court to try all forms of financial crimes. The remedy for fiscal sanity is in the bowel of a specialized court and procedure. This will promote knowledge, timeousness, training and coherence.

    The case of a special court to expedite proceedings and attain the ends of justice is unassailable. The challenge before the proposed special court would be to define the boundaries of corruption related offences to be brought before it. Corruption is too specialized to be handled by an unspecialized court or tribunal. An effort to foist a distinct judicial arm to pronounce on the plethora of anti -graft legislations will produce overt patriotic fervor. Special court can fortify the moral conscience of majority of public officers. Venality can be lost on every public officer if the court is deciphered along the sentiment of jurisdictional gerrymandering.

    Much effort has been made by the Governments to make laws aimed at regulating the people, rather than involving the people during the making of the laws. For the fight against corruption to be won, the government must embrace the wishes and desire of the people in formulating policies. The culture of corruption is so established that existing provisions of the law need not only be enforced, but also demand constant decision of creative means of reshaping people to confirm to collective means and  morals. The pleas that have made progress in assets disclosure models have done so because the checks and balances of social contracts are operated to the hilt.

    Assets declaration is only worthwhile were Code of Conduct Bureau is empowered to probe peoples’ claim diligently. The bureau is a consequence of decades of deliberate weakening to enable acts of corruption to proceed unhindered.It will surprise everyone that the only court that can address breach of the code is the Code of Conduct Tribunal and the complainant can only be made by the bureau. So when the bureau is mute the breach continues and this accounts for the towering rate of venality, conflict of interest, cultism, private business in public service.

    In this new administration, the bureau must be all out to check this unwholesome act of ambulatory declaration by energizing the verification department of the organization. Assets Marshalls should be deployed to investigate declarations made before it is approved. National Orientation Agency should lead the sensitization unit of the proposed open assets declaration model.

    The standards under which disclosure will be granted is made clear in Freedom of Information Act 2011. The bureau must stop loose criteria in the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act and disclose voluntarily when requested to so do. This inadvertently will reduce expensive law suits to secure disclosure.

    The code partially prohibits public officers from engaging in private business or trade. There is a window of opportunity in farming and it is unequivocally allowed in the code. Farming by a public officer should be encouraged as a way of augmenting the officers’ wages and should attract compulsory agricultural loan for public officers. Public officers that excel in farming should also be awarded.

    It is surprising that many low rank public officers collect pittance monthly and yet have enormous properties that cannot be justified. The result is the drain of public fund by public officers and the only way the state can tame it is by a genuine declaration, publication and verification of assets. Assets publication will reduce the incidence of corruption and this will in turn prevent the citizens from the neighborhood noise of generators that absence of the good supply of electricity forces us to endure.

    Continual publication of assets will undoubtedly strengthen the defence against domestic corruption and meltdown conflict of interest as secrecy of public officers diminishes dividend accrue to the public and also creates an impression that something is wrong. Assets publication is material for accurate public scrutiny of any public officer. This is the only available avenue to place remuneration side by side with properties acquired or inherited to review the credibility of public officers

    It takes more than a surgery to separate public officers from corruption. The media can complement the NOA in sensitising the public of the expected level of responsibility and accountability. But first, the media must itself have a good grasp of the code of media practice and the implication of each item to the conduct of government business. The guiding framework for conduct in public office is only the starting point of influencing the behavior of public officers.

    Community based organisations (CBO) should come up with an annual evaluation of compliance with the code of conduct in the country, but first must enrich public understanding of how assets publication will tame graft and develop new policy ideas and advocacy strategy to building a new public service. A new sense of public service that speaks about how public officers should conduct themselves and contribute to the making of a good society, a new public service where value and honesty is spelt out as a guidepost to service and performance. A new public service that remains green even when the officers are gone.

    The CBO’s must stimulate probing conversations in various communities on ethical goals and clear focus on public officers’ ethics. This should be embedded into peoples’ orientation strategy for the fight against venality since many corruption perception studies persistently show a high degree of mistrust by the public of their government. Adoption ofopen assets declaration model explains leadership that saw his trust sliding into the grave of self- annihilation on the account of corruption and tried to do something about it.

  • Court resolves land dispute in Ojora family’s favour

    Court resolves land dispute in Ojora family’s favour

    A Lagos High Court has declared that the Ojora Ruling House has the Statutory Right of Occupancy over a vast parcel of land that has been the subject of litigation since 2012.

    The ruling is an addendum to an earlier one that gave the Ojora Royal Family the legal right to take possession of the entire Iganmu community, with effect from July 31, 2007.

    The property includes a substantial part of the land hosting 7up Bottling Company in Ijora.

    Justice Kazeem Alogba handed down the verdict in a 16-page judgment with Suit No. LD/443/2002: Oba Fatai Oyegbemi Aromire (Ojora of Lagos) and two others versus Chief Ogunyemi and thirty (30) other respondents.

    Following the delivery of the judgement last Wednesday, September 16, the Ojora ruling family swung into action in the early hours of Thursday, September 17, taking legal possession of the land.

    The family in company of policemen and High Court Deputy Sheriffs pasted notices, informing occupants of Badia, of the ruling of the High Court.

    The notice reads: “The claimant are persons entitled to possession of the parcel of land in Ijora – Badia between Orile – Iganmu, Ijora Express Road and container terminal to Ebute – Iganmu Ijora more particularly delineated and edged red on the survey plan”.

    The notice further declared the occupants as illegal trespassers and threatened to deal with them if they refuse to vacate the area according to the confines of the law.

    “Any person who remains in illegal possession or is found on the land covered by the judgement will henceforth be treated as trespassers and will be dealt with according to law,” the notice continued.

    In 2002, the paramount ruler of the Ijora kingdom, Oba Fatai Aremu Aromire Ojora, prayed the court for, among others, a declaration that his ruling house is entitled to the Statutory Right Of Occupancy of the disputed land, stating categorically that the defendants are trespassers on the land and prayed the court to issue an injunction restraining them from further trespassing on the land. Speaking with The Nation on the implication of the judgement, the elated Oba expressed fulfilment and gratitude to God for allowing the recovery of the land during his reign.

    “I am happy that this judgement has come during my reign and I thank God for helping the Ojora family to recover this stolen land. This land dispute has been in court since 2002 and after much controversy and court sessions, the judgment was delivered, returning our land to us.

    “Both the land and structures now belong to the Ojora family,” he said.

    The Oba insisted that there will not be any form of negotiation with the occupants, noting that they are squatters who never even purchased the landed property they are presently occupying.

    “They are migrants who were pursued when the National Theatre was to be built. They came to Ijora Badia and the Ojora of that time accommodated them. They started building and expanding so much that they claimed the land. It was not as if they bought the land. So, there won’t be any negotiation,” he said.

    Also speaking with our reporter, Barrister Kunle Jimoh of Segun and Segun Legal Practitioners, who handled the case from inception for the Ojora family, revealed that the legal battle for the land lasted 12 years until Justice K.O. Alogba delivered judgment in favour of the Ojora family last Thursday.

    He said that many justices had sat over the case within the 12-year period of litigation until Justice Alogba finally gave judgement.

    Jimoh added that although the Nigeria Railway Corporation (NRC) tried to delay the judgement from being passed, Justice Alogba, against all odds, delivered the judgement.

    When The Nation sought the views of the occupants of the community – house owners and tenants – on the new development, they were reluctant to speak. At Bimade Diagnostic Services in Ijora, owned by Mr. John Adeyemi, who also owns a set of shops in the community, the receptionist said the doctor was busy and referred The Nation to Mr Adeyemi’s lawyer.

     

  • How to win corruption battle’

    How to win corruption battle’

    The  majority  of  Nigerians  who voted  for  President  Muhammadu Buhari  in  the  2015  general elections did  so  because  they  were  fed  up  with  the  sickening  levels  of  corruption  that  pervade  Nigerian  society.

    It  is  a  generally  accepted  fact  that  corruption  in  Nigeria  has  reached  endemic  proportions  and  people  have  had  enough  of  it;  at  least  people  other  than  those  who  are  direct  or  indirect  beneficiaries  of  this  corruption.

    A  former  President,  Chief  Olusegun  Obasanjo,  when  he  signed  the  Independent  Corrupt  Practices  Commission  Bill  into  law  on  13th  June  2000  stated  thus:  “with  corruption,  there  can  be  no  sustainable  development  no  political  stability.    By  breeding  and  feeding  on  inefficiency,  corruption  invariably  strangles  the  system  of  social  organization.    In  fact,  corruption  is  literally  the  antithesis  of  development  and  progress.”

    Although  there  is  considerable  skepticism  as  to  whether  Chief  Obasanjo  himself  practiced  what  he  preached  whilst  he  was  in  office,  it  is  to  his  credit  that  it  was  under  his  administration  that  corruption  was  first  identified  as  a  substantial  problem  in  Nigeria  with  specific  legislative  steps  taken  to  combat  the  scourge. President Buhari’s battle against corruption has commenced.

    However,  as  has  often  been  found  in  Nigeria,  when  you  fight  corruption,  corruption  fights  back  and  given  the  sums  reportedly  generated  by  corrupt  practices,  those  involved  have  more  than  enough  resources  to  fight  with.

    It  is  for  this  reason  that  we  think  the  government  needs  to  take  the  fight  against  corruption  to  another  level  if  it’s  going  to  stand  any  chance  of  reducing  it  significantly  even  if  it  cannot  eliminate  it  completely.

    Drastic  problems  require  drastic  solutions  and  we  propose  some  solutions  that  may  be  considered  drastic  but  which  we  feel  are  justified  by  the  enormity  of  the  problem  corruption  constitutes  in  Nigeria.

    Information  obtainable  from  the  website  of  Transparency  International  accessed  at  http://www.transparency.org/news/feature/nigerias_corruption_challenge,  quoting  Global  Financial  Integrity,  asserts  that  Nigeria  has  lost  an  estimated  $157  billion  to  corruption.

    We  get  a  proper  perspective  of  the  enormity  of  the  problem  when  we  think  of  it  in  terms  of  the  infrastructure,  housing,  health  care  facilities  amongst  other  that  could  be  enjoyed  by  Nigerians  if  these  sums  were  saved  and  applied  towards  these  ends.

     

    Entrapment 

    Entrapment  is  the  process  by  which  law  enforcement  authorities  and  personnel  proactively  create  situations  and  scenarios  in  which  a  person  commits  a  crime,  with  a  view  to  apprehending  the  person  and  securing  his  or  her  conviction  for  the  crime.

    In  a  paper  published  in  the  Nigerian  Institute  of  Advance  Legal  Studies  Journal  on  Criminal  Law  and  Justice  in  2011,  Akinola  Akintayo  of  the  Faculty  of  Law,  University  of  Lagos  examined  the  various  types  of  entrapment,  drawing  distinctions  between  “fair”  and  “unfair”  entrapment.

    According  to  him,  fair  entrapment  occurs  where  the  law  enforcement  authorities  merely  provide  an  opportunity  for  the  accused  person  to  commit  the  offence  or  facilitate  the  commission  of  the  offence;  whilst  unfair  entrapment  occurs  where  the  law  enforcement  authorities  actively  induce  the  accused  person  to  commit  the  offence.

    Mr.  Akintayo  acknowledges  that  the  distinction  between  the  two  types  of  entrapment  is  often  difficult  to  draw  and  that  the  determination  whether  a  particular  instance  of  entrapment  is  fair  or  unfair  will  depend  on  the  facts  of  the  particular  case.

    Whilst  entrapment  is  not  specifically  recognised  as  a  defence  to  criminal  liability  under  Nigerian  law,  Mr.  Akintayo  argues  that  “unfair  entrapment”  implicates  the  breach  of  various  constitutional  rights  protected  under  Part  IV  of  the  1999  Constitution  as  amended,  whilst  “fair  entrapment”  could  be  justified  pursuant  to  the  provision  of  section  45  of  the  same  Constitution,  which  empowers  the  government  to  pass  laws  that  derogate  from  these  constitutional  rights  where  such  laws  are  reasonably  justifiable  in  a  democratic  society  in  the  interest  of  defence,  public  safety,  public  order,  public  morality  or  public  health.

    In  our  view,  the  endemic  proportion  that  corruption  has  attained  in  Nigeria  makes  it  eminently  justifiable  that  government  deploy  all  means  at  its  disposal  to  discourage  corrupt  practices  and  will  justify  the  express  legislative  adoption  of  entrapment  as  a  tool  for  discouraging  corruption.

    As  Mr.  Akintayo  notes  in  his  paper,  one  of  the  strongest  arguments  proffered  for  the  practice  of  entrapment  is  the  deterrent  effect  that  it  has  on  wrongdoers  and  their  natural  reluctance  to  participate  in  wrongdoing  once  they  are  uncertain  whether  their  co- participants  are  law  enforcement  agents  (full  time  or  part  time)  merely  luring  them  into  a  trap.

    One  of  the  greatest  facilitators  of  corruption  in  Nigeria  has  been  the  impunity  with  which  it  is  perpetrated  and  the  general  belief  that  there  is  no  sanction  for  corrupt  practices.

    A  review  of  our  laws  and  the  specific  encouragement  of  entrapment  as  a  policy  has  the  potential  to  change  this  dynamic  immediately.

    Once  there  are  a  few  examples  of  persons  successfully  entrapped  engaging  in  corrupt  acts,  this  will  serve  as  a  strong  deterrent,  as  persons  will  be  wary  of  demanding,  offering,  accepting  or  receiving  bribes  or  other  corrupt  inducements  when  they  don’t  know  whether  the  demand  or  offer  is  a  trap  that  could  lead  to  prosecution  and  jail.

    Of  course,  the  process  by  which  entrapment  can  be  implemented  as  a  specific  policy  aimed  at  fighting  the  scourge  of  corruption  has  to  be  carefully  thought  through  and  necessary  safeguards  have  to  be  put  in  place  to  ensure  that  it  achieves  the  desired  result  and  is  not  used  as  a  means  of  arbitrary  persecution.

    President  Buhari  has  recently  inaugurated  a  Presidential  Advisory  Committee  on  Anti- corruption  headed  by  Professor  Itse  Sagay,  SAN.

    We  recommend  that  the  Committee  should  advise  the  government  to  push  for  specific  legislation  authorizing  the  use  of  entrapment  as  a  legitimate  means  of  apprehending  persons  engaged  in  corrupt  practices.

    We  also  recommend  that  government  should  be  advised  to  set  up  or  re- energize  task  forces  such  as  the  National Anti-Corruption  Volunteer  Force  set  up  by  the  Independent  Corrupt  Practices  Commission.

    These  task  forces  should  be  constituted  in  various  spheres  and  sectors  of  society  and  of  the  economy  and  should  enlist  willing  Nigerians  to  participate  in  this  crusade  to  rid  our  country  of  corruption  and  entrapment  should  be  a  legitimate  tool  to  be  utilised  in  the  fight.  Make  anti- corruption  lucrative  The  motivation  for  all  corrupt  acts  is  financial  reward.

    Thus,  if  the  corrupt  realise  that  rather  than  bringing  them  financial  reward,  engaging  in  corrupt  acts  could  cause  them  financial  loss,  that  is  likely  to  be  a  strong  deterrent  to  engaging  in  corruption.  There  are  many  sides  to  this.

    The  first  side  is  by  the  imposition  of  stiffer  financial  penalties  for  corrupt  acts.    Such  penalties  could  be  flat  or  graduated  rates  or  could  be  calculated  based  on  multiples  of  the  illicit  reward  that  the  corrupt  gained  or  hoped  to  gain.

    The  imposition  of  such  financial  penalties  could  be  in  addition  to  or  in  lieu  of  jail  terms  and  is  likely  to  be  a  more  effective  deterrent  to  corruption.

    The  Corrupt  Practices  and  Other  Related  Offences  Act  and  the  Economic  and  Financial  Crimes  Commission  Act  both  make  some  provision  for  the  imposition  of  financial  penalties,  but  these  penalties  are  not  stiff  enough  in  our  opinion  and  the  emphasis  thus  far  has  been  more  on  sending  offenders  to  jail.

    Given  the  prevalence  of  corruption  in  Nigeria,  the  emphasis  on  jail  terms  will  require  a  considerable  investment  in  the  construction  of  many  more  prisons,  if  the  enforcement  of  anti- corruption  is  to  be  taken  seriously.

    Moreover,  a  jail  term  is  not  too  much  of  a  deterrent  where  the  perpetrator  of  the  crime  can  serve  his  or  her  sentence  and  then  come  back  into  society  to  enjoy  the  ill- gotten  gains.

    Such  jail  terms  will  seem  less  of  a  holiday  where  the  perpetrators  of  corrupt  acts  suffer  financial  ruin  in  addition  and  this  may  even  suffice  in  lieu  of  jail  terms.

    Another  side  to  this  is  that  effective  pursuit  and  prosecution  of  corruption  could  prove  very  lucrative  for  the  Nigerian  government.

    Information  obtainable  from  the  website  of  the  United  States  Securities  &  Exchange  Commission  accessed  at  http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/fcpa/fcpa- cases.shtml  indicates  that  between  1997  and  2015,  the  Department  of  Justice  and  the  Securities  &  Exchange  Commission  generated  sums  in  excess  of  4  Billion  Dollars  in  fines  and  penalties through  active  and  aggressive  prosecution  of  companies  and  individuals  found  to  have  run  foul  of  the  Foreign  Corrupt  Practices  Act  (FCPA).    This  is  a  model  that  Nigeria  would  do  well  to  follow.

    Aside  from  stemming  corruption,  it  might  also  help  to  shore  up  government’s  finances!  The  third  side  to  this  is  that  government  should  actively  promote  and  reward  whistleblowing  and  entrapment  of  corrupt  persons.

    One  of  the  reasons  why  corruption  has  thrived  is  because,  aside  from  attaining  a  moral  high  ground  or  standing  on  principle,  there  has  been  no  incentive  for  people  who  are  not  corrupt  to  actively  participate  in  reporting  and  prosecuting  those  who  are.

    One  way  of  signaling  government’s  seriousness  about  stamping  out  corruption  is  to  reverse  this  dynamic.    Government  should  promote  legislation  that  would  provide  healthy  rewards  for  persons  who  report  corrupt  practices  and  cooperate  and  participate  in  the  successful  prosecution  of  the  corrupt.    This  will  turn  the  tables  on  corruption  and  make  anti- corruption  attractive  and  lucrative.

    Indeed,  in  appropriate  cases,  the  level  of  reward  could  also  be  linked  to  the  amount  by  which  the  public  purse  has  been  protected  from  depletion  by  the  courage  of  those  who  take  it  upon  themselves  to  report  and  expose  corruption  in  the  public  sector.

    Legislative  amendment Implementation  of  these  proposals  will  require  legislative  action  either  by  way  of  fresh  legislation  or  amendment  to  current  legislation.

    The  willingness  or  otherwise  of  the  legislature  to  endorse  and  support  such  legislation  will  be  a  barometer  of  whether  and  to  what  extent  the  legislature  is  part  of  the  problem  of  corruption  in  Nigeria.

     

  • CJN queries judge over 2011 pre-election case

    CJN queries judge over 2011 pre-election case

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, has asked a judge of the Federal High Court in Lagos, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia, to explain why judgment was not delievered in a 2011 pre-election suit  after judgment was fixed twice within the last three years.

    It was learnt that the CJN’s correspondence to the judge, with Reference number NJC/F.3/FHC.26/1/232  dated February 17, was sequel to a petition to the National Judicial Council (NJC) by Mrs. Victoria Ayeni, the plaintiff in the 2011 pre-election suit brought against Olusola Sonuga and two others.

    The CJN’s missive, which served as a reminder, was titled: “Re: Petition against Honourable Justice R.N. Ofili-Ajumogobia, sitting at the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria”. It was copied to the court’s Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta.

    It reads: “I refer to my predecessor’s letter No. NJC/F.3/FHC.26/1/212 dated 14th August, 2014 on the above subject matter, which you are yet to forward your response.

    “I forward herewith a reminder petition dated 31st January, 2014 (sic) by the petitioner, Mrs. Victoria A.A. Ayeni.

    “You are, therefore, requested to explain why judgment cannot be delievered in the matter. Your response should be forwarded to my Chambers through your Chief Judge within two weeks from the date of your receipt of this letter, please.” It was signed by the CJN and in his capacity as the Chairman of the NJC.

    Judgment in the suit  No.  FHC/AB/CS/31/2011, which was reportedly argued by parties on May 22, 2012 in Abeokuta, was first fixed for judgment on July 10, 2012.

    It was argued de-novo (afresh) in Lagos following a directive by the Chief Judge that the matter be concluded by the trial judge, who had then been transferred to Lagos. Judgment was fixed for June 14, 2014. But judgment is yet to be delivered in the matter till date.

    In her petition, Ayeni, an aspirant for the Ogun State House of Assembly on the platform of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) had accused the judge of having a “compromising posture” in the suit numbered  FHC/AB/CS/31/2011. The PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) are the other defendants.

    The petitioner, who alleged that the trial judge was using judicial powers against her since 2011, is asking for a panel of investigation to be set up to determine whether or not the trial judge “has not compromised her position” as a judge in the suit.

    Ayeni alleged that  hearing in the suit, which was filed on June 2, 2011 through an Originating Summons, did not commence until May 22, 2013, after seven adjournments.

    The petitioner said it was in the course of waiting for the judgment that the judge was transferred to the Lagos Judicial Division, adding that it took several months before the Chief Judge  directed that the matter be concluded.

    She claimed she paid several visits to the court in Lagos without getting a hearing date.

    Consequent, her lawyer, Dele Ajasa, wrote a letter dated May 30, 2013, requesting for a date for hearing which was later fixed for November 25, 2013.

    Though her counsel and that of the first defendant argued their case on the resumption date, she claimed that the trial judge ordered that a fresh hearing date be served on the second and third defendants and adjourned the matter till December 3, 2013.

    The matter, she claimed, went through six adjournments before a fresh hearing was finally held on April 3, 2014 and judgment fixed for June 16, 2014.

    The petitioner added that case suffered several adjournments  between June 16 and July 16, 2014.

    According to Ayeni, she lost her patience when it became obvious that the judgment may never be delivered.

    Although fixed for July 16, 2014, the judgment was again not delivered that day despite the fact that her counsel and that of the second defendant were in court.

    Spokesperson of the NJC, Mr. Soji Oye, said given the date of the CJN’s correspondence, the judge would have replied the CJN.

    Oye said if she can defend her action and her reply appears satisfactory,  there would be no problem and they would write the petitioner appropriately.

    “But if he is not, he can then set up a committee to investigate the allegation of the petitioner and the committee would recommend to the NJC. I believe that committee would have sat by now and taken its decision and made a recommendation to the CJN,” he said.

    Asked if that could be the reason why the judge has not given a date for judgment in the matter, he said it all depended on what the committee recommended to the CJN.

    In the originating summons, Ayeni, aside from listing four issues for determination, had prayed the court for an injunction restraining the third defendant from recognising and, or accepting the first defendant as the candidate of the PDP for Ikenne constituency in the April 26, 2011 election into Ogun State House of Assembly.

    She sought an order nullifying the certificate of return issued by the third defendant to the first defendant; an order deeming the plaintiff as the candidate of the PDP for Ikenne constituency that won the April 26, 2011 elections into the Ogun State House of Assembly, among  the nine reliefs sought from the court.

    But the first defendant, in his 24-point counter affidavit, contended that he won the primary election of the party and was duly announced as winner.

    He averred that the plaintiff voluntarily withdrew her candidacy for the April 2011 general election and that it was on that strength, which was also communicated to the second and third defendants, that the final list was released by the party, showing candidates for the election.

    He contended that the plaintiff having validly withdrawn her candidacy two months before the election could not turn around to challenge her substitution with himself.

    The second defendant, who was the secretary of the party and had good knowledge of the event, averred that it was the party that persuaded the plaintiff to withdraw her candidacy in order to increase the party’s chances of winning the election.

    He contended that the plaintiff willingly withdrew her candidature to enable the first defendant fly the party’s flag at the election since the first defendant is from Ikenne, adding, “the state chairman of our party, Chief Dayo Soremi therefore wrote a letter dated February 10, 2011 in which the party gave notice of the change of the party’s candidate from the plaintiff to the first defendant and forwarded the INEC Form CF 004-Notice of Change of Candidate duly signed by the plaintiff to the third defendant”.

    In its own counter affidavit, the third defendant admitted paragraphs 1 to four and denied all other averments of the plaintiff in her affidavit deposed to in support of the originating summons and contended that before the final list of candidates for the general election was released in Ogun State by the third defendant, the second defendant through a letter dated February 10, 2011 notified the commission that Mrs. Atinuke Ajoke (Ayeni) had voluntarily withdrawn as the party’s candidate by signing form CF.004.

    It contended that between the date the plaintiff voluntarily withdrew her candidacy and the date of election, the third defendant never received any counter letter with respect to the voluntary withdrawal of the plaintiff.

     

  • Judicial commission seeks clarification on N60m payment

    The Justice Elizabeth Kpojime Judicial Commission of Inquiry  has ordered the Benue State Ministry of Finance to provide clarification on the N60 million given to the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs on February 20, 2013 under the caption ‘Handling Charges. It also directed the Ministry and office of the Attorney-General as well as Head of Service of the state to ensure that all documents contained in the summons issued to them are submitted to the Commission at its next sitting.

    Chairman of the Judicial Commission, Justice Kpojime gave the directives at last Friday’s sitting following the verbal application for additional time by the permanent secretary, ministry of finance Mrs Ruth Ijir and the permanent secretary, office of the head of service, Mr Joseph Oko, who appeared before the Commission. Justice Kpojime also ordered the affected witnesses to provide evidence of directives for the disbursement of funds as contained in the documents they had submitted. She said it was necessary that every witness to the Commission tenders all documents listed in the summons demanding the appearance of the witness.

    Presenting some of the requested documents, two of the witnesses, the permanent secretary, ministry of finance, Mrs Ruth Ijir and Mr Gabriel Ameh, an assistant director, office of the accountant general of the state who were led in evidence by the lead counsel to the Commission, Mike Agber, made varying submissions on the appropriation of funds in the period under review.

    Mrs Ijir tendered documents, which were the statement of Zenith Bank account operated by the state government between the first of June, 2007 and 30th June, 2015. Other documents submitted by the permanent secretary were details of withdrawals from the sale of Benue State government shares in Zenith Bank amounting to N5.3 billion; details of the payment for the contract of biometric registration of workers; details of beneficiaries of the state taxi scheme, as well as the N1 billion Central Bank loan to Benue state on agriculture credit scheme.

    Mrs Ijir, however, said details of those who bought bank shares in Zenith Bank could be obtained from the Benue State Investment and Property Company, BIPC. Similarly, Mrs Ijir said details of bonds taken by the state government could be obtained from the office of the attorney-general of the state.

    Another issue on which the Commission sought clarification was the expenditure on foreign and local trips by the immediate past Governor. Responding, Mrs Ijir promised to submit during the sitting of the commission, details of the expenditure on foreign trips undertaken by the former Governor as disbursed by the ministry of finance.

    Earlier in his witness, the assistant director, office of accountant general, Mr Gabriel Ameh had submitted documents on the dispatch register for the disbursement of funds to ministries, departments and agencies of the state. He also tendered documents on approvals for the N13 billion loan obtained by the state government during the previous administration. Other documents he submitted were on SURE-P funds, the N1 billion CBN agric loan, N500 million emergency funds for flood management in the state as well as approval for the sale of state shares and remittances.

    When the lead counsel to the Commission raised the point that the memo sent to it by the accountant general’s office indicated that the indebtedness of the state as at May 2015 stood at N120 billion, Mr Ameh however said he could not confirm the figures until he was given more time to go through the financial records once again.

    Members of the Commission demanded further clarification on the disparity in the figures contained in the documents tendered by the ministry of finance and the office of the attorney-general which in according to the records of the finance ministry, showed that total receipts of the state government in 2012 were N4.4 billion while records from the accountant-general’s office indicated that total receipts for the same year stood at N9 billion. Disparity was also observed in year 2013 which showed total receipts as N3 billion according to finance ministry’s records while evidence from the accountant-general’s office put total receipts for the same year at N6.6 billion.

    The last witness to appear before the Commission for the day was the Head of Service, Adaikwu Inwata whose presentation was brief giving way for the permanent secretary administration, office of the Head of Service, Mr Joseph Oko who promised to furnish the Commission with details of SURE-P funds in its next sitting. The Judicial Commission of Inquiry adjourned its sitting to the 28th of September this year.

     

  • Court to hear suit over estate Sept 28

    The Abia State High Court, Umuahia will on September 28 hear a suit filed by a former chairman of defunct Citizens International Bank, Lady Joyce Udensi Ifegwu.

    She sued the court’s probate registrar and six others, seeking to halt the issuance of letters of administration to the second defendant, Okafor Dike Udensi.

    Okafor is the son of the  late Lord Chief Dike Udensi Ifegwu from his first wife while the other defendants  are his siblings.

    The deceased’s children had applied to the probate for a letter of administration for their late father’s estate. The late Ifegwu allegedly died intestate.

    Other plaintiffs in the suit are Nkechinyere Dike Udensi, Emmanuel Dike Udensi and Margaret Mmannu Dike Udensi.

    Urum Udensi Ifegwu, Okorie Udensi Ifegwu, Mrs Iheanacho Kalu Aru (nee Udensi Ifegwu), Kalu Udensi Ifegwu, Eze Osogho Udensi Ifegwu and Agwu Udensi Ifegwu are the other defendants.

    Lady Ifegwu claimed that she married the deceased under the Marriage Act, therefore, she was entitled to be issued with the letter of administration.

    She prayed for order mandating the second defendant to produce details of rent proceeds and property sales from the estate.

    In her statement of claim, Lady Ifegwu said the deceased died intestate. She said there were married for 35 years.

    But in their statement of defence, the defendants, who are the deceased’s siblings, claimed that Lady Ifegwu was never married to their late brother.

    The defendants said they did not accompany their brother to perform any traditional marriage rites according to the tradition of her place in Delta. They argued that the marriage certificate she is presenting was not genuine.

    “Lord Chief Dike Udensi Ifegwu, late, was never married to the First Claimant either as alleged or at all, a position which until recently the defendants had thought to be otherwise.

    “Rather on January 7, 1977, the deceased wedded his lawful wife, Eunice Dike Udensi Ifegwu. The said marriage of January 7, 1977 was perfomed in accordance with the customary rites of marriage in Abiriba,” the defendants said.

    According to them, some of those rites included the payment of bride price, delivery of customary drinks among others.

    “The deceased and his said wife had this relationship until the demise of the former and there was no divorce in acccordance with customary law or under any other law,” they said.

    The defendants claimed that their brother was never married to the claimant.

    Besides, they said since there was already an existing lawful marriage under the customary law in 1978 when Lady Ifegwu claimed she got married, her marriage to their brother was null and void.

    The said it was invalid to contract such marriage under the Marriage Act, adding that there cannot be two lawful marriages, one under the custom and the other under statute between the deceased and two women.

     

     

  • Soldiers must obey constitution’

    Men and officers of the Nigerian Army, 15 Field Engineering Regiment, Topo, Badagry, Lagos, have been urged to focus on their constitutional duties.

    Major Gen. Edmond Obi said soldiers must be non-partisan and must be committed to defending the country against any form of aggression.

    He said any soldier who deviated from their duties will be disciplined.

    Obi spoke during a familiarisation visit to Topo Barracks.

    He warned the soldiers against overzealousness, warning that acts of indiscipline will not be tolerated.

    Speaking with newsmen, Obi’s visit was to interact with officers under his command, encourage them and to carry out first hand assessment of their challenges to advice the military authorities.

    According to him, the security situation in the country requires total commitment of every soldier for the war against insurgence to be won because the government is committed to their welfare.