The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has advised the Federal Government to provide access to healthcare to children and women raped and impregnated by Boko Haram militants.
It spoke against the disclosure by the military authorities that about 214 children and women rescued from Islamist Boko Haram militants in north-east are pregnant.
In a statement by SERAP Executive Director Adetokunbo Mumuni, the organisation said: “Having survived the horrific crime of rape and sexual violence, these children and women should be spared further physical and mental torture by ensuring that they are urgently allowed access to all necessary medical treatment. Such medical treatment must be provided on a non-discriminatory basis.”
It continued: “These children and women have suffered a wide range of significant physical, psychological and social consequences. Under international law, all victims of conflict, including rape victims, must receive the best care as soon as possible. The children and women are therefore entitled as of right to enjoy access to good quality medical care, including for sexual and reproductive health.
“SERAP is seriously concerned that the pregnant children and women continue to face adverse treatment or lack proper treatment and care. If urgent action is not taken, the severity of the crime against them means many of these children and women can spend the rest of their lives with full blown emotional problems, such as post-traumatic stress disorder.’’
The group said by ensuring their access to medical treatment and care, President Goodluck Jonathan would be sending a message that the rights of the children and women would be honoured by his government.
SERAP contended that children and women raped during armed conflict are within the “wounded and sick” protected by Common Article 3 Geneva Conventions. Nigeria is obliged to provide all wounded and sick victims of armed conflict with humane treatment, and access to appropriate life-saving medical care and attention required by their conditions without discrimination,” the group said.
“Any denial of access of these children and women to medical care and attention will be life threatening and continue to cause unbearable suffering to them, and therefore contravening Common Article 3, as well as violating principles of humanity and the dictates of public conscience.”
“The Geneva Conventions imposes an absolute duty on governments to provide persons “wounded and sick” in armed conflict with complete and restorative medical care without discrimination,” the organisation stressed.
The group urged the government to ensure that regular information is provided to the public on the exact number of pregnant children and women now being screened by the authorities; the level of medical care and attention they are receiving; the level of their access to the minimum essential food which is nutritionally adequate and safe; basic shelter, housing and sanitation, the level of their access to essential drugs, and the plan for their rehabilitation.”
“SERAP is closely monitoring the situation of the children and women and will take appropriate legal actions nationally and internationally should the government continue to deny them their right to effective remedies, and fail to implement the above suggested recommendations,” the organisation added.
”The UN General Assembly Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action commit states including Nigeria to provide women who are subjected to violence with just and effective remedies for the harm that they have suffered. The right to a remedy for the children and women should include: access to justice; reparation for harm suffered; restitution; compensation; satisfaction; rehabilitation; and guarantees of non-repetition and prevention”, it stated
A constitutional lawyer, Ike Ofuokwu, has urged the President-elect Gen. Muhammadu Buhari to review the recent appointments made by President Goodluck Jonathan.
The appointments, he said, could not be justified by any one neither is there any political exigency to warrant them.
He urged the incoming administration to nullify any such appointment if found not to be based on merit.
Ofuokwu said: “All these last- minute recruitment and appointments should be reviewed by the incoming Buhari administration and where there is no merit in them, should be cancelled and nullified immediately because they are founded on political considerations.”
The lawyer said some of the appointments were based on political patronage and to reward those who want relevance at all cost and who seek “an agency of government that must pick up their bills for the rest of their lives.”
Ofuokwu, an All Progressives Congress (APC) leader in Oshimili North Local Government Area of Delta State, said he mobilised votes for Gen. Buhari and Prof. Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) during the general elections. He faulted a report in which President Jonathan was quoted as questioning Gen. Buhari’s victory.
He said: “I want to believe that the president was quoted out of context, otherwise it goes further to show the nature and the character of men who ran the affairs of this country for nearly six years.
“Their approach to issues is simply reductionist. It is anachronism to expect that Jonathan would have won in a free and fair election after a-nothing-to-write-home-about outing of nearly six years. ‘’
He continued: “In the first place, let’s put the records straight: there was nothing statesmanly about his conceding defeat and congratulating Gen. Buhari even before the winner was announced. That was the only option he had in an election that humbled him.
“It was only in the imagination of PDP members that they thought that Jonathan could have won that election. It’s therefore a misconception and an abuse of the word to label him a ‘statesman’.
“It was the most inappropriate word to use for him in an election where we are yet to fathom how he got the bogus votes recorded for him in Rivers, Delta, Akwa Ibom states etc.
“We all saw the turn out in pre-election rallies and there is no way he could have scored what was awarded him in Kano, Kaduna, Katsina and in some other states.
“It is simply hypocritical and an afterthought for anybody to question Buhari’s victory. With the exception of the politically nerd, months before the elections, every right thinking person saw the victory coming.
“As a matter of fact it was the shift in date to enable PDP perfect the art of rigging that saved them from what would have been a total humiliation rejection.”
Ofuokwu praised APC National Leader Asiwaju Bola Tinubu for his role in ensuring victory at the polls.
“Like him or hate him, he has indeed proven himself a worthy leader and a consummate politician.
“Even when he could have joined the ruling party with immense benefit, he remained in his own party, built it into a vibrant opposition and transformed it into a national mega brand while other top politicians were busy jumping ship and indulging themselves in political prostitution.
“I recommend that present and aspiring politicians should understudy his political sagacity,” he said.
On his expectations from the incoming APC/Buhari administration, Ofuokwu said: “When you talk of integrity, honesty and resilience, Buhari is a global brand.
“However, I do not envy Buhari/APC at all because they have inherited a near comatose economy, disillusioned people and morally bankrupt workforce that is bereft of any meaningful legacy,” he said.
Among others, Ofuokwu wants the incoming administration to review the sale/privatisation of some public utilities.
“This again lends further credence to the insatiable appetite of the outgoing government to bankrupt this country at all cost with their penchant for primitive acquisition of our common patrimony.
The frosty relationship between Ondo State Governor Segun Mimiko and his deputy, Ali Olanusi, climaxed last week with the latter’s impeachment by the House of Assembly. But constitutional lawyers believe Olanusi’s impeachment is faulty. They advise him to seek legal redress, reports ADEBISI ONANUGA.
•Lawyers fault Ondo deputy governor’s removal
Can the impeachment of Ondo State Deputy Governor, Alhaji Ali Olanusi be sustained? Lawyers believe it cannot and they are advising him to go to court. Olanusi who defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC) before the eve of the March 28, presidential election, was removed last Monday by the House of Assembly for alleged insubordination and anti-party activities, among others.
Curiously, Mimiko defected from Labour Party (LP) to PDP few months ago, without the lawmakers accusing him of anti-party activities. Rather, they jumped ship with him.
Last April 22, the assembly served an impeachment notice on Olanusi, preferring seven allegations against him. Some of the offences bordered on financial misappropriation, absenteeism from official duties and causing disaffection in the state Executive Council (Exco).
A panel set up by the Chief Judge, Justice Olaseinde Kumuyi found Olanusi culpable of the seven offences. He was reported to be outside the country when the notice of impeachment was served. He had no pportunity to defend himself before the Chief Magistrate Olatunde Adeniyan(rtd) led panel.
Besides, there was an April 23, court order, restraining the assembly from the impeachment. Another application is expected to be heard in respect of the matter on Thursday at the state high court.
•Gov. Mimiko
When the motion for his impeachment was moved, 22 of the 26 member-house voted in favour. Olanusi’s travails began when he dumped PDP for the APC on the eve of the presidential election. He had earlier defected with Mimiko from LP, on which platform they were elected, to PDP. Mimiko perceives Olanusi’s defection as an affront and insubordination. The offences levelled against Olanusi were:
“That Alhaji Ali Olanusi, being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor, permitted and condoned the perpetration of fraudulent activities in the office of the Deputy Governor in that Alhaji Bola Idris Olanusi, the younger brother and Special Assistant in the office of the Deputy Governor procured false LPO’s with the knowledge of Alhaji Ali Olanusi and obtained from one Ehiso Resources International Limited two (02) Trucks of AGO with forged documents and for personal benefits, thereby putting the office of the Deputy Governor into Disrepute
2. “That Alhaji Ali Olanusi being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor of Ondo State and having full knowledge that his younger brother, Alhaji Bola Idris Olanusi, who at all material time was his personal staff had engaged in activities unbecoming of officials of government refused to sanction, query or discipline the said staff, thus, bringing the office of the Deputy Governor into disrepute”
3. “That Alhaji Ali Olanusi, being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor of Ondo State engaged in Press Release and interview with various media outlets especially at pages 50 and 51 of the Saturday Punch of April 18, 2015 publication wherein false allegations were levelled against the governor who was falsely portrayed as
(i) A person who instigated the carting away of Ballot boxes
(ii) A person who instigated the killing of people in Ondo State
(iii) A person who disrespects the Judiciary.
(iv) A person who worked against the interest of the President.
(v) A person who bribed the electorate.
4. “That Alhaji Ali Olanusi, being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor of Ondo State, engaged in absenteeism and truancy by regularly absenting himself from office, place of work and other official engagements especially on 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th of April and Monday, 20th of April , 2015 without lawful excuses or authorization but generally acting in a manner inconsistent with the dictates and expectations of the high office of the Deputy Governor of a State, thus, undermining the governance process, an act which amount to gross misconduct under the Constitution.
5. “That Alhaji Ali Olanusi, being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor on or about Wednesday 15th April 2015 caused his security aides to shoot indiscriminately at peaceful protesters along Fiwasaiye/Oba Adesida Road in Akure thus creating panic, breakdown of law and order, and general sense of insecurity within the state under pretext that the said protesters disrupted his convoy, an act unbecoming of holder of high office of the Deputy Governor.
6. “That Alhaji Ali Olanusi, being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor at various dates collected various sums of money for the purpose of traveling and medical bill as follows: 2009 (N8, 175, 410), 2010 (N8, 952, 600), 2013 (N10, 833, 200) and 2014 (N11, 328, 100) when in actual fact, the said Alhaji Ali Olanusi did not travel on the said specified dates or did not travel at all and, or did not expand the approved medical bills as appropriate, thereby unlawfully enriching himself and/causing loss to the State Government.
7. “That Alhaji Ali Olanusi, being the holder of the office of Deputy Governor engaged in political conduct designed to undermine the office of the Governor by ensuring political disaffection and deliberate working at cross purpose with the Governor and the Executive Council of the State with a view to destabilising the state government by openly canvassing for the impeachment of the governor following the Presidential Election conducted on March 28, 2015 which amounts to an act of gross misconduct under the provisions of the Constitution”.
The state assembly members claimed that the deputy governor was impeached “Pursuant to the provision of section 188(2) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. But observers viewed his impeachment as a vendetta for his action. They wondered if the impeachment would have been thought of if he had remained in PDP.
Observers are not just worried about the turn of political development in the state after the defection of the governor from the LP to the ruling party, the PDP, with the Deputy Governor opting for the APC. There was concern over the speed with which the impeachment was carried out and also for the disrespect for constitutional provisions as Olanusi was impeached without being given the opportunity of a fair hearing.
Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is unambiguous on the need for fair hearing before any action is taken hence it expressly stated, “In the determination of the civil rights and obligations, including any question or determination by or against any government or authority, a person shall be entitled to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by a court or other tribunal established by law and constituted in such manner as to secure its independence and impartiality.” Pundits have always argued that the doctrine of fair hearing is an integral part of justice administration and it is derived from the principles of natural justice and fairness. It also requires that in all disputes between two or more parties, judgment should not be based on one-sided testimony. The principle of fair hearing, they argued, is not only applicable to the courts or tribunals but also to any person or persons acting in a judicial capacity as in the case of the panel that purportedly investigated the allegations against the deputy governor.
Constitutional lawyers who faulted the procedures adopted in impeaching the deputy governor include Chief Felix Fagbohungbe (SAN), a member of the Ogun State Judiciary Council, Abayomi Omoyinmi, Executive Director, Social Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), Adetokunbo Mumuni and the Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja Branch, Yinka Farounbi.
Fagbohungbe said if there is a subsisting order of the court restraining the house from impeaching him, of course, the order of the court should be obeyed. If they failed to do that, that of course would make the whole process unconstitutional. “Having said that, the constitution empowers the house to impeach but the issue of the non-appearance of the deputy governor makes it a different issue completely. If he was properly served, I expected him to appear before the panel. Also, if there was a court order, he cannot appear since a court of competent jurisdiction has restrained them from commencing the impeachment process as it wont be proper for him to face the panel since there was a court order”, he said. Fagbohungbe, however, agreed that the members of the assembly have not acted fairly with the process. According to him, if the deputy governor wasn’t around as claimed, then he couldn’t have been properly served. They ought to have allowed him to present his own defence.
Omoyinmi stated that Section 188 of the 1999 Constitution stipulates the procedure to be followed in removing or impeaching president, vice president, governor or deputy governor. He, however, expressed doubts if the impeachment followed the procedures spelt out in the constitution. “It is very hard to conclude that the impeachment fully complied with constitutional procedures because the time and days set out by the contitution to carry out the process for the impeachment were not adhered to, and this is very crucial in determination of whether proper constitutional procedure was followed or not”.
According to Omoyinmi, “the service of the impeachment notice on the deputy governor who was purportedly to be outside the country on medical treatment is another cause for alarm especially on the issue of whether a copy of the notice was caused to be served on him plus whether he has the right to defend himself which provision under the constitution is mandatory.
“His removal was, to my mind, motivated by the fact that Mr. Olanusi defected to APC on the eve of the presidential election. This is malicious and in bad faith”, he stated.
Mumuni explained that Section 188 of the constitution has 10 sub-sections. The constitutional procedure for impeachment is to follow the procedures laid down in sub-action one to 10. If they failed to follow any of the steps, it follows that the impeachment cannot stand. So, whether the impeachment cannot stand or not would depend on if all the steps laid out in the constitution were followed. Again, there is this other issue that the court made an order that nothing must go on, status quo be maintained. So, once there is an order like that and t he court says they should not do anything, they should obey it because it is also part of the process. If the Deputy Governor wants to pursue it, the impeachment may still be declared null and void.
On what may be the motive for the impeachment, Mumuni said: “Impeachment is a political question. It is a political game. If it is the opinion of the legislators and they are in majority and they say you are not doing what is right, there is nothing anybody can do about it, but what is important is that it must follow all the steps laid out in section 188 of the constitution. As a matter of law, when it comes to impeachment, the motive for doing it is irrelevant. He cited the case of Sarki and Kotoye decided in 1994 by the Supreme Court to buttress his argument.
Farounbi described the action of the Ondo State House of Assembly impeaching the Deputy Governor, Alhaji Olanusi as condemnable. “Impeaching him while an order of court is subsisting is to say the list barbaric and unconstitutional. The legislatures should have taken steps to attend to the court case before embarking on the impeachment. Order of court is meant to be obeyed until set aside”, he emphasised. The NBA chairman stated further “by virtue of Section 36 of our constitution, a party must be accorded fair hearing before being pronounced on. Not according this opportunity to the Deputy Governor is a violation of his constitutional right to fair hearing and where there is proof of no fair hearing, the decision thereon cannot stand.
“The manner in which the impeachment was rushed definitely do not follow the laid down constitutional procedure. The whole process was done within one week. Whereas, there is no way the normal procedure can be accomplished within just one week”.
To Farounbi, “The lawmakers acted unfairly and with gross malice as a result of the Deputy Governor’s recent defection to the other party, the APC. The governor felt slighted and decided to fight back by initiating and backing the impeachment. This is however ironical when one vividly reconnect that the governor himself has changed party more than three times. He was once in AD, PDP, LP and back to PDP. He who lives in glass house must not throw stone”.
The NBA chairman lamented that the nation, particularly those in authority has learnt nothing and are not prepared to learn. “They do not care whether the country survives or not, as long as their personal interests are protected. A nation can only be in peace and harmony when the rule of law is allowed to prevail and the judiciary is given unhindered and uncaged opportunity to perform and operate. One of the ways to allow the judiciary to operate without hindrance is by obeying its orders and decisions even when they are unfavourable. The law gives an aggrieved party the chance to complain by taking step either to appeal or set aside any order or decision, but the law do not allow for self help”.
Way out
Fagbohungbe emphasised that the remedy in any situation is always in court. “He can always challenge the impeachment process, that the court should set it aside. Even if the impeachment had held, that would afford him the opportunity to put his record straight rather than having a record of impeachment”, he said.
Omoyinmi advised, “Mr. Olanusi, who has a subsisting court order against the house that status quo ante be maintained before he was impeached, can equally challenge his impeachment further in court of law seeking unconstitutionality, nullity and voiding the procedure for contravention of S188 of the 1999 Constitution”.
To Mumuni, “ if it is clear that the procedures for his impeachment has not been followed, particularly on the issue that he was not given fair hearing, he can head for the court to fight his impeachment and get it remedied”.
Farounbi also posited , “since damage and the illegality has been done, the only civilised remedy open to the Deputy Governor is to approach the court for redress and all things being equal, the impeachment could be set aside. It has been done before and can still be done once the proof is established”.
Following the arrest and prosecution of an anti-corruption activist, Mutembo Nchito, by the Zambian government, Activist lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has appealed to the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights to intervene in the case.
In an April 24 petition addressed to the Rapporteur on human rights defenders at the commission, Madamme Reine Alapini-Gansous, Falana urged the body to prevail on Zambian government to drop the charges against Nchito.
Tagged: ‘’Request for urgent action in the case of unlawful arrest and continuing intimidation and harassment of a human rights defender and anti-corruption campaigner, Mutembo Nchito”, the petition prayed the commission to compel the government of Zambia to desist from harrassing the activist.
Falana who also copied Michel FORST, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human right defenders, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations, alleged that the charges against Nchito were ‘politically motivated’.
He expressed concern over the unlawful detention and continuous harrassment of Nchito through politically motivated charges, fueled by his anti-corruption and human rights work as the country’s Director of Public Prosecution.
“We, therefore, ask you to urgently assert your mandates to put pressure on the government of Zambia to immediately end all forms of intimidation and harassment of Mutembo Nchito and to drop all politically motivated charges against him. The Special Rapporteur should send a strong message to the government of Zambia that the campaign of unlawful arrest and detention, intimidation and harassment against anti-corruption campaigners is unacceptable, and will not be tolerated”, he stated.
“As Director of Public Prosecutions, Mutembo Nchito has discharged his mandate with a reasonable measure of success. Since 2002, he has prosecuted many cases of high profile corruption that have seen him indict two former presidents, a chief of intelligence, a Zambia Army Commander, a Zambia Air Force commander and a commander of another defence force called Zambia National Service. He also prosecuted a former Minister of Finance and his permanent secretaries for corruption and abuse of office among many other high profile individuals. His excellent achievements as anti-corruption defenders with high conviction rates have expectedly earned him very powerful enemies within the political system’, Falana noted.
He further stated that at the time of the death of Zambia’s fifth president, Michael Sata, in October 2014, Nchito was in the middle of prosecuting former president Mr Rupiah Banda for abuse of office by Banda’s personalising of the proceeds of a government contract which, in concert with his family he banked in Singapore.
He recalled that the funds laundered through Mauritius was transferred to Japan for purchases that were then shipped to Zambia , pointing out that “this money came from the supply of 20,000 barrels of crude oil daily by the late Umar Yar’Adua government to the Zambian government, as supposed Nigeria’s contribution to Zambia’s development. This case has reached an advanced stage as he has closed the state’s case and it is now for the court to determine whether the president has a case to answer.
“However, following the election of Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu as president on January 20, 2015, former president Mr Rupiah Banda switched his support from his own party to Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu’s ruling party, who publicly acknowledged financially benefiting from Mr Banda for his campaigns.
“Before the Election, The Post, a leading Zambian newspaper published an article that claimed that the quid pro quo for Banda’s support for Lungu was that his cases in court would be stopped. Citing sources who were allegedly close to the discussions The Post disclosed that Banda and Lungu agreed that a way should be found to remove Mutembo Nchito from the office of Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to make their work easier. Once this scheme was publicly exposed it appeared that new approaches had to be found.
“On Thursday, February 5, Mutembo Nchito’s elder brother Mr Nchima Nchito SC with whom he practised law before becoming DPP, was called by his former Law School class mate who also happened to be one of president Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu’s campaign managers. His name is Mr Kelvin Fube Bwalya. When Mutembo Nchito’s brother went for the meeting, Mr Bwalya informed him that he had a message for Mutembo Nchito from the President. The message was to the effect that the President wanted Mutembo Nchito to resign or face an acrimonious removal process. Mutembo Nchito’s brother wondered why the President was using a private individual to deal with the removal of the DPP. He wondered why the President could not call him. He was told that the President did not want to speak to him”.
Falana said Mutembo Nchito has continued to be harassed and intimidated by the new government in Zambia, adding on Monday, February 9, 2015, he received a tip-off from a journalist that he had received information that in order to facilitate the ending of cases involving former President Banda and investigations against members of his family he would be arrested to create a basis for his removal from office. He recalled that a very close associate of president, Edgar Chagwa Lungu, was used to lodge a criminal complaint against Mutembo Nchito and to obtain an arrest warrant on charges that have not been investigated by any competent authority. He said Mutembo Nchito successfully obtained Leave to commence judicial review proceedings which was adjudged to operate as a stay of the warrant arrest from an inferior tribunal but this order was blatantly disregarded when he was bundled in vehicle and driven 50 kilometres outside Lusaka where he was thrown into a crowded cell like a common criminal.
He believed Mutembo Nchito was supposedly suspended by president Edgar Chagwa Lungu who also gave an order for a tribunal to be constituted to investigate allegations him by a staunch supporter of the former president Rupiah Banda whom he is prosecuting for corruption. As things stand, Mutembo Nchito is facing a removal tribunal without ever having been asked to respond to the charges as a starting point. The tribunal hurriedly set up to investigate the suspended DPP is constituted by three former chief justices. “It is pertinent to note that two of the tribunal members were forced to prematurely resign from office based on charges of corruption, bribery and abuse of office which were investigated by Mutembo Nchito. It can be concluded that a verdict of guilt is inevitable from such a fundamentally biased tribunal.
Godwin Obla is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). He is a prosecutor for the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and has conducted several high profile cases. In this interview with John Austin Unachukwu, he speaks on election petitions, Judges appointment and judicial reforms.
The much awaited change is here, what are your expectations in the justice sector?
First and foremost, Nigerians are very expectant now, they are very expectant because they believe that things have not been going the way they expected. But I think that the expectations should be reasonable because the usual thing is that when a new government comes in, the populace expect a magic wand, but life is not about magic, life is about reality. The justice sector to which I belong is a sector that has had a lot of challenges over the years. These challenges are not new but what the populace are looking forward to is a reform that will enhance speedy dispensation of justice without affecting the quality of justice that is dispensed. In criminal matters, especially in matters involving politically exposed persons, the public expects speedy justice.
However, I think that it will be unfair to pigeon hole these expectations in relation to particular category of persons. Politically exposed persons deserve speedy justice, people involved in other forms of crime deserve speedy justice, the business man deserve speedy justice, the banker who lends out money to people desires that his matter be tried on time so that he can recover his money and move on. The person having a land crisis also needs that his situation be dealt with, so also those involved in matrimonial issues or those that have issues of inheritance. So, it is a complete overhaul that we need. May be our procedural laws have been too inhibiting, if they have, then what do we do.
What kind of transformation do we then expect?
It is not an overnight transformation that we are expecting, but the Chinese said that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a first step. So, there will be a lot of interventions in the justice sector. Incidentally, the incoming Vice-President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo has also cut a niche for himself in the area of Justice Sector reforms, the reforms that the Lagos State Judiciary is experiencing today is substantially traceable to him, so I think that he will work hand in hand with the new Attorney-General and Minister of Justice whoever that may be to bring some serious sectoral reforms in the Justice sector.
A lot of Justice Sector Bills that started their journey in the 6th National Assembly could still not be passed into law by the outgoing 7th Assembly. Naturally such bills will start fresh legislative journey to be passed into law in the forthcoming 8th Assembly, how do we checkmate this unnecessary waste of time and resources in the legislature?.
We need to be realistic with ourselves, most times, blames are heaped on the executive arms of government, and people forget that the system of government that we operate, involves the Legislature, the Judiciary and the Executive arms of government. We also forget the fact that the three arms are to work in synergy and the failure to work in synergy affects the quality of governance that we all experience. A lot those bills you mentioned will never be passed into law because of the diverse interests that are involved in them, like the Non Conviction bills, Assets Recovery bills, people are looking the fact that some of these bills, when passed into law will impact on them personally, or their businesses later on. So, they actually put their feet down and frustrate it.
Corruption has also affected the activities of the National Assembly, those are not bills that hold any potential for of actually impacting on the members so there is no incentive for the members to pass this bill into law. They are not like the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), or like any other bill that has any serious commercial interest.
So, how do we get over this?
I believe that until the members of the incoming National Assembly change their attitudes, their work ethics and do what is right for the country, no matter how well intentioned the incoming executive may be, you will find out that they will achieve very very little because our laws are the basis upon which they will operate effectively. So, if you don’t have good laws, no matter your good intentions, will definitely meet obstacles on the road.
Law has always been a catalyst for economic development, what is your advice to the incoming National Assembly in this respect so that we can have good governance in the country?
I think that the incoming National Assembly should first and foremost have a proactive perspective of development all over the world and to reflect this perspective on the nature and character of laws we make. Let me give you an example, commerce now, has largely been influenced by telecommunications and the internet. We are doing a lot of the things that Europeans and Americans are doing here, but do we have the legal framework to support the transactions that we are doing, most times they ask you to pay for items over the internet in Nigeria, you pay for Joint Admissions and Matriculation (JAMB) forms, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) forms, conference forms over the internet, what is the legal framework that support these payment platforms that we are using. The world has substantially changed, there is so much cyber related crimes and offences now, what has the National Assembly done, how far have gone to bring our laws in tandem with all these developments. So, the next National Assembly needs to be very proactive and speed is required in everything that they do. They may think that four years is a long time, but it is a very short period indeed for them to articulate this bill, bring them out, conduct public hearings, then go back clean them up and then send them to the executive for signature. So, they have to hit the ground running and do the right thing, all these distractions and unnecessary altercations with the executive arm should be a thing of the past.
The race for Senate Presidency is getting hot, your zone, the North Central Zone is contesting for that and your state Benue is in the frontline for it, what is your take on this?
My zone which is the North Central Zone of all the geo-political zones in the country, has been the most dynamic in this election. I say this because it was the zone that changed the equation; it was the zone that was essentially in the mainstream Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Kwara State was in the PDP, Kogi State was there , Benue State was , Plateau State was there too as well as Niger State . All these states made a 360 degrees turn and moved in favour of the opposition party, that was the zone that determined the victory of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Presidential candidate, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari in that election. So allowing the Senate Presidency to stay there is not a big deal for a zone that ensured victory, it is just an acknowledgement of what they have done and I strongly believe that the zoning should be left there. Don’t forget that Nigeria is a religious and politically sensitive contraption. I heard that bsome people have said that they want to move it to the North Central Zone, that will be a most unwise decision for the party. I am not a religious fanatic neither am I an extremist canvassing a position that is not realistic.
What do you mean by this?
Don’ forget that the incoming President is from the North West, Katsina. North East just moved two hitherto PDP states into the main APC but the North Central moved five states into the APC, that number is not a number that you can ignore. The North as it used to be has two religious positions, the Christian minority of the North and then the Muslim majority of the North. Gen. Buhari is from the Muslim majority of the North, the North Central is essentially the Christian belt of Northern Nigeria. As a President, he is already a Muslim and is from the Northwest, there is no Christian member of the incoming government that I know that is a Senator. So if you are moving it to the North East, it is going to be Muslim Muslim thing again from the north. Those of us from the North Central that are Christians, we feel that the history of marginalisation of our people that has always led to rebellion is being made manifest again and that we have been used as guinea pigs in a political laboratory and that we are no longer needed. Of course, we are a very patient people, we are hopeful that it will not come to that but if it does, we will still take a look at ourselves, don’t forget that government is an ongoing thing and that when you get to the National Assembly and all that, we will still be required for purposes of the various permutations that will take place, so it is just a question of time, but I think that the best thing to do is to leave it in the North Central Zone.
This the era of election petitions, how do you think our laws, especially the 180 days rule will affect the expeditious determination of electoral disputes?
Well, a lot of the election petitions have just been filed and I don’t think any of the respondents have filed processes in rebuttal of what most of the petitioners have filed.
It all depends on the nature and character of the case, if for instance the Petitioner said that he is going to call 300 witnesses and the Respondent in rebuttal said that he is going to call 600 witnesses, it is within his right. Do not also forget that the right to fair hearing is a fundamental aspect of our constitution and everybody, the Petitioner and the Respondent has a right to be heard. So if in the course of hearing 180 days elapses, well, that is it, the law has not been changed.
What lessons did we learn along this line from the 2011 experiences, how did the law affect the determination of electoral disputes then?
We ought to have learnt lessons from the 2011 elections and the related petitions that arose there from. My expectation is that may be the National Assembly having regard to the lessons learnt, would have taken appropriate steps to make certain amendments if need be, well they just over looked it and as far as we are concerned it our law, a good law and we are stuck to it.
The process of appointing our Judges has been blamed for most of the ills bedevilling the Judiciary including the quality of Judgments delivered at our Courts, what is your reaction to this?
Well, I think that there is always room for improvement in the conduct of human affairs, but the area that I am most worried about is the area of the perceived secrecy of the process. If our procurement process for the purpose of contract award has been made so open that the entire public participates in it, I don’t actually understand why the appointment of Judges should be like a matter involving the appointment of the Pope where people are secretly locked up somewhere to conduct the process, I don’t really understand this. If Judges need to be appointed, there should be an advertorial, just the way the rank of Senior Advocates of Nigeria is also appointed, would-be judges should be made to pass through a filtering process that is rigorous.
The narrow interpretation suggested by learned Appellant counsel, it was contended, is legally infeasible. Learned counsel inter-alia relied on Victor Adegoke Adewunmi Anor v.The Attorney General of Ekiti State & 6 Ors (2002) 1 SCNJ 27 at 49, Mobil Oil Nig (Ltd) V. Federal Board of Internal Revenue (1977) 3535; (1977) LPELR-SC.488/75, and Nafiu Rabiu V. Kano State (1980) 8-11 SC 130; (1980) LPELR-2936(SC) inemphasising that the Appellant does not come within the exception created under Section 68(1) (g) of the Constitution.
The Court stated that the narrow issue to determine in the appeal, is whether or not the two Courts below are right in holding that, by virtue of Section 68(1) (a) and (g) and 222(a) (e) and (f) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, the division at the State level the Appellant relies upon indeed entitles him to abandon the party that sponsored him, the Labour Party, for another, the Action Congress of Nigeria, (ACN) and retain his seat inspite of the defection. The Court further stated that both lower Courts answered this overriding question in the negative. They are said to be concurrent in their findings. Given the facts available to the two Courts and the law applicable to these facts, it their decision that Appellant’s defection to the Action Congress of Nigeria does not come within the purview of the law. the Court held that Learned counsel to the Respondents are correct that the Supreme Court remains hesitant to interfere with such concurrent findings of fact and does so only if same are shown, notwithstanding their being concurrent, to be perverse. See UBN Plc V. Chimaeze (2014) LPELR-SC 204/2006, Atolagbe V. Shorun (1985) LPELR-592(SC). The Court held that theAppellant can succeed only if he demonstrates that the two Courts below have, in arriving at theirconcurrent decisions, either ignored facts,incorrectly applied any principle to correctlyascertained facts, took into consideration irrelevantmatters or excluded such other matters which arerelevant to their findings and, in addition, theinjustice the concurrent decisions in thecircumstance occasion.
The Court noted that the determination of the dispute the trial Court was approached to resolve turns decisively on the meaning of the word “division” as used by the framers of the proviso to Section 68(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended. Whereas learned Appellant’s counsel contended that “any division”, in the political party would entitle a person who contested and won an election on the platform of that party to defect to another party and inspite of the defection to retain his seat. Learned counsel to the Respondents’, except the 5th & 7th, on the other hand, argued that the “division” in the State structure of the Labour Party only does not entitle the Appellant to abandone the Labour Party for the (ACN). Not being the kind of “division” that affects the national structures and therefore the corporate existence of the party, learned counsel insisted that the Appellant’s defection does not come within the proviso to Section 68(1) (g) to entitle him to retain his seat in the House of Representatives inspite of his defection to the (ACN) from the Labour Party on which platform he contested and won the seat. The Court held that the position of the Respondents is unassailable. Citing the case of Fedeco V. Goni (1983) LPELR-SC.54/1983
The Court further held that the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in the cases of Fedeco V. Goni (1983) LPELR-SC.54/1983 and Abubakar V. AG Federation (2007) 10 NWLR (Pt 1041) 178; LPELR-SC.7/2007, is to the effect that only such factionalisation, fragmentation, splintering or “division” that makes it impossible or impracticable for a political party to function as such will, by virtue of the proviso to Section 68(1) (g), justify a person’s defection to another party and the retention of his seat for the unexpired term in the house inspite of the defection. Otherwise, as rightly held by the Courts below, the defector automatically loses his seat. The Court held that in the instant case, the two Courts are right that the Labour Party that has continued to function as a political party by meeting the conditions associations by virtue of Section 221 and 222 of the Constitutions must necessarily meet, cannot be said to have been so factionalised, fragmented, split or divided to justify the defection of the Appellant to another party and retention of his seat inspite of the defection.
On the whole the Court found the appeal unmeritorious on the 19th March, 2015 and dismissed same.
The Centre for Socio-Legal Studies in collaboration with the Court of Appeal will on May 25 at the Sheraton Hotel and Towers, Abuja present a book in honour of the first female President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa. The book is entitled Cases and materials on Election Petitions and Appeals.
The compendium contains 72 leading judgements of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. The book has Prof. Yemi Akinseye George (SAN) as Editor-in-Chief, while Prof. Maxwell Gidado and other sound legal minds are on the editorial board.
Lawyers and activists last week joined other Nigerians to honour environmental rights activist and presidential aide, late Oronto Natei Douglas in Abuja.
The event, which held at ThisDay Dome in the Central area of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), was a night of tributes for Douglas.
Fondly called OND by his friends and associates, Douglas, 48, died on April 9, after a long battle with cancer.
Speakers at the event all eulogised the deceased, just as they narrated how he positively impacted the lives of many Nigerians.
•Prof Odinkalu
At the event were Chairman, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Prof. Chidi Odinkalu; Convener, Save Nigeria Group (SNG), Pastor Tunde Bakare; Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Chief Anyim Pius Anyim; Ambassador Fanny Amun; and C.E.O. of Skye Bank, Tunde Ayeni, among others.
Douglas, who was interred at the weekend in his home town in Bayelsa State, was a foremost environmental activist renowned for his intellectual articulation of the Niger Delta struggle.
The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (NBA-SBL) has expressed optimism that Nigeria’s economy would improve under the incoming administration of Gen. Muhammadu Buhari.
Its chairman, Asue Ighodalo, said with the successful conduct of the general elections, the country is poised for new beginnings, adding that President Goodluck Jonathan’s concession of defeat would further boost the nation’s democratic credentials and reputation.
He spoke during a press conference in Lagos on NBA-SBL’s Ninth Annual Business Law Conference to be held from June 7-9 at the Eko Hotel & Suites, with the theme: Regulators as Catalysts for Economic Growth.
Ighodalo said the conference is coming at a time when citizens have higher expectations of the government, adding that the gathering would set an economic agenda for the incoming administration.
He disclosed that the format of the conference has been altered; the opening ceremony would be held on Sunday evening rather than Monday morning.
He said nine plenary sessions will be held, providing a forum for regulators, lawyers and business executives to dialogue on policies and regulations that shape economic growth.
Ghana’s Minister of Trade and Industry, Dr Ekwow Spio-Garbrah will give the keynote address.
A premium plenary session will hold on June 9, featuring the Chief Economist of PricewaterhouseCoopers John Hawsworth, who will speak on “Long Term Global Economic Trends and Implications for Nigeria.” The session is based on PwC’s World 2015 Report.
Ighalo said the conference aims to attract at least 1,000 delegates, including practicing lawyers, in-house counsel in the private and public sector, corporate Nigeria and the government.
Among the events planned are an opening dinner, a boat cruise, and a closing party and excursion for young lawyers to three top law firms for mentoring sessions.
Some of the sessions’ themes are: Improving Nigeria’s ease of doing business; Is there Nigerian Content for Lawyers?; What’s trending with financing Nigerian projects?; Counsel-to-Counsel roundtable; Value based pricing for legal services; Young Lawyers roundtable with senior lawyers; and Nigeria’s power privatisation process: Learning curves and Next steps.
As Lagos Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) starts preparation for its yearly law week, Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Ade Ipaye has pledged government’s support for the group.
He made the pledge when members of the 2015 Law Week Committee visited his office.
While noting that the government had always supported the association, Ipaye said the cordial relationship between lawyers and the government has deepened justice sector reforms.
He stressed the need for continuing legal education to enable lawyers sharpen their skills and remain relevant.
Earlier, branch Chairman, Alex Muoka, who led the delegation, informed the Attorney-General of his aelection to chair the tax session during the Law Week in June.
Muoka said there will be high-profile Law Week Dinner in honour of Gov. Babatunde Fashola (SAN) who would have left office as well as Governor-lelect, Akinwumi Ambode.
In her contribution, Chairperson of the Law Week Committee, Mrs. Tolani Edu-Adeola noted that the week is designed as the “best ever in the history of the Premier Bar, given the array of resource persons, topical industry-related discourse and fun-filled activities lined up.”
Other members of the Law Week Committee present at the occasion were Ms. Geraldine Wey, Mr. Emeka Nwadioke and Mrs. Tara Aisida
