Judges and magistrates have barred journalists from covering some cases, including those considered to be in the public interest. A recent example involved Justice Aishat Opesanwo, who walked journalists out during a robbery trial. Are such cases supposed to be heard in ‘private?’ PRECIOUS IGBONWELUNDU asks.
It started with Magistrate O.O. Martins of Lagos Magistrate Court, Igbosere in 2012, who, on several occasions, walked reporters out of her courtroom for no reason.
At first, journalists thought it was probably because the cases in question were among those for exemption as provided for in Section 36(4) of the 1999 Constitution and as such, obeyed her directive.
Unfortunately, that was not the case as the Magistrate one morning openly said: “I don’t want reporters in my court,” irrespective of the fact that the cases she handles neither jeopardise state security, involve minors, nor endanger public health.
This reporter decided to confirm the complaints from her colleagues who she had chased out before from her courtroom.
So, that fateful morning in 2012, she was among the first callers at the court and quietly sat on the last bench awaiting the arrival of Magistrate Martins to commence the day’s proceeding.
As soon as she came in and was about to start taking matters, one of her support staff walked up to her and whispered something in her ear.
The look on Martins’ face was anything, but unpleasant as she yelled: “I have said it severally that I do not want journalists in my court. What are you doing here? Get out of this place and let no reporter ever come to this court again.”
Seeing her so enraged, the reporter quietly, but angrily left her court and never went there again till date.
As if that was not enough, a High Court Judge, Justice Aishat Opesanwo, last week banned reporters from covering a murder trial in her courtroom on grounds that “it is a private matter.”
Unlike Magistrate Martins, Justice Opesanwo was calm as she told the three female reporters seated at the gallery to leave the court because they were not needed.
Aside the two examples personally witnessed, incidences abound where reporters have reportedly been humiliated and sent out of courtrooms by judicial officers in outright violation of the constitution, which clearly categorises a court as a public place.
As if to borrow a leave from their learned brothers on the Bench, instances abound where some lawyers, who came late to court and could not secure seats at the Bar, have asked reporters to vacate their seats at the gallery for them.
There was a particular case at the Federal High Court, Lagos, before Justice Ajumogobia, where a latecomer lawyer tapped a reporter on his shoulder and said “get up I want to sit down.”
Initially, the reporter ignored him thinking he would respect himself and leave, but when he persisted, the angry reporter scolded him to the hearing of the judge, who also reprimanded the lawyer.
However, most reporters have expressed worries over this cold war or seeming disdain for them by judicial officers, who see their presence in courts as intruding rather than fulfilling their constitutional obligations.
Some have wondered whether the actions of the judicial officers were as a result of sheer ignorance of the law or because they have skeletons in their cupboards, which they do not want the journalists to uncover.
They are worried that as custodians of the law, judicial officers who should, at all times, uphold the constitution, have turned to lawbreakers.
What the law says
The Constitution in Section 36 (3) expressly classified a court as a public place and went further in 36 (4) to state thus: “whenever any person is charged with a criminal offence, he shall, unless the charge is withdrawn, be entitled to a fair hearing in public within a reasonable time by a court or tribunal.
“Provided that (a) a court or such tribunal may exclude from its proceedings persons other than the parties thereto or their legal practitioners in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality, the welfare of persons, who have not attained the age of (18) eighteen years, the protection of the private lives of the parties or to such extent as it may consider necessary by reason of special circumstances in which publicity would be contrary to the interests of justice.
“(b) If in any proceeding before a court or such a tribunal, a Minister of the government of the federation or a Commissioner of a state satisfies the court or tribunal that it would not be in the public interest for any matter to be publicly disclosed, the court or tribunal shall make arrangements for evidence relating to that matter to be heard in Private and shall take such other action as may be necessary or expedient to prevent the disclosure of the matter.
Similarly, the Supreme Court in the case of Nigerian Arab Bank (NAB) vs. Barri Engineering (1995) cited in the Nigerian Weekly Law Report (NWLR) (pt. 413) 257 at 290; as well as the Court of Appeal in Asani Kosebinu vs Misri Aliyu (2005), stated categorically that the courtroom is a public place and the only place where court proceedings can take place.
While nullifying the delivery of judgment in-chambers by judges, the court cited Justice Ogundare (JSC) thus: “A judge’s chambers is not one of the regular court rooms nor is it a place to which the public have right to ingress and egress as of right except on invitation by or permission of the judge.
“It is my firm and considered view that a place qualifies under Section 36 (3) of the Constitution to be called “public”, and which a regular court room is, if it is out rightly accessible and not so accessible on the basis of the “permission” or “consent” of the judge…
“It is of essence of justice that not only should it be done, but that it should actually be seen to be done.
“Any act of secrecy, however desirable it might seem, detracts from the aura of impartiality, independence, publicity and unqualified respect which enshrouds justice given without fear of favour.”
In the same vein, many senior lawyers whose counsel were sought following the issue said it wrong for the judicial officers to ask reporters to leave the court, just as they explained that there was no such thing as “private matter” in a public court.
The lawyers advised the reporters to petition the Lagos State Chief Judge, Justice Funmilayo Atilade, so that such actions by judicial officers can be contained.
However, the Lagos State Attorney General, Ade Ipaye when contacted, said Justice Opesanwo took the action in order to protect prosecution witness in the case.
He said: “It was for witness’ protection. Perhaps she should have explained better. Witness felt threatened and afraid and would have had to leave his residence if made to testify in public view.”
Homeowners in Pearl Garden Estate, at Sangotedo Village in Eti-Osa Local Government Area of Lagos State have filed a N100 million class action suit against a property developer, Oyetubo Jokotade Estate Resource Limited, over alleged incessant harassment and imposition of arbitrary charges.
The claimants in the suit included Messrs Francis Adesuyi, Felix Obiakor, Martin Ajayi-Obe and Peter Afenotan. They filed the N100 million suit on behalf of themselves and all interested homeowners within the Pearl Garden Estate.
The claimants filed the suit before a Lagos State High Court sitting in Epe, headed by Justice Abisoye Bashua.
Joined as second defendant is CMB Building Maintenance and Investment Company Limited, in charge of providing estate management services to the claimants.
In the suit, the claimants are asking the court for a declaration that the incessant harassment, restriction of movement and the imposition of arbitrary charges on them by the defendants as illegal and unlawful.
They also asked the court to declare that the refusal of the second defendant to allow them install borehole in their homes as illegal and unlawful.
They had prayed the court for “an order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, jointly and severally, their agent, privies and cronies from further demanding or collecting reticulation charges in the sum of N650,000 or any other sums from the claimants contrary to the express terms of the Deeds of Assignment and the Sale and Management Agreement.
“A Mandatory Order directing the second respondent to refund to the claimants and other residents all monies collected forcefully as part or full payments of the unlawful imposition of the reticulation charges and the unilateral estate charges immediately to the respective claimants and other homeowners.”
They also asked for an order restraining the defendants from further harassing them and also the sum of N100 million as general damages for the barricade, destruction of property and unlawful denial of the claimants access to the estate on March 13,2013.
At the hearing last Thursday, counsel to the respondents, Mr R.A. Aladesanmi, said they had filed an application asking the court to stay proceedings on the suit, pending a referral from arbitration proceedings.
Aladesanmi argued that all purchases of the land entered into an arbitration agreement contained in their individual sale and management agreement, adding that the appropriate place to resolve the dispute was arbitration.
But counsel to the claimants, Mr Adeyinka Adeyemi, objected to the application, arguing that some of the parties in the suit did not sign the arbitration clause.
Adeyemi argued that it was ironic that the same defendants asking for arbitration had filed notices of appeal at the Court of Appeal against a previous order of the court, which restrained them from restricting the claimants from the estate.
Adeyemi further submitted that the said agreement was entered between some of the claimants and the first respondent, adding that the second defendant (BCM) was not a party to the agreement.
“As at now, there is no appointed body to even conduct the arbitration. They have not taken any step to show that arbitration has commenced. The arbitration is inexistent so the court cannot stay proceedings.
“The claimants in view of this submitted that ”It will be gross injustice for the matter to be referred to arbitration that is non-existent and that which has not even commenced as papers are yet to be filed to that effect,”he said.
After taking the submissions of the parties, Justice Bashua adjourned the matter till May 21, for ruling.
Lawyers at the 19th edition of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) Conference, which held in the Glasgow, Scotland, have scored the conference high in spite of poor attendance.
They said the resource persons and quality of delivery made a great impact on them.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) First Vice-President, Mr. Francis Ekwere said: “It has been a worthwhile experience being here. It has opened our eyes to see how conferences are organised, the seamless transition from one session to another, etc. We will try and see what we will do to improve our own conferences. We have a lot to take home from here.”
Another participant, Mr. Rotimi Oguneso (SAN), said: “It is very stimulating because it afforded various practitioners from the commonwealth countries the opportunity to exchange ideas, network and bring their individual experiences to this conference while they learn from each other.”
To Mr. Aniedi Akpabio, the conference was a great success notwithstanding the low attendance.
“The resource persons were carefully selected. Their delivery was fantastic and change of sessions seamless. I urge lawyers from Commonwealth countries to always strive to attend this conference because it is quite interesting and very rewarding,” he said.
Another participant, Mr. P.C.N. Okorie, described the conference as rewarding.
A commissioner in the Nigerian Law Reform Commission, Kefas Mogaji said: “The conference was indeed; a huge success. First of all, the resource persons are those that are experienced and vast in their various areas.”
A former Muslim Lawyers Association of Nigeria (MULAN) president Tajudeen Oladoja, said: “I will take home how to enhance access to justice for teeming Nigerian indigent clients because that is the focal point of one of the sessions I attended at the conference.”
The Nigerian people have been dealt a double whammy, in the closing days of the Jonathan presidency. As things stand, both the new constitution from the Jonathan’s national conference and the national assembly arranged fourth constitutional amendment,may become relics of our political history. Tragically, the relics would have been accumulated at humongous costs to the tax payers. While the legislative enterprise cost about 4 billion naira, the executive business is said to cost not less than 7 billion naira. The monies were substantially spent to smother our duplicitous political elites; who gathered at the variously organised jamborees, even as the organizers appear to know they were merely playing poker, with our commonwealth.
With the presidency and national assembly controlled by the same political party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP);it is a measure of the party’s lack of discipline that they choose to work at cross purposes. President Jonathan’s so called master stroke – the constitutional conference, has now turned out a mere smoke bubble. Yet at that time, the hopes of long suffering Nigerians were heightened that at last, Nigeria was about to have something close toan autochthonous constitution. Even when the president choose to heavily induce the selected members, with sums that beggars any patriotism, (a whopping 12 million naira, per person), many still invested hope in the conference.
On their part the national assembly which refused to give a legislative imprimatur to the conference, also refused to entertain any budgetary allowance for it. To show to what dubious use the so called executive-wide votes can be put, Jonathan’s men were able to raise the billionsneeded to excessively pay-off, the 492 conferees, which this column called thenan ensnarement into “the gang of national treasury looters”. Because the tension which had risen following President Jonathan’s determined presidential ambition, suddenly ricocheted, as the selected troublesome elites busied themselves with sharing the billions; Bishop Matthew Kukah made the famous quip, that Jonathan has dealt his opponents ‘a master stroke’.
As may be obvious now, the Jonathan’s master stroke was only successfully aimed against the national patrimony. Meanwhile, the quality of the men and women gathered by Jonathan, gave many the hope that something positive may yet come out of the exercise. After several weeks, the conference submitted a report which commentators claimed would revolutionize the political and socio-economic laws of the country; which no doubt is more unitary than federal. Unfortunately, instead of Jonathan’s presidency moving with speed to implement the recommendations that require mere executive actions, and also submit a bill on others to the national assembly, it choose to set up another committee over that report. Of course, all efforts to get Nigerians to give Jonathan a second term, with a promise to implement the recommendations if re-elected,have turned a mirage.
On their part, with a mind-set, to cut the executive to size; the legislature in complete disregard to the fundamental principle of appropriation, also dug its heavy hand into the treasury, and with 4 billion in their pockets, they set-outon a nation-wide consultation (some called it a frolic), towards a fourth amendment of the 1999 constitution.In the particular effort of the lower chamber of the national assembly, a mini-conference was organized under the suzerainty of each Representative, to garner what they touted were the preferences of the people, from a list determined by the House. The senate also arrogantly set their minds to determine what the people wanted, as they organized town hall meetingswith their acolytes, which they passed-off as consultations.
Pretending to be the only patriots, the national assembly members went ahead to fashion a fourth amendment, in their own image. One of the major highlights is the provision of mind boggling luxury for their principle officers, at retirement. They did not spare a thought about being one of the highest paid legislature in the world;which according to some sources, amounts to about 25% of the annual national budget. Having flagrantly over the years usurped the powers of anexecutive body, the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission, the gamers at the national assembly also tried to chip-off more powers from the executive;in further defiance of the fundamental principles of separation of powers, which is the bedrock of a presidential system of government.
Just as the current regime is about to wind up, it has become evident that the 7th legislative house and the Jonathan executive,would jointly and severally carry home the moral baggage that goes with their respective ill-fated expensive jolly rides.While the legislature early enough sought to make a mockery of the constitutional conference, by refusing to gift it, a legal premise; the Jonathan presidency waited for its dying days to hand over to the legislature, a mock exam in constitutionalism. With clear malice against each other, the two prodigals have submitted their petty quarrel to the Supreme Court for adjudication.
I support the intervention of the learned silk, Femi Falana (SAN), urging the national assembly and the presidency to come down from their high horses, and immediately seek a compromise in the interest of Nigerians. Eating such humble pie would enable the country gain a modicum of reform, if for instance, some provisions of chapter 11 of the 1999 constitution, dealing with fundamental objectives and directive principle of state policy,gains justiciability under the fourth amendment. At least, it would reduce the resources that would be available for more prodigality,in case the 8th national assembly retains their predecessor’s DNA. If for instance education is made a fundamental right, then there will be less resources for the executive to steal or mismanage. President Jonathan with few enduring legacies, should consider reaching a compromise with the legislators, instead of the double dealings against greater national interests.
Stakeholders have called for laws to regulate the importation of used European cars, which have reached the end of their lives.
A former Lagos State Attorney-General, Mr Olasupo Shasore (SAN) said such laws should set a limit to the age of vehicles brought into the country.
He spoke in an interview with reporters at a colloquium in Lagos to mark the 2015 Earth Day, organised by the Kuramo Conferences and the Resource Innovation and Solutions Network Nigeria (RISSN), initiators of the Sustainability School Lagos. The theme was: Solutions for a sustainable future.
A German chemist and toxologist, Dr. Beate Kummer said Nigeria had become a dumping ground for “end-of-life” vehicles meant for recycling in Europe.
She said about 300,000 of such cars were pushed into Nigeria in 2012, adding: “Nigeria is a huge market for end-of-life vehicles, which are sold for dumping prices. These vehicles are often smuggled from Europe or North America through over 1,400 illegal routes.”
Shashore said Nigeria can stop being a dumping ground for such rejected items through the enactment of relevant laws and proper regulation.
“We have learned that there is an end-of-life designation for European cars. We don’t have legislation that creates a cut-off period for the end-of-life of a vehicle, the point at which a vehicle must be recycled.
“We don’t have legislation that can designate use of batteries, telephones and our inverters at home. They become hazardous and harmful when they are not disposed of properly. It affects the soil and the water, and drinking it can lead to cancer.
“If we have the knowledge as legal practitioners, we can lobby for a framework to be created. That is a lacuna in our laws right now. All we do is find ways in which we discourage it hopefully by increasing the importation duty.
“Some of these vehicles have reached the end of their lives in the countries of their importation. There is no framework.
“We hope that will be one of the points that should make the agenda of this colloquium,” Shasore said.
RISSN Director Dr Olufemi Olarewaju called for the strengthening of the legal framework to reduce the import of rejected vehicles and other expired and harmful appliances into Nigeria.
“Advocacy is what we need to be a part of. We’ll be doing a lot of engagements,” he told reporters. First of all we don’t even know what the legal framework is. In terms of abandoned vehicles for instance, why should a car that is condemned somewhere in the world be able to come into Nigeria freely?
“In our situation most of the time the laws are in the books. We just have challenges in enforcing them. The legal framework is significant because it is based on it that the private sector can operate; they need to obey the laws of the land. It’s a critical component of what we need to achieve going forward.”
Managing Director of the Lagos Waste Management Agency (LAWMA) Mr Ola Oresanya believes having a strong database of what is imported would help in regulation.
He, however, argued that what is considered old or useless in one country may not been seen as such another, saying: “What is ‘end-of-life’ in Europe may not be ‘end-of-life’ here. You define what is ‘end-of-life’. It’s a relative word really; it’s not absolute.”
Among the guests were Dr Babatunde Ajibade (SAN), former Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO) president, Mrs Ayo Obe; environmentalist Newton Jibunoh; Country Director, Africare Nigeria Dr Orode Doherty; Manager, First Bank Sustainability Centre, Lagos Business School Dr. Ijeoma Nwagwu; ms. Baerbel Freyer of the German Industry and Commerce in Nigeria, among others.
Former President of Sri Lankan Bar Association (SBA) Upul Jayasuriya has been declared winner of the Second Commonwealth Law Conference Rule of Law Award. He was the President of Sri Lankan Bar from 2013 to March 31, 2015.
The award was presented to him at the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) conference.
He is the second winner of the beautifully engraved trophy with a $5,000.00 monetary value.
The inaugural award was won by Ms Robin Sully, a Canadian lawyer, who contributed to the rule of law both in Canada and across the Commonwealth
Jayasuriy said: “ I am very happy, I feel that our cause has been achieved, we have been vindicated and all the sufferings we passed through has been appreciated by the Commonwealth Lawyers Association.
“I came up to this level because of circumstances. I led the Bar at the when the Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake of Sari Lanka was impeached. At that time, the Bar needed a leader who could pursue her cause to the very end. The lawyers gathered and gave me overwhelming mandate to do that and that is just what I did.”
Justice Akintunde Savage of a Lagos High Court, sitting in Ikorodu, has dismissed an application filed by two members of the Odusago royal family of the Lasunwon Ruling house seeking to be joined as 13th and 14th respondents in the suit challenging the adoption of the Odofin of Ikorodu, Chief Kabiru Shotobi as the oba-elect by the king makers.
Justice Savage, in his ruling last week, dismissed the application for lacking in merit.
Jamiu Olusola Alejo and Durojaiye Ekundayo Alejo, through their lawyer, Suleiman Talabi, had on behalf of Odusago branch of the Lasunwon Ruling House of Ikorodu, sought to be joined as defendants in the suit.
Those seeking to be joined based their reasons on three main issues in their 17-point affidavit in support of the motion on notice filed before the court.
They averred that it was necessary that they were joined in the suit as defendants. As descendants of Lasunwon Ruling House, also entitled to present candidates for the selection and nomination for the throne of Ayangburen of Ikorodu, the decision of the court, according to them, may adversely affect their claim to the stool should they be excluded from the present suit. They said it was in view of the aforementioned facts and in the interest of the proper and holistic determination of all issues before the court, that they sought to be joined as defendants.
They averred further that it was imperative that all interested parties be included in this suit for the court to have a proper appraisal of the consent judgment delivered by Justice Habeeb Abiru, now of the Court of Appeal, in the earlier suit number IKD/57/2007.
The judge noted that while moving the application, counsel to the joinders , Sulaiman Talabi, had submitted before the court that the members of the Odusago royal family were not interested in the earlier suit, which centered on the position of Odofin of Ikorodu, but was interested in the present suit because the issue at stake was the Ayangburen stool.
They also submitted that it becomes necessary for them to join for easy resolution, and to save the time of the court by avoiding multiple suits.
Justice Savage also noted the opposition of counsel to the applicants, John Osighala and that of the second respondent, Kazeem Adenabjo to the joinders application.
He noted that Osighala in a nine- paragraph counter affidavit had submitted that the parties seeking to be joined are not parties in the previous suit numbered KD/57/2007 and that the matter in the new suit can be resolved without them. He also noted that in his counter affidavit, Adebanjo denied the existence of Odusago royal family of Lasunwon Ruling House of Ikorodu and the fact that those seeking to be joined were not parties to the earlier suit, the enforcement of the consent judgment of which they are seeking in court now.
Adebanjo, the judge said, submitted that the alleged Odusago royal family has never occupied the stool of Ayangburen and that he cited relevant laws and decided cases of the Supreme Court of Nigeria to support his submission on why the application should be rejected and dismissed.
The judge also noted that counsels to other respondents in the suit, including Gbenga Hassan for first and third respondents, O. Fabunmi for fourth to seventh respondents and S. A. Quadri for 11th and 12th respondents did not oppose the application nor file any counter affidavit.
On Justice Savage request, Chief Babatunde Olusola Benson (SAN), who is an “amicus curiae” (friend of the court) and a prominent son of the soil, reported to the court that several meetings held with various counsels after the court’s sitting of March 18, were deadlocked as counsels refused to shift positions.
Justice Savage, while ruling on the matter, held those seeking to be joinders were not parties in the previous suit and that they ought to have shown interest before the consent judgement delivered by Justice Abiru(now Justice of the Court of Appeal) in 2007 or at the Court of Appeal as an intervener. He also noted that the consent judgment was never appealed at the appellate level.
He also held that parties cannot join a suit in which judgment has been delivered and which enforcement has become the subject of another suit.
At this stage, Osighala asked for cost in the sum of N150,000 explaining that the joinders application had made them incurred addition cost as they had to file counter affidavit and serve 13 respondents.
Adebanjo aligned with the request of Osighala, pointing out that the application took them back despite the fact that the court had taken a decision to ensure speedy hearing in the matter. Adebanjo submiited further that the application seeking to be joined was filed “malafides” (in bad faith), adding: “our time was wasted, efforts wasted and three adjournments wasted on the application.”
But Talabi argued that any application in a suit must be judicially determined otherwise “people would be scared of bringing application before the court”.
Talabi declined to concede to costs, but prayed that if the court must award costs, it should not be more than N10,000 and urged the court to use its discretion on the matter. Justice Savage said the two counsels were right to ask for cost and awarded N30,000 each for Osighala and Adebanjo. He said other counsels did not merit costs as they filed no counter affidavit.
Just as Osighala asked the court for a date to move the main application, which was brought by an originating summon, counsel to the state government (11th and 12th respondents), Quadri, told the court that he wanted to withdraw his earlier application dated February 18, and to substitute it with another dated March 16.
Counsels to the third respondent, Hassan, and those of the fourth to the seventh respondents, Fabunmi, did not raise any objection to the development.
But Osighala, counsel to the applicants, opposed the substitution of the application by the government counsel, Quadri, saying: “counsel is attempting to withdraw through the back door, issues already raised in our argument already made and submitted before the court.
“The law does not make provision for substitution. What the law provides for is amendment under Order 24 Rule 2. Secondly, it is “over reaching” wherein by rules and procedures, arguments had commenced and closed, a party is extort from proferring new arguments to over-reach previous issues already canvassed.
“If we keep doing this, there would be no end to litigation because if allowed, I would have to go and file an amendment.” He cited various cases decided by the Supreme Court of Nigeria to buttress his submission.
Adebanjo also said the attempt by counsel to the government to have previous process withdrawn was surprising. He submitted that if allowed, the court would have to call for counter applications fron other counsels in the matter.
Asked for their views on the new development espoused by government counsel, Hassan, counsel to the first and third respondent, said he was indifferent and left the matter to the discretion of the court.
Fabunmi, counsel to the fourth to the seventh respondents, said no harm would be done by the substitution of the application the government wanted to make. “Claimants counsel has the opportunity to respond again,”he said.
Quadri also said arguments had not really commenced on the matter as they were yet to commence hearing of the originating summon. He said the only right counsel to the applicants have is that of reply having been served the application.
He said the court has the discretion to either allow or disallow the substitution of the application, which he claimed has been done “for typographical errors” and to dot the “i’s and “t”s.
Ruling on the matter, Justice Savage held that no harm would be done to issues already canvassed and that counsels can file new responses if issues are affected in the new application.
“The processes filed on February 18 is hereby struck out. Counsels are at liberty to respond to processes dated March 16,” he declared.
The matter was adjourned till today for applicants to move their originating summons.
Like every profession, law has also been infiltrated by quacks. This is giving the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) sleepless nights. It has come out with a stamp, which it believes will stop the quacks. How far can this measure go? ADEBISI ONANUGA reports.
Law is universally acclaimed to be a noble and honourable profession. It is guided by a code of conduct which every practitioner is expected to abide with.
But today, the code is being abused by quacks who have infiltrated the profession. Fake lawyers now handle cases in courts and, in some instances, offer legal advice to unsuspecting clients. Some have lost millions to these quacks.
For instance, a Ghanaian, Keinde Dodo, was once arrested for practising as a lawyer when he had no such training. The 74-year-old Ghanaian ran a law firm and had been in practice for 15 years before he was arrested, tried and jailed.
On February 5, last year, a suspected fake lawyer, Daniel Ikhidenor Ikhuoria, 30, was arrested at the Lagos High Court, Igbosere, where he went to attend court proceedings. The suspect was caught by a police orderly attached to the Appeal Court Deputy Chief Registrar (DCR).
During interrogation by the police, the suspect, who lives at 34, Nathaniel Osagie Avenue on Ikorodu Road, Owode, Onirin, Lagos, allegedly confessed that he was a fake lawyer. In his confessional statement, the suspect claimed he had been practicing as a lawyer since 2011 and represented clients at the magistrate and high courts.
He admitted not to have attended the Law School or studied law. He merely bought a gown and wig and started practising as a lawyer.
The police arraigned him before a Tinubu Magistrate’s court. Chief Magistrate A.O. Awogboro granted him N500,000 bail, among other conditions. He was remanded in Ikoyi Prison when he failed to meet the bail conditions.
Another fake lawyer, Jonathan Kingsley, 25, was caught at the Ebute-Metta Magistrate’s Court while claiming to be a lawyer in a criminal case.
Kingsley had appeared before the court to defend a suspect, Akin Afolabi, in a charge of defilement before he was caught by the Chief Magistrate, A. A. Demi-Ajayi.
It was learnt that after announcing his appearance as a counsel for Afolabi, the Chief Magistrate had queried Kingsley due to his clumsy introduction which betrayed him. The court subsequently issued a bench warrant for his arrest after which he was arraigned on one- count charge offence.
The charge reads: “That you, Jonathan Kingsley, on May 13, 2014 at about 11am at Chief Magistrate Court 6, Ebute-Metta, Lagos; in the Lagos Magisterial District did present yourself as a lawyer in a case of Commissioner of Police versus Akin Afolabi with charge number F/22/2014 in order to be acted upon as genuine, knowing to have been false.”
The offence was said to be contrary to Section 378 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, Nigeria 2011. Kingsley pleaded not guilty. The Chief Magistrate admitted him to bail in for N300, 000 with two sureties.
Meanwhile, Afolabi, whom Kingsley said he wanted to defend in court, was acquitted of wrong doing by the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP). The DPP in its advice said the defendant had no case to answer.
•Justice Mohammed
The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, had last week expressed great concern about the rising number of ‘fake’ lawyers in the country.
Speaking during the launch of Stamp for Lawyers, produced by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), the CJN lamented the prevalence of fake lawyers, saying it negatively affects the integrity of the legal profession and casts a shadow of disrepute on the judiciary as an arm of government. He regretted that one of the major challenges facing judges “is how to differentiate between a “real” and “fake” legal practitioner”.
He added: “Indeed, Judges find it difficult to identify which counsel, appearing before them, is genuine or otherwise.
“Of even greater concern is the fact that members of the public are often left in a quandary over who they can place their trust, property and even lives in.
“We must not forget that the credibility of the Bar has a direct impact on respect for the Rule of Law and the independence of the Courts,” the CJN said. The NBA, Ikeja branch in February held a brainstorming session on the need to sanitise the legal profession which has come under public ridicule owing to the activities of quacks.
A lawyer, Taiwo Adedeji, had at the session, expressed concern on the practice of the profession. He lamented that many fake lawyers now operate in the industry and expressed concern on how to salvage the profession from quacks. He urged the leadership of the Bar to be proactive more than before on issues of enforcement of the law by arresting and prosecuting fake lawyers.
Worried by this ugly trend and the need to cub the activities of these quacks, the NBA inaugurated a 13-man Committee in July, last year to enforce the Stamp and Seal Policy of the association to differentiate authentic lawyers from the fake ones.
During the committee’s inauguration, the then President, Mr. Okey Wali (SAN), said one of the roles of the association was to explore means of regulating its members’ activities through various ways of identification.
Wali said the committee had the mandate of identifying fake lawyers through identification by seal and maintaining an accurate members’ directory through the information contained in the application form for the seal.
The committee was also mandated to ensure that lawyers in practice paid their practising fees annually, adding that the seal would be renewed annually upon proof of payment of practising fees. The significance of using the seal was underscored by the provision of Rules 10(1), (2), & (3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for legal practitioners.
The Provision of the rules of professional conduct further states that the NBA shall interface with the judiciary to include the compulsory usage of seals by legal practitioners in their practice. The former NBA President said this policy could only have effect when the judiciary ensured that only documents bearing the stamp and seal were allowed for filing in the court or admitted in evidence at trials.
However, Wali was unable to implement the Stamp and Seal policy before his tenure ended in August, last year. His successor, Mr. Augustine Alegeh (SAN) in his inaugural address on August 29, renewed the bid of the judiciary to collaborate with the new NBA Executive Committee to in its efforts to rid the legal profession of quacks.
Observers are worried whether the use of practice stamp alone can stave off fake lawyers or whether the NBA needs to evolve other method and strategies to identify genuie lawyers. The concern arose out of the knowledge of growing number of fake law firm websites that are scamming “clients”, using real attorneys’ profiles. Others however see the acquisition of seals by the NBA as not only a move which can properly regulate its members but also regulate the practice of law in the country.
The CJN, at the launch of the stamp, said a key role of the NBA is the regulation of its members’ identities through various means of identification.
He urged every lawyer to ensure that the stamp is used as a veritable means of authenticating a qualified legal practitioner and the documents emanating from him.
“I believe that the stamp can, if properly deployed, become a hallmark of a firm’s work and a way for prospective clients to better identify their counsel- a veritable means to “Know Your Counsel, Thus, having an innovation, which may bestow a “stamp” of integrity and respect, is indeed welcome. “Indeed the significance of this event is underpinned by the provision of Rule 10 (1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007. This rule mandates that a lawyer acting in his or her capacity as a legal practitioner, legal officer or adviser of any government department or corporation, shall not sign or file a legal document unless his stamp and seal are affixed on any such document.
“The Stamp we are here to launch today has breathed life into this provision and further elevated legal practice in Nigeria to meet the challenges of an evolving society,” the CJN added.
Lawyers who spoke on how the stamp and seal could be used to check the activities of quacks in the profession include a former Presidential aspirant of the NBA, Funke Adekoya (SAN), Chairman, NBA, Ikeja Branch, Yinka Farounbi, a member of the Ogun State Judicial Service Commission, Abayomi Omoyinmi, Emeka Nwadioke and former chairman, NBA Ikeja Branch, Monday Ubani.
Reactions
Adekoya (SAN) said the practice stamps, if properly implemented will ensure that fake lawyers cannot practice. “I wholeheartedly support the concept, which was the centre point of my campaign for the position of 1st Vice President of the NBA in 2002. So better late than never. She remarked that issuing of stamps and seals to lawyers is however only the first step. “Mode of implementing the concept, enforcement and continuity by following administrations of the NBA are key to the eradication of fake lawyers. I have discussed mode of implementation and enforcement with various branches all over Nigeria. My thoughts are well documented and easily available to those who want such information,” she said.
Farounbi lamented that desperate characters took advantage of the harsh economic situations in the country and started cutting corners and infiltrated the Legal profession as fake Lawyers. He noted that the ugly trend has been with us for a reasonable length of time. He recalled that a couple of steps had been taken to stem the situation though, with little success.
According to him, the establishment do not envisage the infiltration by these fakes, so, no predetermined solution was ever put in place and that in situations of this nature, different approaches would be the order of the day.
He argued that the stamp and seal of the NBA is the first progressive and bold step ever taken to contain the activities of fake lawyers that has become rampant within the system. He said that this new approach must be developed to sanitize the system. Like I did observe earlier, a journey has been commenced and it could be improved upon. Thus and contrary to what may seem the general believe of the people, I am of a very strong opinion that the NBA has taken a bold step in eliminating the trend of fake Lawyers in our society.
Omoyinmi described the issue of prevalence of fake lawyers as a very sad story in the profession. “That the CJN can speak out on the issue of fake lawyers is an indictment on everyone that belong to the legal profession. How did we get to this stage?”
“I think the bar association under the leadership of the NBA president should, ultimately, do the right thing to right the wrongs on this issue, I think the time has now come to introduce the practise stamp without any further delay so that the public can have confidence in our legal system with reference to legal representation in matter of law.
‘’The legal practice is an integral part of our society and governance and to input sanity in the system is best acceptable practise all over the world. Anyone found to misrepresent himself/herself as a lawyer should also be made to face the consequence,’’ he said.
Ubani on his part noted that the havoc caused by fake lawyers in the country cannot be quantified and so every effort must be put in place to erase them from the legal profession. He argued that the stamp and seal policy of the leadership of the NBA is very commendable and one of the far reaching measures that the leadership of the bar is enthroning as measure to fight fake lawyers in the legal profession. He, however, said that more needs to be done by the various branches to combat effectively this menace.
“Every lawyer practicing under a branch must be made to register with the branch. Registration will entail presentation of qualifying papers to the branch to ensure that the lawyer is qualified to practice law. With that encompassing arrangement everyone that is unable to follow this simple process becomes a suspect whose identity should be properly verified before he can be recognized as a lawyer,” Ubani said.
Lagos lawyer Emeka Nwadioke said quacks are prevalent in virtually all professions in Nigeria.
“The reason is not far-fetched. In fact, the incidence of quackery in the legal industry is a global menace. Fake lawyers and bogus law firms exist in the United States and the United Kingdom, too.
“However, the quest by the Bar association to contain the malaise has at best been in fits and starts, even unsatisfactory. Indeed, a sense of monetization had pervaded programmes aimed at authenticating genuine lawyers in Nigeria. It is safe to say that many lawyers viewed the Stamp projects as merely money-making ventures instead of projects decisively targeted at tackling the malaise head-on.
“This led to a sense of disinterest and disenchantment among lawyers, and made a buy-in from the critical mass an uphill task. Not surprisingly, the problem remains with us even after lawyers have been subjected to multiple “verification” exercises over the years. The current exercise has not evaded the charge of commercialization either.
“I commend the decisiveness of the NBA leadership in pursuing the stamp project. However, I am not confident that the current exercise will contain the malaise for the simple reason that the quacks are not likely to give in easily merely because the Bar Association has now devised a “stamp” to be affixed on legal documents. Even more worrisome is that the two “key security features” on the stamp are merely on colour differentiation and Bar enrolment details. If we are dealing with fakes, we really need to up our game,” Nwadioke said
Way out
For further improvement and solution to the menace, Farounbi enjoined the Bar to make sure that every lawyer is captured in the NBA database. This will enable easier identification of any Lawyer whomsoever on a mere prompt of the button.
Equally, like we have the Directory of SANs reviewed periodically, the entire lawyers in the country should have a directory reviewable at least once in five years.
Ubani emphasised the need for every practicing lawyer to put up an antenna to decipher in any relationship involving a lawyer to find out whether that person is a qualified lawyer. The members of the public must also report any untoward acts of these so called lawyers as many of these fake lawyers find it difficult to exhibit honesty and integrity in transactions. My advice is that every hand must be on deck to check this menace and eradicate the scourge of fake lawyers.
Nwadioke called for a full implementation of the new initiative. “I find more exciting and sustainable the prospects of legal email and court automation vis-à-vis authentication through internet and intranet platforms as advanced by the CJN. It seems that with a secure ICT architecture, these platforms will offer a more full-proof alternative.
“Ultimately, we may never eradicate quacks, but we can devise a system that reliably and consistently punishes,such as miscreants. There is no alternative to a vigorous and consistent prosecution of suspected quacks.
“The naming and shaming exercise must be deliberate, concerted and unrelenting. Bar branches must own the project while the Bar/Bench Forum and sundry agencies should be fully utilised to fish out the quacks. This is however notwithstanding the legal hurdles the stamp project must scale to gain validity,” Nwadioke said.
Agroup, Lawyers for Change, has urged the president-elect General Muhamadu Buhari to make the rescue of the kidnapped Chibok school girls a priority.
Its National Coordinator, Mr. Adesina Ogunlana, at a briefing in Ikeja, said the girls’ freedom was paramount.
He said they disagreed with statement allegedly made by the President-elect that he could no longer guarantee the freedom of the girls.
Ogunlana urged Buhari to live up to his earlier campaign promise of finding the girls.
He stressed that Buhari’s comments after the general elections contradicted the promise he made prior to the elections adding that this was not acceptable to them.
The girls were seized on April 14, last year from their school’s dormitory while they were preparing for their school certificate exams.
He said: “What he said now is at variance with his promise. Chibok girls must be rescued, they must be found.”
The group also admonished the newly elected, at both the national and state (Lagos) level, not to bask in the euphoria of past glory, but to endeavour to create the much awaited change Nigerians have been craving for.
According to him, to adequately address and curb the issue of corruption, there must be a project tagged ‘real retooling of the national economy’.
“Misappropriation of government funds must end. To serve as a deterrent yo others, wealth corruptly acquired should be relinquished. Our country must change and be changed.
“Life in Nigeria must not remain the same. What the people elected in is change, and change they will get, change not just transition,” he added.
Ogunlana also commended Nigerians for electing Buhari/Osinbajo who he described as real agents OD change and promised to ensure that his group will continue to be a watchdog on the incoming administration.
He said, “we will be the conscientious critics of the people voted into power. Our leaders must become lean so that our people can become fat. The only thing our leaders must deliver is nothing but change.”
A constitutional lawyer, Mr Ike Ofuokwu, has urged General Muhammadu Buhari to keep Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) members who defected to the All Progressives Congress (APC) at arm’s length if the fight against corruption must be won.
He said corruption remains one of Nigeria’s major ills; therefore corrupt persons who seek protection from prosecution in APC must not be tolerated.
“I strongly believe that the Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (GMB) administration will restore Nigeria’s lost glory. As we have canvassed severally in the past, all the ills that have eaten into the fabric of this project called Nigeria are founded on corruption.
“The moment we are able to get rid of this monster called corruption, every other thing will fall in place. GMB has done it before and he will do it again.
“The GMB administration must be very weary of political jobbers who have no other job other than to feed fat on any government in power.
“All this political decampees should be welcomed but put at arms length so as not to infect the incoming administration,” Ofuokwu said.
The lawyer, an APC leader in Oshimili North Local Government Area of Delta State, mobilised the party members in the state to vote for Gen. Buhari and Prof Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) as well as the APC governorship candidate during the general elections.
Addressing APC leaders during one of the meetings, Ofuokwu urged them support the party and demonstrate to members in the other states that they are true agents of change.
“We must avoid the need for our state to be in the opposition. We need to align completely with what is happening at the centre.
“I am tired with the report of some of us still drawing the distinction between Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN). Needless to reiterate again that for almost two years now we are one big family called APC without any distinction. We are all fighting the cabal and impunity called PDP.”Furthermore, there is need for us to maintain peace despite all conspiracies from the PDP to provoke you to anger. It is quite unfortunate that the PDP in this state particularly in our LGA have been using their power of incumbency to emasculate other parties.
“They boasted before everyone that irrespective of our numerical strength that our vote will not count. I want to assure you all that it’s only a question of time and the reality would be done on them as it has happened at the centre. Be rest assured that this wind of change blowing is inevitable in Delta state,” said Ofuokwu.
At the meeting were APC Ward 5 Vice-Chairman Sunday Odogwu; LGA Leader Morgan Agetue; LGA Assistant Organising Secretary Henry Nkwuka; Ward 5 Chairman Patrick Okolie; LGA Leader Chief Kizito Ijeh (who was LGA Coordinator, Buhari/Osinbajo Campaign Group); LGA Leader Miss Judith Ezeife; LGA Women Leader Isioma Francis; Assistant Ward 5 Women Leader Mrs Awele Ashimedua; Ward 5 Publicity Secretary James Omeligwe; Ward 4 chairman Prince Azuh Nmarkwe and LGA Exco member Miss Lima Nwalupue.
