The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

Lawyers back colleague’s governorship bid

A head of the April 11 governorship election, members of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Jos branch have backed the governorship bid of their colleague Simon Lalong, who is running on the All Progressives Congress (APC) platform.

Lalong informed the branch of his ambition last Thursday.

Lalong, former Plateau State House of Assembly Speaker, was the branch’s Assistant Secretary. He believes lawyers are the society’s leading lights, adding that he would implement his party’s laudable policies in the state.

He vowed to use his wealth of experience in governance to ensure that all segments of the society are transformed under his administration, assuring that the masses’ welfare and youth employment would be foremost in his agenda.

The branch Chairman, Mr. Ledak Dazuk Dafer assured Lalong of the branch’s unflinching support.

He said: “We have about five of them contesting and we have given all of them opportunity to address us.

“My expectations from them is that they will excel because they will apply the unique training of a lawyer in addressing socio-economic and political problems of the country

“You know that the legal profession is a respectable one because it trains people in character and in learning and by the grace of God, I expect all the best from them. They should perform well like we already have templates across the country. They had done well as lawyers, so I am sure that they will definitely perform if elected in their respective offices of aspiration.”

He added: “Lawyers are agents of change, we have gone around educating voters to make good use of the forthcoming elections by participating massively and voting for candidates of their choice.”

Immediate past NBA Vice-President Mr. Steve Abar said Plateau State was privileged to have Lalong as a governorship candidate.

“I say this because he is a quintessential leader, a gentleman per excellence, an epitome of humility, a selfless leader who cherishes the virtues of honesty, modesty, truth and genuine service. He is an apostle of the rule of law, justice and equity, a rare breed politician not given to graft and self aggrandizement or the primitive acquisition of wealth which is the hallmark and characteristic of most politicians of today.

“Lalong is a person passionately committed to the growth and development of Plateau State, a passion he has demonstrated in the various opportunities in leadership he has had in the state. He has been tested and proven as a practicing lawyer and a committed member of the NBA. In the past, he creditably served the NBA Jos Branch as an Assistant Secretary before hearkening to the call of his constituents and was elected to represent them in the Plateau State House of Assembly.

“In the House, he rose to the enviable position of Speaker, a position he occupied for about seven years and his era witnessed unprecedented stability and high level of legislative enactments, notwithstanding the destabilizing efforts of the Federal Government and its Agencies.

“He excellently passed the true test of character by resisting the then President, Olusegun Obasanjo and the Economic and Financial Crimes’ (EFCC) offer to aid the illegal impeachment of Chief Joshua Dariye and benefit therefrom by being rewarded with the Governorship of Plateau State at the time.

“The courts eventually vindicated his stance when it nullified Dariye’s illegal impeachment. The subsequent Federal Government/EFCC sponsored attempt to recall him from the House of Assembly was also stoutly resisted by his constituents who overwhelmingly voted for him in the referendum organised for that purpose.

“If elected as Governor, Rt. Hon. Lalong will be bringing to the stable of governance his wealth of experience garnered overtime in the judicial and legislative arms of Government, both as a practicing lawyer and as member/Speaker of the Plateau State House of Assembly.

“Another critical benefit of his election is that it will be a re – unifying factor and rallying point for a just, equitable, peaceful and progressive Plateau State. It will also restore the harmony requisite to galvanize unprecedented and even development of the Plateau State. It is an indisputable fact that the candidacy of his major opponent has left the citizens of Plateau State in a fractious and disunited condition.

“To my mind, a Lalong and Prof. Trodden governorship will restore Plateau State to an era of unprecedented peace without which there cannot be the critically needed development. This why lawyers in Plateau State and I in particular are rallying around and rooting for him,” Abar said.

Aformer chairman of NBA Jos branch, Mr. Caleb Dajan said Lalong would be following in the footsteps of the state’s former governor Chief Solomom Lar.

“We very confident that a lawyer will do better as the Plateau State Governor because we have seen lawyers in Lagos, in Akw Ibom, in Enugu State and we have seen how they performed, so we don’t expect anything less from Rt. Hon Lalong in Plateau State,” he said.

March 3, 2015
Senior advocates, others to Jonathan: obey courts on soldiers’ deployment

The Court of Appeal has held that it is illegal for the president to deploy soldiers for elections. The All Progressives Congress (APC) has written President Goodluck Jonathan, asking him to comply with the order. But will he? Lawyers advise the president not to do anything that will portray his administration as lawless. JOSEPH JIBUEZE sought their views.

if Nigeria was a country where the rule of law guides government’s actions, there would be no debate as to whether a judgment would be obeyed. In other countries, compliance with court verdicts is a given because it has become a way of life.

One issue that is generating heated debate now is whether soldiers should be deployed for the general elections. The courts have held that it would be illegal to do so. Ordinarily, the matter should end there. Yet, there are doubts that the Federal Government will obey the judgment during the March 28 and April 11 elections.

Concerned that court judgments are usually treated with levity, the All Progressives Congress (APC) wrote President Goodluck Jonathan, insisting that the military should be excluded from direct election duties.

The party’s letter came after Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman Prof Attahiru Jega spoke about the elections vis-a-vis security at the National Assembly last week.

Jega said: “I keep saying consistently that INEC is not a security organisation. We are an election management body, so we rely a lot on security to be able to ensure that things are done well and that there is no disruption of the electoral process.

“We have been working very closely with the inter-agencies consultative committee on election security and that is why for us, if the Service Chiefs say that ‘we can’t guarantee security, give us more time’, what is the alternative security arrangements?”

In its February 16 letter, APC drew Jonathan’s and the INEC’s attention to the January 29 judgment of Justice R.M. Aikawa of the Federal High Court, Sokoto and the February 16 decision of the Court of Appeal, Abuja, which outlawed the President’s unilateral deployment of soldiers for the June 21, 2014 Ekiti State governorship election. It urged them to obey both decisions.

In the letter signed by the Director, Legal, APC Presidential Campaign Council, Chukwuma-Machukwu Ume (SAN), the party argued that by virtue of both decisions, it had become illegal for the President and INEC to involve members of the armed forces in electoral matters without the National Assembly’s permission.

What the courts said

Justice Aikawa restrained the President and INEC “from engaging the service of the Nigerian Armed Forces in the security supervision of elections in any manner whatsoever in any part of Nigeria, without an Act of the National Assembly.”

Justice Abdul Aboki , in his lead judgment in the Ekiti State Governorship Election appeal delivered on February 16, held that “even the President of Nigeria has no powers to call on the Nigerian Armed Forces and to unleash them on peaceful citizens, who are exercising their franchise to elect their leaders.

“Whoever unleashed soldiers on Ekiti State disturbed the peace of the election on June 21, 2014; acted in flagrant breach of the Constitution and flouted the provisions of the Electoral Act, which required an enabling environment by civil authorities in the conduct of elections.”

Section 215 of the 1999 Constitution makes the maintenance of internal security, including law and order during elections, the exclusive responsibility of the police.

According to Lagos lawyer Mr Femi Falana (SAN), it is erroneous for Prof Jega to say that only the military could guarantee security during the elections.

To him, once INEC has discharged its constitutional duty of fixing election dates, the onus is on the police to provide security and maintain law and order.

Falana recalled that the courts have consistently enjoined the Federal Government to desist from involving the armed forces in elections.

He cited the leading judgment of the Court of Appeal in Yussuf v Obasanjo (2005) 18 NWLR (PT 956) 96, which the court held: “It is up to the police to protect our nascent democracy and not the military, otherwise the democracy might be wittingly or unwittingly militarized. This is not what the citizenry bargained for in wrestling power from the military in 1999. Conscious step or steps should be taken to civilianize the polity to ensure the survival and sustenance of democracy.”

The court, Falana said, reiterated its views in the case of Buhari v Obasanjo (2005) 1 WRN 1 at 200 when it stated: “In spite of the non-tolerant nature and behavior of our political class in this country, we should by all means try to keep armed personnel of whatever status or nature from being part and parcel of our election process. The civilian authorities should be left to conduct and carry out fully the electoral processes at all levels. “

Upholding the judgment, the Supreme Court stated in Buhari v Obasanjo (2005) 50 WRN 1 at 313 that the state is obligated to ensure that “citizens who are sovereign can exercise their franchise freely, unmolested and undisturbed.”

Falana said going by the verdicts, Prof Jega should ensure that INEC is not further blackmail by the military hierarchy.

“On their own part, the National Security Adviser (NSA) and the Service Chiefs should desist from usurping the constitutional responsibility of the INEC and the Nigeria Police Force,” Falana added.

PDP’s position

The Director of Media and Publicity of the PDP Presidential Campaign Organisation, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode, insisted that soldiers must be deployed in order to avert killings during the elections.

He said: “The PDP Presidential Campaign Organisation hereby declares unequivocally that the sordid killing of youth corpers or anyone else must not be repeated in the forthcoming general elections.It is for this reason that the Federal Government must deploy soldiers to ensure peace, stability and security during and after the elections.

“The attempt by the APC to discredit the use of soldiers by promoting some misleading audio footage of the so-called rigging during the Ekiti governorship election, in which one Capt. Sagir Koli was the dramatis personae, is childish and absurd.

“The Federal Government deployed soldiers in the Anambra, Edo, Ondo, Ekiti and Osun governorship elections and all those elections were devoid of violence. Remarkably, the APC won in Edo and Osun; APGA won in Anambra, Labour Party won in Ondo while the PDP won only in Ekiti State.”

He alleged that the basis on which the APC was agitating for the exclusion of soldiers from the election by sponsoring court cases was patently dubious and untenable.

Fani-Kayode said: “The reason that the APC and its leaders do not want soldiers deployed is to be able to intimidate voters and unleash violence on the polity once they lose the elections. They know that it would be far more difficult for them to do that when soldiers are on the streets.”

Asked if the President would disobey the judgment, Fani-Kayode said: “The President is a law-abiding citizen. I know this government will not work against the judgement. We are a law-abiding government, moreover, I will suggest that we allow the Attorney General of the Federation to speak on the matter.”

Will the Federal Government obey?

The Federal Government and the ruling party have, in several instances, been accused of lawlessness. To some observers, the Jonathan administration has demonstrated that it has little regard for the rule of law, the Constitution and even the courts; therefore, it will come as no surprise if the judgments are defied.

For instance, after the Court of Appeal ordered the re-instatement of PDP National Secretary Olagunsoye Oyinlola, rather than obeying the order, the party suspended him. Many saw this as a deliberate ploy to circumvent the judgment.

The presidency was also accused of being in tacit support of the assault of judges in Ekiti State which prevented the hearing of the eligibility case against Governor Ayo Fayose prior to his swearing in.

The presidency and the party, observers say, did not condemn what many believe is a blatant act of lawlessness when seven Ekiti lawmakers in the 26-member assembly, joined by three persons whose identities were allegedly unknown, “impeached” the Speaker.

Last year, House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Tambuwal asked a Federal High Court in Abuja to summon the Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Suleiman Abba, to explain why he should not be jailed for disobeying the court’s order.

Tambuwal accused Abba of consistently disobeying the court order made on November 7, 2014, which directed parties to maintain status quo in his suit filed to stop his removal.

The Speaker said Abba, in further disrespect of the order, appeared before the House of Representatives Committee on Police Affairs on November 26 and told the members that he would not recognise Tambuwal as the Speaker.

Is the military non-partisan?

The military is supposed to be constitutionally apolitical, but recent developments tend to suggest otherwise.

Those who oppose deployment of soldiers during elections cite the allegations that army officials were used to rig the last Ekiti governorship election, won by the PDP. It was alleged that PDP chiefs gave directives to the military to favour the party.

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Emeka Ngige, said soldiers are now being deployed to assist the ruling party and its affiliate parties during elections.

He recalled that during the 2010 governorship election in Anambra State, soldiers allegedly worked for the interest of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) candidate who is now in PDP.

According to him, an army chief from the hometown of the APGA candidate was the commander in charge of security for the Anaocha local government area. With his presence, the agents of the opposition party were arrested, severely beaten and kept in police custody till after the election.

The SAN alleged that APGA had a field day during the election, and when a complaint was lodged with the army authorities at Onitsha, nothing was done. The same scenario, Ngige said, repeated itself in 2011 elections in Anambra State.

Regarding the audio tape of the alleged conspiracy to rig the 2014 Ekiti governorship election, Ngige said it was instructive that the military authorities have not issued any official statement on the scandal.

“That tells you how the professionalism in the armed forces has deteriorated in the last 16 years by the meddlesomeness of the civilians in government,” Ngige said.

Some have also questioned the army’s sincerity regarding the APC Presidential candidate General Muhammadu Buhari’s certificate issue.

Initially, the Army claimed that it does not keep originals of certificates of service men in their files but photocopies, and that Gen. Buhari was free to apply to get copies of his certificates in his file. But the army later claimed that neither the original nor photocopies of Buhari’s certificates were in the file. According to Ngige, the belief is that the army apparently took the latter stance to portray the General as having been enlisted in the Army without a qualifying certificate.

“A truly professional and non-partisan Army would not indulge in that type of double speaks,” he said.

Many called for the service chiefs’ heads after Prof Jega attributed the general elections postponement to their inability to guarantee security.

To many observers, the service chiefs were merely doing the presidency and the ruling party’s bidding, despite their denials.

“Clearly this attitude portray the service chiefs as working for the interest of the political party that had clamoured and wanted a postponement to enhance its chances in the election,” Ngige said.

Other lawyers speak

Mr George Oguntade (SAN) said the fact that deployment of soldiers for elections duties has become a debatable point was very worrisome.

“I do not know of any democratic country that is not at war where elections been accompanied by the deployment of soldiers and cannot comprehend why Nigeria has to be any different.

The roles of the Nigerian Police Force and the Nigerian Army are specifically spelt out in the Constitution and it is manifestly clear that it is the Nigerian Police Force that is charged with the responsibility of providing the required security and ensuring the maintenance of peace and order during elections.

“There cannot, therefore, be any justification for the usurpation of this role by the Army. Military deployment will only serve to create unnecessary tension and an atmosphere of fear that may prevent a substantial number of the electorate from coming out to vote,” Oguntade said.

For Mr Jibrin Okutepa (SAN), soldiers have no business superintending or supervising elections.

His words: “Deploying soldiers for elections is as dubious as it is unconstitutional. The constitutional duty of soldiers is to protect and safeguard the territorial landmarks of Nigeria from external aggression. Election is not war. Election is civil responsibility of the citizens. Mere presence of soldiers has the potential of scaring some voters. It is only in Nigeria that we use soldiers for all manner of duties. Let us keep soldiers out of our elections and confine them to their traditional role.”

A constitutional lawyer Mr Ike Ofuokwu believes deploying soldiers is an indication that the Federal Government has totally lost faith in the police.

“To go looking for the soldiers is a tacit vote of no confidence on the Police Force. Then why still maintain a Police Force that cannot provide adequate security during General Elections?

“To drag the military into intimidating opponents and voters on election day under whatever guise is to further devalue whatever value is left of the armed forces. We are still confronted with manpower challenges in fighting insurgency in the Northeast, so if no sinister motive, why bring in the military into electoral matters?” Ofuokwu asked.

To him, elections can never be free and fair where voters feel intimidated by the presence of soldiers.

“Please who actually is afraid of free and fair elections? Nigerians need to know. The political class needs to be warned of the urgent need to keep the military away from government to enable them focus on their core objectives.

“The interpretation of section 217(2)(C) of the 1999 Constitution can comfortably be on either side of the divide depending solely on the viewpoint of the speaker. But as it is now, the Federal Government cannot afford to defy the Court of Appeal judgment barring the use of soldiers in the conduct of elections. There is no need for academic argument; it is a judicial pronouncement except the Supreme Court rules otherwise. INEC itself cannot afford to be contemptuous of this ruling.”

Is there any circumstance that may warrant the military being deployed during an election? Ofuokwu answers: “The military can provide peripheral security services within any part of the country or the states but without coming close to the polling arena. To do otherwise is a violation of Section 217(2(c) of the Constitution and Section 1 of the Armed Forces Act as pronounced by the court of appeal.”

However, Dr Joseph Nwobike (SAN) believes the issue of whether or not to deploy soldiers for elections is more political than legal. He noted that there are very compelling reasons to deploy soldiers in some troubled areas.

“With respect to those areas, I believe that the President, as the chief security officer of the federation, should deploy soldiers to maintain peace and order immediately before, during and after the elections.

“On the other hand, there are areas where the security situation is not volatile. There will be no reason to deploy soldiers in those areas. There are also borderline areas where the possibility of electoral violence of high proportion is likely.

“In such areas, it is expected that the President will look at the security reports and do the needful. In all, the President is entitled under the constitution to enforce law and order during the general election,” Nwobike said.

The SAN said President Jonathan should use his discretion, notwithstanding the recent judgments, as he would be blamed should there be a major security breakdown during the polls.

“Some opponents of the deployment of soldiers during the general elections have been relying on the decisions of the Federal High Court in Sokoto and that of the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

“While I do not contest the validity of those decisions, I take the view that they do not prevent or take away the powers vested in the President to deploy soldiers whenever the need arises.

“It is very unfortunate that politicians have now successfully politicised the simple issue of national security. The same politicians are the ones that will quickly condemn the President if security breaks down anywhere in the country during the election.

“So, I believe that the President should exercise his discretion in the national interest, at all times,” Dr Nwobike added.

February 24, 2015
The profound anti-corruption legal framework Nigeria needs

One thing has become completely clear. The 2015 Presidential election is about Nigerians’ frustrations with the failure of successive governments to frontally attack and defeat corruption in our public life.But the Nigerian Law itself has many loopholes through which it aids corruption, writes IWILADE AKINTAYO.

The Nigerian citizenry obviously yearn for an end to the odious corruption that has retarded the country’s progress for too long. The law, stripped of all its niceties,will remain complicit in our under-development crises until it is fundamentally restructured to promote, as against stifling, this legitimate yearning. But in what ways can a more profound anti-corruption and legally enforceable framework be formulated for Nigeria if this anti-graft war is ever to be properly conceptualised, fought, and won?

Outright theft of public resources, misappropriation, conversion, diversions, the criminally insensitive but dubiously‘now almost legalised’ irrational pay packages for public officials at the expense of dire public works, contract inflations, bribery, kick-backs, prebendalism, nepotism and several other similar terminologiesall describe varied shadesof corruption by whatever definition we codify it. For Nigeria, it is easy to cite the Criminal Code, Penal Code, Advance Fee Fraud Act, the EFCC and ICPC Acts,etc as having largely made provisions against some of the corrupt acts covered by the mentioned terminologiesand prescribing prosecution and punishments for same- even if the adequacy of some of the so-called punishments are deeply questionable.

But there are still some protections for corruption advertently being promoted by Law itself which must be urgently deconstructed, to make the Nigerian Law more profoundly intolerant of corruption, especially in public life- in the coming period. Some of the ways the Law itself currently engenders corruption in public life begins with the structure of the 1999 Constitution (even as so far amended), given its rabidly consumerist, prebendalist and unproductively unitaristdisposition which, pretend as we may, remains a fundamental drag on Nigeria’s development prospects.

To start a genuine anti-corruption war, public office must first be adorned in genuine garbs of probity, prudence and an inspiring modesty that emphasizes honest service far above the insatiable material gluttony that currently underlies the habits of the political class. Thus, in addition to the massive looting that has become commonplace, anarea that unarguablyreflects the legitimation of corruption in public life is the unchecked irrational salaries and allowances the current political class mindlessly allocate to itselfin complete contempt for the miserable quality of life of the people it purports to represent. These clear cases of ‘legitimized’ corruption are points from which any sincere anti-corruption combat must decisively start.

Unfortunately, the Law is yet to expressly criminalize this utterly insensitive but dubiously ‘legalized’ irrational pay packages being dishonestly paid to public officials. The Law must urgently place a rational limit on this rapacious looting being disguised as legitimate pay while also fiercely criminalizing any crossing of the set limit. It must do so urgently if the anti-corruption war is to be sincerely waged and if it is to gain unprecedented traction and momentum within a pretty short time.

Let’s take but only one of the criminally insensitive examples- i.e; the much indignantly analyzed pay packages of Nigerian Legislatorswhich is still, to complicate the assault on the people’s dignity, even shrouded in secrecy. The figures are disparate but there is almost universal consensus that Nigerian Legislators are one of(if not) the highest paid in the world. Given that the people they purport to represent are among the poorest of the world, it is beyond debate that it smacks of unprecedented legitimation of corruption to allocate such disproportionately large chunks of scarce resources to irrationally enrich Legislators and other public officials who pretend to be representing some of the world’s poorest people. The Revenue Mobilization, Allocation and Fiscal Commission Act clearly provides for the Commission’s powers under Section 6 as follows: “The Commission shall have powers to determine the remuneration appropriate to the holders of the offices as specified in Parts A and B of the First Schedule to this Act”.

Now that we are faced with situations where public officials now create parallel Lawsacross the States and even plain administrative decisions to circumvent the powers of the RMAFC, to allocate clearly undeserving rewards to themselves, outside the figures already fixed by the RMAFC in line with powers given to it in Section 6, the Law cannot continue to stand helpless in the face of such unbridled desecration of public life.

A simple amendment to Section 6 of the RMAFC Act will immediately water down these circumventions. Or, in addition, an outright enactment of a separate Act to limit the remuneration to be received by all categories of public officials could also be considered so as to properly spell out the philosophy of service and to also criminalize the festering ideas, and irrational remuneration practices,that have made public office essentially a platformfor primitive acquisition in Nigeria.

For instance, an additional phrase to provide that in the exercise of the powers of the RMAFC under its enabling Act, the Commission shall not fix the total salaries, allowances, pensions or other remuneration package by whatever name called, and of any public official of whatever designation, whether serving or retired, including the President and Vice-President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, beyond the sum of Thirty Million Naira per annum which value shall at all times be determined by the purchasing power and value of Thirty Million Naira as at January of the year 2015,(or something of sort)will be a vital addition to the RMAFC Act.

Also, a provision that it shall be an offence, under the Act, for any public official to earn or draw from the public treasury any further salaries, allowances, pension or other remuneration package by whatever name called, and under whatever guise, beyond the limit provided by the Act, and beyond the limit provided for in the category of the said public official under the relevant guidelines issued from time to time by the commission, will also be essential. If the maximum limit is fixed at the current value of Thirty Million Naira for instance, it will mean the highest paid public official, which is Mr. President, cannot draw beyond N30 million from the public purse for salaries, allowances and other remuneration by whatever name called. That stands to reason that all other public officials down the line from the Vice-President to ministers to legislators till the councillors at the lowest Local Government Ward Levels will earn lower wages relevant to their service and status.

This is fair enough for the long oppressed Nigerian people to drastically cut their ‘leaders’’ untenable appetite for earning in ways that mock the extreme poverty already inflicted on the majority of citizens. If the United States President, despite sitting on the largest government budget on earth, and being in charge of the world’s biggest economy;still earns a maximum annual income of $400, 000.00 (approximately Eighty Million Naira) by Law, no President of Nigeria deserves to earn beyond a maximum annual income of $150,000 (approximately Thirty Million Naira) in view of the wretched state of the average Nigerian citizen. How much will be saved from such drastic cuts in public officials’ pay will be almost unimaginable.

More so, the revolutionary impact of such drastic reforms on dismantling the psychology and perception of public office as the place to earn undeserved wages will be phenomenal. To immediately render sterile the irrational aspects of various Pension Laws for former governors and other public officials that have been surreptitiously passed across the states, the RMAFC Act and other reformatory Acts that may be pushed for enactment, need to fundamentally provide that where there is any conflict between the State Laws and the reformatory Acts and guidelines, the State Laws to the extent of their inconsistency must stay void. We should also have a provision that shall make it mandatory,for any relevant body, to make available to the public, on request, any details about what any public official receives as salaries, emoluments, pensions and benefits by whatever name called.

There are some finer legal and economic details to be worked out beyond this article of course but the bottom line is that public service must be urgently rid of its current obscene ostentatiousness that continues to push recurrent expenditure to unsustainable limits and making it almost impossible to develop critical human capital and material infrastructure without which we are headed nowhere.

The current racket going on in the name of ‘jumbo’ pay is festering because there is no consequence for such and the Law probably never envisaged such a rapacious bunch. But now that we are faced with such embarrassing legitimation of corruption, the Law can wade in since persuasions and criticisms have apparently achieved nothing so far.

Anybody guilty of contravening the limits set by Law should be liable on conviction to fines double whatever extra amounts drawn in addition to mandatory jail terms of not less than 15 to 20 years. Such Laws will no doubt be a sword in the hands of a truly anti-corruption government to activate its anti-graft agencies to impartially prosecute the hundreds of members of the political class who had no business aspiring to political office in the first place anyway.

Other corruption prone laxities being promoted by Law include the patronage system of the 1999 Constitution, and supporting Laws that continue to create an over-bloated and pointless bureaucracy. An example is Section 147 (3) of the 1999 Constitution which provides for appointment of Ministers from every State of the Federation. The provisions in many enabling Acts and Regulationsto the effectthat appointments into boards, parastatals, even judicial appointments, etc must have representative from every state or region of the federation also promote the corruption of public life in disguised ways. A society founded on patronage above rational merit cannot be corruption free.

We just must find a way, by Law, to end this patronage system currently being run in Nigeria in order to bring forth the creative energies of all people without regard to wherever anybody comes from, which God they worship or don’t worship, the genitals they possess, the biological, ethnic, sociological or ancient cultural circumstances of their birth etc. Definitely it will require a lot of political will and tact, but we just have to someday end our queer style of statutory federal character application in Nigeria and gradually embrace rational merit to stop the corruptive influences of entitlements based more on so-called places of origin as against actual conscientious effort and capacity in our public life.

Singapore was a nation riddled with corruption at about the period of Nigeria’s independence but not again. Different fundamentals have been attributed to how that country moved from having corruption as a way of life (as Nigeria currently is) into dislodging it almost totally from its public life. The foundation was political will which is obviously currently lacking in Nigeria. Other fundamentals include proactive and firm anti-corruption Laws, an effective and impartial anti-corruption Agency, a Judiciary that supports the anti-corruption movement with well reflective jurisprudence and of course, an effective government that delivers on its service responsibilities to the citizens.

Nigeria too must adopt stiffer anti-corruption laws with provisions like those in the Corruption Prevention Act currently in force in Singapore. Some useful provisions of Singapore’sCorruption Prevention Act include a presumption clause whereby public officials found in custody of sums suspected to be proceeds of bribes or misappropriation are to be presumed to have corruptly obtained it except they could prove to the court’s satisfaction that such sums derived from honest earning. This is similar to the proposal in Nigeria for Court ordered Assets Confiscation pending satisfactory explanation of honest source of acquisition in situations where there are reasonable suspicions of corruption, especially when someone is not known to have engaged in any meaningful trade or calling and yet possesses assets in excess of what can reasonably accrue from what he purports to do for a living.

On corruption, our Evidence Act and jurisprudence have to shift the absolute burden of full presumption of innocence in such instances where public or private citizens come into sudden wealth without rational explanation. The State should be empowered to wade in to satisfy itself, through an impartial judicial system, that the wealth is product of honest earnings, failing which same should be liable to forfeiture. The Singapore model, of course with necessary modifications if need be, is highly recommended for Nigeria. Indeed, asides the statutory provisions, there are strictly enforced codes of transparency and accountability for every public officer in Singapore and the private sector is also not spared of the stringent anti-corruption battle. And with political will as the sub-structure, it has so far worked to the extent that Singapore, a once rabidly corrupt Country like Nigeria, is now one of the least corrupt countries in the world.

All said, if our development is not to remain a mere lousy wish, the need to frontally attack, and dismantle corruption; long entrenched in our public and private governance, is one of the fundamental questions that should determine the outcome of Nigeria’s 2015 Presidential election. Whatever the provisions of the Law or the adoption or modification of our prescriptions here, if enforcement is lax and a deficit in political will remains prevalent, the Law framersand thinkerswouldonly have labored in vain- and Nigeria will remain corrupt and primitive. But hopefully, if the envisaged strong political will to courageously confront corruption is truly the choice of the majority this crucial ‘fourth’time,Nigeria may well be getting ready to become corruption free while we deal with other immanent contradictions as we move along.

•Iwilade Akintayo is a Lagos-based

Legal Practitioner.

February 24, 2015
Court orders bank to pay lawyer N10.5m

Justice Oluwatoyin Ipaye of a Lagos High Court, Ikeja, has issued a garnishee order compelling Zenith Bank Plc to pay the judgment sum of N10.5million from the account of People’s Democratic Party (PDP) to a lawyer, Mr. Debo Adeleke.

The amount represented his professional fees for various court cases handled by the lawyer for the Lagos PDP.

Justice Ipaye issued the order last week following the refusal of the PDP to pay Mr. Adeleke his professional fees after the court had initially delivered a judgment against the party.

In her ruling, Justice Ipaye upheld the arguments of the claimant and his request for a garnishee order to compel Zenith Bank Plc pay Mr Adeleke from the PDP’s account domicile with the bank.

The judge ordered Zenith Bank Plc to issue a N10.5 million Cheque to Mr Adeleke from the PDP account within the next three days.

Justice Ipaye regretted that it was very unfortunate that a lawyer would have to drag his client to court for payment after rendering legal services to the client.

Adeleke had sued both the national headquarters and Lagos State branch of the PDP over their failure to pay him his outstanding legal fees after he had made over 180 representations in court for the party in its election petition matters.

Adeleke contended that he handled seven cases for the PDP at the Lagos State Local Government Elections Petitions Tribunal between November 2011 and August 2012, saying that the party only paid him N1.45 million out of the N12 million agreed for handling the cases.

Delivering judgment last November, Justice Ipaye upheld the argument of Mr Adeleke and ordered the Lagos State chapter of the PDP to pay him N10.5 million as his outstanding legal fee.

Ipaye had also asked the Lagos State PDP to pay a N50,000 cost in favour of the claimant.

The Lagos PDP, the judge noted, breached the provisions of Order 11 Rule 4 of the High Court of Lagos State Civil Procedure Rules.

According to the judge, proof of service before the court showed that the party was served with the court processes, but refused to file its response to the claimant’s affidavit.

Ipaye posited that the failure of the party to comply with the court rules had shown that the party was not interested in defending the suit.

She had said then that the court was more than satisfied with the totality of the unchallenged facts of the claimant and therefore, entered judgment in his favour.

At the resumed hearing last week, counsel to PDP, Mr. Chukwuma Nmesirionye had filed a motion challenging the judgment of the court.

Moving the application to set aside the judgment, Nmesirionye said the order was against the account of the 2nd defendant (Lagos PDP) and not account of the 1st defendant (the national PDP).

He argued that the attempt by the judgment creditor to attach the account of the national PDP domicile in Abuja is against the order of the court.

But counsel to Adeleke, Thankgod, opposed the application.

Thankgod had argued that the summary judgment gave his client the right to recover his money from the Lagos PDP’s account from anywhere in the country.

Thankgod said Zenith Bank had confirmed that PDP’s account with them has enough funds to satisfy the judgment sum.

He had subsequently urged the court to dismiss PDP’s application seeking to set the judgment aside.

February 24, 2015
African Bar seeks free, fair elections

The African Bar Association (AFBA) has urged the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to ensure that the March 28 and April 11 elections are free and fair.

At its maiden press briefing in Lagos by its interim executive committee led by Mr Hannibal Uwaifo, the association said it would pay close attention to the general elections even though it was not accredited as an observer by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) because it applied late.

Uwaifo, who is the interim president, said AFBA would do its bit towards ensuring violence-free exercise.

“We’re going to be monitoring the elections from our own vantage point. I also know that our colleagues in the African Bar Association are also monitoring it, such as the Director of Information and Protocol. We’ll be issuing statements of a broad nature in due course.

“We’ll encourage a fair electoral process, an independent umpire, political tolerance and we’ll be discouraging violence. We’ll urge those who win to be magnanimous in victory and those who lose to take it with all sense of equanimity,” Uwaifo said.

Members of the interim executive are Uwaifo (Nigeria), Mr Dev Erriah, Vice-President (Mauritius); Mrs Flavania Charles (Tanzania), General Secretary; Mrs Obele Akinniranye, Deputy General Secretary; Mr Nyamordi Ochieng-Nyamogo, Director of Information/Protocol (Kenya) and Mr George Chisanga (Zambia). Mr Stenford Moyo of Zimbabwe is the governing council chair, while Mrs Funmi Oluyede is the co-chair.

To assist the AFBA interim executive are former Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS) Director-General, Prof Epiphany Azinge (SAN), who will serve as Chairman, African Bar Research Council; Mrs Joseph Anenih (Chairperson, African Women Lawyers’ Forum and Inter-Governmental Relations); former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Lagos Branch Chairman, Chijioke Okoli (Co-ordinator, Nigeria Committee) and Gogo Karibi Whyte as Chairman, Organisation and Planning.

Also appointed were Mr. Kolade Adegboyega, who is the Director for Budget & Planning; Rudolf Ezeani, executive director; Mr. Val Oaiya as Chairman AFBA conferences; Chukwuma Ezeala as Chairman, elections committee West Africa; Mrs Tola Rotimi Chairperson Public Rights Reference Council and John Austin Unachukwu, who was appointed as the Media Officer.

Uwaifo said AFBA is a non-governmental organisation formed in 1972 in Lusaka, Zambia, to foster unity and encourage cross border practice; corporation amongst lawyers in advancing the legal profession and promoting rule of law and good governance in Africa; helping members to defend citizens’ rights; and helping African nations attain high level of transparency in governance as well as eliminating corruption.

AFBA suffered setback due to political interference, but in order to sustain its founding fathers’ dreams, the immediate past President Charles Idehen constituted the interim committee pending the next AFBA conference when elections would be held into substantive offices.

Uwauifo said membership of AFBA is open to individual lawyers in Africa, and registration forms can be obtained from its temporary secretariat on 8, Ribadu Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

February 24, 2015
Why vote for Akinwunmi Ambode?

One of the best campaign songs for the 2015 general elections, belong to Akinwunmi Ambode. He is the All Progressive Congress (APC) gubernatorial candidate, in Lagos State. I refer to that campaign theme song that ignites thus: ambooo ambo.ambooo ambo …. After that intro, the music takes the listener through a delectable thematic content and beats, to rally the voter’s mindaround the APC’scandidate’s potentials. Regardless of the variant, that campaign thematic song, urges the listener to vote Ambode, duringthe next gubernatorial elections. His opponents, particularly Jimi Agbaje of the Peoples Democratic Party, have their own theme songs, but none excites, like A+MBODE’s own.

The A+MBODE sign, has to do with the visual theme of Mr. Akinwunmi Ambode’s campaign. On this score, the APC candidate surely has his acts together. Among the numerous campaign posters, one of the most memorable also belongs to him. I refer to the poster, where AMBODEdelicately joins his two palms, perhaps in supplication for votes, but more significantly, a pose depicting his devotion to unity and peace. For the religious, it is the Amen or Amin sign. With a chubby, handsome, and peaceful face, solemnly looking ahead, the APC candidate, seems to be praying for a successful election. There, his bright eyes oozes love, while his palms delicately sticking together, is an open plea for all Lagos residents to come out enmass, to unanimously endorse him, as the next governor of Lagos State.

Talking of endorsements, the APC candidate surely has his bag full, with very significant endorsers. The first and perhaps one of the most treasured endorsements, came from the traditional ruler of Lagos. Interestingly, before Akinwunmi Ambode became a household name and a gubernatorial frontrunner, in record time, Oba Rilwanu Lukman Akiolu, openly endorsed A+MBODE as the anointed candidate, to take over the governorship of Lagos State, after the glorious reign of Mr. Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN). With that royal decreeby the preeminent Lagos State monarch, Akinwunmi’s candidacy took a life of its own.

Significantly, Mr. Ambode also has the emblematic support of the incumbent governor of Lagos State. The endorsement by the learned Senior Advocate of Nigeria, is not half-hearted. It is total, unequivocal and comprehensive. To sell A+MBODE, Governor Fashola is not leaving anything to chance. He uses town hall meetings, campaign stands, official functions, and indeed all opportunities, to expertly market his candidate. He sells Ambode as more experienced than his closest rival, Jimi Agbaje, of the PDP. He reels out A+MBODE’s excellent performance in public service, and excitedly tell Lagosians that his candidate has the competence, drive and ingenuity to shepherd the state of excellence.

Governor Fashola, himself, with impeccable credentials as governor, dutifully reminds Lagosians of the numerous signature projects of his administration, and the need for sustenance. He warns Lagos voters not to torpedo the Lagos-Badagry rail project that has reached advanced stage; the Bus Rapid Mass Transit programme that has brought modernity to Lagos; the urban renewal programme that street by street, is restoring the pride of Lagos. He talks about the free and qualitative strides in education, which has restored the impetus of primary and secoundary education, with all the potentials that it portends for the future of the state.

The Governor of the State of Excellence, reminds Lagosians of the need to sustain the financial autonomy and independence of the state. He reminds Lagos residents that Akinwunmi Ambode was at the financial trench, to rout the imperial invasion by the federal government, under former President Olusegun Obasanjo, which had withheld the funds of the local government councils, to cripple the state. He sells his candidate as a financial genius, an administrative expert, who will hit the ground running, if elected his successor, as he has been part and parcel of the success story of the State of Excellence. Like a proud marketer of an excellent product, BRF excitedly reals out A+’s multiple academic laurels, and the other numerous exhibits of his fecundity.

The man who started it all, to the glory of Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, advisedly tells Lagosians that we should all board the Ambode train, as it is sure to lead to further prosperity. The distinguished leader of the strongest opposition party ever, in the chequered political history of Nigeria, we must remember, was the Nostradamus, who saw the brilliant performance of Babatunde Fashola, well before he nominated him, as his successor. He reminds us that he was castigated by those without the gift of clairvoyance. But like all true leaders, he stood his ground then, that, Fashola was the man; and true to his prediction, BRF today stands out in shining armour.

Now again, the man with the gift of prophesy, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, has prophesied that Akinwunmi Ambode is the next man with the Midas touch. I guess it makes a lot of sense to believe him. At his campaign stops, AMBODE the man of the moment has shown his capacity for logic and clear thinking. He has shown a firm grasp of fundamental governance issues. He has been able to connect and empathise with the poor and the deprived. He has shown uncommon acumen and succinct grasp of the big issues that would transform the mega city of Lagos, to one of the best and safest in that class.

Akinwunmi Ambode, has also shown capacity to connect with the ethnic and cultural plurality of Lagos State. In his campaigns, A+ has gained endorsements from discerning cultural associations of non-indigenous peoples of Lagos, without alienating his kits and kin. For Ndigbo in Lagos, with Mr. Ben Akabueze, the Honourable Commissioner for Economic Planning and Budget in Fashola’s cabinet leading, they have a stake in AMBODE’S triumph.k

February 24, 2015
AG Moeller not registered by CBN

The Federal High Court in Lagos has heard that a firm, A.G. Moeller Limited, is allegedly not registered as a financial services company by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

A former Chief Accountant at Cross Country Limited, Mr. Godsday Chukwusa said this while testifying in the trial of A.G. Moeller’s Managing Director, Adeloye Olukemi.

The police charged him before Justice Okon Abang, allegedly defrauding Cross Country Chairman Bube Okorodudu of N80million.

Chikwusa had earlier testified that sometime in March 2007, Cross Country wrote the defunct Oceanic Bank Plc, Fidelity Bank Plc, EBN Finance Limited (a subsidiary of the defunct Intercontinental Bank Plc) and AG. Moeller for finance lease facilities to enable it buy some vehicles.

He said AG Moeller gave Cross Country N140 million to finance the acquisition of 40 buses with a tenor of 24 months at 60 per cent interest rate per annum.

Yesterday, Chukwusa said the total sum payable to AG Moeller Ltd at the end of the tenor stood at N228 million.

“For a transaction of N288million, Cross Country paid about N223 million, but AG Moeller said the company was still owing N213 million,” the witness said.

According to him, what Cross Country owed AG Moeller, including default charges, was N19million rather than N213million.

He said following AG Moeller’s demand for an outstanding sum of N213million, and worried by the “excess charges”, Cross Country’s lawyer, Mr Ladi Rotimi-Williams, wrote a letter to the Association of Financial Houses after every effort to resolve the dispute failed.

“Chief Williams wrote to the association, which replied that AG Moeller was not a member,” the witness said.

At this point, the police counsel, Ralph Nkem, sought to tender the letter as well as the reply of the Financial Houses Association.

However, Olukemi’s lawyer, Mr Kunle Ogunba (SAN) objected to the admissibility of the documents on the basis that the letters were neither addressed to the witness nor did he write them.

Nkem, however, argued that the documents were relevant, adding that the witness was the Chief Accountant when the transactions were made, and now serves a consultant to Cross Country.

“The documents can be tendered through him, and one of the counts in the charge is that the accused operated a financial house without licence by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN),” Nkem said.

In the charge, the police said Olukemi and others at large on March 29, 2007 at 2, Ebun Street, Surulere, Lagos, did conspire amongst themselves to transact financial business without a valid license by the CBN.

The alleged offence is punishable under Section 517 of the Criminal Code Act, Cap C38, laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Another count reads: “That you Adeloye Richard Olukemi ‘M’ between March, 2007 and January 2010 at the same place in the aforesaid Judicial Division with intent to defraud did obtain the sum of N80m from one Bube Okorodudu, the Chairman/Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Cross Country Limited in excess of the capital sum of N140m advanced to him through the medium of a contract of finance lease facility induced by false pretence and thereby committed an offense contrary to Section 1 (a-c) and Section 1(2) and punishable under Section 1(3) of the Advanced Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006.”

Olukemi pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Justice Abang will rule today on Ogunba’s objection to the documents’ admissibility.

February 24, 2015
Ex-senatorial candidate sues govt, NJC to ECOWAS Court for rights abuse

In what seems a novel case in the history of electoral disputes, the ECOWAS Court will on March 3 begin hearing in a case of alleged fair hearing denial and miscarriage of justice resulting from proceedings at the Justice Raphael Agbo-led 2011 Delta North Senatorial Election Appeal Tribunal, Eric Ikhilae reports.

A former senatorial candidate Jude Azekwoh has gone to the Economic Community of West African States Court (ECOWAS Court) to enforce his rights against the Federal Government and the National Judicial Council (NJC). He is asking that the government and NJC be sanctioned for allegedly denying him the right to fair hearing.

Azekwoh initiated the suit marked: ECW/CCJ/APP/23/2013 on December 9, 2013 following the alleged refusal by the NJC to act on his letters of complaint to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), who is NJC’s Chairman, over the handling of his petition at the election tribunal.

The plaintiff, who is seeking, among others, $10 million compensation from the NJC, argued that the defendants violated his right to fair hearing as guaranteed under sections 3, 7 and 13 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR).

Azekwoh contested the 2011 Delta North Senatorial election on the Democratic People’s Party (DPP) platform. Senator Arthur Ifeanyi Okowa of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) won the election.

He challenged the election outcome before the Electoral Tribunal in Asaba, Delta State. The tribunal struck out his petition on the ground that the application for the pre-trial session was not by way of motion.

He proceeded to the Appeal Tribunal, Court of Appeal, Benin, Edo State where, he said, his appeal against the decision of the election tribunal in Asaba was allegedly subjected to “unfair, unjust and illegal termination” by the appeal panel in Benin headed by Justice Raphael Agbo.

Azekwoh said his recourse to the ECOWAS Court resulted from the alleged failure of the NJC (an agency of the Federal Government, with control over the nation’s judiciary) to act on letters written to it by his lawyer in the case, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN), asking the NJC to intervene and redress the injustice done to him.

Okpeseyi had, in one of the letters, stated that Azekwoh’s “petition was sacrificed on the altar of technicalities” at both the tribunal and the appeal levels, thereby leaving unresolved, the questions he raised about the competence of the PDP candidate.

“The decision and approach of the panel of justices of the Court of Appeal, Benin in respect of this matter, violently violated our client’s right to fair hearing, compromised his appeal and has occasioned miscarriage of justice,” Okpeseyi said in one of the letters, copies of which formed parts of the court documents.

Azekwoh argued that where his appeal against a decision of an electoral tribunal was “dismissed for no reason in law and in fact, without hearing,” his right to equality before the law, protection of the law, fair hearing and right to participate in government guaranteed by the ACHPR, have been violated.

He is praying the court to declare:

•That his right to equality before the law and protection was violated was the Appeal Court in Benin allegedly refused to hear his appeal petition on no justifiable legal or factual ground.

•That the his rights, as a Nigerian and citizen of ECOWAS, to have his case heard at the appellate level of the country’s court and be accorded fair hearing were violated when the Court of Appeal, Benin refused to hear his appeal no: CA/B/EPT/230/2011.

•That the failure of the NJC to act of his petitions, has resulted in the continuing breach of his right to fair hearing and freedom to participate in the government contrary to Articles 7 and 13 of the ACHPR.

The government and NJC have objected to the hearing of the case. They filed separate responses to the suit. The government wants the case struck out for want of jurisdiction, while the NJC is seeking the case’s dismissal on the ground that the suit lacked merit.

Represented by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Mohammed Adoke (SAN), the government argued that the subject matter of the suit is based on election petition, over which the court lacked “the requisite jurisdiction to hear and/or adjudicate.”

It added that the decision of the Nigerian Court of Appeal in such matters was final on the ground that the appellate court was the final domestic court with jurisdiction over such election petitions under the country’s Constitution.

It further contends that the ECOWAS Court was without jurisdiction to adjudicate on a suit already heard and finally disposed of by the Nigerian court, and that the plaintiff’s claims do not disclose any cause of action against it (the Nigerian government.)

The NJC, who entered defence over a year after the case was instituted, but applied for an extension of time, denied the plaintiff’s allegation of not being accorded fair hearing. It said the plaintiff, being aware that hearing in electoral appeal must not exceed 60 days, failed to conclude his case within the stipulated time.

On allegation that it failed to act on the plaintiff’s letters of complaint, the NJC said it took the necessary steps as provided by the law, including demanding that the President of the Court of Appeal (PCA) responds to the allegation that the plaintiff’s appeal was sacrificed on the altar of judicial technicalities.

The NJC said it concluded that Azekwoh’s case was without merit upon receiving the PCA’s response, and in view of fact that it lacked the power under the law, to reconstitute a fresh appeal panel to hear the case after the expiration of the 60 days allowed.

In separate responses to the arguments by the Fed Govt and NJC, Azekwoh faulted the defendants’ applications for extension of time, arguing that they failed to provide sufficient reasons why they did not respond within the one month allowed, upon being served with the plaintiff’s processes.

In faulting the Fed Govt’s objection, the pliantiff observed that the government (named as the 1st defendant) failed to plead the political aspect of the case, which it (the Fed Govt) referred to and on which basis it urged the court to decline jurisdiction.

“Preliminary objection brought without pleadings (statement of defence) being made available to the court is in the nature of demurrer, a process which is no longer allowed in all jurisdiction in Nigeria and worldwide because judges must look at what was before them in order to give considered opinion on preliminary point of law in objection to the proceedings,” Azekwoh said.

He raised four issues for the court’s consideration. They include whether subject matters arising from political and legal dispensation in a member country that violate the fundamental rights of citizens and the provisions of ACHPR shall not be heard by the ECOWAS Court simply because of their origin in politics and law.

Azekwoh also asked the court whether a citizen of a member nation of ECOWAS is not entitled to remedy under Article 3 and 7 of the ACHPR if the judicial process of his country by action or inaction, made it impossible for his cause to be heard.

In reaction to NJC’s defence, Azekwoh argued that a failure by the Justice Raphael Agbo-led tribunal to hear his appeal while he was still within the 60 days allowed under the Electoral Act, “is a failure of fair hearing.”

He contended that by virtue of Part 1 of the 3rd Schedule of the Constitution, the NJC owes him a duty to show that, a report to it ,was followed up with appropriate action and where, no step was taken in respect of the plaintiff’s report of violation of his right (as is the case in this suit), the NJC cannot absolve itself of liability.

February 24, 2015
INEC should have no excuse for not holding elections

Dr. Kayode Ajulo, a lawyer, is the National Secretary of the Labour Party (LP). In this interview with ADEBISI ONANUGA, he speaks on his party’s crisis, postponement of the general elections and the ongoing distribution of Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs), among other issues.

Has the leadership crisis in Labour Party (LP) been resolved?

There is no leadership crisis in the Labour Party. Those claiming to have caretaker committees are merely wasting their time. They do not have the party paraphernalia; they do not even have the support of the stakeholders, including the civil society. They are not even recognised by the INEC. It is funny how desperate our friends could turn out to be, they tried to field candidates and when their nominations were rejected they turned around to make efforts to condemn all candidates, but they again failed. Their foray into the party hierarchy is just meant to shore up their dwindling fortunes in the labour movement. And I am sure they have enough forest fire to put out on their farmlands now than to continue to fan the ember of discord in our fireplace. They deserve no attention for now. Labour Party is presently preoccupied with how to bring power back to the people and we are on course.

Are you impressed with INEC’s level of preparedness, especially with PVCs’ distribution?

Prof. Jega had four years to prepare for the general elections, but chose to be chasing shadows and pursuing frivolities instead of getting down to the important details. He had demonstrated himself in the past as a shoddy umpire, when in 2011 he had to postpone election when voters were already on queue ready to cast their vote. Those of us that contested then suffered from this ineptitude of the INEC. I nearly lost my life thereafter as I was abducted for three nights. Now INEC has unleashed an avalanche of uncompleted tasks to crown the garbage heap of laggardness and shoddiness. I can authoritatively say that out of the six steps or thereabout, promised towards a free and fair and violence free election, Jega-led INEC has only been able to fulfil one, which is the production of voters’ register. But, this is also filled with errors and a lot of omission of voters’ names. If Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola of Lagos State, or the Sultan of Sokoto, could not find their names on that ill-famed register, how much more the teeming ordinary people? In most zones of the country, a large number of voters have not been able to collect their permanent voter’s cards (PVC). For instance, in the Southwest and Northwest the figures are less than 60 per cent, and in the Northeast where it is highest, it is about 75 per cent. Secondly, seven days to election, the INEC ad hoc staff is yet to be employed and properly trained and kitted for the process, the police are not ready and the army has said it is not going to be involved. For now INEC was not ready. The preparations so far were shoddy. But with the six-week shift, I don’t think Jega should have any excuse. He has already said he is on top of the situation. Let us give him the chance to do what is expected of him as INEC Chairman.

What is your take on elections postponement?

Let me quickly address the issue of nomenclature and concept. Correctly put, what has happened is a mere shift or rescheduling in the date of elections and not as postponement as such. And as at the time INEC finally did that it was already long overdue. It was more or less almost belated. Even the blind could sense that a shift was inevitable given the lack of readiness on the part of INEC. Prof Jega was not prepared for the election; stubbornly pressing ahead to conduct the polls would have amounted to an exercise in chaos. Yes, there was the issue of security, which was germane, particularly in the Northeast, palpably under siege from Boko Haram. But it would interest you that in most parts of the country more than 40 per cent of the people were yet to collect their permanent voters’ card and thus would have been disenfranchised. In such circumstance, any party that loses would definitely have had legal grounds to reject the results. Also, it stands against all reasons to think that INEC that was yet to train and kit ad-hoc staff, print ballot papers and put in place the necessary logistics would want to press ahead with the election. Those claiming that it was a ploy by the PDP are either not well informed about the true state of things or are just plainly trying to be mischievous. The fact is when all the cards were laid on the table; the parties all agreed that it was only fair to the electorate as well as the political gladiators to have a shift in date. Even if you ask some people in opposition parties now expressing their dissatisfaction, they will tell you that at the meeting with the INEC, which I attended, they had the opportunity to express themselves, but could not advance any logical argument against a shift in date of election. For me, it was a right decision, a face saver for INEC and contrary to speculations the organization that benefited the most from the shift is the INEC itself. You can also see that it has helped to douse the tension beclouding the political space.

Do you think battle against insurgency can be won in six weeks?

I am not a military man, neither am I an intelligence officer, so I wouldn’t know what information they had at their disposal and what level of readiness or strategic and tactical considerations that made them to make such projections. But we should be cautious of those critics, who can’t differentiate a pump action from a Dane gun. We should give our security institutions the benefit of the doubt. Nigerians need to have faith in our institutions; it is an organ of the state meant to protect the interest of all. So, if they have come out with certain claims on an issue that borders on the security and integrity of Nigeria, then we must give them that benefit of the doubt. It is also noteworthy that some people seem to have made it their cliché that nothing good can come out of this country or any of its institution except from them or when they are in power. But they have forgotten that the country is greater than any cabal or group. That is why such element would rather project the invincibility of Boko Haram than praise Nigerian officers and soldiers when they demonstrate gallantry and unequalled heroism in the fight against Boko Haram. I think the government and the military deserve our moral support and faith in the fight against Boko Haram. If you lose election today, you can always come back to win some other time, but if you lost the country, you have lost it for good. You have lost everything, and this should be more paramount to us. We should stop running down our armed forces. He said he has already deployed all the PVCs. I think we should wait and hope he gets it right this time around instead of being pessimistic.

There are reports that Jega may not be allowed to conduct the elections because the Presidency feels he is too independent-minded. Do you think the president can fire him?

For me such speculations are more or less ill-wind that blows no one any good. You call someone the Chairman of an independent electoral body and you will now sack him for being too independent minded? These for me are speculations by recurrent monumental political nitwits. They are speculations by political jobbers, who are stared in the face by their dwindling political fortune and now resort to heating up the polity. As to whether or not the President has the right to sack Jega, I would say yes, with emphasis. By the provision of our sacred Constitution and other extant laws, Prof. Jega is an appointee of the President. The President, of course, has the right to fire him. This is the law and there are some issues we should not over politicise.

Do you support the use of Temporary Voters’ Cards in place of PVCs?

The most important thing, I think, is that people should not be disenfranchised on account of failure on the part of INEC. There have been instances of people, who cannot find their names on the register, but have evidence of registration in the form of temporary voters’ card. INEC should be ready for other options in resolving this, even if it means use of temporary voters’ card. But then that would depend on how significant such cases are vis-a-vis the pros and cons of such decision. I am apprehensive on the usage of the voters card thing, we seem to be deceiving ourselves, yes the world is moving digital, but I believe the card must be tested and Nigerians on the real and most important election should not be used as guinea-pig to test run the effectiveness of such technology.

Do you think the president is sincere in his promise to hand over power if he lost?

I have no doubt in the president’s commitment to the peace and integrity of Nigeria. I equally have no doubt that he is a man of integrity. He is a democrat, who respects the rule of law and I don’t expect him to deviate, even under the most difficult condition for him as a person. Let’s recall the Edo State election, his party PDP lost and he congratulated his party’s opponents. In my state, Ondo, the popular party, that is Labour Party, won and he congratulated us in which the likes of General Olusegun Obasanjo castigated him and called for his head and removal despite that the man is unfettered. The party lost in Osun State and the President embraced his opponent, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola. These instances should not be overlooked. The man is humble, he came from a lowly background, which he has not ceased from telling us, he should forever be grateful for God’s grace on him and I am sure that what he now owes his creator is to be sincere to his country.

Some Niger Delta militants have threatened war if the president loses. Don’t you think they should have been arrested by now?

Did you say arrest? That is not the first time such threats are being made. And they were not the first to make such threat. I think what needs to be done is total investigation of these threats of war and to caution all Nigerians to be more decorous in their pronouncements. We also need to note that such statement by Jonathan’s kinsmen was in response to xenophobic idioms of monkeys and baboons from the opposition. I think everybody needs to be cautious. Our security agents need to be proactive in their dealings with these war mongers and all of us.

What is your take on the President’s perception that stealing is not corruption?

We must learn not to be mischievous or given to trivialising issues. It is wrong to take things out of context. But, I really feel what the President meant was that the problem of corruption in Nigeria goes beyond mere stealing of public funds, that it has different, deep, and more damaging dimensions. If the president acknowledged that a problem was more deep-seated than we all reckon, I see no reason why we need to take him out of context. That was the height of mischief; simply an exercise in malicious imputation. The President needs to be advised that our institutions must be strengthened and the law must take its course even if heaven will fall and if heaven must fall as I have always said, we should have enough strong men to hold the heaven from falling on our heads.

Why is it that your party has no presidential candidate?

The truth is, we threw it open, but with certain set of criteria which candidates must satisfy. However, no candidate with such criteria came forward. So for us, it is better not to field a candidate than to field one we will regret.

There are reports that LP may endorse Buhari or Jonathan? Why is your party not fielding a presidential candidate? As for endorsing Buhari or Jonathan, we have a tradition, the committee setup has submitted its report and their recommendation must be made known to all our members before the endorsement, everybody must be carried along we are not a party inside a brief case like some parties. We are today the third largest and the fastest growing party in Nigeria and yes, Africa, all our candidates too must be carried along and we will not just endorse but actively campaign for the dynamic, youthful and cerebral Presidential candidate that will increase the lot of the workers, the youths, women and the whole Nigeria.

The Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) election in Abuja ended in chaos last week. Is your party not bothered by this development?

The Labour Party, as a workers-driven party, is greatly worried over the failure and alleged attempt by the former leadership of the NLC led by Mallam Abdulwaheed Omar, to abuse the electoral process by promoting electoral malpractice. But let me state here that, we are available to assist the NLC hold a peaceful and credible election. The NLC is the hope of the common man; therefore, we cannot allow it to fail. We in the LP are saddened that the NLC could not hold a peaceful and successful transition of leadership. This should be of concern to all true lovers of democracy. The failure of the NLC to transit on the eve of Nigeria’s most important election in the past 15 years should alarm every patriot in this country. It is in this regard that we are offering to intervene and help the congress conduct a transparent and credible rescheduled election because the leadership has demonstrated that it needs all the help it could get. If left alone, the NLC might be unable to realise the objective of transparent and credible process.

February 24, 2015
‘Don’t allow subversion of peoples’ will’

Lawyers under the auspices of Lawyers for Change, have urged Nigerians not to allow selfish and greedy politicians subvert their will.

Addressing reporters in Lagos, the national coordinator of the group, Adesina Ogunlana, urged the people to keep a close watch on political developments in order not to turn the country into another “Cote D’Voire”, especially now that the military has allegedly been compromised.

“Our people must reject the unholy schemes and plans to stymie growth of democracy in our country. We must all vote and ensure that our votes count,” he said.

Ogunlana said based on their observations of political events in the country, the group is convinced that the government of the day and the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) are not interested in a free and fair presidential election “because of the possibility of a General Buhari wining”.

He remarked that President Jonathan can no longer be trusted and listed several failed promises and agreements within and outside the PDP to buttress his claim.

Ogunlana lamented that the federal government has since the postponement of the elections applied intimidating tactics against the opposition in the West, East and North of the country without any reasonable cause and legality.

He condemned the deployment of military personnel and armoured vehicles to residences of some key figures of the opposition party, All Progressive Congress (APC) including Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, Imo State governor, Rochas Okorocha and Head of the Media, Buhari-Osinbajo Campaign Organisation, Garba Shehu in Abuja.

He also noted the deployment of heavily armed soldiers to streets of Lagos, Kano and Port Harcourt, described as strongholds of the opposition.

The national coordinator of Lawyers for Change berated the Assistant Inspector General of Police (AIG) Zone II, Joseph Mbu over statements credited to him that the Police would kill 20 persons for every officer killed in the event of electoral violence.

He remarked that such statement from a high ranking police officer was capable of leading to a massacre of thousands of innocent Nigerians in the hands of trigger-happy police officers.

He described as sad and curious the fact that government has not said or done anything since Mbu made the threat.

He, therefore, called for immediate retirement of AIG Mbu, who he described as a henchman deliberately posted to Lagos to carry out a pre-conceived agenda in the coming elections, “since Lagos is the heartbeat of the APC”.

February 24, 2015