The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Appeal Court does not unduly interfere with findings of fact

    Appeal Court does not unduly interfere with findings of fact

    The Appellant, Ayiere Godsgift (alias Alex) was charged before the High Court of Cross River State, Calabar Division on two-count charge of child stealing contrary to Section 371(1) of Criminal Code and murder contrary to Section 319 of the Criminal Code. From the evidence, the facts are that on 8th October, 2007 between 12.00 noon and 1.00p.m the Appellant went to Grace and Gold Nursery/Primary School, State Housing Estate Calabar and fraudulently enticed and stole away John Okon Edem aged 10years (the deceased). It was alleged that the Appellant deceived both the security man and John Okon Edem’s teacher (PW2) by showing them the snacks he bought for the lad. The Appellant was given access to young John Okon Edem by the class teacher. The deceased was excited to see the Appellant whom he affectionately referred to as “uncle”. As the teacher who had somebody in her hand turned around to keep them, the Appellant left with John Okon Edem.

    The teacher waited for a while for the Appellant to return with John. After some time, she left the classroom for the security post to enquire from the security man (PW3) if he had seen John. It was at that point the teacher was informed by the security man that the Appellant had taken John away. The teacher promptly informed the head teacher who called PW1 (the father of the deceased) to find out if he had sent someone to pick up John from school. PW1 said he did not and called his wife to find out if she did while the search for Johnson Okon was going on, PW1 claimed to have received a telephone call from someone who identified himself as “Johnson” who demanded a ransom of N3million for the release of John Okon Edem.

    According to PW1 “Johnson” sounded like the Appellant, a former employee of PW1 whose voice PW1 was very familiar with because they talk regularly on telephone. This fact aroused PW1’s suspicion. “Johnson” made several calls to the deceased boy’s father to demand the payment of the ransom until later PW1 reported to the Police who arranged “paper money” in a bag to be given to Johnson. On 11th October, 2007, the faceless “Johnson” directed PW1 to take the money to PW5 who operated a commercial call centre of B52, Border Road, Ikom. Johnson also sent a commercial motorcyclist, Samuel Ezaka to pick up the money from PW5. It was in an attempt by Mr. Ezaka to pick up the money at Ikom that he was arrested by the Police. Later in the day of 11th October, 2007, the Appellant was also arrested by the Police for his role in the disappearance and death of the deceased, John Okon Edem.

    In his defence, the Appellant denied any involvement in the kidnap and eventual murder of John Okon Edem. The case went on trial. In proof of its case, the prosecution called five witnesses and tendered several exhibits while the Appellant testified for himself. At the conclusion of the trial, the leaned trial judge, Philomena Ekpe, J., of the Cross River State High Court, Calabar Judicial Division in a judgment delivered on 17th March, 2010, convicted the Appellant of the offence of murder and sentenced him to death. The Appellant dissatisfied with that judgment of the trial Court appealed to the Court of Appeal.

    The Appellant formulated a sole and single issue for determination of the appeal as follows:

    “Whether or not the prosecution proved the appellants guilt beyond reasonable doubt as required by law as to justify his conviction”?

    In arguing the appeal, the learned Appellant’s Counsel submitted that in a case of murder as the present case the prosecution must prove not only the cause of death, but also that the act of the accused caused the death of the deceased. Omogodo v. The State (1981) 5 SC 5 of 26 – 27; (1981) LPELR-2644(SC. In holding that it was the act of the appellant that caused the death of the deceased Ekpe J., the trial judge placed much weight on identification evidence. It was submitted that the conviction of the Appellant based on the identification of the Appellant by PW2, PW3, PW4 and PW5 was not proper. See Abudu v. State (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1) 55; (1985) LPELR-57(SC). It is submitted that the consideration that govern a proper identification exercise have been stated by the apex court in many cases. It was further submitted that none of the witnesses gave the description of the Appellant to the Police or state the opportunity they had in observing the Appellant of his feature which they noted and communicated to the Police. That they did not also say an identification parade was conducted by the Police for the purpose of identifying the Appellant. See Eyisi v. State (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt. 691) 555; (2000) LPELR-1186(SC) and Ebri v. State (2004) 11 NWLR (Pt. 885) 589; (2004) LPELR-996(SC). The Appellant submitted that no identification parade was carried out and if there was one it was improperly made and hastily done. It was submitted that the procedure as outlined for conducting an identification parade were not followed. Consequently that the identification of the Appellant was improper and wholly irregular.

    It was also submitted for the Appellant that the law requires the accused to raise the defence of alibi promptly at the earlier opportunity and that the Appellant raised the defence promptly in the very statement he made to the Police and in the aftermath of his arrest. It was contended that having done so it is incumbent for the police consistent with the duty for the prosecution to disprove the alibi, to investigate it. It was alleged that the Police failed to verify and check the alibi properly and timely put by the Appellant. It was submitted that the failure to investigate or check the alibi ought to have created a reasonable doubt in the mind of the Court as to whether the Appellant was actually responsible for the death of the deceased. Ikemson v. State (1989) NWLR (Pt. 110) 455; (1989) LPELR-1473(SC) and Ozaki v. State (1990) 1 NWLR (Pt. 124) 92 at 109; (1990) LPELR-2888(SC). It was further submitted that it is well settled that the defence of alibi where successful, results in the acquittal of accused. The Court was urged to quash the conviction of the Appellant on this ground.

    On the defence of alibi purportedly set up by the Appellant and the allegation that it was not investigated, the brief of the Respondent stated that the Respondent’s witnesses specifically and unequivocally linked the Appellant to the scene of the crime thereby making the investigation of the Court unnecessary. On the submission from the Appellant’s brief that the circumstantial evidence in this case is not credible and compelling enough to arrive at an irresistible conclusion that the deceased was last seen with the Appellant, the Respondent’s response is that this submission from the Appellant’s brief is misconceived. The Respondent submitted that the deceased was last seen with the Appellant who came and lured him out of school. PW2 and PW3 both testified to this fact and PW2 evidence was never challenged. The deceased disappeared thereafter until his corpse was found with the assistance of the Appellant at Bendghe Ekurim forest, along Ikom/Obudu Road a distance of over 200 kilometres from where he was taken.

    On the whole, the Court held that an Appeal Court is always slow or reluctant to interfere with the findings of fact by a trial court which had the opportunity of hearing and seeing the witness. The Court held that it only interferes where the finding of facts and evaluation of evidence and ascription of probative value to such evidence were improperly done, the trial court made imperfect or improper use of its opportunity to hear and see the witness or to draw a wrong conclusion from the accepted or proved facts or a wrong conclusion or arrived at a perverse decision. The Court stated that there is no question of perversity in the evaluation said to be done by the learned trial judge. See Lion Buildings Ltd. v Shadipe (1976) 12 SC 135; (1976) LPELR-1785(SC). The lone issue on these reasons was therefore resolved against the Appellant.

    With the only lone issue in the appeal having been resolved against the Appellant, the Court held that the appeal therefore does not succeed and must be dismissed. It was thereby accordingly dismissed by the Court. The judgment of Philomena Ekpe of High Court, Calabar Division, of Cross River State, was affirmed.

     

    Edited by LawPavilion

    LawPavilion Citation: (2014) LPELR-23514(CA)

     

  • NBA faults ‘secret’ composition of govt boards, parastatals

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has criticised the secrecy applied in the composition of some boards of parastals, saying sometimes due process is not followed.

    It said most Federal Government boards and agencies are statutorily mandated to have various stakeholders represented to always ensure compliance with the law, rules and regulations.

    The NBA said rather than follow the requirements, some boards, commissions and parastatals remain shrouded in secrecy.

    The association said for instance, certain statutes require the NBA as an institution to send nominees to such boards, but it has not been receiving such invitations.

    NBA President Augustine Alegeh (SAN), while inaugurating a committee on boards and parastatals to determine which ones the association is statutorily entitled to a representation, said some of the agencies “have turned NBA positions to their personal estates.”

    Alegeh also set up a committee to review NBA’s Constitution to address the rancor associate with its election.

    “The amendments to our constitution to introduce e-voting and other changes would be given priority and dealt with speedily with the hope that the system would be operational and members made conversant with its working long before the 2016 national elections.

    “In the light of the approval of uniform Bye Laws for NBA Branches, it would be advisable for the provision of e-voting to be contained in the Uniform Bye Laws to afford Branches the opportunity to implement e-voting and be conversant with its operations before the national elections,’’ Alegeh said.

     

  • Conferment of SAN on Onagoruwa belated, says Falana

    Conferment of SAN on Onagoruwa belated, says Falana

    Lagos  lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN) has described the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of  Nigeria (SAN) on former Attorney-General of the Federation, Dr. Olu Onagoruwa by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) as belated.

    In a statement in Lagos on Sunday, Falana said Dr. Onagoruwa ought to have been conferred with the rank by virtue of his appointment as the Attorney-General of the Federation by the military government of the late Gen. Sanni Abacha in 1993 pursuant to the LPPC guidelines.

    He, however, commended the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Maryam Muktar-led LPPC for ensuring that justice was done at last.

    “Like Chief Fawehinmi, who was conferred with the rank of SAN towards the tale end of his life, Dr. Onagoruwa is being admitted, rather belatedly, when he can no longer take advantage of the title.  Even though it is a mere psychological relief at this stage of his life, he is likely to feel professionally fulfilled,” he said.

    Falana said the case of Dr. Onagoruwa has reopened the call for the democratisation of the selection for SAN rank for qualified lawyers in strict compliance  with section 42 of the Constitution.

    Falana said Section 42 of the constitution abolished discriminatory practice in the rank’s conferment.

    “This submission accords with the guidelines for the rank of SAN which have not pegged the annual award to any number of lawyers. In other words, there is no justification for picking 17 out of the multitude of lawyers that meet the prerequisites every year. After all, the LPPC approved the conferment of the rank on 25 legal practitioners in 2006. In the same vein, 25 legal practitioners were honoured with the rank in 2012,” he noted.

    He also argued that the case of Dr. Onagoruwa questioned the continued relevant of the rank of SAN adding: “It is illegal to continue to refer to the award as a privilege as it has become discriminatory and illegal not to confer the rank of SAN on any lawyer who satisfies the laid down criteria.

    “The deliberate exclusion of activist and radical lawyers from the inner bar is a painful reminder of the discriminatory treatment meted out to the first Nigerian lawyer, Christopher Sapara Williams by the colonial regime. Called to the English Bar in 1879 and the Nigerian Bar in 1898 Mr. Williams challenged obnoxious colonial laws and policies in court and organized rallies to campaign for the repeal of ordinances which violated the rights of the Nigerian people”, he stated.

    Falana recalled, “ at a period when human rights had been put in abeyance by martial law  Dr. Onagoruwa handled many cases of constitutional significance which questioned the basis of continued military rule. He had cause to challenge the arrest of “political extremists” like Ken Saro-wiwa, Minere Amakiri, Tai Solarin et al.                                                                                                              “When Chief Fawehinmi, Beko-Ransome-kuti and I were detained at the Kuje prison in 1992 under the obnoxious State Security(Detention of Persons) Decree No 2 of 1984 Dr. Onagoruwa was on hand to defend us. On account of his leading role in the defence of public interest cases he was subjected to crude intimidation by the military junta.

    “Instead of supporting progressive lawyers for leading the campaign for the restoration of democracy and rule of law in the country the reactionary forces who held sway in the legal profession at the material time teamed up with the military minions to harass them.

    “Chief Gani Fawehinmi was almost  struck out of the list of legal practitioners for popularising law reporting when only a handful of lawyers had access to certified true copies of the judgments of the appellate courts.  In order to preserve the conservative nature of the legal profession civil rights and radical lawyers were stigmatised for using the instrumentality of the law to question the status quo.

    “Notwithstanding their enormous contributions to legal development the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) resolved never to confer the title of SAN on Chief Fawehinmi and Dr. Onagoruwa.  Hence, their applications for the rank were consistently rejected on the spurious ground that they were not “fit and proper persons” to be admitted to the inner bar. However, the legal establishment was exposed to self inflicted embarrassment when  Dr. Onagoruwa was appointed the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice in December 1993 by the Sani Abacha junta.

    “But the Committee of senior judges and lawyers headed by the then Chief Justice of the country, the Late Justice Mohammed Bello,  decided to breach the law and refused to confer the rank on the Justice Minister. In a bid to justify its unjust decision the Committee instigated the Lagos State Ministry of Justice to approach the Supreme Court to set aside the verdict of the Court of Appeal, which had dismissed the charge of stealing brought against Dr. Onagoruwa.

    “Upon being served with the hearing notice Chief Fawehinmi invited me for a meeting to discuss the frivolous appeal. Since the human rights community had vehemently opposed Dr. Onagoruwa’s appointment Chief Fawehinmi asked whether we should handle the appeal. Since our opposition to the Minister’s appointment was on solid principle I made it clear to him that if the appeal was allowed in the circumstance the state would appeal against all decisions in favour of the members of the pro-democracy movement.

    “As Chief Fawehinmi had parted ways with Dr. Onagoruwa over his controversial appointment, I was given the task of informing him of the notice of the appeal and our decision to challenge the appeal on his behalf. I did and the Minister expressed dismay that his opponents were running from pillar to post in the bid to have him convicted.

  • 52-year-old man faces N2m visa scam

    A 52-year-old man, Udosi Eke, who allegedly obtained N2 million on the pretext of securing travel documents for a woman, was on Wednesday charged before an Apapa Magistrates’ Court, Lagos.

    Eke, who resides at Iganmu area of Lagos, is facing a two-count charge of conspiracy and obtaining money under false pretences.

    Prosecutor Kingsley Jackson told the court that the accused committed the offences on July 10 at No. 14, Navy Barrack, Ajegunle, Apapa.

    He said Eke with others still at large collected N2 million from the complainant, Mrs Patience James, with a promise to secure for her travel documents.

    Cpl. Jackson said the accused converted the money to his personal use.

    The prosecutor said the offences contravened Sections 312 and 409 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Section 312 prescribes a 15-year jail term for obtaining money under false pretences, while Section 409 stipulates two years sentence for conspiracy.

    The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    The Senior Magistrate, Mr. Mukaila Fadeyi, granted the accused bail in the sum of N200, 000 with two sureties in like sum and adjourned the case till Oct.17 for mention.

     

  • Certificate of incorporation is prima facie evidence

    Certificate of incorporation is prima facie evidence

    The Respondent in this appeal as the Plaintiff commenced an action at the Federal High Court, sitting at Enugu against the Appellants as Defendants by means of an originating summons for the determination of two questions: (1) Whether having regard to the specific provisions and clauses of the All Assets Debenture between the Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant dated 17 February 2006 the 1st Plaintiff is not entitled to appoint a Receiver/Manager (as it has already appointed and registered same with the Corporate Affairs Commission) over the affairs and endeavours of the 1st Defendant upon its failure or refusal to liquidate its huge outstanding indebtedness to the plaintiff as covenanted in the All Assets Debenture, and (2) Whether the Peter Nwabunike Eze having been appointed Receiver and Manager of the 1st Defendant by the Plaintiff, the 2nd Defendant has the right to further act as Managing Director of the 1st Defendant and to deal with its assets the subject of the All Assets Debenture. Predicated upon the likelihood in the positivity and negativity of answers to both questions, the Respondent sought some reliefs from the Court. The Defendants at the Federal High Court in opposing the originating summons, filed a motion on notice and affidavit wherein they sought for the dismissal of the “suit for being incompetent” on the ground that the Respondent “lacks locus standi” to institute the action as presently constituted.

    At the trial court the learned counsel for the parties agreed and sought that both the originating summons and the Appellants’ motion on notice be consolidated and heard/argued together. At the end of it all, A. Abdu-Kafarati, J. in his reserved judgment found and held that: (1) The Respondent had a good cause of action which entitled it to commence the instant suit, (2) That in the given circumstances of this case; Exhibits “DB7”, “DB8”, “DB9”, “DB14” and “DB15” attached to the affidavit in support of the originating summons were not required to be certified, and (3) That going by the facts of the case and documents placed by the parties before the lower court; the appointment of Mr. Peter Nrvabunike Eze as the Receiver/Manager of the 1st appellant, “was made in accordance with the law and is therefore proper”. The Appellants were dissatisfied with the said decision of the learned trial judge and appealed to the Court of Appeal vide a notice of appeal.

    The Appellants distilled three issues for determination in this appeal and the Respondent also distilled three issues for the determination of the appeal. The Court having perused the record of appeal, grounds of appeal and the issues distilled therefrom by the learned counsel for the parties, stated that the issues identified by the learned counsel for the respondent, succinctly captured the essence of the complaints or challenges mounted by the Appellants against the decision of the trial court. The issues formulated by the Respondent were accordingly adopted by the Court for determination of the appeal. The issues were couched in the following terms:-

    Was the trial court right when it held that the Respondent had locus standi to institute the action and seek the reliefs sought in the originating summons?

    Was the lower court right when it refused to expunge Exhibits DB7, DB9, DB13, DB14 and DB15?.

    Is the Respondent a legal person which can sue and be sued?

    Arguing issue 1, learned counsel for the Appellants fired the first shot with the question thus: “why did the Diamond Bank Plc. commenced this action and in its own name rather than the receiver/manager who had already been appointed as such for more than one and half months?” He referred to Section 391 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 1990 and faulted the finding by the learned trial judge in this regard, to the effect that this is not an action by the receiver seeking direction but by the Plaintiff Bank seeking confirmation whether it has right under the All Assets Debenture to appoint a Receiver upon the 1st Defendant’s failing to fulfill its obligation. He made the point, that in order to determine jurisdiction of the court over a matter, the totality of the claim and the reliefs have to be examined. He cited and placed reliance on Adeyemi vs. Opeyori (1976) 10 S.C. 31; (1976) LPELR-171(SC), Tukur vs. Govt. of Gongola State (No. 2) (1989) 4 NWLR (Pt.117) 517/549; (1988) LPELR-22(SC), Mandara vs. Att.-Gen. of the Federation (1984) 1 SCNLR 311/312; (1984) LPELR-8048(SC). It was then contended that the reliefs relate to or are connected with the performance of the functions of a receiver as none of the reliefs sought by the Respondent at the trial court, deals with the point whether the Plaintiff/Respondent has a right to appoint a receiver. The learned Appellants’ counsel argued that it is the receiver/manager who is vested with the locus standi to commence the action. It was his submission in essence that since the Respondent instituted the instant action by means of originating summons in its name and without stating on the face of the originating summons, that it was being instituted in a representative capacity and or on behalf of the receiver/manager, that the action was not proper and competent as the respondent lacked the requisite locus standi to commence the suit in its name.

    In response to the submissions made above, learned counsel for the Respondent on his part, submitted that the reliefs sought from the trial court relate to the questions submitted for determination by the Court and arise from the contract between the parties that is the All Assets Debenture made between the parties. That the declarations sought by the Respondent are merely consequential thereto. It was also contended, that a close look at the reliefs sought shows that they are such that protect the interest of the Respondent under the debenture deed. The mere fact that such reliefs relate to the rights of the Receiver/Manager are irrelevant. According to the learned counsel, the reliefs sought in this suit are directed at empowering the receiver/manager to take necessary steps to protect the interest of his principal. Learned Respondent’s counsel, cited the case of Intercontractors Nig. Ltd vs. U.A.C. of Nig. Ltd. (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt. 76) 303/307; (1988) LPELR-1521(SC)  on the point that once a Receiver is appointed, he becomes the alter ego of the company. It was then argued, that it would amount to the Receiver suing himself if he brings an action against the company which by virtue of his appointment, he has become the alter ego.

    The main question or complaint is whether or not the Respondent hadlocus standito institute the instant action. Put differently, whether the Respondent is the proper party to request for adjudication in this case. In determining the appeal, the Court stated the trite law that once a Receiver/Manager is appointed, he becomes the alter ego of the company. The Court further stated that the law is also well established that where a creditor enforces his security by appointing a Receiver/Manager, the assets belonging to the debtor company now come under the Receiver/Manager. See Inter-contractors (Nig.) Ltd. vs. National Provident Fund Management Board (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt.76) 280; (1988) LPELR-1520(SC). The Court held that asking, insisting or suggesting that it is compelling on the Receiver/Manager to sue in such a circumstance/situation as in the instant case, is tantamount to requesting the Receiver/Manager to sue himself. Issue No. 1 was thus resolved in favour of the Respondent.

    On issue 3, the Appellants counsel urged the Court to either dismiss or strike out the suit and set aside the judgment of the trial court; among other reasons, for failure of the Respondent to prove its legal personality. On the part of the learned counsel for the Respondent, it was opined that the Appellants, overlooks the fact that the they had always treated the Respondent as a legal entity and cannot now wake up to deny the fact that the Respondent is duly registered as a limited liability company. It was thus his submission, that it is too late in the day for the Appellants to now wake up from slumber to argue that the Respondent to whom they acknowledged that they are indebted to the tune of N300,000,000.00 is not a legal person. According to the learned counsel for the Respondent, the Appellants are estopped from denying the legal personality of the Respondent.

    On this issue, the Court stated the position of the law to the effect that where it has been duly pleaded and issues joined by the parties on the legal personality of an incorporated body, that the legally admissible evidence by which the incorporation of such a company can be ascertained and or established is the production of the certificate of incorporation. The Court stated that Section 36(6) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 1990 provides that the certificate of incorporation shall beprima facieevidence of compliance with requirements of registration and due registration of a company under the Act.

    On the whole, all the issues in the appeal were resolved against the Appellants. The Court held that the appeal lacks merit and it was dismissed. The said decision of the learned trial judge was accordingly affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

     

     Edited by LawPavilion

    LawPavilion Citation: (2014)            LPELR-23560(CA)

     

  • Traders vs Tecno: Court orders detainee’s release

    Traders vs Tecno: Court orders detainee’s release

    The Lagos State High Court in Ikeja has ordered the release of an electronics dealer, Mr Oscar Modebe, who is being held by the police.

    Modebe, an executive of the Phone and Allied Products Dealers Association, was detained since July 12.

    He was said to have been arrested as he sought to prevent a fracas when officials of the Standard Organisation of Nigeria (SON) stormed the Computer Village in Ikeja and carted away phones and allied products from the traders.

    Ruling on an ex-parte application dated August 8 and filed by the applicant’s lawyer James Ogunyemi seeking to enforce Modebe’s fundamental rights, Justice Michael Savage held that his continued detention was illegal.

    The Assistant Inspector-General of Police Zone 2, Commissioner of Police Lagos State and Tecno Telecoms Limited are the defendants.

    The judge, after granting leave that the application be heard during the long vacation and urgently, held:  “It is further ordered that the 2nd defendant should release forthwith the applicant who had since 12th July 2014 been in custody of and is still in the custody of the 2nd defendant now at the office of the Commissioner of Police (SARS) Ikeja, Lagos.”

    It was learnt that the police insisted Modebe must identify and produce the “unruly street traders” who caused a breach of the peace when SON officials came to perform their duty before he is released.

    Modebe had sought a declaration that his arrest and detention without charge is unlawful and in breach of his fundamental rights to liberty, freedom of movement and his dignity as a person.

    He sought an order enforcing his fundamental rights to dignity of his person, liberty, fair haring and movement as enshrined n the constitution by directing his immediate and unconditional release by the 1st and 2nd defendants or in the alternative, an order of the court admitting him to bail.

    The traders’ association also petitioned the Inspector-General of Police and Minister of Interior over the alleged harassment, wrongful and unlawful arrests and detention of their members.

    In the petition copied to the Senate President David Mark, House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Tambuwal and the Director General, State Security Service, the association said it was concerned about Modebe’s fate in police detention for over two months without charge at Tecno’s alleged instance.

    Tecno, it was learnt, alleged that the traders are selling sub-standard products bearing its name, hence its complaint to the police and SON.

    The traders, however, denied the allegation.

     

  • ‘Domestic, sexual violence perpetrators must not escape justice’

    ‘Domestic, sexual violence perpetrators must not escape justice’

    Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Mr. Ade Ipaye has urged the Domestic and Sexual Violence Response Team (DSVRT)  to ensure that offenders are brought to book.

    He observed that  domestic and sexual violence was on the increase because of impunity and the victims failure to give information that would ensure offenders’ prosecution.

    Speaking while inaugurating the team, which he chairs, Ipaye lamented victims’ lack of awareness of their right under the law.

    Members of the committee are from the Police; Office of the Public Defender (OPD); Directorate of the Citizen’s Rights; Directorate of Public Prosecutions; Office of Youth and Social Development; Ministry of Women Affairs;  Poverty Alleviation; the Civil Society and the media.

    The prosecutors,  Ipaye said, have the responsibility to ensure that victims get justice at all times, saying no offender should be made to think that he or she is above the law.

    He urged the committee to coordinate and develop a community response to prevent domestic violence, protect and support victims and bring perpetrators to justice.

    “DSVRT is a specialist team and the purpose of the establishment of the team is to increase victims’ safety and offenders’ responsibility by providing a cross jurisdictional response that is uniform in approach in domestic violence cases across Lagos State,” he said.

    The establishment of DSVCT, he said, will be instrumental in the reduction of domestic and sexual related crimes and ultimately provide some succour to victims of the heinous crimes in the state.

    Ipaye stressed the need for awareness on the part of victims and advised the team to be devoted to education and creation of awareness among all interest groups in order to reduce and prevent incidences of sexual and domestic violence in the state.

    The team, according to Ipaye,  would be  devoted to education and creation of awareness among all interest groups in order to prevent or reduce the incidence of sexual and domestic violence in the state.                                                                                                                                                        According to him, some of the responsibilities of the team include risk assessment and safety planning for victims and children;  conduct research on issues of sexual and domestic violence to improve the knowledge and appreciation of stakeholders and refer victims of sexual and domestic violence to relevant stakeholders for follow up action, proper investigation and prosecution of alleged offenders and treatment of victims.

    Ipaye said an e-mail address and website have been created and a dedicated telephone lines (Toll-Free lines) would be available to members of the public, particularly, victims who may wish to call in and register a complaint.

    The Attorney-General commended Police efforts and other community service organisations, who he noted, are ‘working passionately with a view to tackling this menace’. He pointed out  that it is important to harmonise the efforts and provide a coordinated response to the issue while working towards a common goal.

    The OPD Director, Mrs. Rotimi Omotola demanded that domestic and sexual violence should be one of the cases that should fall under the fast track system in the courts. According to her, it will quicken dispensation of justice and reduce stress on the victim.

    She advised that government should take issues of preservation of evidence very seriously, noting that lack of evidence and inability to protect it have been the reasons why cases are thrown out of court.

    The Director, Directorate of the Citizen’s Rights, Mrs. C.O. Ibirogba suggested the publication of a handbook which will list all legal steps to be taken by victims and other stakeholders to get justice.

    Other members of the team include Senior Special Adviser to Governor Babatunde Fashola on Legal Matters, Mr Gbolahan Adeniran; Ironsi Bose;  Itoro Eze-Anaba;  Keziah Awosika; Oke Mobolaji Olamide;  Modupe Aladelusi;  Adegboyega Bajulaiye; Babajide Martins;  Mosunmola Balogun; Alaba Fadairo;  Titilope Akosa;  Okoro Uche;  Vweta Chadwick; Oghogho Olabisi and  Chinwe Onyeukwu.

     

  • Ex-NBA chief: only judicial panel can clear suspected Boko Haram sponsors

    Ex-NBA chief: only judicial panel can clear suspected Boko Haram sponsors

    Only a judicial commission of enquiry can clear those fingered as Boko Haram sponsors, a former Secretary of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) Ikeja Branch, Adesina Adegbite, has said.

    Adegbite, who urged the Federal Government to raise a panel to investigate those suspected as Boko Haram sponsors, said the Australian, Dr. Stephen Davis should not be discontenanced.

    Davis claimed in an interview with Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) that former Chief of Staff, Lt Gen. Azubuike Ihejirika and former Borno State Governor Ali Modu Sheriff are Bko Haram sponsors.

    He said the exoneration of Ihejirika by the  spokesperson of Directorate of Security Service (DSS), Marilyn Ogah was too hasty.

    Adegbite said Nigerians expected more from the government in its handling of insurgency.,

    “It is, indeed, very pathetic that we have to rely on a foreigner to reveal the identity, albeit suspicious  sponsors and backers of Boko Haram terrorists in Nigeria.

    “I carefully and deliberately used the word terrorists because that is exactly what these mindless murderers are. However, dealing specifically with this issue, let me tell you without mincing words that the least the Federal Government should do is to institute a commission of enquiry.  Nigerians actually expect more from the government,” he said.

    According to him, Boko Haram scourge could not have lasted till now but for official silence and complicity of some very high ranking politicians and military officers.

    The former NBA scribe wondered why the former governor of Borno State, Alhaji Modu Sherrif was not exonerated by the spokesperson of alongside the former chief of Army Staff, General Azubuike Ihejirika

    “I feel personally embarrassed that the DSS through its spokesperson came out to exonerate the former Chief of Army Staff in such a hasty manner. I wonder why she failed to exonerate the former Governor of Borno State in similar blanket manner. Anyway, as far as I want to believe, most Nigerians are concerned, irrespective of whether Dr. Davis is a self acclaimed negotiator as stated by Mrs. Marilyn Ogar or not. Everyone mentioned must be scrutinised and properly investigated. Such an open and hasty exoneration is certainly not healthy,” he said.,

    The government, Adegbite said, must convince everyone through proactive and effectively coordinated military action against the Boko Haram insurgents.

  • 40 indigent students get Fawehinmi’s scholarship

    40 indigent students get Fawehinmi’s scholarship

    No fewer than 40 indigent  undergraduates  have been awarded Gani Fawehinmi Scholarship Awards.

    In a lecture titled: “The Law, the Lawyer and the Public Spirit: Gani Fawehinmi in Historical Perspective”, delivered at the award ceremony held last week, Professor Ademola Popoola of the Faculty of Law, Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, decried the continuous falling standard of education in the country.

    The .

    Popoola who spoke on  issues affecting the education sector in  Nigeria, at the event, which held at the late Fawehinmi’s Nigerian Law Publication House, Otunba Jobi Fele Way, CBD, Alausa, Ikeja, said anyone who has the interest of Nigeria at heart cannot but share the late Fawehinmi’s passion for education.

    The late Fawehinmi, according to him, beleived education to be the bedrock of sustainable national development and the pivot of progress.

    He said the problems of Nigeria’s educational system are legion, adding that access to it, funding, governance, quality and relevance are more telling.

    “It is indeed, a sad commentary that in 2014, education, in the appropriate metaphor of Professor S.O Awokoya, is still “The Crisis Child of Our Time”.

    “The percentages of failure recorded in the past four years ranged from 75.06 per cent in 2010, 44.66 per cent in 2011, 61.19 per cent in 2012 and 35.74 per cent in 2013, up to a whopping 70 per cent in 2014,” he said.

    According to the Law Professor, what the falling standard  portends for the country includes threat to the hopes and aspirations of the youths, who are the future and bedrock for any effective and sustainable development.

    “Regrettably, in most developing and underdeveloped countries of the world, including Nigeria where corruption, abject poverty, unemployment and disease have assumed a frightening dimension, the youth have become endangered species with bleak and uncertain future,” he said.

    The don commended the late  Fawehinmi for his initiative in addressing  some aspects of the crisis of education at the individual level. He blamed the crisis on long years of neglect, mal-administration and policy somersaults.

    “The late Chief Gani Fawehinmi had passion for education as he had for Law. In his life time, he meant many things to many people. Even in death, the memory of him and his good deeds is indelibly etched in the hearts of his teeming compatriots, particularly the down-trodden and the oppressed, whose lives he had touched in a lasting and remarkable way,” he said.

    Prof Popoola said the Senior Advocate of the Masses (SAM) conferred on Chief Gani Fawehinmi long before he became a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) was  not by accident.

    The late Fawehinmi, according to him, was the only recipient of such title, adding that any other claim to the title of SAM is fake and should be ignored.

    Dr. Dipo Fashina, who chaired the Gani Fawehinmi Scholarship Awards Board,  said the number of recipients was reviewed upward from 20 in 2012 to 40 this year because  the award was not given last year due to incessant strike of the tertiary institutions across the country.

    The number of recipients, he noted, may be increased in the future as the need arises.

    Dr. Fashina, a former President of the Academic Staff Union of Universities, (ASUU) said the late Fawehinmi was concerned about Nigerian children who were very brilliant, but indigent.

    “There was another thing the late Chief Fawehinmi was concerned about, the disparities in the distribution of education in Nigeria. That there must be a reflection of the fact that there are bright students all over Nigeria,” Fashina said

    Over 1,000 students have so far been empowered through scholarship since the awards begun in 1973 by the Gani Fawehinmi Scholarship Awards  Board.

     

  • Jega sparks huge fire with polling units

    Jega sparks huge fire with polling units

    Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman Prof. Attahiru Jega stirred the hornet’s nest last week when he unveiled additional polling units. The exercise is generating heat, some alleging that it is designed to favour the North to the South’s detriment. It has also brought Jega’s integrity to question. Is he compromised? Should he be sacked as demanded by his critics? Lawyers weigh in with their views, reports ADEBISI ONANUGA.

     The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman, Prof Attahiru Jega, came under fire  last week when he announced the creation of additional 30,027 polling units nationwide ahead of the 2015 elections. At a news conference in Abuja, Jega said INEC’s decision to re-configure polling units and create additional ones was driven by Nigerians’ collective aspirations to reform and improve upon the electoral process for free, fair, peaceful and credible elections in 2015 and beyond.

    “There is no sectional or parochial agenda in this decision,” he said.

    According to him, the commission used the “2011 post-Automated Fingerprint Identification Software (AFIS) voter register figure of about 70,383,427; and, based on a figure of 500 voters per polling unit, there should be, at least 140,000 polling units in the country.”

    He added that from the exercise, “there is no political advantage to any individual or any party or any region.”                                                                                                                            It is to ease voters’ access to the ballot box in 2015 and beyond; decongest over-crowded polling units and distribute voters evenly.

    More polling units, Jega said, would also reduce voters’ stress in walking long distances to cast their ballot as movement is usually restricted on election day.

    According to him, some polling units in front of private homes were also relocated; some are to be located inside classrooms or such other suitable enclosures, in line with international best practices; splitting large polling units such that they have an average of 500 registered voters; and creating additional polling units to cater for new settlements not serviced by any existing ones.

    The creation of the additional units, based on the powers conferred on INEC by the 2010 Electoral Act, has brought the number of polling units in the country to 150,000. The law states that no polling unit shall have more than 500 voters, compared to past experiences where registered voters in a polling unit are sometimes over 1,000.

     

    How the new polling units are allocated 

     

    A breakdown of the polling units, based on the six geopolitical zones, showed that the commission would allocate 21,615 polling units to the North and 8, 414 to the South. The total figures as further broken down per geopolitical zone are as follows: Northwest, 7,909 polling units; Northcentral, 6, 318; Northeast, 5,291; Southwest, 4,160;  Southsouth, 3,087; and Southeast 1,167.

    The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) will get 1,120 polling units. When broken down further, it showed that Lagos got 2,870, increasing the polling centres in the state to 11,565. Kano came second with 2,053 polling units to bring its number  to 9,809. Kaduna got additional 2,878 polling units, bringing the state’s total to 7,878; Bayelsa got 121 polling units, bringing its number to 1,925.

     

    Criticisms

     

    Since the announcement, Jega and the commission have come under strident criticisms, with some questioning his integrity and calling for his sack. There are complaints that the newly created polling units favoured the three political zones in the North.

    The critics are worried about the timing of the exercise as they suspect that it could be part of a purported design to undermine the South’s chances in next year’s election.

    The Middle-Belt Justice Forun For A Stable United Nigeria, in an advertorial, dissociated its people from the arrangement. In what it called “INEC’S divide and rule (21,000) polling units for North,”  the group said it would not be party to a political plot that will “enslave and decimate our people anymore.”

    Southern elders said Jega has lost his credibility. They called for his removal, saying he was biased in proposing  the polling units.                                                                                                                                                                                 The elders, under the umbrella of the Southern Nigeria Peoples Assembly, queried the rationale behind increasing the polling centres when the number of registered voters has reduced from 70 million to 57 million.

    The pan-Yoruba socio-political group, Afenifere, also rejected the additional 30,000 polling units barely five months to the general elections. They have  passed “a vote of no confidence” in Jega over his ability to conduct a free and fair election next year.

    Its spokesman, Yinka Odumakin said “the imbalance in the distribution is unacceptable.”

    “A war ravaged Northeast where people are fleeing was allocated 5,201 new polling units while the entire Southwest, which is brimming with people, is allocated only 4,160 additional polling units. The entire Southeast was allocated 1,166 new units while FCT alone was allocated 1, 200 units. We do not know of any country in the world where you would change electoral law one year to the election, not to talk of creating additional polling units six months to the election,” the group said.

    But Jega defended his integrity, saying he is not a religious or ethnic jingoist. The need factor, rather than political, he stressed, necessitated the planned distribution of the polling units.

    Jega noted that the criticisms were unjustified, as the initiative was aimed at developing the country. He told reporters that the units would not give political advantage to anybody or  group.

    Jega faulted the critics for focusing on the planned 150,000 polling units rather than considering  their distribution.

    According to him, under the current 120,000 polling units, some states have more polling centres than they should have.

    He noted that it was regrettable that people viewed every national action with suspicion.

    “INEC’s decision to re-configure the structure of polling units and create additional ones is driven by our collective aspirations as Nigerians to reform and improve upon the electoral process for free, fair, peaceful and credible elections next year and beyond. There is no sectional or parochial agenda in this decision and there will never be any such agenda under this commission,” he said.

    Analysts are questioning INEC’s credibility as an umpire in future elections. Their questions are: Are new polling units needed when the number of registered voters is dropping? Who are those going to use the new polling units where people are leaving in droves from, such as in the North? Is the sharing of the new polling units in line with federal character? Is the INEC chairman acting a script? Has Jega, a man known for his integrity, been compromised? Is the clamour for his sack justified?

    Observers are worried about the development and are watching whether Jega would shift ground.

    The Imo State House of Assembly said the creation of the 30,000 polling units was intended to give undue political advantage to the North. In a motion sponsored by the member representing Isiala Mbano  Constituency, Simeon Iwunze, and supported by all members, the lawmakers rejected the additional polling units.

    The House, which resumed sitting after three months’ recess, called on the Federal Government to prevail on INEC to stop the ongoing review of the voters’ register in the state and distribution of the Permanent Voter’s Cards (PVCs) till the polling units were adequately distributed among states, according to the number of registered voters.

     

    Lawyers weigh in

     

    Lawyers, especially those versed in electoral laws, are expressing divergent views.

    Those who spoke include University of Lagos (UNILAG) law teacher and public commentator Wahab Shittu; Constitutional lawyer Ike Ofuokwu; Lagos lawyer Mr Emeka Nwadioke,  Abayomi Omoyinmi, Ikechukwu Ikeji and Yemi Omodele.

    Nwadioke agreed that the creation of additional polling units seemed an after-thought, having not featured in any of the earlier commitments of INEC towards credible elections.

    Nwadioke admitted not being in a position to determine whether Jega has been compromised. To him, the distribution of polling units should not have been done through federal character.  He saw it as  “essentially an operational issue” which must however, be done with utmost transparency.

    According to him, the controversy also begs the question as to whether the political parties were carried along in the run-up to this action.

    To him, it is difficult to determine the utility of the new polling units in the absence of credible data. He argued that in climes where public institutions are more predictable, perhaps Prof. Jega would have been accorded some degree of good faith.

    Omoyinmi , a  member of Ogun State Judicial Service Commission, disagreed with critics of the newly created polling units. He said there is no indication so far that Jega has any ulterior motive and no one is able to prove otherwise thus far. The numbers of registered voters cannot be said to be dropping in view of the fact that so many voters, who were below the voting age in last election election, would obviously be qualified to vote this time around. He said where polling units are created in line with population of eligible voters, which is clear from the past figures that the north has more registered voters than the south, this may have justified Jega’s reason for the creation of new and more polling units in the North and same would ever be controversial even if done in utmost good faith.

    Omoyinmi recalled that it was not long ago after the election of Ekiti and Osun that Jega was given  thumbs-up for jobs well done regardless of the polling units available to voters. He said what was important is the credibility in the conduct of the election. Jega, according to him, has given explanation to the world in response to the suspicion about the creation of the additional polling units in preparartion for the 2015 general election. There is no indication so far that he, Jega, has any ulterior motive; and no one is able to prove otherwise thus far.

    The numbers of registered voters cannot be said to be dropping in view of the fact that so many voters who were below the voting age in last election election would obviously be qualified to vote this time around.

    Shittu and others  however, feel different on the matter.  To Shittu,  INEC ought to avoid needless controversy and suspicions ahead of the 2015. According to him, there is need for INEC to tread softly on the creation of additional polling units. He said whatever the merits of INEC’s arguments with reference to decongesting the polling units and easing the logistics  and challenges  ahead of the elections, the move is controversial for several reasons.

    “Some may consider the move as allegedly an attempt to give the North a political advantage over the South in view of the breakdown of the poliing units involved. Secondly, the introduction of the automated finger identification system by INEC is intended to drastically rduced the incidence of ghost voters, therebyaddressing the issue of congestion of voters.

    Thirdly, the number of registerd voters is now reduced fdrom 73million to 57 million. Therefore how can a reduced voter strtength of 57 million require more polling units of 150,000 as against 119, 973 polling units which previously covered 73 million registered voters. Fourthly, there is no justification for increasing the polling units in the North East whre there is rising incidence of Boko Haram insurgency as against zones in the south where the political climate is relatively stable,” he said.

    Ofuokwu said there can be no justification for this impunity which even members of the commission from other zones find strange  and  curious. “If the truth must be told Prof Attahiru Jega has outlived his usefulness (if any) in INEC. He has requested for and gotten so much more than any of his predecessors have gotten, yet with little to show for it and without been challenged by anyone. He has been given so much freedom and  independence by this administration. This step of creating additional polling units at a time when the numbers of registered voters has dropped is arbitrary and  an impunity designed to achieve a northern agenda. It is a well known fact that the INEC chairman is a well known apostle of a clear agenda to favour the North,” he said.

    Ikechukwu Ikeji said there is no need for additional polling units at this time, “and if indeed it becomes so imperative to establish more units, they ought to be shared at least as equally as possible not the present situation where 80 per cent of new units have been dished out to the northern part of Nigeria.

    “It is no surprise that even the middle belt people, people from the north central zone, have come out to condemn and reject the new structure even where they were beneficiaries of the skewed distribution. “One is at a loss as to the real reasons why INEC did what they did since additional polling units should always be a function of increase in population or intervening exigencies based on human population. Geographical size without human beings cannot be a justifiable ground to create additional polling units”, he stated.

    Ikeji  cannot say for sure if Jega has been compromised or not. “Compromise happens in the dark, but its effects are seen in the actions of the affected person. So, while there may not be evidence of compromise, there are reasons to suspect it.

    “We should all be vigilant and careful. The call for his sack is justified although it may not be exigent given the extent of the preparations for the elections in which he, Jega, is a central figure. He just needs to be called to order and pressure put on him to rescind his new polling units programme,” he said.

    Lagos lawyer, Yemi Omodele, said Jega is an appointee of the PDP government, who takes instructions from the government of the day directly or indirectly.

    “He professes what his masters want. He cannot bite the fingers that feeds him. He wants the incumbent to be returned in 2015 elections and as a political scientist he is strategising ahead of the deal day. He wants a situation whereby the opposition is weak at their strong holds, particularly the northern part of the country, hence, he segregationally and discriminatoril y created poling units.

    To him,  “Jega is from the North, therefore, his decision to create more polling units in the North is to favour his brothers and sisters and his region. It is unfair. He should have done the creation equally without fair or favour on all parts/regions or geo-political zones in Nigeria,” he said.

     

    The way out

     

    Ikeji said it is clear that Jega is playing out a predetermined script but for whom is not yet clear. He should be scrutinised closely to understand where he is heading because his latest actions are unpopular and clearly tilted in favour of a particular region, a region that is desperately bent on regaining presidential power by all means, even violently. “The sharing of the new polling units is clearly against the principle of federal character, which requires the diversities of Nigeria to be taken into cognisance in the distribution of positions and sundry benefits and burdens. This is the intendment of Section 14 (3) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999, as amended.

    “So, while there may not be evidence of compromise, there are reasons to suspect it. We should all be vigilant and careful. The call for his sack is justified although it may not be exigent given the extent of the preparations for the elections in which he, Jega, is a central figure. He just needs to be called to order and pressure put on him to rescind his new polling units programme,” he advised.

    Nwadioke said this is one case that Jega must clearly address with facts and figures in order to lay to rest the demons unleashed by these grievous charges and assuage the concerns of his critics. “Otherwise, the 2015 Elections would have been severely compromised by a huge credibility deficit even before the first ballot is cast. Jega has a duty to save Nigeria such odious prospect,” he said.

    Omodele said  Jega should have had a wider consultations before jumping into conclusion.

    “He should be careful with his autrances, decisions and polices. His decision in creating more poling units may lead to uproar and confusion. I advise him to hear the voice of the masses and not otherwise.

    “I also state that if he has intergrete, he should resign where and when his appiontors are dictating for him. I say Jega should go. He pretends like a saint, but he is not so though he has made some imparts in the political history of Nigeria. However, he is not perfect. He is not intelligent more than the entire country,” he said.

    Said Shittu: “Jega may be lacking in integrity, but the sensibilities and consciousness of Nigerians across the geo-political zones must be recognised and respected.”

    Ofuokwu  added: “I expected Jega to be able to appreciate what a vote of no confidence implies  and throw in the towel. His northernisation agenda of the top hierarchy of the commission is enough damage that would take years to correct. If the President does not do away with Jega then Jega will do away with him sooner than expected. He should be sacked without delay for bringing the commission to disrepute.”