Category: Law

  • Sponsors of Boko Haram insurgency

    The trade of allegations between the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressive Congress (APC) that the sponsors of that menacingreligious insurgency in the north-eastern part of Nigeria are members of the opposing political party has been hijacked. While the PDP has to a large extent successfully cast the APC, as populated by religious extremists who are sympathetic to the Boko Haram cause, especially within a swath of their Christian sympathizers; the APC have in recent times sought to debunk that insidious allegation, while tamely casting that aspersion back on their opponent, particularly their agent, the former Governor of Bornu state, Ali Modu Sheriff who is now back to the PDP, after an unsuccessful stint at unsettling the fledgling APC.

    To add kerosene to the stoking fire, one Mr. Stephen Davis a shadowy Australian, recently promoted in the media as a federal government negotiator with the Boko Haram over the abducted Chibok girls, has rehashed the old tale against Ali Modu Sherriff and added a new twist, by linking the former Chief of Army staff, General Azubuike Ihejirika to the alleged list of sponsors. Mr. Davis strangely refused to name the other alleged top Central Bank official and the other sponsors of the group, on the rather ridiculous claim that it will affect the police investigation of the bombing in Kubwa, Abuja. Let me say right away that General Azubuike has my sympathy over the second attempt by what appears to be very powerful forces to rubbish the record of his public career. The first attempt was the threat by the so called Bornu elders to have him charged before the International Criminal Court, Hague, for alleged war crimes, during his tour of duty as the then Chief of Army staff.

    Unfortunately the Bornu elders instead of calling on the armed forces, to prosecute the war against Boko Haram with diligence to safeguard the rights and safety of their people, rather decided to personalize their position against General Ihejirika, which immediately staked ethnic bias over their claim. Now again, Mr. Stephen Davis acting as if he has been hired by the detractors of the General, has fired an unreasonable and unsubstantiated salvo against the retired General. To make their unbelievable allegations, substantially worthless, the Australian reportedly claimed that he got the information from leaders of the same Boko Haram that General Ihejirika as army commander was famed to have worsted mercilessly. Here again like the case by the Bornu elders, General Ihejirika is singled out as an individual that is capable of sponsoring the insurgents, even when he was seen as personally being too high handed in dealing with that national menace, as the head of he army.

    In sympathising with the retired General Ihejirika for what is likely an invidious libel against his person, it needs to be noted that the old Australian in seeking fame from the Nigerian debacle, relied on the wily tactics of the lazy Nigerian elite. When the PDP’s garrulous propagandists willfully tagged General Muhammadu Buhari because of his obvious piousness as an extremist and sympathizer of the Boko Haram, they were foolishly applying a dangerous and lazy antidote to a ranging national crisis. So while they may have gained an undue political advantage from that unsubstantiated claim, they succeeded in laying a dangerous precedent which any other crooked person can emulate to gain attention.

    With respect to the allegations against the former Bornu state governor, he remains a prime suspect of being responsible for organizing and funding the politico-religious pressure group, which metamorphosed into the Boko Haram insurgency. The attempt by Mr. Steven Davis to claim any credit for that stale allegation is therefore of no moment. Interestingly Mr. Davis was represented in the press as an expert negotiator, whose services have been retained by the federal government to secure the release of the Chibok girls, who have been in the custody of the Boko Haram criminals since April 15. How he transformed into a secret service investigator in the course of his job is a matter for conjecture. Surprisingly, the federal government which all the while allowed the common believe that they employed the Australian to deal with the Boko Haram crisis to fester, has now denied ever employing his services.

    If the Australian journeyman wants to be taken seriously, he should provide the evidence of the alleged sponsorship by General Ihejirika. If his only evidence is the allegations allegedly made by the commanders of the Boko Haram insurgency, then he should get ready to pay heavily to stem a libel suit by General Ihejirika, even if Alhaji Sheriff may be daunted by the existing prejudices against his innocence. As General Ihejirika rightly said in the interview he granted the press, “If this accusation was made in a country like US or Uk, it would not be discussed for one hour because they would wave it aside”. Indeed I doubt if the Australian would have made such damning allegation against a General of any serious country in Africa talk less of the leading countries of the world. The wily fellow knows he is dealing with Nigeria, with a strong reputation for the frivolous, unfounded and unfathomable.

    In fairness to the Australian, he is filling the vacuum created by our challenged intelligence and security agencies. If they had been able to contain the Boko Haram menace as we all patriotically hoped, the old man would have found better things to do with his time. But because we have become incapable of helping ourselves, all manner of people have turned our advisers and helpers. The lesson from this Janjaweed allegation is that it is dangerous to throw up sand in the market, for you never know who would bear the dirt.

    The trade of allegations between the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the All Progressive Congress (APC) that the sponsors of that menacingreligious insurgency in the north-eastern part of Nigeria are members of the opposing political party has been hijacked. While the PDP has to a large extent successfully cast the APC, as populated by religious extremists who are sympathetic to the Boko Haram cause, especially within a swath of their Christian sympathizers; the APC have in recent times sought to debunk that insidious allegation, while tamely casting that aspersion back on their opponent, particularly their agent, the former Governor of Bornu state, Ali Modu Sheriff who is now back to the PDP, after an unsuccessful stint at unsettling the fledgling APC.

    To add kerosene to the stoking fire, one Mr. Stephen Davis a shadowy Australian, recently promoted in the media as a federal government negotiator with the Boko Haram over the abducted Chibok girls, has rehashed the old tale against Ali Modu Sherriff and added a new twist, by linking the former Chief of Army staff, General Azubuike Ihejirika to the alleged list of sponsors. Mr. Davis strangely refused to name the other alleged top Central Bank official and the other sponsors of the group, on the rather ridiculous claim that it will affect the police investigation of the bombing in Kubwa, Abuja. Let me say right away that General Azubuike has my sympathy over the second attempt by what appears to be very powerful forces to rubbish the record of his public career. The first attempt was the threat by the so called Bornu elders to have him charged before the International Criminal Court, Hague, for alleged war crimes, during his tour of duty as the then Chief of Army staff.

    Unfortunately the Bornu elders instead of calling on the armed forces, to prosecute the war against Boko Haram with diligence to safeguard the rights and safety of their people, rather decided to personalize their position against General Ihejirika, which immediately staked ethnic bias over their claim. Now again, Mr. Stephen Davis acting as if he has been hired by the detractors of the General, has fired an unreasonable and unsubstantiated salvo against the retired General. To make their unbelievable allegations, substantially worthless, the Australian reportedly claimed that he got the information from leaders of the same Boko Haram that General Ihejirika as army commander was famed to have worsted mercilessly. Here again like the case by the Bornu elders, General Ihejirika is singled out as an individual that is capable of sponsoring the insurgents, even when he was seen as personally being too high handed in dealing with that national menace, as the head of he army.

    In sympathising with the retired General Ihejirika for what is likely an invidious libel against his person, it needs to be noted that the old Australian in seeking fame from the Nigerian debacle, relied on the wily tactics of the lazy Nigerian elite. When the PDP’s garrulous propagandists willfully tagged General Muhammadu Buhari because of his obvious piousness as an extremist and sympathizer of the Boko Haram, they were foolishly applying a dangerous and lazy antidote to a ranging national crisis. So while they may have gained an undue political advantage from that unsubstantiated claim, they succeeded in laying a dangerous precedent which any other crooked person can emulate to gain attention.

    With respect to the allegations against the former Bornu state governor, he remains a prime suspect of being responsible for organizing and funding the politico-religious pressure group, which metamorphosed into the Boko Haram insurgency. The attempt by Mr. Steven Davis to claim any credit for that stale allegation is therefore of no moment. Interestingly Mr. Davis was represented in the press as an expert negotiator, whose services have been retained by the federal government to secure the release of the Chibok girls, who have been in the custody of the Boko Haram criminals since April 15. How he transformed into a secret service investigator in the course of his job is a matter for conjecture. Surprisingly, the federal government which all the while allowed the common believe that they employed the Australian to deal with the Boko Haram crisis to fester, has now denied ever employing his services.

    If the Australian journeyman wants to be taken seriously, he should provide the evidence of the alleged sponsorship by General Ihejirika. If his only evidence is the allegations allegedly made by the commanders of the Boko Haram insurgency, then he should get ready to pay heavily to stem a libel suit by General Ihejirika, even if Alhaji Sheriff may be daunted by the existing prejudices against his innocence. As General Ihejirika rightly said in the interview he granted the press, “If this accusation was made in a country like US or Uk, it would not be discussed for one hour because they would wave it aside”. Indeed I doubt if the Australian would have made such damning allegation against a General of any serious country in Africa talk less of the leading countries of the world. The wily fellow knows he is dealing with Nigeria, with a strong reputation for the frivolous, unfounded and unfathomable.

    In fairness to the Australian, he is filling the vacuum created by our challenged intelligence and security agencies. If they had been able to contain the Boko Haram menace as we all patriotically hoped, the old man would have found better things to do with his time. But because we have become incapable of helping ourselves, all manner of people have turned our advisers and helpers. The lesson from this Janjaweed allegation is that it is dangerous to throw up sand in the market, for you never know who would bear the dirt.

     

  • Abuja Branch  wins NBA cup

    Abuja Branch wins NBA cup

    The abuja branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has won the President’s Cup.

    It defeated the Owerri Branch 2-1. The match was played at the Dan Anyiam Stadium, Owerri, during the association’s annual general conference in Owerri, the Imo State capital.

    This is the third consecutive time the branch is winning the trophy.

    Former NBA President, Okey Wali (SAN) praised the branch for the feat.

    He gave a cash reward of N500,000 to the winning team and N250, 000 to the other team.

    Chairman, Appeal Committee of Nigerian Football Federation (NFF), Mr. Ibrahim Eddy Mark said he was not surprised that Abuja Branch won.

    “I was not surprised that Abuja branch won the match. This is their third time of winning the cup. It was indeed a good football. The Owerri team was also good. They played good football, but they are new in the game and so they have to pay their dues.  Abuja team has shown that they are the masters and that we  didn’t come from the Federal Capital to watch the good things of Owerri, but  to see the good things and also to take the  cup back to Abuja for keeps, I am glad indeed.”

    Former NBA Second Vice-President  Steve Abar said: “I believe that in every sports, the best team should always win. Obviously, from the performance of the teams in this tournament, the best team has indeed won.”

    The Chairman of NBA Abuja branch, Desmond Yamah said he was excited that his branch won.

    “It is, indeed, a justification for the efforts that  our players have put into training, put into the preparation for this game and I must say that they did very well. It is  our third consecutive win, so we have won the cup for keeps and we are coming back next season to win the cup again.”

    For the branch’s coach, Mr. Chudi Igwe, it is the second time he will win it. “The first time, I won it as a player,” he said.

    Former NBA Legal Adviser the football match is a means of promoting friendship among members.

    “The NBA all about fraternity. It  also  shows that lawyers can play football apart from exchanging legal tackles in courts,” he said.

    NBA General Secretary Mazi Afam Osigwe said the victory was a product of dedication,  hard work and excellence.

    Chairman, NBA Sports Committee Mr. Okey Ohagba described the match as “wonderful”.

    “It is expected that lawyers should engage in activities like this in other to keep body and mind sound. It is part of the conference in order to add colour and flavour to it.

    “This is the first conference of the NBA where 16 branches got registered for the football tournament and they consistently played their matches till the final.

    “We encourage lawyers  and their branches to always participate in such tournaments to promote the spirit of sportsmanship in the NBA,” he said.

    Chairman of NBA Owerri Branch Mr. Stanley Imo said: “No victor, no vanquished. Everybody is a winner and the NBA is the major winner. I want to put it on record that I am very happy with my team because this is the first time Owerri branch is participating  in this competition and for us to get to the final goes to show that within the next few years, no team in NBA will beat Owerri.”

    The branch’s coach, Mr Francis Nwokeocha, said though his team played well, the better side won, adding that they would play to win next time.

    “Constant training will make them to play better next time, because of time factor and because we have not played together for long, that is why  we were defeated, but with time, we will improve,” he said.

     

  • INEC seeks offences commission

    The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),  has called for the establishment of an Electoral Offences Commission to deal with electoral offences that will arise from next year’s general election.

    The commission’s Director of Legal Services, Mr. Ibrahim Bawa, said the commission should be set up because INEC does not have the resources to prosecute electoral crimes.

    He spoke in Owerri, the Imo State capital at a programme by the Lawyers in the Media (LIM) forum of the Nigerian Bar Association  (NBA) during its Annual General Conference.

    Removing the responsibility of prosecuting those involved in electoral fraud and offences, he said, would enhance INEC’s concentration  on logistics.

    According to him, the commission will deter potential offenders from violating the electoral laws.

    Presenting the Keynote address titled: “Media, law and the struggle for good governance in Nigeria: 100 years after, the journey so far”, Chairman, NBA Election Working Group, Dafe Akpedeye (SAN), said no institution, not even the body of lawyers, civil rights activists or other civil society groups, has done and sacrificed more in the fight for good governance in Nigeria, than the  media.

    According to him, the media has been the most persecuted and vilified by the authorities in power.

    “The press (electronic and print media, and in recent times online media) of any nation is regarded as the fourth estate of the realm: It is saddled with the responsibility of serving as watch-dogs of the activities of the government and their various agencies, reporting on events and occurrences.

    “The press is also expected to enlighten the citizenry of these occurrences, proffering solutions to socio-cultural and economic challenges. In so doing, the Press helps in shaping the mindset of the populace and in effect the policies of the government,” he said.

    Tracing the history of the media, Akpedeye said  its vibrancy  dated back to the colonial times, saying the country can boast of the freest and most outspoken media in Africa.

    The media, he said, had however, been the target of harassment by both the past military dictatorships and the  civilian governments.

    “Many agents of the media have been imprisoned, exiled, tortured, or murdered. Among them was the late Ogoni activist and television producer, Ken Saro-Wiwa, who was tried by a kangaroo tribunal and executed for treason on the orders of the late General Sani Abacha  in 1995. This was done  without recourse to the accused right of appeal (resulting in the expulsion of Nigeria from the Commonwealth of Nations and sanctions from many nations),” he said.

    Akpedeye who recalled the activities of the media from pre-Independence era to post-Independence Nigeria, canvassed an urgent need to protect its practitioners.

    “Despite the backing of the judiciary to extend protections for a free press, Nigeria remains a dangerous place to practice journalism. Sharia, or Islamic law courts, which operate in 12 northern states, demonstrate antagonism toward free expression, and Sharia statutes impose severe penalties for alleged press offenses,” Akpdeye said.

    He continued: “One major threat to press freedom and public safety in 2011 was the violent campaign by the militant Islamist sect, Boko Haram, whose wave of bombings, assassinations and intimidation have claimed hundreds of lives during the year. The group is seeking to impose strict Islamic laws over all of Nigeria. In October of that year, the group carried out one of its most brazen attacks on journalists, when its members allegedly shot and killed Zakariya Isa, a reporter and cameraman for the state-owned Nigerian Television Authority (NTA) as he covered the aftermath of one of the sect’s bomb attacks in the northeastern city of Maiduguri.”

    Other acts of intimidation against the press in 2011, according to him, included more than 30 attacks on press freedom before April 2011 presidential, legislative, and gubernatorial elections.

    Journalists, he said, were targets of ill-disciplined police and State Security Service (SSS) agents, who arrested and detained them for brief periods without any authorisation. “Separately, in October 2011, the police raided the offices of The Nation newspapers, seeking information on how the medium obtained a letter from former President Olusegun Obasanjo to President Jonathan outlining former’s desire for Jonathan to replace the leaders of the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF) and four other agencies with his own candidates. After the newspaper refused to disclose such information, police arrested four editors and two journalists. However, they were released and charges against them were never filed. There are motley of cases of the murder of journalists’over the years which have remained unsolved,” he noted.

    According to him, the journalistic fervour and zeal inherent in traditional journalism have gradually faded, giving way to biased reportage, money-induced, favourable reviews and lazy journalism.

    “Of utmost concern is in the obvious lack of investigative journalism. It is rare, if not uncommon, to find present day Nigerian journalists going through the drudgery of researching on events, stories or expected occurrences.

    “The unfortunate norm in present day Nigeria is the knack for journalists to sit in front of computer screens, typing on the key-board, manufacturing baseless stories with the intention of second-guessing the minds of the Nigerian populace who have over the years been deep in high scale gullibility (an attribute the media men exploit by filling the newsstand with stories suited to feeding the populace with concocted stories they love to hear.)

    Akpedeye accused politicians of helping in dragging the profession in the mud. “This is done in connivance with deep-pocket politicians, who are mainly interested in furthering their political benefits, notwithstanding the potential negative effects their actions will have on the nation. The extent of politicians’ desperation and press-manipulative tendencies is evident in their insistence to perpetuate laws that are inconsistent with modern progressive journalism,” he said.

    He, however, said blogging on the social media (online journalism) has become a much safer and easier conduit for Nigeria’s growing internet-enabled minority to express their dissatisfactions with the current state of affairs in Nigeria.

    Speaking on the topic: “Pronouncing and enforcing legal penalties for the violation of political advertisements in Nigeria: Apcon’s role and journey so far”, the Advertising Practitioners Council of Nigeria (APCON) ‘s Registrar, Alhaji Garba Bello Kankarofi, represented by the former LIM Chairman, Mr. Charles Odenigbo, said: “To check political advertising abuses, we urge you to contact APCON if you see, read or hear adverts that seem to contain such abuses.”

    He asked them to write to the Registrar/CEO, APCON, noting that APCON alone could not enforce the law.

    He urged the media to collaborate with council to ensure that politicians play according to the rules of the games.

    The former NBA chief, Mr. Joseph Bodunrin Daudu (SAN) said the media has been very proactive before and after the independence. He noted that without a virile  and independent press, no nation, no matter how highly gifted, could develop.

    Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama (SAN), represented by the Director-General, Vox-Populi, Mr. John Egwuonwu, said the journalistic zeal of the media had remained undaunted from pre-independence era, noting that the advent of social media has its own challenge for traditional media.

    He urged the media to continue its watchdog responsibility in the interest of the country by holding governments accountable to the people.

  • Groups give Jonathan 21-day ultimatum to probe war crime allegations

    Nine civil society groups have urged President Goodluck Jonathan to set up an Independent Commission of Inquiry on war crimes as alleged by the Amnesty International in a recent report.

    They said the commission’s terms of reference should be wide enough to cover similar allegations made in the past by the Human Rights Watch and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

    The groups said they would go to court should the President fail to act within 21 days of receiving their petition.

    “If the government fails to do this, we will use all available legal avenues to press these demands, and vindicate the legal responsibility of government to undertake the actions requested,” they said.

    The report titled: “Nigeria: Gruesome footage implicates military in war crimes,” was accompanied by gory footage of security forces allegedly committing grievous violations of human rights which included detainees having their throats slit and their bodies dumped in mass graves by men who appear to be members of the Nigerian military and the Civilian Joint Task Force (JTF).

    The groups are Access to Justice (AJ) (whose Executive Director Joseph Otteh signed the letter), One Voice Coalition for Sustainable Development in Nigeria (OneVOICE), Women Advocates Research and Documentation Centre (WARDC), Human Rights Law Services (HURILAWS), Socio-economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP), Network on Police Reform in Nigeria Foundation (NOPRIN), Nigerian Automobile Technicians Association (NATA), Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG) and Centre for Constitutionalism and Demilitarisation (CENCOD).

    Noting past allegations of violations of human rights by security forces operating in Northeast, the groups observed that the government is bound to respect and defend the rights of its citizens, including those under suspicion for alleged crimes.

    On why an independent body is needed, the groups said: “The military clearly lacks the kind of independence required to conduct these investigations since the atrocities were allegedly committed by military operatives themselves.”

    They added: “Your government must now take deliberate action calculated to…end the culture of impunity reportedly flourishing within security forces fighting terror and insurgency and ensure that the rule of law is an integral part of any efforts to combat terrorism in Nigeria.”

    According to them, persons suspected of terrorism-related crimes are as entitled to the constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.

    “The very idea of arbitrarily arresting persons who may or may not have any connection with terrorism and then slitting their throats before the evidence against them is presented in a proper forum is loathsome, barbaric and intolerably inhuman,” they said.

     

  • 2015: Tussle over ballot boxes shifts to Appeal Court

    2015: Tussle over ballot boxes shifts to Appeal Court

    A Federal High Court in Abuja declared in 2012 that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) had since 2011, unlawfully deployed the collapsible ballot boxes in elections. It restrained the commission and its Chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega, from further using the boxes, except with the permission of the patent right owner, Bedding Holdings Limited (BHL). The court also declared that unathorised use of the boxes will render null and void, the purpose for which the boxes were used. INEC and Jega have appealed against the decision. Parties have equally settled their briefs, awaiting a hearing date. Eric Ikhilae examines issues canvassed by parties and the case’s likely implication for next year’s general elections.

    As the yearly vacation of the Court of Appeal gradually comes to an end,parties in an appeal lodged by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) at the Court of Appeal, Abuja are anxiously awaiting a hearing date. Parties have settled and exchanged their briefs.

    INEC is by the appeal, seeking to set aside a judgment delivered on June 5, 2012 by Justice Adamu Bello (now retired) of the Federal High Court, Abuja in a suit instituted by a firm, Bedding Holdings Limited (BHL).

    BHL had in 2010 sued INEC, Jega, and five others over the electoral body’s decision to award contracts to three private firms for the purchase of ballot boxes in preparation for the 2011 elections.

    The suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/783/2010 also had as defendants, the Registrar of Patent, Federal Ministry of Commerce and Industry, the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the three firms – Emchai Limited, Tambco United Nigeria Ltd and Anowat Project and Resources Ltd.

    The plaintiff’s case was that it possessed subsisting patent right over the ballot boxes  which INEC had awarded contracts without its (BHL’s) prior consent, as required by law.

    But, upon overtures by the AGF for an out of court settlement, the court struck out the case on December 16, 2010 following an application to the effect by the plaintiff’s lawyer. BHL returned to court shortly after settlement became impossible. It filed a similar suit, which was marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/82/201.

    In his judgment on June 5, 2012, Justice Bello held, among others, that BHL owns valid and subsisting patent rights over Transparent Ballot Boxes and Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes being used by INEC for elections.

    The judge upheld BHL’s claim to being the bona fide patentee and the exclusive owner of the invention named “Transparent Ballot Boxes” on which it was issued certificate of registration patent rights No. RP12994 and registration of industrial designs rights No. RD5946 by the Registrar of Patents on January 12, 1998.

    The judge also upheld the subsequent certification of an improvement on the invention named “Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes” (with certificate of registration of patent rights No. RP16642 and registration of industrial designs rights No. RD13841 issued on November 27, 2006 which are still valid.

    Justice Bello voided the rights over similar inventions purportedly issued later, by the Registrar of Patent, to three firms – Emchai, Tambco and Anowat.

    He restrained the defendants from further utilising the ballot boxes without the consent of BHL. The judge declared that any unathorised use of the boxes will render null and void, the purpose for which the boxes were used.

    Justice Bello refused a subsequent application for stay of the judgment pending appeal, which INEC and Jega filed. In his ruling on May 28, last year, the judge hinged his refusal on the ground that it was declaratory (as the one by Justice Auta).

    The judge frowned at INEC’s and Jega’s decision to deploy the same ballot boxes in subsequent elections, including the governorship elections in Edo and Ondo states, without the consent of the plaintiff and in disregard of the court’s orders contained in the June 5, 2012 judgment.

    “They (INEC and Jega) conducted the elections on July 14 and October 20, 2012 using the same ballot boxes as averred by the plaintiff/respondent (BHL) in its counter affidavit, which has not been denied by the 6th and 7th defendants (INEC and Jega) in the two further and better affidavits, in total disregard to the injunctive order, the execution of which they now seek to stay by their application.

    “Since the elections have been conducted, the need for staying the execution of the injunctive order granted by the court has abated, at least for now. And even if the need for the order for stay of execution has not abated, the defendants, by proceeding to conduct the two elections, using the same ballot boxes, the use of which was restrained by the court’s judgment, have soiled their hands and cannot therefore seek the indulgence of the court.

    “He, who comes to equity, must come with clean hands. The 6th and 7th defendants have not come with clean hands before the court and cannot, therefore, seek for equitable relief of stay of execution of the order in the judgment.

    “Consequently, I refuse to grant the application, as granting it will be tantamount to the court encouraging further breach of its own judgment order, which subsists until set aside by the Court of Appeal,” Justice Bello said.

    In their appeal numbered: CA/A/535/2012, INEC and Jega are praying the appellate court to set aside the judgment by Justice Bello, arguing among others, that the trial judge erred in granting all the prayers by the plaintiff.

    The appeal was filed for them by a team of seven lawyers, including six Senior Advocates of Nigeria. The SANs include Adegboyega Awomolo, Mrs. V.  O. Awomolo, A. B. Mahmood, Onyechi Ikpeeazu, H. A. Liman and Ahmed Raji.

    The appellant raised five grounds of appeal and distilled two issues for the court’s determination. They challenged the competence of the suit as constituted before the lower court and faulted the decision of the trial judge to grant the plaintiff’s prayers, arguing that the plaintiff did not sufficiently prove its case to have warranted the granting of all the reliefs it sought.

    INEC and Jega equally challenged the plaintiff’s locus standi (its right to sue and be heard). They argued that having failed to show before the trial court that it was a corporate entity, registered by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), by allegedly not exhibiting its certificate of registration as required by law, BHL (named as the 1st respondent) ought not to have been granted audience by the trial court.

    The appellants also raised the issue of fair hearing, accusing the trial court of denying them their constitutional right to be heard. They denied being served with processes and hearing notices in relation to the case at the trial court. The appellant argued that BHL has not shown anywhere in its pleadings that the appellants were served with the originating summons or any of the hearing notices.

    In challenging the competence of the suit at the lower court, the appellants argued that BHL ought to have initiated the suit by way of writ of summons owing to the contentious nature of the claims, which could only be resolved by the calling of further evidence.

    They further argued: “The grant of declaratory reliefs as sought by the plaintiff (BHL) are not automatic, rather, they are granted based on proof of cogent, credible, sufficient and reliable evidence to show that it (BHL) is entitled to same. This, the respondent failed to do.”

    In its respondent’s brief filed by Karina Tunyan (SAN) and John Okoriko, BHL urged the court to uphold the judgment by the trial court, and “not to disturb the finding of fact reached by the court below” because it proved and established its case with credible affidavit and documentary evidence to the satisfaction of the court.

    “This is particularly so when the respondents, including the appellants, did not file any counter affidavit by way of defence to the 1st respondent’s case at the court below despite being served with the originating summons and the various hearing notice,”  BHL said.

    It argued that since the trial court had delivered its judgment in the case and has become functus officio (it could no longer act on it.), BHL urged the court to disregard the appellants’ argument on whether or not it showed it as a corporate body worthy of being heard.

    It submitted that since the issue about its corporate existence was not raised at the lower court, and the appellants having also failed to include it as a ground of appeal in their notice of appeal, they could no longer raise it.

    On service, the 1st respondent argued that “there is overwhelming documentary and affidavit evidence, by way of numerous proofs of service and publications in the newspapers, to the effect that the appellants were duly served with both the originating processes and hearing notices of this case.

    “In spite of the numerous services of the court processes and hearing notices on the appellants, informing them of the pendency of this suit against them, the appellants refused to appear in court or put up a legal representation in defence of this action against them,” BHL argued.

    There many other pending cases involving INEC, Jega, BHL and some others, most of which are offshoots of the case over ballot boxes.

    There is a pending appeal by INEC and Jega against the January 28, this year judgment in which Justice Ibrahim Auta of the Federal High Court, Abuja awarded about N17.3billion in favour of BHL and against INEC, Jega and three others for infringing the subsisting patent rights of the plaintiff.

    The judgment was on a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/816/2010, filed shortly after INEC awarded the about N34.5billion contracts for the supply of Direct Data Capturing machines for the registration of voters, preparatory to the 2011 general elections.

    Defendants in the suit included INEC, Jega, the AGF, Haier Electrical Appliance Corporation Limited, Zenox Technologies Limited and Avante International Technology Incorporated.

    The plaintiff had claimed the sole ownership of the subsisting patent rights Nos: RP16642 and RP NG/P/2010/202, and copyrights designs No: RD13841covering its inventions – the Proof of Address System Scheme (PASS) and the Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Box (ECTBB).

    It claimed that a combination of both inventions creates a voters’ register involving “the process and application of DDC machines for the compilation and collection of various bio-data.”

    It said the suit was intended to protect its inventions after INEC proceeded to award the DDC contracts despite having been notified of its subsisting patents and the need to first obtain its consent.

    There are other pending cases in which BHL is among others, seeking to void the elections that produced Adams Oshiomhole (Edo Governor), Olusegun Mimiko (Ondo) and Willie Obiano (Anambra) on the ground that its ballot boxes were used without its consent, in violation of the June 5, 2012 judgment. The cases are before Justice Ahmed Mohammed (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja).

    As the nation prepares for general elections next year, the fear in many quarters is that, beyond the huge public funds being deployed in these legal battles by INEC, no one, as it is the case in actual battle, knows how these cases will end.

    There is also the concern over what will happen should the plaintiff, as has been the case in two instances, succeeds in the cases seeking to void the elections held after the June 5, 2012 judgment, including the 2015 elections.

  • NBA is alive, says Alegeh

    NBA is alive, says Alegeh

    Excerpts of inaugural speech by NBA President Augustine Alegeh (SAN)

    •Continued from last week

    Nba Identification Card

     

    All lawyers who have been verified in
    the NBA Data Base shall be issued with
    NBA Identification Cards which would be a chip and pin card that would contain the following:

    •Name of the lawyer

    •Passport photograph

    •Supreme Court enrolment number

    The card would also function as a payment card for ATM, PoS and online transactions.

    Presentation of the Card would entitle the lawyer to a variety of discount and other packages negotiated by NBA.

    This card would be issued free.

     

    Nba Insurance Policy

     

    We have received offers from various insurance companies in respect of the NBA Insurance Scheme, which would provide insurance cover for all lawyers who have paid their Bar practicing fees as at when due.

    The latest offer we are considering offers Lawyers the following choices:

    Option A: N700,000.00 – Death or Permanent Disability

    Option B: N500,000 – Death or Permanent Disability

    N500,000 – Death by Accident

    Option C: N350,000 – Death or Permanent Disability

    N350,000 – Death by Accident

    N350,000             –              Critical Illness

    Option D: N280,000 – Death or Permanent Disability

    N280,000             –              Death by Accident

    N280,000             –             Critical Illness

    N30,000               –              Medical Expenses

    It is to be noted that all lawyers who have paid their bar practising Fees as at when due are automatically entitled to this insurance cover and a policy would be issued in the lawyer’s name.

     

    Bar Practising Fees

     

    I shall propose to NEC a 10% reduction across board in respect of Bar Practising fees for lawyers excluding Senior Advocates. Upon ratification by NEC I will take appropriate steps to give effect to the reduction.

    I shall also propose to NEC, that the share of Branches from BPFs be increased from 10% to 20%. The additional 10% to branches would be applied to set up a Lawyers Welfare Trust Fund at all Branches.

    The payment of the Branches’ share of BPF shall be by direct debit utilising available e-banking means.

     

    Annual General Conference fees

     

    The fees for the 2015 Annual General Conference shall be a 40% percent reduction of the Fees for the  Annual General Conference.

    The Fees shall be as follows:

    1 – 5 Years:                         N5,000

    6 – 10 Years:                       N15,000

    11     – 14 Years:                                 N25,000

    15    – 20 Years:                                 N35,000

    Above 20 Years:                                N50,000

    SANs/AGs/Benchers:      N100,000

    Judges:                               N75,000

    Magistrates:                       N50,000

    Governors/Legislators

    & Political Appointees:    N250,000

     

    Judicial reforms

     

    The judiciary is taking positive developmental steps and NBA must continue to collaborate with the Judiciary as there remains so much room for improvement.

     

    Employment of research

    assistants for judges

    The provision of Research Assistants for our judges must not be delayed a day longer.

    The benefits of Research Assistant employed, not by Judges, but by the Judiciary would be a monumental step forward in our quest for speedy dispensation of high quality justice. Consequently, I will shortly engage the various Government agencies involved in the process to sensitize them of the enormous benefit to the Nation.

     

    Judicial appointments

     

    The current secret shrouded appointment of Judges system must yield to a more transparent system where merit rather than cronyism is the basis for appointments and promotion of judicial officers.

    The fight to rid the judiciary of corruption would remain a mirage unless and until the appointment and promotion system is reviewed. We cannot expect judicial officers appointed through the back door to be incorruptible especially at this time when those who arranged the appointments have retired but rather than stay quietly at home to enjoy their retirement, now masquerade themselves as Consultants in cases where they have never seen the Court processes. Their main claim to fame and Consultancy fees remains the fact that the Judge is “MY BOY”. This is utterly disgraceful. It should be discouraged. It should be condemned. I say no more for now.

     

    Digitalisation of our courts

    We need digitalization of Our Courts urgently to enable us take advantage of modern technology in our quest for speedy and effective dispensation of justice.

    I watched the recent Oscar Pistorius trial in awe when hour long trial transcripts were available for use by Lawyers in Court immediately thereafter. I don’t know the cost of this equipment but we cannot claim to be the Giant of Africa if we cannot afford to equip our Courts with technological tools designed to ensure the speedy dispensation of justice we all crave.

     

    Quacks in the legal profession

     

    The judiciary should collaborate with the NBA in its efforts to rid the legal Profession of quacks.

    The NBA has just introduced its stamp and seal policy and this policy can only have effect when the judiciary ensures that only documents bearing the stamp and seal are allowed for filing in Our Court or admitted in evidence at trials.

    I must commend the progressive thinking of Honourable Justice Njemanze, the Honourable Chief Judge of Imo State for his practice direction to the effect that all affidavits in Imo must be prepared or endorsed by Lawyers.

    This is a step in the right direction and I urge other Chief Judges to issue the same practice Direction.

    The NBA would shortly formulate Practice Directions as Well as Guidelines in selected areas and topics which we hope the respective Chief Judges would not hesitate to deal with expeditiously.

    I must also at this point advise all persons who use tax payers funds to pay foreign lawyers under any guise that such foreign lawyers who are not enrolled to practice in Nigeria are definitely quacks under Nigerian Law. We shall in the next few weeks issue Freedom of Information Requests to certain Government bodies who have developed the habit of briefing foreign lawyers with a view to bringing them to face the law. Nigerian work is for Nigerian Lawyers and I will leave no stone unturned in dealing with any person who threatens our constitutionally guaranteed source of income.

     

  • Law and politics of impeachment

    Law and politics of impeachment

    A Lagos lawyer, Chijioke Emeka, argues that impeachment is essentially a political trial with predetermined outcome.

    Recently, Murtala Nyako, former Adamawa State governor, was ‘impeached’. Shortly thereafter, Tanko Al-Makura, Nasarawa State governor narrowly survived ‘impeachment’. Mr. Sunday Onyebuchi, Enugu State deputy governor got the boot for allegedly running an ‘illegal poultry’ and refusing to represent the governor at functions.

    Before these incidents, Jude Agbaso, Imo State deputy governor was ‘impeached’. These events have raised legal and political issues, which I would try to examine in this piece. Since I am a counsel in the Agbaso case, which is still before the Court of Appeal, Owerri Division, I would avoid any comment on the Imo incident.

    Let me enter a caveat.  The term ‘impeachment’ does not appear anywhere in the 320 Sections of the 1999 Constitution (hereinafter ‘CFRN’) or in its seven schedules and three alterations. It is, however, used in this text in its popular sense as the process of removal from office of an elected executive (president, vice president, governor and deputy governor), for gross misconduct.

    Being essentially a feature of the presidential system of government, it was not until 1979 when Nigeria switched to the presidential system that the tool could first be put to use. (In parliamentary systems, confidence vote, vel non, was the equivalent political sledge-hammer to bring down a premier’s government).

    Thus, Alhaji Balarabe Musa, the then Kaduna State governor became the proverbial guinea pig used to test the brand new weapon of ‘impeachment’. If the resolution of the Kaduna State legislature removing Musa from office was a Zmapp drug experiment, it came out successful.

    At the new turn of democracy in 1999,  Abia State deputy governor, Enyinnaya Abaribe; Kebbi State deputy governor, Suleiman Argungu; both Lagos State deputy governors, Kofo Bucknor-Akerele and Femi Pedro; Oyo State governor, Rasheed Ladoja; Bayelsa State governor, DSP Alameseigha; Ekiti State governor and deputy governor, Ayo Fayose and Biodun Olujinmi; Anambra State governor, Peter Obi; Plateau State governor, Joshua Dariye; Bauchi State deputy governor, Mohammed Gadi; Bayelsa State deputy governor, Peremobowei Ebebi; Taraba State deputy governor, Sani Abubakar Danladi and others have had to swallow this bitter political pill.

    The Ladoja, Dariye and Obi cases were most celebrated because  the courts explained the law and firmed up jurisprudence. The three governors were restored by courts and effectively won the politics of return. A successful impeachment is a blend of politics and legality. The plotters must win the politics and then, if challenged in court (as is almost always the case), also pass through the legal crucibles.

    As a political process, ‘impeachment’ is intended to constitute a political trial and judgment of the Legislature, while the courts are silent. This is apparently why the CFRN provides for an ouster clause; and partly defines gross misconduct as whatever is so “in the opinion” of the legislature. (There are equivalent provisions for removal of president and vice president in section 143(10) and (11).)

    From Balarabe Musa forward, two bizarre consequences soon reared their heads to the consternation of well-meaning persons. The first was the creation of ‘gross misconduct’ from just ‘anything’, the most popular being refusal of a chief executive to open the public till to the legislature or a ‘godfather’ on demand.

    Nigerians lost count of how many times former President Olusegun Obasanjo was threatened with impeachment by the legislature over ‘gross misconduct’ that was generally interpreted to mean ‘refusal to share the money’. None was however, consummated. Obasanjo himself later became infamous for aiding the impeachment of state executives on questionable ‘gross misconduct’ that ranged from not being a member of his political party to being perceived as hobnobbing with his political opponents, especially his vice president, Atiku Abubakar; or simply being ‘disloyal’, which could mean opposing his truncated bid to secure a third term.

    In respect of deputy governors, who had been at the worst receiving end of the scourge, their ‘gross misconduct’ usually constituted a perceived political ambition without the blessing of the governor, or any other disagreement with the governor on private or policy issues, or simply the governor perceiving it as politically ‘strategic’. It should be noted that in all these, an ostensible ‘gross misconduct’ is normally minted. This has usually been corruption allegations, but recently running an ‘illegal poultry’ has made the fascinating list.

    The second problem that exploited the CFRN’s politicisation of impeachment was jettisoning of due process by the legislature. During the Obasanjo years, once the blessing of the president or a ‘garrison commander’ was secured with the backing of the EFCC, the Legislature could proceed without due service of notice of allegation or even without a quorum; sit at un-parliamentary hours; sit without a Speaker or the Mace; sit in a hotel in town; or proceed without the required votes etc.

    There was no end to the violation of procedure by the legislature. They apparently believed the ouster clause in Section 188(10) meant that even if the wrong procedure was adopted there was no judicial oversight, as Section 188(10) made them complainant, lord and master of procedure and the first and final Judge.

    Given their ordinary grammatical meaning, the words of the ouster clause are so clear that no court would on the face of that provision accept an impeachment case. This was the cruel fate suffered by both Musa and Abaribe. But this was soon to unravel. The Gestapo manner in which Ladoja was removed as governor, which shocked every normal person, became the catalyst.

    Thus in ADELEKE V OYO STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (2007) 1 NWLR (PART 100)  608, the Court of Appeal courageously ‘redrafted’ the ouster clause using the judicial license of ‘interpretation’. Law is dynamic and bad times give rise to revolutionary times. It was held that since Section 188(1) – (9) prescribes procedures, the proper interpretation to be given to the ouster clause is that it could only be activated when such procedures had been complied with.

    Many who thought that the revolutionary decision was judicial activism gone too far were surprised when the Supreme Court in INAKOJU V ADELEKE (2007) 4 NWLR (PART 1025) 42 not only upheld the decision but laid down far-reaching principles that effectively put impeachment procedure under the radar of judicial scrutiny. Thus, contrary to the decisions of the Court of Appeal in BALARABE MUSA V AUTA HAMZA (1983) 3 NCLR 229 and ABARIBE V SPEAKER ABIA STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (2002) 14 NWLR (PART 788) 466, judicial oversight is available over impeachment procedure.

    So if the letters of Section 188(1) – (9) are strictly complied with, judicial power ends, and politics prevails. The courts would not question the finding of the panel of seven or question any of the two resolutions of the legislature in the process, that is, so long as the required majority was met. Where any of the letters is overthrown, the impeachment is legally wrong even if politically right.

    The then emergent jurisprudence that the legal correctness of an impeachment as expoused in LADOJA was justiciable soon ossified as law. This was evident when the Court of Appeal applied it in Peter Obi’s case. See BALONWU V OBI (2007)  NWLR (PART 1028) 488, Dariye’s Case, DAPIALONG V DARIYE (2007) 8 NWLR (PART 1036) 239; and in Ebebi’s Case. See EBEBI V SPEAKER BAYELSA STATE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY (2012)  5 NWLR (PART 1292) 1.

    While the problem that arose on the issue of due process was resolved by revolutionary judicial tactic, the political angle remains. It is noteworthy, however, that in LADOJA, Niki Tobi JSC (then) hinted on the need for a valid gross misconduct to exist. This could mean that judicial power may extend to test the grossness of an alleged misconduct. Hopefully this would be taken in an appropriate case.

    However, my humble view is that since Section 188(10) opened with a constitutional definition of ‘gross misconduct’ as a “grave” violation of the Constitution and then leaves a discretion to add new strains, the ejusdem generis rule would apply to remove absolutism from such discretion. It would thus in my view be constitutionally invalid to proceed on an allegation that falls out of class with a “grave” constitutional violation. Running an alleged ‘illegal poultry’ is not a constitutional violation, talk much of “grave”. My view though.

    Impeachment is political because once the master-mind and his co-conspirators secure a required majority of the legislature; and the Chief Judge (though expectedly apolitical) is ‘with due respect’ made to appoint the ‘right’ people as Panel of Seven, the impeachment is a done deal. The importance of the role of the Chief Judge was demonstrated in the failed bid in Nasarawa State.  There, the legislature felt the ‘wrong’ people were appointed.

    Being essentially a political trial with predetermined outcome, an apprehensive subject usually keeps off the panel’s sittings, but Al-Makura appeared. That was significant and too telling. It was also clear that the legislature lost the politics when they began to demand for reconstitution of the panel. Section 188(5) CFRN gives the Chief Judge discretion to appoint neutral persons. For the politics to succeed, the panel members are usually not neutral. By Section 188(8) CFRN the politics failed the day the panel reported that the allegations were not proved. The legislature only retained the liberty to commence a new process on new facts or submit a legal dispute.

    The successful impeachment of Murtala Nyako is also a case study in the triumph of the politics. It is believed that his virulent epistle to the president was behind his travail. But the politics was effective as all hands were on deck (or forced to be on deck) to pull it off. The ability of the actors to unite on a common object explains why what succeeded in Adamawa failed in Nasarawa. It remains the legal crucibles of constitutional validity.

    Successful politics (or bad politics) of impeachment is a skill honed by good students during the Obasanjo era. The irritating interventions in state affairs, which was not limited to impeachment, compelled Professor Ben Nwabueze SAN to publish two interesting books: “How Obasajo Subverted the Rule of Law and Democracy” and “How President Obasanjo Subverted Nigeria’s Federal System”. Since many good students of those years are still around today to offer their services, we expect more impeachments and of course, more court cases challenging them.

    • Emeka, Principal Counsel at Auxano Law Consult, writes from Lagos.

     

     

  • ICT firm partners NBA

    The Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) has partnered with an Information and Communication Technology (ICT) firm, LawPavilion, on use of technology in law practice.

    The firm, which provided ICT facilities at the 54th NBA Annual General Conference, also launched a new product, tabletarize your practice.

    The firm’s Managing Director, Mr. Ope Olugasa, said Law Pavilion is is leading the adoption of the ICT in the legal industry.

    According to him, over 52 per cent of Nigerian lawyers is yet to embrace ICT.

    Mr. Olugasa said: “If you look at the email of lawyers, over 85 per cent of them still use yahoo and we are still wondering how will serious multi- national converse with them? How will they communicate with them by e- mail, using yahoo? It does not show a good brand and a high level of professionalism.”

    He said with the tabletarize campaign, every lawyer can have access to Samsung Galaxy or i-Pad at affordable rates.

    “With the tabletarize campaign, the issue of power supply, for example, will longer stop lawyers from adopting ICT, because most of these tablets can stay seven to  10 hours without electricity.

  • How to restore integrity,independence of NBA

    How to restore integrity,independence of NBA

    Following the shortfalls in the last election of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Chairman  of  NBA Ikere Ekiti branch, Bunmi Olugbade calls  for the restoration of the interigrity and independence of the Bar.

    The Nigeria Bar Association (NBA)’s Annual General Conference, which held in Owerri, Imo State last month has come and gone. This article is aimed at highlighting some of the key issues which should have engaged the attention of the conference and the new leadership of the Bar.

    In my humble opinion, the greatest task before the NBA and its new leadership is the restoration of the integrity and independence of the Association. Many have posited that these are not the best of times for the NBA.

    One of the primary aims and objectives of the Association is the “maintenance and defence of the integrity and independence of the Bar and the Judiciary in Nigeria, as well as the promotion and protection of the principles of the rule of law and respect for and enforcement of fundamental rights, human rights, human rights and the people’s rights”. See clause 4 (a) and (k) of the NBA Constitution.

    Close observers of the Bar in the last five (5) years both lawyers and non-lawyers will confirm that the existential objectives and fundamental principles of the Association have been so shamelessly compromised and eroded.

    Indeed, it is arguable if the NBA has not lost its relevance to its members and the nation at large. No wonder, all the five candidates, who contested the office of the President of the Association in the July 2014 election, openly canvassed a change of direction for the Association. The truth is that what the NBA needs today is not just a cosmetic change, but a fundamental transformation from its present alienated position from its members and its timid, docile and sometimes escapist approach to critical national issues.

    Independence is a state or quality of not being subjected to the control or influence of another. Not being controlled or influenced by other people or things. The Oxford Advance Learners’ Dictionary defines independence to mean among others, “being financially supported by private rather than government money”. In my humble opinion, if anything has compromised the independence and integrity of the Bar or silenced the voice of the Bar in recent times, it is money.

    The new executive must restore, secure the integrity and independence of the Bar by putting a definite stop to soliciting for and receiving money in form of grants, donations or gifts from governments both at the state and Federal levels.

    From observation, collecting funds from state governments became a habitual act under the outgone administration to the embarrassment of members of the Bar. At times, we heard of the President and  Local Organising Committees  fighting and quarrelling over monies approved for National Executive Committee meetings by state governors because it was  a  habitual  practice to seek for and obtain money from state governments to host the quarterly NBA  (NEC) meetings.

    This must stop. A dependence on fat envelopes from politically exposed persons and government patronage is not the best for the Association. He who pays the piper dictates the tune. NBA has become a piper that stands face to face with external interferences and possible dictations. The consequences, of course, is the painful loss of the voice and dynamism of the Bar as witnessed in recent times.

    It is the responsibility of the NBA under its constitution to host its quarterly meetings. Therefore, soliciting for and getting government funds to hold NBA NEC meetings was not the practice of the Bar. It is indeed, a recent innovation that has eroded the integrity of the Bar. Hence, this my humble submission that the practice of soliciting for and collecting money from governments to host NEC meetings amounts to corrupt practice on the part of the NBA leadership.

    According to Edo State governor, Comrade Adams Oshiomole in 2013 after  the NBA June NEC meeting, which  held at Yenagoa, Bayelsa State,  while condemning the NBA position on the crisis of election of the Governor’s Forum. “I watched the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)  saying in Yenagoa,  Bayelsa State that the Governors Forum should be discarded. I think the factor of location influenced his conclusion…. The environment and the overall circumstances known and unknown that led the NBA President to call for the freezing of the rights of Governors to associate boarders on corrupt practice.”

    There is hardly any doubt that NBA is an influential body. It is expected to be the guardian of our nascent democracy and the protector and defender of the Rule of Law and due process. Regrettably, that influence and relevance to defend the rule of law, protect fundamental liberties of the Nigerian people and protect democracy has virtually disappeared.

    At the NEC meeting held in Ekiti State in March this year, the state Chief Judge stated repeatedly in his address that the NBA  has lost its voice. The silence of the Association at these critical times can never do the nation any good. It is not only the legimate expectation of the people, but it is also the duty of the Bar to speak to powers-that-be at all times. NBA must wake up from its slumber to once again take its rightful position as the conscience of the nation.

    Let it be stated that the long standing crises that have plagued the judiciary of Rivers State must attract the new NBA leadership’s attention with utmost urgency. It is a common knowledge that Lawyers in Rivers State have not gone to court in the last six (6) months or  neither have litigants been able to have their matters adjudicated upon. The business of the third  arm of government in Rivers State has been totally and effectively frustrated by the impasse between the state government and the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    Strangely, this all important issue was never discussed once at the NBA NEC. The outgone  administration under Okey Wali (SAN) heard nothing, said nothing and did nothing. This can only be likened to “ a blind man surrounded by deaf people.”

    Clause 9 of the NBA Constitution generally empowers the NEC to exercise control and manage the affairs of the Association including, but not limited to its finances, appointments of representatives to statutory bodies and to express the views of the Association upon any matter of public interest or general interest o the legal profession.

    It is also the powers of the NEC to generally exercise all the powers vested in the Association so as to promote and carry out the aims and objectives of the Association. We pray that the era of “approved, approved” at NBA  NEC shall be gone for the good of all lawyers in Nigeria.

    Furthermore, the Constitution empowers the NEC to exercise all the power vested in the Association so as to promote and carry out its aims and objectives. These clear provisions were serially breached with relish by the last three successive NBA administrations, all of whom one after the other ran the affairs of the association like dictators or sole administrators.

    The new President must thread the path of Democracy and Constitutionalism. Internal democracy must be returned to the proceedings of the NEC. Plurality of opinions must be encouraged and promoted. Democracy and good governance must be institutionalised. Like we all say, you cannot give what you don’t have “Nemo dat quod habet”.

    Other critical areas requiring urgent transformational focus and attention include, but not limited to the issue of electronic voting and universal lawyers suffrage,  that is to say, “One Lawyer, One Vote”.

    The delegate system has been highly abused, totally misused and outrightly corrupted. It must be stopped forthwith. My experience at the last delegate election in Abuja was particularly worrisome and not palatable. The leadership of the Electoral Committee of the NBA pretended and feigned ignorance of what election is all about. Thus, it created a huge credibility problem for the product of the exercise.

    How does one explain an electoral  process in which a candidate is notified of his disqualification a few hours to the election proper when the NBA Constitution provides for 24hrs for such notice? I read a letter written by R. O. Balogun  to NBA President dated 31st  July 2014 on his  “unlawful exclusion from the NBA 2014 Elections” with consternation, pity and prayers for the electoral committee and the future of NBA.

    He cited the authority of OGBORU Vs  UDUAGHAN (2010)LPELR-CA/B/EPT/38/10 where His Lordship Moniga B. Dongban-Mensen (JCA) held: “The law as we understand it, is that “election” is a generic term; a process which embraces the entire gamut of activities ranging from accreditation, voting, collation to recording on all relevant INEC Forms and declaration of results”

    The question now is how would Okey Amaechi (SAN) interpret the above authority in relation to Article 20(f) of the Second Schedule to the NBA Constitution as it affected R. O. Balogun. More worrisome was the fact that there was no accreditation before voting at the last election and this was deliberate. There can be no excuse for failure. When a process is vitiated or characterised by flaws, fraud or fundamental irregularities, it cannot be cured by excuses. Whether this was done to favour a particular candidate is of no moment now. The deed, or better called, damage is already done. Our new President definitely must live up to prove these assertions wrong.

    Happily enough, this was one of the major campaign promises of the new president. The new leadership will do well not to shy away from this important agenda.

    It is sufficient to say that the welfare of members of the Bar particularly the junior and young member must occupy the priority attention of the new leadership. Otherwise, to keep the Association together in the near future may pose a serious challenge.

    Like Prof. Odinkalu said in the report of the NBA Committee on the Professionalisation of the NBA Secretariat in 2012 “the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) is a body with an “insecure future…If any other organisation or entity can rise to offer to members of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) a unifying promise of professional growth or edge, the NBA as we know it could become history.”

     

     

     

  • Ezeobi for burial tomorrow

    Ezeobi for burial tomorrow

    The remains of Chief Theodore Ezeobi(SAN) will be buried tomorrow at his home town, Osikwu Village Awgbu in Anambra State.

    The interment, which will be preceeded by a church service, will hold at the family compound in Osikwu Village Awgbu, Anambra State.

    The funeral will start with  a Pontifical Funneral Mass at St. Theresa’s Catholic Church, Osikwu Village Awgbu, Anambra State.

    The family will hold a Vigil Mass at 5.00 pm today at the family compound.

    Other events include condolence visits, scheduled for between tomorrow, September 3 and September 8.

    The burial will be rounded off with a thanksgiving man at the St. Theresa Catholic Church next Sunday, at 9.00 a.m.