The Nation Newspaper

Category: Law

  • Supreme Court re-affirms time limit for election petitions

    An application was brought before the Court pursuant to Sections 6(6)(a) and (b), 36(1) and (3), 294(2) of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended); Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act, 2004; Order 2 Rule 28(1) and Order 8 Rule 17 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1999 (As Amended); and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court and seeking for the following reliefs:-

    a) An order setting aside its ruling delivered in open court on 8th day of June, 2012 in Appeal Nos. SC.191/2012 and SC.191A/2012, terminating the said appeals;

    b) An order implementing/enforcing its order/decision delivered on 14th November, 2011 that the petition be heard on the merits;

    c) An order Restoring Appeal Nos: SC.191/2012, SC.191A/2012 terminated on 8th June, 2012 and hearing same on the merits;

    d) Accelerated hearing of this application;

    e) Such further order(s) as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.

    The background facts leading to this application may be stated as follows:-

    The applicants were the petitioners against the declaration of the 1st respondent as the winner of the Gubernatorial Election which held in Benue State on 26/4/2011 in Petition No: GET/BN/02/2011 filed on 17/5/2011. On 23/6/2011 they applied by motion ex-parte for the issuance of pre-hearing notice under paragraph 18(1) of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act (as amended). The Tribunal granted the order and caused pre-hearing conference notice to be issued to all the respondents. The 1st and 2nd respondents by different motions on notice sought orders to set aside the pre hearing notices already issued. While the 1st respondent later withdrew his application which was struck out on 29/6/2011 the Tribunal proceeded to hear the 2nd respondent’s motion which was dismissed on 19/7/2011. On appeal by the 1st respondent, the Court of Appeal set aside the ruling of the Tribunal and consequently decided that leave under paragraph 47 of the 1st Schedule to the Electoral Act is applicable to all applications under paragraph 18(1) of the same schedule and proceeded to dismiss the petition. On an appeal to the Supreme Court in SC.360/2010 delivered on 14/11/2011, the appeal was allowed and the decision of the Court of Appeal was set aside. The Supreme Court then made an order that the petition be heard on the merit. By the time the parties went back to the Tribunal, the 180 days time limit prescribed by the Constitution for hearing and determination of the petition had lapsed and the petition was accordingly struck out.

    On 4th June, 2012 when Appeal Nos. SC.191/2012 and SC.191A/2012 came up for hearing before this court, the 3rd respondent’s counsel informed the court that it had preliminary objection in respect of SC.191/2012. It was agreed by both parties that since Appeals SC.191/2012; SC.191A/2012 and SC.192/2012 are based on the same decision of the court below, the preliminary objection should be taken first and ruled upon. This Court then ruled on 8th June, 2012. This is the ruling that is being sought to be set aside.

    The central focus of the submission by the applicants’ counsel alleged a breach on the Constitutional provision of the right to fair hearing. The senior counsel related copiously to the Constitutionality of Section 285(6) in the light of Sections 4(8), 6(6)(a) and (b) and 36(1). In further establishing his position, learned counsel reiterated that Section 285(6) of the Constitution cannot take away the inherent powers and sanctions of a superior court of justice such as the Supreme Court etc that are not created by statute but by the Constitution. Counsel also submitted the damaging effect of Section 285(6) which is capable of emasculating or destroying the appellants’ Constitutional right of action, Constitutional right of appeal and Constitutional right to fair hearing implicit in Sections 285(2), 285(7), 246(i)(ii), 233(2)(e) (iv) and 36(i) of the said Constitution.

    It is also the submission of senior counsel that in the exercise of its powers under Sections 6(6), 233(1)(2) (e) (iv) and 285(7), the court is not to be inhibited by the provision of Section 285(6) of the Constitution especially if the tribunal gives the judgment within 180 days in compliance with the said Section and appeal arising there from is also decided by the Appellate court within 60 days in compliance with Section 285(7) of the said Constitution. Specifically and with reference made to the case of Alao V. A.C.B. Ltd. (2000) 9 NWLR (Pt. 672) 264 at 296; 2000) LPELR-SC.14/1995(2), the counsel re-iterated the findings therein and added that the provision of Section 6(6)(a) and (b) of the Constitution does not derogate from the general judicial powers of the court to set aside its own decision should injustice or miscarriage of justice be perpetuated; that the Supreme Court will unhesitatingly set aside its decision which is a nullity. Counsel in the result urged that prayers (a) and (c) on the motion paper be granted.

    On behalf of the 1st respondent, submitting to substantiate their course of objection, the 1st respondent’s lead counsel Mr. D.D. Dodo. SAN formulated three issues for determination. Submitting on the 1st issue raised, the 1st respondent’s counsel drew reference to the established principle of law that where an action or an appeal has no practical or utilitarian value to the appellant, even if judgment is given in his favour, the appeal is rendered a mere academic exercise. It was the counsel’s submission that, 180 days having lapsed from the date the original petition was filed and 60 days also having lapsed from the date of delivery of judgments by the Court of Appeal which judgments were appealed against in Appeals SC.191/2012 and SC.191A/2012, the two appeals have lapsed; that with the substantive appeals which gave rise to the present application having lapsed therefore, the application itself has become academic and bereft of any live issue consequent upon which the court now lacks the jurisdiction to entertain the application which should determine only live issues. It was the contention of counsel that the court should decline jurisdiction by reason of the Constitutional operation.

    In further submission, the learned counsel considered issues 2 and 3 together and stressed in strong terms the position taken by the court on the finality of its decisions, in a number of cases, which does not however extend to or include the power to sit on appeal over its decisions. Considering the decisions of the court, it was the counsel’s contention that the application did not satisfy any of the exceptional circumstances to warrant the honourable court interfering with its well considered decision delivered 8th June, 2012. The counsel on the totality therefore impressed upon this court to dismiss the application as lacking in merit.

    In opposing the motion also, the 2nd respondent’s counsel submitted that the court does not as a general rule have the jurisdiction to set aside its own judgment except on satisfaction of certain stringent conditions as set out in the case of Igwe V. Kalu (2002) 11 NWLR (Pt. 787) P. 435; (2002) LPELR-SC.26/1996 that the applicants at hand have failed to satisfy any of the conditions enumerated in the said authority to warrant setting aside the Ruling of the court delivered 8th June, 2012.

    In further submission, counsel re-echoed that the order of the court made 14/11/2011 to hear the petition denovo has no effect whatsoever because it was made after the 180 days within which the tribunal was to hear and determine the applicants’ petition filed 17/5/2011, which time expired on 12/11/2011. On the totality of his submission the counsel concluded that the applicants have failed to satisfy the conditions that will warrant this court to set aside its ruling delivered 8th June, 2012; he therefore urged that the application be dismissed.

    While adopting the submissions by the 1st and 2nd respondents, the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent Mr. Okutepa, SAN centered the totality of his argument on Order 8 rule 16 of the rules of the court which empowers the court to set aside its own decision; that in the absence of any reason given for the setting aside of the judgment, the counsel in summary also called for the dismissal of the application as a sheer abuse of court process.

    In considering the application, the Court noted that the crux of the application was centered on the 1st relief which sought an order setting aside the ruling delivered 8th June, 2012 and that the main issue for determination in this application therefore was:-

    “Whether in the circumstances of this case the applicants have, as a matter of law, satisfied the conditions to warrant this court, setting aside its Ruling delivered on 8th June, 2012.”

    The Court stated that Order 8 Rule 16 of the rules of court is specific in stating that the court has no jurisdiction to set aside its decision, Ruling/Judgment if properly made in the exercise of its powers and jurisdiction. The Court further stated that it was rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the 1st respondent, and the court has re-affirmed the finality of its decision in a plethora of cases and also held times without number that its inherent power to set aside its own decision, when same is later found to be a nullity or obtained by fraud, does not extend to include the power to sit on appeal over its judgment/ruling. This principle of law the Court stated was well entrenched in the case of Igwe V. Kalu (2002) 11 NWLR (Pt. 787) P. 435; (2002) LPELR-SC.26/1996. The Court held further relying on the above case that notwithstanding the above principle, there is also a rider or a caveat which holds secure that in appropriate cases, it is expedient that the court, in the exercise of its inherent powers, can set aside its Ruling or judgment provided the circumstance calling for such order has satisfied the stringent conditions that the judgment or ruling is a nullity; that such decision was obtained by fraud; and that the court was misled in delivering the said judgment or ruling.

    The Court noted that the appropriate question to pose at that juncture was, does the applicants’ application before the Court fall within the situational circumstances and the decided authorities? The Court further noted that it is for instance expedient to restate that the totality of the applicants’ averments in their supporting affidavit, only allege an “error” on the part of the court and not lack of competence in delivering the Ruling of 8th June, 2012. The Court held that with reference made to the conditions set out in the case of Igwe V. Kalu (supra), it is evident that for the court to set aside its judgment, the decision must have been a nullity. In other words it must have been made by the court either without statutory jurisdiction, or when a condition precedent for the court to assume jurisdiction has not been fulfilled. An erroneous judgment however, is one made within the court’s competence and therefore cannot be branded as a nullity.

    The Court stated that the affidavit in support of the applicants’ motion did not indicate that the court was misled into giving its ruling, or that there was the absence of jurisdiction on its part in entertaining the preliminary objection that culminated in the said ruling of 8th June, 2012. It was not also disclosed that the ruling sought to be set aside was obtained either by fraud or deceit.

    The other arm of the applicants’ view-point for consideration was the submission relating Section 285(6) and (7) of the Constitution which learned senior counsel argued constituted encroachment on the Independence of the judiciary and a denial of right of fair hearing to the determination of the applicants’ petitions.

    The Court stated that the Constitutional mandate and also its enforcement were well pronounced and enunciated in various judicial authorities by the court wherein imposition is placed upon the tribunal to deliver its judgment within 180 days from the date of filing a petition. The Court further stated that prominent among such authorities is the case of ANPP V. Goni (2012) 1 NWL R (Pt.1298) P.147 at 181; (2012) LPELR-SC.1/2012 (Consolidated), which affirmed the immutability of the 180 days instituted in Section 285(6). The Court held that the jurisdictional competence of the tribunal under Section 285(6) cannot by any reason exceed the 180 days allotted. It remains sacrosanct and can neither be added to nor subtracted from.

    On the whole, the Court held that the Constitutional effect of Section 285(6) and (7) had been well pronounced upon by the court times without number, in a plethora of authorities. The Court further held that the subsequent recurrence of suits filed and seeking to overreach the Constitutional interpretation of the Section thereof was of great concern. The Court stated that Clarion calls are made in loud and clear terms that there must be an end to litigation. The Court noted that it is unfortunate that the call appears as if it is a lone voice sounding only in the wilderness and not within human hearing. Decisions in case laws are meant to speak volume both in the given situation and for future guidance. Counsel was well advised to desist from filing unnecessary suits which are merely academic and yielding no benefits but mere waste of quality time. The Court held that the application at hand is purely academic and therefore frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of court process. Same was thereby refused and dismissed. The Court awarded punitive costs against the applicants’ counsel and it is assessed at N1,000,000.00k in favour of each set of respondents.

     

    Edited by LawPavillion

    LawPavilion Citation: (2014) LPELR-22882(SC)

  • Lagos plans data bank of sexual offenders

    The Lagos State government has concluded  plans  to  establish a database for sex offenders amongst other projects to enhance the efficacy of the justice sector.

    The idea behind the move is to  identify a serial rapist and mete out appropriate and stiffer punishment.

    The  Attorney-General and Commissioner  for Justice, Mr. Ade Ipaye disclosed this last week in Lagos  while declaring open  a three-day Action Plan workshop for the review of the justice sector in Lagos State.

    The workshop was funded by the United Nations (UN), through the  United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes (UNODC) in collaboration with  the European Union (EU) and the Federal Government. It is aimed at achieving  a sustainable approach towards improving justice delivery, especially in the criminal justice sector in the country.

    According to Ipaye, Lagos State features a justice system that encourages compliance with the rule of law, aids effective governance and improves the lives of residents.

    “Aside from our traditional strongholds of civil and criminal procedure reforms, improved case management facilitation, criminal justice sector coordination, the state is planning the provision of free mediation services to the public and others.

    Ipaye said the state recognised the need for all that come before its courts to access legal assistance that would facilitate a successful utilisation of the judicial system.

    “Our legal assistance scheme for the indigent, through the Office of the Public Defender(OPD) is growing and we have further established the Public Interest Law Partnership (PILP) to elicit and co-ordinate offers of pro-bono service by private legal practiotioners,”he noted.

    Lagos State, Ipaye said, is mindful as a pilot state, of the need to get it right so that others can benefit from the models established.

    He assured stakeholders of the state’s willingness to abide with the recommendations reached at the end of the  workshop, stating that the state has been in the forefront of justice sector reforms, which have invariably  percolated to other states across the country.

    The commissioner, however, recognised the need for linkages with renowned training institutions all over the world through partnership, staff exchange programmes and virtual exchange forums to faciliate peer learning and fast track developmental reforms, especially  in the area of forensic examination and state counsel on a very strong conusmer protection agency to safeguard consumers.

    Project coordinator, Justice Sector Reform, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes (UNODC), Mr Ade Omofade, disclosed that the organisation is embarking on the review and update of action plan projects  in 10 states in the country.

    The project, he said, was initiated with a view to supporting national priorities of effective coordination and cooperation among justice sector institutions, with enhanced legal and policy frameworks as well as enhancing operational structures and capabilities  in the justice sector, increased access to justice, respect for human rights and the rule of law, especially for disadvantage and vulnerable groups.

    He pointed out that Lagos was chosen as a pilot state for the project because it has consistently blazed the  trail in implementing judicial  reforms.

    Other states listed for the project are Anambra, Bayelsa, Benue, Cross Rivers, Imo, Osun, Katsina, Yobe and  the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja.

    Omofade also enunciated that the project is taking off  in Lagos in order to further enhance the practice of encouraging a strategic and sustainable approach towards the justice system reform.

    He said it was done as a necessary means of enhancing good governance, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

    He said the workshop, which has in  attendance  key stakeholders in criminal justice administration in Lagos State, would review and update the existing action plan already in place in the state.

    According to him, the review and update of this action plan is particularly  timely in linking with existing efforts and activities of the Lagos State government particularly in the protection of the rights of the most vulnerable  and disadvantaged.

    Omofade  said the participation of experienced stakeholders across various justice sector institutions and their input was absolutely essential to achieving  reform.

    In her  remarks, the chairman of the ocassion and  Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Ayotunde Phillips, represented by Justice Toyin Ipaye, canvassed  for more action on the parts of all stakeholders to sustain reform in justice sector.

    She said the state would tackle all issues causing bottlenecks in the justice sector frontally with a view to finding solutions to them and improve justice delivery in the state.

  • ‘Extension of state of emergency legal’

    ‘Extension of state of emergency legal’

    A Lagos lawyer, Mr. Abayomi Omoyinmi has said President  Goodluck Jonathan was right in extending the state of emergency in the three states in northeastern part of the country.

    The states are Borno, Yobe and Adamawa.

    He argued that the action of the president was in tandem with the law.

    Omoyinmi, who is a member of the Ogun State Judicial Council, justified the action of the President under the present circumstances and in view of the rate at which Boko Haram is perpetrating fresh insurgency on the people.

    According to him,  Boko Haram has created a very unsafe warlike environment in the northern  part of the country, particularly in the northeast.

    Omoyinmi argued that the fact that the state of emergency was not effectively used in the first instance  does not stop the President from making fresh request for an extension of the emergency rule.

    He counseled, however, that the President must  ensure that all the indices that will make the state of emergency effective are put in place and  achieved.

    He posited that unless the activities of the dreaded sect is nipped in the bud it would be difficult to hold  elections in the country next year.

    “Under the present situation, no successful election can take place. So it is not a matter of the president creating a ploy to ensure that election does not hold in the states, afterall the insurgency is not the creation of the president,” he noted.

  • Debt recovery: Bank appeals ruling

    Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB) Plc has appealed against a ruling by the Federal High Court in Lagos vacating its order to preserve the assets of a company, BSS Steel Rolling Mills Limited, which is under a receiver/manager.

    The bank is seeking to recover a N346 million debt from a Lagos businessman, Otunba Ayoola Abioye, said to own the company.

    The bank, through its lawyer Mr Norrison Quakers (SAN), has also filed an application urging the court to restrain Abioye or his agents from taking steps, based on the ruling, which could prejudice its constitutional right to seek redress at the Court of Appeal.

    A GTBank official Soga Adewale stated in a supporting affidavit that by offer letters dated May 11, 2009; June 30, 2009 and March 2, 2010, the bank, at Abioye’s request, granted various loan facilities amounting to N400 Million for the importation of iron rods.

    According to the bank, the facilities had a two-year tenor, including three months’ moratorium. They were secured by an All Assets Deed of Debenture over all the company’s fixed and floating assets; and a tripartite legal mortgage on a property located at 25 Sehinde Crescent Oshodi, owned by the company’s Vice Chairman Ayoola Abioye.

    Other security for the loan included tripartite legal mortgages on a five bedroom duplex located at 24C, Victoria Garden City, Victoria Island; a property owned by one Samuel Ariyo situated at 191 Igbosere Road, Lagos, and Abioye’s personal guaranty.

    The bank claimed that the company defaulted in its repayment of the loan facilities and could not meet up with its obligations.

    It said the company is indebted to it to the tune of N346,798,405.96 as at January 2012, while interest continued to accrue on the principal loan sum.

    In view if the defendant’s alleged failure to pay its debts, the bank appointed Quakers as a receiver/manager to take over and preserve the assets of BSS Steel Rolling Mills covered by the Deed of Debenture to enable the bank recover the debt.

    The bank accused Abioye, being the company’s alter ego, of failing to make good his promise of paying the loan in the event that the company is unable to pay.

    However, Abioye, in a counter affidavit, denied almost all the bank’s allegations, stating that the N400million loan granted by the bank was for different purposes and at different times.

    He said it was not true that as at January 2012, the company had defaulted so much that it had an indebtedness of N346, 798,405.96.

    Abioye said a forensic analysis of all the payments made by the company showed that the bank overcharged the company to the tune of N248, 779, 903.99.

    The trial judge, Justice Muhammed Idris, adjourned till June 6 for hearing.

  • Why we should swap the chibok girls

    As this piece is published, the over 200 girls, kidnapped from Government Girls Secondary School, Chibok, Borno State, may have been in the custody of the Boko Haram elements, for 43 days. That is an awfully long time to be among a gang of rapists, arsonists, brigands, looters, murderers, religious extremists and what have you. Unless by the special grace of God, most, if not all the girls would have been grievously defiled or molested, one way or another. So, if truly the hoodlums have offered to have their wives and children detained by the federal government, swapped in exchange for the Chibok girls, then Nigeria should accede to that request, without delay.

    After all, if the wives and children of the bandits are in detention, then they are most likely in protective custody of the federal government. For while their husbands or fathers are clearly despicable elements, because of their criminal conducts, the women and children can only become accomplices if they aided and abetted them in the commission of crime. Indeed, the mere fact that they are the spouses or children of this band of marauders can not make them legitimate detainees, except their individual conducts warranted that. So let’s swap their women and children for our girls.

    It is however my hope, that while in the custody of our government, unlike when they were under the control of their husbands or fathers, that, we have had the opportunity to teach them about the sanctity of human lives. I hope, that, while their husbands or fathers were forcefully converting the Christians among the Chibok girls to Muslims, that the security officials have all this while, allowed them to freely practice their religion. I also wish that while the bandits they have been co-habiting with as husbands or fathers were threatening to sell off the Chibok girls into slavery, our security agencies were able to make provisions for the children among them, to go to school to acquire education.

    Indeed, it is my wish that if we had anticipated this perverted offer from Boko Haram, to exchange our innocents for their peculiar type, then we have had our opportunity to train some of them, as undercover agents to re-indoctrinate these criminals. For while in the state custody, it is possible to gain the confidence of these women and children, whose husbands or fathers have become criminals, to begin to see them for truly who they are. I hope that while in state custody, their innocents, especially their children, have been exposed to the contemporary musical lyrics of Flavour, Ice Prince, Tuface, D’bang and others. I hope they had the opportunity, while in our custody to play games, watch cartoons, and eat ice creams, rice, chicken and plantain. I hope they were shown the documentaries on Malala Yusuf of Pakistan, and also the television recordings of the several bombings and the anguish and pains caused by the incendiary actions of their husbands or parents and their comrades in trade elsewhere. Such expose, would have trained them to re-train their bandit husbands or fathers.

    But beyound getting our Chibok girls back, there is the urgent need to reinvigorate the fight against Boko Haram and other putative insurgency in our country, through other means. While fighting to win this current war, we need as a country to reappraise the structure and philosophy of our nationhood, if we want to avoid ‘a country of war without end’. That explained the need for a national conference; for many believe that the festering uprisings across Nigeria, and the obvious difficulty in subduing them, are mutations of the structural deficiencies in our country. The recent spat between the Hausa-Fulani oligarchists and the Yoruba autonomists underscores this urgency. For the country as presently structured and governed, is untenable.

    But while we seek the enduring solution to the challenges of our nationhood, through dialogue, those in positions of authority must at least attempt to exhibit some semblance of good governance. I consider it a big shame that while we are contending with treating the victims of the Boko Haram’s last week’s twin bomb attacks in Jos, we are also forced to worry about the victims of cholera outbreak, in the same city. So while Boko Haram criminals bear unequivocal responsibility for the victims of bomb attacks, Governor Jonah Jang and other relevant administrative officials of the state bear unequivocal responsibility for the victims of cholera outbreaks. So, while reporting the death caused by Boko Haram, we should also report the death caused by the failure of Governor Jang and his officials to provide clean water and enforce basic sanitation in the state.

    To show how thoroughly alienated Governor Jang and most of his co-travelers across the country are from their primary responsibility, the Governor was reported to have blamed the market officials for not noticing the strange vehicles that bore the improvised explosive devices, which killed over 100 persons in Jos. Yet, even as the Boko Haram murderers ravage our country, no state or local government, to my knowledge, has taken the important step to expose their residents or even their public officials to basic security trainings. While we mourn our losses, I guess it is time that we mobilize the citizens to understand basic security tips and how to react to an emergency.

    So, while the #Bringbackourgirls campaigners are working very hard to keep the lethargic government of President Goodluck Jonathan on its toes, it may consider adding the further demand of training Nigerians on basic security tips, as an urgent necessity. As the Jos bombing and the foiled attempts in Kano have shown, the Boko Haram elements are not merely contended with keeping in custody, our girls from Chibok.

     

  • ‘Azinge bids NIALS farewell’

    ‘Azinge bids NIALS farewell’

    The Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS) has reviewed its activities under the outgoing Director-General Prof Epiphany Azinge (SAN), who will soon bow out. JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU reports.

    How has the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS) fared under its outgoing Director-General Prof Epiphany Azinge (SAN)?

    Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Aloma Mariam Mukhtar (CJN), a former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Presient Joseph Bodunrin Daudu (SAN) and Prof. Charles Iloegbune, among others, believe the institute has thrived under his leadership.

    They spoke in Abuja at  the maiden State of the Institute and valedictory lecture by Azinge. He spoke on the topic: Law and transformation: NIALS,  forensic empiricism  and legal pragmatism.

    Azinge was appointed Director-General in 2009 and has served the mandatory five-year term. He will hand over the baton of leadership to Prof. Deji Adekunle

    Justice Mukhtar, who is NIALS’ Governing Council chairman,  said the many strides achieved during the Azinge  era were monumental.

    According to her, he is one of the most successful administrators since the inception of the institute, adding that his legacies would resonate many years to come.

    “Your dogged determination for perfection has made you a dynamic force to be reckoned with and as the Chairman of Council I am extremely proud to be part of the history of this great Institution. Under your dispensation NIALS became a brand and as far as legal scholarship is concerned NIALS is at the fore.

    “The Institute can boast of over 30 peer reviewed legal journals of International repute, the research undertakings by the Institute are truly world class and the findings of these projects are landmarks. The Institute over the years has established platforms for respected political leaders, academic scholars and statesmen worldwide.

    “These revolutionary public lectures have been  highly sought after by the polity. Also, I must mention the strategic roundtable  sessions, which have served as platforms on very pertinent national issues. Indeed, these activities have been of great educational benefit to us all,” Justice Muktar said.

    According to the CJN, it was during Azinge’s tenure that she had the privilege of being part of the 2013 Karibi Whyte Convocation ceremony.

    “The high point of this ceremony was the graduation of the first set of PhD students. It was truly a memorable event and one that resonates positively for the Nigerian educational system that indeed, one can still acquire his or her doctoral degree within the stipulated time frame of three years in Nigeria,” she said.

    The Institute, she said, has truly achieved world class standard and has been instrumental in propelling the Institute to astronomical heights.

    “You have been a channel for  change and contributed immensely to the stability of the Institute where we can now announce the Institute as world class. It is for this and other numerous reasons, we are here to wish you the very best as you draw the curtain on a very successful tenure as the Director General of the Institute,” she said.

    Daudu said Azinge ran a superhuman tenure at the NIALS, adding that what he achieved only takes the grace of God.

    “I am very happy that he started peacefully and has ended on a very very high note. NIALS has never been like this and I am confident that all the person coming in needs to do is to follow the template left by Prof. Azinge. He would be adjudged as being successful or more successful if he merely follows the templates that has been laid down on the record by Prof. Azinge and refines them.

    “He doesn’t have a difficult task  at all because the work has been done. All he needs to do is for the year, how was it arranged? He follows the same thing,  if he likes  to add to it let him add to it but  keep up running with what Prof. Azinge has done, he should not avoid it.

    “The beauty of it is that they  have  all been documented, it is all on record so, if I am stepping into his shoes, it  makes things very easy for me to be more successful than Prof Azinge,” Daudu said.

    Iloegbune said Azinge was “a real phenomenon in the Institute.”

    “He has left a trail, he has left a mark that I highly sympathise with anybody who would like to step into it. But we know Prof  Adekunle, who is coming in. He is a very capable  man and I am sure that he will be propelled by this enthusiasm that is overwhelming internally and globally. Azinge is great and a gift to Nigeria and I am happy that he has given that gift to us,” he said.

    Azinge said under his watch, many Lectures series were established, providing platforms for robust scholarly engagement.

    “The state of the Institute Lecture is therefore, the latest addition to NIALS Lecture Series. It is a platform for me as an outgoing Director-General to highlight clear-cut legal methodology that  emerged  in researches conducted under my watch.

    “It is also an opportunity to assess the impact of strategic vision of the Institute under my watch. Here we will evaluate the impact of our roundtables and communiqués flowing there from; our policy dialogues, public lectures and conversations; relevance of our leading peer reviewed specialized journals and book publications; our innovative programmes for aspiring judges and public policy analysis and experts; modified programmes for  paralegal officers in our continuing legal education: our PhD programme in legislative drafting; our agenda setting programme and draft of bills to address critical sectors of our national life, ranking of law faculties; conferment of Fellowships and admission into NIALS Hall of Fame, community service that finds expression in Public Service Award and support to secondary Institutions, establishment of endowment of Professorial Chairs and more significantly, the integrity of being acknowledged as Nigeria’s law abode.”

    After highlighting his numerous achievements, Azinge urged NIALS staff to support Adekunl.

    “I hereby extend my hand of fellowship to him and pledge my support and loyalty to his leadership. May I also appeal to all members of staff to please give all your support to the new Director-General. My prayer is that his tenure will be fruitful and even more successful than mine.

    “I also pray that under his leadership, NIALS will move to the next level and all over the world the institute will be truly recognized as ‘Nigeria’s Law Abode’.

  • Agbakoba scores confab below average

    Agbakoba scores confab below average

    Former President of the Nigerian Bar Association and a member of the ongoing National Conference, Dr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) has scored the confab below average in terms of performance.

    In a chat with The Nation, Agbakoba said participating in the confab has been very revealing, but regrettably, nothing massive has come out of it.

    He frowned at the extension of the conference by four weeks, stating that if the confab manages its time very well, it can conclude its assignment within the originally allotted time.

    Agbakoba said: “The National Conference in my view  has offered Nigerians the opportunity to revisit their relationship with one another, that is the main purpose. Forget the fact that people said that the President could not summon it, the fact is that we are there. The conference is really very revealing, it reveals the great  division in Nigeria. There is a massive divide between the various ethnic groups in the country.

    “On whether the conference is going to be transnational, Agbakoba said: “I don’t think so because we are still caught in the web of massive ethnic, religious issues. So you find for instance, the Southwestern  zone appearing to be  the most dynamic and the most transnational on all the key issues. Issues about how Nigeria can move forward, the most key issue is that of regional autonomy. They  have been  the most  forthcoming on it. The North has been a bit conservative in the sense that they would rather retain the system but If I  may ask, don’t they know that the system has not worked.

    The former NBA boss said: “In the context of the southeast, surprisingly, I have failed to see a coherent and conducive policy of transformation coming  out of the Southeast. Southsouth  has canvassed the issue of resource control.

    “So that has been the general setting. For me on one hand I will express relief that after the initial confrontation with Lamido’s out burst, we have been able to talk, we have been able to get the committees to submit their interim report, so that should be applauded. But what is most important is whether these deliberations will not become another talk shop. The challenge is who is going to use the outcome of the deliberations.

    On his rating of the work of the conference so far, Agbakoba said: “My rating of our work so far is just  below average, it is important that the outcome of the conference should be converted.”

    Concerning whether there should have been an extension of the conference  Agbakoba said: “I don’t think so because the conference can be better managed in terms of time. For those of us who declined to have remunerations,  to add four weeks  is just  further personal expenses,  maybe some like the extension because of the remunerations.

    I don’t know, but  I think that we have enough time to come and conclude our work within the originally allotted time. The problem is that too many delegates want to  grandstand because the media is there, but if the media can go and we settle down because right now the media is not contributing anything. A lot of delegates want to stand up and talk because the media is there, but if the media is out and we review very carefully the way we can manage time. There is really nothing because when you look at the interim reports,  we  have only four committees with controversial issues namely the committee on the devolution of powers, committee on political restructuring in Nigeria, committee on fiscal federalism, committee on religion. The other committee’s  work are not  really controversial. The confab has been eye opening, revealing but surprisingly, nothing massive has come out so far.”

  • NBA to document rights violations in Northeast

    NBA to document rights violations in Northeast

    •Lawyers seek free, fair election

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has urged its branches in the Northeast to document rights violations by security agencies in the region.

    This, it said, would enable it take action against any culpable agency.

    This was one of the resolutions reached at the association’s National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting held in Abuja.

    It said its branches in Borno, Yobe and Adamawa states should send such documented reports to the National Secretariat.

    The fight against terrorism, the NBA noted, is not only for the government, adding that where necessary, it would employ public interest litigations.

    “Therefore, NBA calls on all sectors of the economy, social organisations, including the private sector to be involved in the efforts to confront violent extremism in the country.

    “In fulfilment of its public interest role, the NBA shall henceforth, be more proactive and active in the use of public interest litigation to challenge impunity and abuse of human rights, and also the promotion of Rule of Law, Pro Bono,” it said.

    According to the association, public interest litigation not only provides the possibility of attaining reasonable redress of the grievances of victims of exploitation and violations of human rights, it can also be used in enforcing and  promoting the rule of law, clarifying laws, challenging draconian laws, fostering government accountability, creating pressure and public advocacy, among others.

    These were contained in a communiqué issued at the end of the meeting.

    On insecurity, NBA said: “The NEC condemned in strong terms the Chibok girls kidnap and the recent Nyanya bomb attacks on two occasions, and further noted that the Chibok girls’ episode has exposed the lethargic response of the Federal Government to matters of urgent national security.

    “The NEC observed that it has taken the abduction of the 223 school girls from Chibok Girls Secondary School for the menace of Boko Haram and terrorism to get the type of attention the government should pay to such dire situations and reiterated its earlier reminder to the Federal Government that the primary duty of government is the security of lives and properties of its citizens.

    “The NBA NEC joined the world in calling on the Federal Government to do everything lawful within its powers to ensure the return of the remaining 223 school girls safely home to their families, and also appreciated foreign governments that have offered assistance of sorts in that regard.

    It added: “While NEC agreed that the terrorist sect, Boko Haram, should be rooted out, it also advised that no option should be foreclosed in enthroning peace, as history has taught us that constructive engagement of such insurgents have sometimes yielded dividends

    “That intelligence gathering, which is crucial to counter terrorism strategy, is one area that the Federal Government of Nigeria has failed woefully, and that the Federal government should improve on its intelligence gathering capabilities with a view to assisting security agencies in the war against terror.

    NBA condemned the porous nature of the nation’s borders, which have made them vulnerable to attack and commission of heinous crimes by rebels from neighbouring countries. It then called on the Federal Government to pay more attention to the borders with a view to securing them.

    It viewed as embarrassing, allegation by the human rights watchdog, Amnesty International, that Nigerian Security Forces failed to act on advance warnings about Boko Haram’s armed raid on the state-run boarding school in Chibok, which led to the abduction of over 200 school girls. “While the NBA does not believe that that allegation is true yet, the NBA NEC stated that it is waiting impatiently with berthed breath for the Federal government to come out in no distant time with its findings,” it said.

    NBA urged the National Assembly to expedite action in passing pending Justice Sector Bills into law as it is not enough for members of the National Assembly to issue statements condemning acts of terrorism and violence; and visiting victims in the hospitals.  “They would have helped fight the scourge of terrorism and walked the talk if they had passed these all important Bills into Law, when they should have done so,” the communique said.

    It urged the government not to tamper with the judiciary’s independence, saying: “Government must grant to it, true financial autonomy, and a full self-accounting status. The funds of the judiciary must be released to it as soon as same is approved in the budgets of the Federal and State governments.”

    NBA announced the lifting of the ban on campaigns ahead of its July 14 and 15  election. With this development, candidates for various offices  wasted no time in distributing their campaign materials.

    Five candidates have shown interest in the Presidency of the association which has been zoned to the Western  Bar Forum.The candidates are Mrs. Funke Adekoya (SAN), Mr Dele Adesina (SAN), Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN), Mr. Augustine Alegeh (SAN) and Osas  Justy Erhabor

    The association president, Okey Wali (SAN) advised  candidates  to go about the campaigns with maturity and avoid campaign of calumny.

    NBA Lagos branch, at the NEC meeting,  presented its  resolution  for free and fair election.

    The branch, in a motion,  sought the nullification of stipulations in the guidelines  and time table for 2014 NBA elections requiring every registered branch to submit bank tellers as evidence of payment of annual Bar practising fees as at April 1.

    It said detailed information of all lawyers and all branch  members who have paid practising fees as at March 31 is already with the the NBA secretariat and should be made available to all branches  and the NBA electoral committee.

    The branch contented that the requirement is not contained in NBA Constitution 2009 and is, therefore, an unconstitutional requirement which would disenfranchise branches and voters.

    The Lanke Odogiyan Election Review Committee  report, which has since been adopted by the NBA NEC, the branch said, should direct the “electoral committee to amend the guidelines to bring them in conformity with the above resolutions”

    Reacting to the resolution, the  Chairman National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Prof. Chidi Odinkalu said: “A lot of things about our elections are opaque, new branches are being created, manufactured overnight and hawked in the black market.

    “We have got delegates list that are unknown, we have got people that are not very well known and whose origins are very well known. There is nothing that gives us the assurance that this election will have credibility.

    “When an NBA president emerges under a moral burden because the process of creating that Presidency lacks legitimacy, the NBA itself lacks legitimacy and we don’t want a Bar that lacks legitimacy particularly in a country that is going into  very crucial  elections in 2015.

    “Be fair, be transparent and give every side an equal shot to do things properly. Produce voters rolls. We adopted the Lanke Odogiyan Committees report in 2012. Why have we not implemented it to make sure that we have a transparent voters’ rolls with the delegates properly delineated?

    “Let us for the first time agree to have independent monitors in NBA’s election and above all, these new black market branches must not be allowed to vote.”

    On what may happen if the new branches paid their practicing fees at their former branches before their creation, Odinkalu said:   “They will vote in their former branches,  but not under the current rules, no,” he said.

    A former President of  Otu-Okaiwu Lagos, Chief Guy Ikokwu said: “I think that lawyers who are the bastions of democracy cannot get to a situation where they deny ordinary  lawyers their voters’ rights when ordinary  villagers, even people who are disabled are allowed on the voters’ list.

    “Sixty millions  of us in Nigeria are allowed to choose our President. Lawyers who are practising and who have fulfilled their financial dues should be able to vote and choose a president.

    “And if the president is coming from one of the six geo-political zones in the country, that is ok. It is fair.”

  • ‘Law is my family’s second language’

    ‘Law is my family’s second language’

    Mr Adesegun Mohammed Ajibola (SAN) and son of former World Court judge, Prince Bola Ajibola (SAN). He cut his legal teeth in three law firms in England before joining G.O.K Ajayi & Co, Lagos. In 1993, he joined his father’s firm, Bola Ajibola & Co, Lagos, where he is presently the Managing Partner and Head of Chambers. He was made SAN in 2011 after 21 years at the Bar. He tells JOSEPH JIBUEZE how his father influenced him to read law, how to ensure speedier justice delivery, and sundry national issues.

    It must be a huge responsibility to be the son of Prince Bola Ajibola (SAN), a former Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, a  former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and a  judge of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at the Hague.

    Mr Adesegun Ajibola, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, was born in 1963, a year after his father was called to the English Bar at the Lincoln’s Inn, having graduated from the Holborn College of Law, University of London.

    Coming from such a family, Ajibola said people expect  a lot from him. It is also not surprising that he chose to study law as a young adult, having been influenced by his father‘s successful career. “It is impossible for an  animal not to be influenced by his environment, in particular by his forebears,” Ajibola admitted.

    “If you see a man behaving in a particular manner, most times they ask you to check his background and his parentage. My case was no exception. I grew up knowing my dad as a lawyer. Legal profession was the second language in our home.

    “Words like lawyers, courts, Nigerian Bar Association, conferences, seminars and things that had a bearing on the legal profession were common themes in our home. One could not but be influenced by those circumstances one found himself. I must confess that my influence came from that background.

    “In a lot of ways  my dad was helpful in encouraging that I took that line, being a line he had trodden successfully and in which he believed I could find a future. With gratitude to God, I’m privileged to be born into that environment which gave me the opportunity to be in the noble profession that I have been in all my working life.”

    But could he have studied anything else other than law? “Most likely I would have been an artiste, a musical artiste, if I hadn’t read law. When I say this to some people they laugh. I love music and I still do. That was the direction that I first felt I was going to go.

    “Another thing that I thought of when I was young was farming. I love plants and animals. I’m amazed at how trees grow from saplings, and how animals grow from birth. I love nature, astrology and the likes.”

    Ajibola said people, even judges, expect a lot from him, being the son of a former justice minister, but he said he is doing his best to live outside his father’s shadow. For instance, it took him over 20 years of hard work to be made a SAN.

    “I have grown used to those kinds of situations; people expect so much from me. It is  not  uncommon. I expect that coming from that  stock, there is a level of quality that would be assumed that you would have. But in most cases that is not always the case.

    “Everyone has his own approach and ways of looking at things. I think it is a bit unfair, but I understand perfectly why it is so, but I have accepted it as  a  way of life and a  cross I must carry. I live with it as comfortably as I can, without  letting it get to me much.”

    Having practiced law for two decades, Ajibola is bothered by allegations of corruption in the judiciary, and he would want to see anyone indicted tried. He spoke against the backdrop of the practice of retiring judges found to have violated their oath of office.

    “Judiciary and corruption are two things that must never  mix because of the very crucial  nature of the responsibility that the judiciary is required to discharge. It is of a nature that cannot habour corruption. It  could destroy  its entire fabric.

    “On whether  corrupt judges should be subjected to criminal trial, I think there is a good point there. We have the anti-corruption laws either founded in the EFCC Act, ICPC Act  or Criminal Code. Judges are no exemption from the applicability of those laws and the requirement that they can be prosecuted if they are found wanting in that regard.

    “I am one of those who believe that the first step in dealing with the problem of corruption is the immediately relieving them of the responsibility that they hold, and then giving an opportunity for the law to take its course.

    “I agree that they should go a step further, and that judges should not be allowed to feel immune from the hands of the law, when in fact the law does not allow for such immunity.

    “If any judicial officer has been found corrupt, or has committed a crime of any sort, either in his sheer capacity or otherwise, he should be made to face the law like anybody else would do. I think it would send down the right signal and encourage the deterrence that we want to have.

    “As soon  as we begin to see such situations, perhaps we will see a better managed judiciary and less corruption. However, I don’t think there’s a society that is corruption-free,  but we want to have it as manageable as possible, so that we don’t have a breakdown of law and order which can flow from a breakdown of judicial responsibility.”

    Another area of concern to stakeholders is the very long time it takes to decide a case. There are several instances in which trial is yet to begin in criminal cases that were instituted against former governors in 2007.

    Most have been delayed due to the filing of one interlocutory application or the other. Some have wondered whether such preliminary applications should be done away with. What does Ajibola think?

    He said: “Law in its application must have a process, and there are procedure and rules which guide the application of those laws. However, those rules and procedure are open for abuse by people who don’t have the proper sense of responsibility. That is the aspect that we need to deal with and arrest.

    “We as lawyers need to tell ourselves the frank truth. We have ethical standards; rules and regulations which guide our practice. They do not encourage the idea of filing frivolous applications with a deliberate intention of delaying the matter.

    “But it is difficult to know when an application is filed for a frivolous reason. It is the difficulty in accessing that intention that gives room for the abuse that we talk about. How do you know whether in sincere and honest sense the lawyer is not acting in the best interest of his client, moreso when the steps he has taken are  procedures which the law allows?”

    What  does he think is the best way out? “We need to re-orientate ourselves and appreciate the fact that at the end of the day we’re all losers. It may work for you today, because you’re on this side of the law. If tomorrow you find yourself on the other side, and the same thing happens to you, you will lose.

    “Encouraging that kind of approach to administration of justice is  something that will do  no one no good at the end of the day. It may help in resolving a temporary situation, but in the long run, we’re all losers. Perhaps there is no other country that has as much causes of delays in dispensation of justice as Nigeria, except as I hear, in India.

    “We need to evolve better arrangement which will be in  place to curb the excesses of some of us  who abuse that process. I think it requires a think-tank approach, as try to do regarding law reforms. The new Lagos State rules came  from the need to fast-track and reduce bottle-necks and roadblocks in  dispensation of justice.

    “However, no one process is perfect. Any process designed by man stands to be defeated by the same men. The same man who invented the pencil invented the eraser. We don’t benefit from it generally. As far as I’m concerned, we’re all losing.

    “Once we can accept that as a platform, and get people to understand that the failure of one is that failure of all, the sooner we begin to approach the situation from a standpoint of positive and honest sense of purpose. It requires a scientific approach in dealing with a very  fundamental problem which has bedeviled our system and is slowing us down.”

    Another provision  in the rules that has caused delays is  a case that starts de novo (afresh) if witnesses had been called before  a judge is transferred, is elevated to a higher court, or dies and another judge takes over.

    In that case, witnesses would have to be recalled. Ajibola said this provision too, needs to be revisited. “It’s difficult for a case no to start de novo. One of the functions of  the judge is to watch the demeanor of the witnesses before him, not just listen to testimony alone. He has to see that the evidence being given is given with conviction, and in a manner which portrays the truth.

    “It is difficult for a judge who has taken over a case and who has not had the opportunity of watching the demeanor of the witnesses to  form a complete picture of the evidence that has been given. It will be akin to vision without sound.

    “I agree that it reverses the order and tends to delay the matter, but in most cases where evidence had not been taken, the need for  de novo is not applicable. It’s applicable in most situations where evidence has been taken. It will be unfair to expect a judge who did not see the witness to have the complete picture and form an opinion as to whether the witness is one of truth or of lies.

    “It is that requirement to see that justice is done and transparently done that gave rise to the de novo principle. When you compare the injustice that can be, you probably find out that it is better to take all the time that is required to achieve justice than injustice in a short time.

    “What I will be happy to see  is that the aspect of the requirement for trial to start all over as it is in most cases is restricted strictly to aspects which evidence by witnesses have been taken, so that whoever takes over assumes all the processes and procedural steps taken before then.

    “In this country where our approach to things is most times questionable, once you have a witness come in once and give evidence, getting him back most times to repeat most things he has said is a problem. Situations change and influences would come in. Eventually some people escape justice.”

  • VAT: Why Lagos lost at Supreme Court

    VAT: Why Lagos lost at Supreme Court

    The Supreme Court has ruled in the case of Lagos State vs Attorney-General of Federation. A lawyer and Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria, Chukwuemeka Eze, analyses the verdict.

    On April 11, the Supreme Court struck out the suit instituted by the Lagos State government in 2009 challenging the constitutionality of the Value Added Tax Act (VATA), which vests in the Federal Inland Revenue Service the mandate to collect tax indirectly from consumers of goods and services except those expressly exempted under VATA.

    Lagos State in its quest to increase its internally generated revenue had loathed the enactment and implementation of the VAT by the Federal Government through the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS). Section 40 of VATA provides that:

    “Notwithstanding any formula that may be prescribed by any other law, the revenue accruing by virtue of the operation of this Act shall be distributed as follows-

    (a) 15 per cent to the Federal Government;

    (b) 50 per cent to the state governments and the Federal Capital Territory(FCT), Abuja; and

    (c) 35 per cent to the local governments:

    Provided that the principle of derivation of not less than 20 per cent shall be reflected in the distribution of the allocation amongst states and local governments as specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.”

    From this provision, it is evident that the 36 states  and the FCT will share 50 per cent of the VAT collections while 768 local government councils will take 35 per cent. Of course, the Federal Government will take 15 per cent.

    Considering that Lagos is the economic hub of Nigeria hosting about 70 per cent of non-oil economic activities in Nigeria, including industrial output, in the Lagos corridor, Lagos State is convinced that if it can wrestle the collection of VAT from the Federal Government, then it will not need the monthly allocation from the Federal Accounts Allocation Committee to administer the state. Without VAT, it is currently earning about N20 billion per month as internally generated revenue.

    Lagos sought to take comparative advantage of its commercial status, hence its challenge of VATA. A little digress will show that Lagos State had floored the Federal Government last year on the issue of whether it was the Federal Government through the Nigeria Tourism Development Corporation (NTDC) or a state government should regulate the operation of hotels or hospitality centres within a state.

    The Supreme Court had resolved the case then in favour of Lagos State government. Earlier, the state had in 2009 enacted the Hotel Occupancy & Restaurant Consumption Law (HORCL), which places consumption tax of 5 per cent on personal services enjoyed in a hotel or restaurant or event centre. Such services include food and drinks. The argument by experts that this consumption tax contained in the HORCL is similar to VAT, which is also 5 per cent of the value of goods supplied or service rendered, did not deter the Lagos State government in the implementation of the law. It was further argued by experts that consumption tax charged by Lagos State was akin to the moribund sales tax, which was declared illegal and unconstitutional by the courts in two notable cases.

    In Mama Cass Restaurant Limited & 2 Ors. v. Federal Board of Inland Revenue and Attorney General of Lagos State, reported in Vol. 2 of Tax Law Report, the Federal High Court in 2006 decided that remittance of consumption tax should be made to FIRS. In the earlier case of Aberuagba v. A.G. Ogun State, reported in (1985) I Nigeria Weekly Law Report Part 3, page 260, the Supreme Court had decided, in a case involving collection of sales tax on liquor brought into Ogun State during the 2nd Republic, that where there are identical laws passed by the National Assembly and a state House of Assembly, it would be more appropriate to invalidate the identical law passed by the state House of Assembly on the ground that the law passed by the National Assembly has covered the whole field of that particular subject matter.

    From the above background, one can see that many battles have been fought in many courts as to which law between the Federal and the state should be obeyed by the citizens when both of them have been enacted on the same matter of consumption tax, which is represented by VAT under the federal law.

    After fighting individual and corporate entities on this matter at the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal, Lagos State decided to go for the Big Masquerade –the Federal Government – so as to settle the matter once and for all.

    Lagos claimed against the Federal Government “that the House of Assembly of Lagos State of Nigeria is the body entitled, to the exclusion of any other legislative body, to enact laws with regard to the imposition and collection of tax on the supply of all goods and services within Lagos State of Nigeria and that the Lagos State of Nigeria, or any agency of the state, is the body entitled, to the exclusion of any other body, to assess and collect such tax, and that the revenue of the Lagos State government has been and continues to be affected by the enforcement of the provisions of the Value Added Tax Act, Cap V1, Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘The VAT ACT’.”

    The state sought the following reliefs:

    “A declaration that the Value Added Tax Act Cap V1 Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 2004 is, to the extent that it provides for the imposition and collection of taxes on goods and services in Lagos State (and other states of the federation), outside the legislative competence of the National Assembly and is therefore, unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    A perpetual injunction restraining the Federal Government of Nigeria by itself, its ser- vants or any of its agencies from continuing to give effect to the provision of the said Value added Tax Act to impose and collect taxes on goods and services within the Lagos State of Nigeria.”

    The Federal Government instead of confronting Lagos frontally, by going into the merits of the case, filed a preliminary objection on the grounds that (a) the cause of action relates to the acts of a federal organ and cannot form the basis of invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which requires that the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction can only be invoked in disputes arising between a state and the Federation or between states; (b) that the entire suit constitutes an abuse of court process and should be struck out.

    The Supreme Court found that the thrust of the claim of Lagos State are encapsulated in the following paragraphs:

    “… the Lagos State Government is entitled, to the exclusion of any other body, to collect any tax charged on the supply of all goods and services within the Lagos State of Nigeria under any law passed by the Lagos State House of Assembly and no other body or Government is entitled to a share of such tax may be collected.”

    “The Federal Government continues, through it agents, to administer the Value Added Tax Act and to assess and collect tax thereunder with regard to the supply of goods and services within the Lagos State of Nigeria and within the territories of other States and distribute such tax in accordance with the fee sharing formula.”

    The Supreme Court painfully came to a conclusion that the claim of Lagos relates to the revenue of the Government of the Federation, consequent upon which the taxes one of its agencies levies and/or seeks the interpretation of the Constitution as to how the operation of the Constitution affects the Federal Government or any of its agencies, is at the wrong court hence the Court declined jurisdiction.

    This means that the matter that Lagos filed at the Supreme Court should have been properly filed at the Federal High Court, which is the court cloaked with exclusive jurisdiction to determine disputes relating to the revenue of the Government of the Federation. Ultimately, the Supreme Court declined jurisdiction and struck out the case of Lagos State Government. What will be the next move of LASG? Is the VAT war over?

    It seems but with Lagos, one can never be too sure of anything. This reminds me of the title of one of those books I read in the 1980s: Lagos Na Waa, I swear!