Tomorrow, 25 lawyers will be conferred with the coveted Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC). The process of selection has in recent times been questioned, with some lawyers calling for the abolition of the rank. Their argument is that it has been politicised, as, according to them, those believed to be qualified do not get the title. A group, the “Abolitionists”, has been at the forefront of the call for the scrapping of the rank, saying it will create a level-playing field for all lawyers. The “Retentionists” say there should be a height all lawyers must aspire to reach, which the SAN represents. JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU and JOSEPH JIBUEZE revisit the arguments.
T
omorrow, the number of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) will swell. Twenty-five lawyers will be conferred with SAN by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC). Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court Mr Sunday Olorundahunsi, who is LPPC’s Secretary, said the selection was done in accordance with the provisions of the Legal Practitioners’ Act 2004.
The new silk are: Prof. Yemi Akinseye-George, Prof. Clement James-Dakas, Mr Femi Falana, Mrs joy Adesina, Mrs Connie-Jean Aremu, Mahmud Magaji, Ogwu Onoja, Garuba Tetengi, Selekeowei Larry, Abenny Mohammed, Charles Obishai, Luke Illogu, Francis Agbu, Paul Ananaba, Akinlaja Moses, Ahmed Raji and Adekunle Oyesanya.
Others are: Rotimi Oguneso, Oluseye Opasanya, Aduroja Olumuyiwa, Aliyu Umar, Ilo Sanusi, Rotimi Jacobs, Ndukwe Nnnawuchi and Henry Ogbodu.
Olorundahunsi said the stringent selection criteria accounted for the low number of applications received. A total of 125 applied; 71 were shortlisted.
SAN is a title conferred on lawyers of not less than 10 years’ standing who have distinguished themselves in the legal profession.
It is the equivalent of the Queen’s Counsel (QC) in the United Kingdom (UK) from which Nigeria became independent in 1960 (Republic 1963), as well as in South Australia, the Northern Territory, and Canada (except Ontario and Quebec).
Several countries use similar designations such as Senior Counsel, State Counsel, Senior Advocate, and President’s Advocate. A SAN enjoys the privilege of sitting in the “Inner Bar”, as distinguished from the “Outer Bar” consisting of junior advocates. SANs also have their cases called first in court.
The conferment is made by the LPPC headed by the Chief Justice of Nigeria. It comprises the Attorney-General, one Justice of the Supreme Court, (chosen by the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General for a term of two years, renewable on one occasion only), the President of the Court of Appeal, five of the Chief Judges of the States (chosen by the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General for a term of two years, renewable on one occasion only), the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, and five legal practitioners who are Senior Advocates of Nigeria (chosen by the Chief Justice and the Attorney-General for a term of two years, renewable once).
The first recipients of the award were Chief F.R.A. Williams and Dr Nabo Graham-Douglas on April 3, 1975. Since then, 349 persons have been awarded SAN.
The award of the title has been dogged by controversies in recent times. There have been allegations that the process is fraught with corruption, with only those highly connected given the rank while more qualified persons are ignored.
Two divergent groups have emerged among lawyers, one calling for the rank’s abolition, the other insisting on its retention.
The abolitionists cite alleged favouritism, nepotism, lack of transparency and corruption of the award process for their demand. The retentionists argue that, as in every profession, upcoming lawyers should have something to aim at, and so it should be retained while the process is strengthened.
In the current exercise, 71 candidates were invited for interview based on the numbers of cases they had successfully argued at the Supreme Court/Court of Appeal/High Court. Some of the shortlisted candidates were said to have scored 12, 11, 9, 8, 7, 6, 3 marks (i.e. no of cases argued in the Supreme Court). However, some who scored three, five and six were allegedly given the award, leaving out those with 11, 8 and 7 marks.
Analysts are of the view that no other profession in the country sets apart a select few and effectively hands them a meal ticket for life. If the legal profession is willing to condone this type of honours peddling, why not extend it to other professions? they asked.
Why not, for instance, have “Senior Doctors of Nigeria” so they get to work in the best hospitals? How about “Senior Civil Engineers of Nigeria” so, they can attract the best construction work on our roads? How about “Senior Musicians of Nigeria” so, they get to charge astronomical fees for their gigs?
Opponents say there is no ‘equality before the law’ when a few are set apart from others irrespective of intellectual capacity. To them, the legal profession is one that insists on a level-playing field for everyone, irrespective of background or status, which principle the rank vitiates.
Some observers said there are many ways of acknowledging a person of distinction within a profession; but conferring them with a privileged access to justice is not and should not be one of them.
According to them, if indeed the SANs are good, and excellent in judicial matters, it is for their clients and the community they serve to so proclaim them.
Exceptional lawyers, they said, are known by dint of their work for their clients and the public at large. People know a competent, formidable advocate when they see one. Such lawyers do not need the extra mystification of the title “SAN” to stand out.
They point to American lawyers, for example, who achieve notoriety, fame and fortune not by being accorded privileged access to justice, but by being hired and achieving results for their clients.
To those opposed to it, the title does absolutely nothing to promote the rule of law. On the contrary, they argue, it tends to promote only the cult of personality, and with allegations of money changing hands during the screening process, it runs the risk of becoming a legally sanctioned racket.
Leading the abolition call is octogenarian lawyer Pa Tunji Gomez, who believes that the rank has outlived its usefulness. The chairman of the Movement for the Abolition of the rank of SAN argued that the rank is oppressive and promotes exploitation.
He said: “The most important thing is that the award of SAN rank is oppressive to all other lawyers; it is oppressive, against fair trade and violates the provision of the Constitution and that of the African Charter. It does not give the lawyers a common level-playing ground.
“It is in that respect it ought to be jettisoned. When it was first introduced, I was one of the lawyers who were agitating that it should be abolished on the grounds that it was discriminatory. The award was based on merit initially but now it has become like a chieftaincy title. It is no longer on merit. Even some of the SANs are now crying out that the procedure for conferment of the award is flawed.”
According to him, being a SAN does not make one a better lawyer. “That is a misconception. Anybody that knows the history of the legal profession would easily know that it is a misconception. “There was a time we never had the rank of Queen’s Counsel or SAN. This was a time when nobody was looking forward to any rank, yet we had very good lawyers. We had the likes of J. Alex Taylor, the father of Idowu Taylor who became the Chief Judge in Lagos State.
“We had Sir Adeyemo Alakija, we had Adegunle Soetan. These were prominent lawyers. Before the award of the rank, even lawyers like Magnus Williams and Rotimi Williams had already made their marks.
“They had nothing to look forward to; they were simply good. To buttress the point, America has got nothing like Queen’s Counsel or SAN rank, don’t they have good lawyers?
“Ghana has abolished it, don’t they have good lawyers? So what are they talking about? One thing about Nigeria is that people like titles too much. If we had good lawyers without the rank why can’t we continue to have good lawyers?”
However, some lawyers feel the rank should be retained. They said rather than abolish it, the process of its award should be made more transparent and merit-based.
Constitutional lawyer Mr Jonathan Iyieke said: “The fact that some lawyers are to be conferred with SANship does not negate or relegate to the background the objective moves by the abolitionists nor does it make the process of SANship non-political.
“I opine that the proponents for the continuation of SANship, particularly the LPPC, should revisit the guidelines, rules and regulations for becoming a SAN, otherwise the call to abolish it is to receive new blood.
“The rank of SAN is not a political honour, family hereditament, veinal chattel nor is it a class crown with or without the prerequisite and fundamental requirements of the law. The title is for the distinguished lawyers, not otherwise.”
For Mr Mr Chinedu Dike, the rank needs an overhaul. “The truth remains that the abolitionists have not lost out completely. It is a struggle. They have made a positive point. SANship conferment in Nigeria needs total overhauling. The conferment must be merit-based.”
Lagos lawyer Mr Mr Clement Onwuenwunor, said: “There’s certainly nothing wrong with the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, but the process of conferring it needs to be further reformed to become more transparent and awarded solely on merit.”
Rights activist Mr Theophilus Akanwa said although the appointment is statutory, reform of the process is still needed.
He said: “May I congratulate those to be conferred wt d rank of SAN particularly Barr Paul Ananaba my fellow Ngwaman and indeed the first Ngwaman to attain that height.
“No one has lost d battle of reshaping the legal profession as it affects the scrapping of the title of SAN. Change is one thing that is inevitable and good. It can happen in d nearby future and d abolitionists’ target can be achieved indirectly.
“If there were some unhealthy issues for the profession emanating from the award of SAN same has been cured, then progress has been made to enable the profession move forward.
“The smooth running of the award process devoid of oppression and intimidation must be hallmark as the body that has the mandate to appoint SANs cannot afford not to do so when d time is ripe.”
Category: Uncategorized
-
Lawyers demand transparency in SAN award
-
‘What SAN means to us’
Three recipients of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) have spoken on what the award means to them.
Prof Yemi Akinseye-George said: “I am very happy. It will encourage me to commit myself more to excellence and to service.
“It will also help me to come to contribute my best to the improvement of the legal profession.”
Dr Garuba Tetengi said: “I feel elated because this is a great achievement in the legal profession.
“It is a mark of excellence and I should now be able to contribute more to the development of the country.
“I am a consummate Bar man and I will use the position to contribute to the Bar and interact with the people in high positions for the development of the profession.”
Chuk Agbu said: “It is a vantage position to improve and serve as a model to young and enterprising lawyers.
“It is an honour to be recognised and honoured after practising law for some time.” -
Daudu thanks God as wife turns 50
FOR the family of the former President of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Joseph Bodunrin Daudu (SAN), penultimate weekend was a happy and memorable one.
That weekend, Daudu (SAN), handed over to Okey Wali (SAN), the 26th President of the NBA. That same weekend, Daudu’s wife Ranti Bosede, popularly called the Gimbiyya by admirers, turned 50.
The two events were marked by the family in a grand style. Immediately after handing over to Wali on August 31, the Daudu family, friends and well wishers went for a thanksgiving mass at Our Lady of Perpetual Help Catholic Church, Galadinma Gwarinpa II, Abuja. The mass was to thank God for the successful completion of his tenure as the 25th President of the NBA.
Friends, well wishers and Bar leaders who attended the mass followed the Daudus home where they were entertained.
The programme continued on Sunday, September 2, with thanksgiving mass and reception.
The event was attended by prominent Nigerians, including Wali, Governor of Kaduna State Patrick Yakowa, wife of Katsina State Governor Dr Fatima Ibrahim Shema, and Corps Marshal of the Federal Roads Safety Corps(FRSC) Osita Chidoka etc.
-
Public health not doctors’ preserve
SIR: In Nigeria, the rivalry between health professionals has become a big issue in public health. It has reached a stage where by one professional group determines what goes in and out, leaving other health professionals as onlookers.World Health Organisation [1952] defines public health as “the science and art of preventing disease, prolonging life, and promoting health and efficiency through organized community efforts for the sanitation of the environment, the control of communicable infections, the education of the individual in personal hygiene, the organization of medical and nursing services for early diagnosis and preventive treatment of disease, and the development of social machinery to ensure for every individual a standard of living adequate for the maintenance of health, so organizing these benefits as to enable every citizen to release his birthright of health and longevity”.
Considering the all-encompassing scope of public health, no profession, be it medical, nursing, chemist, etc., can lay claim to be its only promoter, as obtains in Nigeria where at the mere mention of ‘public health’, people look in the direction of doctors only.
Doctors have now appropriated public health practice as exclusively theirs.They determine how it should be run, from federal level down to local government level.
Nowadays, it has become a norm that every minister of health must be a doctor. In majority of states, the position are also reserved for doctors. This gives rise to a situation in which health policies tend to be one-sided, from the prism of medical practice, with the exception of other sides which are equally important.
Now doctors are penetrating in to many professions and forcing their thoughts on how to do or not do this and that; they are into radiography, laboratory science, pharmacy etc., but still want to usurp the role of those who started from the degree level.
The other area where other health professionals are being discriminated is their non-admission by many universities for Masters in Public Health, which it seems is exclusive reserve of medical doctors. With the exception of few universities in the South – like Federal University of Technology, Owerri, University of Calabar, University of Port Hacourt, University of Uyo-all northern universities reject any non-doctor health practitioner for the programme, even if s/he has first class in his degree.
I am not bringing this to castigate or blackmail my fellow practitioners, as I have many doctors as mentors, but to highlight the issue which directly or indirectly affect delivery to the target beneficiaries.
No profession is an island unto itself as doctors needs pharmacists, radiographers, laboratory scientists, and other health practitioners vice versa. As an environmental health officer, I need the police, lawyers, engineers, laboratory scientists, etc., to discharge my work accordingly, as such, public health services needs all of us to join hands to deliver.
Public health belongs to us not one of us.• Sani Garba Mohammed,
Dept of Public Health Technology,
FUTO, Owerri. -
Police erred in declaring me wanted
ALagos-based lawyer, Mr Emeka Ozoani, has said it was wrong for the police to have declared him wanted.
Ozoani described the declaration as a disregard for the rule of law as a court had, set aside a warrant of arrest for him four days before he was declared wanted.
In a statement issued by his firm, the lawyer argued that based on the court’s ruling, nobody can declare him wanted with the said warrant.
According to a court ruling attached to the statement, an Imo State Magistrate Court, sitting in Owerri presided by Chief Magistrate M.U. Onyewotu, had set aside the warrant of arrest dated June 23, 2011 on August 30, 2012.
“The motion seeking an order of court to set aside, rescind and nullify the warrant of arrest dated 23/6/11 issued against Emeka Ozoani is hereby granted,” the ruling stated.
Chief Magistrate Onyewotu set aside the warrant of arrest after reading the Motion on Notice brought pursuaant to Section 6(6)(a) and (b) of the 1999 constitution as amended and the 20 paragraphs affidavit deposed by Ozoani and filed on July 18, 2012.
Chief Magistrate Onyewotu had granted the prayers of the applicant, Ozoani after being satisfied that the Commissioner of Police, who is the respondent in the suit, was served but did not enter appearance nor file any counter affidavit.
The lawyer described the said manhunt by the police which listed him as a “Series A” wanted person as a gimmick to stop him from doing his duty as a legal practitioner, especially when the said matter is related to a case that is before a law court.
Ozoani claimed he had always gone to court for his cases, but stressed that the rule of law should be followed by all concerned.
Pointing out that a counsel cannot be held liable for a witness’ statement on oath, Ozoani asked the police to follow the due process of the law by obeying the ruling of the Imo State Chief Magistrate Court, Owerri. -
New Lagos legal year starts Monday
The new legal year of the Lagos State Judiciary will begin next Monday, September 17, 2012.
Highlights of the one week of activities include a visit to Lagos Prisons by the Chief Judge of Lagos State, JusticeAyotunde Phillips.
Justice Phillips is expected to visit the Kirikiri Medium and Maximum Prisons, Apapa next week to free some inmates who are qualified to be released under the prerogative of mercy laws of the state.
In a statement signed by the Chief Registrar, Ganiyu Safari, the programme will kick off with a church and mosque service on Monday, at the Cathedral Church, Marina and the Central Mosque, Lagos.
The Chief Judge will thereafter proceed to the High Court to inspect a parade of guards by the Nigeria Police.
On Tuesday, September 18, the Chief Judge and her management team and members of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) will visit the Kirikiri Prisons to liberate inmates qualified for freedom under the laws.
A stakeholders’ summit on the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) and the Family Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2012 will hold on Wednesdsay at the City Hall, Lagos at 10 a.m.
The activities will be rounded off with a dinner at the City Hall, Lagos on Friday. -
Nigeria’s gloomy food security future
SIR: Barring unforeseen intervention from the government, Nigeria shall be facing food shortages in the next few years. The United Nations World Food Program (WFP) has said that 925 million people don’t have enough food to eat and 98% of this people live in emerging economies.Nigeria’s outlook for food security despite the laudable attempt by farmers to produce food is crushingly gloomy.
This ominous situation is not eased by the fact that Nigeria is surrounded by countries that have encountered dreadful and severe droughts in the past. These nations are Niger, Chad, and Mali amongst others.The heart wrenching story of the recent famine in Somalia is still being told with so much resignation by international aid partners. While the situation in Somalia is not comparable to Nigeria’s, it doesn’t negate the fact that Nigeria is at the precipice of a serious food crises.
Significantly, non governmental agencies have presented non-impeachable facts to the Nigerian government on the imminent food crisis. Oxfam, an international civil society group engaged in the fight against global poverty and hunger had warned the government to boost the nation’s food security system and prevent imminent food crisis
Tackling the issue of food insecurity can’t be resolved if the Nigerian government continues to pay lip service to agriculture. Small-scale farmers should begin to be supported, encouraged, informed and educated. They can be the fan to ignite the ember of food security. This can be achieved by offering interest free loans to them. Also, modern farming techniques should be taught to the farmers. In addition, tax havens should be granted to importers of farm machineries.Furthermore, the youths must understand that agriculture is everybody’s business. The truth is except the youths are compelled to take up agriculture, they would keep running away. Perhaps, the National Youth Service Corp should be extended by one more year. The first year should be the usual service while the second year should be dedicated to farming. Without satisfying these criteria they should not be allowed to pass out. Parents should also engage their kids in farming by engaging themselves in farming too. Kids easily learn from their parents.
Corporate organizations as part of their social responsibility must “adopt a farm” and support the farmers financially for better output.
Nigeria must shelve the idea of playing the big brother by feeding other countries while her citizens go hungry.
• Ogunfowoke, Adeniyi Ayuba
Badagry, Lagos. -
Plight of Nigerians living abroad
SIR: Each time I get to read about the plight of Nigerians in foreign lands, I feel saddened, depressed and angry.
Why? I am perturbed that my fellow country men and women suffer endlessly, and in most cases, they are simply marked-down for offences they really knew nothing about. It is regrettable that many Nigerians are routinely thrown into jail for offences they may not have committed.Regrettably, the government has not done much to protect its citizens from such vagaries in foreign lands. This posturing is both unacceptable and indefensible.
These citizens after all left the country with great hopes, frustrated by lack of jobs at home. Not a few of them took loans, sold houses, cars, left lucrative jobs and even threw a lavish send-forth party before embarking on the search for opportunities they could not get at home.
Reports of racist attacks against foreigners, inclusive of Nigerians mostly, in the United States of America, Europe and lately, South Africa have continued unabated.
The ordeal of some of these Nigerians sometimes stems from persecutions, stereotyping, false accusations, harassments and other forms of racial abuses. In many cases, these unfortunate citizens receive little assistance or protection at all from the embassies.
The way Nigerians are treated abroad does no credit to the image of the Federal Government. We can borrow an example of the State of Israel of how to treat citizens. The Middle-east nation is renowned for its unapologetic protection of her citizens wherever they live in the world. The dictum is that every Israeli life is precious to the Jewish State. Even the remains of her dead in war and peace are sacred and treasured.
What the country needs is proactive diplomacy that will enable our envoys anticipate problems before they develop, not the present reactionary and lame mode.
As a first measure, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs should undertake to publication of travel advisories. The information would provide the necessary enlightenment.
There is need for all to ponder on the state of our nation and tame the monster that drives people away. The rate of unemployment is daily skyrocketing, insecurity is at its peak, the cost of living is intolerably expensive and corruption is the order of the day while basic social infrastructure continues to be out of the reach of the common man.
•Adewale Kupoluyi
Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta. -
Re: We advocate substantial justice
I humbly refer to an article authored by J.S Okutekpa (SAN) and Captioned as above. The said article was published on page 30 of The Nation newspaper of Tuesday, January 3, 2012.
In the said article, the learned Senior Advocate condemned a situation where election petitions linger in various tribunals beyond the 180 days stipulated by section 285 of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended). He specifically made reference to appeals that were allowed and ordered to be heard de novo on their merits before another panel. The learned Senior Advocate of Nigeria decried this situation and described it as Judicial Legislation and a violation of the principle of separation of powers… “He further submitted that “Those courts or tribunals still hearing petitions outside the 180 days set out in section 285 of the constitution are … committing constitutional sacrilege and insubordination in the extreme”.
Although the learned SAN did not mention any particular case, it is apparent that he was referring to the recent Supreme Court decisions in Akpanudodehe Vs Akpabio and others as well as Professor Stephen Ugbah and others VS Suswam and others (unreported).In the cases cited above, the election petition tribunals sitting in Uyo and Makurdi dismissed petitions filed by the appellants on purely technical grounds. The court of Appeal upheld the patently obnoxious decisions of the various tribunals.
On further appeal to the Supreme Court, it was held (and quite rightly in my humble opinion) that the cases should be tried de novo on their merits.
In taking this laudable decision the Supreme Court (Per Musdapher CJN) emphasized that every court has a sacred duty to do substantial justice in all cases brought before it and that no court should allow technicality to defeat the cause of justice.
Consequent upon the foregoing decision of the Supreme Court, the cases were sent back for trial de novo before new panels.
It is apparently against the back ground of the foregoing that the learned SAN complained that the cases have lingered beyond the mandatory 180 days stipulated by section 285 of the 1999 constitution.
In arriving at this conclusion however, the learned SAN failed to consider the legal implications of a trial de novo.
I submit with the greatest humility that the legal implication of a trial de novo is that no trial ever took place. No reference or mention will therefore be made of any thing that happened in the previous trial.
There is a plethora of authorities to support this proposition. In Bakule Vs Tanerewa (NIG) Ltd (1995) 2 NWLR Part 380 page 728 at 732 Ratio 6, the Court of Appeal held inter alia “The effect of starting a case afresh (de novo) before another judge is to sweep clean all previous proceedings in the case”. See to the same effect Fabunmi Vs Oyewusi (1990) 6 NWLR Part 159 page 728 at 731 Ratio 5.
Thus the legal implication of the trial de novo ordered by the Supreme Court in the case of Professor Stephen Ugbah Vs Gabriel Suswam and others (Supra) as well as Akpan Udoedehe Vs Akpabio and others (Supra) is that the 180 days stipulated by section 285 of the constitution will start counting from the day the trials were started afresh. This is because proceedings in the previous trials had been swept clean and in law, the cases are presumed to have been freshly filed.
May I conclude this piece by applauding the decision of the Supreme Court to descend ruthlessly on technicalities. Technicalities are evil as they constitute a clog in the wheel of justice. If justice must not only be done but be seen to have been done then substantial justice must be eternally upheld.
Maraizu is a lawyer and Managing Partner of Abuja-based Iheanyi Maraizu & Co -
Police / sss quarrel over probe of Oyerinde’s murder
The recent controversy between the Nigeria Police and the SSS in the investigation of the murder of Mr Oyerinde, the former principal private secretary of the Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomole, is unfortunate and uncalled for and has given rise to this write up.
The two sister organisations are creation of statutes whose duties and/or functions are clearly stated in the enabling laws establishing them. By way of historical recapitulation, before 1976 internal security in Nigeria was the sole responsibility of the “E” Department of the Nigeria Police Force. The “E” Department was also known as the Special Branch of the Nigeria Police Force.
But on the 24th day of March, 1976 the then Federal Military Government under General Olusegun Obasanjo promulgated Decree No.16 of 1976 establishing the Nigerian Security Organisation – the N.S.O – with responsibility for all aspects of security in Nigeria – within and without. With the advent of that decree the Nigeria Police Force was divested of all responsibility concerning internal security.
Then in 1986, the military government of General Ibrahim Babangida promulgated the National Security Agencies Decree No.19 of 1986. That decree scrapped or disbanded the former Nigerian Security Organisation- the NSO – and in its place created three separate security agencies each charged with responsibility for specific aspect of security. That decree is now known as the National Security Agencies Act Chapter N74 Laws of the Federation 2004.
Under this Act, there are three bodies or agencies charged with responsibility for various aspects of national security. They are as follows:-
• The Defence Intelligence Agency
• The National Intelligence Agency and
• The State Security Service (SSS)
See Section 1 of the Act.
Their functions are as follows:-
The Defence Intelligence Agency
a. The prevention and detection of crime of a military nature against the security of Nigeria.
b. The protection and preservation of all military classified matters concerning the security of Nigeria both within and outside Nigeria.
c. Such other responsibilities affecting defence intelligence of a military nature both within and outside Nigeria, as the President or the Chief of Defence Staff, as the case may be, may deem necessary. See Section 2 (1) of the Act.The National Intelligence Agency
a. The general maintenance of security of Nigeria outside Nigeria, concerning matters that are not related to military issues, and
b. Such other responsibilities affecting national intelligence outside Nigeria as the National Defence Council or the President, as the case may be, may deem necessary. See Section 2(2) of the Act.The State Security Service
a. The prevention and detection within Nigeria of any crime against the internal security of Nigeria.
b. The protection and preservation of all non-military classified matters concerning the internal security of Nigeria and
c. Such other responsibilities affecting internal security within Nigeria as the National Assembly or the President, as the case may be, may deem necessary. See Section 2(3) of the Act.
Of particular significance also is the provision of Sub-section (4) of Section 2 of the Act which states as follows:-
“(4)-The provisions of sub-section (1), (2) and (3) of this section shall have effect notwithstanding the provisions of any other law to the contrary, or any matter therein mentioned”
From the above Section 2(3) of the Act it is crystal clear that the main function of the SSS is the Internal Security of the country by intelligence gathering.
Although the National Security Agencies Act Cap N74 Laws of the Federation 2004 did not define the phrase “Internal Security”; the Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Edition at page 732 defined “Internal Security” as follows:
“Internal Security. That branch of law and government (e.g. CIA, FBI) dealing with measures to protect the country from subversive activities.”
The question that arises from the above definition of the phrase “Internal Security” is whether the offence of “murder” being investigated by both the SSS and the Police qualifies as “Subversive Activity.”
It is submitted with respect that going by the definition of the phrase “Subversive Activities” the common crime of the offence of “murder” does not qualify as one. See the definition of the term by the Blacks Law Dictionary 5th edition at page 1282 as follows:-
“Subversive Activities- acts directed toward the overthrow of the government including treason, sedition and sabotage”.
From the foregoing provisions of the National Security Agencies Act Cap N74 Laws of the Federation 2004 and from the Black Laws Dictionary definition of “Internal Security”, it is very clear that the functions of the SSS is solely targeted at internal security of Nigeria and not the investigation of common crime like murder, no matter how heinous the common crime may be. Under the Nigerian laws that function belongs to another statutory body – the Nigeria Police Force – as will be seenanon.
Section 214 (2) (b) of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides as follows:-
“214(2) (b) – the members of the Nigeria Police Force shall have such powers and duties as may be conferred upon them by law”
Alsoby virtue of Section 4 of the Police Act Cap P19 Laws of the Federation 2004 the general duties of the Police can be stated as follows:-
“Section (4) – The Police shall be employed for the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, the protection of life and property and the due enforcement of all laws and regulations with which they are directly charged, and shall perform such military duties within or outside Nigeria as may be required of them by, or under the authority of, this or any other Act.”
It is submitted, with respect, that reading and construing Section 2(3) of the National Securities Agencies Act Cap N74 Laws of the Federation 2004 which stipulates the functions of the SSS and Section 214(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution as amended and Section 4 of the Police Act Cap P19 Laws of the Federation 2004 which stated in eloquent terms the duties of the Nigeria Police Force, it is hugely doubtful whether such ordinary crime as “murder” or even “assassination” can be said to fall within the purview of the functions of the SSS.
It is submitted with respect and without fear of contradiction that the murder of Mr. OlaitanOyerinde the former principal private secretary (PPS) to the Edo State Governor, Adams Oshiomole cannot by any stretch of the imagination be said to amount to an act bordering on internal security. It is purely a simple case of “murder” which should be handled by the Nigeria Police Force on the authority of Section 4 of the Police Act which assigns to the police the duty of prevention and detection of crime. The SSS could be described in this matter as a meddlesome interloper!!
In the days of yore the SSS never struggled for recognition nor sought public attention neither were the officers seen parading suspects before klieg lights.
Secret agents worldwide, like officers and men of the SSS, are known to operate covertly and discretely shunning publicity, but operating incognito.
Under Section 2(3) of the National Security Agencies Act Cap N74 it is the responsibility of the SSS to feed the police and other sister services with the result of their covet operation for necessary action.
The SSS should allow the IGP and the Police to do their job andconcentrate on issues like the Boko Haram and other internal security challenges and not engage in murder investigation.
What Nigeriansexpect from the SSS and the Nigeria Police Force is absolute co-operation in the discharge of their duties, not unnecessary and unhealthy rivalry.
Each agency should confine itself to the duties assigned to it by the constitution andthe enabling laws.
God bless Nigeria!!
Dated the 7th day of September, 2012The recent controversy be
tween the Nigeria Police and
the SSS in the investigation of the murder of Mr Oyerinde, the former principal private secretary of the Edo State Governor Adams Oshiomole, is unfortunate and uncalled for and has given rise to this write up.
The two sister organisations are creation of statutes whose duties and/or functions are clearly stated in the enabling laws establishing them. By way of historical recapitulation, before 1976 internal security in Nigeria was the sole responsibility of the “E” Department of the Nigeria Police Force. The “E” Department was also known as the Special Branch of the Nigeria Police Force.
But on the 24th day of March, 1976 the then Federal Military Government under General Olusegun Obasanjo promulgated Decree No.16 of 1976 establishing the Nigerian Security Organisation – the N.S.O – with responsibility for all aspects of security in Nigeria – within and without. With the advent of that decree the Nigeria Police Force was divested of all responsibility concerning internal security.
Then in 1986, the military government of General Ibrahim Babangida promulgated the National Security Agencies Decree No.19 of 1986. That decree scrapped or disbanded the former Nigerian Security Organisation- the NSO – and in its place created three separate security agencies each charged with responsibility for specific aspect of security. That decree is now known as the National Security Agencies Act Chapter N74 Laws of the Federation 2004.
Under this Act, there are three bodies or agencies charged with responsibility for various aspects of national security. They are as follows:-
• The Defence Intelligence Agency
• The National Intelligence Agency and
• The State Security Service (SSS)
See Section 1 of the Act.
Their functions are as follows:-
The Defence Intelligence Agency
a. The prevention and detection of crime of a military nature against the security of Nigeria.
b. The protection and preservation of all military classified matters concerning the security of Nigeria both within and outside Nigeria.
c. Such other responsibilities affecting defence intelligence of a military nature both within and outside Nigeria, as the President or the Chief of Defence Staff, as the case may be, may deem necessary. See Section 2 (1) of the Act.The National Intelligence Agency
a. The general maintenance of security of Nigeria outside Nigeria, concerning matters that are not related to military issues, and
b. Such other responsibilities affecting national intelligence outside Nigeria as the National Defence Council or the President, as the case may be, may deem necessary. See Section 2(2) of the Act.The State Security Service
a. The prevention and detection within Nigeria of any crime against the internal security of Nigeria.
b. The protection and preservation of all non-military classified matters concerning the internal security of Nigeria and
c. Such other responsibilities affecting internal security within Nigeria as the National Assembly or the President, as the case may be, may deem necessary. See Section 2(3) of the Act.
Of particular significance also is the provision of Sub-section (4) of Section 2 of the Act which states as follows:-
“(4)-The provisions of sub-section (1), (2) and (3) of this section shall have effect notwithstanding the provisions of any other law to the contrary, or any matter therein mentioned”
From the above Section 2(3) of the Act it is crystal clear that the main function of the SSS is the Internal Security of the country by intelligence gathering.
Although the National Security Agencies Act Cap N74 Laws of the Federation 2004 did not define the phrase “Internal Security”; the Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Edition at page 732 defined “Internal Security” as follows:
“Internal Security. That branch of law and government (e.g. CIA, FBI) dealing with measures to protect the country from subversive activities.”
The question that arises from the above definition of the phrase “Internal Security” is whether the offence of “murder” being investigated by both the SSS and the Police qualifies as “Subversive Activity.”
It is submitted with respect that going by the definition of the phrase “Subversive Activities” the common crime of the offence of “murder” does not qualify as one. See the definition of the term by the Blacks Law Dictionary 5th edition at page 1282 as follows:-
“Subversive Activities- acts directed toward the overthrow of the government including treason, sedition and sabotage”.
From the foregoing provisions of the National Security Agencies Act Cap N74 Laws of the Federation 2004 and from the Black Laws Dictionary definition of “Internal Security”, it is very clear that the functions of the SSS is solely targeted at internal security of Nigeria and not the investigation of common crime like murder, no matter how heinous the common crime may be. Under the Nigerian laws that function belongs to another statutory body – the Nigeria Police Force – as will be seenanon.
Section 214 (2) (b) of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides as follows:-
“214(2) (b) – the members of the Nigeria Police Force shall have such powers and duties as may be conferred upon them by law”
Alsoby virtue of Section 4 of the Police Act Cap P19 Laws of the Federation 2004 the general duties of the Police can be stated as follows:-
“Section (4) – The Police shall be employed for the prevention and detection of crime, the apprehension of offenders, the preservation of law and order, the protection of life and property and the due enforcement of all laws and regulations with which they are directly charged, and shall perform such military duties within or outside Nigeria as may be required of them by, or under the authority of, this or any other Act.”
It is submitted, with respect, that reading and construing Section 2(3) of the National Securities Agencies Act Cap N74 Laws of the Federation 2004 which stipulates the functions of the SSS and Section 214(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution as amended and Section 4 of the Police Act Cap P19 Laws of the Federation 2004 which stated in eloquent terms the duties of the Nigeria Police Force, it is hugely doubtful whether such ordinary crime as “murder” or even “assassination” can be said to fall within the purview of the functions of the SSS.
It is submitted with respect and without fear of contradiction that the murder of Mr. OlaitanOyerinde the former principal private secretary (PPS) to the Edo State Governor, Adams Oshiomole cannot by any stretch of the imagination be said to amount to an act bordering on internal security. It is purely a simple case of “murder” which should be handled by the Nigeria Police Force on the authority of Section 4 of the Police Act which assigns to the police the duty of prevention and detection of crime. The SSS could be described in this matter as a meddlesome interloper!!
In the days of yore the SSS never struggled for recognition nor sought public attention neither were the officers seen parading suspects before klieg lights.
Secret agents worldwide, like officers and men of the SSS, are known to operate covertly and discretely shunning publicity, but operating incognito.
Under Section 2(3) of the National Security Agencies Act Cap N74 it is the responsibility of the SSS to feed the police and other sister services with the result of their covet operation for necessary action.
The SSS should allow the IGP and the Police to do their job andconcentrate on issues like the Boko Haram and other internal security challenges and not engage in murder investigation.
What Nigeriansexpect from the SSS and the Nigeria Police Force is absolute co-operation in the discharge of their duties, not unnecessary and unhealthy rivalry.
Each agency should confine itself to the duties assigned to it by the constitution andthe enabling laws.
God bless Nigeria!!
Dated the 7th day of September, 2012
