The Nation Newspaper

Tag: case

Case for special courts for looters
The Federal Government’s seeming recharged firing at corruption, without instituting corresponding special court of speedy trial of identified offenders, is unlikely to hit the magnificent bull’s eye. The increasingly multiplying number of pending cases, including cases of corruption, at the law courts makes nonsense of the country’s system of administration of justice. The essence of the law and its administration is to ensure stability, peace and harmony in a society. In today’s Nigeria, however, these advantages of justice have rapidly peeled away in slow dispensation of justice. And Nigerians are fast losing confidence in the judiciary, and growingly resorting to jungle justice – a sure path to anarchy.

A number of cases of corruption against politicians have remained pending ad infinitum at the law courts, or remained untried as long as the relevant politicians remained alive, and Nigerians have learnt to treat such cases as forgotten pieces of history. Extraordinary offences call for extraordinary measures. Here lies the justification for existence of special courts or tribunals in Nigeria and elsewhere that claim to be governed by the rule of law. Rightly, today’s democratic Nigeria still retains a number of special courts, including the Armed Robbery Tribunal, the Anti-Corruption Commission, established by the corrupt practices and other related offences Act (2000), and Fast Track Courts, established in 2007 to try and conclude commercial cases “within six months of the date of filing the case”. The existence of special courts or tribunals will not be an excrescence on our judiciary system. In addition to armed robbery, mounting illicit wealth of politicians and incidences of Advance Fee Frauds, commonly known as “419”, there are cases of internet frauds and fraudulent property speculators and sellers, and several other cases. Special courts should exist to handle extraordinary offences and ensure speedy justice in such matters.

Contrarily, some argue that the existence of special courts is not the solution to the delayed justice that characterizes ordinary law courts. They point to the dismal, sluggish performance of the election tribunals in the restored democracy. Delivery of verdicts by the tribunals on a number of petitions was so delayed that certain petitioners who eventually won their cases enjoyed abridged justice, and as a result lost considerable portion of their constitutional tenure. Indeed, almost four years after the 2003 elections, a number of election petitions were not really disposed of. The petitioners had withdrawn from the litigations after calculating that even if they won, there was negligible justice left for them to enjoy. One sensible argument against the existence of tribunals or special courts is that it is a violation of the rule of law, which demands that the same ordinary court of law that tries a farmer for stealing a hoe should try a tycoon for defrauding a bank or a political leader for looting the public treasury. Again, they say, special courts are not ruled by normal laws, and in some cases, too, the extraordinary laws are not administered by professional judges.

By the way special tribunals were composed, constituted and administered in the stretched military rule, Nigerians are bound to perceive them as all-round evil, intolerable in a democracy. However, there is hardly anything fundamentally wrong with tribunals or special courts, if the laws in the tribunals are administered by professional judges, and persons convicted by tribunals granted the right of appeal. The denial of right of appeal in the initial provisions of the Civil Disturbances (Special Tribunal) Decree 2 of 1987 came under severe criticism in 1995 when nine Ogoni men were executed after their conviction for murder by the tribunal. The decree was amended the following year, 1996, to grant the right of appeal to persons convicted by the tribunal and to remove military personnel from membership of the tribunal.

The right of appeal is sine qua non in dispensation of justice. As Thomas Jefferson, the great constitutional lawyer and a former US president succinctly put it: “The sword of law should never fall but on those whose guilt is so apparent as to be pronounced by their friends as well as foes.” The removal of armed forces personnel from sitting on the special tribunals is in line with the demand of the rule of law that the laws of the land must be administered by a known and impartial judge.

Let there be special court for looters of public treasury as there is special court for “419” cases. Let there remain special court for bank and other financial offences as there has remained armed robbery tribunal. Let there be miscellaneous offences tribunal to try miscreants who tamper with PHCN and NNPC equipment. Let there be other workable special courts, provided each of them is properly constituted and the laws there administered by competent judges, and the convicted granted right of appeal.

It is always a serious mistake to believe that world democracies, including Britain, regarded as the mother of the rule of law, totally abhor special courts, and are ruled by law alone. It has not been so, not just because of the special courts’ advantages of specialization in cases they handle and their speedy delivery of judgments in such cases. The over-riding point is that certain developments today compel the existence of special courts as part and parcel of modern democratic governance.

It is wrong to assume, as Prof. A.V. Dicey, who propounded the theory of the rule of law, assumed, that Englishmen are ruled by the law and only the law. The conventions play an important part in the British constitution, and many conventions are never enforced by law. Another point is that the British parliament is supreme over the law, in the sense that parliament can over-rule the decision of the judges if it does not agree with it. Besides, the growth of delegated legislation, the right to legislate granted to others by parliament, and administrative jurisdiction undermines the theory of the rule of law. For instance, a Briton who feels wronged by his local council goes to the appropriate ministry, and not to the law court, to seek redress.

However, special courts as they exist in Nigeria today appear to be restricted to criminal matters, and this gives the false impression that only private citizens commit offences. Special courts should be extended to include administrative courts, which should try public officers for some acts that they have committed in their official capacities against the private citizen.

In essence, Nigeria should adopt a model of the French system of administrative law and the administrative courts. Under the French Legal System since the time of Napoleon 1, a clear distinction exists between administrative law and the general law of the country. Administrative law deals with the state, the public service etc. in their relationship with the ordinary citizen. If a citizen feels aggrieved as a result of any act of omission or commission by a public authority, he can thus initiate an action in the administrative courts.

If, for instance, such courts exist in Nigeria, citizens whose houses or shops were erected with officially approved plans but were demolished on the orders of a governor, minister or council chairman, will take such public officer to the administrative court. Likewise, a minister who denies a politician or a political party access to a public-owned media like the television, radio or newspaper, or invokes a non-existing law to shut a media house will equally be taken to the relevant tribunal for trial and sentencing.

If Nigeria has a Federal Character Commission, it should also have a federal character court; if it has unity schools, it should also have unity schools court, and so on. There is a strong case for the adoption of a system of administrative law in Nigeria and other countries, including Britain, which do not have it.

However, one major problem in adapting it in Nigeria is the problem of getting enough judges and lawyers specialized in the relevant laws. Administrative law is a definitely specialized branch of law, and, if judges and lawyers specialize in it, it is reasonable to expect fairer and more enlightened handling of administrative cases while the special powers enjoyed by the administrative courts enable them to act decisively in cases where they find an abuse of power on the part of public authority. The same also goes with other special courts.
- Ubabukoh writes from johnifeanyiu@yahoo.com
September 28, 2015
Experts make case for girl-child

I dropped out of school in 2011 when I was in Class Four,” said Catherine Kloji, 16. “I left because I didn’t have school uniform and could not pay my school fees. Mum is poor and wants me to learn a trade so I could use the skill to make some money so that hopefully one day we can afford to pay my fees and uniform again.”

Miss Kloji, was one of many girls in hard-to-reach communities for whom experts pleaded at a Lagos event.

She is learning to sew and make a living from it. It is four years since she quit school.

The plight of the hard to reach girls who are shut out of school because of inadequate funds was the focus of a high-level dialogue organised by the Action Health Incorporated and funded by Ford Foundation. The event held at Protea Hotel in Lagos.

The stakeholders who attended the programme included policymakers, entrepreneurs, donors, community members, media, civil society and young people.

Speaking at the event, the former Chairman on Diaspora, House of Representative, Abike Arewa said that the need to upscale the effort toward inclusion of the girl child in school is very apt as girls are more vulnerable no matter how educated they are.

She said that we need to double up work on implementation of the child right act because we want to get to a stage where there will be no child that will be out of schools in Lagos.

She lamented that many girls are vulnerable and they need our support to lead a normal life despite being a girl.

In her speech, the Executive Director, Action Health Incorporated, Essien who spoke on the Education, Health and Socio-Economic Realities of Out-Of-Schools Adolescent Girls in Lagos Slums said that according to the United Nation Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) in 2014 that In Nigeria,over 5 million girls of school age are not in school.

She said while several UN conventions and local policies appear to guarantee the well being of young persons in Nigeria, there are indications that many girls remain extremely socially and sexually vulnerable particularly those living in the slums and low income communities across the country.

She said sadly, very little is being done directly/indirectly to seek out these girls and address the challenges they face.

She cited a research conducted by Action Health Incorporated on the hard to reach communities said “1 in 4 girls has never attended school.1 in 3 of those who ever enrolled never made it beyond primary school and only 1 in 3 completed JSS3”..

She added that the Lagos State Development Plan (2012-2025) puts the number of slums in Lagos at over 100. In these slums, many of the residents lack basic amenities, access to services and opportunities, with a vicious cycle of poverty and deprivation.

She opined that from a 2010 research carried out by Action Health Incorporated (AHI) among 480 adolescent girls in Iwaya – a densely populated slum in Lagos, showed that almost half (45.2 percent) of girls aged 10 -14 had never attended school while none of the girls surveyed reached beyond secondary school level. This finding reveals the rising demographic of out-of-school adolescent girls and this should be a concern for all.

She said despite an increase in the number of programmes supporting girl-child education and empowerment in Lagos state, out-of-school adolescent girls living in slum communities remain marginalized. These girls lack opportunity, safe spaces and other services necessary for their healthy development.

“They need formal and/or non-formal education, sexual and reproductive health information and services, vocational skills and business-related training, as well as protection from sexual abuse and violence as these will help reduce their vulnerability while protecting and improving their well-being and that of their communities”, she said.

Essien opined that effective investment in out-of-school adolescent girls is not only the right thing to do but the smart thing to do. When girls are empowered with age-appropriate information, skills and resources it creates a multiplier effect of sustainable change that benefits families, communities, and nations.

The Speaker, Lagos State House of Assembly,’Rt. Hon Mubashiru Obasa promised that the state government will do more in making laws that would benefit hardest to reach communities.

He said children and the youths are the pillars of development in our society and we will do more in making the state safer and secured for them.

Obasa noted that it is the responsibility of all stakeholders to advocate for the adolescent and girl child well being and reduce the amount of peer pressure within their community.

He said we promised that the involvement of the Lagos state house of assembly on laws and resolutions on the right of the girl child will be effective, appropriate and more accommodating for adolescent across the 40 constituency in the state.

Also speaking at the event, The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Women Affairs and Poverty Alleviation, Mrs. Boladele Dapo-Thomas, said even though the Federal Government had instituted some vocational programmes for affected girls, it could however not execute them alone.

Thomas said it was the responsibility of state governments to map out empowerment programmes that would rehabilitate and reintegrate out-of-school girls into the education system.

She said, “The state government has a duty to eradicate poverty and develop the infrastructure of the state for a better society. They know what is going on these communities through their various engagements with the leaders. The agencies and ministry cannot do it alone. Stakeholders should…support these girls.”

September 25, 2015
CJN queries judge over 2011 pre-election case

The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, has asked a judge of the Federal High Court in Lagos, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia, to explain why judgment was not delievered in a 2011 pre-election suit after judgment was fixed twice within the last three years.

It was learnt that the CJN’s correspondence to the judge, with Reference number NJC/F.3/FHC.26/1/232 dated February 17, was sequel to a petition to the National Judicial Council (NJC) by Mrs. Victoria Ayeni, the plaintiff in the 2011 pre-election suit brought against Olusola Sonuga and two others.

The CJN’s missive, which served as a reminder, was titled: “Re: Petition against Honourable Justice R.N. Ofili-Ajumogobia, sitting at the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria”. It was copied to the court’s Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta.

It reads: “I refer to my predecessor’s letter No. NJC/F.3/FHC.26/1/212 dated 14th August, 2014 on the above subject matter, which you are yet to forward your response.

“I forward herewith a reminder petition dated 31st January, 2014 (sic) by the petitioner, Mrs. Victoria A.A. Ayeni.

“You are, therefore, requested to explain why judgment cannot be delievered in the matter. Your response should be forwarded to my Chambers through your Chief Judge within two weeks from the date of your receipt of this letter, please.” It was signed by the CJN and in his capacity as the Chairman of the NJC.

Judgment in the suit No. FHC/AB/CS/31/2011, which was reportedly argued by parties on May 22, 2012 in Abeokuta, was first fixed for judgment on July 10, 2012.

It was argued de-novo (afresh) in Lagos following a directive by the Chief Judge that the matter be concluded by the trial judge, who had then been transferred to Lagos. Judgment was fixed for June 14, 2014. But judgment is yet to be delivered in the matter till date.

In her petition, Ayeni, an aspirant for the Ogun State House of Assembly on the platform of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) had accused the judge of having a “compromising posture” in the suit numbered FHC/AB/CS/31/2011. The PDP and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) are the other defendants.

The petitioner, who alleged that the trial judge was using judicial powers against her since 2011, is asking for a panel of investigation to be set up to determine whether or not the trial judge “has not compromised her position” as a judge in the suit.

Ayeni alleged that hearing in the suit, which was filed on June 2, 2011 through an Originating Summons, did not commence until May 22, 2013, after seven adjournments.

The petitioner said it was in the course of waiting for the judgment that the judge was transferred to the Lagos Judicial Division, adding that it took several months before the Chief Judge directed that the matter be concluded.

She claimed she paid several visits to the court in Lagos without getting a hearing date.

Consequent, her lawyer, Dele Ajasa, wrote a letter dated May 30, 2013, requesting for a date for hearing which was later fixed for November 25, 2013.

Though her counsel and that of the first defendant argued their case on the resumption date, she claimed that the trial judge ordered that a fresh hearing date be served on the second and third defendants and adjourned the matter till December 3, 2013.

The matter, she claimed, went through six adjournments before a fresh hearing was finally held on April 3, 2014 and judgment fixed for June 16, 2014.

The petitioner added that case suffered several adjournments between June 16 and July 16, 2014.

According to Ayeni, she lost her patience when it became obvious that the judgment may never be delivered.

Although fixed for July 16, 2014, the judgment was again not delivered that day despite the fact that her counsel and that of the second defendant were in court.

Spokesperson of the NJC, Mr. Soji Oye, said given the date of the CJN’s correspondence, the judge would have replied the CJN.

Oye said if she can defend her action and her reply appears satisfactory, there would be no problem and they would write the petitioner appropriately.

“But if he is not, he can then set up a committee to investigate the allegation of the petitioner and the committee would recommend to the NJC. I believe that committee would have sat by now and taken its decision and made a recommendation to the CJN,” he said.

Asked if that could be the reason why the judge has not given a date for judgment in the matter, he said it all depended on what the committee recommended to the CJN.

In the originating summons, Ayeni, aside from listing four issues for determination, had prayed the court for an injunction restraining the third defendant from recognising and, or accepting the first defendant as the candidate of the PDP for Ikenne constituency in the April 26, 2011 election into Ogun State House of Assembly.

She sought an order nullifying the certificate of return issued by the third defendant to the first defendant; an order deeming the plaintiff as the candidate of the PDP for Ikenne constituency that won the April 26, 2011 elections into the Ogun State House of Assembly, among the nine reliefs sought from the court.

But the first defendant, in his 24-point counter affidavit, contended that he won the primary election of the party and was duly announced as winner.

He averred that the plaintiff voluntarily withdrew her candidacy for the April 2011 general election and that it was on that strength, which was also communicated to the second and third defendants, that the final list was released by the party, showing candidates for the election.

He contended that the plaintiff having validly withdrawn her candidacy two months before the election could not turn around to challenge her substitution with himself.

The second defendant, who was the secretary of the party and had good knowledge of the event, averred that it was the party that persuaded the plaintiff to withdraw her candidacy in order to increase the party’s chances of winning the election.

He contended that the plaintiff willingly withdrew her candidature to enable the first defendant fly the party’s flag at the election since the first defendant is from Ikenne, adding, “the state chairman of our party, Chief Dayo Soremi therefore wrote a letter dated February 10, 2011 in which the party gave notice of the change of the party’s candidate from the plaintiff to the first defendant and forwarded the INEC Form CF 004-Notice of Change of Candidate duly signed by the plaintiff to the third defendant”.

In its own counter affidavit, the third defendant admitted paragraphs 1 to four and denied all other averments of the plaintiff in her affidavit deposed to in support of the originating summons and contended that before the final list of candidates for the general election was released in Ogun State by the third defendant, the second defendant through a letter dated February 10, 2011 notified the commission that Mrs. Atinuke Ajoke (Ayeni) had voluntarily withdrawn as the party’s candidate by signing form CF.004.

It contended that between the date the plaintiff voluntarily withdrew her candidacy and the date of election, the third defendant never received any counter letter with respect to the voluntary withdrawal of the plaintiff.

September 22, 2015
Anti-graft war: A case for special court

Excessive delays in the regular courts have necessitated the call for the establishment of special courts to try corrupt public officers. Assistant Editor LEKE SALAUDEEN examines what the nation stands to benefit from the innovation.

The anti-corruption drive of President Muhammadu Buhari requires a judicial system that will accelerate the trial of corruption cases. Eminent jurists have warned that excessive delays in trying high profile corruption cases can frustrate and undermine the credibility of the government’s commitment to anti-corruption and fuel the culture of impunity. They contend that that the establishment of special courts to handle corruption and related cases will buttress the seriousness of the government in its campaign against corrupt practices.

The reason special courts are being proposed is the failure of the court system to facilitate prompt prosecution of suspects. Judges in the regular courts are fond of questionable long adjournments, frivolous injunctions and undue emphasis on technicalities that detract from the essence of corruption trials. The sad commentaries trailing Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC’s) efforts in prosecuting corruption cases justify the demand for special courts manned by judges with iron cast will to bring the corrupt to justice and fence off deliberate hindrances stalling quick, diligent and successful prosecution of public officers and other prominent Nigerians docked for corruption.

It is public knowledge that the EFCC is yet to seek superior court orders to overturn dubious perpetual injunctions against the prosecution of many former governors who ruled between 1999 and 2007 accused of money laundering and frauds running into billions of naira. No tangible result had been achieved in prosecuting them. Worse still, most of them are not just freely enjoying their loot, a lot of them are occupying other political offices particularly in the legislature making laws for the people they had short changed.

It was the helpless situation of the EFCC that prompted the Commission’s chairman, Ibrahim Lamorde to make a case for the establishment of special courts to prosecute corrupt persons as a way of facilitating the anti-corruption war. He maintained that the anti-graft agencies are bugged down by the slow process in the regular courts.

To get it done, Lamorde suggested the amendment of the Nigerian Constitution to make provision for special courts to handle corruption- related cases and bring the culprits to book. “Some relevant laws in the Nigerian Constitution needed to be amended before the adoption of an action plan towards the fight against corruption. The challenge my colleagues and I are facing, especially in the EFCC and ICPC, is issue of prosecution of corruption and economic and financiall crime cases in regular courts”, he stated.

A former boss of the EFCC, Mrs Farida Waziri, alleged that some senior lawyers were frustrating the fight against corruption by stalling the prosecution of their clients docked by the anti-graft agency. She lamented the activities of such lawyers, who, according to her, fraudulently obtained money from their clients under the guise of delivering same as bribe to officers of the commission to kill cases under investigation. She said the lawyers most often exploit the weakness of the judiciary by filing frivolous applications to frustrate the trial of suspects for corruption and money laundering.

Constitutional lawyer Professor Itse Sagay (SAN) said the establishment of special courts is the best option for the present administration that has zero tolerance for corruption. According to him, the special court will accelerate and give a sharper bite to prosecution of corruption cases in the country.

Sagay noted that corruption cases linger for such a long time that there is little hope of timely justice both for plaintiffs and defendants. The purpose of trying a corrupt person in order to serve as deterrent to others is lost as the case drags for long while the suspect facing serious charges of corruption is left to strut about and use proceeds of such crime to thwart the judicial process.

“No doubt, the country needs special courts but it cannot be achieved overnight. It requires Constitutional amendment to give it legal backing. The executive has to send a Bill to the National Assembly for their consideration and approval. It will take between six months and one year to pass the bill”, he stated.

The Head of the Presidential Advisory Committee against Corruption explained that there are alternatives that could be used pending when the special courts would come on stream. According to him, government can create criminal law division and identify particular judicial officers who have the capacity, integrity, courage and knowledge to do justice without fear or favour.

“Pending the time the special court will get legal backing, government will put in place other alternatives to ensure quick dispensation of corruption cases so that the objective of this administration to fight corruption headlong will be achieved”, Sagay said.

Supporting the call for the establishment of special courts, a lawyer/human rights activist, Mr Monday Ubani said it will enhance President Buhari’s anti-graft war. He said if established, the courts will add fillip to the expeditious trial of corruption and related cases that have for long been suffering due to a combination of several factors such as court congestion and the complicity of some unscrupulous members of the bench and the bar to scuttle high profile corruption cases.

Ubani observed that the general lethargy, sabotage and scant commitment of the judicial system are the major reasons many Nigerians believe the anti-graft war is deceptive and not working. He believed the proposed special courts to be established by the Buhari administration to handle corruption and other related cases will buttress the seriousness of the government’s resolve to confront corruption.

Apart from setting up special courts, the former Chairman of the Nigeria Bar Association, Ikeja Branch, called on government to introduce socio-economic policies that would discourage corruption among the people. For instance, government should ensure judges and civil servants are well enumerated, job opportunities for school leavers and social welfare programme for the unemployed.

A Kaduna based lawyer, Mukhtar Modibo endorsed special courts because the nation’s judiciary as operated today cannot bring speedy justice to corruption offenders. He observed that corruption cases, like other cases linger for a long time that there is little hope of timely dispensation of justice. Prosecution of corruption cases involving high profile suspects are frustrated due to frivolous applications, questionable injunctions and long adjournments granted by the judges.

He said the courts if established would facilitate the work of the anti-corruption agency. The EFCC, according to him has 1,500 cases pending in various courts across the country; seventy-five per cent of these cases involve high profile persons whose cases have been pending for more than seven years. He suggested that the courts should be established in each of the six geo-political zones of the country.

Modibo noted that the courts are overwhelmed by the sheer volume of cases before them which is responsible for slow adjudication process that is brazenly exploited by suspects. According to him, it is not enough to put in place special courts for corruption. The authority should ensure judges of proven integrity are appointed to preside over them. Otherwise, the objective for setting them up, which is to quicken administration of justice will be defeated, he added.

Special courts in other clime

Specialised law enforcement bodies dedicated to the fight against corruption have been established in several European countries. They often focus on middle and high-level corruption offences and corruption related acts committed by high- ranking public officials. Investigators and prosecutors are usually specialised in corruption and financial crimes and have access to special investigative techniques.

Bulgaria, Croatia and Romania have all adopted specialised law enforcement bodies as part of their efforts to curb corruption and end the culture of impunity that permeates these countries. The results achieved are varied.

Few countries have also established specialised anti-corruption courts. They have jurisdiction over the offences investigated and prosecuted by special anti-corruption bodies. These are far less common than specialised law enforcement.

In Bulgaria, a specialised court and prosecution office for organised crime became operational in 2012. The court deal with crimes committed by organised criminal groups, including corruption-related crimes.

Special court departments were established in Croatia in 2008. These courts have subject matter and territorial jurisdiction of criminal cases. They only hear middle and high-level corruption and organised crime related cases. The judges in the special department have more experience of working on complex cases. They are appointed through the annual schedule by the court president, based on the opinion of the Council of Judges. They also have to pass through a security check. According to Amnesty International, special judges receive higher salaries and are recruited from amongst the most experienced criminal law judges.

In Slovakia, the Specialised Criminal Court was created in 2009. The main rationale for establishing the court was to build the capacity of the judicial system to deal with complicated criminal cases that are often also of great economic and social significance. The specialised criminal court in Slovakia is a court of first instance positioned at the same level as regional courts. Its decision can be appealed to the Supreme Court. It has jurisdiction over criminal matters and it adjudicates on the following offences: fraud and corruption in public procurement, abuse of power, acceptance of a bribe, economic crimes and crimes against property, indirect corruption, creation and promotion of criminal or terrorist groups, crimes committed by criminal or terrorist groups and deliberate killings.

The analysis of corruption related judgments, according to Transparency International report on Slovakia, shows a steep increase in the number of convictions after the establishment of the court –from 25 per cent in 2005 to 75 per cent in 2011. The court is perceived as independent and very professional. Financial as well as human resources are considered to be sufficient and the educational background of judges and the staff is also said to be adequate.

For Advocates of anti-corruption courts laid emphasis on training on complex issues related to corruption and economic crimes.

August 31, 2015
Imo ex-Commissioner makes case for Buhari

A former Commissioner for Health in Imo State, Dr. Joe Obi-Njoku has faulted the insinuation by some politicians that President Muhammadu Buhari is not keeping pace with his promise in handling Nigeria’s problems.

Obi-Njoku who disclosed this in an interview in Owerri, the Imo State capital, said, “Those accusing Buhari of being slow in handling the country’s problems miss the point”.

He explained that President Buhari was taking his time to diagnose Nigeria’s problems properly before administering treatment to achieve effective results.

The medical practitioner further maintained that “Nigeria’s enormous problems could not be tackled without proper diagnosis, otherwise no good socio-economic result would be achieved”.

He commended the president for taking stock before embarking on appointments and other key matters of governance.

The former commissioner appealed to Nigerians to exercise patience with the Buhari administration, adding, “The President has vowed to put Nigeria in the right direction and his determination to fight corruption showed that he understood the major causes of Nigeria’s backwardness”.

Obi-Njoku argued further that “Nigeria was under threat of collapse under President Jonathan as a result of the overwhelming influence of insecurity but Buhari’s victory saved the Country from collapsing because his military background has been brought to bear in tackling the problem”.

He expressed optimism that Nigerians will witness prosperity under the Buhari’s administration, while urging Nigerians to give him the deserved support to succeed.

The medical practitioner finally dismissed the allegation that President Buhari hates the Igbo, saying, “The President is for all Nigerians and there were Igbo working with him even before now”.

August 28, 2015
‘Case against NIIA not struck out’

A media research and consulting firm, Delphi Media Consulting Nigeria Limited, has said its N25 million suit against the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA) has not been struck out.

Delphi sued NIIA and its Director-General over alleged plagiarism and misappropriation of sponsors’ funds for hosting an International Brainstorming on Migration in West Africa.

Its lawyer Mr. Godfrey Ndubuisi, in a statement, debunked claims that the suit has been thrown out.

He said the claim was an attempt to mislead the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the public, and was aimed at influencing the case before the Federal High Court.

“Our client is prepared to pursue its cause to a logical end,” Ndubuisi said.

August 18, 2015
Group makes case for hijab

National Ameer (President) of the Muslim Students’ Society Of Nigeria (MSSN), Muhammad Jameel Muhammad has described as intolerable the continued denial and discrimination against the use of Hijab.

He spoke at during a courtesy visit to the House Of Representatives’ Deputy Speaker Hon Lasun Sulaiman who received them on behalf of Speaker Yakubu Dogara.

A statement by the National Public Relation Officer, Muhammad Grema Bukar quoted Muhammad as saying that since Hijab has never hindered the users from excelling in all fields, the Islamic dress code should not be denied anymore by any individual, organisation or even government.

“Moreover, as if the plotters against the Hijab are not contented with their unconstitutional act, some of them, he said, have gone ahead to advocate a legislation to totally ban the use of hijab in Nigeria on the pretext that it is used by terrorist as a cover to launch attacks on innocent Nigerians.

“Our query lies in the fact that, in civilised societies, few cases of abuse of something have never been used as an excuse to abolish such an important thing. We therefore call on you to sponsor a bill to enact a specific legislation that will criminalise the denial of the use of Hijab in this country.”

Muhammad expressed dissatisfaction over the action of the Joint Admission and Matriculation Board (JAMB), especially in the recent time.

He said: “While we now have some sigh of relief for the timely intervention of the Federal Government on the Board’s imposition of course and institution on the candidates against their choices, we want the relevant authorities particularly the National Assembly to find whether the statutory objectives of JAMB is to generate revenue like FIRS, or to render a necessary social service-access to higher education. This is necessary given the apparent extortion of candidates in the form of sales of scratch to determine one’s posting for post UTME. We call for immediate refund of such monies.”

The National President expressed happiness that the leadership emergence issues of the House of Representatives have been amicably resolved in that a way that there is no winner no vanquished.

“In fact, we should say a win/win type resolution. As we pray the same to happen at the upper chamber, we fervently ask Allah to make the happenings of the previous weeks avenues of knowing one another and knowing the job, which will ultimately usher in a more robust, a more dispassionate and a more united National Assembly, despite multifaceted diversity,” he said.

He lamented the relegation of religious subjects in various academic institutions, saying that “at a time when we seriously need God consciousness, decency, sacrifice among other virtues as antidotes to corruption, immorality and all social vices, it is sad that religion as a subject is relegated to an elective status in our secondary schools. It is equally sad that general course of core status like Moral Philosophy have been made insignificant at a time when our higher institutions of learning are afflicted with cultism, nudity, examination malpractice, intolerance among other indicators of total moral bankruptcy. We call for a rethink and a quick review of this unpopular, inimical policy.”

Among the team that visited the leadership of the National Assembly include Auwal Yunus (National Secretary General), Bukar, Anas Hamisu Lawal. (National financial Secretary), Surajuddeen Abdulaziz (National Ex-Officio I) and Abdulhakeem Kolawole (National Islamic Affairs Officer B’Zone) among others.

August 11, 2015
Making a case for patriotism

Iowadays, it is becoming understandable why many people do not feel a sense of patriotism whenever our National Anthem is being recited. Rather than being patriotic, many people tend to question the lines of the anthem. This may be because of the way the affairs of the country are being run.

What has become of the country from the way and manner the government treats the citizens have given valid reasons for some people to ask questions about the continuous existence of the nation.

Like all emotions, patriotism comes from within. Whether we are rational or not, we are reaping the benefit of some people’s sense of patriotism. These are our founding fathers and soldiers who fought to keep this country united.

From my observation of happenings in the Nigeria today, most people no longer respect our national anthem and the national flag. In some cases, I have seen citizens sitting, walking, moving or even dancing while the national anthem is been played or recited. While the first stanza of the anthem urged us to rise up whenever it is being recited, most people would rather want to sit or do something that would be in anathema to aim of the anthem.

I believe this attitude of our fellow citizens toward the national anthem and the national flag can be traced to bad governance and corruption in the system. The country’s resources have been mismanaged and kept away from the majority by a few privileged countrymen. Since the masses do no longer benefit from their God-given resources, many are of the opinion that they don’t need to feel the urge to believe in government and the country.

In advanced democracies, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, citizens are ready to die for their countries. It is not an expression of thoughtless patriotism that is making them to stand up for their countries, but because their countries and their leaders protect their interest wherever they may be on earth. This makes these citizens to be loyal and willing to do anything to protect the interest and integrity of their countries.

I cannot imagine the anthem of the United States being played anywhere and an American citizen will pay no attention or disrespect it.

Our countrymen must know that it is high time we began to respect to our national anthem and flag. Let us drop all acts that have made us to show a great disrespect to our identity.

Let see this as a contract. We feel safe at our homes, office and transact businesses freely because some people were patriotic enough to defend us and territory. These people swore to protect our lives with their lives, whether the threat comes from burglars, armed robbers, terrorist or even natural disaster. The one and only thing that would make them take such a drastic oath is patriotism.

When we treat our national anthem and flag with utmost respect, we are somewhat satisfying our side of the contract. Therefore, when we stop respecting our nation while still expecting to be protected like any other citizen, we are nothing but a hypocrite. Let us patriotic and promote patriotism through our actions and spoken words.

Tolulope is a Corps member, NYSC Birin Kebbi

February 5, 2015
Court strikes out NFF case

Following application for discontinuation of case, the Federal High Court in Jos has struck out the case challenging the Executive Committee of the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) led by Amaju Pinnick.

The court presided over by Justice Ambrose Allagoa struck out the case yesterday following a notice of discontinuation filed by counsels to the plaintiffs who said the notice of discontinuation led from appeals by well-meaning Nigerians who were concerned that further delay of the case could attract FIFA’s wrath.

The court had fixed yesterday for a ruling on a stay-of-execution of its earlier ruling dismissing the election of the Pinnick-led NFF executive committee and a preliminary objection by the NFF insisting that the court has no jurisdiction to hear the case.

Justice Allagoa said: “I have prepared his ruling the previous night only to be confronted yesterday with the notice of discontinuation, but that because the rules say a plaintiff could request the discontinuation of a case at any point, he had to strike out the case.”

Counsel to the plaintiffs, Habila Arzard, who addressed journalists after the court proceedings, restated the reason for asking that the case be discontinued: “Since yesterday when we left court, several well-meaning Nigerians have called the plaintiffs and appealed to them to give greater consideration to the interest of this nation. The plaintiffs are Nigerians and they love football. So, in view of the appeals by the well-meaning Nigerians and the interest of the nation, they decided to terminate the proceedings. That’s why this morning (Thursday) we decided to file the notice of discontinuation.”

Defense counsel Damon Dashe who expained the implication of the court proceeding of Thursday, said: “Now that the matter has been struck out, it means the order of October 23 (dismissing the Pinnick executive committee) has no life now and there are no more restrictions. The entire NFF execo elected on the 30th of September 2014 is the substantive exco of the NFF. That is the position of the law now.”

October 31, 2014
Why Giwa must withdraw case, by Pinnick

The President of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF), Amaju Pinnick yesterday gave reasons why the factional NFF President, Chris Giwa should withdraw his case from the law court.

Giwa had taken the issue of NFF election to Nigerian court which is threatening World Football ruling body, FIFA’s hammer.

Speaking with State House correspondents, Pinnick said that Giwa should rather wait for the outcome of the case before Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) instead of going to the general court.

He said: “So, it is a situation that you have to manage tactfully and that is what we are doing; not wanting to say Nigerian laws are not important in this regard, they are. But you should look at the bigger picture. But then, I believe Giwa will see reasons why he should withdraw the case and concentrate on the one in CAS. If the one in CAS favours him, it’s his luck, but if it doesn’t then he should work with us, that’s what I told him yesterday.”

“The country is very passionate about football development. So we will do our best in making sure that we do the right thing, we do the best, taking all interests into consideration to ensure that this does not repeat itself.”

“It is not every four years we should keep having crisis in the NFF. We’ll perfect the legislations, the NFF Act which also says that we shouldn’t go to court, we should go to CAS if you have cases, and so on and so forth. Those are the things we are setting out to achieve.”

“Normally, you are suppose to go to ordinary court but you can go if you wish because the Nigerian law is supreme. There is no way you will relegate the Nigerian law. But because we have signed on to FIFA you are meant to respect FIFA legislations. If we had not signed on to FIFA we would say go to hell, but we have signed on to FIFA and CAF.”

“It’s like an association you have signed on to and therefore you need to respect its laws, but not at the detriment of your own law which of course is supreme and that is why you exist.” He added

October 30, 2014