The Nation Newspaper

Tag: case

  • Ogoni community seeks speedy trial of case against Shell

    Ogoni community seeks speedy trial of case against Shell

    Three years after suing Shell in  a London Court for oil spillage, the  Bodo community in Ogoniland in  Rivers State, is seeking speedy hearing of the case. The community has asked its chiefs and London solicitors – Leigh Day & Co – to fast-track the hearing of the case.

    The Chairman of the Council of Chiefs, Mene Slyvester Kogbara, told The Nation that the over 15,000 villagers wanted the matter tried speedily. He listed the group to include farmers, fishermen, artisans and traders.

    The council, he said, also demanded from the lawyers why the case is delayed and what should be done to fast-track the hearing.

    He said: “The community is worried about the delay hence the pressures from different angles to  ensure that the case is fast-tracked.  The pressure is coming from  the Council of Chiefs and the community. Meetings have been held to get the right support on the issue. Our solicitors have promised to fly to Nigeria in the next two weeks to give us the updates vis-a-vis efforts being made to speed up the hearing of the case.‘’

    Mene said the community  believes that  the court would favour it.

    ‘’We are not contemplating failure at the London Court where Leigh Day & Co has been standing as our Solicitors since the case started a few years ago. The last thing on our mind is defeat at the court. We have enough evidence that the oil spills have ravaged our land  and affected socio-economic activities. Shell has accepted responsibility for over two oil spills in 2008 that polluted the waterways of the fishing communities, even though it is  insisting that the volume spilt and the number of those who lost their livelihoods as a result is exaggerated.

    “Though the case has suffered delay, the victory is sure because the court has promised to be fair to all the parties concerned on the issue. Once there is a fair hearing and presentation in a court, victory is assured. Part of the demands is that Shell should come and clean the land since the communities are running short of food supply.’’

    Mene said the community would not disclose the amount of compensation expected from Shell in line with the advice of their lawyers.

    He said other community affected by the oil spills are Bomu, Gbe, K& B, Dere,  and Kpor Gol.

    ‘’For technical reasons, we have agreed individually and collectively not to disclose the worth of the compensation expected on the issue of spillage and its attendant destruction to the environment,‘’ he added.

    Efforts to get Shell’s spokesman, Precious Okolobo,  to speak on the issue proved abortive. Text messages and calls made to him were not replied.

    The battle for compensation began six years ago when the community discovered that  spills  from oil exploration  have affected their land. The spills from Shell wells have ravaged many areas in the Niger Delta. The region has been hit by problems, including sabotage, kidnappings of oil workers, theft of crude, and conflicts between communities over clean-up contracts or compensation deals.

  • Ex-Army chief makes case for fire extinguisher

    To reduce incidence of fire, the Corporate Institute of Risk and Safety Management (CIRSM) has advised that every home should have a functional fire extinguisher, where as parents, children and ward should be thought on how and when it should be used.

    In addition, homes, no matter how small should have two exit doors to serve as emergency exit whenever there is a fire outbreak.

    The institute spoke during the weekend through its Vice-President, General Alex Ogomodia (rtd), who was the chairman of the third public lecture and induction of members and fellows of the CIRSM.

    He noted that because safety is everyone’s business, we must always be security conscious by having a sharp nose to smell any suspicious air around and such smell should be traced to the root to avert any upcoming danger.

    Not only should families inculcate safety habits in children, the small black extinguishers are known to be the best bet to fight the smoke that choke people to death and is advisable that the extinguishers be bought from a fire department.

    At the ceremony, a total of 68 people were inducted by the Registrar of CIRSM, Mr Daniel Umoh include the Assistant Commandant General of the Nigerian NSCDC Osaro Lugard and Dr Marcus Olorunwa of the Lagos state College of Health Technology.

  • The case against death penalty

    SIR:Once again, the controversial issue of death penalty (or capital punishment) has been resurrected from the limbo in Nigeria. This is against a backdrop of the recent media report quoting President Goodluck Jonathan as urging the state governors to discharge their constitutional responsibility by signing the death warrants of condemned prisoners pending before them and the subsequent hanging of four death row inmates of the Benin prison, in Edo State.

    Although Nigeria has maintained a kind of moratorium or suspension on criminal execution since her return to civilian rule on May 29, 1999, the policy appears to be reversed, somehow, with the hanging of a number of condemned persons across the country in 2006, 2012 and this year. Obviously, public and political opinions are sharply divided on the ongoing heated debate on whether to retain or abolish the punishment in our penal code.

    For proponents of death penalty, the severe measure has a uniquely deterrent force, which no other formal punishment has or could have. In their argument, the fears of being caught for committing gravest crimes like armed robbery and made to face the commensurate gravest punishment would help reduce the rate of such crimes. They also contend that capital punishment would permanently remove the worst criminals in our midst, thereby providing an enabling environment for a safe and peaceful society.

    For opponents of death penalty in Nigeria, the pristine argument of deterrence of the penalty is otiose and no longer tenable. This is in the light of the futility of such harsh measure in stemming the tide of violent crimes – as criminals do not often think about the punishment that awaits them but about the possibility of being caught and arrested.

    From the standpoint of this writer, capital punishment is morally unjustifiable and unacceptable. For one, human life is so sacrosanct and inviolable and it is only God, the giver of life that has the inalienable right and control over it. For another, death penalty removes the humanity of the executed persons and the attendant chances of rehabilitation and their giving something back to society, in terms of community service. Additionally, the penalty is contrary to the contemporary international human rights standards and values- a development that made the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, through the Resolution 62/149, to call on member states to commute without delay all death sentences to terms of imprisonment.

    It is important to state that the intractable problem of violent crimes in Nigeria, which gave rise to application of capital punishment, has its root cause in our grotesquely unjust system that incubates and breeds criminals. These include awful legacy of bad governance, rampant corruption, deplorable state of the economy, inefficient criminal justice system (including the police, the court and the prisons), relative deprivation, mass poverty, chronic unemployment, widening gap between the rich and the poor, human exploitation, greed, unbridled materialism, ungodliness, immorality, erosion of the spirit of social solidarity and decline of traditional family values. In fact, if we did not push back the frontier of these often ignored factors that fuel violent crimes, our all-out efforts to surmount the upward spiral of such crimes will be in vain.

    As part of the reform of the administration of justice in Nigeria, the Federal Government should respond swiftly and vigorously to the contentious issue of death penalty. This is considering that the penalty has obviously failed as a deterrent measure against violent criminals. Removing capital punishment from our criminal laws is also made paramount by the fact that Nigeria is a signatory to internationally recognised human rights protocols, which guarantee each individual’s right to life, like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (or the Banjul Declaration of 1981).

     

    • Okechukwu Emeh, Jr

    Abuja.

     

     

  • Making a case for writing

    “If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write things worth reading or do things worth writing about.” – Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), US author and politician

    In the world of today where information has become free and communication indispensable, everyone desires to share his ideas in writing. Nobody is pleased to be a spectator and watch as history unfolds under his nose. Each man wants to dictate how history is told. I am no exception.

    I am fed up with being told different stories by different writers. I want to express myself too. I want to write to right wrongs, to curb menaces, to remedy maladies and propagate my own ideas, too. Gone are the days I used to think online write-ups were scribbled by some word-spinning bots. What is my belief now? Of course, I know that it is ordinary people like me who are shaping history. And I have got ideas I can give humanity too.

    Writing is about the best, the most far-reaching and permanent medium to express any opinion. It is rare, if not impossible, to come across somebody who will declare: “I hate writing!” I do wish to know how to assemble words in writing to express my thought and sell my views. But many only wish, a few actually write.

    I cannot claim to be a writing guru. But I dare say writing gives me tremendous joy and that it brings me a load of fortune too. I have won a number of national essay writing contests, so readers can be sure it is something I have a flair for; my very specialty. I have written a couple of opinion pieces published in national dailies and read hundreds of others, so I guess I am really addicted to the craft. My slogan is: “A writer can, with word, move the world if he knows how to write masterpiece.”

    My advice to readers is that writing is an impressive way of selling ideas and contributing one’s quota to burning local, national or global issues. People that do not want themselves rendered irrelevant in public discourses write articles as many as they wish. Hence, one cannot afford but to be counted among the writers in the society, a formidable one at that.

    It is said, and I think rightly, that everyone has an opinion. So, if one has a strong opinion about something, why not let the world know at least through writing?

    Now the question for many aspiring writers is: “How do I write good pieces?” The answer is plain. The best way to learn how to write is by writing. It may seem illogical, but that is the truth. How do you learn to walk? By walking, right? How do you learn to speak if not by speaking?

    Writing also demands commitment, perseverance and self-motivation. If one wants to be a prolific writer, then one need consistency. One way we can achieve that is to write regularly.

    We must summon the courage and start from somewhere. We must not be deterred by “if” or “but”, we just must start and be consistent in order to be a good writer. We must make our ink flow freely because our writings can achieve cure many things in the society.

    Muhammed, 400-Level Law, UNILORIN

     

  • The case against pension chief

    The case against pension chief

    Senators were particularly furious that Maina was invited six times to appear before its Joint Committee to answer questions bothering on mismanagement and missing pension funds but he fragrantly refused to honour the invitation.

    The Senate Joint Committee on Public Service, Establishment and State and Local Government Administration Chaired by Senator Aloysius Etok with Co-Chairman, Kabiru Gaya, spent over five months investigating alleged mismanagement of over N469 billion pension funds.

    The Joint Committee submitted its report to the Senate in plenary on June 20, 2012.

    The report said the sum of N273.9 billion pension funds was diverted between 2005 and 2011.

    In December 2012, the Joint Committee said that it discovered a fresh N195 billion pension fund fraud.

    It summoned Maina to appear before it to clarify some issues as Chairman, Pension Reform Task Team (PRTT).

    Etok specifically told the Senate that Maina was discovered to have spent N1 billion allegedly to screen 29 pensioners.

    Etok said Maina was further discovered to have spent N8 million weekly on 38 security personnel guarding him.

    Because Maina failed to appear before the Joint Committee, Senate President David Mark, issued a warrant of arrest against him.

    Before he got into trouble with the Senate, Maina claimed that the Task Force had recovered and saved over N221billion.

    He said he had conducted biometrics for 170,000 pensioners and detected and deleted 71, 135 ghost pensioners from the Office of the Head of Service Pension Office.

  • Saraki’s case for Appeal Court April 15

    The Court of Appeal, Abuja division has fixed hearing for 15 April, in an appeal over the disputed Kwara Central Senatorial Seat.

    The appeal was filed by a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain, Alhaji Lasisi Ayinla Kolawole Jimoh against the PDP and its candidate; the immediate past governor of Kwara State Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki.

    The former governor has however asked the appellate court to decline jurisdiction in the case on the ground that the appellant lacked locus standi to institute the appeal case against him.

    Saraki also told the court of Appeal that the appellant did not participate in the last national assembly election in Kwara State and therefore cannot challenge the outcome of the election.

    He also argued that the primary election that produced him was a domestic affair of PDP which in law, cannot be inquired into by any law court.

    In his response to the appeal case against him, the former governor faulted the suit that brought appeal case claiming that it was instituted at the federal high court six days to the constitution of the Kwara State National Assembly Election Petition Tribunal.

    The Senator representing Kwara Central Senatorial District in the Senate insisted that since Jimoh instituted his case after the election, he ought to have gone to the election petition tribunal and not any regular court.

    He asked the court of Appeal, Abuja division to hold that it has no jurisdiction in the appeal case because it was a post election suit that must first pass through an election petition tribunal before the appellate court and asked the court of Appeal to dismiss the appeal suit.

    Jimoh had sued Saraki at a Federal High Court in Abuja where he challenged the nomination of Saraki as the PDP flag bearer on the ground that the bye election that produced him was not conducted in accordance with law but the court upheld Saraki’s election.

  • Court strikes out Goje’s bid to transfer case

    Court strikes out Goje’s bid to transfer case

    The Federal High Court sitting in Gombe has struck out the application of immediate past governor of the state, Senator Danjuma Goje, seeking to transfer his trial to Abuja or any other part of the country outside the northeast geo-political zone.

    Chris Uche SAN, Counsel to Goje had previously applied to the court to transfer the trial of his client outside Gombe State and the northeast on the ground of insecurity.

    He argued that the sensitive nature of the case vis-à-vis the security challenge in Gombe State and the entire northeast necessitated the application, even as he acknowledged insecurity in Abuja and elsewhere.

    The prosecution Counsel, Wahab Shittu, who agreed with the claims of insecurity across the country, said government was doing everything possible to address the situation.

    He then submitted that seeking to transfer the case out of Gombe was tantamount to attempting to slow down the process and eventually the course of justice.

    He pleaded that the application be thrown out.

    Delivering his judgment, the presiding Judge, Justice Babtunde Qadiri said that after carefully studying the arguments of both the Prosecution and Defense counsels, he arrived at the conclusion that they shared common grounds.

    He acknowledged that there has been series of attacks in Gombe and other parts of the country and the rights of all the accused to fair hearing has not been infringed.

    The Judge, however, observed that none of the accused persons or counsels had been attacked or subjected to any threat since the case commenced.

    He added that relocating the case will give a different impression to the common man.

    He therefore rejected the application for change of venue saying, “this application is hereby rejected for now. However if any of the accused persons, counsels or witnesses face harassment, no matter how little, even if it is a phone call, please inform the court.”

     

  • Obasanjo makes case for Ogun PDP returnees

    Former President Olusegun Obasanjo yesterday urged leaders of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Ogun State to accept aggrieved members, who are willing to return to the party.

    The former Chairman of the PDP National Board of Trustees (BOT) spoke at his Hilltop home in Abeokuta, the state capital, while hosting leaders of the party from Ogun West Senatorial District.

    Calling for discipline in the party, Obasanjo said: “I do not want to say anything about politics, especially PDP in Ogun State. I think we have done what we are supposed to do. I have told you to embrace anyone that wants to return with open arms. We have done what is expected of us as leaders.

    “There must be discipline in any institution. Many of them were misguided. When the misguided see the light and return, we must open our arms to embrace them. The misguided must be welcomed and reintegrated into the fold.

    “Ogun West needs attention because the people are not cooperative. People say Ogun West lacks credible people. The senatorial district has credible people but you need to help yourselves.

    “If there are two things coming to the state, if the two do not go to Ogun East, Ogun Central will have one. If they are three, two will go to the East and one will go to Central. If four, two will go to the East and two the Central. The resources of the state must be evenly distributed for even development.”

  • Court refers case

    The Court of Appeal, Benin, yesterday, referred a case brought before it by members of the dissolved Edo State House of Assembly Service Commission to the Chief Judge for retrial.

    Delivering judgment in the case brought by Abraham Esesene and others against the Speaker, Justice G. O. Shoremi scolded counsel to the Assembly for failing to address issues raised in the originating summons as originally pleaded by the appellants at the lower court.

     

  • Why I withdrew Ogboru’s case, by SAN

    Why I withdrew Ogboru’s case, by SAN

    Sebastine Tar Hon is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). He is also an author of four law books, including ‘Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence in Nigeria,’ which helped in resolving the impasse over Dr. Goodluck Jonathan’s acting presidency status when the late President Umaru Yar’Adua was flown abroad for medical attention. He speaks in this interview, on the ongoing constitution review and reacts to allegations by Chief Great Ogboru of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) in Delta State that he compromised his interest. BISI OLANIYI reports.

     

    In view of the views of hte Nigeria Bar Association on the Constituion review process, how would you want the 1999 Con-stitution amended?

    I want them to focus more on the judiciary and the rule of law. Section 285, Sub-Sections 5, 6 and 7 should be amended. The sections limit the timeline within which tribunals and courts of justice should deliver judgments in election matters. Currently, tribunals must deliver judgments within 180 days, from the time of filing of the petitions. The Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court are to deliver judgment within 60 days from the time of filing of the appeals.

    In so much as we agree that the extension was noble, the Supreme Court has now said that anything outside those days, count us out. So, it is for the National Assembly to amend those sections and put provisos, stating that provided that if a judgment is delivered after those number of days, a court hearing such an appeal, can make certain orders.

    The second vital area is to state as one of the functions of the National Judicial Council (NJC), because it is not expressly stated, should originate budgetary proposal for the state High Courts, Sharia Courts of Appeal and Customary Courts of Appeal in the states and the FCT (Federal Capital Territory), in case of capital expenditure, to be presented to the National Assembly and budgeted upon. Once that is budgeted upon, the courts will access the funds from the NJC. Without that, state Chief Judges are pawns in the hands of state governors. Whatever they want, they do to them and the Chief Judges cannot stand up to them, in present day Nigeria.

    You have been accused by Chief Great Ogboru, the 2011 governorship candidate of the Democratic Peoples Party (DPP) in Delta State, of compromising his interest because you withdrew his application at the Supreme Court. How will you react to the allegations?

    I went to Lagos in April 2012 for a matter at the High Court, Ikeja. After the matter, Chief Great Ogboru called me and said somebody gave him my number over a matter he had at the Supreme Court. We arranged and when he met. He told me the Supreme Court has dismissed his appeal and he wanted me to apply that the Supreme Court should set aside the judgment.

    I told him that the Supreme Court hardly overrules itself, after delivering a judgment. He persisted and I told him that I would think about it.

    Luckily for me, I stumbled over an authority. A decision of the Supreme Court reported in 2011: Dingyadi against INEC, where the apex court overruled itself in a particular decision it gave, not that it set aside its previous decision, which was given in another matter. So, I felt encouraged. When Great Ogboru called me to give him feedback, I told him, with the authority, we could boldly approach the Supreme Court.

    In the course of my research too, I came across an authority: Adegoke Motors against Adesanya, reported in 1989, where the Supreme Court stated that if any counsel felt that the apex court had made an error in judgment, the counsel should be bold enough to approach the Supreme Court to overrule itself.

    So, that was the basis for accepting the brief…

    Based on these two authorities, I filed an application to have the decision overturned. In essence, I was asking the Supreme Court to sit back and determine the appeal or refer it back to the Court of Appeal. If they said that the judgment of the Court of Appeal was a nullity, I told them that it was not proper, with due respect, to say that the appeal that made them to make the pronouncement was a nullity. It was on that basis that I accepted to file the application at the Supreme Court.

    When the matter came up at the Supreme Court, I indicated openly, which can be verified from the records of the Supreme Court, that I was ready to move my own application to have the Supreme Court overrule itself or set aside its judgment.

    When I made the statement, counsel on the other side/opposing counsel, consisting of WoleOlanipekun (SAN), who was leading Alex Izinyon and a great number of other lawyers, said they had filed some preliminary objections to the application, on the issue of jurisdiction. The presiding Justice of the Supreme Court asked me, whether on the basis of the objections, if I was going to withdraw, but I said no. I will not want to mention the Justice’s name. Another counsel from Afe Babalola’s Chambers, who is also a SAN, led the team for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and a young lady led the team for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). The opposing counsel all said they had preliminary objections.

    So, you then withdrew the application…

    The presiding justice asked me again, whether in view of the objections, I was still ready to go on with my application and I responded in the affirmative. To show you the resolve, I had to move the application.

    The Supreme Court then said in view of the fact that I was served that morning, the matter would be adjourned till November 8, which was done. Immediately after the adjournment, the Supreme Court asked me the nature of my application. Of course, the justices had known, but they wanted to take me to task and I knew. I told them that it was an application I wanted them, with due respect, to overturn their previous decision. That was where trouble started.

    How?

    The justices of the Supreme Court told me that I was bringing the apex court on collision course with politicians and ridiculing the judiciary. They said they had read all that I had filed, including the ones filed the previous Friday and they had come to the conclusion that nothing on earth would make them grant the application. There is electronic evidence to back what I have said.

    At that point, it was only responsible and reasonable for me to withdraw the application. That was exactly what I did.

    It has been alleged that it was predetermined.

    If I had a predetermined intention not to move the application, why did I prepare and file a reply on points of law on the Friday just before the Monday that the matter was to come up? If I had anything to hide, why did I insist on that same day that Chief Ogboru put up appearance in court on the day I was to move the application? Why did I have to worry myself telling the Supreme Court, ab initio, that I had an application and was ready to move it?

    Again, why did I reject the first offer by the Supreme Court that I should withdraw the application? Was it not suicidal and bad practice when the Supreme Court raised grave allegations against me, for me to have allowed even one more second to pass without openly showing the Supreme Court that I was not that character they were describing me to be?

    How did your client react to the withdrawal?

    He called and abused me. He said a lot of wrong things about me. He accused me of compromising his brief. He called me a fraud and unprintable names. I kept my cool till today. He said I compromised his brief. I told him nothing of such happened. Before I could say anything, they had flooded the Internet with those allegations, accusing me of unprofessional conduct and even had the effrontery of writing to the Supreme Court that they had engaged another lawyer and that my conduct was gross misconduct, but I said no. This is a man or a group talking out of ignorance.

    What did he expect you to do at that point?

    I do not know what Chief Ogboru expected me to do at that point. I practise my law before the Supreme Court and not before any other person. It is the Supreme Court of Nigeria that made me a SAN and also called me to the Nigerian Bar. If the Supreme Court is directly accusing me of ridiculing it or bringing it on collision course with politicians, where am I going to practise my law? if I am thrown out of the Bar or disrobed as a SAN? What respect do I have again?

    If you go to the Internet, they said it was a predetermined position. I challenge them to go and obtain the records from the Supreme Court. When I went to the Supreme Court, I announced my appearance, and others also announced their appearance. After that, I told the Supreme Court that I was ready to move the application.

    Was Ogboru or any of his associates present in court, to be consulted, before withdrawing the application?

    My client was not in court. We met the previous Friday and I told him, while preparing the last set of papers, to be in court on Monday, He said his deputy would be in court. I learnt that the deputy was on the way, when the matter was withdrawn. Chief Ogboru sent his associates and some lawyers to court. I consulted one of the lawyers he sent, who told me not to withdraw, but I said no, I was not going to seek adjournment again, since the Supreme Court had made its position known.

    At that point, consultation was no longer necessary. It was no longer a fact. An application is based purely on law. I did my best, which my client described as the best that he has ever seen and the Supreme Court said it was not enough. There was no need to go again and consult.

    The matter came up at the Supreme Court on Monday. On Friday, we were together in my chambers in Abuja and he saw all that I prepared and he described it as excellent. He said my posture was also excellent. I then went to court. The Supreme Court said it was an academic exercise, that the application would not be granted. At that point, what other consultation would I have made? It is more reasonable to terminate the matter at that stage, than to prolong the evil day.

    Will it be correct to say that you actually compromised in the matter? Couldn’t you have simply withdrawn your apperance?

    How could I have done that? Since I started practice, this is the first time any client of mine is feeling dissatisfied, not to talk of alleging that I collected money from opposing camp to compromise his brief.

    As an authority, as an author of four law books: Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence in Nigeria Law of Evidence in Nigeria, Substantive and Procedural Civil Procedure in Nigeria, Federal High Court, State High Courts and FCT Abuja High Courts, Volume 1, Hon’s Law of Evidence in Nigeria, God has given me the grace to become a SAN at my age, won’t I be the greatest fool, if I compromise myself? I am a reference point, both nationally and internationally. I just have to bring out my person, so that Nigerians and everybody will know that these allegations are useless, baseless and capricious. Why should Great Ogboru’s matter be different? In short, I regret accepting that brief. If he goes beyond this point, I will fight him legally.