An Ikeja High Court yesterday discharged Ojo Gbenga of the offence of armed robbery due to the absence of witnesses.
Justice Oyindamola Ogala struck out the two-count charge of armed robbery and conspiracy brought against the suspect by the state.
The trial judge said the defendant is presumed innocent until the prosecution is able to prove the charge against him.
“The defendant should be released in the absence of any matter in any other court.
“The prosecution is at liberty to re-arrest him when the victim, who is the prosecution witness, is ready to reopen the case,” Ogala said.
The state prosecutor, O. A. Azeez, told the court that the prosecution witness, who is the victim in the matter, relocated outside of Lagos State after the incident.
Azeez said that his efforts to contact the Investigating Police Officer (IPO) in charge of the case was not fruitful.
Responding, the defence counsel, Bidemi Ademola urged the court to strike out the matter.
, since the prosecution witness had relocated, and had no intention of coming back to Lagos.
He said that the defendant has been in custody since 2022 and should not be kept there indefinitely.
The defendant was first arraigned before to the court on August 3, 2022 on a two-count charge bordering on conspiracy and armed robbery.
He was alleged to have carried out the act in company of others, now at large, on February 26, 2022, at about 10:30 p.m., in Ojo-Ladipo Street, Ikotun area of Lagos.
After a long hiatus, this writer appeared before a Magistrate court over a small claims case (less than N10 million liquidated money demand), and the experience before Magistrate Odubayo Oluwafumilayo, shows that our adversarial legal system is not irredeemable after all. The adversarial legal system is an accusatorial legal system, in which the opposing parties are allowed by the courts to slug it out, each relying on every opportunity or loophole provided by the law to win a case. The other, inquisitorial, allows a judge suo moto to dig deeper than what the parties presented before the court, in the interest of justice.
In practice the adversarial system sometimes don’t approximate to what a common man would regard as fair and just, especially where the contending advocates rely on technicality. The above background is necessary for the reader to understand why this writer, unlike what he experiences at the High Court and appeal courts, was enthused when he appeared before the magistrate. The first pleasant experience was that filling at the Magistrate Court in Lagos State has become automated, and a new Handbook on Small Claims (2023), the Small Claims Court Forms and Practice Direction on Small Claims (2023) issued by Hon. Justice Kazeem O. Alogba, the Honourable Chief Judge of Lagos State, are in use.
The contents of the handbook show a potential litigant how to start a case in the Small Claims Court, file a simple debt recovery claim in the Small Claims Court, find the right court for a claim and obtain and enforce judgment. The forms are designed to make filing easy, with prototype of letters of demand, complaint form, summons, application for summary judgment, affidavit in support, affidavit of non-service, form of admission, defence and counterclaim, defendant’s counter affidavit of service, motion ex-parte for substituted service and forms for appeal process and garnishee processes.
Armed with the above practice direction, the court moves with definite alacrity. For the proceedings at the court, Article 10(1) of the Practice Directions, provides that the magistrate shall promote, encourage, and facilitate an amicable settlement of the dispute among the parties by providing settlement options to the parties as the magistrate deems fit. The process of facilitating an amicable settlement shall not exceed seven days. The parties are also encouraged to contact one another to explore settlement. It is important that while providing opportunity for settlement, a specific time frame is given so that the defendant would not use it to buy time.
Where settlement fails, the matter moves expeditiously, and no party or counsel on either side is allowed to cause any form of delay. Article 10(3) provides that if the parties are unable to settle the dispute amicably, the magistrate shall proceed to hear the application for Summary Judgment or give directions for hearing the Claim or Counterclaim. Article 10(4) provides that the hearing shall be conducted by the court from day to day as far as is practicable and may only be adjourned as a last resort and for the shortest possible time. Subsection 7 provides that the entire hearing period shall not be more than 30 days from the first date of the hearing, inclusive of the seven days for amicable settlement.
Article 11 provides that the parties may represent themselves at the proceedings in the Small Claims Court, while Article 12(1) provides that parties may testify for themselves and tender all necessary documents and they may call other witnesses to give evidence at the hearing. Article 12(2) provides that in the interest of justice, the court may depart from the strict application of the provisions of the Evidence Act. Furthermore, Article 13(1) provides that the magistrate shall deliver judgment within 14 days of the completion of the hearing. The court shall include in its judgment, rulings on any interlocutory applications heard in the proceedings.
In practice, for a determined magistrate, the application of the rules has made hearing and determination of simple, clear, unambiguous and straight forward cases of Small Claims very expeditious. And that is what a working justice system should be. A magistrate relying on the Practice Direction can insist that all applications must be determined together with the judgment. That once the claim is filed and served, the application for summary judgment already designed should be filed and served. A defendant must within six days file his defence and a counter-affidavit stating why a summary judgment should not be entered.
While appearing, I was also observing with amusement the discomfiture of lawyers, including this writer, as the new practice direction has displaced the usual lethargy of law practitioners, especially defendants and their counsels, who have no defence to the claim against them. All attempts by counsels to get a long date are rebuffed. When there is a little challenge which can be quickly dealt with, instead of an adjournment, the magistrate would stand the matter down, to enable the challenged party go to the registry to resolve the problem.
I witnessed some claimants conducting their cases themselves with the magistrate directing them on the necessary steps to take in accordance with the Practice Direction. A Special Registry and Sheriff Section have also been created for the Small Claims Court, and while there are challenges with adjusting to the new innovative technology, the speed of getting a matter filed and served is commendable. Where necessary, a form for substituted service by pasting or through a WhatsApp number is provided for by the rules and immediately approved, upon an application before the court.
Article 15 provides on Appeals. Article 15(2) provides that the aggrieved party shall file the Notice of Appeal within 14 days of delivery of the judgment stating the reasons for the appeal, while sub-section 3 provides that the Assistant Chief Registrar shall compile the Records of Appeal within 14 days of the submission of the Notice of Appeal. The matter is sent to the Fast Track Registry of the High Court, where it is assigned to a Judge of the Fast Track Court designated to hear appeals from the Small Claims Court.
Article 15(7) provides that the whole process from the assignment of the appeal to judgment shall not exceed 30 days. Article 16 provides for the regulation, monitoring and assessment of the magistrates of the Small Claims Court. This column commends the Honourable Chief Judge of Lagos State, Hon. Justice Alogba for the elaborate Practice Procedure, and accompanying documents, and earnestly prays that it will be strictly adhered to by all those concerned.
Chief Judges of the High Courts across the country are encouraged to adopt similar Practice Procedure, for their Magistrate and High Courts. The adversarial legal system needs modification, and enforcing efficient practice direction could aid justice before the courts and in the eyes of the public.
’Aiyedatiwa appeal shows he’s not ready for reconciliation’
An Ondo State High Court, sitting in Akure, has struck out a suit instituted by Deputy Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa, for lack of jurisdiction and abuse of court processes.
Aiyedatiwa had approached the court to stop the House of Assembly from impeaching him for alleged gross misconduct.
At the last court sitting, Ondo Assembly filed a motion, challenged competence of the substantive suit by relying on Section 188 (10) of the Nigerian Constitution.
It said Section 188 (10) ousted jurisdiction of the court, adding that the suit was premature since the Assembly was yet to conclude the impeachment proceedings, especially when there was no request before the chief judge to constitute a panel of investigators.
The assembly contended that the suit constituted an abuse of court processes, saying a similar suit was also filed in Abuja by the deputy governor.
Delivery judgment, Justice O. Akintan-Osadebay declined jurisdiction to avoid conflicting verdict between Ondo High Court and Abuja Federal High Court.
Justice Osadebay held that it was a gross abuse of court process to engage in “forum shopping, by instituting same case in Akure and Abuja High Court.”
An Ondo State political pressure group, Ondo Masses Solidarity Movement (MSM), has said the appeal filed by Aiyedatiwa against yesterday’s ruling was a proof that he was not ready for reconciliation.
Coordinator Chief Ogunyemi Jeremiah alleged that the report that Aiyedatiwa had withdrawn the suit filed in an Abuja High Court following the intervention of the All Progressives Congress (APC) leadership in the matter was planted to delay the court case and mislead the public about a reconciliation effort.
Aiyedatiwa, yesterday, filed an appeal against the ruling of the Akure High Court, which earlier struck out the suit challenge his impeachment proceedings by the House of Assembly.
In the Notice of Appeal filed at the registry of the Akure High Court, the deputy governor raised five grounds of appeal.
He said the judge erred in law in combining the hearing of his application for an amendment together with the application of the House of Assembly challenging the jurisdiction of the court, which amounts to a denial of his right to fair hearing.
He said the judge was wrong to hold that the case constituted an abuse of court processes, as the parties and the subject matter of the case in Akure were different from those of the case in Abuja.
He urged the Court of Appeal to set aside the ruling of the High Court.
A Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned till October 16 to rule on whether to proceed with its hearing of the suit by the Ondo State Deputy Governor, Lucky Aiyedatiwa seeking to stop his planned impeachment by the House of Assembly.
Justice Emeka Nwite fixed the date yesterday after listening to lawyers to the parties, who disagreed on whether the court should grant indefinite adjournment or proceed to hear the case.
Justice Nwite had, on September 26, in a ruling on an ex-parte motion by Aiyedatiwa, granted interim injunctions restraining defendants in the suit from taken any further steps in relation to the alleged move to impeach the plaintiff.
Listed as defendants in the suit are: Inspector-General of Police (IGP), the State Security Services (SSS), Governor Rotimi Akeredoku, the Speaker of the House of Assembly, the Chief Judge of Ondo State and the House of Assembly.
At the mention of the case, lawyer to Aiyedatiwa, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, (SAN), told the court that there have been new developments in relation to the case.
Adegboruwa recalled that the All Progressives Congress (APC), on October 6 constituted a reconciliation committee headed by former Katsina State Governor to settle the issues.
“In line with extant practice and procedure of this honourable court to encourage parties to promote settlement, it is our humble view that the court allows and encourage the reconciliation effort as the continued prosecution of this suit may be hostile to those efforts,” Adegboruwa said.
The senior advocate added that on October 3, the Speaker and the House of Assembly submitted a petition to the National Judicial Council (NJC) “accusing this very court of compromise and deploying all manners of unprintable epithets against the court.”
Claiming that the petition was still pending before the NJC, Adegboruwa said the implication of the action of the petitioners was to express their lack of confidence in the court.
“And if the allegations are investigated and found to be correct God forbid, the consequence will be that this court may not be in the position to proceed on the determination of this suit,” he added:
Adegboruwa urged the court to direct the petitioners to serve all parties in the suit with copies of the petition to enable them to respond.
“I watched on television news where they described my lord as ‘a certain judge,’ he said, adding that the court should directed them to stop further attack on the judge”, he said.
Lawyer to Akeredolu, Kassim Gbadamosi (SAN) kicked against Adegboruwa’s request for indefinite adjournment, arguing that Ondo State was not a one-party state.
Gbadamosi noted that the APC’s effort was only to reconcile Akeredolu and Aiyedatiwa which did not affect other political parties which made up the assembly.
He said: “They cannot impose their whims on the house which has APC, PDP, Labour Party and APGA,” adding that whatever allegations Adegboruwa raised about media engagement were mere documentary hearsay.
He urged the court to take such allegations with a pinch of the salt and denied seeing any petition against the judge.
Gbadamosi argued that granting an indefinite adjournment in a matter of this nature was akin to giving judgment on the matter which had not been heard, going by the earlier interim order.
He prayed the court to, instead, order parties to address it on whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case.
Lawyer to the Speaker and the House of Assembly, F. E. Emodamori, confirmed that his clients actually wrote a petition to the NJC.
Emodamori denied authoring the petition and also denied describing the judge as “a certain judge”
“Speaking from the utmost duty of a counsel to speak the truth from the bar, I want to say with all categorical assertion that I never used and will never use or encourage anyone to use such derogatory language or gutter language against your lordship either in the letter the learner silk referred to or in any media interaction on the subject matter.
“It was authored by the 6th defendant (House of Assembly) and signed by the 4th defendant (Speaker) and not counsel.
“Regrettably my lord, it was in that petition that that unacceptable language ‘certain judge’ was used. It was used regrettably by the parties who authored the petition.
“So, I will never use that language. My learner silk (Adegboruwa) knows that I also have respect for him.
“He is one of my own role models. I am shocked that the same person alleged this against me.” Emodamori said.
He told the court that his clients have since written the NJC, which letter was accompanied by an affidavit , submitted on October 6 to have the petition withdrawn following his advice.
After hearing from the lawyers, Justice Nwite frowned at the development, noting that it was unfortunate that lawyers would allow themselves to be used by politicians to denigrate the court.
The judge who said he has been meticulous in his conduct, said: “Why should somebody in his own opinion decide to dent my image which I have built for long.
“If you know that you are not comfortable with that interim order, you approach the court and apply that it should be varied.
“The Nigerian Bar Association too is not helping matters. When you see this kind of things, you asked what is the need?
“Anybody who has been following my adjudication will know that I am not the kind of judge who can compromise. It is quite regrettable.”
He then adjourned till October 16 to rule on whether or not to grant an indefinite adjournment as sought by Adegboruwa.
‘Constitution amendment needed to limit cases that go on appeal’
Justice Amina Augie vacated the Supreme Court Bench on September 3 on attaining the mandatory retirement age of 70. The valedictory court session was held in her honour on September 21. Justice Augie spoke about her ancestry, school days, life as a teacher, legal career and experience on the Bench. She added that one of the measures to be adopted to ease the workload of the Supreme Court Justices is to ensure that not all cases make their way there. ERIC IKHILAE was at the event.
I was called to the Nigerian Bar in July 1978, and the turning point in my life was when I reported for National Youths Service (NYSC) in Sokoto State.
We were the fifth set of graduates to serve, and the Military Governor of Sokoto State hosted a reception to welcome us to Sokoto for our service year.
When some friends heard that my late classmate, Funke John, and I were posted to Sokoto State, we were pressured to change our posting because it was said that there were no cars in Sokoto, and riding donkeys was the only form of transportation in town.
When we narrated what we were told to my late husband, whom I met in Sokoto during NYSC, I remember him saying that it was stupid to think we would land at the airport, disembark from an aircraft, and jump on donkeys from the airport to town.
There were misapprehensions about the NYSC scheme itself,particularly the idea of postings to unknown parts of Nigeria. But we learnt to value and appreciate what makes us Nigerians.
As it turned out, Funke stayed in the Ministry of Justice, Sokoto, for five more years after NYSC, before she went back to Lagos, and I took up appointment with the Legal Aid Council, Sokoto, after NYSC, before my stint in the academic world as a lecturer.
So, my reporting for NYSC in Sokoto, despite calls to change it, was the best step I took on my way to becoming what I am today.
Even so, I almost derailed my legal career when I left Zaria to follow my husband, who had been transferred from NTA Sokoto to NTA Headquarters in Lagos, and for a very flimsy reason too.
I was his second wife, and one day in Lagos, a friend of his, who did not know he had ventured into polygamy came visiting, and asked for madam. I came out, and he looked at me in shock, as if my husband had smuggled a girlfriend into his home.
It was when my little daughter ran out of the kitchen that he explained that he was not aware that his friend had taken on another wife.
So, to show people that I was, indeed, his wife, I abandoned my job and post-graduate studies in Zaria, and relocated to Lagos.
Of course, as anyone in a polygamous set-up would tell you, living with another wife in the same house is not a walk in a park and before long, I was desperate to get a job, any kind of a job. But no one would listen.
They could not fathom how, with all that I had going for me, I left my job as a lecturer in the first place.
Auspiciously, I had the chance to talk to my husband’s friend, who was at the Cabinet Office, and who had not heard my story.
Justice Amina Augie (rtd)
He had just come out of a cabinet meeting where it was agreed that the Office of Chief Counsel to President Shagari should be beefed up after the Shugaba case, handled by Federal Ministry of Justice ended the way it did.
So, my next job was Senior State Counsel in the Office of the Chief Counsel to the President.
Teaching at Law School
The soldiers struck in December 1983, and in February 1984, we were informed that our services were no longer required, and I was jobless again. But, as God would have it, our former Lecturer at the Law School, Mr. Folagbade Olateru-Olagbegi III, the late Olowo of Owo, who had been the Chief Counsel to the Vice-President, Chief Alex Ekwueme, went back to Law School.
The students, who studied abroad, resume at the Law School a month before the others, and that year 1984, the Law School was short of lecturers. When the Director-General, late Mr. Ibironke, was looking around for lecturers, Mr. Olateru-Olagbegi told him they could ask me since I was no longer in the President’s office.
It was Thursday, and the foreign students, as we called them, were to resume on Monday when I was asked to start teaching at the Nigerian Law School, and the formalities of employment would follow later.
My journey on the Bench
My life took another turn when my husband decided to go into politics in Sokoto State, which had not yet been split into three, and to satisfy the requirement that he must be resident or have his family in his state, I moved to the state as a Chief Magistrate.
The Chief Judge posted me to my husband’s village, Argungu.
When he came back nine months later to decongest the prison, he was shocked to hear from prison officials that there were no accused persons awaiting trial, as I had cleared all their cases.
Thereafter, I was never tested again. I moved back to Sokoto to head the Magistracy, and later appointed a High Court Judge.
The late Hon. Justice Jean Omokri, who was my colleague, and who was Director of Public Prosecutions, when I came for NYSC, used to say that my Argungu posting was like asking me ‘to go and do a solo dance,’ which showed the stuff I was made of.
The lessons I had learnt on my way up the ladder to this point, allowed me to gain a better understanding of what worked well, what didn’t work, and what can be done differently in the future.
And so, by the time I was elevated to the Court of Appeal in 2002, I was well-equipped to cope with postings from one division of the court to another, and to work as a team with other Justices, because Justices of the Court of Appeal get moved around a lot.
I served in Benin, Ibadan, Kaduna, Enugu, and Lagos divisions and from 2008, I was posted five times in five years: Ibadan to Kaduna in 2008, Kaduna to Benin in 2009, Benin to Enugu in 2010, Enugu back to Kaduna in 2011, and then Kaduna to Lagos in 2012.
The beauty of it all is that I had classmates everywhere I went since I schooled in Ibadan, Calabar, Enugu, Kaduna, lle-Ife, and Lagos.
I met students I taught at the Law School and university, and I was warmly welcomed and treated as a son of the soil.
Being consistent all my life also helped. I was not one thing here, and another thing there, therefore, everywhere I went, I received the same treatment from all and sundry as if I lived in one place.
Elevation to Supreme Court
On November 7, 2016, I attained the pinnacle of my legal career when I was elevated to the esteemed position of a Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
I was only the sixth woman to attain this distinction in over 50 years of its existence; walking in the footsteps of Hon. Justice Maryam Aloma Mukhtar, who first shattered the glass ceiling, and later became the first female Chief Justice of Nigeria, and others who followed her. Initially, the shoes felt oversized, but I slowly grew into them.
I have served Nigeria with all my strength for 45 straight years, and in all those years through thick and thin, and ups and downs, all I had was my faith in God and a strong desire to do something with all that He blessed me with in His Service and for mankind.
So, I left the choice to Him. He guided my steps up to this court (Supreme Court) but I was a pencil in His hands and He made the very best of me.
What it means to be a judge
As much as I hope that all I said so far will motivate and inspire young lawyers, who aspire to reach this height, to walk the walk and talk the talk on their journey to this court, I must add that getting here is one thing, but what you do here is another thing.
When I was appointed a High Court Judge of Sokoto State, a mix of emotions overcame me. It was the culmination of years of nurturing a dream, a validation of my worthiness to serve in the temple of justice.
The dream had transformed into a reality. But, as any judge would tell you, the honour of being one, carries with it immense intellectual and emotional challenges.
We grapple with intricate legal questions, which often strain the delicate balance between our objective interpretation of the law, and personal convictions. In this role, the imperative is clear, personal beliefs must yield to the dictates of the law.
While there are instances where personal beliefs align with legal principles, each day on the judicial pedestal presents a new chapter in the internal struggle between our private convictions and the law.
However, in no time, we learn to set aside personal beliefs, as objectivity and impartiality are the bedrock of our profession.
Yet, this does not lessen the weight of our responsibility as the judge’s career is marked by moments of deep introspection,where we face the mental anguish stemming from awareness that our pronouncements can deeply alter another person’s life.
As a Judge, I witnessed a spectrum of emotions in court, especially in criminal trials; anxious uncertainty of the accused, transformation of hope into dismay, the elation of acquittal, and the sad tears of families upon the conviction of their loved ones.
It becomes, even more challenging when we realise that our rulings can shape governance and impact the lives of millions.
But, as Thomas Hobbes aptly noted, a good judge must ‘divest himself of all fear, anger, hatred, love, and compassion.’
It is a job that demands perfection from imperfect individuals, an arduous endeavour that we must undertake daily. It is a calling to serve, to rise above personal quirks and predispositions.
Service entails pain, but it is pain I would willingly endure again.
Role of Supreme Court Justices
A Justice of the Supreme Court everywhere, not just in Nigeria, holds a pivotal position within the judicial system, tasked with upholding the rule of law, justice, and democracy.
Their duties include interpreting the Constitution, setting legal precedent, and safeguarding individual rights, while also maintaining the separation of powers among the three branches of government.
The Supreme Court is the final appellate authority, serving as the court of last resort. This role, therefore, involves making decisions that profoundly impact the liberty, lives, and property of individuals, and even change the course of the entire nation.
The legal issues presented to the Supreme Court are often highly intricate and nuanced. Justices of the court must grapple with these complexities to reach sound and fair decisions, and these decisions often involve complex legal, moral, and societal issues, making the burden of responsibility considerably heavy.
Supreme Court decisions are collaborative efforts among a panel of Justices, which may lead to internal disagreements, requiring the reconciliation of personal beliefs with consensus.
Upholding ethical standards, particularly in a politically charged environment, presents challenges but integrity is paramount.
The Supreme Court decisions are subject to intense public scrutiny and analysis.
The Justices must navigate intricate legal issues, striving for fair and accurate decisions. They must also withstand public criticism, political pressure, and intense media attention while upholding their independence and impartiality.
Upholding ethical standards and avoiding conflicts of interest can be challenging in such highly visible and politically charged environment.
However, the Justices of the Supreme Court must navigate these ethical dilemmas with unwavering integrity.
In essence, being a Supreme Court Judge entails the weighty responsibility of safeguarding the Constitution, ensuring legal accuracy, and protecting individual rights.
Despite that and the challenges and intense scrutiny they face, their commitment to upholding the rule of law remains paramount and unwavering.
Supreme Court is overburdened
Now, as I bid farewell, my hope is that those that come after me will not face the same challenging situations, which made it so difficult for those of us before them to fully rise to the occasion.
When it comes to the Supreme Court, the age-old saying that the ‘higher you go, the cooler it becomes,’ is turned on its head.
I have had the privilege of serving as a Chief Magistrate, High Court Judge, and Justice of the Court of Appeal. Yet, I can confidently say that nowhere in these three lower courts did I encounter the level of heat I have experienced in this court.
The heat is not about the weather, but the sheer magnitude of the workload. I even turned to an online thesaurus for words to capture the essence of this workload: ‘burdensome, difficult grievous, harsh, intolerable, laborious, onerous, oppressive, hard, severe, tedious, vexatious, wearisome.’
Each of these words accurately encapsulates the demands we face daily.
Day we heard an appeal on burnt goats
Sometimes, we sit all day and have to deal with appeals that do not align with the court’s role as a policy-making court.
Allow me to share a perplexing example. One remarkable day, we found ourselves entertaining an appeal in an unusual criminal case. Surprisingly, it was not the accused or convict who had filed the appeal; it was the state.
The case involved an incident of arson where 12 goats were set ablaze. As we grappled with the load of pending judgments and the stack of files awaiting review for our upcoming conference – a sacred ritual in this court – I could not help but voice my astonishment. I leaned over to my brother Justice, and whispered: ‘With all that is on our plate, why would such a case come before us? Our primary role here is to be a policy-making court.’
Something must change. This court is the apex court, and its final decisions shape society’s social order. Justices should be able to focus on what truly matters. They could issue directives for formulating specific policies or amend existing ones to better serve their intended purposes. But how can they do that when they are drowning in an overwhelming caseload?
The only way forward, as highlighted by the Hon. Chief Justice of Nigeria, Hon. Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, GCON, during the special court session marking the commencement of the 2022/2023 Legal Year, is to amend the Constitution to restrict the circumstances under which appeals can reach this court.
Tasks before National Assembly
This marks the final instance where my voice will be heard in any court, and I wish to use this opportunity to directly address the 10th National Assembly, through the Distinguished Senate President, Sen. Godswill Akpabio, who was once my student at the Law School.
I had the privilege of teaching him Evidence, and I trust that he learned it well. Hence, it should be evident to him that swift action is needed from the 10th National Assembly to accomplish what others could not – amending the Constitution to enhance the functioning of our courts in Nigeria.
It is said that a teacher’s reward is in heaven, I cannot wait to reach heaven to receive my reward for teaching him because it is my sincere wish that the Justices coming behind me do not go through what those before them went through.
Thus, I implore the National Assembly to undertake the necessary constitutional amendments. By doing so, this court and its Justices can be freed from the constraints that impede their ability to fulfill their mandate of upholding the rule of law, justice, and democracy.
My ancestry
My ancestral heritage is a tapestry woven from various threads that span across Nigeria’s diverse regions. On my paternal side, my grandfather, Dr. Ernest William Graham, a missionary doctor from the Cumberland Graham Clan of Scotland, served in the West African Medical Service in then Niger Coast Protectorate and the Gold Coast from 1899 until his passing in Nigeria in 1920.
His dedication to healthcare took him to various parts of the country, including Calabar, where he died on duty in the hospital.
He attended to a patient and died before the next one came in.
His final resting place is not in Scotland, but in Calabar, and his grave is identifiable alongside Mary Slessor’s grave in Calabar. My paternal grandmother, Aishetu Elizabeth, hailed from the Nupe ethnic group, specifically from the present day Katcha in Niger State.
She and members of her family were traveling from Katcha to Lokoja along the River Niger when the canoe capsised after Baro. She was rescued by white traders, and ended on the other side of the river, which is how she crossed paths with my Scottish grandfather, and my father, Patrick Graham was born.
My father grew up in Onitsha, in present-day Anambra State, and he was warmly embraced as an Onitsha native by his peers.
My maternal grandfather, Robert Ashley, an English engineer, married my grandmother, Comfort Ojukwu, who was from Uturu in present day Abia State.
My mother, who is here with us, was raised by her grandmother in Kwale, in present day Delta State, and she, therefore, calls Kwale home. So, my family’s roots are deeply embedded across Nigeria, and we proudly carry this diversity with us.
Why I adopted my late husband’s hometown
From our early years, we embodied the spirit of a detribalised Nigeria. Our father often referred to himself as ‘a citizen of the world,’ when asked about his state of origin.
While that approach may have been suitable in the early days of Nigeria, it no longer aligns with modern-day requirements.
As I grew older and recognised the importance of a clear State of Origin in our country, I made a vow that when I had my own children, they would have solid roots in their father’s hometown, thereby, eliminating any ambiguity about their state of origin.
So, when I married my late husband, Senator Adamu Augie, in October 1979, I embraced his hometown of Argungu as mine, and his people became my people.
Yet, I was stunned when the Emir of Argungu, Alhaji Samaila Mohammed Mera, announced at my 70th birthday party in Abuja that I have been honoured with the traditional title of Jarumar Kabi (Star of the Kebbi Kingdom), the first time in the centuries-old history of the kingdom that a traditional title has been bestowed on a woman.
I pray that this also inspires a young girl, whose dream is to make a difference.
My journey through schools
My father, Patrick Graham MFR, the first Chief Scout of Nigeria, was a Chief Social Welfare Officer in the then Western Region, when I was born at the Creek Hospital, Ikoyi, Lagos, in 1953, and after a few years in London, I started School at Ibadan in 1958.
He became Chief Social Welfare Officer in the Eastern Region, and we moved to Calabar, and then to Enugu, where I completed my primary education. In 1965, I started secondary school at the Queens School, Enugu, but the civil war disrupted my schooling.
Seeking refuge in Uturu, my grandmother’s hometown in the ‘Biafran territory’ during the war, my journey took a divine turn. When ‘Federal troops’ came in, we went into hiding in the bush.
They were told that my father was a foreign mercenary, who was training guerilla fighters, and we were asked to come out and report to their Commanding Officer at the Mission House, Uturu.
They were suspicious, until my four-year-old brother innocently expressed his wish to go home. My mother told him, ‘ask Daddy’ and their doubts about him being a mercenary were dispelled, when my brother ran to him and said, ‘Daddy, I want to go home.’
The Commanding Officer took us to the Brigade Commander, the late Lt. Col. Abdul D. S. Wya, who was married to an Irish woman.
He noted our resemblance to his children and when he was told children were not schooling in Biafra, he pointed to an officer, and said, ‘Captain Halad, you are going to Kaduna tomorrow, take the first two children with you and put them in schools.’
‘Captain Halad, ‘ the late General Mohammed Balarabe Haladu, obeyed the order, and took us with him to Kaduna the next day.
This is how I got to Queen of Apostles College, Kakuri, Kaduna (now Queen Amina College), where I finished Secondary School.
Why I chose to read Law
Even as a young child, I knew I wanted to be a lawyer, which was a male-dominated field then. I remember telling ‘Capt. Halad’ that when he asked me what I wanted to be when I grow up and his response was ‘so you want me to stand up for you one day.’
This only made me more determined to pursue a fulfilling career in the field of Law, and I embarked on a journey that would not only define my life, be a more just society.
It started at the University of Ife (Obafemi Awolowo University), where I went to study law and developed a thirst for knowledge.
I graduated at the top of my class, winning ‘the Faculty Prize for Best Overall Student,’ ‘Phoebe Chiadikobi Ajayi’s Prize for the Best Female Student with Second Class Upper and above,’ and the ‘Amicable Assurance Prize for the Best Student,’ which paved the path for me to pass through academia and the Bench.
My rewarding life as a teacher
I am first and foremost, a teacher. To me, teaching is a calling; it comes naturally to me in that everything I am, everything I do, is invested with a special devotion, dynamism, and enthusiasm to impart knowledge, which is contagious, because knowledge grows more knowledge when it is learned and shared to others.
In those days, once you did well in school, it is assumed that you would go into academics.
My first job as a law teacher was at the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, where I was an Assistant Lecturer while pursuing my Master’s Degree from 1980 to 1982.
My next teaching job was at the Nigerian Law School, Lagos, where I taught the Law of vidence from 1984 to 1988.
Even as a Chief Magistrate in Sokoto State, I was a part-time lecturer at the University of Sokoto, now Uthman Dan Fodio University.
Despite being a High Court judge, I went back to the classroom to teach, sometimes four core subjects, at the same university.
It meant that after I finished in court, I would be at the university from 4pm until 10pm at night sometimes. But the joy I get when I see students from those days come up to me is unquantifiable, as their paths crossed with mine on their way to being lawyers.
A Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square on Monday, sentenced a suspended Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), Drambi Vandi, to death by hanging for killing a Lagos-based lawyer, Omobolanle Raheem, on December 25, 2022.
Justice Ibironke Harrison passed the verdict after finding Vandi guilty on a one-count murder charge brought against him by the Lagos State Government contrary to Section 223 of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State, 2015.
The judge held that the convict should be hung by the neck until he dies.
The judge said: “I hereby pronounce that you Drambi Vandi, shall be hanged by the neck until death. May God have mercy on you.”
During the trial, the prosecution called 11 witnesses, which included, a pathologist, eight police officers, some of whom were the defendant’s colleagues, and two eye eyewitnesses.
The defence opened its defence on May 16, 2023, and closed on May 31, 2023. Vandi was the only witness who testified in his own defence.
Vandi, attached to the Ajiwe Police Station in Ajah, Lagos State, shot the pregnant Raheem while she was returning from an outing with her family members on Christmas Day.
While delivering the judgment, Justice Harrison, analysed the evidence of all the eyewitnesses.
She held that none of the eyewitnesses actually saw the defendant pull the trigger but the circumstantial evidence was overwhelming.
The judge said that a defendant could be convicted when the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.
Justice Harrison said: “The question in the mind of the court is did the prosecution proffer any additional evidence?
“The court finds that the ammunition of the other officers who were on patrol with the defendant remained intact but two of the defendant’s ammunition was missing.”
Harrison said that the defendant had alleged that the shortfall in his ammunition was because it was counted in his absence.
The judge also said that the defence of the defendant that the bullet tendered in court was not his own.
The court, however, held that the defendant constituted himself as a ballistician pathologist without tendering a certificate to that effect.
Harrison therefore dismissed the evidence of the defendant as to the bullet used.
“The court finds that the forensic expert and the medical doctor’s evidence confirms the circumstantial evidence that the defendant had the opportunity to shoot the victim and that the victim was shot and died from the gunshot.
“Every eyewitness heard the loud noise and the passers-by shouted in Yoruba language (oti pa eyan) meaning you have killed someone.”
Justice Harrison held that the prosecution proved its case beyond every reasonable doubt that there was overwhelming circumstantial evidence that it was the convict who shot the gun that killed the deceased.
She held: “The death of the deceased was instantaneous. There is no other explanation, it was the gunshot that shattered the side glass and pierced the victim’s chest.
“It was the defendant who had an AK-47 riffle whose ammunition was missing after the armourer counted it.”
The judge further held that the defendant did not say that he pointed the gun to force or scare the people in the vehicle to obey the order and park the vehicle.
She said that the defendant did not also say that the shooting was an accidental discharge which would have earned him a smaller sentence of manslaughter.
“Therefore, the defendant is found guilty of the one count charge and sentenced to death by hanging he should be hung until he dies,” she held.
Vandi, during his defence, told the court that he had never come across the bullet that was shown in court as the alleged murder weapon.
He said that the bullet was not the same ammunition in his rifle on the day of the incident.
Vandi pleaded not guilty to the one-count charge of murder and the court then granted accelerated hearing on the case.
During trial one of the convict’s colleagues Inspector of Police Matthew Ameh had told the court that they were conducting a stop and search when the incident happened.
He stated that his colleague Inspector Fiyegha Ebimine was in front while he was at the middle and Vandi who was the leader of the team was at the back.
Ameh who was the first prosecution witness said that when Ebimine saw a car coming, he flagged it down but the car didn’t stop and when the car got to where he was standing, he also flagged the car down but the car didn’t stop as well.
He said: ” The next thing I heard was a gunshot and I looked back to see what was happening and I saw that a windscreen was falling down.
“The next thing I saw again was a dark woman who jumped down from the vehicle and I heard her saying that oga you have killed my sister, the woman held him and before I and Ebimine could get to them, they entered the car locked it and left.”
Ameh who was led in evidence in chief by the former Attorney General and Commission of Justice, Moyosore Onigbajo SAN, who led the prosecution team alongside the Director of Public Prosecution, Babajide Martins, told Justice Harrison that on December 25, 2022, he and his other colleagues resumed duty at 6 am, in their office at Ajah.
When asked the time the incident happened, he said that it was around 1pm and that the car the deceased was killed in was a Toyota car that had no number plate.
Ebimine in his testimony also confirmed the evidence of Ameh.
He said: “One woman was in the passenger seat, and a man was driving. I flagged the vehicle down. It didn’t stop. They passed me. I wondered why. He was not speeding. Ameh also flagged him down but he didn’t stop”.
The witness said: “Shortly after, I heard a gunshot from the back. I asked Ameh, ‘What is going on?”
Ebimine told the court that afterward a crowd gathered and swooped on Vandi, brought him out of a Korope (commercial minibus) where he hid, and put him in the deceased’s car.
On January 25, the deceased’s husband, Gbenga Raheem told the court that the car where the deceased was allegedly killed by Assistant Vandi, was gifted to her.
He said she received the car on Friday, December 23, 2022, from a property developer when she worked two days before she was shot dead.
Gbenga a property developer stated that the car was a Toyota Venza which was gifted to her because she met her target as she was a very hard-working woman.
He said they normally go to the Redeemed Christian Church of God at Ikoyi. But on that particular Sunday, their church was having a programme at Surulere.
“So we decided to go to The World Assembly Church where we got married 10 years ago, because my wife was very close to the founder of the Church and they brought her up spiritually when she was growing up.
“They had also lost a son, so we went to greet them after service when she finished greeting them, my wife said it would be nice if we can get everyone, Pizza.
“So we went to get Ice Cream and Yoghort and went to Domino’s pizza, near Ajah under the bridge, we are the pizza and ice cream and then we went towards Ajah under the bridge to make a U-turn, to come back towards Abraham Adesanya, because our house was a few buses stood before Abraham Adesanya.
“As I did Uturn I saw police officers ahead and the car in front of me slowed down, I overtook the car and there was an officer on my left who said I should park.
“While he was still saying that I should park because he was following me, all of a sudden I just heard a sound on my wife’s passenger’s window and the window shattered it smashed and I saw blood gushing out of her chest.”
Following the conclusion of both sides’ cases, the state’s Director of Public Prosecution, Babajide Martins, and defence lawyer Jude Egwu notified the court that they were ready to adopt their final written addresses.
The defence counsel informed the court that the defendant’s last written address was filed on June 20, 2023, and that a reply on points of law was made on July 12, 2023, in response to the prosecution’s written address.
The defence counsel relied on all of the paragraphs of the written address in support and accepted them as the defence’s argument, urging the court to maintain the argument and discharge the defendant.
Egwu contended that the prosecution’s case was founded on hearsay and circumstantial evidence and was insufficient to convict the prisoner.
The prosecution told the court that on July 5, 2023, the prosecution’s written address was filed. He pleaded with the court to convict the defendant based on all of the arguments presented.
The prosecution urged the court to dismiss the defence’s final written address and respond to questions of law. He also stated that the defence’s concerns regarding discrepancies are not fatal and will not result in a miscarriage of justice.
“The ballistician’s testimony in court did not exonerate the defendant and never mentioned that the bullet did not come from the defendant’s gun.”
During his testimony in court, the ballista noted that the bullet was so damaged and broken that it was difficult to identify.
PW6 and PW7 testified directly against the defendant, directing the court’s attention to the IPO’s (PW7) testimony, to the effect that the deceased’s sister and husband held on to the defendant after the shooting, and that he was seen taking cover under the hospital’s staircase without his uniform and wearing mufti. PW6 said that following the incident, the defendant requested one round of ammunition.”
The prosecution contended that the defendant’s decision to fire the ammunition was deliberate and intentional in killing the dead.
The State government in a charge, dated December 28, 2022, and marked LD/20598c/22, alleged that Vandi killed Raheem contrary to Section 223 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
He was arraigned before the court on January 16, for allegedly shooting to death the 41-year-old pregnant lawyer at the Ajah underbridge Roundabout, on Lekki- Expressway, checkpoint on December 25, 2022.
While speaking with Journalists after the verdict, the Director of Public Prosecution, Babajide Martins, thanked the Lagos state government for providing the enabling environment for seeing the prosecution through.
He also thanked the police for their cooperation and added, “I want to of course, say thank you to my team members for their industry and more especially, the Solicitor General, Permanent Secretary, Mrs. Shitta-Bay, who had also appeared on this case on a number of occasions.”
Abiye Tam-George, Secretary of the Sub-Committee constituted by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), to ensure that Justice is served for Bolanle Raheem’s case while reacting to the judgement said, “Beautifully well delivered Judgement has just taken place. The NBA has been at the forefront, immediately we were informed of the tragedy, we did everything humanly possible to contact the Commissioner of Police, the Attorney General and we did everything. We are most grateful that the Judge did exactly what she has been sworn in to do. She has taken the responsibility to deliver Justice in good time.
“We are calling on the Ministry of Justice to consider the Gafaru’s case, which is also a mandate of this sub-committee, to ensure that Justice is done. It has to be dealt with expeditiously, there has been delay and storytelling in the case and we want that done as well,” She concluded.
Olakitan Bolu Agbaje, the counsel representing Raheem’s family expressed her satisfaction with the verdict stating that though, it could not bring the dead back, the judgement would give the family the hope that the Convict has been brought to book and would get his deserved punishment.
Meanwhile, Adetokunbo Odutola, the lead defence Counsel, said that he would know the next step to take when he receives the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgement.
A Lagos State High Court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square on Monday, October 9, sentenced an Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), Drambi Vandi, to death by hanging for killing a Lagos-based lawyer, Omobolanle Raheem, on December 25, 2022.
Justice Ibironke Harrison convicted Vandi, on a one-count charge of murder brought against him by the Lagos state government.
The judge sentenced Nielsen to death by hanging on this count.
The state, on January 16, arraigned Vandi on a one-count charge of murder which reads: “ASP Vandi on the 25th of December 2022 at Ajah roundabout along Lekki-Epe Expressway Lagos in the Lagos Judicial Division unlawfully killed one Omobolanle Raheem (F) by shooting her in the chest”.
The Lagos State High Court sitting at the Tafawa Balewa Square annex, at Igbosere has convicted and sentenced the suspended Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP), Vandi to death by hanging, for the murder of Lagos-based lawyer, Omobolanle Raheem.
Upon convicting the ASP for the murder of the pregnant lawyer, Justice Ibironke Harrison pronounced the judgment.
The Justice held that the prosecution, the Lagos state government, had established the case against the suspended officer beyond all reasonable doubt.
The judge held: “The court finds the defendant guilty on one count of murder. You will be hanged by the neck till you are dead.”
On January 16, Vandi was charged in court for shooting to death the 41-year-old pregnant lawyer at the Ajah underbridge checkpoint on December 25, 2022.
The convict faced a one-count charge of murder contrary to Section 223 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
The lawmaker representing Akoko Southwest/Akoko Southeast constituency in the House of Representatives, Adegboyega Adefarati, has said that 13 court cases were instituted against him before and after the last general elections.
Adefarati spoke at Akungba-Akoko at a thanksgiving to show gratitude to God for emerging victorious despite the legal hurdle.
He said God helped him to survive the pre-election struggles and the post-election travails.
Adefarati said it was God that helped him to actualise his long-time ambition to represent his good people at the National Assembly.
The Chairman, House committee on Labour, Productivity and Employment, said his successes at the poll was largely due to the pedigree and integrity of his late father who served as Governor of Ondo State between 1999 and 2003.
Adefarati promised never to depart from the progressive ideals of his late father.
He distributed the sum N50,000 each to 100 persons nominated from across the 26 wards within his federal constituency as empowerment fund.
According to him, “I am full of praises and gratitude to God for His invaluable grace that saw me through the electioneering period unscathed and, especially, for the victory secured at the poll.
“I ask the church to always remember me in their prayers so that my time in office will bring dividends of democracy to the people.”
A Lagos High Court will on Monday rule on the celebrated case involving a police officer, Darambi Vandi, charged with shooting dead a Lagos-based lawyer, Mrs Omobolanle Raheem, on Christmas Day.
The court sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square gave the judgment date on July 13 after the adoption of final written addresses by parties in the suit.
Vandi was arraigned on Jan. 16 on a count charge of murder but he pleaded not guilty.
The court granted an accelerated hearing on the case.
According to a report by the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), the Lagos State Government alleged that the defendant shot Raheem in the chest on Dec. 25, 2022, at Ajah Roundabout, on Lekki- Expressway, Lagos State.
The offence contravenes Section 223 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2015.
The prosecution team led by the then Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Moyosore Onigbanjo, called a total of 11 witnesses including eight police officers.
The other prosecution witnesses are two eyewitnesses and a pathologist.
Among the prosecution witnesses is Insp Matthew Ameh, who allegedly worked with the defendant at the time of the alleged murder.
The prosecution closed its case on Feb. 25.
On Feb. 28, the defendant through his counsel, Mr Gbenro Gbadamosi, filed an application, praying the court to quash the charge against him.
Gbadamosi argued that evidence of the prosecution witnesses were inconsistent and did not link the defendant to the alleged murder.
On April 3, the court, however, dismissed the no-case submission.
Justice Ibironke Harrison held that prosecution established sufficient oral and documentary evidence linking the defendant to the alleged crime, which required explanation from him.
Harrison added that evidence by the defendant would shed light on what happened.
On May 31, the defendant gave evidence and closed his case.
His counsel had told the court that Vandi was the sole defence witness.
On July 13, the parties adopted their written addresses, and the court reserved judgment until Oct. 9.
