- Neither person nor institution can stop due process
To be clear: in civil settlement of disputes, as opposed to barbaric self-help, every party has the right of recourse to the courts, for remedies against legitimate injuries.
But that right is injured, or at least suspect, when a party tries to wield justice as some satanic blackmail — from the way it structured its case, sounding as if the system were male-fisted, and forged to punish one side, to the detriment of the other. That’s false. Sound justice is an equal-opportunity system.
In the wee hours of August 10, reportedly following credible intelligence, 50 armed operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), and the Nigeria Police, staged a sting operation at the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidential Library (OOPL) complex, Abeokuta, Ogun State.
After the sting, at a poolside party in the complex, 93 suspects were arrested, with vehicles and sundry IT gadgets. After an initial profiling, according to an EFCC press release, almost all of the suspects were indicted for alleged impersonation, identity and Internet fraud.
From the EFCC initial findings, they would appear alleged 419 fraudsters, celebrating after an alleged kill, and thinking OOPL was a safe haven that could shield them from the law.
But to push the right to due process, EFCC, in the same release, said 23 of the suspects would, on August 15, be arraigned before Justice D. Dipeolu, of the Federal High Court, in Ikoyi, Lagos.
That is how it should be. Suspicion is no automatic guilt. The court would decide, either way, after the suspects must have had their day in court. Due process.
But the OOPL management, chafing at the sheer haul of suspects from their facility, have reacted rather angrily, demanding within seven days, a comprehensive apology and seeking N3.5 billion in damages, for what they called an “invasion”. Otherwise, they would sue EFCC. Again, it’s within their constitutional right to seek legal redress. What is not, is to turn that right into cheap bluff and bluster, that border on illicit threat.
But perhaps the OOPL release should speak for itself.
Vitalis Ortese, the OOPL managing director, claimed: “We are fully persuaded that the acts are not only aggravated, unconstitutional, oppressive, capricious and arbitrary; the actions are also clearly actuated by malice against the institution of OOPL and also of its chief promoter, HE Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, GCFR, who was Head of State (1976-1979) and President of Nigeria (1999-2007).”
With all due respect to the OOPL managing director, there is little evidence, beyond ruffled proprietor pride and anger, to justify the tumbling adjectives that impute bad faith by the EFCC sting.
Besides, linking OOPL with Chief Obasanjo is at best illiterate, at worst reckless. More so, it’s utterly disrespectful to any civilised order. Unfortunately, in his ardour to stack his cards and appeal to the fallacy of force and threat, Mr. Ortese brought in Chief Obasanjo, in a matter that concerns only the OOPL, a corporate citizen, and not Obasanjo himself — except, of course, he was hinting at illicit influence: the No. 1 blight to legal due process and basic societal decorum.
That is utterly condemnable.
Still, here is a riposte to Mr. Ortese’s supposition. That Gen. Obasanjo was military Head of State or Chief Obasanjo was elected President of the Federal Republic, does not elevate him above the law. Let that be very clear. Also, by the stretch of that illicit sentiment, it doesn’t elevate any business he is associated with above the routine laws of the land, which order the operational behaviour of all corporate citizens.
For emphasis, if EFCC and allied security agencies are empowered to do sting operations to prevent the commission of crime, or arrest an ongoing crime, which credible intelligence at their disposal suggests, then the question of the alleged “invasion” of OOPL is ludicrous — except of course, OOPL can prove that it’s different from, or is indeed elevated above, other hotels and public fun facilities, promoted by private concerns for legitimate profit.
In truth, any supposition that OOPL is superior to similar businesses, in the eye of the law, is corporate conceit and organisational hubris pushed too far.
To be clear: that very day law enforcement agencies start giving OOPL preference, because it’s linked to the Obasanjo name, that very day, Nigeria plumbs from a Federal Republic under the rule of law, to a banana republic, under whims and caprices. OOPL was not the first, and certainly won’t be the last, public space security agencies would raid, under heavy suspicion, to curtail the commission of crime.
It’s quite understandable: the OOPL management were rightly embarrassed at the haul of arrests. Almost 100 financial crime suspects didn’t quite add any sheen to their facility’s image. The optics, to be sincere, were also decidedly ugly, at least for a future clientele. In addressing that however, the managing director went into another strange bluster.
Hear him: “We, therefore, demand a comprehensive investigation be undertaken by all relevant security agencies with their reports openly published,” he held, “especially regarding the brutalisation of our patrons, being citizens who had apparently done nothing wrong nor apparently infringed on any law other than engaging in a party, as allowed under the law.”
To be sure, this claim can’t be summarily dismissed. Perhaps, from their robust documentation, the OOPL management can prove this glut of sentimental claims, on their patrons, who EFCC has now arrested and tagged suspects? If OOPL has such extenuating documents, let them please share with the public.
Anything short of that would be pandering to bubbly emotions. “Brutalisation” of patrons would appear a high play on emotions, except OOPL can prove the EFCC and the police, on that mission, abused their arms. That the suspects are “citizens who had apparently done nothing wrong” beyond “engaging in a party, as allowed by the law” is again another sweet sentiment OOPL is in no position to prove — except it has access to EFCC’s intel; and can conclusively prove it is phony. Anything other than that is just blowing hot steam.
The way the OOPL management are going, they might end up setting themselves up for a fair charge of aiding and abetting the commission of an alleged crime. If it’s not the first time a pool party was held there, and no law agent ever raided the place, why this hurried imputation of bad faith? What a responsible corporate citizen should do is cooperate fully with security agencies, when crimes are alleged in their facilities.
Though its image might get soiled a little by such accusations, demonstrating own good faith and total cooperation to crack the crime helps to shore up innocence; and proven non-involvement chimes with public goodwill. The present OOPL tack is the diametric opposite, with the delusion they can illicitly profit by the Obasanjo name. That won’t — in any case, shouldn’t — happen, if Nigeria must keep its soul as a lawful republic. OOPL should change that tack — and the earlier, the better.
Still, the OOPL management was right on one score: let there be a thorough and open investigation into the sting operation, starting with the genuineness or otherwise of the EFCC intel. If the EFCC had indeed abused its powers by the sting, the operatives must bear the full brunt of the law. This is less to confirm OOPL’s imputation of malice — rather wild, to be honest — but to restate that EFCC itself, a creation of the law, can’t afford the hubris of towering above its creator. Besides, with proven malice, OOPL can rightly sue.
Still, EFCC has started well with the phased arraignment of the suspects. Twenty-three, out of 93 suspects, is a near-drop in the ocean, though. So, without jeopardising robust investigation, the commission should speed up its arraignment processes, and let everyone have their day in court, as quickly as possible.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
