Tag: Falana

  • Why Nigeria should prioritise economic restructuring, by Falana

    Why Nigeria should prioritise economic restructuring, by Falana

    LAGOS Lawyer  Femi Falana (SAN) yesterday described leaders calling for Nigeria’s restructuring as speaking from both sides of the mouth.

    Falana said Nigerians should ignore them and instead demand for economic restructuring.

    He accused those leaders of selling the nation’s common patrimony before coming out to cry about restructuring.

    Falana recalled that from the regime of former military President Ibrahim Babaginda, to the present government, the leaders embraced privatisation of public institutions and sold most of the national assets to themselves, their cronies or the rich.

    He said the move sent the common man into the gallows of poverty.

    Falana spoke at the colloquium/tribute for Prof. Abubakar Mommoh, an activist and Dean of Faculty of Social Sciences, Lagos State University (LASU), who died last month.

    He challenged the citizens to begin to ask questions on how the nation must prioritise economic restructuring, adding that should be a precursor to real restructuring.

    The event organised by Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), Lagos State University chapter, in collaboration with labour and civil society organisations, had the theme: ‘Nigeria in crisis, rethinking economic policies and posing alternative developmental and practical option.’ It was held at the LASU auditorium.

    Academicians, human right groups, civil society groups, youths and students paid tributes to the late activist.

    Falana challenged the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Chief John Odigie-Oyegun to take back his pronouncement that the party never promised Nigerians restructuring but power devolution to states.

    “In Article 25 of that manifesto, APC said it was going  to initiate programmes that would lead to the restructuring of Nigeria so that true federalism can be realised; but you know once you get to power in Nigeria, you want to retain the status quo”, Falana added.

    Still speaking on abuse of power, Falana noted that though Section 130 of the Constitution conferred titles such as President, the Head of State and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, and the Chief Executive Officer of the Republic, nonetheless there is no provision in the constitution that confers the title of ‘Executive Governor‘  on our governors.

    ”This is where restructuring must face. Nigeria is the only country in the world where if you serve as governor for four or eight years, you will get a house in the state you govern, and even in Abuja where you never governed. This is aside medical allowance of N300 million in a year. You also receive the salary of governor and get about 10 armed policemen for life. You change cars every two or three years. At present, we have 21 of them now- former governors and deputies in the National Assembly – collecting humungous sums of money at the end of every month. But as employees here, if you are pensioned, you can’t collect full salary except you get a contract.”

    Falana described Prof. Mohmoh as someone who consistently and aggressively sought lasting solutions to Nigeria’s problems.

    Activist and Professor of Political Scientist Lai Olorode lamented that individuals such as Momoh, who started activism as an undergraduate of the University of Lagos, as well as other genuine activists are either getting old while others are going to the great beyond without finding replacement in vibrant youth, who would continue to champion the cause they stood for.

    ”We are confronted with genuine cultural and political disaster of not being able to recruit young people into our movement,” he lamented

    Olorode said the present government is insincere about its war against corruption. He challenged government that past leaders who have made a wreck of this country should be picked up and prosecuted if government is truly determined to walk its talk.

    ASUU National President Prof Abiodun Ogunyemi asked if the union should mourn or rejoice for losing an indefatigable scholar like Mohmoh. He lamented that in 2013, ASUU lost one of its former national presidents, Prof. Festus Iyayi at the peak of the struggle.

  • Falana: Court didn’t empower lawmakers to hike budget

    Falana: Court didn’t empower lawmakers to hike budget

    Activist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has faulted the National Assembly’s claim that the Federal High Court empowered it to increase budget estimates.

    The lawyer said he was the plaintiff in the suit, adding that although it was dismissed for lack of locus standi, the court never made such a pronouncement.

    Falana said in 2014, he challenged the extent of the National Assembly’s oversight powers to rewrite the Appropriation Bill or increase the budget estimates presented to it by the President.

    He said in dismissing the case, Justice Gabriel Kolawole questioned his legal right to institute the action and described him as a “meddlesome interloper” despite acknowledging him as “a renowned human rights crusader”.

    “No doubt, the learned trial judge said that the National Assembly is not a rubber stamp parliament. The incontestable statement has since been twisted to give the very erroneous impression that the power of the National Assembly to increase the budget has been judicially recognised.

    “In the entire 22-page judgment, the learned trial judge never said that the National Assembly has the power to increase any budget proposal submitted to it by the President. On the contrary, the Federal High Court made it categorically clear that the National Assembly lacks the legislative powers to prepare ‘budget estimates’ for the President or ‘disregard the budget proposals laid before it and substitute it with its own estimates’.

    “Even though I have taken the legal battle over the dismissal of the case to the Court of Appeal, I wish to state, without any fear of contradiction, that the learned trial judge concurred with my submission that the constitution has not vested the National Assembly with powers to increase the budget,” Falana said.

    Falana quoted Justice Kolawole as saying: “The whole essence of the ‘budget estimates’ being required to be laid before the third defendant (National Assembly), is to enable the third defendant as the assembly of the representatives of the people, to debate the said ‘budget proposals’ and to make its own well-informed legislative inputs into it.

    “What the third defendant cannot do is to prepare ‘budget estimates’ for the first defendant (President) or to disregard the proposals laid before it and substitute it with its own estimates. The rationale for this is simple: It is the Executive Arm under the leadership of the 1st defendant that controls and superintends all agencies, corporations and commissions that generate the revenue for the running of the government…”

    According to Falana, the judge rightly stated that the National Assembly was not a ‘rubber stamp parliament’ on the ground that it is empowered to debate and make its informed inputs into budget proposals.

    He said nowhere in the judgment did the Federal High Court say that the National Assembly has the power to increase or insert new items like constituency projects into the budget estimates contained in any Appropriation Bill or Supplementary Bill prepared and submitted to it by  the President.

    Falana said a seeming lacuna in Section 81 of the Constitution has been sufficiently addressed by the Fiscal Responsibility Act No 31 of 2007.

    “Section 13 thereof has imposed a mandatory duty on the Minister of Finance to seek inputs from the National Assembly and other relevant statutory bodies in the preparation of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework, which shall be approved by the Federal Executive Council.

    “Pursuant to Section 18 of the Act, the Medium Term Expenditure Framework shall be the basis ‘for the preparation of the estimates of revenue and expenditure to be prepared and laid before the National Assembly under section 81 of the Constitution’.

    “It is submitted that it is at the stage of preparing the Medium Term Expenditure Framework that National Assembly may influence the introduction of new items or inclusion of projects to be executed in their constituencies. Therefore, the National Assembly cannot prepare any aspect of the budget estimates, lay it before itself, pass same and then request the President to sign it into law.

    “Finally, to ensure that the preparation of the Appropriation Bill is based on the Medium Term Expenditure Framework passed by the National Assembly, signed into law by the President and implemented by the Executive arm of government, Section 51 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act has specifically clothed every citizen with the necessary locus standi or legal capacity to enforce the provisions of the law by obtaining prerogative orders or other remedies at the Federal High Court, without having to show any special particular interest,” Falana said.

  • Opadokun, Falana to Osinbajo: don’t assent 2017 budget

    Opadokun, Falana to Osinbajo: don’t assent 2017 budget

    •Activists seek arrest of those behind rumoured coup

    Former scribe of Yoruba socio-cultural organisation, Afenifere, Ayo Opadokun and fiery Lagos lawyer Femi Falana at the weekend questioned the legality of the National Assembly on the inflation of the 2017 budget.

    They, therefore, urged the Acting President Yemi Osinbajo not to sign the budget into law as presented to him by the National Assembly.

    They spoke in Ilorin, the Kwara State capital, at a colloquium on Kwara at 50 organised by the Movement for Genuine Change.

    Falana spoke on “Politics, Leadership and accountability: The role of the people”.

    Opadokun’s paper was entitled: “Dynastic politics and challenges of a modern state”.

    Falana said:”It is illegal for NASS to increase the budget as transmitted to it by the executive. I, therefore, urge Prof. Osinbajo not to pass the illegal appropriation bill into law.

    On the controversy surrounding who will sign the 2017Appropriation Bill into law, the rights activist insisted that only the Acting President is constitutionally empowered to sign the document.

    Falana called for the arrest and prosecution of the civilian collaborators of the “coup plotters”.

    He, however, warned the political class to stop playing into the hands of potential coup plotters.

    He added: “The enemies of democracy are desperately trying to exploit President Buhari’s health to truncate the democratic dispensation. But in view of the ruinations of our economy, the bastardisation of our politics and the devaluation of our national morality by previous military dictators, the Nigerian people must be prepared to reject the coming into power of another fake salvation army.

    “Notwithstanding the glaring shortcomings of the fragile democratic process, the people should be allowed to take advantage of the democratic structures to take their political destiny in their own hands.”

    On his part, Opadokun said: “When there is a bill of appropriation before the National Assembly, what they can do is to work with the executive to establish that the correct figures are there. But to add something that was not there before is ultra vires powers and I concur with Femi Falana as he is talking law and law in this circumstance is to be respected.  They don’t have that right they are arrogating to themselves.”

     

  • Southwest states can generate power, says Falana

    Southwest states can generate power, says Falana

    Activist lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), has said Southwest states can generate power and make it available for domestic and industrial use.

    He said what it would take to accomplish an independent power project in the states is “political will and commitment of their leaders.”

    The senior lawyer, who spoke in Ijebu-Igbo, Ogun State, yesterday at a public lecture to mark the 65th birthday of Senator Gbenga Kaka, said it was not mandatory that a fraction of the power  generated should be sent  “to the national grid.”

    Speaking on federalism, he said it was feasible if any state decided to establish a state police to protect the life and property of the people.

    Falana said if an individual could be licensed to own gun for protection, what prevented Lagos State government from applying and obtaining gun licences for about 10,000 persons to enable it protect the residents?

    He said the federal system is a flawed one and urged people to ask for restructuring and true federalism so that the best of the country and people can manifest.

    According to him, if the quest for restructuring and true federalism can not be attained through political process because the people profiting from the flawed  system may not want to see it happen, Nigerians should set up a body of lawyers to pursue it through judicial process.

    Falana recalled that the Lagos State government during the ex-Governor Bola Ahmed Tinibu administration sued the Federal Government many times on a number of issues, including the right to create local government development areas and won. He enjoined other states to follow suit.

    Falana blamed herdsmen’s attacks on farmers and communities on mismanagement and inefficiency of the security system.

    He absolved President Muhammadu Buhari of connection with herdsmen, saying: “Buhari has not sent Fulani herdsmen to kill anybody.”

    The activist described Kaka as a “man of extraordinary moral, integrity and humility, who is committed and dedicated to the service of humanity.”

    In attendance are Ogun State Governor Ibikunle Amosun (represented by his deputy, Princess Yetunde Onanuga), Afenifere chieftain Chief Ayo Adebanjo, who chaired the event, the Chairman, Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), Olabisi Onabanjo University (OOU) chapter, Prof. Deji Agboola, among others.

  • Falana, AIED review Buhari’s letter

    Falana, AIED review Buhari’s letter

    Lagos lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) yesterday said there should be no controversy over Prof. Yemi Osinbajo’s status as the acting president.

    He said the President Muhammadu Buhari’s letter to the National Aseembly explained everything in line with Section 145 of the Constitution.

    Accorduing to him, once a letter has been transmitted by the President to the National Assembly that he is going to be away on medival ground, the vice president is automatically the acting president.

    A Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO), Advocacy for Integrity and Economic Development (AIED), described the designation of Vice- President Yemi Osinbajo as “coordinator of national affairs” via the notice of medical vacation submitted to the National Assembly by President Muhammadu Buhari as a desecration of the office of the President and a complete aberration.

    In a statement yesterday by its Director of Research and Publicity, Comrade O’Seun John, the group accused the “cabal” within the Presidency of plotting to create confusion by its continuous interference with the decision of the President.

    AIED said: “We are extremely saddened with the content of President Buhari’s letter where he neglected tradition and voice of sanity to dance to the tune of political vampires by importing a lexicon alien to our constitution. While we are aware of the unambiguous provision of Section 145, we are frightened by signals such as this on the peace and unity of our country.

    “The new designation of Professor Osinbajo can only be interpreted to mean that President Buhari does not trust him enough to act as the President in his absence. With this reality, we are now forced to ask: who does President Buhari truly recognise as the Acting President?

    “This act has put paid to any form of doubt that the powers controlling the affairs of the country have greater influence and perhaps, control than the vice-president, Professor Yemi Osinbajo,” the statement read.

    Also yesterday, the National Coordinator of the Emerging Leaders’ Forum, Alhaji Aminu Balele Kurfi, praised President Buhari for transiting power to the Vice President before embarking on medical trip to the United Kingdom (UK).

    He urged Nigerians not to make issues out of the President’s health..

    He also told State House correspondents that the Federal Government  should consider a declaration of a public holiday in honour of the 82 rescued Chibok schoolgirls.

    The public holiday, if declared, he said, would enable Nigerians to rejoice and pray for the release of the remaining girls and other Nigerians in captivity.

     

  • Lagos, Falana and fate of Rev. King

    SIR: My attention was drawn to the raging controversy on whether it is constitutionally legal for the execution of condemned inmates on death row. This controversy, from my findings, was ignited from a statement credited the Lagos State Attorney General, Adeniji Kazeem who during a press conference was alleged to have stated that the state government had taken a decision to go ahead with the execution of inmates on death row in Lagos Prisons.

    From all newspaper reports emanating from the said press conference of the Attorney General, nowhere did he categorically state that a decision had been taken to execute Rev. King and other prisoners on death row in Lagos Prisons.

    The Punch of April 19, carried the report with the heading: “Death Sentence: Lagos Decides Rev. King, Others’ Fate Soon. I quote: “The Lagos State Attorney General/Commissioner for Justice, Mr Adeniji Kazeem, has said the State will soon decide the fate of the founder of Christian Praying Assembly, Chukwuemeka Ezeugo, popularly known as Rev. King and other prisoners on death row in the state.”

    I am still at a loss as to why this harmless statement reported to have been made by the Lagos Attorney General should have become an issue of controversy in the first instance. However, since I am not holding brief for the Attorney General as to whether he said what was alleged to him or not, I am more concerned with the legal interpretation of the constitutional provision that has been argued by my respected learned Silk, Femi Falana in his reported letter to the governor of Lagos State, Mr Akinwunmi Ambode.

    He had argued that the planned execution of death row inmates in the state would violate a subsisting judgment delivered by Justice Mufutau Olokooba of the Lagos State High Court on June 29, 2012, which ruled that it was illegal and unconstitutional, and a violation of Section 34(1)(a) of the Constitution which prescribed death by hanging and firing squad amounts to a violation of the condemned inmate’s right to the dignity of human person and amount to inhuman and degrading treatment and it is consequently unconstitutional.

    Unarguably, Section 33 (1) of the 1999 Constitution guarantees the right to life of every person. The provision of the section however permits the deprivation of life of any person in the execution of the sentence of a court of law in respect of a criminal offence for which he has been found guilty in Nigeria. This was extensively considered by the Supreme Court (sitting as a Constitutional Court) in the case of ONUOHA KALU V. THE STATE (1988) 11-12 S.C. 4. Where it was held that death sentence was not unconstitutional and that to argue otherwise will be tantamount to embarking on an exercise aimed at defeating the clear provisions of the constitution.

    The Supreme Court has in a plethora of authorities affirmed the Judgments of a number of lower courts for the offences of death and has pronounced on the mode of execution. In particular, the Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeal in the case of Chukwuemeka Ezeogu vs. State (2016) LPELR – 40046 SC, which similarly affirmed the decision of the High Court which stated thus: “…..in respect of count 6, the sentence of this court upon you Chukwuemeka Ezeuko alias  Dr. Rev King is that you be hanged by the neck until you be dead and may the Lord have mercy on your soul…..”

    The decision of Olokooba J. as highlighted in the case of Ajulu & Ors. V. Attorney General of Lagos State (unreported) Suit No. ID/76M/2008 of 29th June, 2012 lacks merit when viewed against the Supreme Court Judgment in the above stated case. The position of the law is clear and unambiguous as to the finality of the decision of the Supreme Court.  In the Supreme Court, the decision of that Court in so far as that case is concerned is final for all ages and final for ever. Only legislation can alter it.

    This is purely a legal stand and should not be compromised by emotion and all other such needless considerations.

     

    • David Izorite Esq,

    Lagos.

  • Falana to Senate: Enact laws to strengthen anti-graft war

    Lagos-based lawyer Femi Falana has called on the Senate to make laws that will strengthen the whistle -blowing policy of the federal government.

    He also asked the National Assembly to consider legislations that will assist the government in managing seized funds by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Femi Falana spoke in an interview with Sam Omatseye on “The Platform” a programme on TVC NEWS NIGERIA.

    He said: “The national assembly should help the Nigerian people to enact a law that will assist the government in managing the funds…”

    Falana advised the seized funds should be channeled to meeting other pressing national needs like improving education, healthcare and other infrastructure that will improve the living standard of the masses.

    He said: “Can we channel these funds to alleviate and improve all our decaying infrastructure so that people can say funds that were recovered were judiciously spent?

    “If care is not taken, if you just pay it into the federation account, unfortunately those funds will disappear.

    “That is our experience with the Abacha loot and alot of recoveries made by the governments in the past.”

    Falana also lamented inequality legal system, pointing out it appears justice is for the highest bidder.

    According to him:” Under bourgeoisie legal system the lady of justice that is paraded as blind or blindfolded; that lid has being removed and that lady has being raped by the rich. There is nothing like equality before the law.”

    “If a man was killed for instance, if it is a poor man we say he was murdered and if it is a rich man we say he was assassinated.

    “The west for instance has money for aiding the poor to access justice. They vote sufficient money yearly to promote Pro Bono work by lawyers to fund legal aid scheme.

    “But here it is only the rich that can really access justice. So we are not going to blame lawyers for that. But we have a duty to join in the movement to create equality in our society.”

  • Falana to igp: stop police  harassment of the poor

    Falana to igp: stop police harassment of the poor

    Acivist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has written the Inspector-General of Police over alleged harassment of citizens under a repealed Vagrancy Law.

    As you are no doubt aware, the vagrancy law was introduced to Nigeria by the former British colonial regime for the sole purpose of harassing and humiliating poor people who were said to have had no means of livelihood. The anti people’s law was retained for the same purpose by the indigenous ruling class who took over power from the alien administrators in 1960. Thus, in a display of class bias whenever rich people were found on the street taking a walk it was said that they were exercising their fundamental right to freedom of movement. But whenever the poor exercise such fundamental right to freedom of movement they were usually arrested by the police who accused them of wandering or loitering.

    However, the human rights movement in Nigeria mounted a vigorous campaign in the 1980s for the repeal of the vagrancy law. Happily, the campaign succeeded in 1989 when the then military junta promulgated the Minor Offences (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (CAP M16) Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 which abolished the vagrancy law in the criminal and penal codes. Specifically, Section 1 of the Act stipulates that:

    “(a). A person shall not be accused of or charged with-

    (i)         The offence of wandering (by whatever name called); or

    (ii)       Any other offence by reason only of his being found wandering (by whatever name called),

    And, accordingly, any person accused of or charged with such offence shall be released or discharged, as the case may be, forthwith;

    (b) a person who is accused of a simple offence shall not, by reason only of being accused of such offence, be detained in police or prison custody.”

    It is sad to note that notwithstanding the abolition of the offence of wandering throughout the country the Nigeria Police Force has engaged in the indiscriminate arrest and prosecution of many poor people for loitering. We have confirmed that under the pretext of ridding the Federal Capital Territory of criminals and other undesirable elements the Police recently arrested scores of young people around Asokoro and other high brow areas in Abuja. The suspects were illegally prosecuted, convicted and jailed by magistrates based on the allegation that they have no means of livelihood. The explanation of some of convicts that they had recently lost jobs was not taken into consideration by the trial Magistrates.

    Although our law firm has decided to challenge such brazen violation of the fundamental right to personal liberty and fair hearing of those who have been illegally tried and convicted under the repealed vagrancy law in the Federal Capital Territory, we hereby request you to use your good offices to direct all police commands in the country to desist from further arresting and prosecuting poor citizens for loitering or wandering.

    Take notice that if you fail to accede to our request within one week of the receipt of this letter we shall pray the Federal High Court to compel the Nigeria Police Force to comply with the Minor Offences (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act forthwith.

  • Judge lacks jurisdiction to  summon me, says Falana

    Judge lacks jurisdiction to summon me, says Falana

    Activist lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has responded to the summons issued to him by Justice J.D. Peters of the National Industrial Court, saying the judge lacks the jurisdictional competence to summon him to explain a comment he made.

    Falana, in a motion on notice filed to challenge the summon, said the procedure adopted by the judge in inviting him was illegal.

    He is praying for “an order setting aside the order of this honourable court directing the applicant to appear before Honourable Justice J.D. Peters to justify the statement credited to him in a newspaper publication, where he was alleged to have said that ‘courts in Nigeria are supermarkets, where justice is sold.’”

    Falana said the procedure being adopted by the judge to initiate contempt ex facie curiae (contempt outside court) against him was alien to the Constitution, the NIC Act and its Rules of Procedure.

    “Before condemning the applicant for contempt of court ex facie curiae, he was never charged by Honourable Justice J.D. Peters for the offence.

    “The applicant has not been served with the charge of contempt of court ex facie curiae to warrant his appearance before Honourable Justice J.D. Peters.

    “Honourable Justice J.D. Peters is the accuser, the prosecutor, the witness, the judge in the charge of contempt ex facie curiae purportedly committed by the applicant.

    “The order made by Honourable Justice J.D. Peters was actuated by bias and malice towards the applicant,” Falana said.

    He contended that Justice Peters cannot use his judicial powers to gag or intimidate him.

    Justice Peters had issued the directive when a lawyer from Falana’s chambers, Stanley Imhanruor, appeared before him in a suit by Vincent Okocha against Salus Trust Ltd.

    Justice Peters had called the lawyer’s attention to an online publication in which Falana was quoted to have said “courts in Nigeria are supermarkets where justice is sold.”

    He said Falana must appear before him to justify the comments.

    In a supporting affidavit, another lawyer from Falana’s chambers, Akeem Fadun, said he had a similar experience before Justice Peters on March 1, 2017, when he appeared in another case.

    Fadun said Justice Peters also referred to Falana’s comment and made an order that the SAN must appear to justify his claim that justice is sold in Nigerian courts.

    The lawyer said Falana’s wife, Funmi, also had a similar experience before Justice Peters on March 14 when she appeared in a suit by Emmanuel Igbodudu against the University of Lagos (UNILAG).

    According to Fadun, Justice Peters told Mrs. Falana the matter would not go on because of Falana’s statement.

    The judge was said to have adjourned the case till May 16 for Falana to appear personally.

    According to Fadun, Falana was not alone in condemning judicial corruption.

    He said the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen and the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) President Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), had also deplored judicial corruption on different occasions.

    “Many other senior lawyers have condemned judicial corruption in Nigeria. Honourable Justice J.D. Peters has never summoned other senior lawyers who have engaged in the condemnation of judicial corruption in Nigeria,” Fadun said.

  • Industrial court judge cannot summon me – Falana

    Lagos lawyer, Mr. Femi Falana (SAN), has responded to the summons issued to him by Justice J.D. Peters of the National Industrial Court, saying the judge lacks jurisdictional competence to summon him to explain his comment.

    Falana, in a motion on notice filed to challenge the summon, said the procedure adopted by the judge in inviting him was illegal.

    He is praying for an order setting aside the order of the court directing him to appear before Justice Peters to justify the statement credited to him in a newspaper publication where he was alleged to have said that “courts in Nigeria are supermarkets where justice is sold.”

    Falana said the procedure adopted by the judge to initiate contempt ex facie curiae (contempt outside court) against him was alien to the Constitution, the NIC Act and its Rules of Procedure.

    He said,”Before condemning the applicant for contempt of court ex facie curiae, he was never charged by Honourable Justice J.D. Peters for the offence.

    “The applicant has not been served with the charge of contempt of court ex facie curiae to warrant his appearance before Honourable Justice J.D. Peters.

    “Honourable Justice J.D. Peters is the accuser, the prosecutor, the witness, the judge in the charge of contempt ex facie curiae purportedly committed by the applicant.

    “The order made by Honourable Justice J.D. Peters was actuated by bias and malice towards the applicant.”

    He contended that Justice Peters cannot use his judicial powers to gag or intimidate him.