The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers. Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part 2
Doctors are just the same as lawyers; the only difference is that lawyers merely rob you, whereas doctors rob you and kill you too.
Anton Chekhov, Russian dramatist
On Saturday, July 13, 2013, I gave a public lecture at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA) under the auspices of the Wole Soyinka Centre for Investigative Journalism. The lecture was titled “The Freedom of Information Act and the Dictatorship of Corruption and Mediocrity”. In the extensive research that I conducted before writing and delivering the lecture, I came across many facts, figures and statistics that both depressed and enraged me to no end. Of these, no item among my discoveries was as depressing and infuriating as my finding that a Sub-Committee of the House of Representatives had issued a comprehensive report on the oil subsidy mega-scam of 2011 in which the names of all those who had wrongfully and illegally benefitted from the scam had been published, together with the astronomical sums that each of these Nigerians had looted. I swear that before conducting that research for my lecture, I had been completely unaware that the names of the mega-scam looters were known, that they were not shadowy figures who had forever disappeared into the night of personal anonymity and legalistic oblivion. But together with my astonishment that these men and women were known and indeed meticulously identified, there was also my greater frustration that they had all without exception tied up the cases pertaining to their prosecution in the law courts by all manner of so-called “interlocutory injunctions” and “stay of execution” writs. That was in the year 2013. Two years later, the cases are still tied up in the law courts and not a single one of the men and women indicted in that oil subsidy mega-scam has either paid a kobo back or gone to jail. Their lawyers and the judges before whom their cases are being tried have seen to that; they have provided what seems to be a permanent and impregnable juridical cover and protection for these men and women whose looting of our national coffers has caused untold suffering and hardship to millions of Nigerians. In this context, the law may be said to be the last refuge, the last redoubt of the looters who, as human vampires, are sucking the blood from the economic arteries of our national commonweal.
If the language I am using here seems too emotive, too sensationalistic, I plead guilty to the charge. Even more, I plead guilty to the charge of deliberately clothing myself in a long tradition of savage linguistic and literary critique of lawyers and the law as moral cesspits wherein some of the most unscrupulous and cynical professionals can be found. This is the context that makes the extraordinarily ferocious attack on lawyers in Shakespeare’s Henry VI, Part Two, that supplied the first of the two epigraphs to this piece seem not too harsh, not too extreme: “The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers”. This was said by a character in that play against the background of a looming uprising of the people against centuries of oppression by their social superiors in which lawyers had played a significant role in maintaining the legal infrastructures and practices of a dog-eat-dog social order. I quote the words here in the hope, the wish that the lawyers and the judges who have for long prevented the men and women bleeding our country and its resources dry may perhaps get a glimpse of the sentiments that some of the world’s greatest literary minds have expressed about them and their kind.
The second epigraph from the great Russian dramatist, Anton Chekhov, seems a tad gentler in its critique of lawyers and the legal profession on the same count of being always prone to acting as accessories to cynical, merciless robbery: “Doctors are just the same as lawyers; the only difference is that lawyers merely rob you, whereas doctors rob you and kill you too”. However, if we juxtapose this ludic and playful Chekhovian quote with the one from Shakespeare’s play, we can see that lawyers, like incompetent and conscienceless doctors, kill too. They “kill”, not directly and interpersonally but by the indirect and epiphenomenal effects and consequences of the legalistic protection and cover that they give their clients, the looters who, it seems, can never be successfully prosecuted in the law courts of the land.
If all this talk about “killing” seems unwarranted in its application to lawyers and judges that are, after all, merely practicing their lawful profession (no pun intended), please consider the N2.53 trillion naira that was looted in the oil subsidy mega-scam; consider too, the fact that thanks to lawyers and judges, not a kobo of that loot may ever be recovered; and finally, consider the number of lives that could have been saved or made richer and more fulfilled if a fraction of that N2.53 trillion naira had been productively spent to create jobs, build roads, improve hospitals and clinics and raise the quality of teaching in our primary and secondary schools. And indeed, there are no literal cannibals anymore, if ever they existed as a distinct social or “tribal” group; what we have now and have aplenty, thanks to many of our best trained lawyers and judges, are social cannibals who have not the slightest inkling that they are “killing” hundreds of thousands, millions through the sense of total protection that they feel when they loot, and loot, and loot yet again.
At this stage, it is perhaps time in this discussion to bring into our conversation two lawyers who indeed recently have had much to say on these issues. Moreover, they are eminent, progressive and patriotic lawyers. These are none other than Professor Itse Sagay and Mr. Femi Falana, SAN. In an article published in The Nation on Sunday, July 19, 2015, titled “Politics, Public Service, Morality and Integrity in Nigeria”, Sagay more or less admitted that the law and the manner in which it is applied in our law courts at the present time make it near impossible to recover stolen loot and put an end to rampant corruption. Indeed, so sanguine was Sagay on this point that he was quite willing to go as far as to suspend the protection of the individual rights (of looters), if any headway is to be made in the struggle to recover stolen loot and curb corruption in our society. Perhaps it is best to hear directly from the Professor himself on this point:
“There will a need to amend our laws to strengthen the state at the expense of individual liberty at least for a short while, if we are to get to redemption point. All legal provisions permitting preliminary objections to prosecutions for corruption must be repealed from our laws. The power of any court to issue an order of injunction against a trial for a crime, particularly corruption, should be repealed. Interlocutory applications, in cases concerning corruption, should be banned.
You cannot read such words from the pen of a lawyer who is also a teacher of lawyers and still repeat, like a robot, the savage indictment from Shakespeare, “the first thing we do is kill all the lawyers”! For in the struggles against the social cannibalism that is at the root of the corruption that has penetrated so deep into the political, economic and juridical order in our country, some of the most eloquent voices have, in fact, been that of lawyers. As everyone knows, Sagay and Falana have been frontline professional and intellectual activists in those struggles.
And indeed, the main point of my bringing Sagay and Falana together in this piece is precisely to try to reconcile what seems to me to be a tension, a contradiction between recent pronouncements of both men on this issue of the seemingly immovable obstacle that the law and its operations in our country pose to the fight against corruption by the new administration of President Buhari. On the one hand, Sagay says laws must be repealed and that we may even have to suspend protection of individual liberty, at least for a while. But on the other hand, Falana says that the enabling acts have now been enacted by the National Assembly and that all that is required now is for the bills to be forwarded to Buhari for them to be signed and made into effective laws. How did I come by this information? Well, Falana himself through an email forwarded to me a speech that he recently gave that contained these claims. The speech was a keynote address that he gave at the 7th Annual Distinguished Lecture of the Nigerian Institute of Quantity Surveyors (Lagos Chapter) on Tuesday, July 21, 2015. The lecture bore the title, “Involvement of the Nigerian people in the anti-corruption war”. Here’s a relevant quotation from the lecture:
“While the decision of the Federation (sic) Government not to interfere in the work of the anti-graft agencies is a welcome development, the National Assembly should forward to President Buhari for his assent the Witness Protection Bill and the Whistle Blowers’ Bill. The National Assembly deserves commendation for enacting both laws together with the Administration of Justice, 2015.
Under the new Act, the granting of stay of proceedings and other delay tactics have been banned in the trial of criminal cases. Accordingly, a criminal trial shall be concluded within 6 months unless there are exceptional circumstances which may prolong any trial beyond that period. Indeed, the elevation of trial judges to the Court of Appeal will no longer lead to fresh trial before other judges as judges will be given the fiat to conclude part heard matters.”
Have the issues raised in Sagay’s article been resolved by the revelation of the passing of new laws by the National Assembly in Falana’s lecture? And is this a matter to be settled only by and among lawyers? These will be our starting points in next week’s concluding piece.
Biodun Jeyifo
bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu
