The Nation Newspaper

Tag: judgement

  • A Butcher’s judgement… typically British

    A Butcher’s judgement… typically British

    • By Louis Odion

    A poor reading of the verdict by the London court slapping a historic penalty of $9 billion on Nigeria last Friday is viewing it as an affirmation of the law of contract. No, it is not. Rather, it is the orchestration of international politics and neo-colonial power-play at their vilest.

    Indeed, let no one be deceived that objectivity is assured in the interpretation of international law even by angels, especially when the interests of multinationals are in dispute concurrently across jurisdictions. In such circumstance, pure nationalistic instinct is likely to trump fidelity to reason or the universal principle of fair play.

    For ages, the doctrine of sovereign immunity was, for instance, often invoked by powerful nations of the West to commit blue murder anywhere across the universe. But good students of history will recall that attempt later in the 70s by newly independent African nations to draw on the same principle ended ghastly. In the international court, it then became fairly convenient to invert Lord Denning’s new theory of “market place” to hand Nigeria the short end of the stick, in the landmark case of Swiss-owned Trendtex versus Central Bank of Nigeria.

    A similar – if not identical – conflict is what is being stoked invariably by P&ID vs Nigeria. In choosing not to view things from the prism of the U.S. court (which can justifiably be seen as unencumbered by any possible nationalist bias), there is, therefore, a compelling reason to see the London court’s Justice Christopher Butcher as bending the arch of justice to favour a home company, with a covetous eye on Nigeria’s substantial asset domiciled within the U.K.

    Given the severity of the penalty awarded, it was as if Justice Butcher opted to literally act out his fearsome name by dealing savage knife blows on Nigeria’s jugular.

    Read Also: FAAC shares N903.480bn to Fed, States, councils for September 2023

    What then appears ludicrous at home has been the attempt by some cynical elements to scrounge some mileage from this sad development for their petty partisan politics. Only genuine patriots would see the development first as more of a huge slap on the nation by foreign interests, even if our leadership failing, to an extent, is still admitted.

    Note, the local airwaves had barely crackled by midday with the highlight of the London judgement, when the social media was drowned with the hysteria of People Democratic Party (PDP) agents against President Muhammadu Buhari as the sole culprit. They claimed the fine resulted essentially from his malicious discontinuation of another of Jonathan’s visionary projects.

    But when more media insights began to pour in, that spin began to be modified ingeniously. The following day, Jonathan’s salespeople decided to sweep the entire blame to the gravesides of both ex-President Umar Yar’Adua and Rilwan Lukman, now incapable of defending themselves.

    Let us concede that Jonathan was completely locked out of Aso Rock while the sneaky contract was being facilitated by “the cabal”, as the then ailing president was gasping for oxygen, and Lukman (the oil minister) seemed too self-absolved in hauteur to submit the details of the contract agreement to the scrutiny of Michael Aondoakaa, commonly regarded then as essentially a comical attorney general.

    But nothing can absolve Jonathan of liability for the non-consummation of the contract, beginning from February 2010, as acting president and three months later as the substantive, following Yar’Adua’s demise. P&ID began to complain more than a year later. By the time the company eventually resorted to arbitration in 2012, Jonathan’s much beloved Diezani Allison-Madukwe had, of course, become entrenched as almighty oil empress.

    From what we now know, she obviously was too preoccupied with either signing Nigeria’s patrimony away to her younger “admirers”, like the now fugitive Kola Aluko, in sweetheart oil-swap deals or immersing herself in the sheer effulgence of her mammoth jewellery collection to have mustered the presence of mind to grasp the contract idea, much less contemplate what benefits might accrue therefrom to the nation.

    So, it bears restating that national interest was least served by those who committed Nigeria into such contract with improbable terms to begin with. That rape of Nigeria was not helped by Jonathan’s subsequent sloppiness. Today’s sorry outcome is traceable to yesterday’s tardiness.

    But by far more atrocious is the taste of British jurisprudence that the nation was offered brusquely by the London court last Friday. While the dereliction of duty on the part of Nigerian officials is regrettable, nothing can however explain the juridical logic summoned by Justice Butcher to enter a judgment that negates morality and mocks all the principles of natural justice.

    Note, to corner this windfall, nothing in the convoluted narration made in British and American courts in the last seven years suggested that P&ID engaged in much toil between 2010 and 2012, other than its officials carrying briefcases around Abuja and meeting with Nigerian officials. It never as much as cracked any soil in Calabar to erect the envisaged gas processing plant (as expressly stated in the contract pact), to which Nigeria was expected to lay hundreds of kilometre of pipes.

    To generations of blacks still stuck today with the trauma inflicted by the colonial disruption of African civilisations, Justice Butcher’s latest travesty must be a sad reminder of the culture of plunder and predation for which imperial Britain was quite exceptional even among fellow European exploiters in history.

    Were the verdict to be enforced to the letter, it should qualify as the single most punitively prohibitive fine ever imposed in history on a sovereign nation, relative to her fiscal strength. The $9 billion sanction represents a whopping twenty per cent the nation’s present foreign reserve and a third of the current national budget.

    At the arbitration court in London in 2012, P&ID began by filing claims of $40 million expenses and proceeded to add “lost earnings” in the twenty-year tenure of the agreement based on impossible operational benchmarks of more than ninety per cent capacity utilisation and a patently unrealistic expectation that oil never fell below $100 per barrel.

    As if that was not already shylock enough, the judge opted to play Father Xmas by granting the petitioner’s additional prayer that compound interest be paid on the fine imposed on Nigeria. That explains how P&ID’s preliminary claim of $40 million in 2012 mushroomed exponentially to the $9 billion awarded last week.

    No sane person will accept such sham without a fight in the first place. Buhari could, therefore, be said to have acted most patriotically by refusing the initial hefty $800 million payout proposed by a departing Jonathan in May 2015. In any case, with Nigeria technically insolvent by the time President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB) took over having lapsed into a recession described as the worst in a generation, there practically was no way Nigeria could have paid, assuming the new administration was even willing.

    Expectedly, the government soon mounted a vigorous counter-attack by filing appeal in the U.K and the U.S. against the claimant. Whereas the U.S. upheld Nigeria’s objection to the enforcement of the claim by pleading sovereignty, the British court chose to dismiss the plea as “frivolous”.

    What makes the Butcher’s verdict all the more curious is a subsequent media expose, suggesting a determined conspiracy to raid Nigeria’s exchequer. Ahead of the judgment, a whopping twenty-five per cent stake of P&ID was snapped up in a strange deal by a hedge fund manager known as VR Capital Group in March. Since the Friday judgment, the side talk in global financial circles is that the hedge fund manager had all along been pulling levers of influence in the U.K. and the U.S. to make Nigeria either settle or be willing to forfeit her asset. So, it would then seem the vultures had long been hovering overhead as the nation began to wallow in the British dock.

    Now the big question: Did VR Capital Group read Justice Butcher’s mind ahead? Or, could his judgment be mere coincidence? Developments like this will only reinforce long-held suspicion that the British jurisprudence is half of the times tainted and can, therefore, not be trusted to avail us justice on own accord without us standing up to the system, nor can its integrity be vouched for to protect our interest behind our back.

    • Odion is a Fellow of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (FNGE). The article was first published by Premium Times on August 21, 2019. This is an abridged version.
  • Two sides of a judgement coin

    Two sides of a judgement coin

    After a draining and soporific 12-hour judgement by the PEPC last Wednesday, during which lawyers and the public battled to stay awake, Nigeria is no less divided after the 2023 presidential poll than they were before the poll. After examining in detail the evidence presented before the PEPC, one side has concluded that the judgement is excellent, impregnable, thorough and irrefutable. They base their conclusions not only on what the justices said, or on their erudition, but on the final written addresses by the counsels to the petitioners and the respondents. The other side, naturally and incorrigibly sceptical, insists that the judgement was procured and flawed. They refuse to take cognisance of the written addresses of the petitioners, and, sounding lawyerly and magisterial, scoffed at the arguments and logic of the justices. For them, since their candidates did not win, there was no jurisprudential logic to be admired.

    Read Also: Tinubu/Shettima: Yahaya applauds PEPC’s verdict

    There are suggestions the petitioners will be heading to the Supreme Court, obviously after paying the fines levied on them, some N84m in all. Should they go ahead as they have sworn, they hope it will afford them the opportunity to continue sullying the image of the president, certainly not to affect the substance or direction of the case. The verdict will of course not change, but so too their determination to cause a lot of reputational damage to the president, the country and its institutions, up to the point of wishing the system to collapse. Even after the apex court has had its say, the PDP and LP will sustain their attacks and excesses until their pastime become unbearably costly. 

  • 12-year case for judgement

    A Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday fixed September 20 for judgment in a 12-year-old forgery case filed against a businessman, Jones Patrick Biyere, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Mohammed Idris fixed the date after the prosecution and defence argued their written addresses.

    Biyere was arraigned in 2007 by the EFCC on a 13-count charge of conspiracy, forgery and exporting forged cheques.

    The commission alleged that the defendant, alongside Tony Adeyemi and Eddy, said to be on the run, committed the offences on or about May 31, 2006, at 15, McCarthy Street, Onikan, Lagos,

    It said they forged and signed 10 Lloyd’s TBS cheques with numbers 002108, 002104, 000096, 00091, 005263, 005260, 000147, 000144, 000546 and 000550.

    The defendant was also alleged to have attempted to export the cheques through the United Parcel Services (UPS) Somolu and Gbagada offices.

    The alleged offences contravene sections 3(2)a 6(2)(b) and 6(1) of the Miscellaneous Offences Act, 1990 and sections 3 and 3(b) of the Counterfeit Currency (Special Provisions) Act, 1990.

    He pleaded not guilty and was admitted to bail, but in the course of the trial, Justice Idris revoked the bail after the defendant missed some court dates.

     

  • Judgement without justice

    I had once written about miscarriage of justice a year or so ago in Osun State. That was when a high court judge sentenced three young boys to death for stealing by force a motor bicycle. The robbers’ ages ranged between 19 and 22. I had argued that even though armed robbery carried mandatory death penalty, the judge who in this instance was a mother herself could have used her discretion to send the boys to jail for a few years to learn a hard lesson especially since nobody died during the robbery incident. I am for tough punishment for errant behaviour, but such punishment must be measured and not excessive. Laws are made for social reformation and not for unusual punishment

    In the same country a director handling police pensions was accused of stealing N24 billion in 2013. He was taken to court by the EFCC and a high court judge in Abuja jailed him for two years with the option of a fine of N750,000 which he promptly paid and was seen being later driven out of the court premises in a Mercedes Benz car. A fine of less than one million naira for stealing N24 billion can hardly be described as adequate punishment to deter others. The EFCC appealed the judgement asking the higher court to make a ruling on if the High Court judgement was defensible judicially. The Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the lower court and fined the director by the name of Yusuf and asked him to return N23 billion to the Treasury and go to jail for six years. If this offence had been committed in China, this senior civil servant would have been executed. The lower court had dismissed all the 29 counts against him and merely condemned him for betraying the trust of retired policemen to whom the money belonged. I do not know why the appeal court ordered the man to refund N23 billion rather than N24 billion he was accused of stealing! At least this is still progress. Those who are shouting about the nation’s poor rating in corruption index had better look more at the judiciary that seems to enjoy throwing out all cases of corruption before it even when the evidence is poking it in the face . Who does not remember the case of a former governor who was declared innocent of several counts of corruption, money laundering, graft, bribery and sundry other nefarious practices by a high court judge in Asaba. The same man was later jailed for the same offences and served about seven years in London as guest of Her Majesty’ s prison.

    Cases drag on till eternity in Nigeria without closure with one injunction following adjournment until the presiding judge dies for the case to start de novo before another judge while the charade begins and rolls on as before until the case is forgotten outright. Many criminals with stolen money are roaming the streets freely and enjoying their loot asking for permission to go abroad for medical treatment in the same country where petty thieves are having their hands and limbs cut off on orders of Sharia court judges. The legal profession ought to examine itself instead of lawyers being masters of ambiguity defending a client in one court and prosecuting another case of the same offence in another court without any conscience about public good. I remember several years ago when a certain high court judge in Kano while sentencing a criminal to jail said he wished he were permitted by law to sentence the defence lawyer to jail at the same time for misleading the court and perverting the cause of justice. Using the same argument, appeal courts while reversing bad judgements of lower courts should be empowered at least to disrobe bad judges or demote them to the level of magistrates. That will send a strong message that bad and corrupt judges and lawyers are not above the law. The judiciary is so critical to the rule of law that if people lose respect for it, they may resort to self-help and rule of the jungle. When apparently obvious criminal cases are thrown out on mere legal technicalities, this does not help the cause of justice. The law may be an ass, but judges should not behave like asses. It is obvious that judgements are sometimes for sale to the highest bidder.  A “big” man in Lagos once said rather than hire an expensive lawyer, he would seek out the judge privately and offer him what would have cost him to hire a lawyer and get the judgement he wants. It reminds me of an American judge in Boston Massachusetts who drunkenly said he takes bribes from litigants before his court and when people were aghast with this open confession, he added that he normally takes bribes from both sides and then declare judgement based on law. Even though his logic made sense, he was immediately removed from the bench as a judicial rascal and bad example.

    In Nigeria we have great judges before like the late Justices Kayode Esho and Chukudifu Oputa but they are few and far between. The process of judicial appointments is faulty. It depends on the executive at state and federal levels and it is a case of who pays the piper dictates the tune. Good lawyers are also not ready to abandon their lucrative practices to go to the bench. The salaries of judges are too low and not commensurate with the burden they carry and the temptations they face. Of course salaries are generally low in Nigeria but if legislators are going home with huge amount of money computed at more than one million a day in salaries, allowances, running costs and constituency projects, one can make a case for judicial officers to be paid much higher than they are earning. Perhaps the country can borrow a leaf from Lee Kuan Yew, the late prime minister of Singapore who paid public servants a lot of money so that they were not tempted to steal unless they were insanely greedy. I remember when I was ambassador in Germany, my Singaporean colleague earned five times my Foreign Service allowances. To be able to do what was done in Singapore, our country would have to move from our present economic pedestal of primary production to industrial and service economy. But in the meantime, there is a need for revolutionary reform of our judiciary. The present situation where people run from one court of equal jurisdiction to another of the same with the purpose of seeking contradictory judgements ought to be frowned upon and stopped in order to maintain judicial integrity. The qualification of judges ought to be raised and well scrutinized. There have been cases of fake lawyers being appointed judges and presiding in courts for years before being found out. The Justice Kayode Esho’s findings some years ago exposed this and instead of the culprits being charged to court and jailed, they were simply removed and asked to go home.

    Finally this brings me to the philosophical basis of the judiciary. One is familiar with the platonic idea of laws being a manifestation of imperfect state because there is no room for laws in an ideal state where everything will work perfectly under a philosopher king. But since there is not the likelihood of a utopia anywhere on earth, laws must exist to regulate human interaction and relations so that society can be governed on the basis of equity and fairness and the rich and the poor can expect to be treated equally. Rather than permit the rule of the mighty man, society will be governed by laws which will operate neutrally with no respect to persons. This is what our judiciary is supposed to rise up to. The question is have they risen up to it? Do we in Nigeria have justice for every one or judgement that is priced above the means of the common man?

  • Anambra Central: Has a Daniel come to judgement?

    You have to read The Merchant of Venice to underscore the import of that cry – A Daniel come to judgement by Shylock the main character in William Shakespeare’s yet epochal classic, and how it could be the final refrain in the Anambra Central Senatorial zone seat, which has been vacant for about two years, owing to several court disputes. The summary: Shylock, was a rich Jewish money lender in Venice. He made cut-throat deals and practically squeezed the anatomy of his victims for maximum effects. Antonio, a rich merchant in the same city, who was the direct opposite, opposed Shylock’s Semitic ways, thus attracting a bitter hatred of the Jew.

    Now, the plot thickened when Antonio had to rush to Shylock to raise a loan for a friend, Bassanio, who needed money to court a Venetian princess, Portia. Shylock seeing this as an opportunity to deal with his arch-enemy, made a deal to slice a pound of flesh of Antonio in the event of a default. Taking it as a joke, without knowing the real intention, Antonio agreed, as he was sure that his ships at sea, carrying his merchandise would have returned on time with more than enough to repay the loan.

    Unfortunately, his ships wrecked forcing him to default. Bassanio, who learnt of the calamity, had to abandon his mission half-way, but missed the deadline for the repayment of the loan on return. That practically put the life of Antonio in Shylock’s hands and he would have nothing in place of it.

    So, the drama began in the court in Venice. All pleas to Shylock for mercy, including offer of 10 times the bond value, even from the Duke, who presided over the matter, but could not intervene to reverse the terms because he was bound to obey the law, failed.

    Implacable, pitiless and determined, he needed nothing more than what the bond provided. By my soul I swear, there is no power in the tongue of man to alter me. I stay with my bond,” were his words to underscore his resolve. So, why waste time?

    Then Portia, who invariably, was the cause and source of the entire sad episode, and who later came in disguising as a man and the judge to execute the bond, in another powerful speech aimed at saving the situation, reminded the Jew that mercy was even mightier than the power of life and death of a king. But it cut no. “My deeds upon my head! I crave the law, the penalty and forfeit of my bond,” Shylock insisted.

    Bassanio, had even attempted to get Portia bend the law a little to save his friend. “To do a great right, do a little wrong. But she would have none of it.

    No power in Venice can alter a decree, lest it be recorded as a precedent, with which many errors would be committed in future against the state, she argued.

    Hearing this, Shylock cried in reference to the biblical Daniel’s penchant to give sound judgements: “A Daniel come to judgment! yea, a Daniel! O wise young judge, how I do honour thee!

    Thoroughly sated, he made with his well-sharpened knife for Antonio, only to be halted: “Tarry a little. There is something else. This bond doth give thee here no jot of blood. The words expressly are ‘a pound of flesh.’ Take then thy bond, take thou thy pound of flesh. But, in cutting it. If thou dost shed one drop of Christian blood, thy land and goods are by the laws of Venice, confiscate unto the state of Venice.” That did it.

    Now, does this equate to the situation under reference? To a large extent, I think so. I don’t want to state how Chief Victor Umeh’s penchant for going for the maximum benefits of any political situation, including the story behind his ascendancy to the office of the national chairman of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), from a mere treasurer of the party and the use to which he put that office, depicts him as a political Shylock per se.

    That is the story for another day. Besides, there are a number of persons, from Chief Chekwas Okorie, founder and first national chairman, former Governor of Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Prof. Chukwuma Soludo, oil magnate, Chief Ifeanyi Uba to tell it better.

    But, like Shylock flaunted his bond before the court in Venice, insisting that only its full interpretation and implementation would satisfy both the law and his own personal quest, Umeh, has similarly told any willing listener that the verdict of the Court of Appeal in Enugu, which sacked Iyom Uche Ekwunife as the senator representing Anambra Central Senatorial seat, was an open and shut case and invariably, the end of the matter.

    Not only was Ekwunife removed in a judgement a lot of people, including some sound legal minds found both curious and outlandish, but the appellate court, went further to bar the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), from participating in the rerun election it subsequently ordered, in a manner that would have made his going to the upper legislative chambers of the National Assembly, a fait accompli, since there is hardly any other party capable of challenging him.

    Let me confess, boldly that I’m one of those who feel that there is something wrong with the document Umeh is flaunting, even if not legally, as it seemed in the case of Shylock, but morally and thus, he should not be the beneficiary of this situation.

    For instance, I feel that Ekwunife, who during her short stay at the Senate, captured the chairmanship of one of the most powerful and prestigious offices in the red chamber – Petroleum Upstream, would have given a better representation than Umeh, given his uninspiring record in the APGA top job, where he practically crashed the fortune of the party, which under Okorie, was already making waves in far-flung parts of the country, to a one-state affair.

    Beyond that I appreciate the reasoning of many, who insist that the appellate court judges nullifying the election because Umeh complained that the PDP did not hold a valid primaries to pick its candidate as akin to an uncle demanding that a marriage should be nullified before a priest because the bride price was not paid in the presence of the bride’s father. What else qualified more to a meddlesome interloper and a busybody?

    It is in this context that I find it not too difficult to align with those who believe that the recent judgement obtained by Dr. Obiora Okonkwo, one of the aspirants to the senatorial seat as a Daniel coming to judgement.

    Every politically conscious Nigerian has seen the powers of pre-election matters. We have seen how cases concluded even by Supreme Court and beneficiaries enjoying the fruits were practically uprooted by the effects of such matters on conclusion. Starting from Rotimi Amaechi, former governor of Rivers State, to Okezie Ikpeazu who was only saved by the skin of his teeth to Herman Hembe and a surfeit of other cases, the force of pre-election matters are quite evident.

    Surprisingly, Umeh, who was insisting a few days ago on AIT that the latest judgement amounted to nothing because the Court of Appeal had given him judgement which was superior to that Justice John Tsoho of the Abuja Federal High Court, cited the injustice done to Okonkwo in the processes he filed in court. Today, he is recanting. Phew!

    It was surprising that neither he nor his interviewer made any reference to it in his AIT outing. He is presently insisting that the January 13, 2018 date set for rerun must hold. Of course nobody needed be told the reason for his haste, just like Shylock in the Venetian court. He believes he holds the aces, once there is an election and his road to Abuja is clear. But he forgets the law is an ass. Let us see how it will turn out this time.

    Let us see how the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which Okonkwo has approached with Tsoho’s orders to issue him with certificate of returns, will discountenance that in preference for Umeh’s desired rerun, at least, without another court’s pronouncement. Let’s see if that will not amount to cutting the flesh without spilling the blood. Let’s see another Umeh magic.

     

    • Igboanugo, a journalist writes from Lagos.
  • Before divine judgement

    Before divine judgement

    Interestingly, President Muhammadu Buhari, who is the pivot of the country’s anti-corruption war, sounded passive when he brought up the corruption problem during his two-day visit to Kano.

    Buhari was quoted as saying at the palace of Emir of Kano Muhammad Sanusi II on December 6: “From 1999 to 2014, the wealth of this country was lavishly squandered by those in the position of authority. Those who have looted the treasury will best be judged by God.”

    The President should not forget that the electorate voted for change, and change should include bringing treasury looters to justice. In other words, before divine judgement there should be human judgement.

    Nigeria’s war against corruption cannot be without casualties. It is noteworthy that in September the head of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu, said there were no fewer than 125 high-profile corruption cases still “hanging in court.” As long as high-profile corruption cases remain unresolved, public confidence in the war against corruption will remain uncertain.

    It is also interesting that in Kano, Buhari recounted his struggle to become President. A report said: “President Buhari also told the Emir of Kano that he had seen a lot since he joined politics in 2003, adding: “As a politician, I really tasted the pains of seeking elective office. Since I joined politics in 2003, I contested for president three times but I could not get it right until the fourth attempt in 2015. I was in court for 30 months, challenging the 2007 election and in 2011 I also spent 16 months in court.”

    Buhari’s struggle to be President, and his eventual success, show a focused fighter.  The war against corruption requires focused fighting, and the country expects no less from the Buhari administration. Curiously, Buhari remarked in Kano:  ”When I was the military head of state, I arrested many people and jailed them for alleged corruption and in the end, I also ended in jail.”

    Now that Buhari is a democratically elected President, he is expected to fight corruption with greater enthusiasm and greater success. The power of his office, which is based on the power of the people, is a potent force that should be used to crush corruption. The country expects that “those who have looted the treasury” will be brought to justice by man before divine judgement.

  • Kwara APGA hails court judgement restoring Oye

    Kwara APGA hails court judgement restoring Oye

    All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) in Kwara State has hailed the Appeal Court judgement restoring Dr.  Victor Oye as the national chairman of the party.

    It also passed a vote of confidence on Oye.

    The Court of Appeal sitting in Enugu has upturned the judgement of an Enugu state High Court, which sacked Dr. Oye as the national chairman.

    The Enugu State High Court, presided over by Justice A.R. Ozoemena, had ordered Oye’s removal and replaced him with Chief Martin Agbaso.

    In a statement, the Kwara State Chairman of the APGA, Elder Ayo Oluleye, said the party was satisfied with leadership of Dr. Oye.

    Members of the party, who hailed the state chairman, Elder Oluleye for his support for Dr. Oye, condemned alleged anti-party activities of some members of the party in Abuja.

    The statement also prayed for the success of Governor Willie Obiano of Anambra State in the governorship election.

  • Judgement without justice

    The Greek philosopher Plato is most famous for his book “The Republic” in which he tried to give his ideas about how an ideal state, that is, some kind of utopia should be governed. In short he advocated for a state ruled by a philosopher king supported by a class who through education would know what is right and would do it without deviation from the path of rectitude. This class would have no family of their own because it is when rulers have families that they are bogged down with family issues and are also prone to corruption associated with making provision for the family.

    Plato felt families will be distractions for those trying to run an ideal state. Below the class of philosopher king would be the class of guardians who will protect the state from its enemies. The lowest class will be those of workers who will provide material sustenance for the state in exchange for excellence in rulership and protection. Property in this state will belong collectively to all thus removing cut-throat competition characteristic of ordinary state’s development along capitalist lines of the crude free enterprise characteristic of Ancient Greek states.

    Plato tried to practice what he preached in Syracuse but met abysmal failure. Perhaps it was this failure that made him rethink his ideas and then wrote “The Laws” perhaps a much more practical compendium on governance. Plato had argued that a perfect state as developed in his Republic would not need laws because according to him, the presence of laws in a state is a manifestation of the failure of governance.  After writing the “The Laws” he then wrote the “Statesman”. For practical purpose “The Laws” has been most useful because he developed the idea of supremacy of laws to that of persons no matter how important they may be. They should not be above the laws. This idea was further developed by Plato’s   student Aristotle in his book “Politics”. Since the time of the Ancient Greece, the idea was further developed during the 18th century Age of Enlightenment when Greek philosophy was rediscovered in Europe through the agency of Arabic translation. The English common law tradition which we have embraced in Nigeria owes a debt to the enlightenment especially the French part of it especially the group who edited under Diderot the “L’encyclopedie”.

    Today it is commonly accepted that laws are no respecter of persons. This is why the symbol of laws is a blindfolded maiden with a sword in hand, a familiar sight in buildings housing courts and other venues of the judiciary. Does this also mean laws are not just asses but they are also blind?  No one will argue about the desirability of impartiality in judicial interpretation. But at the same time, there ought to be a correlation between offense and punishment. Punishment is for the purpose of deterrence and presumably of reformation. Judges are human beings and are thinking persons who should be able to pass judgements that make sense and should not pass judgement repugnant to fairness common sense and justice. When this happens then there is a miscarriage of justice. The law may be an ass but a judge should not be an ass.

    Some three weeks back in an Oshogbo high court, four young people with ages ranging from 19 to 25 years were charged with stealing a motorcycle and wounding the owner with knife cuts. The leader of the gang was a 19-year old jobless hooligan. They obviously owned up to their crime. Reports of the case did not indicate if they had a lawyer. The upshot of the story was that the judge had no mercy on them and the four of them were sentenced to death and the judge said they should be hanged until they are dead. When I read the report, I felt somebody must protest this judgement as a miscarriage of justice. I condemn crime in its entire entirety. There can be no extenuating circumstances for robbing while inflicting bodily harm. Crime should be punished wherever it occurs. But justice should be tempered with mercy. I cannot understand why the judge should sentence four adolescents to death for stealing a motorcycle worth N40,000 in a country where billions of Naira are being unearthed, pardon the pun, with owners disclaiming ownership because the monies are proceeds of crime. What message is this judge trying to send to Nigerians? Is this judge not part of the same judiciary that is releasing thieves and delaying passing judgement on cases of wealthy Nigerians of the political class for years with one adjournment following another? Is this judge not belonging to the same family of judges freeing thieves on basis of legal technicalities thus retarding the development of this country?  Is this judge not one of the judges saying the wife and children of judges can receive gifts running to millions provided there is no proof the decision of the judges in question was influenced by such gifts and largesse liberally dispensed by lawyers arguing cases before his lordship! In exasperation with this kind of behaviour, former President Obasanjo recently spoke our minds when he said corruption cases were taking too long a time for final judgement to be passed.

    It can be argued that if we have good governance with little or no corruption there would be jobs for young people who are now robbing people as a way of surviving. The issue of unemployment among the youth leading to criminal tendencies would need to be addressed. We are operating a cruel, survivalist system without any social safety net while expecting acceptance of the yawning gap between the have and the have nots. Many of us are living in fear especially when we see hordes of unemployed youth aimlessly wandering around our homes.

    I discussed my anxiety over this Osogbo case with a friend of mine who is a lawyer and his opinion was that the judge was simply following the laws and that if I am concerned I should plead with my legislators to review the penal code of Nigeria. He added that rather than sharing money and fighting over which committees are juicy for oversight functions, our legislators should busy themselves with revising the kind of laws our judge used to condemn the four young ones whose leader is a teenager. In civilized world of today, no one has the right to take another one’s life.

    Of course, I know we live in an imperfect world, a world where Americans who in their classic Declaration of Independence in 1776 talked about man’s inalienable rights such as the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness yet regularly kill criminals with  either  electric chair or lethal injection. There are however exceptions in the western world where capital punishment has been largely abolished. In the Osogbo case, I am sure no governor would sign the death warrant for these young men. Their sentences should be commuted to a reasonable length of time. The purpose in this case should be reformation and not termination of life. A state should not commit murder for the purpose of defending property rights. I would of course support the laws of Moses of an eye for an eye if a criminal terminates another one’s life during the process of crime.

  • Why we rejected Edo tribunal’s ruling-PDP

    Why we rejected Edo tribunal’s ruling-PDP

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Edo State has explained why it rejected Friday’s ruling of the Election Petitions Tribunal which affirmed the election of Governor Godwin Obaseki.

    Chairman of the tribunal, Justice Ahmed Badamasi, had in a unanimous judgment thrown out the petition of the PDP and its governorship candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu for failing to support their pleadings with evidence as well as abandoning some pleadings in their petition.

    State Chairman of the PDP, Chief Dan Orbih, who gave reasons why the party rejected the judgement said the tribunal threw away the results obtained from the inconclusive ballot recount.

    Chief Orbih said the tribunal expected the party and its candidate to call over 2,000 witnesses within the 14 days allotted to prove its case.

    Orbih noted that the tribunal through it pronouncement said different unit presiding officers could adopt different standards in the conduct of same election and that the tribunal was saying that there was no need for uniformity in the conduct of elections.

    He said, “Conduct of an election is not a free-for-all exercise where anyone is at liberty to apply his own discretion. What Justice Badamasi was simply saying was that whether the presiding officers followed the regulations or not did not matter.

    “For the first time ever, a judge redefined over-voting as a situation whereby the total number of votes cast exceeds the total number of registered voters. Is that not laughable? I think these are the salient issues that we will challenge.”

    Orbih also challenged former governor Adams Oshiomhole to explain what he meant when he (Oshiomhole) referred to the tribunal verdict as “Mama Akara judgement.”

    He stated that Oshiomhole’s comment suggested that Oshiomhole may have inadvertently exposed how his party purchased the verdict.

    His words, “I watched former Governor Adams Oshiomhole on national television describing Friday’s judgement as Mama Akara judgement. This is about the first time Oshiomhole will be describing things the way they are in his political life.”

    “We know what goes into the making of akara and we also know that the Mama Akara will not part with her akara for nothing. So, we are demanding from Oshiomhole to tell Edo people and indeed Nigerians what was handed the Mama Akara before she let go of her akara.”

  • Why Courts give conflicting judgments – Lawyer

    An Abuja-based lawyer, Mr Abdul Mohammed has said that two seemingly similar cases could get different judgments as a result of different facts made available to courts.

    Mohammed stated this on Sunday in Abuja in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on recent criticisms of the judiciary over conflicting decisions.

    “On the street, the way a case is viewed can be different because there may be some basic information that the court will or will not be privy to.

    “So, those outside might not be privy to these facts which will be the basis on which different decisions will be given in two seemingly similar cases.

    “Also, sometimes when the outcome of a case is different, it could be as a result of changing circumstances at the time,’’ he said.

    He said that judges could not determine a case with information outside of what was presented before them by parties to the case.

    Mohammed also noted that judges were not infallible adding that a judge could make mistakes.

    In criminal cases, the lawyer said it was imperative for the investigators to do a thorough job before bringing the defendant to court.

    He lamented that judges were working under very poor conditions with no infrastructure in the courts and inadequate prosecutors.

    “We need more manpower because in the entire country, we have only about 5, 000 judges and we are about 160 million people.

    “How do you expect the problems of 160 million people be solved by just 5,000 judges?

    “We need to massively increase the number of the judges to a commensurate number to make their work easier.

    “For instance, there are just three prosecutors from the NDLEA servicing 11 courts in the Federal High Court in respect to drug related offenses.

    How do we expect them to cope with the rising drug related cases,’’ he said.

    He expressed confidence that the enactment of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 will help to fast track justice.

    According to him, the law will go a long way in addressing some of the challenges facing the judiciary.