The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Judiciary

  • ‘Judiciary needs surgical operation’

    ‘Judiciary needs surgical operation’

    Dafe Akpedeye (SAN) was Delta State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice from 2007 to 2009. A law graduate of the University of Lagos (UNILAG), he obtained his Masters from the Harvard Law School in the United States, before returning to UNILAG as a lecturer. Akpedeye is chairman, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Election Working Group. In this interview with JOSEPH JIBUEZE, he speaks on corruption and why a special court for electoral offences is needed.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) Chairman, Ibrahim Magu, accused lawyers of collecting ‘stolen money’ from the corrupt to defend them. Should lawyers question the source of a client’s money?

    While I concede to the fact that one has to be careful with some clients and their illicit activities, I must also add that it is not in the place of lawyers to investigate their source of wealth. That is the duty of the security officials and anti-corruption agencies. Lawyers are not trained to be investigators neither are they paid to do so. A lawyer who embarks on that voyage of discovery will end up scaring off clients from his office. Besides, no matter the crimes allegedly committed by these clients, they are citizens of Nigeria who enjoy the right of fair hearing and competent representation in court. Asking lawyers to screen these clients’ source of wealth in terms of professional fees is an uphill task that needs to be jettisoned. The security agencies should do this job, not legal practitioners.

    Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) Abubakar Malami (SAN) reportedly said corrupt judges will face trial. Do you agree with him?

    A judge who is corrupt has breached the Code of Conduct of Judicial Officers on the one hand and has also committed a crime against the state on the other. NJC’s power is limited to disciplining a judge by either recommending his dismissal or compulsory retirement, after setting up a panel/committee to investigate and adjudicate on the petition against the Judge. After the recommendation to the President or governor, as the case may be, the powers of the NJC in that regard, expiates. After the dismissal from judicial service the prosecutorial duties of the anti-corruption agencies kick-start. If they think they have enough evidence to secure a conviction, these prosecutors can arraign the judge for any crime perceived to have been committed.

    Why has that not being the case with corrupt judges?

    This has not being the case in Nigeria over the years because being a nation caught up in the web of encouragement and promotion of corruption, when the NJC manages to reluctantly dismiss a judge, everybody feels it is enough punishment. And so no further step is taken by the executive. However, with the new Sheriff in town, President Buhari, it is quite obvious that things are changing. If feelers are anything to go by, dismissed judges may also be prosecuted for crimes against the state.

    With so many corruption-related cases in court, how can speedy trial be ensured?

    The need for an effective and efficient legal framework for speedy resolution of corruption trials is one of the fundamental reasons why the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, (ACJA) 2015 was enacted. There are stipulated time-frames for these cases to be heard. The Act provides for the maximum number of adjournments that can be granted per party. It now beholds on the judge to enforce these provisions of the Act by taking charge of his court. Lawyers will always be lawyers, especially defence counsel who are aware of the inadequacy of their defence. If given the opportunity they will continue the old practice of delaying proceedings so as to wane the zeal of the prosecution and their witnesses.

    What is your assessment of ongoing corruption cases?

    A careful observation of the prosecution in the on-going anti-corruption trials indicates that the proceedings are going on timeously, with no delay whatsoever. A case in point is the trial of Chief Olisa Metuh which commenced in January this year and as at the end of February, the prosecution had fielded 10 witnesses. The trial is now at defence stage. Another example is the trial of the former Director-General of NIMASA, Patrick Akpobolokemi, which is also moving in a fast pace. Same goes for the trial of Senator Joshua Dariye, the former Governor of Plateau State. The stages of these matters viz-a-viz when they were commenced clearly shows a pace of proceedings which is a departure from the past practice of deliberate delays.

    What are your views on the trial of a Senior Advocate, Mr. Rickey Tarfa?

    With all due respect to my Brother Silk, Rickey Tarfa, nobody is above the law and this is the rule of law which we as lawyers have sworn to uphold. The security agencies have a duty and right to prevent or investigate crime. If any citizen feels he has been unlawfully arrested, he has a right to sue for damages. Besides, the matter is in court, as per Tarfa’s action for fundamental rights enforcement pending before Justice Idris of the Ikoyi Division of Federal High Court. As an officer of the courts, I should not be seen or heard commenting on a matter that is sub-judice.

    Do you think the judiciary is prepared for the corruption war?

    It is my opinion that the judiciary needs to undergo a surgical operation to place it on a pedestal for the needed recovery it needs. Over the years, there have been stories of corruption stemming from the hallowed chambers. A lot of judges have been dismissed from the Bench. However, while admitting that our judges are humans and hence not infallible, we cannot deny that the judiciary is making tremendous progress as an institution under this present dispensation. We might not have gotten it entirely right with the judicial system, but I believe we are certainly on the right track.

    Do you agree that NBA is no longer as vocal on national issues as it used to be?

    I am a member of the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). Whatever it is I say here may be from a bias point. Nonetheless, I can tell you for free that the NBA is indeed engaging the relevant government agencies on policies that directly affect the people. Interestingly, a number of the federal cabinet members are lawyers, hence we have our own unique but effective way of ensuring that they act in the interest of the citizenry at all times in the discharge of their duties and be good ambassadors of the NBA. In my view, we must not cry about every government policy on the pages of newspapers for the entire world to know that we stand with the people if we can engage the government by some other civil means.

    Do you subscribe to the establishment of an electoral offences commission to deal with violations of the Electoral Act?

    The calls for the establishment of an Electoral Offences Commission are borne out of the need to see electoral offenders punished. Nigeria must begin to hold people accountable for crimes committed and punish those who commit electoral violence. In past elections, there were reports of electoral offences. In most cases, after the announcement of the arrest of suspected electoral offenders, there was hardly any information on what became of them. It is evident that none of the accused was ever prosecuted for the electoral offences let alone being convicted. In effect, these offenders soon find their way back to the polling centres each time elections are billed to take place in the country or in any state of the federation.

    What about INEC staff indicted in electoral malpractices?

    It is common knowledge that some ad hoc and permanent staff of the electoral body have been caught working in connivance with politicians to influence and rig elections in favour of these persons. These staffers should be publicly tried with their trial and eventual conviction given massive publicity so as to serve as a deterrent to other potential criminal-minded staffers and their conniving politicians. The Justice Uwais Panel had proposed the constitution of an electoral offences tribunal where electoral offenders are quickly tried and convicted. This fundamental recommendation should be sent to the National Assembly for quick passage. The specialty of this tribunal is good for our legal system being that the regular courts are already over-loaded with cases.

    Is there need for further electoral reform?

    The need for electoral reform has become absolutely necessary against the backdrop of election rigging, widespread rejection of declared results, as well as loss of lives and property. More importantly, our electoral laws appear to be ill-equipped to adequately address these concerns.  We needs to put in place a democratic process that maintains accurate list of citizens who are eligible to vote and encourages every eligible voter to participate effectively in the process.  There is a need to improve the voting system and enhance ballot security. Most importantly, the political class must have respect for the rule of law while we must reject the pervasive culture of corruption in our body polity and be prepared to hold our elected officers accountable for their actions.

    What are your views on the situation in Rivers State?

    The killings in Rivers State is condemnable. President Buhari should order an independent enquiry on the violence and anyone found culpable must be prosecuted. More is also expected of the police and other security agencies in protecting lives and property. Lives cannot continue to be wasted.

    You proposed that the burden of proof should lie with the umpire. Why?

    It is my recommendation that in order to make the electoral body more driven to conduct free and credible elections, they should be made to bear the burden of proof in court to show the elections they conducted were credible, free and fair, while the petitioner would have to disprove that assertion by proving instances and conducts of their officials that negate the credible conduct of the electoral polls. As it stands presently, the Evidence Act places the burden of proof on he who asserts – the petitioner.

     

     

     

     

  • ‘NASS, judiciary cannot reverse new electricity tariff’

    ‘NASS, judiciary cannot reverse new electricity tariff’

    The National Assembly and the Judiciary’s resistance cannot achieve the reversal of the new electricity tariff, an expert in Energy Jurisprudence, Dr Ayoade Adebayo has said.

    Adedayo, who was the Head, Department of Energy Law, University of Lagos (UNILAG), said neither a judicial pronouncement nor pressure from the National Assembly can reverse the new tarifff, adding that it is only the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) that can legally do so.

    He told The Nation that it is only NERC’s chairman and his commissioners can  reverse tariff as stipulated in the Electricity Power Sector Reform (ESPR) Act of 2005,  and not any arm of the government.

    He said: “The NERC is being run by an acting Chief Executive Officer, instead of a chairman and commissioners, who are empowered to suspend or reverse the tariff in accordance with the Electricity Power Sector Reform Act of 2005.  Therefore, both the politicians and the courts cannot achieve meaningful results on the issue.

    “It is only when the Board of the Commission is reconstituted by the Federal Government, and a chairman and commissioners were appointed to handle it that a reversal of the new tariff can take place. There is nowhere in the world that electricity business is politicissed and it records success.  Electricity issues are sensitive and should not be trivialised, and if we trivialise it, we would enjoy it.

    “A lot of calculations must be made before tariff is fixed. This is being done in order to enable investors get returns on investment.  At this juncture, some questions need to be asked. What are the politicians who are representing their constituencies in the National Assembly doing on the issue? What would the court say on the issue supposing the matter is taken to court? They are doing nothing.”

    According to him, the responsibility of fixing the tariff or reviewing it lies with the NERC.

    Adedayo said NERC is one of the agencies, whose role is key to the success of an administration in the country. He said the Board of NERC and other sensitive agencies are vital to the sector, adding that the only way the government can show Nigerians that the board of NERC is relevant, is to re-constitute it as soon as possible, in order to effectively manage the power sector.

    He said the sector requires between $50billion and $100 billion to produce the megawatts (Mw) of electricity that would make industries operate at optimal capacity, adding that achieving the feat is not possible when people play politics with the sector.

    The National Assembly has kicked against the tariff by the Federal Government. Prior to its introduction last month, the National Assembly, human rights groups, members of Organised Private Sector (OPS), such as the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN), Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industries (LCCI) and others, have tried to stop the government from implementing it but to no avail.

  • Let the judiciary be

    Recently, President Muhammadu Buhari was quoted as saying that he was worried about the role of the judiciary in the on-going war against corruption. The opposition party and some lawyers considered it as an intimidation of the judiciary. My guess is that the President came to this conclusion because of the seeming legal barriers being placed in the path of prompt and effective prosecution of people alleged to have engaged in acts of corruption. This is in view of various injunctions and rulings by some judges which had resulted in seemingly unending adjournments. This has, no doubt, stalled the speedy trial of these accused people and thereby serving to frustrate effective prosecution.

    If my guess about the view of the President is right, then he has spoken the minds of very many Nigerians who are equally worried by the role of the judiciary in this instance.

    It is nauseating to observe that most of these accused people suddenly remember that they have to seek medical attention for one ailment or the other as soon as they are charged to court for unjustly enriching themselves at the expense of the public. And, it looks as if many of our judges are ever willing to grant them reliefs to go overseas for medical treatment. This coupled with other hurdles that prosecutions have to surmount in form of unending injunctions and adjustments tend to support the view that the judiciary is also frustrating the effective prosecution of accused people.

    In all these shenanigans, the judiciary appears not to be sufficiently worried to see the need of putting its house in order soonest. As things are, it will not be far from the truth to say that more and more people are losing confidence in the ability or willingness of the judiciary to play the expected role in getting accused persons promptly prosecuted.

    The government, particularly, through its agencies in the vanguard of the anti-corruption war appears not to be helping matters. For one, the agencies seem to be making too much noise or giving too much publicity to its activities even when corruption allegations are still being investigated. Such unnecessary publicity unduly raises the hope of the populace that the anti-corruption war is on course only for such hopes to be dashed when it is taking ages to get the accused persons brought to justice. Unfortunately, this appears to have been the trend since the anti-graft agency was established years ago. We have been inundated many times with screaming headlines like “Corruption case had been established against 21 former governors”, and high profile allegation against top political functionaries. In most of the cases, we only got to hear about the allegation while alleged offenders are never disclosed or even made to face justice. Indeed, this is the most-disturbing aspect of the activities of the anti-graft agency. This, coupled with some apparent cases of selective prosecution of people accused of corrupt practices have justified the claim that the anti-agency is only sent after selected opposition targets by the government of the day. The recent case against the current Senate President has been cited in certain quarters as even an example of selective prosecution. This school of thought believes that the Senate President might not have been charged if he did not go against the arrangement of his party in emerging as the Senate President. Talking about the case of the Senate President, one wonders why he did all he could to avoid prosecution if, as he is now claiming, he can prove his innocence at the Code of Conduct Tribunal.

    Lack of diligent prosecution is also a key weakness of the anti-graft agency. What can one make of a situation where after prolonged and long investigations, the agency pins a 90 – count charge against an accused and at the end of the day fails to make at least one of such charges stick. If this is not gross incompetence, then I wonder what it is! Whenever, the anti-graft agency fails to get an accused convicted, most of the time due to incompetent prosecution, the judiciary is seen as having been compromised.

    Also, the decisions at various election tribunals tend to give the judiciary a bad name. The verdicts on these election petitions are now hailed or condemned depending on the interest of the party concerned. If the verdict favours it, it is hailed if not it is condemned. Even, in these election petition cases, the judiciary has been exposed to odium due to the “inadequacies” in the electoral laws on which the judiciary has no control. After all, the judiciary only has to interpret the laws made by the other arms of government. I want to posit that it is only in very rare cases that an electoral ‘victory’ can be overturned in the present circumstances. I understand that the electoral law contains some chapters that alleged electoral mal-practices must be proved to have substantially negatively affected the result of the election before it can be overturned.

    And, trust our politicians, they do all they can to perpetrate various malpractices during the elections, cover their tracks as much as possible and blackmail the electoral body into declaring positive results for them. They then wait or dare the loser to go to the tribunal knowing fully well that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prove their allegations beyond reasonable doubt as having substantially and negatively affected the result declared by the electoral body. There is also the issue of the very long time it takes to get a final verdict from the judiciary on such petition. At the end of the day, the complainants or petitioners often return from the courts with the notion that justice had not been done.

    One must admit that many officials in the judiciary seem not to be helping matters in the way they grant injunctions and adjournments. In essence, it will be safe to conclude that such officials are compromised. However, the work of the judiciary had been substantially made difficult by the inadequacies, actions and/or inactions of other arms of government. So, it appears that Nigeria is only getting the judiciary it deserves. On its part, the leadership of the judiciary must do all in his power and that very quickly to put his house in order. Attempts should be made, on a continuing basis, to flush our compromised officials and indeed sanitize the judiciary for more effective service delivery. Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.

    It will be in the best interest of everybody if the judiciary lives up to expectation in the ongoing to battle against corruption which had eaten too deep into the fabric of this nation. By bringing the guilty ones to book, we will be putting an end to the era of impunity.

    We are gradually getting to a stage where all public officers are seen as rogues and anyone who is wealthy is perceived as rogue or a friend of rogues in public office. A sure way of arresting this trend of perception is to allow the judiciary to be in the forefront of the on-going war against corruption. On its part, the courts should do their jobs as they ought to be done and help us sanitize this country by ensuring that no individual found guilty of corrupt tendencies escape appropriate sanctions.

     

    • Osunro writes from Ibadan.
  • Fayose hails judiciary for ‘saving democracy’

    Fayose hails judiciary for ‘saving democracy’

    Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose has praised the judiciary for restoring the mandate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors. He said the victory has saved the country’s democracy.

    Speaking in Umuahia, the Abia State capital, at the thanksgiving for Governor Okezie Ikpeazu, Fayose said the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) wanted to scuttle democracy by stealing the mandate of the PDP governors.

    Fayose, who spoke on behalf of five other PDP governors, assured Ikpeazu that they will always identify with him, adding that he should not disappoint his people.

    He said the people were yet to see the change they were tricked into voting for, noting that “true change will only come to the country and its people when PDP takes over the rulership of the country come next elections.”

    His words: “When you look for change in the present administration you can only get one chance, which has made the people to keep waiting for the expected change to come.

    “How can we have change when the electricity tariff will go up without any increase in power generation and poor service, then if the expected change comes, the people will really suffer.”

    New National Chairman of the PDP, Alhaji Ali Modu Sheriff said the party is marching to Aso Rock, come next elections, stressing that every party member is ready for the move.

    Sheriff said when the party rolls out its master plan, the incumbent ruling APC will run back to wherever it came from.

    He said the crowd present at the Umuahia township stadium shows that the governor won the election. “This crowd shows that we won the election clearly and the results were not written.”

    Deputy National Chairman Uche Secondus called for special prayers for the country. “This country needs prayers for it to move forward.

    “We need prayers as PDP members are being hounded every day, their home broken into by members of the ruling party for nothing. I want to warn those being used that they are gradually turning this country into a police state.”

    Governor Ikpeazu described his victory as a victory for all, which will bring unity and equity based on the Abia Charter of Equity which was written by its founding fathers.

    “The victory is about the state and its people, and about what God wants to do in Abia through me and people of like minds”.

    He hinted that several roads in Aba were ready for commissioning while rural electrification is being provided for all, irrespective of political inclination.

    Governors at the service included Nyesom Wike (Rivers), Ifeanyi Okowa (Delta), Udom Emmanuel (Akwa Ibom), among others.

  • Judiciary under inordinate pressure

    Judiciary under inordinate pressure

    THE Nigerian judiciary is running the gauntlet of fierce and cynical critics and sneering and contemptuous government officials. It is unlikely they have ever faced this kind of pressure, at least not in recent years, and not even under the Goodluck Jonathan government. And probably for the first time in many decades, the public and their government have seemed to unite almost completely and resoundingly against the judiciary. The causes of the animus against the third arm of government are of course the court cases against those alleged to have looted the country’s treasury through many phony deals, and to a lesser but no less incendiary extent the plethora of election cases upon which the lower courts have delivered what are described as contradictory judgements, and  the Supreme Court has given what are sneeringly referred to as baffling or probably induced rulings.

    Other than the granting of bail to a few suspects in the corruption cases, all strictly within the provisions of the law, it is not clear why the judiciary is dismissed so cavalierly, especially by the government, as either corrupt or ineffective. In most of the corruption cases advocated so far on diverse media platforms, the investigations are either yet to be concluded or the prosecution has just begun. In no case has judgement been reached, let alone given. So far, too, the adjournments have been few and short, and bail conditions stringent and difficult to meet.  But given the opinions advocated by the public and the petulance displayed by the federal government and its anti-graft agencies, the cause of all the disaffection against the judiciary may be the bail reported to have been given thrice to former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki, a retired army colonel. For the evil he committed, the NSA should be locked up permanently, says the public, and the law be damned.

    While some lawyers have frowned at the government’s legal and prosecutorial subterfuge in refusing the former NSA bail, the judges themselves have been reluctant to take umbrage. Indeed, the judges are proceeding as if nothing is amiss. So, how is the judiciary giving President Muhammadu Buhari headache, as he claimed without any substantiation some weeks ago? Could it be that he expected them to align with the mood of the moment, creatively ignore the provisions of the law, and refuse bail to every suspect simply because they are accused of humongous corruption offences? Critics who accuse the judiciary of being out of sync with the anti-graft war have also not offered credible evidence to show how the judiciary has sabotaged the campaign to curb corruption. It is true that on newspaper pages the suspects have been accused and condemned. But given the antecedents of the judiciary, it will require more than media trial and popular opinion to condemn accused persons.

    Two major reasons may account for the inordinate pressure being put on the judiciary by both the government and the public. The first is a fundamental misconception of the judiciary and especially the intricate web that is the criminal justice system, which must be navigated carefully and forensically. The second reason may be cultural and experiential. If the public and the presidency are unable to grasp the way the judiciary functions and its time-tested slow pace, what about lawyers and other senior legal minds who also virtually accuse the judiciary of selling out on the anti-graft war? This is a puzzle. Every lawyer and judge knows that conviction depends on how well the case is built and presented. But before presentation, investigation must be adequate and relevant. The courts do not reason like the public, nor are they persuaded sometimes as flimsily as the public. If justice is to be done, and seen to be done, then the courts must proceed as cautiously, slowly and methodically as both the defence and prosecution will work their way gingerly through the warrens and thickets of the law.

    Commenting on the Supreme Court decision on the Rivers State governorship election petition, the All Progressives Congress (APC) chairman, Odigie Oyegun, spoke of a ‘fundamental problem with the judiciary’. He did not elaborate. He was probably speaking from a mindset against the judiciary developed perhaps in the midst of top government and party officials, rather than from the perspective of the law. Ibrahim Magu, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) chairman, spoke emotively and deprecatingly of ‘vandals in the temple of justice’, but gave no substantiation whatever. Visiting but intimidated lawyers led by the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) president, before whom Mr. Magu made the statement, did not challenge that terrifying statement. The president himself has a very curious mindset about the judiciary. Speaking to The Telegraph, a London-based newspaper, during his last trip, he said in answer to a question on Britain’s co-operation with Nigeria on the probe of suspects named in corruption scandal, that Britain could do better and faster. “One of the biggest suspects is in Britain,” began President Buhari cautiously. “Britain has earned our respect in the way it deals with these matters. Our only problem is that it seems to be too thorough, and it takes too much time. If there are obvious cases, like bank accounts, houses and hotels, I would hope they could do it quicker so that we can claim these things back promptly.” It is shocking that the president does not share Britain’s concern that justice should not miscarry.

    President Buhari’s headache with the Nigerian judiciary and his general dissatisfaction are, it is clear, probably anchored on the courts’ slow pace of justice administration. He had once tragically reminisced that in his military days, he could lock up suspects until they proved their innocence. But in a democracy, he said plaintively and with a hint of rebellion, he is constitutionally bound to proceed from the point of the suspects’ innocence. By complaining against the judiciary and seeming to encourage the pubic to also whine, the president appears to be unaccustomed to the thoroughness and sensible ‘delay’ required by the courts to reach a just decision. Those who join him to rail against the judiciary appear to embrace his unseemly rush to judgement. They must pray that the shoe will never be on the other foot. For, after all, at the Appeal Court level, the ruling party was exultant. When they suffered reverses at the apex court, when the shoe was on the other foot, they became unbearably sullen and disconsolate.

    If the president and the complaining public want faster justice delivery, have they provided the funds and the infrastructure to quicken the pace? Have they carried out the reforms necessary to enable the courts to function better and more effectively? Until a little over a week ago, the president had not even forwarded to the legislature any bill on money laundering and the anti-graft war. Without reforms, adequate funds and infrastructure, and with the government’s slow pace of investigations, it is a puzzle that the Buhari presidency still heaps all the shortcomings in the anti-graft war on the judiciary. By the time some of the cases are concluded, and with the law not amended, the public will be shocked to discover that penalties for money laundering are little more than a slap on the wrist. Will they also blame the judiciary?

    Apart from the president’s misconception of how the judiciary operates and why, his grouse may also have to do with his own experiences in the courts between 2003 and 2011 when he fought to reclaim what he believed was his electoral mandate. There was little to show he won the three presidential polls he spoke about, but he nonetheless believed he did. And to reclaim that hypothetical mandate, he had put himself through the slow and punishing process of unsuccessful litigation. He recounted those experiences when he addressed Nigerians at a town hall meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, during his visit to that country. He ended by saying his main headache for now was the judiciary. He also suggested that with the support of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, he would reform the judiciary and get it to deliver. How he would do that with low budgetary allocation, the fifth decline in a row between 2011 and 2016, is hard to fathom.

    Already, judicial officers are beginning to feel the heat of the campaigns against the judiciary. Last week, at a corruption case involving the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), wherein some monies were paid to companies that did not bid for contracts, Justice Ibrahim Buba announced to his bewildered audience that he forced himself to sit for the trial despite ill health because he didn’t want adversarial newspaper headlines. “My temperature was very high yesterday (Monday, February 1), he said, “but I forced myself to be here in court so that the press will not write bold headlines that judge’s absence stalled trial.” Last Wednesday, at a valedictory court session held in honour of retiring Justice Muhammad Muntaka-Coomassie, the CJN decried the attempt to stigmatise the judiciary. “The judiciary is duty bound to act in accordance with the dictates of the law as it stands,” he countered, “not as critics would like it to be.”

    The complaints against the judiciary will continue for some time to come. The president has set the tone; that tone, sadly, will dominate all discourses on the judiciary in the coming months and put pressure on the judges perhaps to look beyond the evidence before them. The public want summary trial, though there is nothing on the ground to facilitate that, and the president has never by nature felt comfortable with the slow pace and arcane practices of the judiciary. As more court judgements negate popular opinion, the impartiality of the courts will be questioned and judges will be ascribed impure motives. This trend will worsen as more corruption cases are heard and election petitions decided. If the president will not consciously de-escalate this untoward habit of imputing and questioning the motives of the judiciary, the third arm of government may be so subverted that rampant resort to self-help may be the order of the day. It is not only the judiciary that is blighted by compromise and distorted ethos, even the executive, as the budget debacle shows, is not immune. It is time to step back from the precipice. If the Buhari presidency and the anti-graft agencies will not caution themselves, the rest of the country must eschew their constant longing to demonise institutions and the officials manning them. The alternative, in this era of massive distrust of the judiciary, is too grim to contemplate.

  • Buhari, judiciary and anti-graft war

    How supportive is the judiciary in the anti-corruption stance of President Muhammadu Buhari administration? Is it really slowing down the move to stamp out corruption in the country or just observing and following the required due process.

    These are some of the questions Nigerians want answers to. But only time will give them the answers.

    Over the years, the judicial system has been considered to be too slow in the dispensation of justice for cases brought before it.

    While delay in court cases are attributed to a thoroughness in examining every side of a matter and  avoiding mistakes in judgment, they have, however, been considered to be un-healthily slow.

    Some cases that should have been dispensed with within a year have been allowed to drag for up to 10.

    This has not only slowed down prosecution of criminals walking free on bail but resulted in overcrowded prisons across the country, filled with suspects and inmates.

    Most of the suspects in detention, in many cases, have ended up spending more years on trial than the number of years they would have got if they were promptly convicted on the cases.

    Just like the rising overcrowded prisons with inmates and suspects for other crimes, the ongoing cases of money laundry and theft in public offices brought forward by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) have began to pile up in courts.

    The piling up of the financial crime cases in courts is a result of what Edo State Governor, Adams Oshiomhole, described as ‘only one bleeding point’, which is investigation of funds meant for purchase of arms and ammunition under former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration via the office of the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Sambo Dasuki.

    With the seeming slowness of the processes in courts, Nigerians have started to wonder further if the judiciary will really stand up to the occasion and speedily and accurately dispense more financial and economic crime cases that will be brought before them when government’s investigation goes to other key areas of the economy like the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC).

    Unlike in the past fight against corruption that appeared to be a lip service business only, not a few Nigerians under the new dispensation want to see looters of the treasury convicted and jailed for their crimes.

    The actions of the looters have not only impoverished many Nigerians, but have also sent a lot of Nigerians to their early graves due to dilapidated healthcare facilities in the country among other decaying infrastructures.

    Those pushing for their speedy conviction may not derive any special pleasure from such looters being jailed, but they want it to serve as a deterrence to others that may want to venture into such treasury looting.

    Fighting corruption to a standstill will make the commonwealth of Nigerians be more available for infrastructural and other developments and in turn benefit more Nigerians in the short and long run.

    Because of the importance of the anti-graft war, the issue was brought to the fore a fortnight ago when President Buhari held a town hall meeting with Nigerians living in Ethiopia.

    Buhari did not fail at the interactive session to call for strong support of the judiciary in order to win the war against corruption.

    Against some online reports, the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Mallam Garba Shehu last week insisted that the President didn’t launch any onslaught against the court system in Nigeria during the session.

    He said: “The President did not embark on that. In fact, he said that he had a partner in the Chief Justice of the Federation, Justice Mahmud Mohammed and he is counting on his support to ensure that the war against corruption is won.”

    But expressing worries with the present system, Shehu said: “If EFCC will do their duty, ICPC or the Office of the NSA, which is now involved in this investigation, if all of us will gather all the evidences in this world against one official or the other at a court, and the court decides that all the evidences have come to nothing, then there is a problem.”

    To tackle the congestion of cases in the conventional courts, which result from high rate of cases filed, it may not be out of place here to support the call for establishment of special courts to try economic and financial crimes.

    Creation of special courts for labour-related issues in the country have helped in speeding dispensation of justice for labour matters.

    So, special courts for economic and financial crimes will go a long way in killing the ‘cancerous’ corruption in the country and make more Nigerians benefit from the dividends of democracy.

     

    Adopting Kenya’s agric system 

     

    Despite having less than 8% of its land for crop and feed production, agriculture has remained the most important economic activity in Kenya.

    About 80% of the work forces are engaged in agriculture or food processing in the country

    With this, Kenya is not only meeting local demands for many agricultural produces, but it has also been exporting them abroad.

    Items like tea, coffee, horticultural exports, including green beans, onions, cabbages, snow peas, avocados, mangoes, and passion fruit are being exported  to earn foreign exchange for the country.

    While flowers being exported include roses, carnations, statice, astromeria, and lilies, Kenya also exports sisal, tobacco, and bixa annatto (a natural food coloring agent).

    Kenya is the world’s largest producer and exporter of pyrethrum, a flower that contains a substance used in pesticides.

    Other important crops being produced by Kenya include sugarcane, corn, wheat, rice, cotton, potatoes, beans, peas, sorghum, sweet potatoes, cassava, bananas, and oilseeds.

    Nigeria’s over dependence on oil as main source of government revenue since its discovery in Nigeria has made the country lose its past and enviable glory in agriculture.

    While agricultural produces like groundnut, cotton, palm oil among others were the mainstay of the Nigeria economy in the 1960s, the abundant arable land in the country were neglected for oil, which many now consider to be a curse rather than blessing for Nigeria.

    Declining revenue of oil from the international market has now forced Nigeria to begin to diversify its economy or be ready to perish.

    To get the new moves right in agriculture, the President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration is not closing its eyes to nations with success stories in agriculture.

    He therefore did not fail to take advantage of his visit to Kenya end of last month to take a look at Kenya’s agricultural system.

    Speaking on the visit to Kenya, the Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu said: “Agriculture has raised life in Kenya and you can see quality of lives at the bottom of the societal ladder. The quality of life in Kenya is higher than what it is in Nigeria.

    “Forget about all the years of oil well in Nigeria. Is this wealth evident among the lowest of our people? It is not there, there is still poverty, hunger and disease. But Kenya is rising and it is like everyone is being carried along. Kenya is exporting so much.

    “We also came back from Kenya with the idea of free trade between the two countries. They will not pay duty on goods they bring from Kenya while Nigerians can also take advantage of it to take their goods to Kenya without paying duties. We hope that will help in bringing their expertise in agriculture. They also can learn from the good practices we have concerning our oil,” he said.

     

  • Wike: Supreme Court’s confirmation has restored confidence in judiciary

    Wike: Supreme Court’s confirmation has restored confidence in judiciary

    Rivers State Governor Nyesom Ezenwo Wike has said the Supreme Court judgment on his election has restored people’s confidence in the judiciary.

    He added that it confirmed the will of the Rivers people.

    Wike alleged that if the Supreme Court had nullified his election, he wouldn’t have contested the rerun because of the plot to use security forces to instigate loss of lives.

    He spoke yesterday at a thanksgiving service at St Peter’s Anglican Church, Port Harcourt.

    It was attended by Peoples Democratic Party’s (PDP’s) leaders across the country like Governors Udom Emmanuel of Akwa Ibom State, Seriake Dickson of Bayelsa State, Okezie Ikpeazu of Abia State and the Deputy Governor of Ebonyi State.

    Also present were ex-First Lady Dame Patience Jonathan, former Rivers State Governor Peter Odili and national and state legislators.

    Wike noted that God worked for him by reversing what people thought was irreversible, considering the previous judgments of the Election Tribunal and the Appeal Court.  He said: “Nothing is impossible with God. Clerics prophesied a few days to the Supreme Court verdict that the judgment will confirm the mandate given to us by the Rivers people.

    “We won the election clearly as has been confirmed by the Supreme Court. If there was a rerun, I wouldn’t have contested because there would have been bloodbath. I resolved not to be part of anything that will cause bloodbath.”

    The governor said a plot had been hatched to arrest and detain him to discourage Rivers people before the legislative elections earlier scheduled for February 6.

    According to him, the political powers were already indiscriminately  arresting PDP members and leaders across the state, preparatory to the rerun.

    He assured the people that he would use the mandate to advance development.

    Wike reiterated his earlier declaration that he would not allow the rigging of the rerun, noting that any Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) official who attempted to rig would be treated as an armed robber.

    He said: “I am the executive governor of Rivers State and a strong one for that matter. We will support INEC to conduct credible elections.  Any official who plans to rig will get the treatment reserved for armed robbers.”

    Wike noted that the failure of the evil plotters meant that Rivers people would return all the lawmakers whose elections were nullified by the Appeal Court.

    He called for a fight against corruption, urging support for the prosecution of those who stole Rivers money.

    He said his administration will recover stolen funds.

    Wike assured the Rivers State All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship candidate, Dakuku Peterside, that he would be accommodated in the process of developing the state.  He said Peterside is not an orphan “I will be a father to Dakuku Peterside. He is not an orphan.”

    The Archbishop of Niger Delta Province, Dr. Ignatius Kattey, said Wike’s victory at the Supreme Court has brought peace to the state.

    He advised the governor to be father of all the people.

  • The judiciary and corruption

    The judiciary and corruption

    Buhari’s concern about the courts is apt

    President Muhammadu Buhari’s concern that the judiciary is key to a successful prosecution of the war on corruption is apt. According to the president, “on the fight against corruption vis-à-vis the judiciary, Nigerians will be right to say that is my main headache for now”. The president made this observation during a town hall meeting with Nigerians in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, according to his special adviser on media and publicity, Mr Femi Adesina. We agree with the president that getting the judiciary to cooperate with the executive on this matter should be a major concern to him.

    Indeed, without the judiciary buying into the vision of the president in the fight against corruption, not much will be achieved, after all while the executive is entrusted with investigating and charging corruption cases to court, the determination of the cases is entirely in the hands of the judges. So, the president was right in expressing optimism that with the support of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, he hoped to continue improving the criminal justice process in the country. We are however surprised that some commentators have interpreted the president’s statement to mean that he was bullying the judiciary from the pulpit.

    If it were so, then the president would be off-the-mark. But, considering the performance of the judiciary in recent years, it is right to ask that arm of government to clean up its constituency. The accusation of corruption and inefficiency which the president’s admonition may also imply is not even unfounded, as some members of that very important arm of government had openly accused their colleagues of corruption. The issue of inefficiency in our courts is also backed by facts, as cases have dragged in the courts for years, in some instances, for decades. So, a call for transformation of the judiciary and the weeding out of corrupt judges is in the country’s best interest.

    To achieve the desired change in our judiciary, the National Judicial Council (NJC) must rise up to its constitutional responsibility. The 1999 constitution, as amended in its Third Schedule, paragraph 21(b) provides that “the National Judicial Council shall have power to – recommend to the President the removal from office of the judicial officers specified in sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph, and to exercise disciplinary control over such officers.” The body in sub-paragraph (d) also granted similar powers of recommendation to the Governors of states, for judicial officers named in sub-paragraph (c); thereby granting the body extensive disciplinary control over all judges of the states and federal high courts, Sharia Court of Appeal, Customary Court of Appeal, Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

    In the past, the NJC had exercised these powers to recommend the compulsory retirement of some judges found corrupt or inefficient. But the Minister of Justice, Mr Abubakar Malami, has rightly raised the notch further, as corrupt judges will now not only be retired, but prosecuted for any criminal conduct. According to the minister, represented by his senior special assistant (white collar crimes) Abiodun Akiomo, at a presentation by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Projects (SERAP), “corrupt Judges will go to jail as the government of President Muhammadu Buhari will actively promote and ensure that corrupt judges are prosecuted and their illegally acquired assets are returned to the state”.

    This threat, if carried out, would be a marked difference from the old practice of merely retiring corrupt judges, which was the subject of the report by SERAP, tagged, “Go home and sin no more: corrupt judges escaping justice in Nigeria.” For us, once a judge is found culpable by the NJC and has been retired based on its recommendation, it is important that such a judge is brought to a trial, if the grounds for his retirement border on criminal conduct, particularly corrupt enrichment. Not long ago, a judge whose allegation of misconduct was about to be determined by the NJC quickly sent in his retirement notice, and ended up as a first class traditional ruler.

    Interestingly also, some judges who were found culpable for corrupt conducts and were retired based on the recommendation of the NJC, turned around to sue the NJC, challenging their retirement. While judges who have been unfairly treated should approach the courts for redress, those who were retired for corrupt enrichment, among other vices, and are challenging it, should have their files forwarded to relevant prosecution agencies, for further action. Of course, it is also important to reiterate that while a corrupt judge constitutes a danger to the society, a successful prosecution of a case starts from an efficient investigation and a virile prosecution, which is not in a judge’s hand.

    Without impinging on the constitutional rights and privileges of a judge in the exercise of his/her duties, all stakeholders should do what is needed, to gift our country an efficient judiciary.

  • A second act for judiciary

    It goes without saying that the judiciary is central to the success of the anti-corruption war. To win the war, the judiciary must ensure that corruption cases are speedily disposed and justice dispensed without fear or favour, affection or ill-will. But many believe that the judiciary does not appreciate the enormity of the problem at hand. The judiciary, they claim, does not see the war as one that it should join the larger society in waging.

    Those who talk like this may have a point because of certain developments in the not too distant past. Then the judiciary seemed to have subtly backed those accused of corruption with the way some judges handled the cases before them. They gave judgement which many never believed could emanate from the Bench. The public wondered if it was not the same judiciary that did not bat an eyelid before sentencing small time criminals, such as,  pickpockets and pepper thieves to long term imprisonment that was treating those who stole the nation blind with kid gloves.

    For instance, former Delta State Governor James Ibori was cleared of the charge against him on technical ground by a judge, who held that he should have been tried in Asaba, the capital, and not in Kaduna, where he was docked. His Lordship forgot that corruption, unlike courts, cares less about jurisdiction. Corruption does not also have any shade of colour. What is corruption in Asaba is also corruption in Lagos or any other part of the country for that matter. To throw out a corruption case on the ground of jurisdiction is unfair to Nigerians whose commonwealth many of our leaders have pillaged over the years.

    If our judges are ready to close their eyes to corruption on the ground of jurisdiction, their British counterparts are not ready to do so. They  taught us a big lesson   by sending the same Ibori to jail for the same offence, thereby turning us into a laughing stock in the comity of nations. From also the judiciary, former Governor Lucky Igbinedion walked away with a slap on the wrist for running Edo State like his family empire. He was fined N3 million after being found guilty of corrupt enrichment. The money involved ran into billions of naira. And without breaking a sweat, he dipped his hand into his back pocket and whipped out the fine. Just like that!

    Is that how to fight corruption? Many Nigerians strongly believe that is not how to prosecute the war. They are calling for a proactive judiciary that will treat such cases with the diligence and promptness they deserve. Judges believe they are not to blame for the tardiness in handling corruption cases, claiming that they are only interpreting the law as it is in the statute. But do we have two sets of law – one for the low and another for the mighty? Or a uniform law, which does not recognise status like the scale of justice, which is a blindfolded damsel, wielding a sword? The scale of justice portrays that justice is blind; that it does not know class, but will only do what is just and right, no matter whose ox is gored.

    Many of our judges have not upheld the scale of justice, hence the public clamour for a more vibrant and activist judiciary, which will not compromise under any circumstance. A judiciary that will look corruption in the face and call it by its name and not dress it up in fanciful words or accuse the police and the prosecution of not doing their jobs well before coming to court. In many instances, it was found that some judges hide under such false accusations to throw out cases which otherwise should have gone into trial and convictions secured by the prosecution.

    Corruption will never keep quiet. It will, as Nobel laureate Prof Wole Soyinka said, fight back. And the corrupt will fight with all they have in order to keep all they have stolen. It is for the judiciary to ensure that the corrupt do not enjoy their ill-gotten wealth after leaving office. The place of the court in the anti-graft crusade cannot be wished away as the Nigerian Head of Information Centre of the Inter-Governmental Action Group against Money Laundering in West Africa (GIABA), Mr Timothy Melaye, observed in an interview in this paper on Monday: ‘’If you asked me to return one naira and I returned one naira, there is no court that has said I committed a crime; so it is probable discussion between private or public people. What I would say would be of interest is effective prosecution and securing conviction based on court judgements, then we can now say fine this is a case established by a court’’.

    As we all know, it is only the courts that can convict for any offence. If it were otherwise, there would be less noise today over the judiciary’s handling of corruption cases. President Muhammadu Buhari is so worried that the judiciary is not giving his administration the needed support in fighting corruption that he took his case to the global arena last Sunday during his visit to Addis Ababa for the African Union (AU) Summit. At a town hall meeting with Nigerians living in Ethiopia, the president said: ‘’On the fight against corruption vis-a-vis the judiciary, Nigerians will be right to say that is my main headache for now’’.

    The president was only expressing the popular feeling about the judiciary’s role in the anti-corruption campaign.  But the judiciary may not agree with this popular sentiment, which may be why Chief Justice Mahmud Mohammed on Tuesday in Abuja posited that the three arms of government must come together to fight corruption and related crimes. ‘’Stakeholders in the justice sector’’, he said, ‘’must work in tandem towards a common objective as a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. I believe that if we work in harmony and in sincerity of purpose towards concrete outcomes, then, the efforts that we make will doubtless create a butterfly effect of positive change that is sorely required in the justice sector’’.

    That may be true, but the judiciary remains central to the anti-graft campaign’s success. And it can only discharge this duty honorably if it remains above board in the handling of corruption cases. So far, the people believe it has not lived up to expectation. It is not too late for the judiciary to redeem its image in the next phase of the anti-graft war.

  • ‘Judiciary risks loss of credibility through conflicting judgments’

    ‘Judiciary risks loss of credibility through conflicting judgments’

    Activist-lawyer Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa has warned that the judiciary could lose credibility if election petition and appeal tribunals continue to give conflicting judgments.

    He urged the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmoud Mohammed, to intervene to save the judiciary from imminent loss of integrity and respect.

    “The judiciary ought to have graduated to the extent that there must be a coordinating unit monitoring the decisions of the tribunals to avoid these inconsistencies because these judgments belong to Nigeria.

    “Once we begin to see contrary decisions and inconsistencies most especially when different parties are involved, then people are bound to read meanings even though there are no undercurrents,” Adegboruwa said.

    He said the Supreme Court can set a precedent by correcting what he described as the confusion created by the tribunal judgments in the cases of Rivers, Akwa Ibom and Taraba states.

    According to him, there is an impression that different standards of judgment exist for different people, political parties and interests.

    “In the case of Rivers State for instance, a serving judge, Justice Muazu Pindigi, who was the first judge to head the Rivers State Elections Petition Tribunal, made an allegation that he was approached to decide the election petition in a particular way and that he declined the offer. Justice Pindigi’s panel was dissolved abruptly.

    “We cannot sit by and accept such political influence of the judiciary by politicians. And it is not surprising, therefore, that the tribunal in Rivers State proceeded to nullify the elections of virtually all House of Assembly and House of Representatives members as well as Senators and eventually that of the governor. That is unacceptable.

    “It is pertinent to caution the ruling party against this seemly attitude of ‘I must take it all’. The reason why I am saying this is because we are fighting corruption. And in doing so, we must be aware that there is moral and financial corruption. If you will win the battle against corruption, you must win the battle against moral corruption.

    “It is not possible to succeed in influencing the minds of judges and expect to win the battle against corruption. Because if we are to go by what Justice Pindigi said, then APC has a lot of questions to answer in respect of certain verdicts,” Adegboruwa said.

    The lawyer said the CJN should intervene because the verdicts run contrary to existing judgments of the Supreme Court on similar facts, adding that there should be a settled principle of law in relation to election petitions, as it is in land, matrimonial, chieftaincy cases, among others.

    “I call on the President and his ruling party not to give the impression of seeking a one party state at all costs. Let there be a viable opposition, as was the case under Goodluck Jonathan, which was what led to the defeat of an incumbent president by the opposition,” he said.

    For the corruption battle to be won, Adegboruwa said the judiciary must also be well funded.

    “The judiciary has been a bridge linking one government to another and the only permanent structure that has kept the country together. But go to the judges and see what they are going through, you will pity them. There are judges in Lagos State who drive themselves. No personal driver, no personal assistants, and with very poor office facilities. Salaries are delayed and in most cases they are overworked.

    “It is like the executive arm of government is frustrating the judiciary. The judiciary is the one that will check the excesses of the executive and that is why there is frustration. There was a particular judge, who, during his retirement ceremony, said: ‘I am retiring today, but don’t have a house to retired to’. This is amazing and bad.

    “But having said these, there are bad eggs among judges. We need to save our judiciary. The Supreme Court should do something to take the judiciary away from politics. The responsibility of the judiciary must be limited to only righting perceived wrongs. The judiciary must decide cases for Nigeria because they will become precedents tomorrow.”

    The lawyer said the fight against graft must not be seen to be selective. “There is no way anybody can tell me that all these All Progressives Congress (APC) politicians are saints. A regime of vengeance will not move the country anywhere,” he said.

    On his expectations of President Muhammadu Buhari, Adegboruwa said: “President Buhari should know that whatever happened to his government today, he will bear the responsibility and not any other person. I believe in him and his ability, but he should assert himself now and be the Buhari that we all voted for and bring the change we all expect in this country.

    “And there should be consistency in policies, not what we are having now that the president will say oil subsidy will be removed by January 2016 and the minister will say something to the contrary. It is also shocking to note that up till now, there is no policy to improve power supply.

    “If I say am going to produce 5000 megawatt during my term, the way I will judge you is you must produce part of that in the first year of your reign. Again, there are no policies on law reforms, aviation, transportation. So what is the president working on? None!.

    “We love President Buhari and his sterling qualities but this is not taking us anywhere. Nigerians want him to succeed. And I am sorry to say, he should wake up.”