The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Judiciary

  • How to cleanse judiciary, by CJN, others

    How to cleanse judiciary, by CJN, others

    The judiciary is central to a democracy. As the third arm of government, it acts as a check on the executive and the legislature. But due to political and other influences, the judiciary is not living up to public expectation. Its integrity is being questioned because of the  unseemly conduct of some judges. Experts, including Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Maryam Aloma Mukhtar are calling for the sector’s reform. JOSEPH JIBUEZE reports.

    Will the judiciary ever regain its glory? This is the question begging for answer amid the rot in the sector. In the past, the judiciary  repudiated technicalities to function at an optimum level in dispensing justice without fear or favour. In recent times, many judges have been found guilty of corruption and other sordid acts. The judiciary  is grappling with the challenge of defending its independence and integrity.

    With some exceptions, corruption, undue political and other influences, flawed process of judicial appointments, poor performance and denial of justice have become the judiciary’s lot. The consequence is a loss of faith in the justice system, leading to more people taking the law into their hands. Will there ever be a change?

    Experts say change is possible with fundamental reforms, which must begin from within. According to Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Maryam Aloma Muktar, corruption remains the judiciary’s bane. “Corruption has become a real cankerworm that has refused to depart,” she said.

     

    Need for reform

    Speaking at a Judiciary Reforms Conference in Abuja, with the theme: Putting our best foot forward: The judiciary and challenges if satisfying justice needs of the 21st century, Justice Mukhtar said corruption does not only manifest in judges receiving bribes to alter the course of justice, but in a flawed appointment process that produces inefficient judges that have no place on the bench.

    She called for judicial reforms, which she said requires both cultural and systemic change in the delivery of justice, and must include the implementation of, and adherence to, a strict judicial evaluation performance management system.

    The conference was organised by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Judiciary Committee; the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which is implementing a justice reform programme in Nigeria with the support of the European Union; and a non-profit justice advocacy group, Access to Justice, which is executing a justice reforms project with the support of the Open Society Initiative of West Africa (OSIWA)/DFID, and the Performance Evaluation Committee of the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    Justice Mukhtar said: “It is distressing to say that some judicial officers in Nigeria fall below the standard expected of judicial officers in the area of intellectual capability, uprightness, character and integrity and this reflects in the poor quality of judgments delivered by various courts in Nigeria and a growing problem of conflicting judgments and the attendant confusion they create in the Nigerian legal system. This problem stems mostly from the flawed appointment process of judicial officers and the enthronement of mediocrity over merit.

    “The NJC under my leadership is effectively prosecuting a war against judicial corruption. I shall review the strategies adopted by the NJC to institutionalise the reforms with a view to repositioning the judiciary to serve the interests of the Nigerian people,” she said.

    She said through the Intelligent Performance Measurement System of the NJC’s Performance Evaluation Committee, judges found to be performing below the required standards are either queried or removed.

    Judges, she added, have been warned to stop issuing orders or give judgments that cannot be defended on the basis of available facts and applicable law.

    Justice Mukhtar urged the NBA to pay attention to senior lawyers who have been linked with serial violations of the rules of professional ethics. She also accused some Senior Advocates of Nigeria of unwittingly encouraging corruption in the judiciary, saying they work “in tandem” with corruption judges.

    For instance, she recalled that a judge who was facing a disciplinary hearing for misconduct was represented by no fewer than six SANs. “I think the SANs are equally guilty,” she said.

    Chief Justice of South Africa, Justice Mogoeng Reetsang Mogoeng, who gave the keynote address, said the judiciary has what it takes to kick start a turnaround in Africa’s image. He urged the judiciary to be “ruthless” in dealing with corruption within it, as that is the only way it can develop the moral courage to deal with graft in the society.

    “If there is one institution that can demonstrate that power can be exercised without corruption, it is the judiciary. We have to start it. Only then can we deal as harshly as possible with corrupt people when they’re brought before us,” he said.

     

    ‘Review appointment process’

    NBA President Mr. Okey Wali (SAN) said the judiciary cannot perform efficiently where its independence is not guaranteed.

    “To secure the independence of the judiciary, the government must grant to it true financial autonomy, and a full self-accounting status. The funds of the judiciary must be released to it as soon as the same is approved in the budgets of the Federal and state governments,” he said.

    On appointment of judicial officers, Wali said persons who have had little or no serious practice of law have often been appointed judges.

    “Appointments are not always made on merit but on extrinsic factors, such as family and political ties or affiliation.  As a result of this, the judiciary and ultimately the judicial service system have been the worse for it,” he said.

    He regretted that after 40 years, no practicing lawyers or distinguished university jurists have been elevated to the Supreme Court since the days of the late Justices Augustine Nnamani and Teslim Elias.

    “The NBA repeats our call that practising lawyers and distinguished university jurist of note should be appointed to the High Court and appellate Courts, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court,” Wali said.

    Wali also faulted the organisation and funding of conferences for judges within and outside the country by some organisations, such as the Assets Management Company of Nigeria (AMCON) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), who are litigants or prosecutors before the courts.

    “This is quite disturbing. Like Caesar’s wife, our courts must not only be above board, but they must, at all times, be seen to be above board,” he said.

    A former Lagos Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice Prof. Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) agreed with Wali, saying merit is the least considered factor when lawyers are appointed to the bench.

    “Generally, our systems of appointment locally and nationally focus more on other considerations. Merit comes very low in order of considerations,” he said, adding that when judges are appointed on the basis of ethnicity/religion or other parochial considerations, they will almost invariably see themselves as champions of the platform which gave them the position rather than doing justice to all.

    Osinbajo said to ensure merit in judicial appointments, there should be clarity on criteria, selection process and information for intending applicants; openness in shortlisting and selection from a wide range of eligible candidates, rigorous standard testing of competences and quality assurance at every stage of the process.

    He recommended the United Kingdom model, which involves vacancy request, advertising and applications, short-listing, references, open candidate selection, panel decision, statutory consultation, checks, selection decisions and quality assurance.

    A member of the Lagos State Judicial Service Commission Chief Kunle Uthman, who represented the Chief Judge of Lagos, Justice Ayotunde Phillips, urged the NJC to review the process of selection of judges and make it merit driven, open and transparent.

    “This process of nomination by serving judges is awkward, restrictive, limiting in nature and forecloses other constituencies like the Magistracy, the Ministry of Justice and private practitioners as relevant in the exercises.

    “An important part of the appointment process is the submission of two lists, namely Priority and Reserve, which are sent to the NJC with comments of every member of the JSC on each of the candidates. This process of selection is not merit driven and is further compounded by the submission of the Priority and Reserve Lists.

    “I suggest an abolition of these two lists.  In future, the JSC should forward the exact number of persons to fill the vacancies. Afterall, the JSC and not the NJC interviewed and observed the performance of these candidates prior to making recommendations.

    “The NJC should cease to have the prerogative of tampering with the lists.  If NJC is dissatisfied with the choice of any candidate its sole prerogative is to give in unequivocal terms reasons for such rejection, and request for clarification or replacement.

    “In summary, members of the JSC and the NJC (to a limited extent) involved in the selection and appointment of applicants for judicial office, for promotion to higher judicial office and/or for specific roles within the judiciary should make their decisions by reference to sound, objective criteria, on the basis of each candidates personal merit, experience, competence, performance, skills and abilities,” he said.

    A professor of law, Dakas C. J. Dakas, said the appointment process “should be designed to guarantee the quality and independence of mind of those selected for appointment at all levels of the judiciary”.

    According to him, “an open, transparent and credible process inspires confidence in the men and women who are charged with the responsibility of dispensing justice.”

    Dakas also faulted the appointment process, saying: “Judicial vacancies are officially circulated only in the legal community. Names of applicants or nominees are not published in the media. Non-confidential and non-sensitive information about the applicant are not published in the media.

    “Comments are invited from superior court judges and the NBA, but members of the public are now allowed to submit any relevant information about the applicants candidates are not interviewed, whether in private or public. On the whole, the current dispensation is neither open nor transparent,” Dakas said.

    Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice Mr. Mohammed Adoke (SAN), represented by Bola Odugbesan, said any evaluation system should be focused on the judiciary rather than on individual judges, while the emphasis should be on quality, and not necessarily the number of judgments delivered within a period.

    “I share the view that the judiciary has a system skewed towards quantity rather than quality. We should focus on how well the judiciary is performing as whole,” he said.

     

    ‘Prosecute corrupt judges’

    Responding to Justice Mukhtar’s allegation against SANs, Mallam Yusuf Ali (SAN) said though he had never defended any judge before the NJC panel, the principle of presumption of innocence entitled a person to defend themselves with everything at their disposal, including legal representation.

    Besides, he the best way to deal with corrupt judges is not merely to dismiss or retire them quietly when they’re found culpable, as NJC presently does, but to subject them to full criminal trial.

    “If it has been established that a judge is corrupt, he should be tried. That’s the only way the judiciary can operate with moral authority. We must give corruption the real treatment it deserves,” he said.

    Executive Director of Access, Mr Joseph Otteh said there is increasing public distrust of the judiciary arising from what is perceived as a lack of independence or its unwillingness/inability to fight off political interference in the administration of justice.

    He added that the dwindling public confidence is also caused by the dysfunctional state of the judiciary which results in its failure to resolve cases in a fair, efficient and speedy manner.

    “Issues implicated in a judiciary’s low standing in the public eye ultimately have something or the other to do with the way judges are appointed into office and the degree of accountability of the judiciary to its people and of the accountability of judges to the judiciary itself…

    “This is why we thought, as stakeholders, we could offer our support towards implementing reforms to these processes,” Otteh said.

    He also rejected suggestions that states should have the sole prerogative of appointing judges, without NJC’s intervention. “We need a layer of safeguard and that’s why I think the role of the NJC is very critical,” he argued.

    UNODC Country Representative Mariam Sissoko stressed the need for an effective performance evaluation mechanism for judges to ensure the success of the ongoing reform process in the nation’s justice administration system. She said that the ability to monitor and evaluate the performance of the judiciary is an important component of judicial reform.

    “Public confidence in a free, fair and impartial judiciary is enhanced when the public is not only aware of the process by which judges and magistrates are selected, but also when they are assured that there is oversight in the manner in which the judiciary dispenses justice,” she said.

     

    Resolutions

    A communiqué issued at the end of the conference reads in part: “An essential aspect of ‘putting the right foot forward’ must include a review of the guidelines for the recruitment of judges to encourage a more transparent, competitive and merit-based system that will eliminate non-transparency in the appointment process. The ongoing review of the process by the NJC should include a participatory process that will ultimately lead to the appointment of persons of integrity and eliminate corruption.

    “There should be adopted a manner of appointment of members of the Judicial Service Commissions (JSCs) that would ensure  that only competent candidates are appointed who should resist any attempt to influence them in arriving at their decisions.

    “To reduce case backlogs in states with limited judicial manpower, the option of appointing and using ad-hoc judges is worthy of consideration. SANs, competent senior lawyers and retired judges could be appointed on an ad-hoc basis to fill these positions as  is the practice in other jurisdictions.

    “Judicial appointments should, as much as possible, give adequate consideration to gender parity. There should be enough diversity in the appointment process to ensure proper representation. The quality of justice is improved since a diverse judiciary is able to draw on a wider range of collective experience.

    “Competency based criteria should be adopted in the appointment of judges and the process must be merit-based. Fair and equal consideration should be given to members of the Private Bar and the Academia.

    “There is need for a strategic improvement in the system to involve all stakeholders in order to have a system that takes into consideration  outputs and  standards which have the capability of sustaining public trust. The Nigerian Bar Association should also institute a system of qualitatively monitoring and evaluating courts and judges’ performance at all levels of court.

    “States’ Judicial Service Commissions should undertake performance evaluation at the lower courts where a majority of cases are decided in order to strengthen the system of justice delivery.

    “Performance evaluation should go beyond sanctions for poor performance and should include interventions to improve capacity towards enhancing performance where gaps are noticed.  Exceptional performance by judicial officers should be rewarded.

    “An enabling environment should be created for judges to adequately perform their functions. The judiciary and other stakeholders must advocate for true independence with control over its own budget. There is need to implement and respect the constitutional provision on fiscal Independence of the judiciary.

    “Corruption is an insidious plague that leads to the subversion of justice. The judiciary must play a pro-active role in eliminating corruption within the justice system thereby enhancing integrity and accountability.

    “Judicial officers must develop case, change and time management skills. An evaluation methodology that uses National caseload data will enhance decision-making and produce better performance management policies. A properly structured judicial education system through which continuous training will be available to Judges must be developed.

    “The National Judicial Council should refer all substantiated complaints of corruption against judicial officers to appropriate law enforcement agencies for investigation.

    “Concerns were raised about the commitment of the Bar in securing the independence of the judiciary. Attorneys General must do more in giving relevant advice to governors.

    “Performance data used for evaluating the outputs of judges should include all decisions and pretrial proceedings done by judges.

    “Judges and legal practitioners are vital in securing the integrity of the judiciary. Lawyers should support the judiciary by desisting from playing any part in the corruption and subversion of the judicial process.”

    At the conference were Supreme Court Justices, President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulchachuwa; former PCA, Justice Umar Abdullahi; Heads of Courts, including Anambra State Chief Judge, Justice Peter Umeadi and his Imo State counterpart, Justice B. A. Njemanze; and chairman of NJC Performance Evaluation Committee Justice Emmanuel Ayoola (rtd).

    Also present were Chairman, Senate Committee on Judiciary, Senator Umar Dahiru; his House of Representatives counterpart, Beni Lar; Prof Ernest Ojukwu, Nigerian Law School; Deputy President, National Centre for State Courts, Jeff Apperson; an independent judicial researcher Dr Gar Yein Ng; former chairman, NBA Lagos Branch, Chijioke Okoli.

     

  • No civilised society can develop without an efficient Judiciary

    No civilised society can develop without an efficient Judiciary

    Mr. Victor Nwaugo is a former Legal Adviser to the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and member of its National Executive Committee (NEC) since 2006. He speaks on the forthcoming National Conference, NBA elections, security of lives and property in the country and other sundry issues in this interview with Legal Editor, JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU

    How do you react to Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)’s decision in opting out of the National Conference on basis of allocating a slot to the association at the confab?

    The President of the Bar is the spokesperson for the association. So, the decision to back out was taken by the President of the Bar and ratified by NEC in Ekiti State, which is in order. However, the Bar could have backed out from the so called conference on so many grounds. I read the content of the text of the President of the Bar threatening to back out of the conference on the basis of the number of allotment of representatives. To tell the truth, the Bar President was begging to be allotted more persons to represent NBA and expectedly, Dr Goodluck Jonathan ignored him. At the President’s media chat last month, President Jonathan took the shine off the NBA President when he said the association should have articulated its position for one or two of its members to present same during the conference. If Jonathan’s position is proper, why did he allow more than one representative for each state? Each state should have articulated their position for one  representative or two to present same before the conference. Yet, about 30 persons are representing the southeast, which is about six persons per state.

    The government considers  the present NBA leadership to be  weak; therefore, the Bar can not talk or work their talk. If it were in the golden years of Alao Aka-Bashorun; T. J. N. Okpoko (SAN); O.C.J. Okocha  (SAN); Wole Olanipekun (SAN); Prince Lanke Odigiyon; Olisa Agbakoba (SAN); Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN) and J.B Dandu (SAN) , NBA would have been begged to accept  five representatives. But now, the NBA is like an elephant, one can only tell the story from his or her own view point. We have lawyers in the media; lawyers in litigation; lawyers in the military; lawyers in the corporate world; Human Rights lawyers; lawyers for the Bench; young lawyers’ forum; female lawyers and none can properly present the view point of the other.

    What are your expectations from the Confab?

    My expectation from the National Conference is that money would be passed round. People will talk and all their articulations will be consigned on top of other heap of talks by past administrations to gather dust. I don’t think President Jonathan is sincere in his proposal for a national conference. I see it as wanting to play the North against the South, Christians against Muslims, Igbo against Hausa, minority against the majority, all for the purpose  of gaining advantage for his election in 2015. I hope Nigerians will see it from this angle and be cautious not to be fooled. Any president who really desires  to lay foundation for a true Nigeria will table all issues for discussion when he does not have ambition for a re-election. This National Conference is an after thought from a politician who is desperate to be re-elected.

    The relationship between the Aba branch of the NBA and Abia State government has not been cordial. What are your problems with the state government?

    Well, it appears that an understanding is trying to evolve, the General Secretary of NBA, Emeka Obegolu J.P,  has waded into the matter. You know, Obegolu is a humble and likable fellow. I hope both parties will give him the maximum support to settle the matter. We expect  the Governor and the  Attorney-General, Hon.  Umeh Kalu to let NBA Aba recover all the lost grounds in terms of the largesse the government gave to other branches of NBA in Abia State during the period of the  face off. I tell you, Aba Bar will battle against anyone, who unjustly goes against T.A Orji in future, whether he is still in government or not. Aba Bar fights injustices for all.

    This is an election year for the NBA, what type of president do you envisage?

    The Bar by virtue of Articles 7.3 and 10 (a) of the constitution of the NBA, as amended in 2009, shall in a delegate conference on July 2014 elect national officers for  a single  term of two years. In other words, there will be a delegate conference for the purpose of electing new officers to take over from the incumbent Okey Wali (SAN) led administration. First, I look forward to seeing our delegates resist an imposition of candidates by any person  or group of persons. I urge our delegates to vote for a person who is experienced in the running  and workings of NBA secretariat. A person who will see himself only as a senior prefect among his other elected officers and not an emperor on a kingdom.

    I look forward to seeing an NBA President who will stand to fight government’s bad policies.  The last democrat to govern NBA was Olisa Agbakoba (SAN). I expect a president who will use part of our practicing fees to invest in health insurance for lawyers, more especially now that the practising fees have been increased. I expect a president   who will connect with the owners of the association being her members. I expect a president whose words will remain his bond. I don’t want a ”I know it all” president. I am looking forward to a listening president, God help NBA.

    What is the way out of the security challenges facing the country, especially in the Northern parts of the country?

    The security challenges in Nigeria generally and Northeast in particular is worrisome. The government has not really given a well deserved attention to it. Government should, as a matter of necessity, stop using the security challenges to play politics. Let government, with all reports available to it, inform Nigerians that Boko Haram is a pure religious war and not politically motivated. Government should tell Nigerians the truth and not try to profit from the unfortunate situation to curry the favour of southern part of Nigeria as if it is a war by the North against Jonathan’s government.

    There is the need to properly educate Nigerians on evils of Boko Haram so that the ordinary person in the affected area will see members of the sect as criminals. It has to be a total condemnation by both Christians, Muslims, Southern and Northern Nigeria. It can only be condemned by all when the government properly informs the people and carry them along and not to make the Igbos feel that Boko Haram was established to fight Jonathan’s government. Nigerians should read 9/11 report headed by Henry Kessinger to understand the message of these criminals called Boko Haram sect.

    The 1999 constitution is continuously being amended by the National Assembly, which areas of the constitution would you like amended?

    Well, no matter how you amend the constitution, it needs proper and normal human beings to operate it.  For instance, when immunity clause was inserted to protect a governor from unnecessary distraction by way of litigations and frivolous criminal petitions did anybody know that a governor will hide under that to loot the treasury of the state? Sections 84 (2) (4) (7), 121 (3), 124 (1) (2) of the 1999 Constitution properly provided for fiscal autonomy of the third arm of government, yet those sections of the constitution are observed in the breach. Section 7 (1) guarantees democratically elected local government councils. Yet, only Enugu and Lagos States have respected that section by conducting local government election while the others find time to use caretaker committee to run the local government.

    Again, Section 162 (5) provided that amount standing to the credit of local government councils in the Federation Account shall be allocated to the states for the benefit of their local government council. Yet, the states latch unto the funds and deal with it to their benefit. In the face of the functions donated by constitution to the local governments in the fourth schedule to the constitution, the states still breach and usurp the functions through states agencies.

    On  March 3, this year, a High Court in Aba presided over by  Justice C.C.T Adiele stood firm to declare an obnoxious law in Abia State known as Abia State of Nigeria Physical Planning and Infrastructural Development Fund Law illegal and gave  restraining  orders against the Board, C.J, revenue court and the police from arresting, detaining or trying anybody on account of that law for non payment of the said Infrastructural Levy. The case is suit No. A/243/2012 Mrs. Pamela N. Nwaugo & 7ors vs. Board of Trustees of Physical Planning and Infrastructural Development Fund and 7 ors.  He has played his part in enthroning democracy; we are expected to play ours.

    What are you are trying to make?

    The major area in freeing Nigeria to be a democratic and republican state is through resource control and derivative principle. Let Enugu mine her coal, let Rivers refine her oil, let Lagos be in charge of their ports and pay royalty to the federal government. The headquarters of all ministries should not be concentrated in Abuja. Let Customs headquarters be sited in Owerri, let there be a dry port in Isiala Ngwa. That is the real amendment that will be meaningful.

    What suggestions would you give the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as it prepares  for the next year general elections?

    The Independent National Electorate Commission (INEC) owes Nigerians the duty to organise a clean, proper and acceptable election free from instructions from “ Oga at the top”. INEC must ensure that the right persons are recruited as ad-hoc staff. I propose Rev Fathers in Catholic areas; Anglican priests in some areas; lawyers with recommendation from their association; corps members for NYSC; Imams, Christians and Moslem clerics, and journalists from reputable independent media houses. The idea of using teachers should end because they are government paid workers. Again, INEC should plan for staggered elections. The election of the president and National Assembly should not be in a day. Even that of president should not be in a day.

    INEC can choose two states from each geo-political zone in a day to avoid band wagon effect where it starts with a particular zone so that presidential and gubernatorial elections will be announced in a day spanning over three weeks of voting. Because of inadequate security personnel, INEC should stagger the election.

    Politicians should not be allowed to influence choice of ad-hoc staff. This is one area INEC staff must stand against. I even advise INEC that it is possible to customise the ballot papers and result sheets that only a voter can validly use his/her  ballot paper by having his/her name inscribed on a ballot paper meant for that voter so that where another thumb prints another’s ballot paper, by bio-metrics finger  print system, it will be dictated. Please INEC, let the votes of Nigerians count. Never should the Anambra example come up again in our lives.

    How do we fast track administration of justice in the country?

    The slow pace of justice is a serious concern to every right thinking man because the mark in determining a people’s rank in civilisation is how fast justice is obtained. I don’t know of any civilised society without effective judiciary. Our judiciary is underfunded, in some climes, judges do not have assistants, they work under a leaking roof with no fan, air conditioner and operate analogue system in typing documents.  Judiciary should be directly funded from the Federation Account. Again, the constitution should be amended to create states judiciary structure up to  Supreme Court and certain items in the exclusive list removed and made to end at the states Supreme Court like issue of marriages.

    Why do you say this?

    Imagine a situation where all cases in this country from more than 20 Courts of Appeal are going to one Supreme Court made up of only 16 justices. I think this situation contributes to delay of justice delivery in this country. I am not saying that the state-courts’ structures should be funded by the state executive arm. No, they too should be independently funded from the Federation Account.

    How do you think the realignment of political forces  will affect the forthcoming elections and what role do you foresee for the opposition in the country in post 2015?

    On the realignment of political forces in the country, the likely consequences and the role of opposition in the post 2015,  I have always believed that Nigeria can take a leap into development the day an incumbent president loses election. For instance, the massive development going on in Imo State in educational section; health sector, where general hospitals are being built in all the 27 local governments of the state; massive road projects going on; civil servants and pensioners receiving their pay promptly; free education to the point where  students  receive stipends; books and uniforms. Go to the three zones of the states namely; Owerri, Orlu, Okigwe and see for yourself . While a  former governor from Okigwe zone only constructed one road in Ihitte/Uboma during his four-year term, in my ward Umuezegwu, Ihitte/Uboma in Okigwe zone, Rochas has embarked on three roads. One completed, two on-going. In the entire Ihitte/Uboma local government area, there are several roads projects and other projects going on and some completed. I believe that Rochas desires to perform as a person,  but I believe more that when he remembers that he defeated an incumbent to become the governor, he is pushed to do more in order not to disappoint the electorate who trusted him during the election.

    How does this apply to Nigeria?

    So, If Nigerians will rise to the  occasion to vote out the incumbent president,  I am sure the person in whom trust has been vested in will rise to the occasion. In the last election, Aba for instance, massively voted for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)  when Dr. Jonathan came to Aba and urged them to vote for him and T.A Orji and they did. Since then, he has not bothered to come to Aba to know how we are surviving. Today in Aba, Aba-Ikot Ekpene Road, a distance of fifteen minutes, has completely broken down to the extent that traders from that end now go through Umuahia to Onitsha-Port-Harcourt Road. A Federal Government road that runs through main Aba city is now a death trap. Port-Harcourt-Enugu Express Road, that passes  through Aba is bad, Igbos are importers of goods and are distributors of goods.

    While there are Federal Government intervention agencies for Northern farmers and  Niger Delta people, no Federal Government policy to favour trading, which is the mainstay of the Igbos. President  Obasanjo during his time approved Isiala Ngwa dry port, till date, our supposed man, Jonathan,  has refused to develop it. LNG project approved for Imo State was taken  away by Jonathan. Port-Harcourt-Owerri road project is now abandoned, where are Imo and Abia’s share of federal projects? I thank God, that today, PDP is now in the minority at the National Assembly. The re-alignment of political forces is quite interesting. The rumour that APC is a northern party has failed because people now know that Rochas Okorocha, Ngige and Ogbnnaya Onu, all governors of Igbo land are leaders of APC. So, how is APC a northern party? I thank these governors who saw the re-alignment of political forces and ensured that Igbos were part of the formation.

    For once, main stream west and north have formed an alignment. It would have spelt doom for the Igbos if our sons and daughters were not part of the re-alignment. We look forward to 2015 with high expectations. Let us now see how an Ijaw man has become an Igbo man. In Igbo land an Ijaw man is known as an Mba mmiri man not an Igbo man.

  • INEC, patent and the judiciary

    RECENTLY, an Abuja Federal High Court held that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) infringed on the patent rights of Bedding Holdings Ltd (BHL) in the contract purchase of Direct Data Capture (DDC) machines in 2010. In his judgment, Justice Ibrahim Auta awarded N17.3 billion damages to the plaintiff – representing 50 per cent of the value of the contract. The genesis of the case was the contract awarded by INEC in 2010 to three firms (one indigenous and two foreign) for the supply of DDC machines for voter registration in the run up to the 2011 general elections. It was a contract award that drew much attention to itself, first for the shortness of time for the firms to execute it, and second, for the involvement of foreign companies in a job many argued would be effectively handled by indigenous firms. INEC in a sense heeded the call of some patriotic Nigerians by awarding a huge part of the contract to the only Nigerian firm among the three awardees. This gesture alone created instant jobs for hundreds of Nigerians and arrested capital flight. At the end, Nigerians were justified for canvassing for all the job to be given to competent indigenous firms. Proof of this was the verdict from INEC that only one company delivered the DDC machines within the stipulated time frame of about 35 days. That company (Zinox) was the only indigenous firm among the lot. This feat strengthened the position of local content advocates to canvass for a wider berth for local companies in the overall national quest for economic growth and sustainable development. Consequent upon the award and successful execution of this contract, Beddings Holding approached the court, claiming it is the rightful owner of the patent for DDC machines and allied process of data capturing. In delivering his judgment, Justice Auta said: “From the evidence before this court, it is clear that the plaintiff actually owned a subsisting patent right over the process, application and the use of DDC machines for voters’ registration”. He also said: “Section 6 of the nation’s Patent and Design Act preclude anybody from using a patented invention without the consent of the inventor. So, INEC should always play by the rule so that its conduct does not affect the outcome of elections.” It was on the basis of this that the judge awarded cost in favour of the plaintiff. While I do not begrudge the plaintiff for the judgment or the three companies for making billions of naira from the DDC machines contract, there is the overriding need to examine the nature of patents, the implications of the judgment, the behaviour of INEC and the role of the judiciary in the nation’s electoral process. A patent, according to Encarta dictionary, is an exclusive right officially granted by a government to an inventor to make or sell an invention. Patents are granted for inventions and an invention is a process or device created by someone or group. The very fact that it is called an invention worthy of patent suggests that such process or device is new, unique and has never before been achieved. In the instant case of DDC machines, it is hard to prove that any Nigerian, individual or body corporate, is the inventor. To infer such and to ascribe such status to oneself means that other DDC processes including the bungled national identity card project under former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the direct data capture undertaken by the Nigerian Communications Commission and the telecoms companies in the country all infringed on the right of the patent owner. All of these projects bordered on the capturing of the biometric data of Nigerians in just the same way the INEC DDC machines did. Patent under any law, sovereignty or trade agreement including the World Trade Organisation (WTO) schedule is a very serious matter which must not be subjected to political, pecuniary or sentimental manipulations. Thomas Edison holds the patent for the electric bulb because he invented the electric bulb through well-defined process in a known and verifiable laboratory. He did not lay claim to the invention, he actually created a device. On that count, humanity says he deserves his patent. This is the context in which the judgment of Justice Auta is not only curious but strange. It is at best a mockery of reality and acceptable global tenets on matters of patents and patenting. But it raises a number of questions. Was the DDC machine used by INEC including the process of deploying such machine a Nigerian invention or the invention of any particular person or institution? What about the DDC machines used during the national identity card project or the ones used during the SIM Card registration by NCC and telecom companies in the country? The DDC machine comprises a laptop with camera, fingerprint capturing device (scanner) and printer. Besides, none of these devices can function without a software of its own and you need another software to tie them up together to function as a unit. I am a firm believer in the judiciary and a fervid advocate that people should resort to the judiciary to defend their rights. To that extent, the judgment of any court of competent jurisdiction should be binding on the parties involved. But the judiciary is not all about a High Court. The instant case requires further judicial inquisition and it is on this basis that a judgment of this nature need to be scrutinised by a higher assizes namely the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. It would be interesting to know in the final analysis what should earn a patent from the Nigeria patent office. Should one, for instance, be awarded patent for a product or service which he or she had no factory, laboratory or proven competence to create or just because such person was able to produce any document to support a claim? Nigerians need urgent answers to assuage their curiosity. •Musdafa writes from Abuja

  • ‘How judiciary can stabilise polity’

    ‘How judiciary can stabilise polity’

     In this piece Senator Babajide OmowOrare identifies the role of the judiciary in stabilising democracy

    Constitutional democracy the world over, is naturally anchored on the avowed concept of the rule of law. In this wise, the judiciary owes the State or the component units based on constitutionally ordained jurisdictional competence, the duty to interpret the laws especially the supreme organic law or groundnorm (the Constitution). Therefore, the judiciary plays a most vital role in the determination of the competing interests that usually arise from the electoral process and political activities.

    It is based on the above premise, that this paper undertakes a critical review of the adjudicatory role of the judicial arm of government in the resolution of prominent political conflicts in Nigeria since May 29, 1999, that ushered in our current longest democratic experience.

    This study is divided into seven broad parts. Part I treated the general notion of political stability. Part II detailed the vital role of the judiciary under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended. Part III is devoted to the appraisal of some relevant and salient Supreme Court cases e.g. INEC v. Musa(2003 3 NWLR Pt 806 P. 72), Inakoju v. Adeleke (2007 2 MJSC), Obi v. INEC (2007 9 MJSC), Amaechi v. INEC (This Day Newspaper, January 23, 2008. P.645), Governor of Kwara State v Ojibara (2006 18 NWLR Pt. 102, p.645), and PDP v CPC (2011 17 NWLR 485 @508-514). Part IV dealt with the attitude of the other arms of government and attendant political environmental factors. Part V of this paper highlighted the few instances where the courts have played uncomplimentary and unsavoury role in its constitutional function of providing stability through fair dispensation of justice. Part VI,on comparative basis, analysed the example of the United States. Part VII concluded the study through useful recommendations.

    The concept of political stability

    The organised society is regulated by law and social norms that are unique to such entity. Hence, the usual saying that every man is a political animal. The political system includes the institutions and administrative structure, which governs the affairs of the agencies and citizens within a defined legal boundary. Therefore, political stability connotes a continuous operation of the state and its institutions and administrative machinery in line with predictable legal regime.

    This was aptly summed up by Claude Ake thus:

    “Political stability is the regularity of the flow of political exchanges. The more regular the flow of political exchanges, the more the stability. Alternatively, we might say that there is political stability to the extent that members of society restrict themselves to the behaviour patterns that fall within the limits imposed by political role expectations. Any act that deviates from these limits is an instance of political instability. (Claude Ake, ‘A Definition of Political Stability Comparative Politics vol.7 No.2 (Jan. 1975) p.273 Accessed 25/08/2013).

    It is pertinent to emphasise that political stability is the enduring capacity of the system to absorb the inevitable challenges and trial without loss of historical and political balance. Therefore, the polity may not be devoid of uprising, but not usurpation. There may be revolts, but not revolution. Thus, there may be conflicting and even fiery clash of interests, but they must be subjected to the constitutionally ordained path of resolution, being the courts and obedience to the eventual decision of the court.

    In this sphere, the judiciary becomes that impartial arbiter and sacred altar where the uncontrollable political tension, brickbats and even violence that characterise our electoral and political systems are conditioned and calmed through constructive arguments in the law courts. In the end, the decision of the court or tribunal, which is the rule of law, will prevail rather than the rule of might or anarchy.

    Our democratic constitutional history as a country from independence in 1960 till date is instructive. Our First Republic could not survive the trials and challenges of nationhood beyond the first six years. Thus, the Western Region crisis, the Census controversy and general election of 1965 etc. inevitably paved the way for the military intervention of January 15, 1966 and the eventual demise of that Republic. The Second Republic experiment from 1979 – 1983, was merely a presidential system gamble of only fifty months.

    It is in the above context that we must appreciate our unbroken democratic journey from 1999 to date. In short, the 1999 Constitution as amended, bearing all its challenges and shortcomings, has professed an encouraging enduring capacity than the first and second republics’ constitutions on comparative terms. Our current fourteen- year experience amidst national issues like nationwide strikes, Sharia controversies, insecurity and kidnapping, declaration of state of emergencies, unconstitutional removal of governors amongst others, have been resolved through the rule of law.

    The vital role of the judiciary under the 1999 Constitution as amended

    The judiciary is the arm of government whose primary role is to interpret the law and decide legal disputes between the different major institutions of government, or between the state and the individual or agencies of government. In upholding this judicialfundamental objective, the Constitution vide Section 6(6) (b) states that the judicial powers:

    “shall extend, to all matters between persons, or between government or authority and to any persons in Nigeria, and to all actions and proceedings relating thereto, for the determination of any question as to the civil rights and obligations of that person”.

    This cardinal constitutional role of the judiciary was re-echoed by Uwaifo JSC in the case of Sha Jnr v. Kwan in these eloquent words:

    “It is a fundamental function of courts to do justice to the parties who appear before it in the pursuit of due and proper administration of justice”[2008 8 NWLR Pt. 670 p.708]

    The abiding thrust of presidential system of government is imbedded in the principle of separation of powers and the twin concept of checks and balances. Thus, judicial review becomes an integral and inescapable feature of public administration in order to keep government agencies and officials within the ambit of the law in their discharge of public duties. A deeper understanding of our constitutional history as a federal entity, will lend more weight to the exalted and enviable place of the judiciary in safeguarding our corporate existence. In this wise, our written Constitution and Supreme Court as undeniable features of federalism, endorsed the globally acclaimed principle of judicial review.

    In the original exposition of the concept in the great United States case of Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice Marshall’s verdict strengthens this point that:

    “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each.” [5 US [1 Cranch] 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 1803]

    The entire Chapter VII (Ss. 230 – 296) of our Constitution is also dedicated to the Judicature.

    In furtherance of this central function of the judiciary, the courts offer contending parties the opportunity to express their grievances, set their claims and seek redress in form of damages or compensation. Therefore, the court becomes the most constitutional route to air the society’s grievance and the most dependable path to the resolution of such conflicts.

    Stabilising decisions of the Supreme Court

    The Nigerian judiciary can hardly be found wanting in her vital role to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria through landmark decisions of the courts especially the Supreme Court. In short, the heroic pronouncement of our apex court in the historic case of Lakanmi v. AG Western Region[1971UILR 201 at 209], is still worthy of commendation in the brazen face of military dictatorship that terminated our First Republic. That decision was the last life-line for that unfortunate republic. We must also appreciate the same apex court in the Second Republic cases of Awolowo vs. Shagari[1979 6-9 SC. 51]as well as AG Bendel v. AG Federation[1981 10 SC 1] amongst others.

    The following cases are however, considered of prominence in our present dispensation:

    INEC v. Musa

    This constitutional matter arose out of the guidelines issued by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on May 15, 2001, based on the Electoral Act 2001. That guideline was for political associations wishing to be transformed into political parties with attendant time-table for political party registration. The National Conscience Party (NCP) led by late Gani Fawehinmi and 22 other political associations, objected vehemently to the constitutionality of the INEC Guidelines and thereby filed an action at the Federal High Court challenging same.

    While the action was pending, INEC registered three additional political parties in June 2002, and through official letters, informed the NCP and the other political associations of their failure to meet the registration requirements of the Guidelines. The action ran its course to the Supreme Court in preparation for the 2003 general election. In fact, the Supreme Court delivered her judgment on January 24, 2003, which was glaringly too close to the April 2003 general election. The apex court in nullifying the INEC Guidelines and non-registration of the contending political associations courageously held that:

    “The power of the National Assembly to enact an Act empowering the Independent National Electoral Commission to register political parties will only be validly exercised if such an Act is in conformity with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. This is because an Act which is inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution will be null and void” [Ibid: 200].

     

    Inakoju v. Adeleke

    This ground breaking constitutional matter popularly known as the ‘Ladoja’s case’ is also relevant. The then Governor of Oyo State, Rashidi Ladoja, was elected into office in 2003 for a four-year tenure that was slated to end in May 2007. But in 2005, the 32 member Oyo State House of Assembly broke into two factions that left the state governor with the support of 14 members while 18 others were against the governor. On December 13, 2005, the 18 Legislators met at D’Rovans Hotel, Ring Road, Ibadan, and raised allegation of gross misconduct against the Governor based on a newspaper advertorial.

    It was consequent upon that fact that they mandated the Acting Chief Judge of the state to set up a panel to investigate the said allegation of gross misconduct. The panel sat for two days and without any oral evidence from anybody, recommended the removal of the Governor, which was swiftly effected.

    The judicial review and consequent stabilisation of the political landscape of Oyo State in particular, and Nigeria in general, started formidably in the Court of Appeal. There in Adeleke v. Inakoju [Nation Newspaper, November 3, 2006 p. 43-44] that appellate court bravely rose to the occasion by reversing itself in the case of Abaribe v. Abia StateHouse of Assembly. [2002 14 NWLR Pt 788.C.A] In a most brilliant exposition of uncommon spirit of judicial activism and uncompromising stance of the positivist school of jurisprudence, that court emphatically laid to rest the erroneous view that the court is handicapped in impeachment proceedings of the legislature due to Section 188 (10) of the Constitution. In rejecting the High Court’s decision on that plank of reasoning, J.O. Ogebe JCA as he then was, held that:

    “Indeed, he had jurisdiction to examine the claim in the light of Section 188 subsections 1-9 of the 1999 Constitution and if he was not satisfied that the impeachment proceedings were initiated in compliance thereof, he has justification to intervene to ensure compliance. If on the other hand there was compliance with the pre-impeachment process then what happened therefore was the internal affairs of the House of Assembly and he would have no jurisdiction to intervene”. [The Nation Newspaper November 3, 3006 p.43-44]

    It was on the above Court of Appeal footage that the Supreme Court held with regards to Section 188 of the Constitution in Inakoju v. Adeleke that:

    “… the whole section must be taken into account, subsections 1-9 thereof clearly state what must be done before a Governor may be removed from office. It is only when these conditions are religiously fulfilled will a Governor be said to have been removed from office. When the Governor has been constitutionally removed, there and only then, will subsection 10 come into play – it ousts the jurisdiction of the court to question valid removal from office.”[2007 2 MJSC p.10-11]

    The judiciary on that note reinstated Rashidi Ladoja as the Governor of Oyo State and from whence he completed his social contract tenure with the electorates up to May 29, 2007. Thus, the vehicle of that state’s political stability up to the frightening and volatile political party combat and contest that characterised the general election of 2007 was put back on track.

    Obi v. INEC

    Anambra State manifests worrisome political culture and socialisation indexes. In that stead, that state’s governorship contest for 2003 general election was only resolved by the Court of Appeal on March 15, 2006, which declared Peter Obi the actual winner of the 2003 election. As at the date of that judgment, the Court of Appeal speaking through Omokri JCA, lamented this unfortunate situation thus:

    “It has taken all of 35 months for the 1stRespondent to receive justice in a court of law. 35 months is a very considerable portion of a 4 year term of office”. [Chris Ngige v. Peter Obi [2006] 14 NWLR Pt. 999]

    While Peter Obi was in search of remedial measure to salvage the 35 months he lost to Ngige through the High Court and Court of Appeal, the 2007 general election then caught up with that state. The INEC in spite of the proceeding in court, went ahead and conducted a governorship election in the state and returned Andy Uba as the Governor of the state. Hence, he was inaugurated on May 29, 2007 as the Governor of that state.

     

     

  • Lagos Judiciary Commission to reward diligence

    Lagos Judiciary Commission to reward diligence

    The Executive Secretary , Lagos State Judicial Service Commission, Mrs. Ayodele Odugbesan has said her administration would continue to recognise and reward diligence at work.

    Mrs. Odugbesan stated this during the staff’s end-of-year party held last week at the GRA Ikeja office of the commission.

    The occasion was also used to honour the former Executive Secretary of the commission Rev. Olubukola Balogun and two staff, Miss Kehinde Oyefusi and Mr. Lukman Owolu who won the Best Staff for the year 2013 in the senior category and in the junior category respectively.

    Mrs. Ayodele Odugbesan presented Mrs. Balogun with a plaque in recognition of her “outstanding selfless service and dedication to the commission”.

    Present on the occasion was the Chief Judge, Justice Ayotunde Phillips, the Chief Registrar, Mrs. Oladimeji Akinkugbe, Executive Secretary, Lagos State Law Reform Commission, Mrs. Ade Adeyemo and Presidents of all Lagos State Customary Courts among others.

    Mrs. Odugbesan extolled the virtues of Mrs. Balogun for what she described as her leadership qualities and for being a mother to all.

    Odugbesan traced the genesis of the commission which she said took off inside a small room on the Lagos Island and later moved to Oduduwa street in Ikeja GRA before moving to the present site which was commissioned March, last year.

    She commended her predecessor for the role she played in bringing about the construction of the building that housed the Judicial Service Commission complex, from foundation till completion.

    She said Mrs. Balogun would continue to be remembered for her unparalleled contributions to the development of the commission.

    The Chief Accountant of the commission, Mr. Olayinka Kilanko who was the master of ceremony at the occasion described the honouree as an embodiment of service and a source of encouragement and inspiration to the staff.

    Kilanko, who recalled that Mrs. Balogun was dedicated throughout her career, said that she rose through the ranks to become an executive secretary in the commission.

    He said the former executive secretary joined the commission in 1973 and rose to become the chief secretarial staff in 1993 before moving to the Ministry of Justice where she became a Deputy Director in 2006 and Permanent Secretary, the following year.

    He said Mrs. Balogun held that position till 2008, when she retired from service in 2008 and was appointed Executive Secretary same year and held the position till March, this year when she bowed out.

    Mrs. Balogun thanked the Lagos State governor, Mr. Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) and Justice Ayotunde for the tremendous support she received from them during her tenure.

    She said the support she got from them made it possible to achieve all that she achieved while in office.

    She counselled the staff to improve on their productivity and strive to put in their best always in order to achieve excellence for which the state is known for.

     

  • NBA seeks corruption-free, viable judiciary in 2014

    NBA seeks corruption-free, viable judiciary in 2014

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) on Saturday expressed the need for corruption-free judiciary in 2014, saying that all necessary machinery should be put in place to achieve it.

    The NBA President, Mr. Okey Wali (SAN), made the call in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Lagos.

    Wali said as the year was gradually coming to an end, adequate steps should be taken to promote a more efficient judicial system in the coming year.

    He said that 2014 should be characterised by a more efficient judicial system with adequate working machinery that would enhance effective justice delivery.

    He said at present, judges were still saddled with the rigour of taking down proceedings in “long-hand,” saying that these were some of the problems to be remedied in 2014.

    “A major problem which requires redress in the judiciary is the issue of funding, and this simply entails the provision of more working facilities to enhance a smooth operation of the system.

    “The Nigerian judiciary is one that I know in this age and time, where judges still take down proceedings in longhand.

    “If automated recording devices are provided in all our courts, proceedings will definitely be faster, and this will promote the speedy dispensation of justice,’’ he said.

    Wali, however, noted that although some of the delays were caused by lawyers, litigants and judicial officers, such situations could be dealt with following practice direction of courts.

     

     

  • ‘No longer business as usual in the judiciary’

    ‘No longer business as usual in the judiciary’

    Looking at the reforms being carried out by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Aloma Mukhtar, can you say it has reduced corruption in the judiciary?

    Yes, the changes and reforms being carried out by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mariam Aloma Mukhtar is having the desired effect. And I want Nigerians to rally round her irrespective of whether you are in the legal profession or not because the judiciary is the last hope of the common man. If the judiciary is in trouble, then it affects everyone. She has proven to be a serious minded person with the sole aim of leaving the judiciary far better than she met it. She is prepared to take the bull by the horn no matter whose ox is gored for the interest of justice and for the sake of the legal profession. Many judges have been sacked while some are still under probe. Many judges know that it is not business as usual and that if you are engaged in any corrupt practices, you will be summarily dealt with. She has proven that at the end of her tenure, she will leave a landmark and only pray that these reforms will be institutionalised so that subsequent Chief Justices of Nigeria will continue from where she stopped.

     

    The President has agreed to a national dialogue as a panacea to the problems confronting the nation. Do you really think that is the forward?

    I don’t foreclose anything. I cannot categorically say yes or no because it has not come and gone. If you ask me, I think the national dialogue is rather coming late; but notwithstanding, I think we should give it a trial and see if something good could come out of it. Don’t forget, many Nigerians have been clamouring for this conference for a very long time, with the belief that the conference is the only avenue where Nigerians can discuss the continued basis of their existence as a nation. But the fear being expressed by many is, what will be the outcome at the end of the day? Will the outcome be implemented even if it is not favourable to the government? Will the opinions of the grassroots be heard? Will it really move Nigeria forward and unite all the various ethnic groups we have or will it cause the break-up of the country? I believe the President is the one in charge of the country and he is in the best position to state why he has decided that we should have the conference.

     

    Is that really what the country needs?

    As far as we are concerned, the process is on-going, nobody can stop it. So, we should just wait and see what becomes of the dialogue at the end of the day. As the popular saying goes, ‘uneasy lies the head that wears the crown’. If the country breaks during his tenure, he takes the blame and if it is more united and prosperous as a result of the dialogue, he takes the credit.

     

    Your views are different fron that of your party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) that has rejected the dialogue. Your National Leader Bola Tinubu even described it as a Greek gift. Do you also share this view?

    I just told you that the national dialogue at this point in time is rather coming too late because of its closeness to the 2015 election. With respect to Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, he is a highly respected politician with full grasp of knowledge about the politics of this country. He has been a former senator of the federal republic , two-time governor and now the National Leader of Nigeria’s major opposition political party. I think if that kind of man should give his opinion on an issue, we should listen and listen well. He knows what he saw before rejecting the national dialogue. But my position is that nobody can stop the dialogue at this point because it is ongoing. What I think we should do as good Nigerians is to make our contributions to the panel and see what the outcome will be.

     

    Do you really think what we need is a national dialogue or a sovereign national conference?

    Be it national dialogue or sovereign national conference, I think what Nigerians want is result. We want anything that will move the nation forward. We need anything that will promote the peace and stability of this country. We need what will reduce poverty in the land and ensure that nobody goes to bed hungry. Nigeria is a blessed country, but over the years, we have been plagued with bad leadership which has dragged us backward over the years. So, anything that will assist in moving the nation forward is welcome. Whether you call it dialogue, conference, round table discussion or even town hall meeting, constitution amendment, or fact-finding mission where the opinions of Nigerians will be sought, all we are asking is, how will it return our beloved country to the rightful path?

     

    The face-off between the Federal Government and ASUU has dragged on for over four months. What is your solution to this problem?

    The Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) imbroglio can be likened to that of PHCN which many people still refer to as NEPA or even that of NNPC. We keep talking about Nigeria not having a functioning refinery. But the truth is, these refineries are not spirits, so can’t they be fixed? Look at the billions of naira that has been pumped into PHCN by successive governments, yet we are still talking about power failure. Now to the issue of education, it makes my heart bleed because of the sorry state of our educational facilities. While many people have been appealing to ASUU to call off the strike, I think the government too should be able to make promise and stick to it. You see medical doctors embarking on incessant strikes because contracts were made, but a party is reneging. When this happens, the only way for the other party is to down tools or pull out of any business you have. So, it is a two-way thing. ASUU should temper justice with mercy and pity our youths and their parents who have been at the receiving end of this strike, also the government, too, should keep to their words and pay the lecturers their dues.

     

    Do you agree with the view in some quarters that the demands of ASUU are too side?

    Education should be the number one priority of any responsible government. In fact, it should have the highest vote in the budget. There is nothing as profitable as investing in human capital and you can only do that through the provision of sound and qualitative education to the citizenry. I don’t think the demands of the lecturers are too many. All they are asking for is a conducive environment and improved package to carry out their duties. When they are well taken care of, they will be more productive and motivated to carry out their responsibilities. Even the students will not be able to concentrate under an environment that is not conducive. So, the government should honour the agreement it had with the lecturers. If you promised to give them N4billion and you give them N1billion, I think that is not good enough. At least, even if you don’t have funds, give them half of that amount with a sincere promise to pay the balance. I think the government should be making plans to accommodate the remaining of that money in the new budget. If they can do that, then the society will be able to take sides with the government that they have tried and move against ASUU to call off the strike.

     

    As a strong advocate of women holding political office in the country, how would you react to the car scandal involving the Aviation minister?

    Let me state that there is no justification for what she has done. Inasmuch as more facts are still coming up everyday, we will still wait and see. But to me, what will she be doing with a car of N100million? Will this car fly in the air or what? Even if it is a bulletproof car, she can’t be in it all day long. She will still need to get out of the car to enter her office, to buy things at the supermarket, to attend a meeting and so on. Everything you need to survive as an individual cannot be in the bulletproof car.  Security is only in the hands of God; so I don’t see reason somebody should purchase bulletproof cars for their security. Haven’t we seen people walking on the road and just slumped and died? We have seen people walk into their cars and before you know, they are dead and people dragged them out. And eventually, when you leave office as minister, what becomes of you? It may not be her fault that the cars were bought on her behalf, but if anybody tells me that she is not aware of them, that person is not being sincere. As the head of the ministry, she has to take responsibility for anything that is done by the agencies under her. Look at this one, if she is not careful, so many things will be signed in her name and she will not be aware of them. We were told the then DG of NCAA approved the purchase of the cars, but  today, whose name is being mentioned all over the world? Oduah’s of course!

     

    Don’t you think the minister has created a bad image for women in government and that they cannot be trusted in office?

    Yes, I feel that way because women are known to be more prudent, compassionate, and as effective managers, so putting all these into consideration, it is expected that a woman who finds herself in any position should live an exemplary life which other women will be proud of. I am not happy as a woman that our name is being dragged into this mess. We are advocating 35 per cent affirmative action, which I think we have not fully actualise and we are even asking for 50 because what a man can do, a woman can even do better. But now, people will say, you are asking for 50 per cent, the ones you are given what have you done with it?

     

  • Judiciary worried by Electoral Act

    Judiciary worried by Electoral Act

    The Judiciary has expressed concerns over the manner pre-election matters are handled in the country.

    It faulted the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for listing the candidate of a political party for an election when the candidate’s emergence was still a subject of dispute.

    Justice Ishaq Bello of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court said such situations had been overheating the polity.

    He urged the INEC to correct such anomaly.

    The eminent lawyer explained that there should be a proviso in the act, which should stop the submission of names of opponents when there are disputes over party candidacy.

    INEC Chairman Prof. Attahiru Jega said the commission planned to carry out a wholesale review and enhancement of some of its existing guidelines.

    Justice Bello and Prof. Jega spoke yesterday in Abuja at a retreat on modalities for making and gazetting INEC’s regulations.

    The one-day retreat was organised by INEC for lawyers within and outside the commission to enable the commission get advice and inputs to develop a framework for the commission’s gazette.

    Justice Bello noted that in a situation where there are conflicts, the name of an aspirant should not be submitted to the INEC for any election until the issue is resolved.

    However, he said this had not been the case, because such cases were always pushed to the Judiciary to resolve, whereas it does not have a say in pre-election matters.

    Bello said: “Specifically, looking at the current situation …whenever there are election matters, one of the many fears of legal practitioners or applicants is that of not exhausting internal remedies provided by the constitution of political parties. When such a matter comes before the court, it is thrown out.

  • Judiciary to Rivers PDP: ‘Don’t tarnish judges’ image’

    THE Rivers State Judiciary has appealed to the Chief Felix Obuah-led Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), of the state to desist from smearing the image of judges in the state.

    The Chief Registrar of the State High Court, Leonard Adoki issued the warning while reacting to a statement credited to the Special Adviser to Obuah, Jerry Needam, on the reassignment of Obio/Akpor council matter to a new judge.

    Needam had in the statement allegedly accused Governor Chibuike Amaechi of using the Acting State Chief Judge, Justice Peter Agumagu, to reassign all existing political matters in the State High Court to judges he(Amaechi) could easily influence, and called on the National Judicial Council to investigate the State Judiciary.

    Adoki, however, in a counter statement in Port Harcourt, Rivers State capital, warned Needam and the PDP to stop destroying the reputations of the judiciary in the state, especially that of the Acting Chief Justice.

    In Adoki’s statements, which reads in part: “The attention of the Rivers State Judiciary has been drawn to a statement signed and issued by Jerry Neeedam, Special Adviser on Media to Chief Felix Obuah, chairman People’s Democratic Party (PDP), Rivers State chapter that Governor Chibuike Amaechi wants to use the office of the Acting Chief Judge, Hon. Justice peter N.C, Agumagu, to thwart the administration of justice in the state.”

    Expatiating, he said: “The Rivers State Judiciary would not have reacted to such wild allegations from the PDP in Rivers State. We do not want to be dragged into political gimmicks but we have to react to preserve and safeguard the independence of the judiciary,” adding: “We wish therefore to appeal to politicians especially the Rivers State PDP to desist from tarnishing the image of our very respected judges. For the avoidance of doubt, we want to place it on record that assignment of cases is a routine duty performed by the Chief Judge of the State. The Acting Chief Judge is not a stranger to such duties having once been a Chief Registrar and President, Customary Court of Appeal and in both capacities has been performing that noble task of assigning cases to Magistrates, and Judges of the State judiciary.”

    It would be recalled that the Obio/Akpor council suit came to the fore following the removal of its Executive Chairman Timothy Nsirim and key members of his executives, who challenged their suspension by the State House of Assembly which was fixed for ruling last week by Justice Sylverlyn Iragunuma, but was reportedly transferred to a new judge, Laminkanra Iyaye).

  • Fashola restates commitment to transformation of judiciary

    Fashola restates commitment to transformation of judiciary

    Lagos State Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN) has reaffirmed the committment of his administration to the transformation of the state’s judiciary.

    He said there is need for the people to have access to justice, adding that without it there would be chaos.

    Governor Fashola spoke at the inauguration of the Ikorodu High Court named after the former chief judge of the state, Justice Adewale Candido-Johnson.

    He stressed that the breach of laws is dangerous.

    Noting that the constitution guarantees certain rights and freedom, he said none of them is free.

    “Sometimes, these rights are threatened by the action of others including governments and its agents,” he said.

    Fashola said access to justice has been made more possible with the new court.

    The state Chief Judge, Justice Ayotunde Phillips said the new court would ensure justice delivery.

    Justice Phillips advised lawyers to take advantage of the new Judicial Information System (JIS), adding that it would make it possible for the state judiciary to be at par with their counterparts across the world.

    Earlier in a welcome address, the Attorney- General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr Ade Ipaye, who was represented by the Solicitor-General, Mr Lawal Pedro(SAN) said the government over the years recognised justice administration qs pillar of the society.

    He said the government would continue to  demonstrate commitment to the efficiency of justice system to bring it to the door step of the people.