I am from Nsukka Local Government in Enugu State. My parents are into business (maybe that’s where I got my business ideas). My parents have five children – four boys and a girl. I’m the second child. I’m glad I came from a family where parents still place high regard on morals.
Education
I attended Mercy Nursery and Primary School. I had my secondary school education at Marist Comprehensive Academy, Uturu, Abia State. My secondary school days were pleasant. I can say that was where I picked up academically.
I attended Enugu State University of Science and Technology, graduating in 2022.
Scaling Law School
Law School was demanding. It’s a world on its own. The books to read were enormous. I barely had time for myself. I didn’t engage in any recreational activity. I had to plan myself in a way that I read twice a day – afternoon and midnight.
Choice of law
My study of law was inspired by real-life experiences and inhuman acts in our society. From my childhood, I had wanted to be in a position where I could speak for people who are victims of oppression.
None of my family members is a lawyer. I’m the first lawyer.
Aside from c.hoosing law as my profession, I wanted to be a footballer. Football is a game I have passion for. The dream of being a professional footballer is still in me.
During my university days, I was the SUG Treasurer and I received an award.
Call to Bar
We celebrated it in our own way and capacity, not necessarily a party.
Guiding principles
Good ought to be done and evil is to be avoided. However, wherever there is a wrong, there must be a remedy.
Most interesting aspect of profession
Research. I love research.
Five-year dream
I believe God will place me in a position of high regard.
My Lords, this erroneous belief of police officers in their immunity from prosecution and the sense of impunity has once again been shattered by the High Court of Lagos State in Bolanle’s case.
The point I want to make, my Lords, is that when police officers are prosecuted or convicted for killing innocent members of the public, such incidents are not adequately publicised.
I believe that this lack of knowledge of how the legal process works is responsible for the belief of some police officers that they can get away with killing members of the public since they don’t see immediate consequences of their actions.
All they see is that their colleague(s) involved in such an incident is given an Orderly Room Trial if he is a junior officer and is dismissed by the Police.
They don’t know that the legal process of prosecution and appeals inexorably continues to the highest court, especially where the defendant has been charged and sentenced to death at the trial court.
Invariably by the time the case/appeal process comes to an end, police officers and members of the public would have forgotten the incident. It’s only those who lost their loved ones who remember where they’ve kept track of the case.
It is also important to make the point that it is not because of the public outcry over Bolanle’s case that ensured the prosecution of the police officer, but that the law had always taken its course in most cases of such incidents.
The following are a few decisions I can remember off the cuff in the last couple of years where the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of police officers who killed members of the public.
There are many more of these decisions and many at different stages of trial and appeal.
My point is that policemen at large need to be enlightened about the consequences of their actions.
Let us educate those within our sphere of influence. Hopefully, this will minimise similar incidents.
1. P.C Henry Ekum v. The State – Appeal No. SC.1103/2017, reported in (2022) LPELR-57683(SC), delivered on 13th May, 2022:
On October 23, 2010, at No. 24 Ochedore Street, Four Corners, Ikom in Calabar, Cross River State, the appellant (a police officer) murdered one Ebam Takim Obiba by shooting him in the head with an AK47 rifle.
The appellant had held a certain woman hostage in a salon and after an altercation with his colleague on one side and the woman’s husband and the deceased on the other side, he started shooting randomly and killed the deceased.
He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by hanging. His death sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
2. Onyebuchi Onwunze v. The State – Appeal No. SC.215/2017, delivered on 2nd December, 2022:
On March 25, 2007, in Ilupa Village at Godwin Ozuma’s compound, the appellant (a police officer) took a combatant position on being commanded by his superior officer and shot and killed one Anna Otari Ogbodo, an unarmed elderly woman.
The court convicted the appellant of murder and sentenced him to death by hanging. The death sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
3. Matthew Egheghe v. The State – Appeal No. SC.304/2017- Reported in (2020) LPELR- 50552 (SC), delivered on 10th January, 2020:
On Sunday October 16, 2011, along Sani Abacha Express Way Yenagoa, one Emmanuel Victor was on his way from church when he encountered some policemen.
The appellant (a police officer), chased down the motorcycle wherein Victor was a passenger after having slapped him previously, pulled him down and shot him severally to death.
The appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by hanging. His death sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
4. Akinyede Olaiya v. State – Appeal No. SC.562/2014 reported in (2017) LPELR-43714 delivered on 8th December, 2017:
On March 23, 2011, at Ota Junction, Omuo- Ekiti in Ekiti State, the appellant (a police officer) fired two shots into the crowd without provocation or any real threat to his life or the lives of other policemen with him.
The shots fired by the Appellant killed one Kehinde Ayo Faluyi who was in that crowd.
The Appellant was convicted and sentenced to death. His death sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
5. P.C Adeusi Adesina v. The People Of Lagos State – Appeal No. SC. 622/2014, Reported in (2019) LPELR – 46403 SC), delivered on January 18, 2019:
On November 27, 2008, the Appellant, a Police Constable, in Apogbon Blackspot, Lagos State shot a lorry driver named Dauda Isiako Akao and killed him.
He was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 14 years imprisonment. His sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
6. The State v. P.C. James Egigia (SC) (unreported) delivered on the 26th day of January, 2024.
The respondent who is a policeman on or about February 16, 2006 at Ayama village in Auyo Local Government Area of Jigawa State, seriously beat and fractured the leg of the deceased, one Ismaila Dodo while investigating a case.
The injuries led to the death of the deceased. The trial court found the Respondent guilty of the offence of committing serious assault under Section 224 and punishable under Section 225 of the Penal Code Law and sentenced him to five years imprisonment without the option of a fine. The sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Ogunwumiju, CFR, is a Justice of the Supreme Court. She shared this paper with the National Association of Women Judges.
Nigeria and the United Kingdom last week signed the Enhanced Trade and Investment Partnership (ETIP) to boost trade and investment. However, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) rejected the pact. The Minister of Trade has clarified that Nigeria does not have a Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) with the UK to allow its licensed lawyers to practise in Nigeria. Is the NBA justified in its rejection of the pact? Should foreign lawyers continue to be shut out? ADEBISI ONANUGA felt lawyers’ pulses.
A ROW broke out last week over the Enhanced Trade Investment Partnership (ETIP) Agreement between Nigeria and the United Kingdom.
Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment, Dr. Doris Nkiruka Uzoka-Anite, said the agreement “reaffirms Nigeria’s dedication to nurturing economic and trade alliances, especially in critical sectors like energy, legal, and financial services.”
She described it as “a robust partnership understanding which promises to be a springboard for immense growth in trade relations with the UK.”
UK Minister for Business and Trade, Kemi Badenoch, said: “The two countries will continue to be bound by unshakeable cultural bonds and share a common law system which is the language of our contracts and transactions.”
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) rejected the ETIP agreement, fearing it would take jobs away from Nigerian lawyers.
It vowed to challenge the agreement up to the Supreme Court if necessary.
NBA president Yakubu Maikyau (SAN) said: “We know for certain that the British Government will not undermine its own body of legal professionals in such spectacular fashion as this administration has done to the NBA in the matter of this agreement.
“It is truly tragic that while the government of the UK is seeking opportunities for its own lawyers beyond its constrained environment, the government of Nigeria is attempting to deprive Nigerian lawyers and their millions of dependants of means of livelihood.
“To embark on such a venture without recourse to the NBA is the height of insensitivity to the plight of the legal profession in Nigeria, and this is totally unacceptable,” the NBA said.
The association said it would mobilise its members to challenge the agreement, urging them to “brace up for the struggle ahead.”
“The NBA under my leadership will not allow any incursion into our legal space.
“We intend to fully challenge the legality of this agreement to the Supreme Court if necessary…”
But, Dr. Uzoka-Anite clarified that the agreement does not guarantee easy entry for UK lawyers.
She said on X (formerly Twitter): “Regrettably, our earlier report erroneously suggested that Nigeria has signed an MoU that allows lawyers licensed in the United Kingdom to practise in Nigeria.
“We wish to state emphatically that there is no such provision or agreement in the MoU.
“For the avoidance of doubt, Nigeria does not have a Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) with the United Kingdom and did not commit, under the MOU or elsewhere, to allow UK-licensed lawyers to practise in Nigeria.
“As it currently stands, foreign licensed lawyers (including those licensed in the U.K.) cannot practise in Nigeria, as categorically stated in the MOU.
“We recognise that cross-jurisdictional practice between Nigeria and the United Kingdom is still an ongoing conversation amongst relevant stakeholders within the legal practitioners’ community in Nigeria, and this was reflected in the MOU.”
A highly placed source in the NBA said despite the minister’s clarification, the association would still challenge the agreement.
Is NBA’s rage justified?
In an era where legal practice is going global with the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) and the like, should foreign lawyers continue to be shut out?
Pioneer Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Section on Business Law (SBL) chairman George Etomi once hailed the AfCFTA because it will enable Nigeria to “get our own fair share of the world trade, not only goods but services”.
He added that when trade barriers are opened, more opportunities would open for lawyers.
“There will be myriads of agreements to be drawn and dispute resolutions to be handled,” he said.
Also, lawyer and partner at KPMG, Wole Obayomi, believed that AfCFTA would benefit law firms when they adopt continental partnership models.
He also thought the agreement would allow Nigerian lawyers to develop the capacity to handle complex high-end deals.
Obayomi, speaking soon after the signing of the AFCFTA in 2019, said: “International corporate organisations want firms that can deal with them cross-border.
“If you’re part of an international network, opportunities will be vast.”
So, does it then make sense to rule out foreign lawyers in Nigeria completely? Is it even practicable?
A former Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) President, Mrs Boma Alabi (SAN), does not think so.
Alibi, who is licensed to practise in the UK, stressed it would be futile to attempt to block foreign lawyers.
Speaking on Channels Law Weekly on the controversy generated by the ETIP agreement, she rather called for regulation.
Alabi said: “There are 54 countries that practise similar laws as we do, and because of the similarities, they have minimum entry barriers to lawyers from other commonwealth countries.
“The Legal Practitioners Act (LPA) provides that lawyers who have similar law to Nigeria can be admitted.
“It recognises the fact that there are other countries that practise similar laws to us.
“It’s more practical to begin to look at regulating foreign lawyers coming to practise here as opposed to trying to keep them out.
“We have not kept them out; we have not succeeded, and it’s only going to get worse.
“So, it’s better to recognise that reality and regulate how they practise law here.”
Mrs Alabi highlighted the benefits of opening the legal space to foreign lawyers.
She said: “There is a very bright side to it. We’ve seen in jurisdictions where they’ve opened up that they’ve created employment for local lawyers.
“They’re not going to fly solicitors and barristers to Nigeria to work for them. Fees here will not sustain that.
“They will partner with local lawyers to develop some of these skills that the NBA president said we do not have.”
The SAN also argued that Nigerian lawyers can enjoy similar opportunities abroad.
She said: “What the UK is looking for is reciprocity because already, they’ve opened up their market to us.
“I have been practising law in England for many, many years.
“I practise there because I’m a Nigerian-qualified lawyer. I did not have to go through the whole rigour of attending their Law school again.
“All I had to do was take some examinations – about four of them, and that was it.
“My Nigerian qualification was recognised, and I was able to practise in the UK, practising UK law.
“If you don’t want to practise UK law, you don’t need any qualifying examinations. You literally set up shop and start practising as a Nigerian lawyer.”
Mrs Alabi thinks the resistance is because some do not fully understand the ramifications.
On the shape the regulation could take, she said: “For instance, you can say they can come here and practise their law, but they cannot practise Nigerian law because they don’t know enough about it.
“It means someone can set up to practise Chinese or Korean law, and why not?
“For common law issues, they can take some examinations, maybe at the Nigerian Law School. That may require a change in the LPA to remove the citizenship requirement.
“We can look at what happens in other jurisdictions, see what works for us, and import that
“India opened their legal space partially about a year ago. Foreign lawyers can set up to practise their law or partner with Indian law firms to practise Indian law.
“I’m the one qualified in Nigerian law, for instance. My Nigerian colleagues will work with me, and you (the foreign lawyer) will simply be the rent holder.
“I don’t see what’s wrong with that. That’s giving us additional opportunities.”
Alabi noted that foreign companies are not legally allowed to bring in their private lawyers from the UK to represent them here.
Who can practise in Nigeria?
In an article, a law teacher, Sylvester Udemezue said under the Legal Practitioners Act, only three categories of persons are entitled to practise law in Nigeria.
The first class is lawyers who are ‘entitled to practise generally’.
According to him, this class covers any lawyer who has been called to the Nigerian Bar and whose name is on the Roll of Legal Practitioners kept at the registry of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
The second class comprises those entitled to practise by their office, such as Attorneys-General and others referred to as Official Bar.
He said the third class is usually referred to as “lawyers entitled to practise law by warrant”.
Udemezue noted a provision of the LPA that empowers the Chief Justice of Nigeria to grant leave to a foreign lawyer to come and represent his client in an individual case in and leave afterwards.
“Such lawyers are not entitled to practise generally by setting up a firm in Nigeria as if they were lawyers duly called to the Nigerian Bar.
“Not even under the powers awarded the CJN under Section 2 of the LPA may any lawyer whose name is not on the Roll of Legal Practitioners in Nigeria, get authorised to practise law generally in Nigeria,” he said.
Senior lawyers weigh in
Chief Wale Taiwo (SAN), Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), Dr Joe Nwobike (SAN), and a former member of the Ogun State Judiciary Commission, Abayomi Omoyinmi, also shared their thoughts on the controversy.
Taiwo noted that lawyers now operate in a global community where Nigeria is a major stakeholder.
“My understanding of the ETIP is that the UK is seeking a market for its businesses in the aftermath of the dwindling access to the EU market.
“It is a known fact that Brexit has not delivered the promises the proponents sold to the UK populace.
“The UK economy is even struggling and just entered into a recession.
“Thus, the UK is doing everything to gain access and a foothold in markets afield.
“Nigeria is one of the targets. Our colonial history, English common law traditions, the English language, our assimilated culture, etc., all make Nigeria a prime market for the UK to explore. ETIP is premised on the foregoing.
“In terms of the legal services industry, the legal profession in Nigeria is not on the same pedestal as the UK. It’s a disservice to attempt to compare the two.
“From the available data, the legal services sector makes a significant contribution to the UK economy, contributing £34b – or 1.6 per cent – of gross value added in 2022, and employing 368,000 people right across the UK.
“I don’t have the figure of the legal services contribution to the Nigerian GDP but I bet it’s a far cry when compared to the UK figures.”
Taiwo believes granting UK lawyers would be detrimental to their Nigerian counterparts.
“Before ETIP, I’m aware that some UK firms had already been providing legal services in Nigeria through proxies. It is playing the ostrich to deny the fact.
“The due diligence and legal documentation of majority of the big ticket transactions in our oil and gas, energy, power, project finance, extractive industry sectors involving the multinationals are delivered through the London magic circle firms.”
While backing the NBA, Taiwo said the ETIP’s benefits should be explored, nonetheless.
He said: “We should still find a way to explore the touted benefits of ETIP.
“As I alluded earlier, London firms are already carrying on legal practice via proxies.
“Arbitration Clauses are inserted in all multimillion-dollar contracts; the contracts are made subject to the laws of England and Wales with London as the seat of arbitration. It is a matter of freedom of contract.
“Thus, we need to be realistic about the legal components of the ETIP.
“I think the issue that should be addressed is how Nigerian legal professionals can be relevant for collaboration with our peers in the connected global economy.
“That should be the starting point to addressing the fall out of the ETIP pact.”
British lawyers must
attend law school
Ozekhome said just as Nigerian lawyers cannot automatically practise in the UK, the same conditions should apply to them.
“For as long as Nigerian lawyers, no matter the heights in the profession, are not allowed to practise law in the UK without being called to the English Bar, so also will it be wrong, untenable, immoral and even illegal for any British lawyer or any other foreign lawyer to practise in Nigeria without going through the Nigerian Law School and passing all qualifying examinations,” he said.
‘Fears not justified’
Dr Nwobike said the clarification by the Trade Minister puts the doubts and fears expressed about the ETIP pact to rest.
He added: “That clarification notwithstanding, the practice of law is not a trade and not governed by the rules and regulations applicable to trading and investment activities of any kind.
“The practice of law is specifically governed, as it relates to who can practise the law profession in Nigeria, by the Legal Practitioners Act and the Regulations made under it.
“I, therefore, think that the fears on the possible practice of law by UK licensed lawyers in Nigeria based on the pact cannot be accurately justified given the current state of the law in Nigeria.
“It is, however, very instructive to see the NBA President openly oppose the inference drawn from the statement credited to the Minister.
“The NBA President acted within the confines and expectations of his office to oppose the Pact in this regard.”
On whether the restrictions should remain, Nwobike said: “I am unaware of any jurisdiction that has opened its legal practice for all to engage in. The US has not done so.
“The right acquired to practise law in a state in the US does not automatically entitle one to practise law in another state of the US.
“This suggestion that the practice of law is going global is, to my mind, a proposition and not a factual reality.”
How it is done in the UK
Omoyinmi said in the UK, any lawyer from another jurisdiction who wishes to practise as a solicitor or barrister must take a qualifying test.
“So, it is not automatic for UK lawyers to come and practise in Nigeria without any regulations,” Omoyinmi said.
According to lawsociety.org.uk, from September 2021, lawyers from abroad and overseas students who wish to qualify in England and Wales can sit the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE).
The SQE allows lawyers to qualify as solicitors by taking the same exam as domestic candidates.
To requalify as solicitors in England and Wales, foreign lawyers need to: hold a legal professional qualification; hold a degree in any subject or an equivalent qualification (such as an apprenticeship) or work experience; complete two stages of assessment, SQE1 and SQE2, unless exempt; satisfy the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA’s) character and suitability requirements.
Fully qualified foreign lawyers are exempt from any qualifying work experience (QWE) requirements.
If a foreign lawyer is looking to requalify in England and Wales, the SQE replaces the qualified lawyers’ transfer scheme (QLTS.
Lawyers can give back to society by promoting the cause of justice and human rights, a former Court of Appeal Justice, Peter Olabisi Ige, has said.
According to him, all lawyers ought to practise what he called “cause lawyering”.
“You must be actively engaged in promoting the cause of justice and vindication of human rights where the government or its agencies violate the constitution and the law in our society.
“It is your duty to challenge dangerous policies of the government or its agencies which could bring untold hardship to Nigerians, particularly the downtrodden,” Ige said.
He said: “Lawyers have every opportunity to come together and facilitate the making or enactment of good laws that will be beneficial to the members of the larger society.
“This is squarely within the purview of duties and responsibilities of lawyers.
“Lawyers can tremendously assist the National Assembly to pass laws or Acts that will drastically ameliorate the general suffering of the masses and pervasive hunger starring the majority of Nigerians in the face.”
Justice Ige said lawyers must desist from denigrating the Judiciary.
He said: “For a very long time now, it has become a dangerous vogue for parties and non-parties to cases in court, particularly high-profile cases, election causes and matters to make derogatory comments and sometimes very curious statements concerning election matters that are sub judice.
“Many times, they go on analysing and evaluating cases pending in court to suit their purpose.
“Most often, the comments and conclusions reached by the said commentators are designed to threaten, cajole and sway the adjudicators to their side.
“It is appalling that some of the commentators who are well respected and educated do it to mould public opinion in order to cause resentments and disaffection among the populace against the Judges handling such cases and their opponents and to whip up sentiments.
“There is no doubt that the myopic aim of those peddling such slanted opinions only intended that the Judges should decide the matter or cause in issue in their favour at all cost.
“People’s reputation and public life have been ruined and endangered for no just cause in many instances through such baseless comments.
“To add salt to the injury – and this is embarrassing if not depressing, some members of the Noble Profession have joined the train and the crowd of misguided elements who are in the habit of expressing jaundiced opinions to the newsmen and various media houses (broadcast and print media) claiming that the strength of their clients cases show that ‘there is no way for the opponent’, ‘we have called very formidable evidence that no court can ignore’ and you see some lawyers and their clients nodding in approval!
“A lot of incalculable damage had been done to the administration of justice as any judgment given contrary to their perceived ‘formidable evidence’ would be taken to have been purchased’ from ‘perceived corrupt Judiciary that has been purportedly captured by their opponent’.
“But anytime these commentators and litigants win cases, they boast about ‘a Daniel has come to judgment and the best has happened to the Judiciary’; ‘it is the hope of common man’!
To the lawyers who engage in media trials, one can say- ‘even you Brutus?”
Urging lawyers to fight injustice, Justice Ige noted: “Take for example, the thoughtless introduction of new naira notes policy in November 2022, just a few months to the general election…
“The rich also cried profusely to the extent that some governors approached the apex court to stem the tide of chaos and near anarchy that the policy engendered. The apex court saved the situation.
“Where do we go from here? Who will bell the cat? There are no roads, petrol, gas, diesel and kerosine are no longer affordable. Salaries can no longer accommodate the needs of the families.
“I believe there are a lot the lawyers can do to ameliorate the situation and take the nation out of the cul de sac and the economic doldrums we are in, in Nigeria.”
Justice Ige said Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) and senior lawyers as leaders at the Bar must continue to lead by example while giving a helping hand.
“The Body of SANS, the NBA and its members collectively and individually can always intervene on behalf of the society…
“We cannot afford to remain passive or aloof. I refer to the famous talk of ‘Martin Niemoller: First They Came’. ‘First, they came for the communists and I did not speak out because I was not a communist. Then they came for Socialists and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the trade unionist and I did not speak out because I was not a trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.’ You cannot afford to fail!”
When Professor Attahiru Jega discusses elections, many Nigerians listen. He has been speaking recently about the 2023 general elections, especially the February presidential poll disparaged by many.
Before last week’s media round by the former national chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), he had told federal lawmakers in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, that it was time to improve on the electoral system. Professor Jega said that 24 years after return to civil rule, Nigeria ought to have become a model for other African countries.
While speaking on the 2022 Electoral Act last week, he contended that despite the loud criticism of this year’s election, the legal framework was the best ever. He accepted that the technological innovations embedded in it were designed to ensure that all went well. The Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), that provided for optional finger or facial approval, is an upgrade of the card reader machine introduced by the Jega administration, alongside the Permanent Voter Card (PVC). Both measures brought some integrity to the electoral system. By the scheme, politicians who hired voters to cast multiple ballots were checkmated.
Under the Yakubu Mahmud administration, BVAS was brought in to check the rate at which voters failed to get accredited owing to the state of their thumbs. Besides, the new machine is enabled to transmit the result to the iREV where the general public could monitor development from the polling units.
By the development, it was expected that confidence in the electoral system would be built up.
However, even by design, the lawmakers fell short of fully digitalising the process. The BVAS machine or iREV could not collate the result. The paper trail system by which Forms EC8A from the polling units are taken to the ward, the local government and then state levels still prevailed in the 2023 elections.
There is no doubt that the process has to be tweaked ahead of the 2027 election. But, it must be acknowledged that the problem is more with operations, processes, planning and commitment of officials. Machines have to be operated by officials, and their judgment have to be trusted if Nigeria is to ride the storm. The election management body must therefore come up with an acceptable mode of recruitment, training, retraining, discipline and reward system. This is as important as improvement on technology.
As Professor Jega, a teacher of political science and former Vice Chancellor of the Bayero University, Kano, has pointed out, it is wrong to suggest that the 2023 general election is the worst in the country’s history. The 1964 federal election nearly set Nigeria ablaze, with political parties pitched against one another, regions at war and worse still, the then President, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, publicly on the warpath with the Prime Minister, Sir Abubakar Tafawa-Balewa.
The Eyo Esua-led election commission could not even agree on the integrity of the polls as members from the North insisted that the result declared must be upheld while those from the South kicked against it. That was the origin of the conflagration that consumed the First Republic.
The 1983 election was another election that could compete against the worst conducted in the world. The Justice Victor Ovie-Whiskey Commission literally rolled out the political tank for the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN), paving the way for the party to make inroads into the West and East that were strongholds of the opposition political parties. It was no surprise that the Second Republic quickly went the way of the first.
President Olusegun Obasanjo recruited Professor Maurice Iwu who practically deferred to the head of government as a soldier would to his Commander-in-Chief. As it was in 1983, so it was in 2007.
So, anyone with knowledge of conduct of elections in the country would agree with Professor Jega that the denigrated 2023 polls would actually rank among the best in the country. An analysis by the professor shortly after the February presidential election had laid out the basis for the conclusion as three political parties, the All Progressives Congress (APC), People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party (LP) shared the states almost equally, with New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP), taking control of Kano State.
We have to go beyond the usual blame-the-commission game. It is good that both houses of the National Assembly, international development partners and civil society organisations are waking up to the need for early review of the law and processes. However, it must be noted that the main culprits are politicians who would go to any extent to win. They will compromise the commission’s officials at polling units and collation centres, vote huge sums to induce voters, get security officials to turn the blind eye to malfeasance, and do all things to subdue or denigrate the judiciary. Unless something is done to checkmate such practices, the quest for credible polls will remain a mirage. The starting point is to ensure that all those found to have manipulated the last general elections are duly tried in the courts of law.
Focusing on amending the Electoral Act alone cannot perform the magic. Nigerians must rise to wake up the sleeping ‘giant’ well ahead of 2027.
The House of Representatives has said it will collaborate with agencies of government empowered by law to have subsidiary legislative functions, to perform their duties in line with the laws of the land.
Chairman of the House Committee on Delegated Legislation, Femi Bamisile, who spoke at the inaugural meeting yesterday, said his committee has been entrusted to ensure the agencies perform their lawmaking functions in alignment with the enabling acts, promoting transparency, accountability, and the general welfare of the Nigerian people.
Bamisile said: “Delegated legislation refers to laws made by bodies other than the parliament, but under authority derived from the parliament. It allows for the streamlined and efficient process of lawmaking, as it empowers specialised agencies with technical expertise to create laws in line with the broader objectives set out by the legislature.
“As we gather today, it is imperative to recognise the authority under which this committee operates. Section 62(1)of the Constitution outlines the workings of the House of Representatives, stating that the house shall sit in committees to carry out its functions. This provision emphasises the importance of committees in the legislative process, as they enable in-depth analysis and scrutiny of legislations…
“Subsidiary legislations are often highly specialised and technical in nature, requiring expert knowledge and experience. As lawmakers, we cannot possibly be expected to possess such intricate expertise in every field. Therefore, through delegated legislation, we delegate this power to those agencies and bodies that possess the necessary technical understanding. As a committee, our role is to ensure that these specialised laws are made within the confines of the enabling acts, adhering to due process and safeguarding the rights and interests of the Nigerian people…”
Palestinian Ambassador to Nigeria Abdullah Shawesh has called on the international community to stop the ongoing killings in Gaza.
Shawesh spoke on the backdrop of the Tuesday bombardment of the Baptist hospital, where over 500 civilians were killed.
No fewer than 3,000 people have died in Gaza since Israeli retaliation bombardment on Gaza following the surprise attack on Israel by the Hamas, the arm wing of the Palestinians.
He expressed his country’s willingness to return to the roundtable on the land dispute with Israel so as to reach an amicable resolution.
The envoy, who spoke in Abuja, maintained that “International law must be respected, especially international humanitarian law and human rights law”.
“There should be no exception or impunity for Israel, and it should not be above the law.
“It is time for the international community to stand firm and united in support of the international law.
“For everyone around the world should raise your voice loudly at this historical juncture.
“If not you, then who? If not now, when?”
Following the denial from the Israeli’s authorities of the Tuesday’s bombardment, the envoy said an international inquiry Commission be set up to expose those behind the dastardly act, which killed mostly women and children that took refuge in the hospital.
He said: “Let us create an international inquiry commission to be established by the United Nations, Human Right Council and African Union to determine where the bombardment came from”.
The envoy maintained that all the evidence on ground pointed to Israel and so the onus is on them to proof that they were not responsible for the Tuesday’s bombing.
He noted that Israel is in control of the airspace and are monitoring all the movements of the people in Gaza.
The envoy also noted that his country was not surprise that United States is supporting Israel, saying U.S. had used their veto power on the Security Council 80 times, with more than half of it against the Palestinian people.
Following the controversial amended Akwa Ibom Traditional Rulers Law, 18 Paramount Rulers across the three Senatorial Districts of Akwa Ibom State, have reaffirmed their support for the law.
In a joint statement issued Tuesday, October 17, the paramount rulers also disassociated themselves from the protests against the law while commending the state governor and state House of Assembly for the law.
“First of all, may we formally express our heartfelt appreciation to the Executive Governor of Akwa Ibom State, His Excellency, Pastor Umo Bassey Eno for assenting to the amended Traditional Rulers Law, Cap. 155 of 2022; as passed by the Akwa Ibom State House of Assembly.
“We equally extend our appreciation to the 7th Assembly for commencing the amendment processes and members of the 8th Akwa Ibom State House of Assembly for the passage of the law.
“In effect, the amended Law, which brought forth Akwa Ibom State Supreme Council of Traditional Rulers, has enhanced the prestige of the State Traditional Institution, thus situating our own appropriately at the realms of nobility as obtained in other parts of Nigeria.
“We stand therefore, individually and collectively, to categorically affirm the correctness of the amended Traditional Rulers Law, Cap. 155 of 2022.
“It would therefore be most dishonourable and unexpected of us as Royal Fathers to renounce or fake ill knowledge of what we all knew about and willingly accepted.
“In the light of this sacred fact, we totally disassociate ourselves from the inappropriate, misguided and unwholesome reactions orchestrated through protests, law suit and public statements against the amended Traditional Rulers Law, Cap 155 of 2022.
“Furthermore, it is to our chagrin to see the unpatriotic activities of some highly placed political figures who have decided to introduce uncharitable dimensions into a purely traditional matter. We kindly appeal to them to retrace their steps. Enough is enough of sowing discord between Ibibio, Annang, Oron and others.
“We wish therefore to urge our Royal Colleagues to tread the path of honour and avoid going against their oath of office and oath of allegiance to the Government of Akwa Ibom State of Nigeria. It must be noted that the sanctity of our traditional institution should not be traded or compromised at the altar of politics.
“It must be pointed out that His Eminence, Ntenyin (Dr.) Solomon Daniel Etuk, JP, CFR has effectively assumed office as President General of the Akwa Ibom State Supreme Council of Traditional Rulers in perpetuity, having been sworn in by the Executive Governor of Akwa Ibom State on September 23, 2023.
“Likewise, His Royal Majesty, Odidem Bassey Etim Edet, Paramount Ruler of Udung Uko Local Government Area has assumed office having been equally sworn into office as the Chairman of the Akwa Ibom State Supreme Council of Traditional Rulers by the Governor of Akwa Ibom State on September 23, 2023.
“Those engaging in dishonourable acts against the Akwa Ibom State Government and the Akwa Ibom State Supreme Council of Traditional Rulers should know that the swearing into offices of the President General and the Chairman have effects of Law and cannot therefore be wished away by mere pedestrian actions and vituperations”, the statement said.
Meanwhile, the state governor, Pastor Umo Eno has appealed for peace in the aftermath of the controversies trailing the amended law.
Governor Umo, who made the appeal while meeting with the Paramount Rulers at the Government House on Tuesday, said the meeting was another step in his earnest desire to make peace where there is war and infuse love where hatred abounds.
“As the Governor of this state, a mandate popularly obtained through the will of the people and the endorsement of God Almighty; and a Pastor by calling, I cannot and will not allow strife to persist, and if you check, that it has persisted, is not of my making.
“Recall that I was in attendance at a meeting convened by my predecessor in May this year where the issue of the Supreme Council of Traditional Rulers in our State was discussed.
“Recall also that there has been President’s General position created from 2021 and occupied by the Oku Ibom Ibibio, Ntenyin Solomon Etuk CFR. We can also sincerely recall that there was no comment, except one, from the Paramount Ruler of Itu.
“Thereafter, having assented to the law passed by the House of Assembly, I became aware of the protestations by some Paramount Rulers, and I immediately stood down the inauguration, rather inviting all of you to a meeting the morning of September 23, 2023.
“The aim of the meeting was to offer me an opportunity to listen to the pain points of those affected and for us to collectively reach a decision favourable to all. I waited for hours without the affected Paramount Rulers showing up for the meeting.
“Had that meeting held, all of these tensions would not have arisen in the first place. But you, our traditional fathers, whose office is established by law, appointed and funded by government, refused to attend the meeting or communicate your intended absence to me.
“Rather, you preferred to gather in clusters at politically sponsored settings to make very provocative statements and to pour libation against Government and her officials.
“Despite this obviously provocative response, I still offered an olive branch on Sunday, 24th September, at the State Thanksgiving service, where I asked that I be invited to your meeting so that we can discuss, since you spurned my invitation.
“Till today, I have not received any invitation from you, rather, I have read very inciting, provocative and inflammatory press releases, interviews and the sort.
“Today, I invited you to come let’s reason together, express our fears, concerns and demands in an atmosphere of brotherhood and unity, not acrimony and strife. I am calling on you to drop sentiments and let us discuss objectively in order to reach solutions that will help us not just today, but the generations unborn.
“As a leader, I have been very careful with the things I have said since this challenge surfaced because words are powerful and like a shot arrow, once spoken, cannot be retrieved.
“I am here informing you of my readiness to have this conversation with you and to walk with you on the path that must lead to the destination of peace and unity. But there is however an existing impediment- the law suit filed on this matter.
“With the pendency of this law suit, any in-depth discussion or intervention therein will be subjudice. Therefore, I urge you to remove this legal obstacle, cease all media and politically motivated media wars and return here let us amicably resolve this issue, to the satisfaction of all”, the governor said.
Akwa Ibom State chapter of the Civil Liberties Organisation (CLO) has said the amended Traditional Council Law Cap 55 was against Nigeria’s extant laws.
The controversial law grants perpetual leadership of the Traditional Rulers Council (TRC) on the Ibibio above other ethnic groups such as the Annang and Oro.
Chairman of the organisation, Mr. Godknows Njoku, at a news conference in Uyo yesterday said the new law contravened Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution as amended in 2023.
He described the law recently assented to by Governor Umo Eno as discriminatory and offensive in nature, “as it does not take into consideration other minority tribes in the state.
“We are of the view as a body that the House of Assembly should have consulted the extant laws of the country, especially with regard to Section 42 of the 1999 Constitution as amended in 2023, by looking at how it will affect other minority tribes. The law as it’s being passed now is discriminatory in nature; it is offensive.
“The matter is now in court, but we can safely say that the House of Assembly that we respect did not consider many things, especially the extant laws of the country before they came to that conclusion.
“We trust by God’s grace the court will do justice to it if this matter will continue. By the extent of its inconsistencies, it should be declared null and void. We are of the view that the traditional rulers should look at it and we call upon them to reason together and come up with one voice if they did not want it.
“The CLO is of the view to apply to join in the suit, but we may not join again, having considered the good intention of the governor who has indicated interest and has publicly said he does not intend to marginalise or witch-hunt any particular group of people in the state. That they should write to the state government if they did not want it.”
Njoku said the CLO in the state would have applied to be joined in the suit as plaintiff, adding that it rescinded its decision having seen the good intention of the governor, who had consistently told the traditional rulers to write to the government if they were not comfortable with the law.
Obviously, when Charles Dickens’ character in the 1838 classic novel, Oliver Twist, made a caricature of the law by comparing it to an ass, he must have had that very picture of the donkey at the back of his mind. Disgusted at the law, Mr. Bumble had taken a swipe at its obvious flaws by lamenting: “The law supposes that your wife acts under your direction. If the law supposes that, the law is an ass – an idiot.”
By the way, this expression was originally used by the English dramatist, George Chapman, in his 1654 play, Revenge for Honour, where it is rendered thus: “Ere he shall lose an eye for such a trifle…. For doing deeds of nature! I’m ashamed. The law is such an ass.”
But is the law really an ass? The kind of donkey your mind readily conjures whenever you feel that the legal system has been perverted against you? And, second and most fundamentally, to what extent is the law imbued with the perceived character of the ass?
We must state that the law is not always an ass. In fact, in most cases, it’s not. But in some instances, it is human beings that forcibly, deliberately, transform the donkey, the law, into a dumb and submissive creature so that we can ride it roughshod at the detriment of the common good. To satisfy our own base instincts.
In fact, the New World Encyclopaedia says of the ass: “Donkeys have a reputation for stubbornness, but much of this is due to some handlers’ misinterpretation of their highly developed sense of preservation. It is difficult to force or frighten a donkey into doing something it sees as contrary to its own best interest, as opposed to the horses who are much more willing to, for example, go along a path with unsafe footing.”
It adds that “Once a person has earned their confidence, donkeys can be willing and companionable partners and very dependable in work and recreation.” In a sense, these are the very characteristics of a justice system that has lived up to expectations as it has earned the confidence and trust of Nigerians.
At the heart of this discussion on the ‘assness’ or otherwise of the law are certain judgements delivered by some elections tribunals in Plateau and other states of the federation. Critics say that some of these rulings appear to be outlandish, preposterous and against the very letter and spirit of the extant 2022 Electoral Act they purport to uphold.
For instance, while most of the tribunals have, according to the Electoral Act, ruled that pre-electoral matters cannot be challenged by any individual or institution outside that very political party, a few others have given judgement to the contrary!
To the layman, the law appears to be wearing two contradictory faces. The much revered and hallowed temple of justice, which should protect and project the rule of law without any iota of fear or favour, has automatically demystified and rendered itself hollow. Its voice has lost its firmness, solemnness. It has become a danger to the very ideals it is constitutionally required to uphold.
Dissatisfied parties have since approached the National Judicial Council to seek redress. It goes without saying that this is a deep dent on the integrity of our system of adjudication as a whole.
While doing a preliminary background check on the origins of the expression ‘The law is an ass’ in the English-Grammar-Lessons (2022), I happened upon this interesting image: a blindfolded donkey with the scales of the law firmly balanced on its back. By the positioning of its ears (which are said to have a keen sense of hearing that they can detect sounds from 60 miles away), you can tell that it is very aware of its surroundings.
The law should not be dead to the truth and realities of its environment. Even when the law is an ass, should it not at least possess a conscience, a sense of morality to guide it towards upholding the highest standards of justice that can withstand the harshest scrutiny, even from the court of public opinion?
The Bench is now in the dock in Plateau State and other parts of the country.
We often prefer the path of least resistance by jumping on our horses, disenchanted, and gallop into oblivion. But, no sir! We cannot give up on this ass.
Apparently, these legal tussles are fast eroding the credibility and threatening the very foundations of our democracy. It is increasingly becoming much easier to ‘win’ elections through the courts than by the popular votes of the electorate.
There should be a lesson or two here for us all. He who profits from the spoils of the miscarriage of justice must watch out. Likewise, those who twist the law for personal gain.
Both shall taste of the bitter deserts of this travesty, sooner or later. Even if the wheels of justice grind so tortuously slow.
An injustice is never permanently buried. Willy-nilly, it resurrects someday to haunt those who concocted it. Justice and truth are as eternal as they are elemental, indestructible.
The universal image and symbol of justice is the blindfolded maid. So the distinguished men and women who sit in judgement over men must, while painfully blinding their physical eyes to all extraneous, perverse and self-serving pulls, keenly focus their inner vision on dispassionately wielding the gavel without fear or favour.
Of course, this is fraught with great personal danger to the Bench. But that is the profound sacrifice that goes with being a jurist in the first place. It is in that self-denial that their greatness ultimately lies.
We are wont to trifle with the fundamental notion of natural justice. But it’s at the bottom of all laws. It holds that the powerful must never trample on the God-given right of the weak to live and exist in a world that equally belongs to all. This is the matter at stake here.
Without adhering to the tenet of natural justice, we willingly hand over ourselves to the dictates of the law of the jungle where only the fittest survive. No, that is not the society our constitution envisages, with all of its imperfections.
The ass has an excellent memory, is highly intelligent and is as strong as a horse of the same size. A 2012 study by The Donkey Sanctuary found that donkeys can learn and problem-solve at the same pace as dolphins and dogs. Not only are they sociable and calm, they are capable of independent thinking and decision making.
We humbly submit that the law is indeed an ass. But that largely depends on whether the law acts according to the way Mr. Bumble experienced it or comports itself in a manner consistent with The Donkey Sanctuary’s enviable assessment.
The choice is yours to make.
Gyang is chairman of Journalists Coalition for Citizens’ Rights Initiative.
