The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Lawyers

  • Lawyers disagree over minimum wage

    Lawyers disagree over minimum wage

    What should be the minimum wage for lawyers working in law firms?

    This has become a hardnut for lawyers to crack as they expressed divergent views on the matter in Lagos.

    Among them, former chairman of Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) Lagos branch, Mr. Chijioke Okoli and former President of Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA), Mrs. Boma Ozobia differ on what should be the minimum wage for budding lawyers.

    Fielding questions from participants at the 6th annual mentoring programme for law students at the Lagos campus of the Law School organised by Sterlin Partnership Legal Practitioners, Okoli said it would not be in the professionals’ interest for principals to fix the minimum wage of young lawyers.

    He said the concern should be on how to empower the law firms and broaden their scope to make more money so that the principals will be compelled to pay their juniors a living wage because they make more money so that the principals will be compelled to pay their juniors a living wages. Okoli said asking principals to pay high wages to their juniors would discourage many principals from employing them.

    He asked that other professionals like accountants, estate surveyors and agents be stopped from doing lawyers’ jobs. “When lawyers and law firms do such jobs, it will enhance their capacities to pay higher wages to their juniors.”

    Disagreeing, Mrs. Ozobia said: “I disagree with Mr. Okoli because law is not practised in Nigeria alone, it is practised in about 54 countries of the world and there is a minimum wage for lawyers in England and Wales.” She called on the NBA leadership to look into the poor wages being paid to junior lawyers by senior members of the profession and find a lasting solution to it.

    Addressing the students earlier on the cannons and rules applicable to the judiciary in the administration of justice, Justice A. O. Dabiri of the Lagos High Court said the rules guiding the courts in reaching their decisions are stated in the law.

    Trials, he said, must be free and fair and based on the examination of witnesses. “The court must demonstrate virtues of honesty, integrity and if you are not in control of your court, lawyers will take the court over from you,” he said, adding that a judge must not only know the law, he must be courageous, hardworking and determined to do justice no matter whose ox is gored.

    A participant, Ms Femi Atilade, advised the students to start out after their call to the Bar with law practice. She said: “The advantage of starting with practice is that if everything else fails, you go back to practice to survive.”

    She said good communication skills, good manners, team playing spirit are very important qualities of a good lawyer. She advised young lawyers to have a very good knowledge of their industry, to know the long and short term goals of their organisations. “ Be patient, sacrifice a few years, build your network, get mentors and be an intern somewhere. Above all, pray to God for direction anything you want to do,” she said.

    Another participant Mrs. Ifeyinwa Azubuike said it was nice to be an in house counsel, but to make the best out of it and have insight into the practical side of law. She said clients enjoy in house counsel because of the high level of specialisation and efficiency, which is demonstrated in the performance of their work.

    Mrs. Azubuike said though in house counsel do not go to court, they enjoy satisfaction from what they do and being an in house counsel is not for everybody.

    She advised the students to ask themselves before going into practice whether they would like to become Senior Advocates of Nigeria or whether they would like to solve their clients commercial transaction problems.

    Commercial transactions, she said, is all about assisting your clients to successfully seal their commercial transactions. This, she said, is not for everybody, it is for a group of people who love commerce, economies and getting deals done.

    Mrs. Azubuike said lawyers in commercial transactions study beyond the documents that are passed over to them. It is not about winning the other side or loosing a case, it is about getting transactions sealed up for benefit of your clients.

    She advised students, who love commercial law transactions to go to a law firm that has very good mentorship scheme. “Research skills are very important in the life of an in house counsel, self motivation, commitment and a good plan are very crucial qualities of a good commercial lawyer. Find a way to distinguish yourself, be aware of transactions be ready to learn and be highly innovative,” she said.

    A member of Sterlin Partnerships, Mr. Isreal Aye advised students to make themselves employable. “You have to demonstrate that you have the potential to showcase what you have learnt, you need to show what you are bringing to the company, above all, try and make a value proposal,” Mr. Aye said.

    He continued: “Owning a law firm is entreneurship. Rules of professional practice do not allow you to run other practice with law practice, so, if you have passions for other pursuits, you better opt out of law practice. The key point is wherever you find yourself at the outset, give it your very best, then other opportunities will open up.”

    The President of the Students Representative Council (SRC) thanked Sterlin Partnerships for the initiative, which he said, has richly blessed the students by giving them focus, depth and direction in the vast profession of law.

  • Lawyers bid ex-NBA chief farewell

    Lawyers bid ex-NBA chief farewell

    Judges and lawyers converged on the foyer of the Lagos High Court, Igbosere, Lagos last week in honour of the late secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Lagos Branch, Mr. Babatola Eyitayomi Apata.

    Apata, 41, was involved in a motor accident while going to Ado Ekiti, the Ekiti State capital, to attend the NBA Executive Council meeting. He died shortly after he was discharged from the hospital.

    The valedictory service attracted top shots of the judiciary including the NBA President, Mr. OKey Wali (SAN); Justice Funmilayo Atilade; Justice Morenike Obadina; Justice R.I.B. Adebiyi; Justice Ebenezer Adebajo and Justice Sybil Nwaka, among others.

    Wali described Apata as a calm and optimistic young man of impeccable character and integrity.

    Wali, who was represented by the General Secretary, Emeka Obegolu, described Apata as a thoroughbred professional and an active Bar man who believed in professionalism.

    ‘’I am pained by the loss of a vibrant young man, I am pained by the death of a dynamic, young Bar man, lost in the course of service to his dear profession,’’ Wali said.

    He prayed  to God to  give his wife and other family members the fortitude to bear the irreparable loss.

    Chairman, NBA, Lagos branch, Mr. Alex Muoka described Apata’s death as a great loss to the bar. Morka urged lawyers to strike a balance between work and life, saying “lawyers seem to have little time for their health due to tight schedule at courts and office”.

    He remarked that lawyers in the state would  mourn Apata for a long time given his contributions to the bar in the state. “Apata  served the association well as its General Secretary in 2013,” he said.

    In his remarks, representative of the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lagos State, Mr. Lawal Pedro (SAN) said the late Apata was one of the promising young lawyers from the Lagos Bar.

    He described late Apata as an active Bar man whose conduct should be emulated.

    The representative of Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria, Mrs. Titilola Akinlawon (SAN) said Apata would be remembered for his uprightness and resourcefulness.

    Former NBA Lagos branch chairman, Mr. Taiwo Taiwo described the late Apata as a man who lived a very good life.

    He urged his colleague to give special attention to the families of those who lost their lives while serving the Association.

    ”Let me appeal to lawyers, we should always give our last respect to those who die in active service, those who die in the course of serving the Nigerian Bar Association,” he said.

    A former General Secretary of the Lagos Branch of the NBA, Mr. Seth Amaefule said Apata was a gentleman and someone who holds his views very strongly.

    Amaefule noted that in the suit he and some lawyers filed against the new NBA practicing fee, after the decision of the Court of Appeal, Apata was one of the resource persons he consulted for the way forward.

    “Although he did not want to associate openly because of his position at the NBA, but he still went ahead in giving me certain materials to use in the appeal to the Supreme Court. And unfortunately that was the last time I spoke with him,” he added.

  • Two human rights lawyers shot dead in Delta

    Legal practitioners in Delta state have been thrown into mourning following the gruesome assassination of two lawyers on Thursday.
    Renowned lawyer and human rights activist Mr Horrace Egbon Dafiogho and his junior colleague, identified as Sam Ekwajor, were shot dead along Ughelli – Ozoro road on Thursday.
    It was gathered that the duo were on their way to Ozoro, where they are defending suspects in a high profile kidnap case involving a prominent politician in the state, when they were killed.
    Although the circumstance surrounding the killing was yet unclear, it was gathered that the incident has led to shock and panic among legal practitioners in the state.
    The National Coordinator, Forum for Justice and Human Rights Defence, Mr Oghenejabor Ikimi, told our reporter he was stupefied by the development.
    He said, “It was last night that I just heard the news and it is very surprising to me. Why would anybody kill a lawyer and an activist who spends his time defending the less privileged in the society?”
    Our reporter gathered that prior to his death on Thursday the legal practitioner had raised the alarm over threat on his life.
    One his colleagues told our reporter, “He even told the judge hearing one of his cases that his life was being threatened.”

     

     

  • Lawyers to CJN: Tread with caution

    Lawyers to CJN: Tread with caution

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has sanctioned five judges for what it called ‘gross misconduct’ and ‘low performance.’ Its action brings to nine the number of judicial officers penalised since July, 2012 when Justice Aloma Mukhtar became its chairman following her appointment as Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN). Lawyers argue that though the effort to enhance ethical conduct among judicial officers is commendable, the big stick should be applied with caution. ERIC IKHILAE reports.

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has wielded the big stick, again, sanctioning former Acting President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Dalhatu Adamu and four judges.

    It suspended Justices Gladys Olotu (of the Federal High Court) and Ufot Inyang (Abuja High Court) and recommended that they be retired by President Goodluck Jonathan. It sent warning letters to Justices Adamu, A. A. Adeleye (Ekiti State High Court) and D. O. Amaechina (Anambra State High Court).

    They were accused of engaging in acts amounting to “gross misconduct.” In the case of Justices Olotu and Inyang, the NJC said its decision was informed by its findings after investigating thr petitions against them. In justice Olotu’s case, the Council said it found:

    •That she “failed to deliver judgment only to deliver same in Suit No. FHC/UY/250/2003, 18 months after the final address by all the counsel in the suit, contrary to the constitutional provisions that judgments should be delivered within a period of 90 days”;

    •That she “admitted before the Fact Finding Committee of the Council that investigated the allegations that she forgot she had a pending ruling to deliver in an application for joinder”;

    •That she “entertained a post-judgment matter in Suit No. FHC/UY/CS/250/2003 in Port Harcourt after delivering judgment, which made her functus officio” and

    •That in another case: Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/505/2012, “Hon. Justice Olotu failed to deliver judgment twice.”

    As regards Justice Inyang, the NJC said it found, among others, that he “included in his judgment, references to the Garnishee Proceedings, which came after the judgment had been delivered on December 20, 2011.

    It added that Justice Inyang “included the name of the counsel to the Federal Road Maintenance Agency (FERMA), Chief Chukwuma Ekomaru (SAN), who came into the matter after the judgment of December 20, 2011 was delivered.”

    Justice Inyang was said to have “recklessly signed a writ of execution, a day after delivering his judgment of December 20, 2011, the same day a Notice of Appeal and Motion on notice for stay of execution were filed.”

    The NJC said it found that the judge continued with the garnishee proceedings, despite application for stay of execution; and that before delivering his judgment of December 20, 2011, Justice Inyang “ignored a properly filed Motion on Notice for leave to file additional witness statement on oath.”

    Justice Adamu, who presides over the Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division, was warned for “deliberately absenting himself from duty”, which the Council said “is an act of gross misconduct contrary to the provisions of the Constitution and the Code of Conduct of Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

    The offence of Justices Adeleye and Amaechina was that of “very low performance.”

    This latest case brings to nine the number of judges that has so far been sanctioned since the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) and NJC Chairman Justice Aloma Mukhtar, assumed office on July 16, 2012.

    Others were Justices Thomas Naron (Plateau State High Court), Charles Archibong (Federal High Court), Abubakar Talba (Abuja High Court) and Okechukwu Okeke (Federal High Court). Justices Naron and Archibong were recommended for retirement; Justice Talba was suspended for 12 months; Justice Okeke was warned.

    Beside, the firmness with which the NJC now enforces the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers, the current leadership of the judiciary has also introduced some measures for eliminating identified institutional challenges.

    Some of them are the review of the Rules of Practice and Procedure and the issuing of Practice Directions to eliminate trial delays. Each judicial officer’s performance is now being evaluated based on key performance indicators to enhance efficiency.

    Developments in the judiciary since the emergence of its current leadership have attracting divergent views, with some praising the forces driving the changes. Others called for caution, warning that a possible derailment could occur.

    Those in support have termed the seeming frequency of sanctioning judicial officers and the various initiatives introduced in recent time as an attempt to ensure discipline among officers and enhance performance.

    They also see the developments as a realisation of the CJN’s Justice Muktar pledge, on assumption of office, to cleance the judiciary.

    During her screening by the Senate on July 11, 2012, admitted that the temple of justice had been desecrated by some elements.

    “As at now, it is very bad and I am saddened by it. I will try. I don’t want to sound like a broken record. I will try to make sure that the confidence reposed in the judiciary, as it was before, is returned. I will try to ensure that the bad eggs that are there are flushed out. That there will be a cleansing by the NJC based on petitions.

    “It is sad that the ordinary man on the street thinks and feels that he cannot get justice. This is because of the situation we find ourselves. I will ensure that this perception changes,” Justice Mukhtar had said.

    Critics, however, are of the view that there is the need for caution to prevent a situation where judicial officers begin to exhibit what they termed symptoms of excessive control, which include demotivation.

    They argued that a situation where a judge begins to look behind his or her shoulders, before exercising his or her discretion in taking decisions, would be antithetical to the known tradition of judicial independence.

    Critics noted that a cleanse and upright judiciary cannot be attained under the prevailing practice where judges’ appointment and promotion are influenced from outside the system.

    They observed that most judges toil daily to ensure balance between objectivity and pressure from the interests that influenced their appointment and promotion.

    To ensure a cleanse and an upright judiciary, critics said emphasis should be on how to ensure a system that abhors patronage but rewards hard work and merit.

    Lawyers, including Dr. Abubakar Uthman, Johnson Daramola, Anthony Nwachukwu and Gideon Tokori are of the view that while the current reforms in the judiciary are welcomed, it must be carried out with caution to avoid a situation where the ‘baby is thrown away with the bath water.’

    Uthman said while the promptness with which the NJC addresses petitions against judges is commendable, “the Judiciary must evolve a system that effectively screens out frivolous and malicious petitions from meritorious ones that require attention.”

    He urged the NJC to always subject petitions and complaints against judicial officers to thorough scrutiny before taking action.

    Daramola stressed the economic implication of having many retired judges, who draw retirement benefits from the public fund. He said cases where judges are retired prematurely, unwittingly populates the rank of retired judges. “In such cases, we lose their services prematurely and yet, pay them retirement benefits for life.”

    He said those, whose cases are proved to be bad, and are found to have breached their oath of office and committed gross misconduct, should be sacked outrightly.

    “The idea of compulsory retirement is like giving soft landing to people, who are found wanting,” he said.

    Nwanchukwu contented that since Nigeria is reputed as a corrupt nation, the judiciary should not, in a bid to prove to the world that it is better than the other sectors, over subject its personnel to scrutiny.

    “This can result in loss of self-confidence and independence of mind on the part of the judges. Why is the NJC harsh on judges when the Executive pampers the rogues among them?

    “Don’t we read in the papers and see on television how these ministers loot the nation’s treasury blind and yet, the President looks the other way or at best reluctant to sanction them? The NJC should stop being quick to fire or sanction erring judges. They should be given opportunities to make amend.

    Tokori advised that the NJC, under Justice Muktar should not be hasty in wielding the big stick. He observed that more judges are being sanctioned now than before. He wondered how many will still be affected before the CJN retirees later this year.

    “The lady (CJN) should be cautious. Every wrong should not end in compulsory retirement. Some of those, who have been sacked, are seen by some of us as good materials, who ought to be encouraged. These people are faced with a lot of pressure and tempting offers. It really takes the grace of God not to fall for such tempting offers as a judge in Nigeria,” Tokori said.

     

  • Lawyers petition CJN over appointments in Abuja High Court

    Lawyers petition CJN over appointments in Abuja High Court

    A group, the  League of Solicitors Against Injustice and Official Victimisation,  has petitioned the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Aloma Mukhtar over alleged promotion of ethnicity in the appointment of administrative and judicial staff by the Chief Judge of Abuja High Court, Justice Ibrahim Bukar.

    The group  urged the CJN to set up a committee to urgently investigate all the fundamental issues raised in their petition.

    In the petition dated December 5, 2013, the group alleged that the Federal Character provision in Sections 13 and 14 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was not followed in the appointments made by the Abuja Chief Judge.

    Sections 13 and 14 of the 1999 Constitution states that: “It shall be the duty and responsibility of all organs of government, and all authorities and persons, exercising legislative, executive, judicial powers to conform to, of serve and apply the provisions of this chapter on this constitution.

    And that, “The composition of the government of the federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a manner as to reflect the Federal Character of Nigeria and the need to promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few states or from ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or any of its agencies.”

    Justice Bukar, the group alleged, acted in a way to show that he is oblivious of or insensitive to the provisions of the constitution in his recent appointments of staff of the judiciary.

    The lawyers listed  10 departments in the FCT High Court where most of the appointments reflected people from one geo-political part of the country.

    In the petition signed by its executive secretary, Mr. Bamidele Ogundele, the group pointed out that only two of the departments, Planning, Research and Statistics and Litigation are headed by southerners while the remaining eight departments are manned by northerners.

    The petition gave the identity of the departments held by northerners to include Finance and Supply; Administration; Abuja Multi-Door Court; Magistracy; Return Cases; Probate; Information Technology and Library.

    The group alleged  that the Chief Judge retained the Director of Finance, Alhaji Ibrahim Buba,  a retired civil servant because he is on contract.

    They claimed that the only reason for not allowing a serving civil servant to be in that position is because the person who would have occupied it was from the south.

    “Most importantly, the above was the position of things until November 21, 2013, when a new department was created by the Chief Judge from the existing litigation department. The Chief Judge promptly made Hajiya Zainab Mohammed Fufore the head of that department. She is also a northerner.

    “But the fact that she is a northerner is not the problem. The problem is that Hajiya Zainab Mohammed Fufore is not the most senior person to occupy that position. She is on Grade Level 15 as an Assistant Chief Registrar 1 at the FCT High Court when there are more than six people who are senior to Hajiya Zainab Mohammed Fufore and who are on Grade Level 16 as Deputy Chief Registrars”.

    The petition  was copied to the Chairman, Senate Committee on Federal Character; his House of Representatives counterpart; the National Chairman of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA); all members of the National Judicial Council; the Executive Secretary, Civil Liberty Organisation (CLO) and the President, Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR).

    It posed three questions:

    – What are the criteria for the appointment of contract staff when there are highly competent staffers in the service?

    –  What are the criteria for the appointment of Hajiya Fufore over six highly dedicated senior staffers that had been working tirelessly, relentlessly and assiduously over the years and

    –  Why the incumbent Chief Judge appears to have continued in the ethnic policy of  his former boss (names with-held)?

    When contacted, the Public Relation Officer (PRO), FCT High Court, Mrs. Tabita Kangiwa confirmed the existence of the petition, but stressed that the issues raised in it are not new and are baseless.

    Kangiwa said the court would prefer not to comment on the petition since it is before the NJC and await the outcome of NJC’s handling of the petition.

    An NJC official, who sought not to be named, confirmed that the petition was before the NJC, but advised that all parties should await NJC’s decision on it.

    “NJC will look at the issues raised by the petitioners, call for respnse from the FCT High Court’s management, and reach a decision one way or another.

    “Until that happens, there is nothing I can say about the matter,” he said.

  • NBA Presidency: South West lawyers forum crisis deepens

    NBA Presidency: South West lawyers forum crisis deepens

    The crisis rocking the South West Lawyers forum(Egbe Amofin Odua), which ia a unified body of yoruba lawyers in the South West, deepened yesterday as the Mrs Priscilla Kuye (SAN)-led screening committee of the forum was unable to come up with the much expected consensus candidate for the zone.

    Addressing journalists shortly after the four hours meeting, Kuye explained that the committee made up of chairmen of the 25 branches within the zone, decided to stay action on recommending any candidate while agreeing to report back to the larger house.

    She said the decision was taken due to six petitions written against the committee, which she regretted, contained allegations too weighty to be ignored.

    The Nation gathered that wo of the contenders, Mrs Funke Adekoya(SAN) and Niyi Akintola (SAN)had on friday announced that they would no more subject themselves to the committee, stressing that the committee had been compromised.

    Adekoya had alleged that some of the committee members, especially some of the branch chairmen had been financially induced to favour a particular candidate, while Akintola had said: “a situation where a senior member of the bar is being screened by a legal practitioner with less than 5 years post call experience simply because he/she is a branch chairman is unacceptable to me”

    Although some branch chairmen present at the meeting of the screening committee yesterday were disatisfied with the houses refusal to simply “adopt Dele Adesina (SAN) who had been “humble” and “respectful” to the committee, Kuye maintained that such action would jeopardise the unity of the forum.

    “We received six petitions, two from Adekoya and Akintola and four each from Okitipupa, Badagry, Ikorodu and Ogbomoso branches. While some of the branches say their chairmen do not have their mandate the two contestants allege financial inducement and inelligibility of some committee members to screen them on the basis that they are too young”

    “This allegations are weighty and capable of dividing the group. We would be further splitting the Egbe if we just go ahead and screen one candidate. Let’s understand that the unity and integrity if the Egbe is at stake”she said

    Kuye went further that there was need to look into the allegations levelled against her committee which included financial inducement.

    “Why would a lawyer of my calibre, with all the long years of reputation I have built over the years will not allow my name to be soiled in the face of such weighty allegations” she said.

  • Much ado about a letter

    Much ado about a letter

    Since he received the letter of the 11 defecting Senators from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC), Senate President David Mark has sat on it. Last week at a closed door session, he said he could not read the letter because of a court order. Did the court restrain him from reading the letter? The APC says the court did not. Lawyers believe that he should read the letter. Will he? What happens if the case he referred to is not decided before the 2015 elections? Adebisi Onanuga takes lawyers’ views.

    It is a simple matter of reading a letter, but Senate President David Mark has made a mountain out of a mole hill. For weeks, he has sat on the letter of the 11 defecting Senators from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to the All Progressives Congress (APC). In the letter, the Senators are seeking to inform their colleagues that they are now in APC.

    Mark has declined to read the letter because, according to him, there is a court order restraining him from doing so. He said he would seek legal advice on the matter. Mark said since the issue is in court, his hands are tied by Order 53 (5) of the Senate Standing Rules, which states: “Reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending in such a way as might in the opinion of the President of the senate prejudice the interest of parties thereto.”

    Some questions arise: Is the Senate President’s hands really tied as he claimed? With the registration of APC members going on, must the letter be read before the senators can register? What will happen if the court case Mark referred to is not resolved before 2015 elections? What is the way out?

    The senators who defected are led by Bukola Saraki (Kwara Central). Others are Shaba Lafiagi (Kwara North); Mohammed Ndume (Borno South); Danjuma Goje (Gombe Central); Abdullahi Adamu (Nasarawa West); Magnus Abe (Rivers South East) and Wilson Ake (Rivers West). Others are Bindo Jubrilla (Adamawa North), Abdullahi Gobir (Sokoto East) and Alhassan Aisha Jummai (Taraba North).

    Their January 29 letter to Mark reads: “We the undersigned Senators of the Federal Republic of Nigeria elected under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) wish to notify you that we have severally and jointly joined the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    “This action and decision is as a result of the division and factionalisation in the Peoples Democratic Party that sponsored our election into the Senate.

    “In view of the above, we write to inform you that following the division and factionalisation in the PDP, we have formally joined the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    “This communication is made pursuant to Section 68 (1) (g) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) for your information, guidance and record purposes.”

    Saraki submitted the letter to Mark at plenary, but it was not read. Mark was said to have rebuffed Saraki ‘s  request  to invoke Order 14, which deals with Privileges, to read the letter.

    Rather than reading the letter, Mark was said to have noted that the planned defection had been caught under Order 53(5) of the Senate Standing Rules, which states that the Senate may not mention any issue already before the court if the Senate President believes that such a mention would jeopardise the suit.

    But the defecting Senators were said to have argued that the Mark should not tie his hands with court matters, so as not to set a precedent that can not be sustained.

    Saraki and his colleagues, it was said, argued that their letter was not debatable, adding that reading it does not amount to a violation of the court injunction or Order 53(5) of the Senate Standing Rules.

    Mark reportedly stood his ground that he would not allow the Clerk of the Senate nor Saraki to read the letter.

    It was said that Mark took this position  because  the leadership of the Senate had earlier indicated that there could not be group defection, as every senator was supposed to come by way of personal explanation as contained in Order 43 of the Senate Standing Rules.

    However, the impasse caused by the refusal to read the letter has led to a division in the Senate as some senators loyal to the ruling party  are mounting pressure on Mark to invoke Section 68(1) (g) of the 1999 Constitution and declare the defecting senators’ seats vacant. But, to the APC, there is no court order barring the 11 former PDP senators from defecting to the party.

    The party’s  Interim National Publicity Secretary, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, said the existing court order is to the effect that the Senate President and the Speaker of the House of Representatives should maintain the status quo n defecting lawmakers.

    “What this order means is that neither the President of the Senate nor the Speaker of the House can declare vacant the seats of the defecting lawmakers. It does not mean that the letter of notification from defecting members cannot be read on the Floor of the chambers,” he said.

    APC said the argument that the defecting letter cannot be read on the Floor, so as not to contravene the Senate’s Standing Rules that precludes the Upper Chamber from discussing any matter that is already in court, does not apply in the case.

    “We are not asking that the issue of the defection should be discussed or debated on the Floor of the Senate. All we are saying is that the Senate President should read the letter of notification. The coast is very clear for this to be done, and the Senate President is duty bound to do so,” the party said.

    The party  maintained that the 11 senators can no longer be prevented from defecting from the PDP to the APC and that it is too late in the day for anyone to stall the move on the basis of a non-existent court order or a Standing Rule that will only be operational if, indeed, there is a court order expressly concerning the senators’ letter.

    “The act of defection by the 11 senators took place the moment they handed their letter to the Senate President at 10 am on Wednesday, January 29, 2014 whether or not the Senate President goes ahead to read the letter.

    “Therefore, trying to stall the defection by stonewalling on the letter or attempting to secure a dubious injunction, especially when our lawyers were not served the motion papers until about 4pm of the same Wednesday, is like seeking to abort a pregnancy when the baby has already been born.

    “The existing court order that the Senate President and the House Speaker should maintain the status quo actually strengthens the letter written by the Senators who defected, because it says that their seats cannot be declared vacant until the issue has been determined, hence their defection letter should be read without delay,” the APC said.

    Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Media and Publicity, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, however, told reporters last week that as a way out of the logjam, Mark has been mandated to seek legal advice on the matter.

     

    Lawyers speak

    Lawyers who spoke on the issue agreed with the APC, saying there was no legal hurdle barring the Senate from reading the letter.

    To them, Mark’s position is not necessarily because of the law, but one intended to buy more time for the ruling  party Chairman, Adamu Mu’azu, who is on a reconciliation mission to bring back aggrieved party members. They argued that the matter at hand was political and as such required political solution.

    Others, however, said Mark was only applying the law as expected of him in a situation like this.

    The legal experts included Constitutional lawyers Fred Agbaje; Ike Ofuokwu; Chairman, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Ikeja Branch, Monday Ubani; Lagos lawyer Ikechukwu Ikeji and Executive Director, Legal Defence and Assistance Project (LEDAP), Mr. Chino Obianwu.

    Agbaje urged Mark to stand on the side of constitutionalism as against dirty party politics.

    “Where in Section 68 of the Constitution dealing with tenure of legislators is the requirement of letter writing?  Couldn’t the defection be done orally on the Floor of the house? Where is the freedom of association in all this?

    “The issue of letter, which David Mark is glamourising and dramatising, is a mere additional mathematics which has nothing to do with the fact that the affected legislators had defected.

    “The pending judicial proceedings has nothing to do with the defection, which in the eyes of equity had been done!”

    Ubani said Mark was playing out a script and that it was, unfortunately, that of his political party.

    ”His hands are not tied as alleged.  On the contrary, his political party has tied his hands, his mouth including his legs. The rules he quoted does not apply here,” he said.

    Ubani advised the defecting senators to register with their new party as it is in line with equity. He maintained that the defecting senators are already, in spirit and in truth, members of the APC, only that the Senate President is bowing to his political party’s pressure in refusing to do the needful.

    To him, the case in court will either be thrown out or will be resolved in favour of the defecting senators.

    “We have several decided cases in favour of the defecting senators. It is only a matter of time. PDP is embroiled in crisis, they know it, the whole world knows it. They are just wasting their time. The president was in Sokoto to receive a defected former governor of the state, Attahiru Bafarawa with fanfare. What is good for the goose, is equally good for the gander,” he stressed.

    Obianwu does not agree that reading of the letter of intention of the defecting senators will affect the case in court.

    “In what way will reading out the letter be detrimental to the pending litigation? Clearly, in no way. There is nothing judicially prejudicial about what is already a public knowledge that the senators have joined another political party.

    “There’s no injunction from the court restraining their joining their new party. Is there any legal reason for not joining the new party? There is none,” he said.

    According to Obianwu, the Constitution guarantees the right to freedom of association. The Constitution provides that a legislator can defect to another party without loosing his or her seat if the former party is fractionalised.

    “It is clear that the PDP is fractionalised. There is no legal basis for the Senate President to refuse the senators to declare their new party in the Senate.

    “There has been so many legislators that cross carpeted in the past even under President Mark. There is no basis for the Senate President to take advantage of the privilege of his office to withhold the reading of the letter of the senators.”

    Ofuokwu said that it was immaterial whether the letter of the 11 defecting senators is read on the Floor of the senate or not.

    “So far as it has been handed over and accepted by the Senate President, it is enough to validate their defection,” he said.

    He said the conduct of the Senate President was simply tantamount to parliamentary tyranny and an act of legislative rascality.

    “The earlier members of the National Assembly appreciate and understand that no standing order whatsoever can override constitutional provisions, the better for our democracy.

    “Any bye law of any kind  or standing order of the Senate that is in conflict with the constitutional provision as in this case where freedom of association is guaranteed is, to the extent of its inconsistency, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    “The Senate President by relying on a senate standing rule, which he has jettisoned severally in the past, is only acting out a script of the ruling PDP and he is only attempting to abort a pregnancy that is already successfully delivered.

    “The 11 senators do not need the letter to be read publicly in the House before registering and participating as APC members. The Senate President’s hands are not tied in anyway. Its all about self preservation of his position even when it is inimical to our democracy”, he said.

    “What legal advice can a Senate that parades lawyers and even a member of the Inner Bar be seeking for many days?” he asked.

    Ikeji, however, espressed a divergent view, saying it was disrespectful to a court to do anything that would render its eventual judgment nugatory or merely academic.

    “This is a very popular principle of law enunciated in the case of OJUKWU v. MILITARY GVERNR OF LAGOS STATE. Once parties have submitted their dispute to the court, they must hold all actions regarding the dispute until the court gives its final decision.

    “If the senators had gone to court to restrain the Senate President or anyone from declaring their seats vacant, the case will also affect any person sued or any person who has knowledge of the case.

    “The Senate President is a party to the case, so he is very right in not acting on the letter if he finds his action on the afore-referred senate rules and the court case, especially in view of the opposing contentions regarding the purport of Section 68 (1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, which provides for division in a party or merger as the only grounds upon which a senator or a member of the House of Representatives can defect without losing his or her seat.

    “The appropriate thing to do for the senators is to withdraw the case and allow the law take its course and, if they disagree, they can then go to court.

    “In my view, I think the Senate President’s hands may, indeed, be tied since he may be adopting a reconciliatory tactic. I also think that what the senators want to do amounts to approbation and reprobation, wanting to eat their cake and still have it.

    “If the court says maintain status quo, the appropriate question to ask is, what is the status quo? There is no doubt that the senators are already in APC. They are already body and spirit members of APC.

    “Nobody can stop them in that regard, but inside the Senate chambers and until the case is finally dispensed with, they remain within the ambit of status quo meaning they still remain in PDP and they still keep their seats irrespective of whether the Senate President wants to declare their seats vacant or not. Those two things must go together,” he argued.

    Ikeji also said the Senate President cannot declare the seats of the defecting senators vacant for now until the case is decided and that they remain in PDP. Likewise, he said status quo simply means the position of things before the dispute arose.

    He noted that it is not a must that the letter of the defecting senators be read before they register with their new political party.

    According to him, while they can register with their new party, they must relinquish everything concerning their old parties since it has been held that there are no two PDPs. That, he said, is the intendment of Section 68(1) (g) of the Constitution.

     

    The way out

    According to Agbaje, the only way out is for Mark to read the letter and “ let my people go in peace”. “Why is PDP scared?,” he asked.

    Ubani advised that the PDP should stop heating the polity. “Right things should be done to avoid political crisis in the country. Let the law of the land be supreme over and above individual whims and caprices. My comment is without prejudice to how genuine and people-motivated these defections are”, he said.

    Obianwu, on the other hand, counselled Mark against using his position to create tension in the Senate. He advised Mark to allow the letter be read on the Floor of the House so that the nation could move forward.

    Ikeji, however, said the best way out of the impasse was for the parties to wait for the final decision of the court or the senators can just vacate their seats and insist on immediate election to fill in the vacancies where they shall then offer themselves for re-election. That is the moral and ethical thing to do.

    “The power to declare a seat vacant should be vested in INEC to whom all notices of defection shall be sent, on individual basis, for them to ascertain whether such defections qualify for the affected seats to be declared vacant or not.

  • ‘I will combat unemployment among lawyers,’ says Akintola

    ‘I will combat unemployment among lawyers,’ says Akintola

    Chief Niyi Akintola, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and contender for the presidency of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), spoke with journalists in Lagos. The pro-democracy activist unveiled his agenda, promising that his five-point agenda will solve unemployment among lawyers and reposition the legal profession, among other things. Assistant Editor ADEKUNLE YUSUF was there. Excerpts:-

    The choice of next Nigeria Bar Association President has been zoned to the Southwest and we learnt that ‘Egbe Amofin Oodua’ (Association of Yoruba Lawyers) has embarked on the search for a candidate. Has the body endorsed any candidate?

    The Egbe Amofin Oodua has had two meetings on this issue of NBA President candidacy. The first meeting held in Abeokuta while the second held last Saturday in Ibadan. The body set up a screening committee, headed by former NBA President, Mrs. Priscilla Kuye and the committee is expected to submit its report on February 8, 2014. The decision of the committee is still subject to ratification of members. So, for now, there has not been anyone endorsed by the body.

    You once ventured into politics when you vied for membership of Oyo State House of Assembly and you later abandoned politics. Why are you eyeing the NBA President position now?

    After the military left in 1999, we discovered that the civil society groups that spearheaded the struggle abandoned the terrain for all sorts of charlatans and the implication of that is this state of quagmire which we found ourselves. Today, we are facing multi-various problems within the legal system; prominent among the challenges is the quality of lawyers that are joining the profession today. Of course, the standard of legal practice has to do with education. Our education system has collapsed because I have seen a Master Degree holder who claimed to be a lawyer but could not construct a simple sentence, a lawyer that cannot even prepare a motion. I believe such person could be found in journalism profession too and other sectors. The last call to the bar is over 5,000 lawyers and as at today, we still have about 110,000 lawyers to about 168 million people. It is not the question of having too many good lawyers; we are facing gross unemployment of lawyers. On my Blackberry for instance, I have over 100 applications by young lawyers looking for job. How these boys and girls got my number I don’t know, but they claimed they cannot get those of us who have established ourselves in the profession so easily. There are some among these young lawyers, after five years of being called to the bar, they don’t have work to do. It is as serious as that and I intend to tackle that if I become the NBA president. I’ve been to different international fora in Canada, Singapore, USA, South Africa and some other country and I discovered that something is missing about law profession in our country. Sometimes last April, I was in South Africa, and we learnt that a Law Chamber earned the sum of $5.8 million in a legal year. We discovered that the earnings of all law chambers in Nigeria put together is not up to that. In fact, in South Africa, we discovered that their former president, W. D. Clark still runs a law chamber in Cape Town. I was there; I saw things with my eyes. In South Africa, you can see a chamber having as many as 500 lawyers; some are having more than this number. But, we in Nigeria are yet to key-in into what is going on in developed environment. We have been acquiring experience year in year out. The rules guiding law practice in those developed countries ensure there is enough for everybody. We can solve the gross unemployment problem in this sector if proper rules are put in place. So, I intend to combat unemployment among lawyers if I become the NBA president.

    Apart from issue of unemployment among lawyers as you’ve stated, what other challenges confront practice of the profession?

    Like I said earlier, our educational system is in shambles. It is garbage in, garbage out. While we are in school in those days, we made it a point of duty to read newspapers everyday and we gained a lot from columnists like Sad Sam, Comrade Oyebola and others like that. In those days, the columnists set agenda for the country. Today, the reverse is the case even with journalism profession. The standard has fallen that we no longer recommend any newspaper to any group of students. What we are getting now is appalling and it is not limited to legal profession. We can change that for the better because there is no reason why experienced lawyers, particularly the SANs cannot teach at the Faculty of Law of our universities. That is the practice all over the world but here in Nigeria, we lay much emphasis on certificate and not on what you know. We need to tap the resources because we have them in abundance.

    What are your plans for NBA?

    I want to restrain myself from talking on what I wish to do if I become the NBA president. Mind you, I have to be careful and not let out my cat from the bag. What I can tell you for now is that my manifesto is ready. I have five-point agenda that I strongly believe that they are capable of solving virtually all the challenges confronting law practice in this country. I intend to fight corruption. I commend the current leadership of the judiciary because in the last one year, they have done a lot in that regard. They have done self-cleansing within the legal profession. If other arms of government can take a cue, issue of corruption will be drastically reduced in this country. The issue of corruption in the legal profession is being over-dramatised by the media. In fact, it appears some electronic media don’t have any other thing to report beyond corruption in the judiciary. They don’t even know that nine out of every ten allegations made cannot be verified. That is why those of us who are courtroom lawyers stay away from television stations to do any analysis on any issue. What kind of lawyer will have time to go to television studio in the morning between Monday and Friday to do analysis on issues? We referred to this type of lawyers as ‘Television Lawyer’ who cannot move any motion in their life but are fond of staying at television studio only to castigate a judge or lawyer on an issue they knew nothing about. We cannot find their name in any Law Report and these are lawyers that the media celebrate most. Each time NBA tries to sanction them, they will hide under freedom of speech. They are one of the greatest challenges the law profession is facing here in Nigeria.

    Why do you think you’re the best for the job from Southwest zone?

    Ninety-nine percent of my colleagues are courtroom lawyers, and I am a courtroom lawyer too.  I’ve taken part in NBA activities for years; I’ve been in the profession as a virile lawyer for decades. I know much about NBA and its politics and I run four chambers located in Lagos, Ibadan, Port-Harcourt and Abuja, the Federal Capital. I’ve been operating in Abuja since 2001 and I’ve assisted so many lawyers to move forward in the profession. I’ve travelled far and wide and got exposed to professionalism in law practice.  Let me tell you, the best of lawyers around are not Bar activists.  People don’t even know or hear about those lawyers that are making cool money from the profession and they have been living flamboyant life. Their philosophy is, see no evil, say no evil and hear no evil. They have a choice but I am not out for that. I’ve been an activist all my life and I have a choice too; to keep watching and allow things to go from bad to worse, but I’ve involved in struggle for long. I cannot fold my arms and watch things get worse beyond this level. Under my leadership, if I become NBA president, with the support of my colleagues, I will make change happen. NBA is going to experience positive change, mark my word. I can assure you on that. There is going to be revolution in Nigeria’s legal profession.

    Are you prepared for the financial expenses to go round the country and solicit lawyer’s support for your contest?

    Well, I won’t tell you it is not costly to run any election if I must be frank. It’s not going to be a tea party. Even touring the 104 branches across the country to contest for NBA president position is much more strenuous than contesting for position of a governor of a state because the entire 104 branches are your constituency. And each time one is going, he needs to go with some people. So the cost of accommodation and logistics are there to take care. To answer your question straight, it is expensive to contest but I’ll rely on goodwill of my colleagues.

    Some of your predecessors have lofty ideas like you before coming on board, but because of interference from within and outside, their hands are tied. What are you going to do differently to ensure your hands are not tied while in office?

    It is because they allow their hands to be tied. Let me say this; it all depends on individual concern. Look, at where I am now, look at where I am coming from, go and read about me. I’ve not been known to be one that will compromise. The NBA president position is not for profit making and our existence is not tied to any government subvention.  Some people might have taken or are ready to take government briefs; I am not against anybody doing that. Every lawyer has his or her own client. As a matter of fact, it’s unethical not to take brief if some conditions are met. Even, a lawyer should not deny an armed robber his service no matter how bad the situation may be. It’s justice according to the law not according to morality. That is why people don’t understand lawyers when they render service to certain group of people. To that extent, every lawyer is free to take brief from whosoever needs his or her service. A lawyer is like a taxi driver; whoever flags him down and can pay his fare would be taken to his destination.

    Still on interference, at NBA, there has not been a leader without lofty ideas but   the implementation of these ideas has always been their challenge. How would you go about seeing your ideas implemented without hindrances?

    I can assure you that there will be change this time around. I am not the type that runs away from challenge. I am a professional; I am not in a competition with anybody. I don’t want to be Aliko Dangote or Femi Otedola. All I aspire to be is Afe Babalolas of this world and his likes. That is my ambition. I am a professional and I like to work within that confine as a professional. I found myself comfortable being in the midst and work for the people being oppressed. That is why I am being called opposition lawyer by some people because I’ve defended people like Chief Rasheed Ladoja, Adams Oshiomole and so many people like that. These are people who are not moneybags. The struggle has always been part of my life. For years, I was a counsel to the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Nigeria Union of Teachers (NUT). It has been like that.

    Do you have a specific progr-amme in terms of mentoring the younger ones in the profession?

    Of course yes! I have five-point agenda that I will pursue vigorously if I become NBA president. The mentoring of the up-coming lawyers occupies number three on my agenda. Mentoring of the younger lawyers is lacking by now. I got trained in Ibadan where I was carefully mentored by my seniors. I was trained to be humble in everything. For instance, before I bought my first car, a Beetle, I have to seek approval of my senior in the chamber. Even, after I purchased it, I have to take it back to him for prayers and graduated from that to Peugeot 504, to Peugeot 505, to Mercedes Benz. Our growth during our time is gradual. I trained purely on litigation, my foray into maritime, oil and gas takes almost nine years. In everything we do during our time, we’re modest. The younger ones in the profession do not want to do all what we did in the beginning.  If you investigate the number of lawyers being tried by the disciplinary committee of NBA, they fall in the category of the young lawyers. Some of them embezzled people’s money; some called themselves property consultants. These are not part of the profession because we didn’t meet it that way. When I started, I worked for three consecutive months without receiving salary. Today, the younger ones are not ready to do that. They only care to live big.

    What do you think can be done to resolve the thorny issue of prison congestion?

    If you look at prosecution system in Nigeria and our criminal justice system, you will see that the bane of our criminal system is at the level of poor prosecution, even in EFCC. That is the immediate and remote cause of prison congestion. Part of my own programme to solve the issue of prison congestion is to ensure that only lawyers prosecute people in all the courts across the country; not the police. When you look at the preparation and the proof of evidence by the prosecution, you will be wondering whether the people handling the prosecution are serious. With the collaboration of my colleagues, the IG and other stakeholders, I am going to sell that idea. Once we are able to amend the law in that regard with the collaboration of the National Assembly, it is like killing three birds with just one stone. We will have tackled the issue of prison congestion, human rights abuses and unemployment/underemployment among lawyers.

     

  • How to make Cybercrime Bill work, by lawyers

    How to make Cybercrime Bill work, by lawyers

    The Federal Government has presented to the National Assembly a Bill for a law to, among others, punish cyber criminals. Lawyers are seeking what they call a critical scrutiny of the bill to ensure that adequate measures are taken to prevent rights abuses. ERIC IKHILAE reports.

    As a measure against growing insecurity, the Fed eral Government has presented to the National Assembly a Bill for an Act to prohibit cybercrimes.

    The Bill, titled: Cybercrime Bill 2013, was approved by the Executive Council last August. It seeks a law to empower security agencies to intercept and record electronic communications between individuals and seize data from internet service providers and mobile networks.

    It also seeks to allow security agencies to request telecommunication companies to conduct surveillance on individuals and release user data to authorities.

    A key provision in the bill is that, where there is no urgency, but reasonable suspicion, an ex-parte order must first be obtained from the court before a law enforcement officer conducts a cybercrime investigation.

    Section 22 of the Bill provides: “Where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the content of any electronic communication is reasonably required for the purposes of a criminal investigation or proceedings, a judge may on the basis of information on oath:

    “(a) order a service provider, through the application of technical means to collect, record, permit or assist competent authorities with the collection or recording of content data associated with specified communications transmitted by means of a computer system; or

    “(b) authorise a law enforcement officer to collect or record such data through application of technical means.”

    The Bill, however, provides that such requirement could be sidestepped where there is “verifiable urgency” to intercept and record electronic communications.

    Section 21 empowers security agencies to order internet service providers or telecom companies to “preserve, hold or retain any traffic data, subscriber information or related content.”

    The Bill also seeks to prohibit the transmission of false electronic messages, child pornography, pedophilia and cyber-terrorism.

    It has also suggested punishments to be attached to any breach of its provisions. For instance, it provides that where a service provider refuses to release its subscriber’s data, as requested by the security agencies, such service provider will be liable to N10million fine, while each of its directors, managers or officers shall be liable for three years jail term or N7 million fine or both.

    In Section 15 (1) it provides for a jail term of not less than one year or a fine of N2 million for “any person who, by means of a public electronic communications network persistently sends a message or other matter that (a) is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character or causes any such message or matter to be so sent; or (b) he knows to be false, the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another or cause.”

    The Bill further prescribes death sentence for a person, who commits crime against “critical national information infrastructure,” defined as “certain computer systems, networks and information infrastructure vital to the national security of Nigeria or the economy and social well-being of its citizens.”

    It provides that if the offence did not result in death, but led to “grievous bodily injury,” the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for a minimum term of 15 years.

    As it relates to terrorism, the Bill prescribes life imprisonment for “any person that accesses or causes to be accessed any computer or computer system or network for purposes of terrorism.” It adopted the definition of terrorism as contained the Terrorism (Prevention) Act, 2011 (as amended).

    The Bill suggests a minimum jail term of 10 years or a N20 million fine for any person convicted for producing and distributing child pornography. It specifies 10 years in jail, N15million fine or both for act of pedophilia.

    Information Minister Labaran Maku said after the Executive Council meeting in August, last year, that the Bill seeks to provide an effective, unified and comprehensive legal, regulatory and institutional framework for the prohibition, prevention, detection, prosecution and punishment of cybercrimes in the country, as well as promote cyber security and ensure the protection of critical national information infrastructure.

    Justifying the necessity for such a law, Maku noted that terrorists and other criminals have been using our cyber space to commit crimes. He argued that all democratic countries of the world have cyber control laws and that there is no nation whose cyber space is not monitored.

    The minister said the Bill is in conformity with existing Nigerian laws, the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime, which reflects Nigeria’s obligations under the soon-to-be finalised African Union Convention on the subject matter.

    The Budapest Convention, better known as the Convention on Cybercrime (which influenced the new Bill), is the first international treaty seeking to address Internet and computer crime by harmonising national laws, improving investigative techniques, and increasing cooperation among nations.

    It was drawn up by the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, France, with the active participation of the Council of Europe’s observer states of Canada and Japan. It was adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe at its 109th Session on November 8, 2001. It was opened for signature in Budapest, on November 23, 2001 and it entered into force on July 1, 2004.

    On March 1, 2006 the Additional Protocol to the Convention on Cybercrime came into force. Those states that have ratified the additional protocol are required to criminalise the dissemination of racist and xenophobic material through computer systems, as well as threats and insults motivated by racism or xenophobia. As of November 2013, 41 states have ratified it, while 11 others have signed, but yet to ratify the convention.

    Proponents of this initiative have applauded the government and argued that it is a step in the right direction, particularly in view of the current security situation in the country; the bad reputation 419 and related cybercrimes have attracted to the country and the requirement by every country to effectively man and police its cyberspace.

    They also observed that the law, when enacted, will further aid the government in discharging its constitutional responsibilities under Section 14(2)(b), where it is provided: “The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government.”

    Critics are, however, of the view that it is coming late in the day – years after the coming into force of the Budapest Convention.

    To them, effort by the country to domesticate this international provision, must take into account local peculiarities by criminalising for instance, undue promotion of ethnicity, tribalism, among others in the nation’s cyberspace, in view of their negative implication for the nation’s unity and growth.

    They argued that in view of the inherent weakness in the nation’s criminal justice process, great efforts must be made by the National Assembly to create measures against abuses. They suggested the inclusion of specific provisions for conditions and safeguards, to prevent abuses, as it is the case with Article 15 of the Budapest Convention.

    Article 15(1) of the Convention provides: “Each party shall ensure that the establishment, implementation and application of the powers and procedures provided for in this section are subject to conditions and safeguards provided for under its domestic law, which shall provide for the adequate protection of human rights and liberties, including rights arising pursuant to obligations it has undertaken under the 1950 Council of Europe Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the 1966 United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and other applicable international human rights instruments, and which shall incorporate the principle of proportionality.’’

    Lawyers, including Alex Iziyon (SAN), Yusuf Ali (SAN), Dr. Abdulazeez Ahmed and Solomon Tumba, said much as it is too early in the day to doubt the government’s intention in initiating the Bill, the National Assembly should subject it to critical scrutiny and ensure that provisions are made to guard against abuses and provide sufficient redress mechanisms.

    They suggest that, if passed into law, those saddled with its application should always be guided by the need to always draw distinction between private rights, public interest and national security.

    Iziyon argued that there is the need for the balancing of the private rights – the constitutional rights of the citizens and that of the state – as it concerns national security. He said there has to be a balance, because such law exists all over the world.

    “The issue is that where the private rights is important. But, even the constitution says, your private rights stop if what you are doing is going to affect national interest. For example, you cannot say you have a right to kill somebody because you have a right to carry gun. So, there is a limitation, and that is also there in the Constitution – limitation of the rights.

    “So, with this Cybercrimes Bill, there has to be a balancing. The balancing will have to be that where state’s interest is involved, and there is suspicion of the commission of a crime, and such crime can be tracked, the right of the private individual stops there. You cannot then say there is an invasion of your privacy.

    “But, where the law seeks to go into the bedroom of people that are innocent, and starts monitoring their private e-mails and text messages, then you can now say there an invasion of privacy. I do not think that is what the intention of the Cybercrimes Bill is.”

    Ali said: “Well, I do not think we should bother ourselves much about the intention behind the Bill. We should wait for it to be passed into law first. Provided it is not deployed to witch hunt anybody, particularly those seen as opponents of the state.

    “The beauty of it is that if the law turns out to be unconstitutional, the courts are there. There is no reason for anyone to be apprehensive about the provisions of the Bill. It is only when it becomes law that it can be challenged in court. So, we should wait for it to be passed first.”

    Ahmed said: “I think there is actually nothing bad in the move for a law against cybercrimes in the country. What one should be particular about is its application. You know the problem with this country is not the paucity of laws. We have enough laws, the problem is enforcement and abuses.

    ‘’While the state is seeking to have more laws, the mechanism for criminal justice administration should equally be strengthened to enable it cope.’’

    “What I am saying in effect is that the security personnel, the court officials and those in charge of the prisons should be subjected to periodic training and provided with enhanced remuneration. This is because the cyberspace and the criminals that operate there are highly skilled and exposed to huge funds.”

    Tumba noted: “As is stands today, it is still a Bill to be subjected to the legislative mills. We hope the legislature will do a thorough job, organise public hearing where experts’ opinion will be sought and provided.

    ‘’Many countries have this kind of law. Some have even expanded on their cybercrimes laws.

    “Countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, are examples of countries that have greatly expanded on the law. With the growing sophistication in terrorism and other grievous crimes, it is wise for any country to deploy what it has to protect itself. What we should only guard against is abuse and misapplication.”

    It is, however, expected that the National Assembly will cast aside political considerations and diligently consider this Bill in view of its importance to national security, which many argued, is greatly threatened with the relentless attack by the Boko Haram sect, rising incidents of oil theft, kidnapping, among others.

     

  • Lawyers seek to empower women

    Former Third Vice-President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Dr Ogugua Ikpeze and Co-Chair, International Bar Association (IBA) African Regional Forum, Mrs Olufunmi Oluyede have launched an empowerment programme to advance the personal development of women.

    The initiative, Women Empowerment Now (WEN), is an international programme that promotes the advancement of women, strengthening their abilities and helping them achieve balance among their personal, family and professional lives.

    At a briefing in Lagos, WEN Co-President, Beatriz Martorello, an international arbitrator and mediator, said the programme aims to reach the highest number of women possible and strengthen them regardless of their professional development and achievements.

    Among other objectives is to share powerful and inspirational experiences, and create specific programmes to meet the particular needs of women in reach region.

    WEN Vice-President Aaron Schildhaus, an international business lawyer, said the initiative would reach women through conferences in different cities and countries.

    “WEN is presenting a special series of conferences geared to the complexity of the female world. We discuss a variety of topics, such as women’s leadership, women’s needs, women’s strengths, success, among others.

    “WEN’s audience is both sexes. Men are more than welcome to learn of women’s realities today, and to support and contribute to the essential dialogue, helping women to advance,” he said.

    Ikpeze said the initiative is about human development. “We’re so used to ‘cash’ development, but WEN is about giving people fish, but teaching you how to catch the fish, and not just to feed yourself, but to feed others around you. That’s the target.

    “There is a paradigm shift already. In most women empowerment initiatives, you see basically only women. But WEN is about men too. We want to drive this initiative as a family. In each country, WEN identifies needs. The need in America may not be the need in Nigeria.”

    Mrs Oluyede said the target audience cuts across the learned and the illiterate, and that effort would be made to carry everyone along. Her law office in Lagos, TRLP Law, will serve as a liaison, she said.

    “We’ll ensure that the sky will not be the limit when it comes to what we want to do to empower women,” Oluyede said.