The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Lawyers

  • Why movement can’t be restricted for sanitation, by lawyers

    Two lawyers, Ikenna Okoli and Francis Moneke, have urged the Lagos State Government not to re-introduce a monthly environmental sanitation that will restrict movement.

    They said a 2016 Court of Appeal judgment which ruled that the state government has no power to do so, still stands.

    Okoli is the Chairman, Human Rights and Empowerment Project Ltd/GTE (HREP), while Moneke is the group’s Executive Director.

    Earlier this month, Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu signed an Executive Order against indiscriminate and illegal dumping of waste.

    On June 10, Sanwo-Olu debunked speculations on the purported resumption of monthly sanitation in the state, explaining that conversation on the return of the exercise was still a proposal.

    In a statement to The Nation, the lawyers observed that former Governor Akinwunmi Ambode cancelled the monthly exercise following two appellate court judgments in Okafor vs Lagos State Government declaring it illegal.

    Read Also: Lagos advocates better maintenance culture

    HREP said: “That case, which was sponsored by HREP and prosecuted from the High Court of Lagos State up to the Court of Appeal by Ikenna Okoli, with a team of other lawyers as counsel for the appellant, laid to rest the issue of the propriety of restricting the movement of people for the reason of environmental sanitation.

    “The Court of Appeal in that case reversed the earlier decision of the State High Court on the issue, and held that the fundamental right to freedom of movement which is constitutionally guaranteed under Section 41(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) cannot be taken away or curtailed by a mere executive order or policy, or even a law.

    “Section 41(2) specifically mentions matters on which a law may be justified to restrict the movement of citizens. Environmental sanitation is certainly not a justifiable reason to restrict the fundamental right to freedom of movement.

    “Nothing stops the Lagos State Government from running or implementing a seamless and robust sanitation policy without restricting the movement of people as it is done in other civilised nations.”

  • Lawyers: crazy bills crime against consumers

    To curb what is commonly tagged “crazy bills”, some Lagos lawyers have urged the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) to map out pricing guidelines for consumers’ benefit.

    The lawyers, who spoke with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), described as “outrageous” the monthly bills sent by electricity distribution companies, and classified same as a crime against the public.

    They called for the adoption of an urgent measure to serve as a control on the pricing system in electricity distribution.

    Mrs. Vivian Ekwegh, from the law firm of Chief Benson Ndakara and Co, said ‘Crazy bill’ was exploitative and a crime against the masses.

    Exemplifying herself as a victim of excessive billing, she said: “Estimated billing is a crime against the masses because this is just one out of many ways in which the masses are being exploited.

    “I am a victim of estimated billing, and despite erratic power supply, each month I am sent a ‘crazy bill’ to pay up or risk disconnection,” she said

    Ekwegh said efforts to go through channels to redress the situation and obtain a prepaid meter had failed, as the bills kept coming in monthly.

    “Despite going through the appropriate channels to get a prepaid meter, which, in my opinion, is a proper pricing system to determine how much I really owe, it has proved abortive.

    “This raises my suspicion that indeed, estimated billing may be intentional; it is a racketeering against the public,” she said, and called for proactive measures on the way forward.

    “The solution is for the NERC to live up to its responsibility of protecting consumers by ensuring that every household is given a prepaid meter.

    “If this is done, it will foster a proper pricing system and better estimation of how much electricity consumers utilise,” Ekwegh said.

  • Lawyers and judges should be ashamed

    THE Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) judgement in the asset declaration case involving the former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen has no pretext to be called a judgement, let alone one authored by anyone with a modicum of legal knowledge. CCT, as everyone now knows, and as Danladi Umar, the chairman of the tribunal, admitted in the course of the trial, is virtually a presidential department that acts unreasoningly as a rod of punishment in the wrinkled hands of the presidency. Every ground upon which the CCT panel based its conviction of Justice Onnoghen had nothing to do with law, whether it was the issue of jurisdiction or any of the planks of the substantive case itself. Instead of law, Nigerians saw politics, inane politics writ large.

    It is strange that very little outcry has visited the parody of justice in the Onnoghen case. Perhaps this may be due to the fact that everyone, including legal experts themselves, expected the CCT to convict the former CJN. After all, with its notorious, unprecedented and unconstitutional use of ex parte order to suspend the CJN, why would anyone be surprised that it has taken a department of the presidency to finally sack, banish and expropriate Justice Onnoghen? The problem here is not simply that the former CJN was found guilty of false declaration of assets; of course if the evidence and legal procedures that undergird justice lead in that direction, it would be appropriate to convict him. He is not above the law. No one should be, though in this instance, the presidency has acted, portrayed and placed itself above the law, demolishing the bases upon which the law is anchored in Nigeria, while purporting to fight corruption.

    Lawyers and judges have made only muted references to the case, tiptoeing around the issues raised in the trial, and petrified of the presidency’s sledgehammer. They are afraid of the binary thinking of Nigerians who accuse anyone who questions the trial or the deployment of illegal and indefensible procedures in the case as either supporting Justice Onnoghen’s malfeasance  or supporting corruption in general. The menaces of those who know little about the law have been strong enough to deter the just outcry of those who know the law. The presidency and many Nigerians accuse the judiciary of outrageous corruption; because of that, few people have been courageous enough to stand up for the third arm of government. This irrational fear of the executive has encouraged the presidency to prey upon the biases of the people, cajole vulnerable judges and lawyers, and welcome the short-sighted acquiescence of many judicial officers. In short, the judiciary is now completely subjugated. Few care. It is enough for them that they have invested the Buhari presidency with altruism. Nothing else matters.

    Had the presidency foresightedly closed the Justice Onnoghen case immediately he tendered his notice of retirement, they would have spared the CCT the humiliation of contradicting and perjuring itself by its tendentious and questionable judgement, one in which it worked from the answer to the question. Now, one of the consequences of allowing the case to drag on to its despicable conclusion is that the ponderous Court of Appeal, which springs into life in political cases, will now be forced to also decide on the Onnoghen appeals before them. The appellate court has a choice between following or associating with the inane legal style and practices of the CCT or redeeming itself by letting justice be served. But the appellate judges may also feel vulnerable; and they will wish the Onnoghen cup to pass over them. However, thanks to the stubborn former CJN who insists on seeing the galling case to its logical and damning conclusion, the Court of Appeal will have to decide whether to bow to ignominious quibble or do justice. Soon, too, the Supreme Court will have to vote for law or politics, for honour or something else.

    With the executive arm too far gone in their abominable ways and too steeped in conspiracies to toe the path of decency and rectitude; and the judiciary now panting for air, fooling themselves to think that with the CCT judgement they can at last begin to rebuild; and the National Assembly yet to show their hand, it is not clear what the fate of the country will be. However, the omens are not good at all. Good men, it seems all but clear, are either not enough in the country, or they have chosen to keep quiet in the face of evil. One way or the other, curses are like chickens; they always come home to roost. It may take time; but it will surely happen.

  • Ayade hailed for hiring youths, lawyers

    A group, the Ayade Trans-Generational Movement, has hailed the Cross River State Governor Ben Ayade for his industrialisation policy, which it said, has created jobs for youths and lawyers.

    Through its Director-General Chief Hart Modey and Legal Director Dr DorncKlaimz Enamhe, the group congratulated the governor on his victory in the just-concluded governorship election.

    ATM said: “This is the first time in the history of the state that a candidate will beat all his opponents in the other political parties in all the wards of the state.

    “The reason we mobilised support for the trans-generational governor who has been able to bring people from all generations into government was amongst other things, his welfare package where Cross River workers remain the first to be paid in the country every month.

    “The ability of the trans-generational governor to employ young people into the state service, including young lawyers, endeared him to them, a situation that had not happened in over two decades

    “ATM is also very impressed with his dogged industrialisation policy in a state that could not boast of one industry for over 30 years, even when the state was a full oil producing state and had the capacity to fund it.

    Read also: Ayade woos opposition governorship candidates in Cross River

    “Governor Ayade is the only governor in the history of the state who has raised the bar so much that he has been able to spread industries across the three Senatorial zones in the state.

    “ATM is shocked beyond words and wonders where the government got the funding for the garment factory, the pharmaceutical factory, the banana plantation, the toothpick company, the cocoa industry, the rice industry beyond the rice seedlings factory

    “ATM is overwhelmed that beyond the hiccups the state government had on the construction of the superhighway project and Bakassi deep-sea port, the government has covered this level of mileage in the two signature projects.’’

    ATM also praised the governor for his intention to run an inclusive government.

  • Lawyers Alert sues Borno govt over demolition

    A human rights group under the aegis of Lawyers Alert’s Initiative for Protecting Rights of Children, Women and the Indigent (LA) has sued the government of Borno State for demolishing peoples’ buildings without following the due process.

    The case with suit number BOHC/MG/CV/68/2019 was filed at the Maiduguri High Court by counsels to the applicant, Rommy Mom, Bamidele Jacobs, Sunday Adaji, Richard Hwande and Ellen Onugha.

    Counsels to the applicant prayed the court to declare that the action of the state government by demolishing residential houses, restaurants, shops, hotels and other public places in Galadima area, Baga Road, and the entire Maiduguri metropolis amounts to a violation of the constitutional rights of the concerned citizens.

    The applicant joined the Government of Borno State as first respondent and joined the Borno State Attorney-General as second respondent in the suit, saying that government did not follow due process in the exercise and that the claim that it was on the ground of public interest was not tenable.

    One of the counsels, Rommy Mom said the suit was instituted to protect the fundamental rights of Maiduguri residents pursuant to Order II, Rules 2-5 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009; Sections 43 And 44 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As Amended).

    Mom said “We prayed the court to declare that residents of Galadima Area, Baga Road and indeed of the entire Maiduguri metropolis are entitled to own moveable and immoveable properties in Maiduguri and anywhere in Nigeria.

  • Lawyers seek court’s permission to withdraw from Metuh’s trial

    Lawyers to Olisa Metuh, former spokesman of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) have applied to a Federal High Court in Abuja for permission to withdraw their participation in Metuh’s ongoing trial for alleged fraud and money laundering related offences.

    The lawyers numbering 12, including two Senior Advocates of Nigeria – Onyechi Ikpeazu and Emeka Etiaba – gave reasons, in a fresh motion, why they want to be excused from the case.

    The lawyers, who urged the court to allow them to withdraw from the trial in the interest of justice, claimed to be under “immense pressure” over their continued appearance in the case, and that there have been threats to their lives.

    They said, in the motion: “The counsel representing the 1st defendant have been going through immense pressure, with respect to their appearance in this case, including severe threat to their lives and will be unable to contain the 1st defendant.”

    In the motion, predicated on Section 349(7) and (8) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA, 2015, the lawyers, who were absent when the case earlier came up on Monday, said they will be occupied with election petition cases and would be unable to attend the day-to-day trial ordered by the court.

    Ikpeazu, in a supporting affidavit, said he received crank calls by persons that threatened to kill him because of the way he “mishandled” the case.

    Ikpeazu added: “I have received numerous threats to my life from diverse sources through telephone calls with disguised numbers, giving an ultimatum and threatening to kill me based on the manner they claimed I had been mishandling the case.”

    He added that Etiaba also informed him that he had received similar threats and thus will no longer proceed with the representation of the 1st defendant.”

    He said: “in the circumstance, it is impossible to avail the 1st defendant the legal representation he deserves in this case.”

    The lawyers urged the court grant the motion to enable them to withdraw from case in view of the day-to-day hearing ordered by the court, a schedule, which they said, was difficult for them to meet, “having regard to diaries of their respective offices.”

    Proceedings in the case was stalled on Monday in view of the lawyers’ absence, following which the court adjourned to Tuesday.

    On Tuesday, Justice Okon Abang asked Metuh (who sat in the dock) how he intended to proceed in view of the motion by his lawyers, who also stayed away from court.

    Metuh said he met with his lawyers on Monday evening and that they said they were traumatized by experiences they have had in the hands of the Federal Government since the trial started.

    The ex-spokesman for the PDP prayed the court to grant an adjournment to enable his lawyers argue their fresh motion in which they prayed to be excused from the case.

    Justice Abang subsequently adjourned till March 13.

    Metuh is being tried with his firm, Destra Investment Ltd, for allegedly receiving N400million from the Office of the National Security Adviser (ONSA) preparatory to the 2015 presidential election, without executing any contract.

    Metuh is also accused of engaging in cash transaction to the tune of $2million without going through any financial institution.

    The prosecution has since closed its case after calling about eight witnesses, with Metuh currently testifying as a defence witness.

  • Poll shift lawful, but damages INEC’s credibility, say lawyers

    Lawyers yesterday acknowledged the power of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to reschedule elections but noted that the commission did itself no credit by the way it went about the postponement of the Presidential and National Assembly polls.

    Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN) observed that the Electoral Act permits the commission to make polls adjustments in the national interest.

    Citing Section 26(1) of the Electoral 2010 (As Amended),Akintola said: “INEC has powers to postpone polls. But the sad thing about this postponement is that it waited till very late at night, an unholy hour, disrupting the economy, the political lifeline of the country, the social traffic of the country.

    “To make matters worse, INEC National Commissioner in charge of Information and Voter Education, Mr. Festus Okoye, denied around midnight that there was any postponement. People have travelled far and wide, Mr. President travelled to his state, the vice president had travelled, practically everyone that is somebody had travelled back to their constituencies.

    “See what it has caused the country? Yet there was no apology from INEC. It’s a big disappointment and has cast doubt on the credibility of the election.”

    He urged INEC to learn from its mistakes and up its game.

    Activist-lawyer Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa noted that notwithstanding INEC’s powers, the postponement was “totally unacceptable.”

    He invited the National Assembly to audit and probe INEC through a Commission of Inquiry.

    Adegboruwa said: “The postponement has unwittingly eroded the credibility of the elections and the capacity of INEC, in spite of the huge resources committed to it and the length of time available for planning and logistics.”

    He argued that “INEC should not have waited till the dying minutes before announcing the postponement, since it was well aware of all its handicaps long before now.”

    The lawyer appealed to “all Nigerians to be patient and give room for a proper election at the times rescheduled for it by INEC. No sacrifice should be too great for us as a people, in order to get to the destination of our dreams.”

  • Breaking: Lawyers ignore NBA’s court boycott directive

    Many lawyers in Abuja on Tuesday ignored Monday’s directive by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) for legal practitioners to stay away from courts until the Executive reverses the suspension of Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    Visits to courts in Abuja on Tuesday revealed that fully robbed lawyers, turned up in court, ready to conduct businesses for the day.

    The situation was the same in the Supreme Court (located within the Three Arms Zone), through the Court of Appeal (located also in the Three Arms Zone), the Federal High Court (in Maitama) and the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Maitam.

    Although most judges at the Federal High Court did not sit, with some said to be attending a seminar, Justices of the Supreme Court sat and conducted proceedings. So was the case in some High Court of the FCT visited.

    Read Also; Court boycott: lawyers express mixed reactions

    Some of the lawyers spoken to said the directive by the NBA lacked the force of law. And since it was not an order of court, lawyers could choose to abide by it or disregard it where their client’s interest is at stake.

    They argue that since the issue of the suspension of the CJN was already in court, the NBA and all other interested parties should allow the court reach a decision one way or the other.

    Details later

  • Court boycott: lawyers express mixed reactions

    Some lawyers in Lagos have expressed mixed reactions to the resolution by the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) for lawyers to boycott courts for two days over what they tagged illegal suspension of the Chief Justice of the Federation (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    The NBA reached the resolution after its National Executive Council meeting held on Monday Jan. 28.

    However, some lawyers said such resolution would not be effective while others said it would send a message that rule of law and constitutional provisions should not be undermined.

    The News Agency of Nigeria reports that the Federal Government had on Jan. 25 suspended the CJN over failure to declare assets as required of every public servant.

    The government had acted on a motion exparte granted by the Code of Conduct Tribunal, and replaced Onnoghen by Justice Tanko Mohammed as acting CJN.

    Mr Ogedi Ogu, a Lagos-based lawyer told NAN that such resolution would not be effective because “even the NBA president, Mr Paul Usoro has an unresolved issue which will make any protest led by him to appear as pursuing a personal vendetta.

    Read Also: NBA orders court boycott

    “Based on what is in the public view, It is doubtful if many lawyers are going to partake in this because the NBA president can not rally lawyers for anti-corruption crusade when he has some corruption charges against him in court”.

    He, however, advised that the provisions on exparte applications be strictly adhered to.

    “The impression at the bar was that exparte applications were not grantable, but actions of the CJN and the federal government in obtaining different exparte applications have shown otherwise, however creating some sort of constitutional crisis,” Ogu said.

    Mr Chibuikem Opara, in his own opinion said that the call for lawyers to boycott courts for two days starting from Jan. 29 was a good one.

    He said such a resolution would make government ensure that their actions were guided by the provisions of the constitution.

    According to him, the court boycott is part of the sacrifices that should be made by every patriotic Nigerian, because if nothing is done urgently, other successive governments will believe that they can take laws into their hands.

    Opara believed that the action would save the judiciary from destruction.

    “If the judiciary is destroyed, lawyers will be the ultimate losers. It will affect lawyers income.

    “I would have liked if the boycott was for more than two days to send strong signal that provisions of the constitution should be strictly followed,” he said.

    He said that the courts would be a ghost of itself if lawyers boycott them.

    Another Lagos-based lawyer, Mr Chris Ayiyi, in his own view, advised that exparte application should not be obtained fraudulently.

    He said though the resolution to boycott courts was made to ensure that constitutional provisions was respected, “it would affect some lawyers’ day to day income”.

  • Anambra CJ frees 13 inmates

    Anambra State Chief Judge, Justice Peter Umeadi, has granted 13 inmates at the Onitsha Prisons bail.

    The inmates, who had spent between five to six years awaiting trial, were granted pardon by the Chief Judge in exercise of his constitutional powers of jail delivery.

    Umeadi had embarked on the first quarter of his jail delivery Court Session for the year at St. Maximilian Kolbe Chaplaincy, in company of other twelve judges.

    He said the quarterly visit was targeted at considering cases of those who have spent long time behind bars with a view of granting them bail to enable them become useful to the society.

    Read Also: NDLEA nabs 20 drug dealers in Anambra

    The CJ, who expressed joy over the number of bail grant cases, attributed it to the relationship among the lawyers, magistrates, the Police, Directorate of Public Prosecution and Prison officials.

    “The cordial relationship between the legal practitioners, security agencies and prison officials, many of who were present at the court session, has closed the past existing gaps,” he said.

    The State Comptroller of Prisons, Bar. Emmanuel Nwakeze, thanked the Chief Justice for the visit, saying it would go a long way in decongesting the prison.

    Other cases treated were that of juvenile as well as those of 60 years of age and above and were asked to approach the regular court for bail.