The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF)

  • FG denies report of $6.59b judgment by US court

    The Federal Government has faulted reports that a court in the United States has entered a default judgement affirming a $6.59 billion arbitral award against it and favour of a firm, Process & Industrial Development Limited (P&ID).

    The Solicitor General of the Federation and Permanent Secretary, Federal Ministry of Justice, Dayo Apata, while speaking in Abuja on Tuesday, confirmed that the firm sued the Federal Government of Nigeria in a US District Court, but said no judgment has been given yet.

    Read Also:Ekiti: Court dismisses suit seeking to bar Fayemi

    Apata said the Nigerian government has taken the necessary steps to engage lawyers to handle the case on its behalf.

    He was however silent on the details of the dispute and what informed the suit brought against Nigeria by the private firm.

    Apata, who spoke on behalf of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, said: “no default judgment was entered against Nigeria in the enforcement proceedings by P & ID.

    “The Federal Government through its foreign solicitors, Messrs. Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP, has commenced the process of challenging and defending the enforcement proceedings.

    “It needs be stated that what is being taunted as a default judgment was actually a default entry made by the Court Clerk. Under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), a defendant has up to 60 days period to answer to a petition filed against it.

    “Where no response is entered for the Defendant, the Court Clerk upon application by the petitioner makes a default entry, which in this case was made on 5th June, 2018.

    “It is to be noted that under the FSIA, a default judgment cannot be entered against a foreign State like Nigeria unless the presiding judge determines so after the petitioner/claimant must have established its entitlement to a default judgment.

    “Based on the presumption of sovereign immunity, the US District Court is still under obligation, despite default by a Foreign State, to determine whether the foreign state is immune from the jurisdiction of the US Court under FSIA or whether the case before it falls within one of the recognised exceptions.

    “Even where the court determines that it has jurisdiction, a default judgment will not be granted automatically or as a routine matter to be handled by a court clerk as this can only be done after a formal trial.

    “On 12th June, 2018 our foreign solicitors filed the necessary application to set aside the clerk’s default entry and to dismiss the entire case on grounds of defective service and lack of personal jurisdiction over Nigeria in line with the provisions of the FSIA.

    “We wish to re-assure the general public that there is no default judgment against Nigeria at the instance of P&ID.

    “We urge Nigeria’s foreign friends and investors to ignore the malicious reports.

    “The Federal Government is also making concerted efforts through legal and diplomatic channels to resolve the issues in contention between the parties in this matter,” Apata said.

  • Omo-Agege’s suspension not supported by any law – Malami

    …Court fixes judgment for May 10 in suspended Senator’s suit

     

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) argued Monday that the decision by the Senate to suspend the Senator representing Delta Central Senatorial District, Ove Omo-Agege was not supported by any known law.

    Malami equally contended that the suspension violated the right of the constituency represented by Senator Omo-Agege to participate in the country’s governance and to be so represented.

    The AGF made his position on the issue public Monday at the hearing of the suit by the suspended Senator, challenging the legality of the Senate’s decision.

    The Solicitor General of the Federation (SGF), Dayo Apata, who represented Malami said the AGF’s position in the case was informed by his constitutional responsibility as the defender and guardian of the Constitution

    He argued that although the AGF was sued as a defendant, he has the right to address this court on the need to prevent the breach of constitutional provisions by the Senate.

    Apata added: “In view of the position of the law, it is the 3rd defendant’s submission that the suspension of the plaintiff is not supported by law and should be set aside by this honourable court.

    “As a Senator, the plaintiff represents his senatorial district, whose electorate, through him, participate in the governance and his suspension for a whole lot of 90 days amount to punishing an entire senatorial district for a period of 90 days and denying them participation in the governance of the country, which is a legal right.

    “It is our submission that the suspension of the plaintiff for 90 legislative days without any legal backing is also an infringement of the rights of his people, who elected him to represent them in the Senate to participate in the governance of Nigeria, thus illegal and unconstitutional and we urge my Lord to so hold.”

    Earlier, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Alex Iziyon (SAN) urged the court to nullify the steps taken by the Senate; including his client’s suspension by the Senate during the pendency of a suit he (Omo-Agege) filed against the plan to suspend him.

    Iziyon said: “Under the consequential orders sought by the plaintiff, the court can nullify any other steps taken by the defendant during the pendency of this suit.

    He added that the court has the power to “pull down what has been done in defiance of court’s proceedings”.

    Relying on a number of court’s decision, prohibiting legislative houses from suspending legislators, Iziyon argued that the “this court has the power to undo what they have done.”

    Lawyers to the 1st and 2nd defendants (the Senate and its President), Mahmoud Magaji (SAN) urged the court to dismiss the suit.

    Magaji argued that the cases cited by Izinyon were distinguishable from Omo-Agege’s case.

    He noted that: “Exhibit MAM1 shows that the plaintiff is not an ordinary senator. He is a lawyer. In addition, he is a member of the committee that recommended his suspension.

    “He is number 13 on the list of the members of the committee. He participated in the proceedings of the committee that recommended the suspension of other senators, particularly Senator Ali Ndume.

    “Those who live by the sword must die by the sword”.

    Malami wondered why the senator, “who has been dishing out such punishment to his colleagues should come to court for protection for such punishment”.

    He argued that Omo-Agege was bound by the rules of the Senate and had no basis to challenge the action of the Senate against him.

    Malami said: “He (Omo-Agege) swore to an oath to be bound by the rules of the National Assembly, including the standing order,” Magaji said.

    After listening to arguments by parties, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba adjourned to May 10 for judgment.

    Earlier, the dismissed an application by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senators Samuel Anyawu and Bala Na’Allah, seeking to be made parties in the case

    The judge upheld the objection put forward by Omo-Agege and the AGF against the two senators’ application.

    The judge upheld the contention that since the committee members were agents of a disclosed principal – the Senate and the Senate Principal, needed not to be joined in the suit.

    He added that they could not be joined because no contribution would they make in the case that the Senate and its President could not make.

    He also ruled that the application by the applicants were incompetent as they failed to file their proposed defence in respect of the suit as the court’s rules required of an applicant seeking to be joined in a suit.

    Read Also: Omo-Agege takes Senate, AGF to court

     

  • ‘Why we are probing Mark’s acquisition of Senate President’s house’

    ‘Why we are probing Mark’s acquisition of Senate President’s house’

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) and the Chairman, Special Presidential Investigation Panel for Recovery of Public Property (SPIPRPP), Okoi Obono-Obla have explained why the panel was probing the purchase of the official residence of the Senate President by David Mark.

    They said the investigation was informed by information to the effect that Mark, a former Senate President, unlawfully acquired the property in 2011, without being reflected in the Federal Government’s gazette as required.

    They argued that the house said to be built on 1.6 hectares of land, located in Gudu, Apo, Abuja, is a national monument that was not meant to be acquired by an individual.

    Malami and Obono-Obla’s explanation is contained in the court papers they filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja Thursday in reaction to a suit by Mark, challenging the notice of investigation served on him by the SPIPRPP.

    The documents include a notice of preliminary objection, a counter-affidavit to Mark’s motion for interlocutory injunction and a defence to the substantive suit.

    An official in the office of the Chairman of SPIPRPP, Aribatise Olanrewaju, who deposed to the counter- affidavit for Malami and Obono-Obla stated that the panel was empowered to probe the circumstances in which Mark took over the property.

    He said although former President Goodluck approved the sale of the property to Mark; the purchase was not gazetted as required by law.

    He said: “The request of Senator Bala Muhammad (the then Minister of Federal Capital Territory) was approved by former President Jonathan, but on the condition that the sale should be gazetted.

    “However, the sales of the houses were never gazette. Notwithstanding the directive of former President Jonathan that the said house should be sold to the plaintiff upon enactment of a Federal Government gazette, the said property was illegally sold to the plaintiff;

    “The sales of these houses were never reflected in the Federal Government official gazette contrary to directive/ minute in the memo of Senator Bala Muhammad by former President Jonathan;

    “I know as a fact that the sale of the said house to the plaintiff was never conducted in a competitive bidding and transparent process; this is contrary to the provisions of Section 15 (1) of the Procurement Act, 2007;

    “I know as a fact that the sale was contrary to the provisions of the Federal Government of Nigeria official gazette No. 82, Vol. 92 of 15 August 2005;

    “The said house is a national monument, which should have never been sold;

    “I know as a fact that the provisions of Part 11 (b) of the Certain Political, Public and Judicial Office Holders (Salaries and Allowances, Etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2008 otherwise known as the Remuneration Act, 2008 provides that Senate President is provided with accommodation by the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    “I know as a fact that the sale to the said house was contrary to the provisions of Paragraphs 1  & 6 (1) of Part 1 of the 5th Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) since the purchaser (the Plaintiff) was a the Senate President  he purchased the house.”

    Olanrewaju referred the law that empowered the  panel to investigate Mark’s acquisition of the property.

    He said: “I know as a fact that the notice alluded to in paragraph 17 of the affidavit is therefore not a notice of eviction as claimed by the plaintiff/applicant.

    “I know as a fact that the 2nd defendant never declared the plaintiff/applicant acquisition of the said property illegal, but a notice to inform him that the acquisition of the said property was under investigation by the Special Investigation Panel.

    “I know as a fact that the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for Recovery of Public Property was set up by the Federal Government of Nigeria pursuant to the provisions of Recovery of Public Property (Special Provisions) Act, Cap. R4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004,” he said.

    In their objection, Malami and Obono-Obla faulted the suit by Marked and described it as a ploy to stall his ongoing investigation.

    Obono-Obla, who endorsed the processes filed by the respondents in the suit – the AGF and Obono-Obla – described the suit as speculative and hypothetical.

    He contended, in the objection that the Federal High Court was without the jurisdiction to hear the suit.

    He grounds on which he hinged his argument include that the court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the plaintiffs in view of the fact that, by virtue of Section 251 (1) (p) of the Constitution, the subject matter of the case has nothing to do with the administration or the management and control of the Federal Government or any of its agencies.

    He said the suit was a disguise to scuttle criminal investigation of the plaintiff  (a public officer) using the court.

    Obono-Obla added tha: “This court has no jurisdiction to stop the Special Investigation Panel for Recovery of Public Property established pursuant to Section 1 (1) of the Recovery of Public Property (Special Provisions) Act, Cap. R4, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 from carrying out its statutory functions.

    “The 2nd defendant (Obono-Obla) is an agent of a disclosed principal and as such the plaintiff is wrong to sue the 2nd defendant in his official capacity with his personal name.

    “This suit has disclosed no reasonable cause of action; it is speculative and hypothetical,” he said.

    The SPIPRPP, in September this year, issued a 21-day notice to Mark to quit the property or “show cause” why the Federal Government should not “enforce the recovery of the property for public good”.

    Rather than “show cause” as requested by SPIPRPP, Mark head before the Federal High Court where he lodged the suit and prayed the court to among others, quash all steps taken by the panel to evict him and recover the house from him.

    The case will come up for hearing on January 22 next year before Justice Gabriel Kolawole.

  • AGF regrets sorry state of nation’s prisons

    AGF regrets sorry state of nation’s prisons

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) has regretted the sorry state of affairs in the nation’s prisons.

    Malami noted that, not only are the prisons overcrowded with mostly awaiting trial inmates, they are without the necessary facilities.

    He argued that the condition in which inmates were kept in the nation’s prisons is not only a violation of required international standard, it violate the rights of the inmates.

    Malami spoke in Abuja Tuesday while inaugurating a stakeholders’ committee to oversee the implementation of the Federal Executive Council’s directive to fast track the decongestion of prisons.

    He said: “The current state of our prisons is unfortunately very alarming. There is no gainsaying that the facilities are vastly overcrowded with inmates and the environment mostly not conducive, therefore defeating the primary purpose of the prisons as primarily reformation centres.

    “As a matter of fact, the state of our prisons directly touches on the fundamental human rights of these inmates and constitutes a violation of those rights.

    “It is particularly worrisome that about 70 per cent of the inmates in Nigerian prisons are awaiting trial. This is rather embarrassing and an indictment of the national justice system.

    “This situation contradicts international standards, including those provided in the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) that provides for limited use of pre-trial detention only when certain conditions are present,” Malami said.

    He noted that past efforts at decongesting the nation’s prisons have not been particularly successful, a development that informed the new initiative.

    The AGF said the role of the committee will include coming up with an effective strategy in the form of a road map and comprehensive action plan to ensure that permanent gains were achieved in the task of reforming and decongesting the nation’s correctional institutions.

    Some of the measures to be adopted include the creation of a case management system to integrate existing prison information systems in some parts of the country, and review of cases of inmates awaiting trial for up to five years and of inmates eligible for prerogative of mercy periodically.

    Other measures, Malami said; include the application of the provisions of Part 44, sections 453, 460 and 468 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) on no-custodial sentencing, and liaising with the National Assembly on the need for the prompt passage of the Nigeria Prison and Correctional Services Bill.

    Malami also stressed the need for collaboration with Chief Judges of the states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) on ways to fast track prison decongestion, and working with states’ Attorneys-General to develop necessary prison decongestion policy.

    The committee’s Chairman and Chief Judge of the High Court of the FCT, Justice Ishaq Bello assured that his committee would do a thorough job.

    Justice Bello noted that states were reluctant to adopt the ACJA, a development partially responsible for delay in the administration of criminal cases and prison congestion.

    He urged President Muhammadu Buhari to encourage state Governors to adopt the ACJA as a way of ensure prompt handling of criminal cases and elimination of congestion in prisons.

  • Abacha loot: Switzerland to return $321m – Malami

    Abacha loot: Switzerland to return $321m – Malami

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami ( SAN ) announced Thursday that negotiation has been concluded with Switzerland on the return of $321Million recovered from the late Abacha family.

    Malami also said the country recently recovered $85m from the controversial Malabu Restrained Funds from United Kingdom (UK).

    Spokesman to the Minister, Salihu Isah, in a statement Thursday, said Malami disclosed these in Abua at a Pre-Global Forum on Asset Recovery (GFAR) Consultative meeting with the theme: “Building an ending framework for asset recovery in Nigeria.”

    Isah quoted Malami as saying that with the conclusion of negotiation, the Memorandum of Understanding will be signed by parties at the Global Forum on Assets Recovery meeting to be held on between December 4 and 6 in Washington.

    He said after parties’ endorsement of the MOU, the repatriation of the funds would follow within weeks as agreed by the parties.

    He said Malami stressed the need for the international community to ensure the implementation of measures considered and adopted at the London Anti-Corruption Summit in May, 2016.

    Malami, Isah said, assured that the country was willing to support the transparent return of stolen assets.  He urged the international community to ensure prompt return of assets from the country to enable it meet the sustainable development goals.

    He quoted Malami as sayin:”“It is widely acknowledged that corruption undermines economic development, political stability, rule of law, social development, disrupts social order and destroys public trust in the governance system. It is an established fact that corruption which is linked to organised crime, terrorism and insecurity is one of the reasons for underdevelopment.

    “Resources and funds meant for development of infrastructure in education, health and security sectors, among others have been stolen and hidden in different parts of the world,”

    Isah said the British Ambassador to Nigeria, Paul Arkwright (represented by Senior Police Advisor, Michael H. Bonner) and. Swiss Ambassador, Eric Mayoraz commended the Nigerian government for collaborating with Civil Society Organizations to fight corruption and in tackling illicit financial flows.

    He said they pledged the support and cooperation of their home countries in repatriating stolen funds stashed away in banks at their countries back to Nigeria in due course.

    Read also: United States claims $300m Abacha loot

    Isah also quoted the Director MacArthur Foundation, Dr. Kole Shettima as praising the Nigerian government for getting interest groups on board for the asset recovery drive.

    He said Shettima wished that other parties like the Nigerian movie industry known as Nollywood as well as the media among others are involved to be all encompassing.

    Shettima siad he was not comfortable with the situation where the anti-corruption war would be seen as the fight of President Buhari or government fight, but as the fight of all Nigerians.

    Isah said the Director, African Network for Environment and Economic Justice (ANEEJ), David Ugolor Said Global Forum on Asset Recovery, established as an outcome of the London 2016 Anti- Corruption Summit hosted by former British Prime Minister, David Cameron would build on the experiences of the Arab Forum on Asset Recovery (AFAR) and the Ukraine Forum on Asset Recovery (UFAR).

    The AGF’s spokesman quoted Ugolor as saying: “(the core objective of GFAR is to convene practitioner experts to provide an effective opportunity for countries to cooperate on asset recovery cases.

    “It also tries to highlight the importance of strong political commitment, multijurisdictional coordination and practitioner interaction. “Its inaugural meeting will focus on assistance to four priority countries; Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia and Ukraine”.

  • Bulkachuwa, Malami, Ojo, others seek enhanced ADR use in dispute settlement

    Bulkachuwa, Malami, Ojo, others seek enhanced ADR use in dispute settlement

    The President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN), a former AGF, Bayo Ojo (SAN) and others have called for enhanced application of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms (ADR) in dispute resolution.

    They argued that prompt resolution of business disputes through ADR will not only  serve as a lure to foreign direct investments, it will enhance the success of government’s policy aimed at ensuring ease of doing business in the country.

    Bulkachuwa, Malami, Ojo spoke in Abuja Tuesday at the opening session of the Biannual African Arbitration Roundtable put together by the International Centre for Arbitration and Mediation Abuja (ICAMA).

    The event has as its theme: “Growing and sustaining domestic arbitration and ADR in Nigeria.”

    Other speakers, including the President of the National Industrial Court, Babatunde Adejumo, Chairman Senate Committee on Justice, Human Rights and Legal Services, David Umar and Chairman, House of Representatives Committee on Justice, Razaq Atunwa held similar view.

    Bulkachuwa noted that it was time African development its ADR capacity, including providing skilled hands to drive the process in view of the increasing numbers of arbitration cases involving Africans and African businesses.

    She urged that Africans should put behind them the era when arbitral disputes were exported to other continents for settlement.

    Bulkachuwa disclosed that her court would, by the end of the year commission its ADR centres in Abuja, Lagos and two other divisions as a way of activating the provision of Order 16 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016.

    She said under the arrangement termed: Court of Appeal Arbitration Process (CAAP), where the ADR mechanism pursued under the Court of Appeal Rules 2016 succeeds; the court shall adopt the agreement reached by parties as judgment of the court. But where it fails, the appeal shall be subjected to the normal procedure.

    Malami said the Nigerian government was aware the the existence of effective dispute resolution mechanism was key to attracting investment and was willing to work with all stakeholders in the public and private sectors to ensure that disputes were resolved timeously.

    He said: “We shall also continue to collaborate with the Judiciary, which has a key role to play in ensuring the overall efficacy of dispute resolution mechanisms in the country, including a ADR.”

    Malami, who praised Ojo and ICAMA for working to promote ADR practice in the country, urged that gathering to dwell on ways in which arbitration and mediation could better serve the nation’s economy as a tool for timeous resolution of commercial investment disputes.

    Ojo, who is ICAMA Chairman, said it was now imperative that African countries seeking to attract foreign direct investments must first in place a conducive business environment, a key factor of which it means of prompt dispute resolution.

    He expressed delight that the Nigerian government was working in that direction with its current initiative on the ease of doing business.

    Ojo said the ICAMA roundtable was intended as a platform to engage the diverse perspectives and experiences of arbitrators and other stakeholders in addressing existing challenges in prompt dispute resolution in the continent.

    The former AGF, who noted that arbitration was fast becoming the preferred mechanism for oiling the wheel of economic growth, said there was the urgent need to reverse the practice where arbitral dispute were exported by evolving ways of growing and sustaining domestic arbitration in Africa.

    Adejumo said it was impossible for any nation to grow and attract investments where disputes are not resolved within the shortest possible time.

    He attributed the slow growth of ADR practice in the continent to lawyers’ fear that they would earn less, but noted that the legal practitioners would actually earn more where disputes are promptly resolved and not held down in the process of litigation.

    Umar, who assured that the Senate would do all within its powers to encourage arbitration practice in the country, said the upper legislative chamber was working to endure that when passed, the Bill for the amendment of the extant arbitration law will meet the expectation of all.

    Atunwa, who was represented by a member of the House of Representatives, Igariwe Iduma Enwo, notee that in Nigeria, like any other African countries, the future in settling business disputes now lies in arbitration and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

    This, he said, results from the fact that the conventional recourse to courts could  be too slow, cumbersome and prohibitive in cost.

    He expressed delight that the growing adoption of acceptance of arbitration and other alternative dispute settlement options in the continent has reduced the earlier practice where Africans patronise foreign ADR centres.

    Other speakers included the Director, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, London, Anthony Abrahams and the President, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, London, Professor Nayla Comair-Obeid.

  • High profile cases: AGF denies rift with EFCC

    High profile cases: AGF denies rift with EFCC

    …Speaks of plans for national justice policy

     

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) Thursday waved aside speculation about a rift between him and the Acting Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Ibrahim Magu on the handling of high profile criminal cases.

    A recent letter from the office of the AGF had directed the EFCC to forward files on about 35 high profile cases, involving ex-governors and other prominent individuals to his AGF’s office for vetting and further directive.

    The directive ignited speculation about a possible rift between the AGF and Magu, with many expressing doubt about the AGF’ true intention. Some even claimed the directive was a prelude to the AGF’s office eventual takeover of the cases.

    Speaking in Abuja Thursday, Malami said there was no rift between his office and the EFCC leadership.

    Malami, who was reacting to questions from journalists after an event held in his office, said he did not believe the letter to the EFCC was an evidence of a right between his office and the EFCC or that his office intended to take over the cases.

    Earlier, Malami spoke about a forthcoming “national summit on justice,” slated for August 8 and 10 in Abuja. He also unveiled the upgraded Federal Ministry of Justice’s website and Freedom of Information (FOI) Compliance portal.

    Malami said the summit, to be attended by stakeholders in the nation’s justice sector, was intended to consider, adopt and validate the draft National Policy on Justice (NPJ), developed by a technical committee constituted by the Federal Ministry of Justice in 2016.

    On the need for a national justice policy, the AGF said: “Given the challenges militating against an effective administration of justice and the peculiarity of our federal system, there is the need to harmonize and integrate the various reforms initiatives into a clearly articulated National Justice Policy.

    “The policy is expected to clearly define Nigeria’s political philosophy with respect to justice delivery and provide a common direction for the justice sector stakeholders across the nation.

    “The policy, in broad term, is expected to set out a common vision and provide the guidelines for promoting an effective justice system that guarantees the freedom of the people and socio-economic development of the nation.

    “This policy will therefore, serve as a policy framework upon which relevant institutions can situate regulations and legislation in line with best practices and principles,” Malami said.

    While unveiling the upgraded website and FOI portal, Malami. Said the initiatives were in line with the objective of the Muhammadu Buhari administration to ensure transparency in the condut of government affairs.

    He said: “I am pleased to noted that the FOI portal launched today will not only help in the effective implementation of the FOI Act, but will go a long way in fulfilling the President’s Open Government Partnership (OGP) commitments in the area of access to information as manifested in the OGP national action plan.

    *As a government, we will remain focused, bold and result oriented in delivering on the promises of President Muhammadu Buhari, aimed at providing good governance to the Nigerian people,” Malami said.

     

  • Judge’s arrest: Reps threaten Malami with warrant of arrest

    Judge’s arrest: Reps threaten Malami with warrant of arrest

    …As ICPC backs DSS

     

    The House of Representatives has threatened to issue bench warrant of arrest against the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami if he fails to appear before its investigative panel next Tuesday.

    According to Garba Datti, who chairs ad hoc Committee investigating cases of invasion of property and arrest of persons for reasons outside the general duties of the State Security Services as prescribed by the National Securities Act, since 29th May, 2015, the AGF has refused to honour the Committee’s invitation twice while also declining  to make official submission to the Committee.

    Datti said: “The only area we are having problem is the AGF who is the Chief law officer. We sent letters to him, no answer and no memorandum from him. Before the public hearing, we had summoned him even today (Thursday), he did not appear or sent any representation.

    “This Committee is disturbed by the non-appearance of the AGF. We have given him the opportunity to appear on Tuesday (next week) 29th November, failure of which this Committee will invoke all the relevant laws that give us power for arrest.”

    However, while the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related Offences Commission (ICPC) said the SSS has not erred by the search and alledged arrest of the  judicial officers, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) disclosed that it was not involved in the alleged searh and arrest of the judges.

    The EFCC however disclosed that it was also investigating some judicial officers.

    ICPC Chairman, Nta  Ekpo Nta backed his asertion with legal instruments, saying,  “Section 3(1) of the SSS instrument I of 1999 provides that: “For the purpose of facilitating the discharge of its functions under these instrument, personnel of the State Security Services are hereby conferred with the powers of Superior Police officer in respect of searches and
    arrest.”

    “Likewise, section 3 (2b) of the SSS Instrument I of 1999 provides that in the execution of its functions set out in the Instrument, the SSS shall have power to “impound and keep in its custody the passports or any other property of persons or organizations under investigation if considered appropriate by the Director-General.”

    On his part,  EFCC Chairman, Ibrahim Magu, who was represented by Johnson Ojogbana, Assistant Director (Prosecution) said his agency was empowered to initiate investigation of individual, organisation or any judges including public or political office holders.

    According to him, the anti-graft agency’s statutory powers include investigation and prosecution of all financial and economic crimes and any form of fraud, narcotic drug and trafficking, money laundering, embezzlement, bribery, looting and any form of corrupt malpractices.

    “I can say that EFCC was not involved in that wee hours operation. We have been investigating some judges and our modus operandi have been painstaking. We have not investigated all of them (judges), a few of them filed petitions and investigations are ongoing,” he said.

    While noting that complaints against the incidence should not be equated with opposition to the anti-corruption fight, Ojogbana said it was the methodology employed that was questioned.

    “There is a way to do something good and it becomes bad. It is the duty of the committee to review procedures of operations of the security agencies to be in line with the democratic tenets,” he added.

  • AGF justifies arrest of judges

    AGF justifies arrest of judges

    …Says no one immune to investigation

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) Tuesday justified the arrest of some judges by the Department of State Services (DSS).

    Malami argued that what happened in relation to the affected judges was mere investigation of criminal allegations.

    He contended that no one is immune to investigation under the Nigerian law, noting that once allegation of criminality was raised, it was the duty of the relevant investigating agencies to carry out investigation.

    The AGF spoke in Abuja Tuesday shortly after inaugurating the “country expert review committee for the second cycle of the review of implementation of the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC).”

    Malami, who was asked by journalists to comment on the arrest of judges, said: “The fundamental consideration is whether there is an allegation of the commission of a crime;  whether there is the need for investigation, and whether the relevant provisions of the law and indeed, all circumstances, as provided in the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) are put into consideration in our conduct as regard the fight against corruption.

    “The bottom line is that we have a responsibility to fight corruption. Corruption is a crime and nobody, regardless of how highly placed, and is exempted as far as issues that border on crimes and criminalities are concerned.

    “The limited exceptions as we know constitutionally are the exceptions of immunity. And to the best of my knowledge those exceptions do not apply to investigation.

    “For those that are conferred with the immunity, the right to investigate has not been taken away constitutionally.

    “So, I think the framework and the circumstances within which we are operating are clearly whether there exists the right to investigate or not, and whether the action borders on criminality.

    “Once crimes and criminality are concerned, nobody is an exception. I think the undertone should be exclusively the consideration of the existence of a prima facie case; existence of reasonable grounds for suspicion of commission of a crime.

    “And if there are, no member of the Legislature, Judiciary and Executive can definitely be exempted from investigation. I think where we are now is the point of investigation and that is what is taking place,” Malami said.

    While inaugurating the committee, Malami expressed confidence in the ability of its members to execute their responsibilities.

    He said: “The extant review focusing on Chapter I I and V of the UNCAC, relating to preventive measures against corruption in public and private sectors and asset recovery, is both necessary and timely at this time in the annals of our country, when endemic cum systemic corruption has created a great discontent between our nation’s wealth and the quality of life of ordinary citizens.

    Malami, who noted that the objectives of UNCAC were in harmony with the conviction of the current Federal Government to curb corruption, said it was necessary for members of the committee to understand the important task of nation-building which is being committed to their hands.

    “Let me emphasise that the guiding principles of the review is non-adversarial, non-punitive and not aimed at ranking state parties.

    “Nevertheless, members of the expert committee should understand that those selected, appointed or nominated by my office or your various agencies are chosen based on skills, expertise and commitment.

    “It is therefore important to note that your performance in this assignment will be a step in the direction for us as a country and people to achieve the goals that we have set for ourselves – prevent corruption, recover, return and manage stolen assets,” Malami said.

    Members of the committee are drawn from 22 agencies of the federal government, including Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Special Control Unit against Money Laundering (SCUML), Technical Unit on Governance and Anti-corruption Reforms (TUGAR).

     

  • AGF to Saraki, others: Offer your explanation to court

    AGF to Saraki, others: Offer your explanation to court

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) has responded to claim by the Senate President, Bukola Saraki, and others that the charge of forgery against them amounted to an abuse of the principle of separation of powers

    The AGF, who justified his decision to initiate criminal proceedings against Saraki and three others over the allegation that they were involved in the forgery of the Senate Order 2011, urged the defendants to take their argument before the court.

    Malami, in a statement issued late Thursday by his media aide, Salihu Isah, said he was withing his constitutional powers to initiate criminal proceedings against anybody where any of  the investigating agencies has established a prima facie case against such suspect.

    The AGF, who faulted the arguments by Saraki and others named in the charge before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), urged them to go before the court and explain their roles in the forgery case rather than accusing him of violating the Legislative arm.

    “It is not in doubt that each arm of government is constitutionally vested with distinct powers. Looking critically at the doctrine of the separation of powers, it is a practice that exist on a tripod viz, the executive, legislature and judiciary with clearly distinctive functions and responsibilities as captured under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

    “So, by virtue of this, we are committed to the rule of law and will thus keep to the tenets of the rule of law as enshrined in a constitutional democracy like ours.

    “The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation is empowered under Section 174 (1) of the Constitution and vested with the power to undertake and initiate criminal proceedings in any court of law in Nigeria.

    “By virtue of this power as the Chief Law Officer of the nation, he has simply initiated criminal proceedings for forgery against the affected principal officers in the Senate for altering the Senate Standing Rules in the Federal High Court.

    “It is worthy to note here that the action of the Attorney General of the Federation can stand the test of any law since he did not act on a vacuum.

    “He acted based on a recommendation by the Inspector General of Police (IGP) who having fully satisfied investigative procedure arising from the petition sent to the Nigerian Police by some aggrieved members of the Red Chambers of the National Assembly alleging that the affected officers altered the rules of the Senate for Dr. Bukola Saraki and Ike Ekweremadu to emerge leaders of the Eighth Senate of the National Assembly.

    “Under the 1999 Constitution, only the Attorney General of the Federation has the powers to institute criminal proceedings.

    “For the benefit of doubt, as stated above, there was a petition bordering on allegations of forgery against the defendants, the petition was investigated by the police and the police recommended the case for prosecution.

    “At this point, the question is how initiation of criminal proceedings against Dr Bukola Saraki, Ike Ekweremadu, Salisu Maikasuwa and Bernard Efeturi violated the principle of separation of powers as contained in the Constitution? “The action of the Attorney General of the Federation cannot obviously be said to be a coup against the National Assembly as the Senate has claimed.

    “By preferring the charge, the accused persons are entitled to fair hearing under the law while the prosecution is obligated to prove its case against them beyond reasonable doubts. “Therefore, the Attorney General of the Federation has not violated any known law in the land. Or is the Senate suggesting that its principal officers, members and staff of the National Assembly are above the law or enjoys same immunity as do the nation’s President and Governors?

    “It is common knowledge over the years since the nation embraced democratic system of governance and backed by the current Constitution those elected officers of government who are exempted from legal encumbrances whether it is civil or criminal are known to all.

    “It is pertinent to be reminded too, that forgery of the Senate Standing Rules cannot be described as the internal business of the National Assembly that is exclusively only in its purview. “The Attorney General of the Federation cannot therefore be faulted for his decision to initiate legal actions against the accused for alleged forgery after a thorough police investigation of the issue whether there was an amendment of the Senate Standing Rules in 2015 or not.

    “The case of Adesanya vs Senate which has been seriously touted in its press statement does not support them and they should rather take their plea and defend the action accordingly.

    “We assure Nigerians that the Attorney General of the Federation will continue to be committed to the rule of law at all times.

    “On this particular forgery case, we believe he should rather be commended for his foresight and political will to carry out his constitutional role to the letter and not to be vilified under any guise.”