The Nation Newspaper

Tag: SAN

  • EFCC arraigns judge, SAN for alleged corruption, forgery

    EFCC arraigns judge, SAN for alleged corruption, forgery

    SOME OF THE CHARGES

    •Obla offered Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia N5million
    •Unlawfully enriching herself as a public officer
    •Received $793,800 in several transactions from various sources between 2012 and 2015 ‘so as to have a significant increase in your assets that you cannot reasonably explain the increase in relation to your lawful income’
    •Forged a deed of assignment of County City Bricks Development Company Limited and Nigel & Colive Limited dated July 5, 2010
    •Giving false information to the EFCC

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) yesterday arraigned a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia and a senior lawyer, Chief Godwin Obla (SAN) for alleged bribery and conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
    The judge and the senior lawyer were arraigned on a 30-count charge before Justice Hakeem Oshodi of a Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikeja.
    The charges were read to them after Justice Oshodi ordered them to move from the court gallery into the dock.
    “Unfortunately, you have to be in the dock,” Justice Oshodi told them.
    The defendants were asked by the court’s registrar if they understood English language, to which they answered in the affirmative.
    Thereafter, each of the 30-count charge was read.
    The EFCC, alleged that Obla, while appearing in a suit before Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia, offered a gratification of N5million to the judge to allegedly induce her to refrain from acting in the exercise of her official duties as a public officer.
    Obla, the EFCC claimed, paid the money from the account of his company, Obla & Company Limited, with United Bank for Africa, to Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia through the bank account of Nigel & Colive Ltd in Diamond Bank Plc.
    The EFCC claimed that the judge and the lawyer acted contrary to sections 64 (1) and 97 (1) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, No. 11, 2011.
    They both pleaded not guilty to the offence.
    Obla was dressed in a blue suit, a white shirt and a blue tie to match. His co-defendant, Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia was in a black suit and a skirt.
    Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia, who had 24 out of the 30 counts preferred against her, was accused of unlawfully enriching herself as a public officer, contrary to the provision of Section 82(a) of the Criminal Laws of Lagos State No. 11, 2011.
    The judge was alleged to have received $793,800 in several transactions from various sources between 2012 and 2015 “so as to have a significant increase in your assets that you cannot reasonably explain the increase in relation to your lawful income”.
    According to the EFCC, Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia, by her actions, violated Section 82(a) of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, No. 11, 2011.
    The judge was alleged to have forged a deed of assignment of County City Bricks Development Company Limited and Nigel & Colive Limited dated July 5, 2010, which the EFCC claimed was purportedly prepared and signed by Charles Musa & Co.
    The offence is said to be contrary to Section 467 of the Criminal Code Cap C17, Law of Lagos State of Nigeria 2003.
    In count 30, the EFCC accused Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia of giving false information to one of its operatives, Lawal Abdullahi, on October 19, 2016 by allegedly claiming on the telephone to be on admission at Gold Cross Hospital, Bourdillon Road, Ikoyi, Lagos, while she was not there.
    The offence is said to be contrary to Section 39(2)(a) of the EFCC (Establishment) Act, 2004.
    Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia pleaded not guilty to the charges.
    EFCC prosecutor Rotimi Oyedepo prayed the court for a trial date and for an order remanding the defendants in prison custody pending their trial.
    But Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia’s counsel, Mr. Wale Akoni (SAN), and Mr. Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), for Obla, said while they had no objection to the prayer for a trial date, they were opposed to the application to remand their clients in prisons.
    Both of them told the court that they had filed bail applications for their clients.
    Akoni urged Justice Oshodi to grant Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia bail on self-recognition as a judge of the Federal High Court or to grant her bail on liberal terms, with a condition that the EFCC should not be the one to verify the bail conditions.
    Adedipe also prayed Justice Oshodi to grant Obla bail on liberal terms, assuring that he would make himself available for trial.
    “When he was allowed to travel to the U.S., he did so and returned and submitted his passport to the EFCC.
    “He is one of them in EFCC. He prosecutes cases for them. Rather than pay him, they dragged him to court. He is a respected member of the Bar, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria,” Adedipe said.
    Oyedepo opposed their requests and urged Justice Oshodi not to grant the defendants bail but to order an accelerated hearing of the case.
    Oyedepo said if released on bail, Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia would interfere with investigation and the prosecution witnesses.
    He recalled that it was on that basis that the EFCC revoked the administrative bail earlier granted the judge.
    After standing down the case for about two hours, Justice Oshodi, in a ruling, admitted both defendants to bail on self-recognition.
    He ordered them to deposit N20m each and their passport to the chief registrar of the court pending conclusion of their trial.
    Justice Oshodi warned that the bail would be revoked if the defendants failed to meet the conditions within seven days.
    The trial began immediately thereafter, with the EFCC calling its first witness, Mr. Adedamola Oshodi, a Diamond Bank Plc official.
    The case was, however, adjourned till January 9, next year for continuation of trial, following the submission of the defence counsel who said they were not prepared for the trial.

  • Buhari urged to sell more Presidential aircrafts

    Buhari urged to sell more Presidential aircrafts

    Constitutional Lawyer and Human Rights Activist, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, Thursday urged President Muhammadu Buhari to further reduce the cost of governance by selling four more Presidential Aircrafts from the remaining nine in the presidential fleet.

    He said it was good that President Buhari handed over two of the Aircrafts to the Nation’s Airforce considering the huge cost of maintaining them, lamenting that the country spends over a billion naira monthly to maintain the Presidential fleet.

    The activist made the remarks while delivering a paper titled “The Role of the Judiciary in Promoting and Sustaining Good Governance: Nigeria as a case Study” during the 2016 Annual Lecture and Gold Service Awards organized by the Centre for Democratic Governance in Africa at the Sheraton Hotel, Abuja.

    He criticized the Presidential System of Government as being practiced in Nigeria, describing it as too expensive, and wasteful. He said it was a misnormal for 85 percent of the nation’s annual expenditure to be committed to recurrent expenses.

    Ozekhome also criticized the sting operations carried out by the Department of State Security, DSS, and “the media trial of judges based on allegations that are yet to proven before a competent court of law”, maintaining that the process was not only faulty but unconstitutional.
    He said the action was an attempt to annex and emasculate the judiciary and strip it of its powers and functions as an independent arm of government with the mandate to ensure checks and balances in the functions of the other arms of government.

    The activist maintained that the role of the judiciary cannot be over emphasized in any functional democratic system, arguing that in view of its central role to the stability of the system the issues of appointment of judicial Officers and their condition of service should be taken seriously.

    Ozekhome who condemned any form of corruption in the judiciary further submitted that the nation’s judiciary should be above board at all times.

    His words: “one of the time tested doctrines of the principles of equity is that he that comes to equity must come with clean hands. If the judiciary must effectively carry out its role of fostering accountability, it must first be shown most unequivocally that the judiciary itself is accountable and takes accountability seriously.

    “This is because, a judiciary laden with the baggage of corruption or unaccountable cannot in all good conscience, superintend over the issue of public accountability since it is the last hope of the common man.

    “Consequently in a situation where the common man sees the judiciary as part of the problems, rather than the solution, the role of the Bench in fostering accountability will be gravely hampered and seriously jeopardized. Rather than see Judges as God’s representatives on earth, they will be seen as Lucifer’s earthly chieftains and emissaries” Ozekhome asserted.

  • No attempt to gag media, says SAN

    Mr. Tunde Fagbohunlu (SAN), the counsel to Total E&P Nigeria Ltd, has denied that his client asked the Federal High Court in Lagos to bar journalists from reporting a case of alleged illegal oil export brought against it by the Federal Government of Nigeria.

    In a statement, the lawyer said his client only complained to the judge about “misrepresentations” in media reports on the case.

    Fagbohunlu said: “Total has never requested that journalists be barred from the proceedings. And I did not make any such request to the court either. I brought to the court’s attention that certain publications had made misrepresentations about the proceedings in court, pre-judged the issues in the litigation and presented unbalanced information about the case.

    “I then asked the court to warn the relevant media to desist from these specific acts. The judge did not give a decision dismissing my request, like many of the papers reported afterwards. In fact, she orally warned the media to desist from such types of publication, and made it clear she was not barring the media from performing their work.”

    The Federal Government, through its lawyer Prof. Fabian Ajogwu (SAN), sued several multinational oil companies, alleging that they lied about the volume of crude oil they shipped out of the country between January 2011 and December 2014.

    Fagbohunlu had filed a preliminary objection, urging the court to strike out the suit on the grounds that it failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action against Total E&P Nigeria.

     

  • …. Court didn’t stop Port-Harcourt convention- SAN

    …. Court didn’t stop Port-Harcourt convention- SAN

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Ferdinand Orbih, yesterday dismissed suggestion that a Federal High Court in Abuja stopped the August national convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Port-Harcourt.

    Orbih in a chat with journalists claimed that contrary to interpretations by the media and some vested interests, Justice Okon Abang never restrained the party from holding its convention in Rivers State.

    “The point must be made very clearly that it is not true that Justice Okon Abang stopped the forthcoming Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) convention scheduled to hold in Port-Harcourt on August 17, 2016,” he said.

    “What is true is that there is an application filed by the plaintiffs seeking to stop that convention. It will interest you to note that the application is still pending; it has not even been argued before the learned trial judge.

    “So, there is no way a judge can give a decision on a motion that has not yet been argued before him. So, it is good to disabuse the minds of the public that no such thing happened.”

    Orbih said:  “What the Port-Harcourt division of the High Court decided was that the convention that was held in Port-Harcourt wherein the Ali Modu Sherriff National Executive Committee of the PDP was dissolved and the Ahmed Markafi-led caretaker committee was set up by the PDP, was validly held and conducted and that everything done in that convention was in order.

    “Justice Okon Abang has not set aside that judgment. And so long as that judgment is not set aside, from my knowledge of the law, it means that it is valid and subsisting till the Court of Appeal decides one way or the other about the constitutionality of that judgment.”

    Orbih said the ruling expressly stated that the court will  not set  aside the judgment of the Federal High Court in Port-Harcourt for two reasons.

    Orbih: “First, the court in Abuja said that there is no application before that court wherein any of the parties is seeking to set aside that judgment. Secondly, the court also expressly stated in its ruling that the issue about the validity or the constitutionality or otherwise of that judgment is left for the Court of Appeal to decide. So, it is not also correct to say that the Abuja High Court has set aside the judgment of the Port-Harcourt division of the same court; that is not true at all.”

  • SAN to lawyers: reject bad briefs

    SAN to lawyers: reject bad briefs

    Mr. Sebastin Hon (SAN) is a renowned author and legal scholar. In this interview with Legal Editor John Austin Unachukwu, he shares his views on legal practice, justice sector reform and NBA elections .

    As a leading lawyer, what do you think is the secret of success in the legal profession?

    The key to every successful career is  God. He provides the needed divine blessings and then hard work. In our profession, honesty and ethical conduct are also important factors, because without a good name, one would fizzle out easily. As a matter of fact, for one to be successful in legal practice, he must take it as a vocation or profession and not as a business to make money. If you lay a good foundation, money will always come, God permitting. So, I will give all the glory to God because after graciously giving the gift of knowledge, He also protects me and strengthens me to muscle my way through hard times.

    There have been calls for the over haul of the justice sector to expedite justice delivery in the country. How can this be achieved?

    These calls have been resonating for a very long time now; but I think gradually, things have started taking shape. We have had strict timelines in determination of election petition matters, leading to expeditious determination of such matters. We also have the Criminal Justice and Administration Act, which has also had great impact on the length of time of criminal trials. I will, however, quickly add that the major players in the system – the lawyers, the Judges and the litigants – must be ready to accept that this is a new dawn in Nigeria, where dilatory tactics are no more condoned by Nigerians. I have been watching the trend on social media, and I can confirm that most Nigerians are impatient with delayed criminal trials. For my colleagues, I will counsel that if a matter against your client is not favourable to him, either do not accept the brief or advice him on how best he can go about it without injuring the collective sensibilities of Nigerians. A lawyer is not a magician or an omnibus superpower who can do the impossible, even when the facts are very adverse. And I boldly say that taking up somebody’s defence just for the purpose of endlessly asking for adjournment or deliberately frustrating the trial is unethical and immoral.

    What is your advice on this?

    If you have a bad case, either do not accept the brief or accept it but advise your client on the needful. Our attitude of late is lampooning the professional standing of lawyers; and this image is not good for anybody.

    I will also suggest the establishment of State or at least Regional Supreme Courts and Courts of Appeal – as done elsewhere in other Federal political setups. It’s not every matter that must get to either the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court. If these and more other steps are taken, then the docket of our courts will become more manageable and the terminal life of most cases will be shortened.

    Your book on the Law of Evidence in Nigeria is one of the most useful books for lawyers, how do you feel about this?

    This is a very difficult question, because I would have preferred The Nation to have conducted an opinion poll among lawyers, Judges and the academia to get a more accurate answer. However, I really thank God for that work. When I was researching on it, a Pastor whom I had not met before came around and prophesied that even though he did not know exactly what I was researching on, God had commanded him to tell me the book will take me to places I never imagined. Thereafter, we prayed together; and all I will say for now is that faithful Jehovah has fulfilled his prophesy delivered by a hitherto unknown servant of His. I can proudly say that I am about the most quoted author in Nigeria – courtesy of that book and some others I have authored. I return all the glory to God.

    Your latest book on constitutional and Migration law in Nigeria is due for presentation to the general public. When did you become a constitutional lawyer?

    One thing people don’t know is that I wrote a wonderful book on Constitutional Law which was published in 2004. I can proudly say, but again giving thanks to my God, that the said book has also been a constant resource material in Nigeria and beyond. Google this and see for yourself. Let me quickly add that because of the proactive way I write, that book was the only source material used in 2010 by the Federal High Court to validate Goodluck Jonathan’s Acting Presidency, when the late President Yar’adua was flown out for medical treatment without transmitting a letter to the National Assembly that Jonathan be sworn in as Acting President. Remember that I wrote the book in 2004; and without having any inkling that a sitting President would be so ill six years afterwards as not to be able to transmit that crucial letter, I wrote authoritatively in the book that if for any reason, including ill-health, ill-will or other factors, the President was unable to transmit such letter, the Vice-President should automatically be sworn in as the Acting President. That effort, therefore, took care of the vacuum existing in our constitution then, until the recent amendment that took care of it.

    Back to my latest book, I can mention some features of it which cannot  be found in any other book in Nigeria. First of all, I have reported and commented on hundreds of the most current (up to 2016) relevant cases in Nigeria, the European Court of Human Rights, the US, the UK, Canada, Australia, India, South Africa, Ghana, etc. Secondly, I  have treated topics hitherto not treated in Nigeria,these include migration into and out of Nigeria and in the ECOWAS sub-region, extradition process and proceedings, refugee movement and status in Nigeria, residency rights by foreigners, etc, under the Chapter dealing with Migration Law.

    You mentioned that Chapter 5 of the book is unique, what do you mean by this?

    This chapter deals with Fundamental Rights and it is close to 500 pages. Under this, topical issues like gay rights, wearing by Muslim women of hijabs or niqabs, unauthorised snapping of public personalities, unauthorised exposure of medical records of patients by hospitals, etc, have been elaborately treated while discussing right to privacy. Under right to life, we have treated apparently new topics in Nigeria, like assisted pregnancy, surrogate pregnancy, assisted suicide, mercy killing or euthanasia, refusal to take medical treatment by oneself or his parents/relations, abortion rights, refusal of medical doctors to treat patients rushed to their hospitals, failure of government to protect life, etc. Under freedom of the press, the Freedom of Information Act, free speech, hate speech, mass media laws, etc, have been sufficiently discussed. I have also done annotations on the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, 2009, with the use of the most current cases. I can go on and on. Remarkably, the book is more 1,200 pages and has covered the entire field of constitutional law. That is why other topics like proclamation of a state of emergency, immunity of the executive branch of government, status of the FCT Abuja and a host of other topical issues has been discussed lavishly. Above all, the entire 1999 Constitution, together with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Alterations thereof, have been amply treated. What more do I tell you?

    This is an election year for the NBA, what qualities do you expect from the next NBA President?

    There are two candidates Chief Joseph-Kyari Gadzama (SAN)and A.B Mahmud (SAN). Both of them are respected Senior lawyers. Even though I enjoy right of privacy as far as the candidate I will vote for is concerned, I will counsel members of our respected profession to vote for the candidate who will be with them through tick and thin and not abandon them midstream. He should be able to stand up to anti-people policies of the government, not minding whose ox is gored. He should also be able to objectively support the government of the day on its good policies. He should be outspoken and not reticent or reclusive even in the face of tyranny or injustice. He should be able to defend the interest of his colleagues and the NBA and not pander to some primordial cleavages or tendencies at the expense of the rule of law and due process.

    The NBA President and other Exco members should be elected by popular vote; and in this wise, I will strongly warn against manipulation of the electoral process. The President of the NBA, Augustine Alegeh (SAN), came on board via a thoroughly transparent electoral process,  hence should also pass this legacy on to his successor. It will be shameful if the Port Harcourt fiasco of the 1990s repeats itself again in 2016 under the watch and presidency of my friend, Mr. Alegeh(SAN).

    While I support electronic voting, I will suggest it should be done on branch by branch basis. In other words, each branch should vote while the final collation is done at the centre. All members of each branch should gather at a designated venue (not more than one venue per each branch) and vote thereat. Collation should be done and printed out at each such branch and the results signed by all the agents before the electronic version is sent to the centre for final collation. To enhance transparency and acceptability, each candidate should have their agents at each of the voting centres and at the central or national collation centre. Again, I must counsel, if not warn, that the NBA electoral process be not manipulated in any way.

  • Court reserves ruling on Fani-Kayode, Usman’s bail applications

    Court reserves ruling on Fani-Kayode, Usman’s bail applications

    A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos on Friday reserved ruling on the bail applications of former Minister of Aviation, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode and his Finance counterpart, Nenadi Usman.

    They are to remain in prison till July 4.

    Fani-Kayode and Usman alongside Danjuma Yusuf and Jointrust Dimensions Nigeria Limited were on June 28 arraigned by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) before Justice M. S. Hassan on a 17-count charge of conspiracy, stealing, corruption and making cash payments exceeding the amount authorized by law.

    The accused persons allegedly diverted about N4.9 billion belonging to the Federal Government to political and personal uses.

    They had pleaded not guilty to the charges.

    The accused persons’ counsel,  Ferdinand Orbih (SAN), Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN) and S. I. Ameh (SAN) moved the motion for bail, having filed separate applications in which they prayed the court to release their clients on bail.

    But the prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, said he needed time to respond to the applications.

    Justice Hassan consequently adjourned proceedings to July 1 for hearing of the bail applications.

    At the resumed hearing on Friday, the counsels argued the applications.

    Orbih prayed the court to admit the first accused person to bail based on self-recognition pending the hearing and determination of the charges preferred against her.

     

    Justice Hassan consequently adjourned to July 4 for ruling.

  • Nigerian Universities may be truly autonomous- Afe Babalola

    Nigerian Universities may be truly autonomous- Afe Babalola

     

    Elder Statesman and Founder of Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD), Aare Afe Babalola, SAN, has called for a strict obedience of the laws, regulations and the series of court judgments delivered over the years on the limitations on the powers of Visitors, Vice Chancellors and Councils of universities if the age-long and all-important autonomy of the university system is to be preserved in the country.

    Pursuant to this, he advised Government functionaries like Visitors to Federal and State Institutions of Higher Education, Ministers and Commissioners of Education to begin to appreciate that Universities, Polytechnics and Colleges of Education are not Departments or appendages of either the Federal or State Ministries of Education.

    Babalola, who delivered the Convocation Lecture, titled “University Administration: the Role of Stakeholders” at the 21st Convocation Ceremonies of the Ekiti State University, Ado-Ekiti, last week equally stressed that government functionaries who are statutorily empowered to deal with universities must appreciate now than ever before that universities are not Government Parastatals while the Vice Chancellors are not Permanent Secretaries nor Council Members Directors of Parastatals.

    The frontline legal icon set the tone and agenda for the day when he said: “the unconstitutional and illegal violation of University Laws by successive governments, Federal and State, Ministers and Officers of Government makes it imperative that we should examine the role of stakeholders in University Administration”.

    It is a notorious fact that universities have existed for over a thousand years in other parts of the world before the first University in Nigeria, the University College, Ibadan, was established in 1948, less than 70 years ago. This could be one of the reasons why Nigerian universities, like its toddling democracy, are not only still toddling, they are battling with so many teething problems. After all, History has it that the existence of great universities such as University of Constantinople sometimes known as the University of the Palace Hall of Magnaura was founded in the 425 AD, University of Bologna, 1088 while the University of Paris was founded by the Catholic Church in 1150.

    No wonder then that what a teacher in an American or British university considers to be a convention, arising from long usage, is seen by the Nigeria university teachers as a strange development. With all of this at the back of his mind and for Nigerian universities to assume their age-long autonomy, he emphasized the need for Pro Chancellors and Chairmen of University Councils to appreciate the burden on them.

    Babalola, who was Pro Chancellor and Chairman of Council of the University of Lagos between 2000 and 2007 during which he was twice voted by the NUC as the Best Pro Chancellor of Nigerian Universities while UNILAG was rated the University of First Choice, said: “It is necessary to emphasize here that the Pro Chancellors need to appreciate the burden on them. The success, failure, peace and order of the university rest on them and they take responsibility for everything, good or bad. They and their Councils must embark on policies that will ensure the smooth-running of the universities especially those that affect the development of the universities, contracts, employment of good quality lecturers, finances, including income and expenditure and auditing of university account”.

    He added: “The Pro Chancellor’s job is not one which the office-holder can take lightly. As the Chairman of Council, his duty is not merely to attend meetings, collect his allowances and thereafter go to sleep. He must always think about the growth of the university and what he must do at all times to affect it positively.

    “He is different from the Chancellor whose duty is to appear on ceremonial occasions only. He must be concerned about the welfare of the university community. He presides at all Council meetings, statutory Sub Committees of the University and also at Sub-Committees set up by Council. At meetings, he is primus inter pares”.

    Babalola also frowned at the prevailing situation whereby University Councils are dissolved and not re-constituted any time too soon after. To him, “such an unwholesome practice leaves so much to be desired apart from running foul of the intent and spirit of the law (establishing the universities)”.

    He recalled his experience in May 2004, when Councils of Universities were dissolved by Radio announcement and were not re-constituted for over 11 months as a result of which the Universities lost the steam of progress. According to him, “All those who were working on university projects under the new policy stopped work because they claimed that there was no guarantee of prompt payment anymore. It was a similar experience in efforts to re-organize income-generating units. The Endowment campaign stopped”.

    He added: “The Developers in Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) projects left sites unceremoniously because of loss of confidence. I am also aware that the Vice Chancellor had problems with other areas of administration including but not limited to promotion, appointment and request for approvals for critically important actions to make the university function properly. It is my advice that there should not be undue delay in constituting the Councils of Universities”.

    Besides, the Octogenarian would not understand how successive Presidents and State Governors are wont to dissolve University Councils on assumption of office just as they dissolve those of other Parastatals of the government.

    For example, he recalled that when Alhaji Umar Yar’Adua took over as the President of Nigeria in 2007, he descended on the University of Lagos which was constituted in 2004 and which had one year more in office. The Secretary to the Government announced the immediate dissolution of all parastatals including University Councils. The same trend continued when on July 16, 2015, the Federal Government announced the decision of the President Muhammadu Buhari to dissolve the Governing Boards of Federal Parastatals, Agencies and Institutions.

    By this announcement which was reminiscent of a similar announcement made by the administration of late President Yar’Adua, the Governing Councils of all Universities were dissolved. This action was one of several taken by successive governments over the years which have contributed to the decline in the educational fortunes of the country.

    As it were, it would appear that over the years, government has not been able to see the intricate and time-tested nexus between stable university administration and stability in the educational sector. A situation in which the tenure of Governing Councils of Universities is not secured and the composition thereof is seen as an opportunity to reward political loyalties is not one that augurs well for our Universities.  By law, University Vice-Chancellors have inviolable tenure of five years. They should be allowed to complete their tenure or proper statutory and transparent procedures be adopted, if they are accused of any wrong doings.

    That is the way it is done in other climes. Ours cannot be different. We have to do things the way they are done elsewhere for us to achieve positive and pleasant results.

     

     

  • SAN faults non-disclosure of looters

    SAN faults non-disclosure of looters

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) George Oguntade has faulted the Federal Government for not disclosing the names of those who returned stolen assets.

    The government had announced that some looters returned N78billion, $185million and £3 million, among other assets, but no names were provided.

    Oguntade said: “It is my frank and candid view that the failure of the Federal Government to provide the names of people, who have allegedly returned appropriated public funds is most unacceptable in a growing democracy like ours.

    “The essence of governance is accountability and unfortunately, the Federal Government has provided no reason whatsoever why it will depart from adhering to this standard expectation.

    “In fact, this really is the worrying part. If there was any mitigating circumstance or consideration, the government ought to have stated this for the people to consider, ruminate over and form their views .

    “However, to elect to keep mute on such a fundamental issue amounts to an abdication of executive responsibility! Its effect will simply aid and perpetuate corruption.”

    According to Oguntade, Nigerians are entitled to know who the looters are and how much each much each person returned.

    “All over the world, it is unheard of where the identity of those who have voluntarily returned appropriated public funds is covered up!

    “Where is the deterrence factor when people who have taken public funds unjustifiably know that all they have to do is to clandestinely return those funds and then get on with their lives as if nothing has happened. For all we know, all they have returned is probably a small fraction of what was fraudulently appropriated

    “By refusing to name these people, the government is doing a great disservice to the nation. The Nigerian people are entitled to know who these people are and form their opinions about them and how to relate with them.

    “A situation like this falls squarely within the contemplation and intendment of the Freedom of Information Act and Nigerians will be perfectly entitled to approach the courts to seek judicial orders compelling the Federal Government to release the names of those who have allegedly returned public funds stolen by them and to insist on their prosecution in accordance with this law.

    “The government must realise that the whole world is watching and observing what is going on and must understand that Nigeria must abide with standard norms of governance in situations like this.

    “If this is not done, all the efforts of the President and his numerous pleas of foreign governments around to aid the corruption fight in Nigeria will ring very hollow indeed.”

  • EFCC quizzes Anyanwu, SAN, PDP chair over N1.2b ‘fraud’

    EFCC quizzes Anyanwu, SAN, PDP chair over N1.2b ‘fraud’

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) yesterday arrested  the Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) in Cross River State, Mr. Ntufam John Okon, in connection with the alleged N23.29b poll bribery scandal.

    The agency  has also  quizzed Senator Chris Anyanwu and  a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mike Ahamba, on the matter.

    The three were allegedly paid N1.2billion.

    Anyanwu and Ahamba were allegedly paid N700m. Okon is in EFCC’s custody for taking N500million.

    Okon, who  was being detained yesterday, may be charged to court.

    Also, the EFCC has discovered that some of the suspects implicated in the scandal have gone overseas.

    Among the suspects are some oil industry chiefs who were believed to have been used by former Minister of Petroleum Resources Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke.

    The oil barons contributed $88.35million of the $115million(N23.29b) sent to Fidelity Bank by the ex-minister.

    The money was for some officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to alter the results of last year’s presidential election.

    According to a top source in EFCC, Anyanwu and Ahamba were interrogated at the EFCC’s  zonal office in Enugu on Wednesday.

    But the source said they were released on administrative bail and asked to return for interaction on a scheduled date.

    The source said: “Following the ongoing screening of the distribution list of the N23.29b cash, we discovered that N700million was paid to Anyanwu and Ahamba at Fidelity Bank in Ikenegbu Layout branch in Owerri.

    “The payment was effected by the detained Head of Operations of Fidelity Bank, Martin Izuogbe, based on the directive of the MD of the bank.

    “We have invited and interrogated Anyanwu and Ahamba at our Enugu Zonal Office on how they came about the cash, for what purpose and how the remittance trickled down –  if it did.

    “They have been granted administrative bail, but they were asked to come back on a scheduled date.”

    “Okon was arrested in Calabar, the Cross River State capital for collecting N500million of the money.

    “Investigations by the EFCC showed that Okon collected the money on 26th March, 2015 at a branch of Fidelity Bank in Calabar.

    “The money was placed in the transit account at the Corporate Headquarters of Fidelity Bank but cash was made available to Okon in the Calabar branch of the bank,“ a source close to the investigation said, pleading not to be named because of what he described as the “sensitivity” of the matter.

    “Okon is in the custody of the EFCC and would be charged to court soon,” he added.

    Of the oil barons involved in the scandal, the source said: “Some of these oil barons who contributed to the $115million poll bribery cash have shifted base abroad but we have located their whereabouts.

    “They have forgotten that the law can catch up with them anywhere. And their arrest is easier abroad than at home, which they are afraid of.

    “And since a huge chunk of the $115million was sourced from stolen crude, so many people were parties to the deal and with diligent investigation, we can track all these shady activities.”

  • Court dismisses Rickey Tarfa’s bid to quash bribery charge

    A Lagos State High Court in Igbosere, yesterday assumed jurisdiction to entertain a 27-count charge against embattled Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr. Rickey Tarfa, by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice A.A. Akintoye dismissed Tarfa’s preliminary objection, filed through his counsel Mr Anthony Idigbe (SAN), urging it to quash the charge and decline jurisdiction.

    Tarfa was arraigned on March 9, on a charge of ‎refusal to declare assets, making false statements, offering gratification to a public officer and failure to declare his assets.

    At the resumed hearing yesterday, Justice Akintoye, refused the defendant’s prayers but reserved her decision till the end of trial on the prayer to declare that falsification of age was not an offence known to law.

    The judge said that the EFCC had the power to investigate and prosecute Tarfa.

    “On the issue of the charge being an abuse of court process as argued by the accused, I hold that the information contained in the charge before me is different from the one before my learned brother.

    “In that charge what the accused is charged with, is obstructing EFCC officials from effecting their lawful duties.

    “I therefore hold that the information in this charge is not an abuse of court process,” she held.

    The judge also ruled that the Commission had the power to ask the defendant to declare his assets anytime, whether upon arrest or later, so far the offences charged were related to financial crimes.

    The offence of gratification of a public officer which the defendant was charged with, falls under the powers of the EFCC, she added.

    “It is my opinion that the information disclosed a prima facie case which established that the accused has a case to answer as alleged by the charge.

    “The court will not restrain a statutory body from performing it’s statutory duties in respect of anyone.

    “I hold that this court has jurisdiction to entertain this charge, the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of this court.

    “I refuse the prayer to quash this charge and I refuse the prayer to restrain the EFCC from investigating or prosecuting the accused,” Akintoye said.

    The case was adjourned till May 20 for commencement of trial and May 27 for further hearing.

    Meanwhile, the Commission also opened its case yesterday against another Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr. Joseph Nwobike, at a Lagos State Magistrates’ Court sitting in Igbosere.

    Nwobike is standing trial before Justice Raliat Adebiyi on a charge bordering on an attempt to pervert the course of justice and offering gratification to a public official, a charge he denies.

    The Commission called its first and second witnesses, Joseph Oyekunle and Oliver Enwerem, both compliance officers with United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc, and Access Bank Nig. Plc, to testify about financial transactions that occurred in the accounts of Joseph Nwobike & Co. with both banks.

    During examination in chief by prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, Oyekunle testified that on March 19, 2015, there was a N750,000 debit on the account of Joseph Nwobike & Co. in favour of Mohammed Nasir Yinusa.

    “There must have been an instruction authorizing the transaction,” he said.

    Oyekunle added that on April 1, 2015, “Debit transactions of N1.5 million in four places were made on the same day in Manager’s Cheques,” were made to another account.

    Under cross examination by defence counsel Mr. Olawale Akoni, SAN, Oyekunle admitted that on proper examination of the bank documents before him, the third and fourth transfers of N1.5 million each were made to one Seni Ibiwoye.

    “The 20th and 23rd entries were made in favour of Seni Ibiwoye,” he said, admitting that he neither operated the defendant’s account nor did he know the charge against the him.

    On his part, Enwerem testified that there were several transfers to different accounts by the defendant’s company, including a September 30, 2015 transfer of N300,00 to a company, Awa Ajia Ltd.

    He admitted that after the transactions of September 28 and 30 there were no other transfers into the accounts by Joseph Nwobike and Co.

    The case was adjourned till May 12, for continuation of trial.