The Nation Newspaper

Tag: SANs

  • SANs: no vacuum with Buhari’s absence

    SANs: no vacuum with Buhari’s absence

    •Elder statesman: ‘we’re human beings’

    Two Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) Yusuf Alli and Sebastine Hon yesterday said President Muhammadu Buhari complied with the Constitution by notifying the National Assembly of the extension of his vacation for health reasons.

    They said since he handed over to Vice President Yemi Osinbajo who will continue to act as President, there was no vacuum, which the Constitution abhors.

    Alli said: “We should all just be praying for his recovery. May God shield him so that he can get back to his duty-post.

    “He has transmitted a letter to the National Assembly. That’s what the Constitution says he should do. And he has done that.”

    On Buhari not stating when he will return, Alli said: “What is important is that he has transmitted a letter saying that he would be away.

    “This means by extension that the Acting President continues in office, so there is no vacuum. What the Constitution wants to prevent is a situation where there is a vacuum. Somebody was acting for him and will continue to act.”

    Hon, a constitutional lawyer, said Buhari means well for Nigeria by handing over to the Vice President before traveling.

    He said the Acting President has full powers of a President, so there was no vacuum.

    Hon said: “It is still within his constitutionally allowed time to be absent. Anybody can be sick, so let’s not over blow this thing. I would want everybody to pray for him and to wish him well.

    “The Vice President is the Acting President. He has all the powers of a sitting President as it were, in the absence of the President.

    “Buhari has done well by handing over to the Vice President. Some other people don’t do that. Some governors don’t hand over to their deputies when they travel.

    “So, to hand over to the Vice President shows he means well for the country.”

    Elder statesman and retired Federal Permanent secretary Chief Deji Fasuan, said it is a matter of regret that the president could not return yesterday as expected.

    He added: “since we are all human beings, we are subjected to vicissitude of life including problem with body chemistry. We should continue to pray for him and to wish him well s that he get well quickly and rejoin us.

    “This is one president, a Nigerian who loves this country dearly and who is desirous of cleaning it up. I’m sure all men of goodwill will wish him well.”

    But a former Minister of Aviation Femi Fani Kayode in a tweeted last night: “Buhari has finally acknowledged that he is sick and has extended his stay abroad indefinitely. It is now clear that Nigeria is in trouble.”

  • SANs tackle U.S., NDLEA over Kashamu

    SANs tackle U.S., NDLEA over Kashamu

    Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), Lateef Fagbemi, Alex Izinyon and Akin Olujimi, yesterday described as illegal any attempt to extradite Senator Buruji Kashamu.
    Fagebmi, Izinyon and Olujimi, in a joint statement, said the United States and the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) would be overstepping their bounds by attempting to extradite the senator.
    The SANs said: “The U.S. did not appeal against any of the two UK judgments in favour of our client. The judgments therefore, remain binding against the U.S. and Nigeria for ever. Rather than appeal against those judgments, what the U.S. did next was to latch on to the conducive atmosphere in Nigeria brewed by the political enemies of our client, who even though aware that the U.S. had lost out twice in UK courts against our client, mounted unholy pressure on the former Attorney General to commence extradition proceedings against our client. He was therefore forced to approach the courts in Nigeria for redress. Just as the English courts had ruled in his favour, four different courts in four different suits in Lagos and Abuja found in favour of the Senator.
    “Notwithstanding the various subsisting decisions referred to above given by English and Nigerian courts all outlawing the extradition of our client, the NDLEA is, in clear disobedience of the various judgments, still plotting clandestinely with other security agencies at the behest of US agents to forcibly abduct our client and smuggle him to the U.S.
    “Our client’s U.S. lawyers had filed the suit under a law of the United States which the District court in the U.S. held did not create a private right of action. Our client’s U.S. solicitors appealed against the decision of the District Court in 2016. It was that appeal that the U.S. Court of Appeals pronounced upon on 23rd January, 2017 by affirming the decision of the District Court which held that the statute ‘did not create a private right of action’. In other words, it is not open to any individual to predicate a suit on the statute. Clearly, that was not a decision on the merit of the issues submitted to the court.
    “We are in agreement with the court that mere presence of a U.S. employee during an arrest by local officials in a foreign land and even assisting the local officials in an arrest will not amount to attempted abduction. What was not put before the U.S. court of appeals for determination and which the court did not decide is a situation where the local courts in the foreign land had given express orders prohibiting arrest, abduction and/or detention, as done by the Federal High Court in its judgments prohibiting the NDLEA and other security operatives from arresting or removing and exporting our client to the U.S. Any arrest or removal in breach of the orders of the Federal High court will unarguably amount to abduction as defined in Article 2 of the United Nations International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance adopted by the General Assembly on 20th December, 2006 to which the attention of the U.S. Court of Appeals was not drawn. Indeed Article 5 of the Convention renders perpetrators of enforced disappearance and the State which organize, acquiesce in or tolerate such disappearances liable under civil law, without prejudice to the international responsibility of the State concerned in accordance with the principles of international law.
    “The U.S. court of appeal did not purport to and cannot overrule the decision of any Nigerian court which must be obeyed, except set aside by a higher court in Nigeria … We have no doubt the NDLEA will backtrack from its enthusiasm after reading our analysis of the judgment. It is also worthy of mention that the Central Authority in matters of extradition from Nigeria is the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation. The role of the NDLEA is no more than to provide information that the Attorney General may require in regard to any request for extradition. So, the only authority who can speak as to what Government is doing on any request for extradition is the Attorney General of the Federation. We are not aware that the Hon. Attorney General has assigned or delegated his statutory authority to the NDLEA.”

  • New SANS

    •We congratulate them but they must seek to bring respectability to their profession

    THE annual ritual of appointing new Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) has come and gone. This year, a total of 22 new silk wigs were elevated to the coveted top echelon of the legal profession. By that elevation, the beneficiaries become members of the inner bar, a position that carries a lot of privileges. While congratulating the new silks, we wish to remind them of the great expectations from the general public, particularly now that our country is going through a difficult phase in ensuring public accountability.

    So, we urge them to always remember their primary role as officers in the temple of justice. By that we mean they should not wear their new toga as an impetus to subvert the legal process, any time it suits their rich clients. They must therefore appreciate that a number of their colleagues have by their self-serving conduct, portrayed the legal profession in bad light. For instance, in the fight against corruption, the general impression is that some senior lawyers have taken on the dubious role of sabotaging the process.

    In some of the brazen instances, such lawyers openly abuse a presiding judge, and then turn around to ask the judge to excuse himself, as he will likely be biased after the abuse. Some others even go as far as offering gratification to judges, all in their desperate effort to win their cases. So, the new silks while being inducted into a hall of fame, may also be exposed to a sinecure group of infamy. That is why they must make their choices wisely, particularly if their reputation and the integrity of the profession is of any importance to them.

    Again, we urge them not to make mere technical brilliance the ultimate goal of their career. As is clearly evident, many of the duplicitous senior lawyers who constitute themselves into clogs against accountability in governance, are technically brilliant. Yet, they are ethically and morally bankrupt. As the new silks know, the award of their law degrees and even their new position are based on being found worthy in character and learning. So, why should they, after taking the benefit, then turn around like some of their colleagues, to become dubious?

    We therefore urge the SANs to match brilliance with character, first as officers in the temple of justice, even before giving out their second best for the benefit of their clients. In our view, when a person is elevated to the top echelon of his or her profession, such a person becomes a role model for the younger ones. That should be the case with the learned profession. Indeed, those charged with the responsibility of determining the honourees should also bear that in mind, while making their selection.

    We also note the increasing controversies in the appointment of the SANs. Part of the complaint is that cronyism and nepotism, among other extraneous considerations, have crept into the selection process. For, the aggrieved persons who otherwise do not qualify have been elevated, just because they are connected to those calling the shots. The result is that some of those who bear the title do not deserve it; yet they parade the title. Perhaps, it is time to review the process, to make it more transparent.

    Also, the approving authorities should step down the yearly ritual any year they are unable to find qualified persons to be made senior advocates. They should note that even the national merit award committee sometimes does not find worthy persons to be honoured. We warn that incremental diminution in the quality of lawyers who get elevated diminishes the prestige attached to the position.

  • Three SANs make Delta’s top 100

    Three Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), Chief George Uwechue, Chief Albert Akpomudje and Chief Dafe Akpedeye, have been named among 100 indigenes to be honoured during the commemoration of the 25th anniversary of Delta State.

    The SANs and 97 other icons from various professions would be profiled in a Special Compendium of Honour, for distinguishing themselves through selfless service to humanity and development of the state.

    The compendium to be published by the Corporate and Media Africa Communications Limited, in collaboration with the Delta State Ministry of Culture and Tourism, will be launched on November 5.

    Head, coordinating committee of the compendium, Fidelis Odumosor, and the coordinator, Alex Omordia, said it would serve as encouragement for Delta indigenes across the world who have made meaningful impact in the quest for the state’s growth and service to humanity.

    According to them, the compendium will comprise ‘profiles of top 100 people who have made the state proud in the last 25 years and will also unveil the numerous investment opportunities in the state.’

    The event is slated to be chaired by the former Head of State, Ibrahim Gbadamosi Babangida.

  • Battle of two SANs

    Battle of two SANs

    Two legal luminaries are battling for governor in Ondo State. On November 26, the electorate will decide the fate of Mr. Eyitayo Jegede (SAN) of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Who wears the crown? Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU examines the struggle for power in the Sunshine state.

    Eyitayo Jegede and Rotimi Akeredolu have some things in common. They are senior colleagues who have paid their dues in the bar. Both of them are men of impeccable character. The two lawyers have risen to the pinnacle of their legal profession as Senior Advocates of Nigeria. At different times, Akeredolu and Jegede had served Ondo State as Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice.

    On November 26, the two lawyers will be on the weighing scale. They will test their popularity at the governorship election, which many observers believe will shape the future of the 40 year-old state. Jegede is contesting on the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which is itching to retain power. Eyes will also be on Akeredolu, who is contesting for the second time. In 2012, the Owo-born lawyer and former President of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) was defunct Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) flag bearer. He came third, training Governor Olusegun Mimiko of the Labour Party (LP) and Olusola Oke of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). At the weekend, he emerged as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) at a keenly contested primary in Akure, the state capital. The exercise was supervised by Jigawa State Governor Badaru Abubakar.

    Akeredolu emerged as the flag bearer with 669 votes, beating Segun Abraham (635), Olusola Oke (576) and Ajayi Boroffice (471). Some party officials said scores of aspirants from Owo decided to step down for him so that the ancient town would not lose out. Generally, the shadow poll was free, fair, transparent and credible.

    Jegede and Akeredolu are struggling for power at a time their parties are facing serious challenges. The Ondo State PDP appears fragmented. Two factions, led by Senator Ahmed Makarfi and Senator Modu Sheriff, are fighting for the soul of the chapter. Although the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has recognised Jegede as the authentic candidate, the factional candidate, Jimoh Ibrahim, who is backed by Sheriff, is kicking against his candidature. However, it appears that Governor Olusegun Mimiko is in charge of the party, although there are protests against his style of party management. Since he defected from the Labour Party (LP) to the PDP, old members of the party have raised allegations of politics of exclusion. They said this style has made the challenge of harmonisation more difficult.  The governor succeeded in averting a rancorous primary. Only two aspirants-Jegede and Saka Lawal-were contenders. In the faction, no eye brow was raised against the exercise.

    The election, according to analysts, is more important to Mimiko, fondly called Iroko by his admirers. In fact, some people believe that Mimiko is still the main issue, although Jegede is the candidate. The former Attorney-General is not a politician. He became the anointed candidate, based on his competence and track record as a commissioner. But, Mimiko, sources said, is jealously guarding his political base so that, after leaving office, he can still remain the undisputed political leader of the state.

    Besides, the PDP Governors’ Forum has an unfinished business. The governors want to enlarge the coast of the party. Party sources said a Southsouth PDP governor is coordinating the mobilisation of support for the Ondo PDP in its bid to checkmate the APC.  An Akure-based PDP chieftain, who said the poll is critical to Mimiko’s career, added: “Mimiko and Akeredolu are political foes. If Akeredolu succeeds him, a searchlight will be beamed on his government. This election, for both of them, is also about ego. Like typical Ondo people, the two of them are strong willed. Outsiders will say they are stubborn politicians.”

    For Akeredolu, the governorship election is more important than the primary. While he relied on his structure to win more delegates to his side, he would need the entire party to succeed at the poll. The first post-primary step, therefore, is reconciliation. Ahead of the poll, the APC should put its house in order. Despite the transparent primary, some aspirants may still be bitter over its outcome. Some top party leaders were also enraged that the certain aspirants were overwhelmed by emotion few days to the primary when they passed insults to leaders who drafted them into the race in the past.

    The challenge of reconciliation may have been compounded by the acrimony within the Ondo State APC executive committee. Some officials are up in arms against the chairman, Hon. Isaacs Kekemeke. But, giving hints about how to resolve the logjam, the Publicity Secretary, Abayomi Adesanya, said party officials who have links with the PDP should give way so that they will not be able to act as moles during the election.

    Some chieftains also believe that Akeredolu will have to court his rivals at the primary. The outcome of the exercise showed that the  Ondo APC has four prominent leaders-Akeredolu, Abraham, Oke and Borofffice. “The four of them and other leaders should work together at this time that Ondo is expecting change,” said Adesanya. Working together entails setting up an all-inclusive campaign machinery that gives the aspirants and members a sense of participation and belonging.

    A former legislator, Prince Ademola Adegoroye, who stepped down from the race, few days to the contest, put the challenges more succinctly. He said: “Three challenges are confronting our party after the primary. The first is that of ensuring unity and cohesion in the party. The second is the healing of wounds because of what happened in the few weeks preceding the primary. The third is that we must sell Akeredolu to the people and re-assure them that he will do well. This is necessary in view of the growing popularity of the Akure candidate, Eyitayo Jegede, and the perception of the Akure about the election.”

    Events in the APC may have necessitated a change of strategy by the PDP. Despite the participation of contestants from the three districts at the APC primary, the party appeared disposed to zoning to the Ondo North. That may have been the main reason why the district had the highest number of aspirants. Unlike the APC, the PDP has been silent on zoning. Thus, it has picked its candidate from Ondo Centre, where the governor hails from. The major beneficiary of the decision is Akure, which is reputed for its numerical strength and periodic bloc voting.

    A major challenge for the PDP and the APC is the choice of running mates. Since the PDP has picked its candidate from Akure, some  APC chieftains have been pressing for the zoning of the deputy governorship to the state capital. A source said the PDP is considering picking Jegede’s running mate from the South or North District.

    Ondo State has two options. The two candidates are almost on the same pedestal. They are technocrats. They are conversant with the peoples’ expectations. At 60, Akeredolu is still a bundle of energy. At 53, Jegede is full of vigour and zest. Akeredolu seems to have an edge in terms of field experience, having mounted the rostrum four years ago. During that period, he has been oiling his political machinery and learning the ropes. Jegede has been one of the key aides of the governor in the last seven and half years; experienced, very efficient at work and highly dependable.

    Akeredolu and Jegede are struggling to succeed Mimiko at a difficult time. The state has a lean purse. The federal allocation is dwindling. Yet, the demand for more dividends of democracy is increasing. “Challenging times need extraordinary measures,” Jegede said, stressing that he is up to the task. He rejected the label of a lackey or stooge, saying that he is eminently qualified to rule the state, based on his pedigree, integrity and competence. He acknowledged his Akure root, but he quickly clarified that he is prepared to be governor of Ondo State, and not Akure alone. In the past, Jegede was drafted to the senatorial race. He declined, saying that he was only interested in governorship. The candidate promised to build on the achievements of Mimiko across the sectors.

    Since 2012, Akeredolu has been preaching the gospel of change in Ondo. In his view, the state is blessed with enormous human and material resources, lamenting that its people are still poor in the midst of plenty. He promised reforms in the critical sectors. In addition, he promised to run an efficient, open and transparent government.

    There are other candidates on the platforms of smaller parties. During the poll, they will be spectators. Who wins between the two legal giants? Time will tell.

  • Law School class of 85 to honour CJ, SANs

    The Class of 85 of Nigeria Law School will honour some of its members, who have  distinguished themselves in various spheres of the legal profession tomorrow.

    The event coincides with the ongoing Annual General Conference  of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) taking place in Port Harcourt, Rivers State.

    Chairman of the class, Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), in a statement, said four high court judges, six Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANS), two professors of law, the Solicitor-General of the Federation and three other members, who had distinguished themselves and uplifted the profile of the class, would be honoured at the annual class reunion.

    The event will hold by 2pm at the Asia Town Chinese Restaurant in GRA, Port Harcourt.

    Among the judges to be honored are the Chief Judge of Osun State, Justice Adepele Oyebola Ojo; Justices Sabiu Yahuza of the Federal High Court; Jude Okeke of High Court of Federal Capital Territory and Justice Ada Onyetenu of Federal High Court.

    Among the SANs to be honored are Chief Joe Odey-Agi; Mr. Dejo Lamikanra; Mr. Charles Obishai; Sir Granville Abibo; Sir Emeka Anaenugwu and Mr. Aham Eke-Ejelam.

    Solicitor-General of the Federation and Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Justice, Mr Taiwo Abidogun and the Director of Civil Litigation in the same ministry, Mr. Dayo Apata, would be honoured.

    The university dons on the honour list are the Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Lagos (UNILAG) Prof. Ayo Atsenuwa,  and her Rivers State University of Science and Technology counterpart, Prof. Sunday Okogbule.

    The Chief Registrar of National Industrial Arbitration Panel, Hajia Hajara Usman, former Group Company Secretary of NNPC, Mr. Ike Oguine and former Director of Legal Services of Central Bank of Nigeria, Mr . Moses Adediran are among those to be honored.

    The Class leader, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN) is expected to declare the reunion open.

  • Edo hires SANs to recover Avan Cement factory

    Edo hires SANs to recover Avan Cement factory

    The Edo State government says it has hired some Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) to pursue the recovery of Avan Cement factory.

    It accused the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) administration under former Governor Lucky Igbinedion of withdrawing $31 million from the state’s coffers and setting up the cement factory in the name of an individual.

    Governor Adams Oshiomhole spoke on his administration’s plan to probe the cement factory when the All Progressives Congress (APC) campaign rally was in Akoko-Edo Local Government.

    Oshiomhole said Edo State was given 15 per cent share, whereas 100 per cent of the factory’s assets belonged to the state.

    The governor said those involved in the illicit deal would be prosecuted.

    He said some people were arrested for attempting to sell the factory’s assets.

    Oshiomhole said: “All the problems we are facing today is as a result of the bad leadership of the PDP in Edo State during their 10-year reign and the 16 years they led this country. That is why we have told our people to monitor activities at the factory.

    “The last time I heard they were trying to steal the asset, after I revealed what I saw in the books, we arrested some of the guys and handed them over to the police. Given the natural endowment we have in Akoko Edo, when we bring that factory into operation by reclaiming the ownership from the thieves, we will employ our people there.

    “This is because you cannot take $31 million from the Edo State government’s account and set up a business and call it a private business. We will not accept that. It will be Godwin’s pleasure to bring that factory into work. He will create jobs with it.

    “The PDP killed our state. We can never go back to Egypt. Things are tough today in Nigeria because of how PDP looted this nation. Today, one fake pastor is coming from the godfathers that he wants to be governor. We will punish them with our votes.”

     

  • Behold the new SANs

    Behold the new SANs

    On September 19, in Abuja, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC) of the Body of Benchers will confer the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) on 22 lawyers, including three academics. Legal Editor, JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU, profiles some of them.

    The full list

     

    ON September 19, 22 lawyers will be conferred with the rank of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs). They are Nigerian Law School (NLS) Director-General Olanrewaju  Onadeko, Nnamonso Eminem, Prof. Muhammed Tabiu, Dr. Valerie-Janette Azinge, Olufunke Agbor, Olusola Ojutalayo, Richard Akintunde, Oyesoji Oyeleke, James Njeze Ikeyi and Elisha Kurah.

    Others are: Adewunmi  Ogunsanya, Olatubosun Olanipekun, Chief Kalu Umeh, Adewale Adesokan, Andrew Igboekwe, Fredson Okoli, Olaseni Adio, Olasheni Ibiwoye, Abdulhakeem Mustapha, Mba Ukweni, Edward Gyang Pwajok  and Prof. Chukwu Omaka.

     

    Olanrewajo Onadeko

     

    He was Secretary to the Council of Legal Education (CLE) and Director of Administration of the institution. He teaches Criminal Procedure and Advocacy, which is his specialty. He wrote the book “The Nigerian Criminal Trial Procedure” and many articles in journals. He is the first Chairman of the Editorial Board of the Nigerian Law and Practice Journal (1997-2001). He served as the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) of The Republic of Gambia (1989-1994). Onadeko is a former Deputy Director-General, Lagos Campus of the Law School and rose to become the Director-General of the institution.

     

    Dr. Valerie Azinge

     

    Dr. Valerie Azinge obtained her Bachelor of Laws Degree (LL.B) from the University of Jos in 1980 and finished at the Law School in 1981.

    She obtained a Master of Laws Degree (LL.M) in 1984 from the London School of Economics and Political Science, and in 1990, she obtained a Doctor of Philosophy in Law (Ph. D) from the Ambrose Ali University, Ekpoma.

    Dr. Azinge, the Managing Partner of Azinge and Azinge,  an Abuja-based law firm, is a member of several professional bodies, including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA),  Chairman, Committee on Family and Child’s Rights, Member, NBA  Section on Legal Practice (SLP), International Bar Association (IBA)  and World Jurists Association. She is the author of the Jurisprudence of Failed Banks Tribunal and the Law of Broking in Nigeria.

    Mrs Azinge has held several political offices, including Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) 1996 -2000, Special Rapporteur on extra-judicial killing, NHRC.

     

     Umeh Kalu

     

    Chief Umeh Kalu was born in Okagwe-Ohafia in Ohafia Local Government Area of Abia State.

    He bagged his Bachelor of Laws Degree (LL.B) from the Abia State University in 1981 in 1985 and was called to the Nigerian Bar in 1986.

    Umeh Kalu set up his law Firm, Umeh Kalu & Associates in Surulere, Lagos State in 1986.

    In 2007, he obtained a Masters Degree in Law (LL.M) from the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS).

    Kalu has at various times held the following positions, including Senior Special Assistant on Legal Matters to the Governor of Abia State, Chief Theodore Ahamefule Orji;  member, Body of Benchers from 2009 till date; member, Council of Legal Education from 2009 till date; member, Abia State Security Council; Chairman, Abia State Council on Prerogative of Mercy, founder, the Umeh Kalu Foundation.

    He is the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Abia State.

     

    Andrew Chukwuemeka Igboekwe 

                              

    Andrew Chukwuemeka Igboekwe obtained his first degree in law (LL.B) from the Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in 1987. He won several faculty prizes for being the best student in Law of Banking and Insurance, Law of Taxation, Family Law e.t.c., graduating with a second class upper.  He was also the best all round graduating student in the faculty and won the Dean of the Faculty of Law’s annual prize for the best all round graduating student in 1987.

    He attended Nigerian Law School, Victoria Island, Lagos where he passed the bar final exams in 1988 with second class honours upper division.  He was called to the Nigerian Bar on November 3, 1988. He cut his teeth at the Chambers of Chief Afe Babalola SAN in Ibadan.  He later moved to Lagos and set up his own law firm Andy Igboekwe & Co. In 1993, Igboekwe obtained a Masters in law (LL.M) from the University of Lagos. He is a member of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (UK).

     

    Chijioke Okoli

     

    Chijioke Okoli holds a Masters (LLM) in Sports Law and Practice from De Montfort University, Leicester, England.

    He is a pioneer of sports law in Nigeria, and specialises in commercial litigation, including white collar crime matters in the commercial/corporate environment.

    Okoli was the pioneer General Counsel for Team Nigeria over a decade ago and continues to advise sports clubs and other sports entities.

    A founding partner of Lagos-based commercial law firm of Ilo & Okoli, Okoli is a former Chairman of NBA Lagos Branch. Active in the Section on Business Law (SBL) the NBA, he was in addition member the National Executive Committee of the NBA, for over two years a prosecutor for the Association in the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee of the Body of Benchers.

     

    Mba E. Ukweni

     

    Mr. Mba E. Ukweni graduated from the University of Calabar in 1992 with a Bachelor of Laws, (L L. B). He was admitted into the Nigerian Law School, Victoria Island, Lagos in 1992 and qualified the following year, with Barrister at Law, BL. He was called to the Nigerian Bar on December 15, 1993.

    Ukweni did his National Youth Service Corp in Enugu between 1993 and 1994 in the Chambers of Johnny C. Okonkwo (SAN), Legal Practitioners in Enugu. After his National Youth Service, Mr. J. C. Okonkwo (SAN) retained Ukweni and he practised from December 1993 to July 1998.

    He joined Kanu G. Agabi& Associates in July 1998. Ukweni set up Mba E. Ukweni & Associates on  March 16, 2005. He has since been the Principal partner of the firm.

    Ukweni is a member of the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR).

    He was a member of the Enugu Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), 1993 -1998 and that of Calabar Barnch since 1998. Ukweni was Legal Adviser, Nigerian Bar Association, Calabar Branch, from October 2006 to October 2008 and Chairman, NBA Calabar Branch from April 2009 to April 2011

    Ukweni is an Associate Editor of Legal Text Publishing Company Ltd., the Publishers Weekly Report of Nigeria (WRN), June 2000 till date. He is Chairman, Cross River State Law Reforms Commission.

  • SANs, top politicians disagreee over naming of suspected looters

    SANs, top politicians disagreee over naming of suspected looters

    Prominent Nigerians yesterday disagreed over the failure of President Muhammadu Buhari to “name and shame” looters of the treasury.

    While some are of the view that the Federal Government acted well by not reading the names of those who have refunded looted cash, others believe the non-disclosure of their names has robbed negatively on the anti-corruption war.

    Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Niyi Akintola  yesterday urged President Muhammadu Buhari to declare a state of emergency on corruption and the economy because, according to him, Nigerians are suffering.

    He said the President disappointed Nigerians by refusing to disclose the names of looters, whose activities led to the economic adversity and despair in the land.

    The lawyer, who spoke with The Nation on phone, advised President Buhari to suspend the rule of law for a season so that he can genuinely fight against corruption with speed and efficiency.

    He said the N74 billion recovered from suspected looters fell below expectation, adding that the Federal Government should beam the searchlight on former government officials.

    But, to a Lagos politician, Asiwaju Olorunfunmi Basorun, disclosing the names of suspected looters is risky and may be counter-productive.

    He said: “The disclosure by the Federal Government that the huge amount has been recovered is excellent. It is the right step in the right direction. But, no name can be mentioned now. If you mention their names, they will not return the rest of the money.. If you mention their names, they will resort to litigation to frustrate the process.”

    Akintola, who recalled that he was at the forefront of the clamour for the return of looted funds, maintained that the non-disclosure of suspected looters is a minus to the anti-graft war.

    He said: “The refusal to disclose names fell below expectation. We should name them and name them. Who made the refund? from which ministry? Which agency? We want to know from what sector. We are yet to get refund from the oil sector. What about the pension scam; the aviation sector? They claimed to have repaired Yola airport. It has spoilt again. They said they repaired the Murtala Muhammed Airport, but they are using buckets to clear the water there during the raining season.

    “What about the SURE-P? There is the allegation that the recruitment of beneficiaries in Yobe is sectional. A minister even told me that they are not even from the state. What about the NNPC?”

    In Akintola’s view, it is sad that only N78 billion was recovered in the last one year.

    He said the Federal Government should declare a state of emergency on corruption and the economy, stressing that the anti-graft battle will only be fought with speed and vigour, if the country can suspend the rule of law for one year.

    The lawyer also advised the Federal Government to expand the personnel for fighting corruption, adding that, apart from expanding and fortifying the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC), the State Security Service (SSS), the police and other agencies should be part of the coordinated approach.

    He also said the anti-corruption war should be extended  to the 36 states by governors, who should investigate the activities of past government officials.

    Akintola added: “Attention is not paid to corruption in the states. Governors should look at the states. They take bonds and spend it on elections.”

    The lawyer also urged the government to spend the recovered money judiciously by investing in capital projects for the benefit of the people.

    He added: “Government should stop being bad economic managers. They should use the money to tackle infrastructural decay. Don’t keep the money in the bank. Inflation will catch up with it. The money will not be productive.  Obasanjo left N70 billion in the reserves. The Jonathan administration spent it and left N17 billion when it was leaving. The Bible says the foolish man is keeping money without knowing who will spend it.”

    The chairman of United Progressives Party (UPP), Chief Chekwas Okorie, said looters should be punished to deter others.

    He said: “The money recovered so far is mind boggling. The amount, put together, is about N3.5 trillion, an amount more than 2015 budget. President Buhari must be commended for refusing to be blackmailed that the anti corruption fight is one-sided.

    “Government should be encouraged to deploy the money toward doing what is good for the people.  The government should also map out measures to make public officers account for any money entrusted to them because there will always be a day of reckoning.”

    Okorie added that those who were allocated funds and never bothered to find out the source of the money, but refunded the money should be spared.

    “Those who used their offices to make this kind of money should not be spared because there is no evidence that they have returned all the money in their care.

    “This will serve a lesson to people who are likely to engage in such practices in future, that there is no running away from law.”

    Former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Chief Felix Fagbohungbe (SAN), Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN) and Prof. Yemi Akinseye-George (SAN) said the government deserved praises for not hiding the returned assets.

    But, another former NBA President Rotimi Akeredolu (SAN), said the looters should be “named and shamed” to deter others.

    Olanipekun said: “May I first commend those who advised the Federal Government not to publicise the names of the purported or so called looters. Doing so would have resulted in protracted litigation against the government for libel and defamation. I doubt if the recovered sums would have been sufficient to meet or offset the damages which various courts would have awarded against the government by those who believe they’ve been defamed and blasphemed.”

    According to him, Nigerians should be careful at labelling every person who returns money to government as a looter without weighing the peculiar circumstances and the contingencies compelling the return.

    For instance, he said a citizen who was awarded a contract by the past administration and who received advance payment cannot be fairly described as a looter if the present administration compels him to make a refund, using coercive powers of state to back up the demand.

    “Another citizen who, on his own volition goes to the government to make a refund or return of money transferred or lodged into his account by a serving government functionary who wanted to use him as a front cannot, in good conscience, be described as a looter.

    “Rather, he should be commended. It’s also fluid whether we can stigmatise any citizen as a looter without a court pronouncement adjudging that person as such,” Olanipekun said.

    He urged the government to lay more emphasis on preventing corruption and wanton looting of the treasury rather than always crying over spilt milk and entertaining Nigerians with stories of looting.

    “Why is the treasury so porous? Why is government the easiest way of making money without working? Why do political office holders see political appointments as a payback time by their appointors?  Why is the race and struggle to become ministers or commissioners or board members still a question of do or die?

    “Why is politics the most lucrative profession and enterprise in Nigeria? Why do we have so much excesses at the federal level to the disadvantage of the so-called federating states , and to the extent that a federal assistant director is more powerful than a governor? Why are we afraid and scared at restructuring our warped and fake federalism and diluting the awesome powers and riches at the centre? More questions than answers?

    “For now, I advise the government to divert all the funds claimed to have been recovered into revamping our decaying infrastructure, particularly our educational sector at the tertiary level and all the federal roads which are caving in , if they’ve not already totally caved in.

    “Before then, the government must let us have details of the accounts where the recoverd funds are lodged without necessarily revealing the names of the payees. This is very important as higher figures had been released and or bandied in the past as coming from recovered loot.

    “We should be very transparent on this matter. If any money has been recovered on behalf of any state , the federal government should return it to the state concerned immediately , and should not convert it to federal property,” Olanipekun said.

    But, Akeredolu said looters should have been named. His words: “We commend the government for its efforts so far in the recovery of these sums.

    “I hold the view that releasing the names of those from whom the monies were recovered would send a clearer message of the government’s determination to rid the country of this cankerworm called corruption, which has eaten too deep into the fabric of our society.”

    Former governor of old Anambra State Chief Jim Nwobodo commended the Buhari administration for making public details of recovered looted funds.  He said: “It is a plus for President Muhammadu Buhari and his government. It is a good thing that the government was able to recover such huge amount within one year.

    “The recovered fund will assist the government in executing projects contained in the 2016 budget. Those criticising the president’s fight against corruption should have a re-think. The anti-graft war is yielding positive result.

    “I support the president in its efforts to get rid of corruption in the system. He should not relent until every kobo looted from the public treasury are recovered. Now we have a leader that Nigerians can trust.”

    To Fagbohungbe, naming names could result in needless litigation, and may defeat the purpose.

    “If their names are published, those who still want to return stolen money may become reluctant and scared. If they are charged to court, the matter will be prolonged.

    “Technically, what they have done is plea bargaining. We should not forget that government needs the money to execute a lot of programmes. The government should go ahead and direct its attention to recovering more of the stolen moneyý. Litigation will only impede recovery,” Fagbohungbe said.

    But, Prof Ajayi said except there was an agreement, the government should name the circumstances in which the assets were returned.

    “There is no law that says you cannot disclose. It is neither in the Constitution nor in any law. I do not know of any except there is an agreement not to do so,” he said.

    To Ngige, there is no point naming suspected looters when they have not been tried and convicted by a court of law.

    “The government’s decision is right and proper. This will encourage other looters to return their loot or part of it. The government deserves commendation for its act of transparency in informing the nation on the details of the recovered loot,” he said.

    Prof Akinseye-George said it would be improper to name those who returned looted assets, especially if there was a promise by the government not to do so, as any government which does not keep its promise would be seen as not trustworthy and lacking in integrity.

    “Breaking the promise not to mention their names would be a disincentive to others. They will go into the trenches and use the ill-gotten money to fight the government, using the rule of law. That’s why the lawyers are there to protect all, including suspected looters. All the cases so far being prosecuted have not yielded as much as those plea bargained in terms of assets recovery. All the negative publicity in the papers are meaningless without convictions.

    “Stealing from the country was condoned by past Governments and many Nigerians were involved. Politicians needed huge sums of money to win elections. Delegates to primary elections and voters in general elections were bribed openly by political ‘money bags’. Where did all the money come from? No genuine business man would spend his hard-earned money the way politicians spent looted assets,” he said.

    According to Akinseye-George, while asset recovery is welcome, government ought to pay attention to the root causes of corruption.

    The first major cause, he said, is the excessive use of money to influence the outcome of party primaries and general elections. This, he believes, calls for a fundamental overhaul of the electoral system because it creates an unhealthy rivalry amongst political office holders who often feel pressured to abuse their offices in order to gather funds to compete in future elections.

    “The former administration entrenched corruption. The present administration is merely treating the symptoms of corruption. We need to begin to address the root causes. This is the greatest change Nigeria needs.

    “If this Government does not make it impossible for corrupt people to manipulate elections, they will use their money and influence to block the change intended by this government. It is a great shame that former PDP governors and some incumbents are already regrouping to take over the government when they should be behind bars. Government must not treat the issue of corruption with kid gloves,” he said.

    A member of the Ogun State Judiciary Commission, Abayomi Omoyinmi, said the looters should have been named.

    “ýI feel the government should have named such persons, not necessarily that it will amount to shaming such persons, but at least for the people of Nigeria to know people or persons that have looted our treasury.

    “In any case those that are charged to court are known already. I say this because some of these people do not care about shame,” he said.

    Former Minister of Works and Housing Chief Ebenezer Babatope said the government should have done more than releasing the figures.

    “They are just talking about corruption without getting to the root. What message and lesson is the government impacting? Government said it had recovered money, but no name is written against the money recovered. You cannot publish amount without giving us names of those who took the money. That is not how to fight corruption; the names of those who took the money should appear beside the amount they returned.”

    To Lagos lawyer Mr. Festus Keyamo, the returned money indicate that a lot of stealing took place in the past.

    “The money was not picked from the dustbin, human beings were responsible for that. It only goes a long a way to confirm what has been going on in the country. My own concern is that people are still bringing partisanship into the issue.

    “This is our common patrimony, and I thought that we are on the course of recovering our common patrimony; therefore, we should put partisanship aside in order to recover the looted funds.

    “It is just like the case of an armed robber who stole money and someone pursues the robber and recoveres the money, but another person is saying ‘why did you fight the robber so hard to collect the money?’ Some are saying that the federal government is recovering money without regard to the rule of law; I think that is not fair enough on the government. We must encourage the government to recover looted funds.

    “The last time we had something like this was during the regime of General Murtala Mohammed; we had such aggressiveness in fighting corruption. We also had this in the first coming of Buhari and incidentally he is the one that is doing the same thing again. I think everybody should support him in the fight against corruption,” Keyamo said.

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) said the government should publish the names of high-ranking public officials from whom the public funds were recovered.

    It also advised the government to  spend the recovered funds in a transparent manner so as to remove opportunities for re-looting of the recovered loot.

    In a statement issued yesterday by its Executive Director, Adetokunbo Mumuni, the organisation described the publication of the recovered stolen funds as a positive development towards entrenching a culture of transparency and accountability in government.

    The organisation advised: “The recovered funds must be spent to directly benefit Nigeria’s most vulnerable populations, particularly to improve their access to quality education, healthcare including for children, women and the elderly, and regular and uninterrupted electricity supply. It will be a double jeopardy for victims of corruption if recovered funds are re-looted, as it was the case with Sani Abacha recovered loot.”

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. John Olushola Bayeshea yesterday the release of the list of recovered funds by the Federal Government has vindicated President Muhammadu Buhari’s commitment to transparency.

    He said the government should also involve Nigerians on how the loot will be used for the nation’s development.

    Bayeshea, who with our correspondent, said: “I think it is a very transparent and honest information frpm the government. We don’t have this kind of transparency often. This is the first time I will see the Federal Government being transparent. That is vintage Buhari.

    “I am saying so because when ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration recovered some funds from the Abachas and others, we never knew the value of the amount. And under ex-President Goodluck Jonathan, the situation got worse. The $2.1billion arms procurement cash was part of the Abacha loot but it was re-looted.

    “I hope the money will be well utilized and the government should publish what they will use the recovered funds for. Nigerians should be carried along.”

  • Way out of conflicting judgments, by SANs, others

    Way out of conflicting judgments, by SANs, others

    Conflicting judgments from courts of concurrent jurisdiction remain a problem. Last week, the Port Harcourt and Lagos Divisions of the Federal High Court gave opposing orders, recognising two factions of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Few months ago, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Mahmud Mohammed observed that the Court of Appeal gave conflicting decisions in some election petition cases. How can these be avoided? Former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) presidents Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Joseph Daudu (SAN) and other lawyers proffer solutions. JOSEPH JIBUEZE sought their views.

    Conflicting judgments from courts of concurrent jurisdiction keep recurring. There seems to be no immediate solution in sight. Last December, Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Mahmud Mohammed decried the problem.

    Addressing Justices of the Court of Appeal (JCA) in Abuja during their annual conference, the CJN said: “We must not ignore the negative perception that is occasioned by conflicting judgments delivered at various divisions of the Court of Appeal.

    “Such judicial contradictions only result in untold hardships to litigants in their quest for justice. They further cast your lordships in an unfavourable light and leave the judiciary at the mercy of innuendos, crass publications and editorials.”

    Two judges of the Federal High Court, Justice M. Liman of the Port Harcourt Division and Justice Ibrahim Buba of the Lagos Division last Monday and Tuesday issued conflicting orders on the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) leadership crisis.

    Three people have been laying claim to the leadership of the troubled former ruling party. They are  Senator Ahmed Makarfi, the caretaker chairman appointed in Port Harcourt, Prof. Jerry Gana, the Interim chairman picked in Abuja and Alhaji Ali Modu Sherriff, who was removed by the governors.

     

    The first order

     

    Justice Liman issued an ex-parte order following an application by the PDP in its suit against Sherriff, Prof Adewale Oladipo, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) and the Department of State Services (DSS).

    He ordered: “The first and second respondents (Sherriff and Oladipo) or any and/or all of the national officers, the members of the National Executive Committee and the members of the National Working Committee who were removed from office by the national convention of the plaintiff held on Saturday,  the  21st of May,2016 in Port Harcourt, Rivers State be and are hereby restrained from parading/holding out either individually or collectively as the chairman, Secretary or national officer or member of the National Executive Committee or National Working Committee of the plaintiff, nor do anything howsoever to negate or frustrate the decisions reached at the said convention pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.”

     

    The second order

     

    Justice Buba made his ruling in a suit by Sherriff, Oladipo and Alhaji Fatai Adeyanju against INEC and the PDP.

    He directed the IGP to enforce an earlier order he made on May 12 barring the party from conducting elections into offices of national chairman, national secretary and national auditor.

    The judge held: “The IGP is hereby directed that there is a matter pending in court filed by the warring PDP and the court has made an order of interlocutory injunction in respect of offices occupied by the plaintiffs and there are applications and appeals pending.

    “The police is directed to enforce the orders of this court until all applications before the court are disposed of, so that there will be no anarchy.

    “That Senator Ahmed Makarfi and Senator Ben Obi too shall be served and heard as to why the order of this court is ignored and show cause why their appointments should not be nullified.”

    The implication of the two ruling, analysts say, is that both Sherriff and Makarfi could validly claim to be in charge of the PDP, based on the orders, until vacated or set aside on appeal.

     

    A recurring problem

     

    After last year’s general elections, no fewer than 749 appeals emanated from the decisions of the various tribunals, which were determined by the Court of Appeal. Conflicting judgments were given in some of them, which were resolved by the Supreme Court.

    At a two-day conference by the Court of Appeal to review the 2015 election cases, INEC Chair, Prof Mahmood Yakubu expressed worry about the problem of conflicting judgments. He said it sometimes created confusion for the commission.

    Justice Sidi Bage of the Court of Appeal said conflicting decisions arose from the interpretation of Paragraph 18(1) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act 2010 as it relates to the procedure for initiating pre-hearing session.

    He said there were also conflicting verdicts over use of card reader machine in proving electoral fraud, and use of extrinsic evidence to establish electoral offences such as electoral manipulations and violence.

    He noted that there was conflict in the Court of Appeal’s treatment of the procedure for accreditation of voters other than the one prescribed in the manual for the conduct of election.

    As a way out, he suggested that judicial officers should dwell less on technicalities in considering election cases.

    The Court of Appeal, he suggested, should initiate an internal law report, either electronically or in print, to guide its justices.

    Justice Bage, who referred to a recommendation by retired Justice of the Supreme Court, Niki Tobi, said a mechanism should be in place to ensure that once a judgment is rendered by a division of the Court of Appeal, it is immediately circulated to other divisions to engender uniformity and consistency in verdicts.

    Justice Helen Ogunwumiju of the Court of Appeal suggested among others, the need for an active Court of Appeal website, where decisions of each division could be published, to be easily accessed by other divisions, to eliminate instances of conflicting decisions.

    She frowned on the practice where parties file multiple appeals on a judgment and urged the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to sensitise its members on the Supreme Court position on the filing of unnecessary and frivolous interlocutory appeals and multiple cross appeals against a judgment.

     

    Olanipekun, Daudu, Oguntade proffer solutions

     

    Two former NBA presidents Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) and Joseph Daudu (SAN) suggested ways to tackle the problem.

    Olanipekun said judges should not be too eager to grant every ex-parte application brought by lawyers.

    “Law is not that an ass as people think, and assuming it even has the semblance of an ass, those who administer or practice it, that is, the lawyers and judges aren’t asses.

    “Decisions of courts should be based primarily on precedents and the imperatives of relevant statutes and not really on whims and caprices of judges and lawyers.

    “There are laid down procedures and precedents for the grant of an ex parte order by any judge. T hat is, the applicant must establish a case of extreme urgency; the circumstances must be compelling.

    “He mustn’t have been tardy; he mustn’t be guilty of delay, etc. But it appears to me that all these imperatives aren’t being followed or respected nowadays as ex parte orders fly all over and from most of our courts to the embarrassment of the legal profession.

    “We even see instances of judges granting ex parte orders where the statutes clearly forbid them from doing so. Some lawyers have also thrown caution to the winds by applying for ex parte orders on behalf of clients in clearly ridiculous situations.

    “The late Chief Justice Bello once lamented that it’s only in Nigeria that an ex parte order would be granted at the instance of one disgruntled student forbidding a university from going ahead with its convocation or on behalf of an individual to restrain NEPA from supplying electricity to a whole town!

    “It appears we are re enacting the ugly days that led to the cancellation and annulment of the June 12,1993 presidential election through an ex parte order, and Gen Sanni Abacha mischievously stated that he sacked the Ernest Shonekan interim national government in order to save the judiciary from plunging the country into anarchy,” Olanipekun said.

    He described the seeming conflicting orders by Justice Buba and Justice Liman as “embarrassing” and urged the National Judicial Council (NJC) to intervene.

    “Frankly speaking, the ex parte orders, both for and against on the recent PDP convention are very embarrassing, to say the least. Both the NJC and respective heads of courts should wade in.

    “I’ve noticed a sad trend as well in the sense that some particular lawyers have made applications for and grant of ex parte orders their specialised practice,” he said.

    Olanipekun believes that conflicting orders on ex parte applications as well as conflicting judgments from the Court of Appeal are an extension of indiscipline and failure to follow precedents.

    He suggested that divisions of appellate courts should have a means of exchanging and studying each others’ judgments.

    Olanipekun said: “The Court of Appeal cannot statutorily overrule itself. It’s previous judgment is binding on it, except where it has been upturned by the Supreme Court.

    “When the Court of Appeal was first established with divisions in Lagos, Ibadan, Enugu, Benin and Kaduna, its judgments from the various divisions were being exchanged on weekly basis and one cannot remember a single incident or accident of conflicting decision from any of the divisions.

    “The story is far different now, but the bottom line is that all these pose a very serious threat not only to the administration of justice, but also to the legal profession at large.

    “We mustn’t allow the profession to be plunged into opprobrium. All of us must caution ourselves and apply the brake now,” said Olanipekun.

    Daudu said due to the very large expanse of Nigeria’s land mass and its attendant communication hiccups, it appears in genuine situations that conflicting judgment in rare cases cannot be avoided.

    “But the present strain or feature of conflicting orders in the PDP cases arises from forum shopping,” he said.

    According to him, conflicting orders are avoidable if “forum shopping” based on selfish interests is jettisoned.

    “In my view, cases of contract and tort can only be commenced either where the defendant resides or where the cause of action occurred.

    “Consequently, the only places with jurisdiction are Port Harcourt (where the convention was held) and Abuja (where the PDP headquarters is located). That, however, is if the Federal High Court has jurisdiction to inquire into the internal activities of a political party.

    “If not, then the parties should have recourse to the state high court where the cause of action arose or where the defendant resides.

    “I have stated the position so as to show that conflicting judgments are avoidable and are usually the product of either a selfish interpretation of the law or forum shopping i.e. going to obtain orders from favourably disposed judex. Either way it is objectionable and condemnable,” Daudu said.

    Oguntade said by the doctrine of “stare decisis”, a high court is bound to follow decisions of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, being superior courts. It is, however, not bound to follow a decision of a court that has co-ordinate jurisdiction, as such decisions, he said, are only of persuasive authority.

    He said the conflicting decisions in the PDP cases are “indubitably the consequence of a brazen abuse of process by the parties involved.”

    According to him, following the institution of the first action, it amounted to an abuse of process for the second action to be filed on the same subject. To him, the second action ought to have been subsumed in the first suit.

    Oguntade added: “The court ought to have declined jurisdiction in the second action provided the existence of the first action was brought to its attention as I expected it would have been done.

    “If this was done and the judge in the second action nevertheless decided to proceed, then the judge would have acted improperly and should be sanctioned appropriately.

    “Also, lawyers who proceeded to file the second action despite being fully aware of the pendency of the first action would have acted improperly and a case of misconduct may be made against them.”

    He said issue of different divisions of the Court of Appeal giving conflicting decisions on similar facts, especially in election petitions, is “a very big problem and makes nonsense of the law much to the chagrin of every right thinking person.

    “I  will want to believe that the problem is due to an infrastructural deficit where one court is not aware of the decision of the other court before rendering its own decision.

    “Given the crucial position occupied by the Court of Appeal in the Nigerian Justice system, I will expect judgments of one court to be made available to other divisions immediately upon delivery, in real time.

    “While one division is not bound to follow the decision of another, it ought not to deliver its decision by deliberately ignoring the other.

    “It should at least consider the first decision and then give justifiable reasons why it will not follow it. This is a matter that has to be taken seriously and handled by the President of the Court and I believe that steps are already being taken to remedy this.

    “I will go further to say that where one division is fully aware of the decision of another and nevertheless goes on to give a contrary decision without any reference to the first decision, this should amount to an abdication of judicial responsibility and ought to be sanctioned appropriately,” Oguntade said.

    Lagos lawyer Yemi Omodele said conflicting orders can happen as judges only decide on facts before them. He urged any dissatisfied parties to appeal. According to him, it behoves the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court to set matters straight.

    “So, if it gets to the Court of Appeal, it would be streamedlined, hence it would not be conflicting again because that is the purpose of having appellate courts. They will make sure that the conflict is corrected.  But one cannot say that the judges who made those rulings made a mistake,” Omodele said.