The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN)

  • SAN urges govt to invest in sports development

    SAN urges govt to invest in sports development

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon, has urged the government to invest in sports development.

    “Political leaders have no choice but to be aggressively involved in sponsorship and development of football and other sports within their geopolitical spaces.

    “Football qua sports is a unifying factor, which should be taken into account by political leaders,” he said.

    Hon spoke after he was conferred with the Pillar of Sports Award by Maximum Fitness and Wellness Services in collaboration with Jeffrey Kuraun Foundation. 

    The SAN felt highly honoured to be conferred with the award.

    He said: “I never dreamt of it; I only used to read about Chief MKO Abiola as the pillar of sports in Africa. Even though mine is merely microscopic, I greatly cherish and value it.

    “Additionally, one feels really good that one’s modest efforts are being recognised and appreciated. Above all, I thank Jehovah God Almighty for His mercies and faithfulness,” Hon said.

    Relieving his track record as a sportsman, Hon said: “I started playing football at a very tender age, right from when I was in primary school. I could score up to four goals in a football match, even though playing from the wings.

    Read Also: Segun Johnson expresses joy over recognition by Brampton Mayor

    “I couldn’t play in my college days due to my height and stature. In those days, little boys of my age found themselves amongst giants whilst in secondary school, meaning those of us who were about 12 years old were a minority in getting into the Form 1 class.

    “I passed through the School of Basic Studies. I was around 17 years old then; hence was able to play for the school team.

    “I was commonly known as the ‘Maradona’ because of my dribbling skills and scoring ability. Off school, I used to play for Junior Hawks.

    “I didn’t play for UNIJOS where I read law because I refused to show up on the field of play because ‘lawyers do not play football.’

    “Out of sheer youthful exuberance, however, I showed up late at the Akwa Ibom State NYSC football team training ground.

    “I was again hesitant initially because ‘lawyers do not play football.’ When I eventually showed up, all attacking positions had been taken up; hence I was made the central defender.

    “That was how they started calling me ‘Stephen Keshi,’ due to how I handled that position. I wouldn’t say I would have preferred football to law.

    “This award will definitely spur me up. I, for sure, will do more. For instance, I am planning a football academy in Gboko. I will say no more. 

    “Football is important to international diplomacy and politics. I do not need to elaborate more on this, as it is common knowledge.

    “Then, sporting giants are informal ambassadors of their home countries, attracting all that could flow into their mother countries and or states.

    “Repatriation of funds from the host to the home countries is a common feature when successful sportsmen and women ply their skills in foreign countries.”

    One of the organisers, Dr. Jeffrey Kuraun, said several deserving individuals were honoured, including Hon.

    “We conferred awards on 37 individuals, including football personalities, coaches, and administrators.

    “Our aim is to recognise and celebrate the achievements of these individuals, while also promoting sports development and encouraging others to emulate their examples.

    “We chose to confer the Pillar of Sports in Gboko Award on Prof. Hon because of his outstanding contributions to sports development in Gboko.

    “Despite being a Professor of Law, he has demonstrated a remarkable passion for football, and his efforts have made a significant impact on the lives of many young people.

    “As an awardee, Prof. Hon will be expected to continue promoting sports development and inspiring others to follow in his footsteps.

    “We also hope that he will serve as a role model and mentor to young people, sharing his knowledge and experience to help them achieve their goals,” Kuraun said.

  • SAN at large as EFCC re-arraigns dismissed judge Ajumogobia

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Godwin Obla on Thursday failed to turn up in court for his arraignment for alleged money laundering.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) charged him along with dismissed Federal High Court judge, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.

    When the case was called for the defendants’ arraignment before Justice Rilwan Aikawa of the Federal High Court in Lagos, Obla was absent.

    Prosecuting counsel Rotimi Oyedepo said efforts to reach him failed and that his phones were switched off.

    He said Obla’s lawyer could not also confirm his whereabouts.

    Oyedepo urged the court to allow Ofili-Ajumogobia take her plea alone pending when Obla is produced.

    The court granted the prayer.

    Ofili-Ajumogobia pleaded not guilty to an 18-count charge.

    Read Also: EFCC to re-arraign ex-judge Ajumogobia today

    Her re-arraignment followed her arrest after the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja struck out a previous charge against her on Tuesday for lack of jurisdiction.

    Obla, a former EFCC prosecutor, is the second defendant in the charge numbered FHC/139C/19.

    EFCC said they conspired on May 21, 2014, to indirectly conceal N5million in the Diamond Bank account of Nigel & Colive Ltd, which they “reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of unlawful act to wit: unlawful enrichment”.

    The alleged offence is contrary sections 15 (2) (a) and 18 (a) of the Money Laundering Prohibition Act, 2011 and punishable under Section 15 (3).

    Ajumogobia was also accused of indirectly concealing N12million in the same account.

    EFCC, in another count, said she made a false statement to an officer that the money was payment for a property sale.

    Justice Aikawa is presently writing a ruling on the former judge’s bail application.

  • Lawyer loses SAN rank days before inauguration

    …Barred for 5 years

     

    Few days before his inauguration as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), fate has played a hard one on a lawyer, Ehighelua lkhide as the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC) on Thursday reversed its decision to include the lawyer on the list of those to be formally conferred with the rank on Monday.

    LPPC, in a statement issued late on Thursday, said its decision to reverse the conferment of the SAN rank on Ikhide was informed by its finding that the lawyer “knowingly engaged in gross abuse of court process.”

    Read Also:Why council chairmen are backing me, by Sanwo-Olu

    In the statement signed by the Chief Registrar of Supreme Court and Secretary, LPPC, Hadizatu Uwani Mustapha, it was stated that the committee, in withdrawing the rank from Ikhide, found that he conducted himself in a manner which is clearly in contravention with the provisions of paragraph 22(2) (a) E: (c) and 23(a),(b),(c)& (d) of the 2018 Guidelines of the conferment of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

    The LPPC also barred Ikhide from applying for the SAN rank for the next five years.

    The statement reads: “At the Emergency Meeting held on the 20th day of September 2018, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee by virtue of Section 5(1) of the Legal Practitioners Act, CAP L11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 as amended, considered the petition written against the nomination of lkhide Ehighelua Esquire for the Rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

    “The Committee after a careful evaluation of the facts of the petition, the written reply by the respondent and attached documents, found the petition meritorious; that is the respondent knowingly engaged in gross abuse of court process on the following incontrovertible facts, namely:

    “That lkhide Ehighelua, Esquire instituted Suit No. A/ 36/2017 at High Court lssele Uku, Delta State wherein he filed a motion for interim injunction which was dismissed for lack of merit.

    “That lkhide Ehighelua, Esquire subsequently filed a Notice of Appeal at the Court of Appeal, Benin Division and which appeal was properly entered by transmission of records to the Appeal Registry Benin in Appeal No. CA/B/220/2018.

    “That while the appeal was pending, lkhide Ehighelua, Esquire participated in the institution of a new Suit No. HCK/ 61 /2018 at the High Court sitting in Kwale, Delta State on the same subject matter, between the same parties and seeking the same reliefs as in Suit No. A/36/2017 which was pending at the High Court Issele-Uku and subject of Appeal No. CA/B/220/2018.

    “That on the 30‘” day of July 2018, when the Motion ex parte was granted, lkhide Ehighelua, Esquire personally moved the motion for the interim injunction against the defendant and obtained all the injunctive reliefs that were dismissed in Suit No. A/36/2017and subject of Appeal No. CA/B/220/2018.

    “He subsequently wrote a letter dated 31“ July, 2018 to the Executive Governor of Delta State notifying him of the existence of the Interim Injunction above.

    “That lkhide Ehighelua Esquire being an officer in the temple of justice and an aspirant to the exalted position of Senior Advocate of Nigeria has conducted himself in a manner which is clearly in contravention with the provisions of paragraph 22(2) (a) E: (c) and 23(a),(b),(c)& (d) of the 2018 Guidelines of the conferment of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

    “The aforementioned provision reads: 22-(2) The Candidate must be of good character and must have no pending disciplinary case or complaint relating to professional misconduct against him.

    “A Candidate shall be considered ineligible if in the opinion of the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee the candidate is adjudged to be of the following disposition –

    (a) Bad behaviour, whether in or out of court ; poor temperament or propensity to insult or assault people or cause them harm or put them in state of fear of bodily harm ;

    (c) Evidence of moral depravity or other socially unacceptable behaviour.

    23 – (1) A Candidate must – (a) demonstrate high professional and personal integrity; (b) be honest and straightforward in all his professional/personal dealings,’ (c) be of good character and reputation; (d) be candid with clients and professional colleagues,

    “In view of the above, the Committee has decided as follows:

    (a) That the nomination for the conferment of the Award of the Senior Advocate of Nigeria on Ikhide Ehighelua, Esquire on July 12, 2018 is hereby withdrawn;

    (b) That Ikhide Ehighelua, Esquire is hereby barred from applying for the Award of Senior Advocate of Nigeria for the next five (5) years or five applications beginning from 2019; and

    (c) That after the expiration of this period, Ikhide Ehighelua, Esquire would be at liberty to apply for the rank subject to good behaviour as assessed by the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee.”

  • Usoro wins NBA presidency as Okafor, Ojukwu kick

    The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) Monday declared a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Paul Usoro winner of NBA presidential election.

    The election was held by electronic voting from Saturday to Sunday. The result was announced in the early hours of Monday.

    Read Also:How Buhari, Osinbajo plan to sack Daura was nearly aborted

    Usoro polled 4,509 votes to beat Chief Arthur Obi Okafor (SAN), who scored 4,423 votes and Prof Ernest Ojukwu (SAN), who got 3,313 votes.

    Stanley Chidozie won the race for First Vice President with 6,188 votes, while Dada Olayemi was elected Second Vice President with 4,242 votes.

    Taidi Gunu won the post of General Secretary with 3,574 votes, beating Mobolaji Idris who polled 1,993 votes and Balogun Oyeyemi who got 1,630 votes.

    Okafor and Ojukwu have, however, faulted the result, insisting that the election was rigged.

    In a letter to the outgoing NBA president Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), Okafor rejected the result and called for a post-election audit.

    He said: “I participated in the aforesaid election to conclusion. It is in my candid view that the election was rigged by which I was denied victory.

    “In the course of the election, my team made complaints of obvious malpractices including harvesting of voters’ details using some funny email domains. These complaints were not attended to.

    “I do hereby reject the result of the elections. Whilst considering various options open to me, I call for a participatory post-election audit of both the verification process and voting.”

    Ojukwu, a former Law School Deputy Director-General, claimed that he contested against corruption, rigging and a skewed process, but said he would not challenge the result.

    In a message to his supporters, he said: “Though a winner has emerged from this present contest, remember that we contested against corruption, massive vote buying, vote capture, rigging and a skewed process.

    “These reasons make a challenge of the result important but because of my long and selfless commitment to regenerating the Bar, and the need not create tension in our legal profession, I shall not contest it.”

    Praising his supporters for their efforts, Ojukwu said they sacrificed so much to alter the destiny and fate of the legal profession and their country Nigeria.

    “Regrettably the outcome of our efforts has not been pleasant. I plead with you not to lose hope. With the kind of passion you have and expressed in various actions recently to create a bar of our dream, our destiny is still in your hands.

    “Keep moving on the task of setting a new bar. The Bar is yours. It is your right to have the kind of Bar you desire. It is also your responsibility.

    “Just note that though we could not effectively commence the journey to reform and transform the Bar now, time is still on your side to make that difference in your life time.

    “Do not surrender to a dirty system and fall of our profession. Continue to do your best to help clean it up and set a new bar that would be relevant to all,” Ojukwu said.

    A professor of law and former National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) chairman Chidi Odinkalu described the election as a “messy racket” and a “disgrace”.

    He said in a statement: “This was not an election. It was not even a selection. It was a racket and a messed up one at that.

    “Now, they will ask the NBA National Executive Committee to make this messed up racket their own and ratify it at the pre-conference NEC. That will be interesting. This racket is a disgrace.

    “The process was compromised and did not even pretend about it. The outcome lacks legitimacy and the declared winner has procured a compromised non-mandate.

    “Those who hope or expect that there will be an audit should come off that kind of hallucination – you don’t ask a burglar to investigate the burglary.

    “The outgoing Bar leadership is incredibly tarnished by its role in this messy racket. Yet, we are unlikely to learn.

    “There are no plaudits to hand out, no congratulations to anyone and no one comes out of this a winner.”

  • Fake SAN gets one year imprisonment

    An Ikeja special offences court Tuesday sentenced a 27-year-old man, Omotayo Raphael to one year imprisonment for impersonating a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

    Justice Mojisola Dada found Omotayo guilty of a lone count charge of impersonation after he changed his plea to ‘guilty’.

    The defendant who was initially arraigned before the court on February 5, 2018 for impersonation by the Economic and financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had pleaded not guilty.

    Delivering judgment in the matter, Justice Dada noted that an operative of the EFCC, who led the team to arrest the defendant in his house in Egbeda, August 27, told the court that laptops, phones and modems were recovered from the convict.

    “However, the defendant has changed his plea and I found him guilty and he is hereby convicted accordingly.

    “The defendant is thereby sentenced to one year imprisonment for impersonating a Senior Advocate of Nigeria,” Justice Dada said.

    She said that the sentence will run from the date of his arrest.

    Read Also:Court refuses to order Abaribe’s release

    Earlier, before the judge pronounced judgment in the matter, the prosecuting counsel, Mr A.A. Adebayo informed the court that the Commission has amended the charge against the defendant after he entered into a ‘plea bargain’ agreement.

    “My Lord, the defendant has decided to enter into a pleasant bargain agreement and we are in court today with an amended charge.

    “We urge the court to allow him take his plea,” he said.

    When the amended charge was read to the defendant, he pleaded guilty to the lone count of Impersonation.

    In his allocutus, counsel to the defendant, Adeniyi Quadri urged the court to be lenient with the defendant.

    Quadri said Omotayo has shown remorse, has learnt his lessons and resolved to be of good behavior.

    “I have had the opportunity to interact with the defendant my Lord, and I can tell the honorable court that he is a changed person.

    “While he was in the prison custody, his wife gave birth to a baby boy and he has not had the opportunity to see his child since he was born.

    “I urge your lordship to temper justice with mercy.

    The convict, Omotayo, was first arraigned by the EFCC for parading himself as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN.

    EFCC also said that Omotayo was found to be in possession of some fraudulent documents where he also claimed to be Michael Blacks.

    The commisson also said that documents obtained from Omotayo’s computer revealed that he pretended to be a SAN in order to defraud an American, one Juliet of an undisclosed amount of money.

    Suspecting foul play, Ms Juliet, had petitioned the EFCC who swung into action and arrested Raphael.

    The anti-graft commission said the offences contravenes Section 285 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State 2011.

     

  • Court dismisses no-case submission of Rickey Tarfa

    Court dismisses no-case submission of Rickey Tarfa

    An Ikeja High Court in Lagos, Monday dismissed a no-case submission filed by Mr Rickey Tarfa, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) who is standing trial for alleged obstruction and perverting the course of justice .

    Tarfa , through his counsel, Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN) had informed the court that he had no case to answer  when he was to open his defence Monday before Justice Aishat Opesanwo.

    Justice Opesanwo, in a ruling, after a trial that lasted till 5.25 p.m from 11.00 a.m, dismissed the submission made by Owonikoko on behalf of Tarfa.

    The judge said she was satisfied that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had established a prima- facie case against Tarfa and ordered the deendant to proceed with his defence.

    The judge also declined to award Tarfa N150million as exemplary damages for ‘malicious prosecution’ as he had demanded from the EFCC.

    “I have taken consideration of Section 38(2) of the EFCC Act and Section 97(3) of the Criminal Law of Lagos 2011, the oral and documentary evidence given by the prosecution.

    “I am satisfied that the prosecution has established a prima-facie case against the defendant.

    “I invite the defendant to proceed with his defence of the three-count charge contained in the information herein,” the judge said.

    Tarfa is currently being tried on a three-count charge of obstruction of justice and perverting the course of justice by the EFCC.

    The EFCC alleges that Tarfa wilfully obstructed two of its officers, Moses Awolusi and Sanusi Mohammed, from making an arrest of his clients within the premises of the Igbosere High Court, Lagos.

    Tarfa’s clients, Gnanhoue Sourou and Nazaire Odeste, were suspected by the EFFC of committing some financial crimes.

    The EFCC also alleges that Tarfa engaged in alleged illegal and secret communication with Justice Mohammed Yunusa, a Federal High Court judge who presided over the case.

    Earlier during proceedings yesterday, Owonikoko (SAN) , the defence counsel to Tarfa had in the no-case submission dated December 12, 2017 urged the court to dismiss the case because the defence had no case to answer.

    Owonikoko told the court that he has filed a motion praying the court to consider their arguments on the no-case submission adding that their  written address was formulated a singular issue which is whether at the close of the prosecution’s arguments, a prima facie case has been established to warrant the defendant entering a defence in the three-count charge.

    Owonikoko, argued that the essential ingredients necessary to secure a criminal conviction have been unproven by the EFCC.

    He also noted that the EFCC during the trial, amended the charge but they did not amend the name on the charge, if the evidence does not correspond with the name of the charge, a vital ingredient of the offence is missing.”

    Owonikoko said that the names of the clients that Tarfa was allegedly shielding from prosecution as they were also not properly indicated in the charge and that the EFCC did not amend the alleged error during the trial.

    Owonikoko alleged that there were also discrepancies in the evidence presented by the EFCC regarding count-two of the charge was about Tarfa engaging in alleged secret communication with Justice Mohammed Yunusa.

    “The call log brought by the prosecution was thoroughly disowned the maker of the document under cross-examination.

    “There was so many discrepancies in the documents and the sole evidence they (EFCC) were depending on was that call log and these calls were made without hiding the caller identification.

    “The statement from Justice Yunusa when he was invited by the EFCC was that he was friends with the defendant from university and the calls were social in nature and he never discussed his cases with the defendant.

    “I find it curious that they are using only the written statement of Justice Yunusa as the basis of their case.

    Regarding the third count of the charge which was obstruction of justice, Owonikoko said that issues surrounding the charge are currently subjects of appeal at the Court of Appeal.

    “It is our submission that it is wrong for any of the parties before such an appeal to file a criminal charge on the complainant. For that we will be demanding exemplary damages from the EFCC for malicious prosecution,”he said.

    Responding to the points raised by the defence, Mr G.A Latona the prosecuting counsel for the EFCC, asked the court to dismiss the defence’s no-case submission.

    He said: “The application of the defence suffers from some fundamental lapses. The prosecution has not established the guilt of the defendant which is not required at this stage, what we have shown is that there is something that Your Lordship has to call upon him o explain.

    “What the defence has done is to handpick bits and pieces of evidence and tell Your Lordship that ingredients have been established without considering the totality before the court,” he said.

    The EFCC prosecutor disputed that the issues surrounding the third count of the criminal charge filed against Tarfa are issues currently on appeal at the higher court.

    Latona in his submission also noted that the EFCC had proven that Tarfa engaged in unlawful communication with Justice Yunusa beyond reasonable doubt.

    Justice Opesanwo adjourned the case till May 24 and 25 for Tarfa to open his defence.

    Read Also: Alleged bribery: EFCC closes case against Rickey Tarfa

  • Lawyer urges other African court’s to emulate Kenya

    Lawyer urges other African court’s to emulate Kenya

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon has commended the Kenya Supreme Court for exhibiting rare courage in nullifying the country’s last presidential election.

    Hon said the decision by Kenya’s highest court was not only a celebration of the rule of law, but an indication that democratic tradition was gradually taking root in the continent.

    He urged the Judiciary in other African countries to emulate the display of bravery on the part of the Kenya Judiciary.

    Hon said: “Recent happenings on the political landscape of Africa, including the defeat of a sitting President – Goodluck Jonathan – and his voluntary concession of defeat – all point to the fact that there is a positive upswing in African political thinking.

    “And with the pronouncement of the Kenyan Supreme Court, I think Africans are beginning to think out of the box now.

    “The trend is most welcome and should spread like wild harmattan fire across Africa.

    “Wake me up in the middle of the night; I will still be celebrating this victory for not just democracy, but also the rule of law, in Africa. It is an emerging trend that must be supported by all persons of good will,” Hon said.

  • SAN disagrees with Falana, insists Chief Judges can’t grant pardon

    SAN disagrees with Falana, insists Chief Judges can’t grant pardon

    The debate over whether or not Chief Judges possess the power to grant pardon to awaiting trial detainees continued yesterday with a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon insisting the Chief Judges cannot legally grant pardon.

    Hon spoke in reaction to argument credited to human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN) to the effect that Chief Judges can grant pardon under the Prisons Act and the Criminal Justice (Release from Custody) (Special Provisions) Act.

    Falana had, in a counter-argument, faulted Hon’s position, which was widely reported in the Media on Monday.

    But, in a detailed analysis Tuesday, Hon insisted on his position, arguing among others, that the laws cited by Falana were unconstitutional.

    Hon said: “For the avoidance of any doubt, section 35(4) of the 1999 Constitution has covered the field on what should be done to any person accused of an offence; and there is no room for any administrative action by the Judiciary.

    “Only judicial actions can lead to the release of detained persons, hence any administrative action, apart from the one in sections 175n and 212 will be directly in conflict with the said section 35(4).

    “Also, sections 175 and 212 of the Constitution have advisedly used the phrase ‘a person concerned with or convicted of an offence.’

    “The phrase ‘concerned with an offence’ is so wide that it has entirely and completely covered the situations contemplated by both the Prisons Act and the Criminal Justice (Release from Custody) (Special Provisions) Act.

    “The Constitution having covered the field, these two Acts are null and void, for attempting to provide for the same release from custody, yet by the administrative action of the Judiciary.

    “Similar arguments were advanced in the US case of Schick vs. Reed, 419 US 256 (1974) at 266.

    In rejecting them, Chief Justice Burger held in emphatic terms that ‘the unbroken practice since 1790 compels the conclusion’ that the power of the US President to grant pardon ‘flows from the Constitution alone, not from any legislative enactments,’ concluding that such presidential powers ‘cannot be modified, abridged, or diminished by the Congress.’

    “How then can the Nigerian National Assembly decimate or abridge this power, just because of Item 48 on the Exclusive Legislative List?

    “If Chief Judges are permitted to release persons from custody, what is the legal implication of that action? Do the detainees get the reprieve of pardon that only the President or the Governor can grant?

    “No! They are merely released, while the charges against them are pending! What then happens to those charges, judging from our Constitution or even the Acts cited by Mr. Falana, SAN? Nothing!

    “But if the President or a Governor grants pardon, section 36(10) of the Constitution comes in handy to erase the conviction or even accusation (in view of the phrase ‘concerned with an offence in sections 175 and 212).

    “This position was also reached by the Court of Appeal in Falae vs. Obasanjo (No. 2) (1999) 4 NWLR (Pt. 599) 476 at 495.

    “I conclude by restating that the respective Chief Judges, including even the Chief Justice of Nigeria, have no constitutional powers to embark on prison amnesty.

    “Such amnesties, including the power of the Attorneys-General to enter nolle prosequi, are deliberately left by the framers of the Constitution in the hands of politicians, to avoid the sacredness of the Judiciary being muddied or messed up with, by permitting judicial officers, through administrative actions, to order the release of politically-exposed persons from criminal prosecution,” Hon said.

     

  • Osinbajo lauded for classifying hate speech as terrorism

    Osinbajo lauded for classifying hate speech as terrorism

    The Acting President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo has been hailed for his classification of hate speech as act of terrorism.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon said Osinbajo was “absolutely correct” in his position on the issue of hate speech.

    Hon, in a statement Thursday, noted that Section 1(2) of the Terrorism Act, 2011, has described ‘an act of terrorism’ as an act deliberately done with malice, which, amongst other things, is intended or can reasonably be regarded as having been intended to seriously intimidate a population or seriously destabilise or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation.

    He argued that there could be no better description of the current situation in Nigeria, where ethnic or cultural groups are issuing, willy-nilly organised and unguarded threats to other ethnic groups in Nigeria.

    “I personally must commend the Acting President for this timely proclamation, which only confirms and I dare say addresses my public statement a few days ago that the Federal Government must act fast to arrest our apparent, if not clear, descent to total anarchy, due to the avalanche of hate speeches flying over the whole place.

    “The 2011 Terrorism Act was amended by Act No. 10 of 2013, which upped the minimum punishment for terrorism from 2 years to five years.

    “I will ask the Federal Government to bring to bear the full weight of the law on perpetrators and their financiers or supporters – as Section 4 of the 2011 Act criminalises support for terrorism.

    “We must not permit, I say with all vehemence, our collective existence to be threatened for very narrow and selfish reasons,” Hon said.

     

  • How to achieve efficient justice delivery, by judge, SANs

    How to achieve efficient justice delivery, by judge, SANs

    Senior lawyers and a judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, Monday said the imposition of punitive cost for time wasting, use of electronic recording devices and effective use of case management powers by judges will enhance speedier justice delivery.

    They spoke in Lagos during the second day of the 11th Annual Business Law conference of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Business Law (NBA-SBL), with the theme: Law and changing face of legal practice.

    Justice Dimgba, who was a panelist in the third session with the theme: Creating an efficient system of justice delivery, urged judges to make better use of their case management powers.

    He said fear of being accused of bias sometimes forces judges to grant frivolous applications for adjournments.

    According to him, judges operate in a “difficult terrain” in which false reports are sometimes sponsored against them in the media by litigants whose prayers for adjournment were refused.

    “Sometimes fear and intimidation impedes the exercise of their (judges’) case management powers. Some of my colleagues are afraid of petitions being written against them. It is true that some careers have damaged by such petitions, but I always ask them, is a petition going to kill you? As long as my conscience is clean, I do my job,” he said.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr Babatunde Ajibade, called for imposition of full indemnity cost against those who file frivolous cases, as is done in other jurisdictions.

    According to him, if people pay heavily for time wasting, they would be discouraged from deliberately delaying court actions, especially when they have bad cases.

    “If people have a dispute and know it will never be settled in court, they can just send assassins to kill the other person. If we have an efficient judicial system, crime will reduce and people won’t take laws into their hands,” he said.

    A United Kingdom based lawyer, Segun Osuntokun, wondered why Nigerian judges still record proceedings in long hand rather than with electronic devices.

    “In UK courts, there is real time transcription of what is being said. Everyone sees it instantly. Here, everyone waits for the judge to write in long hand,” he said.

    Osuntokun also faulted the practice whereby cases which had spent years in court begin all over (de novo) when the judges handling them are elevated to Court of Appeal.

    “In England, when you are elevated, you finish your portfolio of cases before leaving. That way, you save at least two years of cases having to start afresh before a new judge,” he said.

    Another SAN, Chief Chief Arthur Obi Okafor, said courts could schedule cases so that lawyers know when to be in court, rather than everyone being in court at the same time and some waiting all day for their turn.