The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Senior Advocate of Nigeria

  • SAN faults Senate’s invitation to Sagay

    SAN faults Senate’s invitation to Sagay

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Sebastine Hon has said the Senate lacks the power to summons any private individual over his/her comments or view on the activities of members the legislative house.

    Hon spoke Thursday in relation to reports to the effect that the Senate has summoned the Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Professor Itse Sagay (SAN) over his comments about the legislators.

    The Senior Advocate argued, in a statement yesterday, that the summons by the Senate to Prof Sagay to appear before it over and concerning the Senators is unconstitutional.

    Hon said: “While those comments are not salutary, they do not merit an invitation to appear before the Upper House.

    “A similar situation had played out in the 1980s, in the case of Senate of the National Assembly vs. Tony Momoh ((1982) FNLR 307. In this case, Prince Tony Momoh had published in the Daily Times of 4/2/1980 an article the Senate of the 2nd Republic considered was
    injurious to its image.

    “A Senate Committee then invited Prince Momoh to appear before it to ‘clarify’ those press comments. Prince Momoh challenged the invitation in court.

    “Even though the Court of Appeal held that Prince Momoh’s action was premature – since the Senate had not taken steps to compel his attendance – it laid down general principles regarding exercise of oversight functions by the National Assembly, thus:

    •      The powers of the National Assembly to investigate are not general but are limited to the executing or administration of laws enacted by the National Assembly and the disbursement and administering of moneys appropriated by it. In other words, the constitutional provisions
      granting oversight functions do not constitute the National Assembly as a universal

    “Ombudsman” with power to invite and scrutinise the conduct of every member of the public.

    •       The powers of the National Assembly in this regard are further circumscribed and limited by subsection (2) of the equivalent of section 88 of the 1999 Constitution – in that the National Assembly can only invite members of the public when it wants to gather facts for the purpose of enabling it to make laws or amend existing laws.

    •       Since from the resolution, Exhibit A, and the proceedings of the Senate, Exhibit C, the purpose of the invitation was to show resentment for Prince Momoh’s affront in daring to publish a matter against the Distinguished Senators rather than for the stated constitutional purposes, the invitation was not proper.

    “The same Court of Appeal restated these principles in El Rufai vs. House of Representatives (2003) FWLR (Pt. 173) 162, wherein the present Governor of Kaduna State, then Director-General of the Bureau for Public Enterprises, BPE, upon being investigated by an ad-hoc
    committee of the House of Representatives, wrote and circulated certain offensive materials against the House.

    “Upon being invited for ‘clarification’ of those comments, he rushed to court; and the Court of Appeal, as stated above, restated the principles in Momoh’s case.

    “Indeed, the Nigerian Supreme Court also, in the case of Attorney-General of Abia State vs. Attorney-General of the Federation (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 338) 604 at 674, brevi manu, circumscribed the oversight functions of the National Assembly in the following words: Oversight functions can only be exercised within the law making powers of the National Assembly. The functions are not at large and must be exercised within the provisions of the Constitution.

    “This line of judicial thinking in Nigeria agrees with the position of the US Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, in a long line of cases – Watkins vs. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 187 (1957); Townsend vs. United States, 95F 2d 352, 361 (D.C. Cir. 1938); McGrain vs.
    Dougherty, 716 Ed. 590, etc.

    “In conclusion, while I agree that Prof. Sagay’s comments against the Distinguished Senators were inappropriate, I make bold to state that the Senate lacks the constitutional competence to summon him to appear before it merely on account of those comments.

    “Let me also add that the Legislature should be cautious in extending summonses to persons under its constitutional oversight functions. If it engages with personalities just because they have made snide comments against it, this will amount to the Legislature reducing its
    constitutional as an arm of government.

    “The Legislature qua the National Assembly should as much as possible conduct itself in such a way as not to be seen to be quarrelsome or petty,” Hon said.

  • Alleged N5m bribe: SAN, female judge contradict each other before EFCC

    Alleged N5m bribe: SAN, female judge contradict each other before EFCC

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission( EFCC) on Tuesday grilled another Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr. Godwin Obla over payment of a N5million bribe  into the account of a female judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia.
    But Obla and the judge contradicted themselves before the EFCC team of interrogators.
    The SAN, who was still undergoing interrogation last night, might be detained by EFCC.
    According to findings, the judge had told the EFCC that the N5million was a part payment for a N40million property she sold to Obla in 2015.
    Obla however said the cash was meant for buying of building materials (iron rods) for a building he was putting up in Abuja and not for buying of any property.
    He said the judge, who was a colleague in the university, only assisted in buying the said building materials.
    He said he came across the judge during a trip to Lagos and sought for her assistance to buy the building materials.
    A source said: “Obla said the judge gave him the name of someone who plies the trade. She provided the company’s name and the account number for the transaction. Obla said he paid the money and goods were supplied.
    “When asked the name of the trader, receipt of transaction and delivery evidence of the goods, the learned silk said he could not remember the name of the trader or his location, neither was there any receipt or delivery note for the transaction.
    Investigation by EFCC detectives confirmed that the N5million was paid into the account of a company in which the judge and her children have interest.
    The source added: “The registered company, not known to be engaged in building materials or any viable business is suspected to be surreptititously set up for the purpose of warehousing proceeds of gratification.
    “The same company has been fingered in other illegal transactions including suspicious payments of sorts by some other persons.”
    Responding to a question, the source said: “I think we might detain the Senior Advocate of Nigeria( SAN), who was a former prosecutor for EFCC.”

  • Gadzama asks court to order fresh NBA election

    Gadzama asks court to order fresh NBA election

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama, has asked the High Court of The Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, to order a fresh election for officers of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA).

    He is praying for an order directing the General Council of the Bar to set up a newly constituted Electoral Committee of the NBA which will issue guidelines and conduct a fresh national officers’ election in line with the 2015 NBA Constitution.

    Gadzama is seeking a declaration that the integrity of the election held on July 30 and 31 was “fundamentally and incurably compromised by undue influence, over bearing and bias conduct”.

    Defendants are NBA trustees, Including Abdullahi Ibrahim (San), Chief Wole Olanipekun (San), Thompson Joseph Onomigho Okpoko (San), Chief Priscilla Kuye, Alhaji Murtala Aminu And Chief Anthony O. Mogbo.

    Others are the Incorporated Trustees of NBA, Chairman, NBA Electoral Committee Mr. Ken Mozia (SAN), NBA president Mr. Augustine Alegeh (SAN) and Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud (SAN), who won the election.

    Gadzama is praying the court to hold that the election was in total violation and disregard of the mandatory provision of the NBA Constitution and thereby made the process null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    He sought a declaration that the internet voting system adopted for the election was not in conformity with the mandatory provisions of the NBA Constitution in that all the pre-requisite preparations, obligations and duties provided to guarantee free, fair, credible and transparent electronic voting system were ignored, disregarded and not complied with by the defendants.

    Gadzama  is praying the court to order that the 2016 NBA Presidential election be held through electronic voting in all branches of the NBA and that results should be collated at branch level and transmitted to the electoral committee’s secretariat.

    Among lawyers who will represent the plaintiff, as listed in the processes, are Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), Chief Bolaji Ayorinde (SAN), Pius Akubo (SAN), Duro Adeyele (SAN), Mr. Sebastine T. Hon (SAN), Prof. Andrew Chukwuemerie (SAN), Mr KunleOgunba (SAN ), Garba Pwul (SAN), Aliyu Umar (SAN), among others.

    Mahmoud, a former Kano State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, polled 3,055 votes in the election to beat Gadzama, who scored 2,384 votes out.

    Mahmoud is expected to be sworn in during the association’s annual general conference to be held in Port Harcourt next week.

     

  • Court orders stay of proceedings in Tarfa’s suit

    The Federal High Court in Lagos on Tuesday asked a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Rickey Tarfa to first defend the criminal charge against him before pursuing civil damages against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Justice Mohammed Idris upheld EFCC’s preliminary objection to Tarfa’s N2.5billion suit. He ordered a stay of proceedings until Tarfa’s trial at the Lagos State High Court is concluded.

    According to him, a substantial part of the reliefs Tarfa sought have a direct bearing on the charge against him.

    He said Tarfa’s vehicle and phones, which the SAN prayed the court to order their release, had been listed as exhibits in the criminal case.

    “Also, it is clear that the information and data retrieved from the mobile handsets are to be used as evidence in the criminal charge pending before the Lagos High Court,” the Judge said.

    Justice Idris said although Tarfa has the guaranteed right to be heard fairly and expeditiously, his fundamental rights suit does not supersede the criminal charge.

    “It should be noted that this right does not stand above the country, the state or the people,” the Judge said.

    Justice added that it would not be fair to the prosecution should Tarfa’s suit be decided in his favour before the criminal case is determined.