AGAIN, EFCC TO ARRAIGN SHASORE ON FRESH CHARGES TODAY

These are not the best of times for embattled former Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Olasupo Shasore SAN as he would today be arraigned on fresh charges by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) before Justice Mojisola Dada of the Lagos State High Court.

According to a news report, the new charge “essentially borders on the corruption of a public official.”

There are strong indications that Shasore will also face another set of charges at the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Following a CITY LAWYER exclusive report, a four-man team of Senior Advocates battled yesterday to secure bail for Shasore as he was arraigned before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court, Lagos on a four-count charge bordering on money laundering.

Leading the team is respected law reform advocate, Mr. Charles Candide-Johnson SAN. Others in the team were Dr. Muiz Banire SAN, Mr. Segun Ajibola SAN, and Mr. Chijioke Okoli SAN.

Shasore was the Chief Law Officer during the administration of former Lagos State Governor, Mr. Babatunde Fashola SAN.

The matter is filed as Charge No. FHC/L/447C/2022, Federal Republic of Nigeria and Olasupo Shasore, SAN.

CITY LAWYER recalls that the EFCC had filed a four-count charge against Shasore bordering on alleged money laundering among others.

Count one of the charge reads: “That you Olasupo Shasore, S.A.N. on or about the 18th day of November 2014 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court induced Olufolakemi Adelore to commit an offence, to wit accepting cash payment of the sum of US100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand United States Dollars) without going through a financial institution which such exceeded the amount authorised by Law and you thereby committed an offence contrary to section 78(c) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under section 16(6) of the same Act.”

Count two reads: “That you Olasupo Shasore, S.A.N on or about the 18th day of November 2014 in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, in a transaction without going through a financial institution, made cash payment of the sum of USD 100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand United States Dollars) to Olufolakemi Adelore through Auwalu Habu and Wole Aboderin, which sum exceeded the amount permitted by Law and you thereby committed an offence contrary to sections 1(a) and 16(1)(d) the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as Amended) and punishable under section 16(2)(b) of the same Act.”

Count three reads: “That you Olasupo Shasore, S.A.N., on or about the 18th November, 2014, in Lagos within the jurisdiction of this honourable Court, induced one Ikechukwu Oguine, to commit an offence, to wit: accepting case payment of the sum of USD100,000.00 (One Hundred thousand United States Dollars) without going through a financial institution, which such amount exceeded the amount permitted by Law and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(c) of the Money Laundering Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 16 (2)(b) Of the same Act.”

Count four reads: “That you Olasupo Shasore, S.A.N on or about the 18th day of November 2014 in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, without going through a financial institution and made cash payment of the sum of USD100,000.00 (One Hundred thousand United State Dollars) to one Ikechukwu Oguine which sum exceeded the amount permitted by Law and you thereby committed an offence contrary sections 1(a) and 16(1),(d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition Act, as amended) and punishable under section 16 (2)(b) of the same Act.”

It is recalled that Shasore was last January invited by the anti-graft agency to shed light on his involvement in the Process and Industrial Developments (P&ID) case. The former Lagos attorney-general had represented Nigeria on the P&ID case.

The Federal Government had told a UK court that Shasore colluded with P&ID to pervert justice in the controversial gas supply purchasing agreement (GSPA) contract. Shasore denied the allegation in an interview.

The P&ID had won a $9.6 billion judgment against Nigeria in a British court, claiming that it entered a contract to build a gas processing plant in Calabar, Cross River State. The company stated that the deal collapsed because the Federal Government did not fulfil its side of the bargain.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

COPYRIGHT 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

BPF: NBA REVERSES SELF, CANCELS TRANSACTION CHARGES

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has cancelled the transaction charges payable by lawyers for the annual Bar Practising Fee (BPF).

A statement personally signed by NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata, noted that “the leadership of the NBA has resolved that the Association will, as was the case with AGC 2021, bear the transaction charges associated with the payment of 2022 BPF.”

It stated that the controversy generated by the high transaction charges by PAYSTACK was due to a communication gap between the NBA leadership and the service provider, adding that “while the NBA team expected that the 2021 AGC reduced fee and pass-through arrangement would hold sway, the Paystack team, having not received any clear directive in this regard, reverted to the default position which is to debit transaction charges from the purchaser, in this case, members of the Association.”

Akpata reiterated that there was no revenue sharing arrangement between the association and PAYSTACK, adding that “no portion of the transaction fees charged by Paystack is shared with or remitted to the NBA, or any of its officers or members of staff.”

The NBA leadership also said that while alternative payment platforms could be desirable, “this new arrangement of moving BPF payments online only would help the NBA improve its service offering to members, restore confidence in our electoral process and enhance accurate data gathering. The NBA will therefore continue with the online only payment policy.”

It is recalled that former NBA Lagos Branch Treasurer and erstwhile Financial Secretary, Mr. Phillip Njeteneh had in an article in CITY LAWYER chided NBA for the high charges, wondering whether the association retains a portion of the charges.

Below is the full text of Akpata’s statement.

My Dear Colleagues,

Compliments of the season and best wishes for 2022.

Since 1st January 2022 when we fully transitioned to paying our annual Bar Practising Fees (“BPF”) online, there have been numerous complaints and commentaries by some of our colleagues on a number of points. This is certainly not unexpected because transitioning to a new process, no matter how laudable or desirable, typically comes with some challenges, analyses, pushback, and initial resistance. However, as mentioned in one of our most recent notices to you, the NBA is, as it should be, open to considering all views aimed at improving our processes, and generally advancing the interests of our members and the profession. To this end, our publicity team has been responding to many of the issues raised so far and I have thought it appropriate to add to our existing responses as follows:

1. Engagement of Paystack – Paystack has been the NBA Service Provider since 2019, before this administration came on board in August 2020. A fair and transparent process for engaging them was concluded at the relevant time and this administration has continued to utilise their services, which have been quite satisfactory. We utilised Paystack’s services for processing 2021 BPF (online) payments under a hybrid arrangement and also for the 2021 Annual General Conference (AGC) registration.

2. Fees charged by Paystack – with regard to payments to Paystack for their services, in 2020, those who paid their BPF online also paid a transaction fee to Paystack which amounted to circa 2% of the transaction amount. For example, BPF of N25,000 attracted about N482.24 as transaction fee. Similarly, in 2021 (under this administration), those who opted to pay their BPF online paid the same transaction fee to Paystack. This is consistent with the contract signed with Paystack when they were engaged.

3. Bearing Paystack fees for members – with respect to the 2021 AGC for which registration was online only, the NBA was able to work out an arrangement whereby the Paystack transaction fee was not only reduced but was borne entirely by the NBA. As such, all those who registered for the 2021 AGC did not have to bear any direct transaction cost for paying online. Coming now to BPF 2022, which is to be paid online only, while the NBA team expected that the 2021 AGC reduced fee and pass-through arrangement would hold sway, the Paystack team, having not received any clear directive in this regard, reverted to the default position which is to debit transaction charges from the purchaser, in this case, members of the Association.

4. Transaction charges for BPF 2022 – the NBA has been able to negotiate a revised fee of 1.3% with Paystack for their services relating to the 2022 BPF payments. Considering that this year would be the first time when members will be required to pay their BPF online only, the leadership of the NBA has resolved that the Association will, as was the case with AGC 2021, bear the transaction charges associated with the payment of 2022 BPF.

5. Who pays the transaction charges in the future? – Going forward, it will be necessary for our Association to come to terms with the fact that online payment for goods and services has now become the norm, and those who provide the platforms through which we are able to make these payments, do so for a fee. Therefore, at the earliest opportunity, I will table a request before the NBA-NEC to take a view or make a determination on whether such future payments should continue to be borne by the Association or by the members directly.

6. Revenue Sharing with Paystack – the NBA reiterates that no portion of the transaction fees charged by Paystack is shared with or remitted to the NBA, or any of its officers or members of staff. All fees charged by them for the service(s) that they render go directly and solely to them, and the BPF paid by members is channeled by Paystack directly into the Supreme Court of Nigeria BPF Account No: 0000976716 which is held with Access Bank. The insinuations, and indeed allegations, in some quarters, to the effect that there are underhanded payments and kickbacks with respect to the transaction fees are most unfortunate.

7. Increase in BPF – to be sure, payment of transaction charges is incidental to making online payments (whether they be BPF, taxes, statutory payments, bank transfers, etc.). Such payment is not an increase in BPF as has been suggested by some of our members.

8. A dual payment system – there have been suggestions that the NBA should allow members the option of either paying their BPF online or making cash deposits at the bank. Interestingly, such hybrid system of BPF payment has existed at the NBA for at least two years, but it has proven to be inefficient to a large extent. Experience has shown that this arrangement has affected our record keeping and the integrity of some of our processes including accurate database of lawyers, NBA voters register, easy processing of stamp and seal, etc. and we are committed to eliminating these inefficiencies. So, besides the convenience for our members and the fact that electronic payment is desirable and consistent with global trends, this new arrangement of moving BPF payments online only would help the NBA improve its service offering to members, restore confidence in our electoral process and enhance accurate data gathering. The NBA will therefore continue with the online only payment policy.

9. Alternative service providers – there have been requests for the NBA to engage alternative or multiple service providers so as to allow our members choose the platform on which to make payments. While we remain satisfied with the current service offering, we will certainly consider this request in due course. The first quarter of each year is the peak period for payment of BPF by our members and we have been advised by our technical team that any consideration of alternatives to the existing platform will be best done when the high traffic abates in order not to disrupt the smooth operation of the system.

I thank you for your attention.

Sincerely,

OLUMIDE AKPATA
President
Nigerian Bar Association

Copyright 2022 CITY LAWYER. Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Join us on Facebook at https://web.facebook.com/City-Lawyer-Magazine-434937936684320 and on TWITTER at https://twitter.com/CityLawyerMag. To ADVERTISE in CITY LAWYER, please email citylawyermag@gmail.com or call 08138380083. All materials available on this Website are protected by copyright, trade mark and other proprietary and intellectual property laws. You may not use any of our intellectual property rights without our express written consent or attribution to www.citylawyermag.com. However, you are permitted to print or save to your individual PC, tablet or storage extracts from this Website for your own personal non-commercial use.

‘STEP ASIDE NOW,’ OJUKWU TELLS USORO

Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) chieftain, Prof. Ernest Ojukwu SAN has asked NBA President, Mr. Paul Usoro SAN to “step aside” from the exalted office and face the charges brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). Continue Reading