Two ranking judges of the Court of Appeal and the National Industrial Court will on Friday tie the nuptial knot in Abuja, CITY LAWYERcan authoritatively report.
The two senior jurists and love-birds are Justice Abdulazeez Waziri of the Court of Appeal and Justice Zaynab Bashir (Ph.D) of the National Industrial Court.
According to an invitation card sighted by CITY LAWYER, the “Wedding Fatiha” is billed to hold on Friday, 17th November, 2023 at the Supreme Court Central Mosque.
Sponsored by the respected Justice Tijani Abubakar (CFR) of the Supreme Court, the reception holds at a venue (name withheld) in high-brow Maitama, Abuja.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY LATEEF O. FAGBEMI, SAN ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION & MINISTER OF JUSTICE, AT THE 2023 ANNUAL CONFERENCE OF THE CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF ARBITRATORS, NIGERIA BRANCH HELD ON WEDNESDAY, 8TH NOVEMBER, 2023 AT THE HARBOUR POINT, VICTORIA ISLAND, LAGOS.
PROTOCOLS:
It is my privilege to be invited to deliver a Keynote Address at the 2023 Annual International Conference of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Nigeria Branch. To the very distinguished Executives and Members of this noble Institute, I say thank you for this honour and for creating this platform to facilitate broader exchanges on arbitration in Nigeria and beyond.
2. Permit me to observe that the activities of the Institute inclusive of this conference and others such as the ICC Africa Conference on International Arbitration, are very important to us as a government and as a nation, because your efforts will go a long way in achieving our desire to elevate Nigeria to the status of the arbitration capital of Africa.
3. The role of international arbitration in promoting international commerce and the affairs of States cannot be overemphasized. It is trite that where there is violation of a right, there must be a commensurate remedy. Arbitration and other ADR options thus provides the appropriate means of ventilating disputes in an economically viable manner. Arbitration and ADR provide avenues to remedy the weaknesses or deficiencies inherent in our conventional dispute resolution efforts through litigation.
4. Despite the positive and promising efforts of some African States in deepening the practice and conduct of arbitration proceedings, Africa is still playing the catch-up game in international commercial arbitration. I will make references to some positive developments across the continent to show that the disposition and viewpoint of African States to arbitration is progressive and responsive to global trends.
Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023
5. In Nigeria, a new Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 (the “AMA 2023”) came into force on 26 May 2023. The AMA 2023 repealed the previous over-35-year-old Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1988 (the “ACA 1988”), to provide a unified legal framework for the fair and efficient settlement of commercial disputes by arbitration and mediation. It is worthy of note that AMA 2023 clarified grey areas in ACA 1988, provided a modern legal framework and introduced innovative and laudable provisions that will ease arbitration practice in Nigeria and beyond. Some key provisions include: Accessible Electronic Communication, Third-Party Funding, Reduction in Default Number of Arbitrators, Appointment of Emergency Arbitrator, among others. I will just dwell on a few as follows:
a) Grounds for Setting Aside of Awards: the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award in Nigeria has not only been harmonized with those obtainable under the UNCITRAL Model Law and the New York Convention, but the Applicant is required to demonstrate that the Award has caused or is likely to occasion substantial injustice. Thus, the AMA 2023 has not only limited judicial intervention in arbitration but also seeks to guarantee the finality of arbitral award.
b) Award Review Tribunal (the “ART”) – the Act created the ART to serve as an avenue for an aggrieved party to seek a first level review of an arbitral award arising from arbitration proceedings seated in Nigeria. The ART is indeed innovative and is similar to the ad- hoc Committee under the ICSID annulment procedure provided for under Article 52 of the ICSID Convention.
c) Promotion of Mediation – AMA 2023 right from its title accords premium to mediation, and it provided a comprehensive procedural and substantive legal framework for the recognition of mediation and settlement agreements.
d) Consolidation of Arbitration Proceedings and Joinder of Parties: related arbitral proceedings can now be consolidated while additional or new parties can be joined to arbitral proceedings as part of the innovations brought about by AMA 2023.
e) Enforcement of arbitration agreements – unlike the discretionary regime under ACA 1988, it is now mandatory for Nigerian courts to enforce arbitration agreements by ordering stay of proceedings in cases where parties already subscribed to an arbitration agreement.
f) Power of Court to grant Interim Reliefs: The new legal regime empowers a court to enforce interim measures issued by an arbitral tribunal and also to issue interim measures of its own.
g) Arbitrator’s Immunity: AMA 2023 guarantees the security of an arbitrator, an appointing authority, or an arbitral institution, to enable them act without fear of liability, by conferring them with immunity in the performance of their duties.
h) Timelines for arbitration proceedings: The Act provided timelines to prevent delays in the determination of arbitration-related court proceedings, including proceedings to challenge an arbitral award, which are to be concluded within 4 months and any appellate proceedings is to be concluded within 6 months.
i) Legal representation in arbitration proceedings: The Act liberalizes representation of parties in arbitration proceedings beyond the limitation to Nigerian lawyers. This enables parties to explore the services of other professionals including foreign counsel (whether from Africa or elsewhere). This will also encourage foreign entities to agree to designating Nigeria as a seat for their arbitration.
6. From the foregoing, it is clear that the enactment of the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 symbolizes a big statement on the future perspectives of Nigeria to arbitration and mediation. It marks a paradigm shift in the jurisprudence of arbitration and ADR in Nigeria by underscoring the importance of party autonomy and demonstrates the commitment of Nigeria to position herself as an attractive seat of arbitration or major arbitration and mediation hub in Africa and globally. The legislative intervention is quite apposite in view of the growing involvement of the government and commercial entities in arbitration locally and globally, either ad hoc arbitrations, international commercial arbitrations or State-Investor arbitration.
7. In a most innovative and forward-looking move, the new Act enables the applicability of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (The New York Convention) in the enforcement of awards in Nigeria and also adopted provisions under the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. The foregoing reforms will strengthen Nigeria’s legal and institutional framework for arbitration and meditation, with consequential benefits for the legal industry and the economy in general. The fact that our courts of law are still expected to perform critical roles pre and post arbitration proceedings mean that we must also do more in the area of administration of civil justice. It is gratifying to note that AMA 2023 has provided some timeframe for arbitration related matters before the courts to avoid undue delays.
National Policy on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution.
8. At the moment and against the background of our recent experiences, the Federal Ministry of Justice in consultation with relevant stakeholders has developed a draft National Policy on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, which will compliment compliance with the provisions of AMA 2023 and expand the frontiers of the practice and jurisprudence of arbitration in Nigeria. The Policy will soon be presented to the Federal Executive Council for approval. Some of its key highlights are:
i. The policy recognises the principle of party autonomy in arbitration, whether in local or international contracts, but seeks to promote or project Nigeria as the seat for arbitration in respect of contracts to be performed in Nigeria.
ii. The Policy stipulates preference of Nigeria as the Seat and Venue of all arbitrations involving Nigerian governmental bodies and accommodates the interests of both Federal and State Institutions.
iv. The Policy favours the appointment of Nigerian lawyers as Lead Counsel. However, where a foreign counsel is engaged on grounds of experience and expertise, the foreign Counsel is expected to partner with Nigerian counsel to enable development of local content in the legal profession.
v. The Policy identifies critical timelines for the resolution of Judicial proceedings arising from arbitration and ADR and stipulates that such cases shall be determined by the courts within a period not exceeding 60 days. The Policy also seeks to promote Customary Arbitration system as a dispute resolution mechanism.
Arbitral Institutions in Africa
9. Africa is replete with arbitral institutions across the continent which is estimated to be over 90 in number at the moment. At the London International Disputes Week (LIDW) 2023 International Arbitration Day, which held on 15 May 2023, participants considered the changing perspectives on arbitration in Africa and noted that there was shifting attitudes towards arbitration across Sub-Saharan Africa, but that the challenges and obstacles confronting arbitration in Africa (inclusive of existing legal and judicial regimes, unfavourable State policies, etc.) are still limiting factors.
10. Despite the huge number of arbitral institutions in Africa, the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce) and the LCIA (London Court of International Arbitration) constitute the institutions dominating international arbitration in Africa. In a 2018 survey of almost 800 arbitration practitioners and users by White & Case and Queen Mary University, African respondents chose the ICC and LCIA as the top two arbitral institutions. Thankfully, the Lagos Court of Arbitration (LCA) ranked as the highest African arbitration institution. Other arbitral institutions in Nigeria are: Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration – Lagos (RCICAL), Lagos Court of Arbitration (LCA), Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) UK (Nigeria Branch), Lagos Chamber of Commerce International Arbitration Centre (LACIAC), International Centre for Arbitration and Mediation Abuja (ICAMA), etc.
11. According to a survey conducted by the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), Arbitration in Africa Survey 2020 Report, the top five arbitral centers in Africa are: the Arbitration Foundation of Southern Africa (AFSA), the Cairo Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (CRCICA), the Kigali International Arbitration Centre (KIAC), the Lagos Court of Arbitration (LCA), and the Nairobi Centre for International Arbitration (NCIA). Other arbitral institutions of note in Africa include: Ouagadougou Arbitration and Mediation & Conciliation Centre (OAMCC), Tanzania Institute of Arbitrators (TIArb), etc. The 2020 Survey also listed Johannesburg, Lagos, Cairo, Cape Town, and Durban as the top five cities in Africa reputed for serving as seats of arbitration proceedings.
12. The reality is that majority of arbitration matters involving African parties are still resolved outside the continent. According to available reports of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), 130 parties from sub-Saharan Africa accounted for about 5% of all parties before it in 2019. African States such as Nigeria was involved in 19 cases, South Africa – 13, Mauritius – 10. In the same vein, the 2019 record of the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) also shows that African parties were involved in over 10% of its cases. In 2019, African States were also active in investor-state arbitrations (about 15%) before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).
13. The situation in South Africa is also reflective of the African perspective on international commercial arbitration. The watershed in arbitration which was brought about by the enactment of the Arbitration and Mediation Act 2023 was earlier witnessed in South Africa with the enactment of the International Arbitration Act, 2017 (“IAA”), which adopted provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law into South African law. South Africa earlier domesticated the New York Convention through its Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Act, 1977. The impact of this enabling legal regime is deductible from the 2022 report of the Arbitration Foundation of Southern Africa (“AFSA”), South Africa’s foremost arbitral institution, which reflected its major users as South Africa, Zimbabwe, Mauritius, Botswana, Australia, Jersey, and the UAE.
14. Other jurisdictions across Africa require appropriate legislative interventions to ensure that domestic arbitration legislations are modernized to reflect international best practices. This is more important because the choice of seat of arbitration is substantially influenced by the home legal system, which determines the framework for the law governing the arbitration procedure and enforcement of the arbitral award. There is also a need for improvement in African perspectives on choice of arbitrators which are currently slanted in favour of senior lawyers or retired judges while neglecting practitioners with requisite expertise and experience.
P&ID: Lessons Learned and Way Forward
15. On the sidelines of the recently concluded International Bar Association conference in Paris, I was part of a Panel of Discussion consisting of Attorneys-General from Africa on the theme “Working with external counsel in litigations and arbitrations: perspectives of African States”. I dwelt on the challenges and experiences which Nigeria faces in the prosecution or defence of international arbitrations and litigations, especially in working with foreign law firms. Expectedly, I made reference to the recent huge victory which Nigeria recorded against Process & Industrial Developments Ltd (“P&ID”) which enabled the country to avoid a whopping US$11billion liability.
16. Let me reiterate that the victory is not just a victory for Nigeria but a significant positive impact for arbitration as a mechanism for dispute resolution as it has dispelled the notion that the secrecy of international arbitration can be used to shield corporate criminal actions from public scrutiny. Let us pause for a second and imagine that a company with no assets and that has made no investment almost walked away with USD11 billion of taxpayers’ money. That is a third of Nigeria’s foreign reserve, without as much as even securing the project site for the project. That would be legitimizing criminality. This would not have helped in making international arbitration more attractive, especially to States.
17. The judgment found that the award had been obtained by fraud and in a way which was contrary to public policy. In particular, the Judge concluded that P&ID obtained the award only by “practising the most severe abuses of the arbitral process”. The judgement highlighted the fact that arbitrators can probably do better than they currently do in ensuring that they intervene especially when the issue of incompetent representation is quite obvious during the proceedings. This is particularly true when States and State Entities are the Respondents, with significant taxpayers’ money at stake. It should have been obvious to the arbitrators that something was wrong with the manner that Nigeria was defended in the arbitration. As a State we have also learnt a lesson that not only must we ensure that the lawyers engaged are competent and experienced but we must also ensure that they are patriotic and morally upright.
18. Like P&ID case, Nigeria is currently involved in other international commercial and State-Investor arbitrations which are ongoing outside Africa for transactions that occurred in Nigeria. It is not unlikely that had the P&ID arbitration been conducted in Nigeria, the outcome would have been different as some of the challenges that Nigeria faced in the proceedings might have been avoided. The Tribunal could have been requested to even conduct a visit to the locus in quo to ascertain if P&ID actually secured a project site at all. Our current reforms through AMA 2023 and the National Arbitration Policy will prevent Nigeria from slipping into such a cul-de-sac again. To drive home this point, the majority decision by Lord Hoffman and Sir Anthony Evans, awarded to P&ID the sum of US$6.597 Billion (Six Billion, Five Hundred and Ninety-Seven Million US Dollars) plus interest at the rate of 7% from 20th March, 2013. However, Chief Bayo Ojo, SAN – the FRN appointed arbitrator, in his minority decision, awarded the sum of US$250 Million to P&ID as fair compensation.
19. I must state that there are various lessons from the outcome of the P&ID case including issues of statutory or regulatory non-compliance, corruption, negative impact of inter-agency squabbles on state defence, etc but I have only limited the issues to those that would be of immediate relevance to this gathering and I assure you that the totality of the lessons has substantially shaped our perspective on arbitration and will serve as a guide in dealing with other cases.
Technology
20. I now consider the place of technology in arbitral proceedings. I believe that we must be proactive in envisioning and adopting the emerging technologies that will reshape arbitration globally in the coming years.
21. Already, we have seen how video-conferencing and virtual hearing rooms have enabled remote participation during the pandemic. But the metaverse and virtual reality platforms may soon allow arbitrators and parties to interact in fully immersive simulated environments. Electronically submitted pleadings and evidence can be instantly accessed worldwide through cloud computing. Artificial intelligence could help analyze massive amounts of data to strengthen fact-finding. Blockchain has the potential to highly secure and simplify document exchanges. Machine learning can help identify patterns and predict case outcomes.
22. These innovations raise important questions about the ethics, admissibility and reliability of technologically enabled arbitration processes. As practitioners, we must be cautious yet open-minded in exploring such new tools. Their prudent adoption could widen access to arbitration and deliver faster, cheaper justice without compromising due process. This conference offers an excellent avenue for delegates to discuss how African nations can harness emerging technologies to upgrade their arbitration frameworks for the digital age. The Ministry of Justice on its part is considering and actively taking steps to adopt and encourage the use of safe and ethical technology. In addition to what we are already doing, we welcome your expert guidance on preparing for the hi-tech future of arbitration.
Conclusion
23. In concluding this address, I wish to recommend that African States (both public and private stakeholders) should be guided by the CIArb London Centenary Principles in improving their perspectives, culture, jurisprudence and operationalization of arbitration practices and procedures. The London principles comprise of ten fundamentals including:
a. an arbitration law providing a good framework for the process, limiting court intervention, and striking the right balance between confidentiality and transparency
b. an independent, competent and efficient judiciary
c. an independent, competent legal profession with expertise in international arbitration
d. a sound legal education system; the right to choose one’s legal representative, local or foreign
e. ready access to the country for witnesses and counsel and a safe environment for participants and their documents
f. good logistical support, including transcription, hearing rooms, document handling, and translation
g. professional norms embracing a diversity of legal and cultural traditions, and ethical principles governing arbitrators and counsel
h. well-functioning venues for hearings and other meetings
i. adherence to treaties for the recognition and enforcement of foreign awards and arbitration agreements
j. immunity for arbitrators from civil liability for anything done or omitted to be done in good faith as an arbitrator.
24. Let me commend the Institute again for the array of salient topics outlined for discussion at this conference to x-ray the status, legal framework (practice and procedure), challenges of arbitration in Africa as well as charting a course for the future.
25. Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate the opportunity granted to me to share my thoughts and perspectives. I wish you all fruitful deliberations as the Conference progresses.
LATEEF O. FAGBEMI, SAN
Attorney-General of the Federation
and Minister of Justice
Wednesday, 8th November, 2023
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Role of the Legislature in Preventing Corruption and Breaches of Integrity in the Justice Sector.
Being a Paper presented at the All Nigeria Judges’ Conference of Superior Courts held at Andrews Otutu Obaseki Auditorium, National Judicial Institute, Abuja on November 14th, 2023 by His Excellency, Distinguished Senator Godswill O. Akpabio, CON, President of the Senate, Federal Republic of Nigeria.
Milords I extend to you all the greetings and warm wishes of my distinguished colleagues of the 10th Senate and thank you for the opportunity to speak on this very important subject that strikes at the very heart of our democracy, the foundation upon which our society rests – “Preventing Corruption and Breaches of Integrity in the Justice Sector, the Role of the Legislature”
Permit me at this juncture to also appreciate Milords enormously for your selfless service to our dear country. I am particularly elated because the judiciary has held things together in the nascent democracy of this country, always thriving to remain the last hope of the common man.
I am first and foremost a lawyer before my adventure into politics and so I have a clear understanding of the real situation including institutional and legal bottlenecks that afflict the justice sector generally. As a member of the legal profession, the President of the Senate and the chairman of the National Assembly, I humbly stand as the representative of the legislature and the people of Nigeria bearing a weighty responsibility in our collective endeavour to ensure that whatever are the causes of the alleged corruption and breaches of integrity in the justice sector, legislative interventions must be pursued vigorously for the purposes of elimination. This collective action-plan must be intentional to create a just, accountable and reliable justice system that serves the very best interest of every citizen.
It has become a norm for every outgoing justices of the various courts to lament on some of the problems of the Judiciary which we all know aforehand before they say it. Some of these challenges manifest in various forms, eroding the fundamental tenets of Justice, impairing public trust, and hampering the sector’s ability to function effectively.
Our responsibility is to support with necessary legislative interventions that will disincentive the eagerness towards corruption, close gaps and minimize negative opportunities and strengthen the Judiciary to purge itself of its own bad eggs. But beyond this, we stand by the determination of the current administration of President Ahmed Bola Tinubu GCFR to ensure improvement in the welfare of our judges of all the various courts.
Our judicial officers are often burdened to resolve conflicts of monumental dimensions and yet, my Lords still struggle with mundane and trivial survival needs and work tools. This is a situation that is now exacerbated by the challenging economy that this administration is battling with and which we are working very hard to improve upon. The legislature is determined to improve the judiciary through very intentional appropriations and we are going to work closely on this.
We are aware that the number of Justices on the bench of the Supreme Court has dropped drastically below the constitutional requirement. It is a matter of national interest that we immediately initiate the due process of law to address the shortfall at the apex court. In this wise, the Legislature is ready to play its role.
The Judiciary and the Legislature share a unique relationship. The legislature is the assembly of the people, while the judiciary is the people’s last hope. We will always therefore seek to identify ways in which Parliament can help the judiciary to remain strong, productive and independent for the benefit of Nigeria. Stringent resource allocation, transparent and merit based appointments and removals are some of the measures that the legislature will entrench to assist the justice sector to regain its glory. Let it be known also that fostering a culture of integrity and accountability is achievable through continuous training of judicial officers on ethical standards and anti-corruption measures. Educating the public about their rights and the justice system’s operations, enhancing transparency in court proceedings and making legal processes more accessible and affordable are essential components.
The utilisation of technology to increase speed and transparency in court proceedings and case management reduces opportunities for corruption and breaches of integrity.
Of importance and which I should mention in this august event is the measures that this 10th Assembly will take to address the delay in justice delivery in Nigeria. We all know that justice delayed is justice denied. This has become a cankerworm that requires urgent solution. It is a truth that it takes average of 15 or 20 years to resolve simple business disputes in Nigeria. This is clearly unhealthy as it has placed the nation in a disadvantageous position in the 21st century. Therefore urgent institutional and legal reforms are required to address this abnormally. We in the national assembly are of the firm view that not every matter from the remotest village in Nigeria should end up at the Supreme Court in Abuja. Some of these cases are better stopped at the various court of appeals in the Federation if we are desirous of quicker dispensation of Justice.
Under contemplation therefore is a bill to address that absurdity. The bill will address the issue of some of the cases that will have its final bus stop at the court of appeal while the Supreme court should be burdened with only cases that the stakeholders have agreed should end up at the apex court. With these and other progressive measures we would have addressed the issue of delay in our justice sector in Nigeria.
In conclusion Milords, the taste of the pudding is in the eating. I cannot exhaust all the plans of legislative intervention in this paper at this conference. What I know is that our commitment to preventing corruption and upholding integrity within the justice sector is unwavering. We are prepared to take robust legislative measures to address the teething problems of our justice sector. With these interventions and strategic moves, the 10th Assembly is dedicated to enhancing the administration of justice and improving justice service delivery across the nation. I solicit the support of the bench for us to strenghten the integrity and capacity of our judges through proactive legislative interventions. The consequence will be a judiciary that is perceived as fair, independent and justice driven with improved positive perception by the members of the public.
I wish milords quality and successful deliberations in your conference.
Thank You.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
A retired gynecologist, Dr. Albert Ndulue has lamented over the demolition of his property on Monday, November 13, 2023 by NICON Trustee.
In a press statement issued today, the 84-year-old described his ordeal as inhuman, saying he has been “subjected to all manner of mental torture, trauma and unbelievable injustice following the unending onslaught against me and my property.”
Below is the full text of the Press Statement
ON THE DEMOLITION OF PROPERTY OF DR. ALBERT NDULUE BY NICON TRUSTEES ON MONDAY 13TH NOVEMBER 2023 AT ALMA BEACH ESTATE
Good afternoon, Gentlemen of the press. I want to thank each and every one of you for making out time to honour this press invitation.
My name is Dr. Albert Ndulue. I am 84 years old. I am a retired gynecologist.
In the past 5 years, I have been subjected to all manner of mental torture, trauma and unbelievable injustice following the unending onslaught against me and my property by the trio of NICON Trustees Ltd, Mr. ABAH ONAH, their alleged receiver manager and Mr. Ejeta Otuoniyo and their accomplice which now include the AIG Zone 2, Onikan Lagos.
To understand the inhuman ordeal they have subjected me and my property to since 2017, here is a brief overview of my title to the property at Plot 8, Block 24. Alma Beach Estate, Lekki, Eti-Osa, Lagos.
In 1991, Alma Beach advertised for the sale of plots in land in Alma Beach. I paid seven hundred and fifty thousand naira (#750,000) for a certain type of plot. Alma Beach allocated a plot to me after i had fully paid for it. But then sand filling was on-going. But when i visited the estate the sand filling had stopped. I contacted the Alma Beach and they told me that they had financial challenge but that had been sorted out. Then in 1993, Alma Beach allocated a plot of land to me measuring 1, 358.974 sqaure metres marked NAO, 1336, 1337, 1353, 1354, and back to 1336.
Following this allocation, I went to Alma Beach to request for the documents required by the Lagos state government to regularize the purchase of the land, obtain governor’s consent, and perfect my title. I was informed that Wale Babalakin SAN had taken over Alma Beach Estate and was responsible for providing the requested documents. I approached Babalakin who refused to give me the documents instead offering me 12m which I rejected. Following his refusal, I sued Alma Beach Estate at the Lagos high court.
In 2011. Having no defence or reason to formally allocate the land or signing requisite documents, the management of Alma Beach allocated my land and executed all necessary documents thereto. Lagos State government issued me the governor’s consent following my application. After obtaining governor’s consent, I submitted a building plan to Lagos Physical Planning and Urban Development Authority which was approved in 2014. I started development on the plot by fencing it round. When I wanted to start the main building, I visited the site and saw a notice on my entrance claiming that my land was subject to an alleged receivership pursuant to an interim order of Justice Austin Obiozor of the Federal High Court Lagos. I immediately instructed my lawyer to verify the authenticity of said order. My lawyer confirmed that there was indeed, an order made by the court in SUIT NO: LD/27/67GCMD/2018 and filed a motion seeking to be joined as a party in the suit. However, before the court could hear the motion, the court found that the suit was fraudulent and incompetent and therefore dismissed it for lack of merit.
Thinking that my ordeal was over, I immediately started building on the land. At about 92% completion of the building, I had a health emergency which warranted my visit to my doctors abroad. This visit coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic causing me to extend my stay in the US. Sometime in July 2021, I got a call from one of my neighbours that my house had been put up for sale. Alarmed at this information, I rushed back to the country and discovered that it was the same Mr Abah Onah, the alleged trustee receiver manager of NICON Trustees Limited and his cohorts who were still relying on the same interim order already vacated, following the dismissal of the suit.
With the aid of thugs, they vandalised my property and carted away all the valuables and building materials.
My lawyers also informed me that the criminal attempt to sell the house was made while the suit was still pending at the Lagos High Court. I instructed my lawyers to petition the commissioner of police Lagos State who immediately approved the petition and invited Mr Abah Onah and his cohorts. Having no defence for the illegal actions, they ran to the Lagos High Court, and filed a frivolous application for enforcement of their fundamental rights. While the fundamental rights suit was pending (which is still pending till date), they continued to encroach on my property, and even claimed to have sold my property to different people, some of whom are Mr Amobi Chukwudi alias money bag, Pastor Ayo Adelaja, Tony Montana, Quartra Architect Limited, and numerous other persons, whose names I do not know. They continued to run to different police stations and courts on the same subject, and once my lawyer appears in court or attends to the matter, they will discontinue or abandon the matter.
The climax of the issue was when they ran to the Commissioner of Police, Lagos State, “Special Squad” and filed another petition on the same subject matter making sundry allegations, even though I was far away in the US. My lawyers were made to halt the initial petition in reverence to the court owing to the fundamental right action filed by them against the police and the directive of the DIG of police from Abuja directing parties that all matters concerning the land should be referred to the courts, and the parties must wait until the court finally decides the rightful owner.
Astonished by the latest petition, the CP, “Special Squad” had to complain to AIG zone 2 Onikan Lagos over the provocative conduct of the suspects and sort that he intervenes. The then AIG, noticing that the matter was pending, with series of judgements delivered in the course of litigation, referred the file to OC legal. Before this time, my lawyer had often informed me that he was worried about the investigation as the AIG team ‘B13’ handling the matter led by one AS Adekunle Samuel and Supol Adewunmi have refused to invite all the suspects and also refused to visit the site to see the extent of damage to my property. It was against this backdrop that my lawyer was invited by the new AIG, Mohammed Aro, for an interview. Upon arrival, he was informed that OC legal had finished a report on the matter and recommended that myself or my lawyer should be charged to court. All the effort of my lawyer to show them that the courts and all the documents presented to them had no allegation against me. At no point where we confronted or made to respond to a counter petition. When my lawyer inquired about the offence we were being charged with, it was discovered that there was no such recommendation on the report. The AIG adjourned the meeting to enable the new OC legal to review the report, and also look at the judgment of the honourable court, which had earlier affirmed the legitimacy of my title, and restrained the police from disturbing my residence in Alma Beach, where my property is located. My lawyer applied for the CTC of the report and the statement of my opponents to enable me prepare for the next interview which was declined until the 28th day of October 2023, when DSP Adekunle Samuel, on the directive of the AIG, Mohammed Aro invaded my property, scaled the fence and arrested my security men, took them to zone 2 and detained them. Fortunately, no charge or allegation was made against my security guards, neither were they made to make any statements against any allegation. However, they were compelled and coerced to sign an already prepared undertaking never to go back to my property or secure it in anyway. From that day, my property has been besieged from all sides by more than 40 armed thugs, wielding all forms of dangerous weapons, taking turns to vandalise my property, carting away the windows, roofing sheets, electrical fittings, and pipes, over the watch and protection of policeman from Zone 2 police station, Onikan.
On Monday, the 10th of November, 2023, when i visited my property, i met an entourage of thugs cannibalizing my property that was 92% completed and carting awaying windows, roofing sheets, electrical materials and other fittings and loading into a standby truck. When i challenged them, they ran away and abandoned their truck. I went to ILasan police station to complain but was told Zone 2 had directed ILasan to stay clear of the matter. When the destruction continued i went back to lLasan police station again seeking DPO’s intervention to stop futher damage to the property.
Surprisingly, while we were discussing, the ILasan DPO told us that the AIG zone 2 had instructed him not to send poilcemen to Alma Beach. While we were there, some armed Policemen from D13, Zone 2 Zonal Command, Onikan, Lagos came to llasan and told the DPO that the AIG zone 2 had requested to meet with both parties.They took me to zone 2 where we discussed with the AIG and two other interested persons who claim to be representing NICON Trustee. All efforts to convince the AIG to send police men to stop the thugs from cannibalizing my property proved abortive. He said he will only send policemen to maintain peace when we start fighting and then ordered us to leave his office.
I thank you again for granting me audience.
Dr. Albert Ndulue Retired gynecologist.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
In this edition of our Quarterly Newsletter is an abridged version of the lecture delivered by Chief Wole Olamipekun, OFR, SAN, who was the esteemed Guest Speaker at the Colloquium and Presentation of Books commemorating the Silver Jubilee of Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama’s conferment as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Theme: “The Nigeria of our Dreams: A Call to the Patriots. His lecture delves into the various aspects of the Nigerian Project and patriots of today’s Nigeria”.
Chief Wole Olanipekun, CFR, SAN emphasizes on the need for true federalism and the collective efforts of all Nigerians to join hands and building a New Nigeria. Chief Wole Olanipekun, CFR, SAN said “It is hoped that this Colloquium will provoke us to dreaming dreams that will match and address not only our present shortcomings but also put us on the crest for future development. A future that will ignite and rekindle hope in our youths and generations to come. With this process in place, war of attrition and transferred aggression by the youths, poor and down trodden against any person or citizen who is generally perceived as an oppressor, be he a civil servant, middle class man or woman, successful Farmer, Lawyer, Doctor or any other professional, would be substantially curtailed”. Chief Wole Olanipekun, CFR, SAN concluded that the acclaimed and celebrated successes of our youths in music and sports bear eloquent collaboration of the foregoing testament that our citizens are not lower in status than any other race or nation.
We have a range of exciting and informative features that are sure to captivate our readers. Our Sights and Scenes section brings you the latest happenings from within and outside our firm. Our Photo Speak section brings you a visual narrative of some of our recent events, while our Legal Humor section is guaranteed to put a smile on your face. We also have exciting news from the firm, including updates on our upcoming events and a proile of our staff members who work tirelessly to provide our clients with the highest quality legal services. As always, we are committed to providing quality and informative content that educate and entertain our readers. We hope you enjoy reading this edition of our Quarterly Newsletter.
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.
In 1968, Stanislav Andrzejewski, the former Polish soldier and prisoner-of-war, who later founded the Sociology Department at the University of Reading in England, coined the word ‘kleptocracy”, which he defined as “a system of government [that] consists precisely of the practice of selling what the law forbids to sell.” He saw in the system of Nigeria’s First Republic, “the most perfect example of a kleptocracy” in which “power rested on the ability to bribe.”
According to Andrzejewski, the defining characteristic of a kleptocracy “is that the functioning of the organs of authority is determined by the mechanisms of supply and demand rather than the laws and regulations.”
In a democracy, there are two things access to which should not be determined by the economic laws of buying and selling. One is the legitimacy of government; the other is the authority of the courts in the administration of justice. Today in Nigeria, however, the authority to govern is conferred not by the people but by the courts and, for the most part, we now know that the decision as to whom the judges decide to confer the mandate in most cases is traded, bought, and sold.
To be sure, courts always have a legitimate role in the democratic process and this was so well before Nigeria embarked on the experiment in presidential politics. The electoral process everywhere is established by law and the courts exist to interpret law. Ideally, the rules that govern elections should be determinate and determined by the courts while the outcome of elections should be indeterminate until the votes are cast. In Nigeria, however, the cone has been inverted so that the courts ensure that the rules are indeterminate, in order that the outcomes can be pre-determined.
This outcome has been achieved by judicial overreach resulting in a jurisprudence of kleptocracy. The four major landmarks in the evolution of this outcome occurred in cases arising from Anambra, Rivers, Zamfara, and Imo States.
First, the Courts granted themselves the powers of an electoral umpire to add and subtract votes in order to pick, choose, and determine who was declared winner in elections. A defining landmark in this trajectory was the decision by the Court of Appeal in March 2006 rightfully striking down the declaration of Dr. Chris Ngige in the 2003 as the Governor of Anambra State. In its judgment, the Court re-computed the numbers declared by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and found that Peter Obi had actually won the election. On the facts, the judgment looked unimpeachable. No one could question the powers of the courts to strike down an outcome procured by electoral debauchery. What this case also did was to establish that the courts could compute electoral arithmetic with greater finality than the INEC. The courts were to exercise this power subsequently in governorship elections in Ondo, Ekiti, and Edo ostensibly to check a perception of habitual abuse of the electoral process by the then ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party, (PDP).
Next, in October 2007, the Supreme Court determined in the case involving the governorship election in Rivers State that a person could be elected as Governor even when his name was not on the ballot. In that case, the then ruling party had arbitrarily replaced the winner of its governorship primaries with a loser in the primaries and acted in defiance of a court order. The Supreme Court struck down the substitution but, in a poorly reasoned fit of judicial pique, went further to say that a person who was not on the ballot actually won the election. To justify this, the court claimed that it was political parties alone who ran for office in Nigeria and not candidates. In so doing, the court established a dubious principle that candidates do not matter in Nigeria’s version of elective politics. Judicial kleptocracy was about to take off on a horse girdled with good intentions.
If the interventions of the courts in Anambra and then in Rivers appeared well-intentioned on the facts, the next two were evidence of courts amok. In May 2019, the Supreme Court ruled to confer the mandate to govern Zamfara State in north-west Nigeria on a man who had been hopelessly beaten into second position, losing in every local government area in the state. It held that the votes of the winning candidate were “wasted votes” because of some pre-election infraction. Now, votes are the only currency of an electoral process and a judiciary committed to upholding the people as the source of legitimacy in a democracy will not venture a jurisprudence that consigns any votes to the dust-bin but that is exactly what the Supremes ordered. So, today, Nigerian courts – many induced by material benefit – talk about “wasted votes” with undisguised glee.
Then, in January 2020, the Supreme Court nullified the election of Emeka Ihedioha as governor of Imo State, replacing him with a man who had been well beaten to fourth place in the election and substituting the computation of the INEC in that case with that of a rogue police officer who claimed to have the true results of the ballot. Miraculously, these rogue results just happened not to have been available to any other except the person for whom six Justices of the Supreme Court (none of whom was registered to vote in Imo State) cast their votes. In this decision, the Supreme Court effectively ruled that when it suits them, the courts could usurp or retrench the INEC as electoral umpire.
So, according to Nigerian courts, you can undertake an election without candidates; administer an election without INEC; and produce winners without votes. Acknowledging the extent of the resulting judicial overreach, former Vice-Chairman (north-west) of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), Salihu Lukman, describes Nigeria as a place in which “citizens can vote but winners are decided in the courtroom by conclaves of Judges.” In 2011, for instance, Alphonsus Igbeke who had never won an election, secured a court order returning him to the National Assembly for the third successive election cycle. On each occasion, he had worked with judges to send him to the National Assembly without any need for the votes of citizens. It was all transparent electoral kleptocracy perpetrated by judges.
The role of adjudicating election petitions has, therefore, become a very prized one in the judicial system. Judges lobby to be put on them. There, many of them indulge in trading in electoral outcomes and getting in bed with politicians and political parties.
Recent results from the election petition tribunals present a confetti of decisions that simply cannot be explained rationally except with reference to a jurisprudence of buying and selling judgments. There have been clear instances of judicial kleptocracy in Abia State, for instance.
But perhaps the state that evokes the greatest attention by far is Plateau State, where there appears to be a clear judicial design to overturn the will of the people and re-assign their mandate to candidates and parties for whom they did not vote. It could be entirely coincidental that the President of the Court of Appeal who oversees election petitions just happens also to come from the state.
There will be time to take a deeper dive into these outcomes sometime soon. What seems evident right now is that through a series of jurisprudential manouvres over the past decade and a half, Nigeria’s courts have become places where, to hark back to Stanislav Andrzejewski, the two things that no one should sell – electoral legitimacy and judicial authority – are now bought and sold in the courts.
A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
LEVERAGING EMERGING LEGAL CHALLENGES TO THE RULE OF LAW IN THE PREVAILING SOCIO-ECONOMIC REALITIES IN NIGERIA
BY HON. JUSTICE ALABA OMOLAYE AJILEYE, PhD (Rtd)
BAZE UNVERSITY, ABUJA BEING THE 9TH BADAGRY LAW LECTURE DELIVERED AT THE 9TH ANNUAL LAW WEEK OF THE BADAGRY BRANCH OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION
HELD OF THURSDAY, 9/11/2023 AT THE NATIONAL POSTGRADUATE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF NIGERIA, IJANIKIN
It is a privilege to speak at this 9th Law Week Program of the Badagry Bar on the topic “Leveraging Emerging Legal Challenges to the Rule of Law in the Prevailing Socio-Economic Realities in Nigeria.” The topic is scaled down in its form but expanded in its character to address a broad spectrum of the challenges to the rule of law in Nigeria. This is to discharge ourselves from unnecessary fetters that will hinder our discussion in limiting it to such challenges that the topic describes as “legal challenges.” Today we should reflect on some basic challenges to the rule of law that are emerging in Nigeria. Some of these challenges are obvious while some are not so obvious. In this lecture, we shall navigate into contemporary and current matters or prevailing issues relating to challenges to the rule of law. The word “emerging” suggests that our discussion should depart from the old and antiquated challenges and focus on challenges that are just appearing, The word “realities” in the topic must also not be ignored. Reality means, ”the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea.” Issues to be discussed here will, therefore, be presented as they truly are. In this regard, within the space of time permitted, I have chosen to focus attention on five emerging challenges: corruption, gradual erosion of public trust in the Judiciary, the idea of regionalising justice, the mode of appointing judges, and the bad side of social media. Some of these reflect new ideas and new phenomena against the rule of law.
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.
Professor Ben Nwabueze (SAN, NNOM, CON), Nigeria’s pre-eminent constitutional lawyer, is dead. He was aged 94 years.
The passing of the legal giant occurred the same day as his protégé and former Chairman of the Body of Benchers, Chief George Uwechue (SAN, FNIALS).
A statement by the family made available toCITY LAWYER reads: “With great sadness, we announce the passing on of our patriarch, Professor B. O. Nwabueze SAN, NNOM, CON, pioneer Secretary-General of Ohanaeze Ndigbo and Oduah Afo-na-Isagba of Atani, Anambra State, on Sunday October 29, 2023 age 94. He lived an exemplary life of consequence.
“Burial arrangements will be announced in due course.
“Eni Nwabueze, MD
“For the Family.”
A profile on the foremost senior lawyer penned by the Hallmark of Labour Foundation reads: Professor Ben Nwabueze or Professor of Professors as he’s fondly called by his numerous admirers is Nigeria’s first academic Senior Advocate of Nigeria. A Teacher, Administrator, Businessman and former Minister of Education and Youth Development, Professor Ben Nwabueze was born on December 22nd, 1932 in Atani, Ogbaru Local government Area of Anambra State.
His academic pursuit started at the CMS Central School Atani, from 1938 – 1945; C.M.S Central School, Onitsha (formerly, African College), 1947 – 1950. He later went to London School of Economics and Political Science, University of London, 1956 – 1961 and School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1961 – 1962. From 1962 – 1965, he was Senior Lecturer at Holborn College of Law, London, and Senior Lecturer, University of Nigeria Nsukka, between 1967 – 1970. In 1971, he was Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Zambia and Director, Law practice Institute, Zambia, 1973 – 1975.
Although, well supported by both father and uncle initially, the greater part of his Academic pursuits abroad were made possible by scholarship awarded to him for his academic excellence.
Prof. Nwabueze earned his Doctor of Laws (LL.D) at the University of London in 1978, based on his three outstanding books – Constitutionalism, Presidentialism, and Judicialism, thus entering the record books as the second (since the death of Dr. T.O. Elias), the only Nigerian and African holder of a higher doctorate degree in Law by published works. He is also the first academic lawyer to be made a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) in 1978 strictly on the basis of his published works.
A seasoned Academician, he was member of Senate of the Universities of Lagos, Dar-es-salaam, Nairobi, Haile Selassie in Ethiopia, Lesotho, Botswana and Swaziland between 1971 – 1978.
He was appointed the University Assessor for Academic Appointments, Universities of Ghana, Lagos, Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University) and Jos between 1978 – 1979.
A firm believer in publishing, Prof. Ben Nwabueze is the proud author of over thirty books and treatises with an average extent of 400 pages. They include; The Machinery of Justice in Nigeria; Constitutional Law of the Nigerian Republic; Nigerian Land Law and Constitutionalism in the Emergent States. Others are Presidentialism in Commonwealth Africa, Judicialism in Commonwealth Africa; The Presidential Constitution of Nigeria; A Constitutional History of Nigeria; Federalism in Nigeria under the Presidential Constitution; and Nigeria’s Second Experiment in constitutional Democracy in Africa in Five Volumes.
He has written over 200 articles in academic journals and more than 100 keynotes at local and international Conferences.
He is a household name in the Legal Profession and hardly, any other author is as frequently quoted in court judgements as Ben Nwabueze. Although, well known for his teaching, research and writing; Nwabueze continued to participate in University administration.
This erudite Professor was appointed to Professorial Chairs in the following Universities; Zambia, 1970 – 75; Ahmadu Bello university, Zaria, 1974; University of Nigeria, Nsukka, 1975 – 76; Anambra State University of Technology; Nnamdi Azikiwe university, Awka 1989 – 1983 (visiting).
Prof. Ben Nwabueze is also a strong advocate for the Igbo cause. He, alongside other prominent Igbo sons like Akanu Ibiam, M.I. Okpara, K.O. Mbadiwe, Chief Ugochukwu, P.N. Okigbo and Udoji, co-founded Ohaneze Ndigbo in 1976. He served as Secretary – General, between 1978 to 2004, in which capacity he transformed the body into a formidable, highly regarded non-partisan Pan Igbo pressure group.
The recipient of several Chieftaincy titles, and The Nigerian Order of Merit (NNOM).
Prof. Ben Nwabueze is truly an academic giant in every sense of the term. Probably, more than any other Nigerian has, through his numerous books and articles contributed towards the application of constitutional law and the broader process of governance in Nigeria.
Indeed, the Nigerian Constitutional Evolution and the evolution of the entire legal system of Nigeria would not be complete without the invaluable contribution of this noble Patriot. It is therefore in recognition of his immense contribution to the advancement of the Nigerian Legal System, particularly in the areas of Academics and publication.
In recognition of his immense contribution to the advancement of the Nigerian Legal System, particularly in the areas of Academics and Publication, Hallmarks of Labour Foundation called on Prof. Ben Nwabueze, a Great Nigerian to join the league of other worthy Patriots of Hallmarks of Labour Role Model (HLR).
Prof. Nwabueze SAN would celebrate his 90th Birthday on Monday, March 22, 2021.
A former Chairman of Nigeria’s Body of Benchers, Chief George Uwechue (SAN, FNIALS) is dead.
Impeccable sources told CITY LAWYER that Chief Uwechue died yesterday afternoon after a courageous battle with an ailment.
A highly decorated and much-loved senior lawyer known for his candour and integrity, Uwechue is also a longstanding traditional Prime Minister (Owelle) of Ogwashi Uku, Delta State.
He attended the Middle Temple, Inns of Court School of Law, London between 1961 and 1965 and was admitted to the Nigerian Bar in 1966 after attending the Nigerian Law School (the last set to undertake the 3-months programme). He has been a lawyer for nearly 60 years.
Born George Nwokocha-Ona Uwechue, the legal luminary was once described by the pre-eminent constitutional lawyer, Prof. Ben Nwabueze (SAN NNOM) as a leading jurist whose brilliance shone early in life. Speaking in Lagos at the launch of a collection of essays (Law in Motion: Nurturing Democracy and Development – Essays in Honour of Chief George Uwechue (SAN), Nwabueze recalled that Uwechue was one of the first set of students he taught at the University of London in the 1960s, saying: “Something that marked George out – I hope I can say this without causing offence to his classmates – he was simply the best! It is not surprising to me that he distinguished himself in the legal profession.”
Elevated to the coveted rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria in 1993, Uwechue has been a member of the Inner Bar for 30 unbroken years. Appointed a Member of the Body of Benchers in 1990, he has been a Life Bencher since 1998.
The senior lawyer was elected Chairman of the Body of Benchers in 2010 and elected a member of the Elders Committee of the Body of Benchers in 2011. It is believed that the “Elders Committee” was his brainchild, being a vehicle for resolving thorny issues affecting leading members of the legal profession.
Aside from leading the legal profession as Chairman of the Body of Benchers, Uwechue also had the uncommon distinction of leading Nigeria’s House of Representatives, having been elected as Speaker (Pro Tempore) on February 23, 1983.
CITY LAWYER recalls that former Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari had felicitated with Uwechue on his 82nd birthday in 2020, describing him as a legal luminary “whose antecedents continue to inspire many in nation-building, particularly in law, leadership and development issues.”
He described Uwechue as a statesman “who in spite of his national and global achievements, has steadily remained relevant in community development, setting up structures and creating opportunities for others to rise in life.” He also commended Uwechue for his contributions to national development through legal practice and law-making, having gained prominence as a two-term member of the House of Representatives and Speaker pro tempore.
Below is an exclusive profile of the deceased legal giant fondly called “OWELLE THE LAW” made available to CITY LAWYER.
BRIEF PROFILE Of OWELLE GEORGE UWECHUE (SAN) FNIALS
1. Name in Full: GEORGE NWOKOCHA-ONA UWECHUE
2. Home Place: Ogwashi-Uku, Aniocha South, Delta State
3. Religion: Christian (Catholic)
4. School, Colleges/Institutions attended with dates
(i) St. Peter’s School, Ogwashi-Uku 1943-47
(ii) St. Thomas’ School, Kano 1948-51
(iii) St. John’s College (now Rimi College) Kaduna 1952-57
(iv) Middle Temple, Inns of Court School of Law, London 1961-65
(v) North-Western Polytechnic, London 1961-62
(vi) The London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London) 1962-65
(vii) The Nigerian Law School, September to December 1965 (The last three months set)
5) Professional Appointments
(i) LL.B 2nd class Hons (London) 1965
(ii) Called to the Bar 1966
(iii) Appointed Notary Pubic 1975 (iv) Moderator (External examiner) in Commercial Law, Nigerian Law School 1975-79 (v) Appointed Member Body of Benchers 1990
(vi) Elevated to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria 1993
(vii) Appointed Member of the Rules of Court Advisory Committee of the Supreme Court, by Bello, CJN 1995
(viii) Re-Appointed by Uwais, CJN 1996
(ix) Appointed Life Member, Body of Benchers 1998
(x) Conferred with Fellowship, Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies on 31st May, 2006
(xi) Elected Vice-Chairman, Body of Benchers 2009
(xii) Elected Chairman, Body of Benchers 2010
(xiii) Elected Member, Elders Committee, 2011 Body of Benchers
(xiv) Awarded a Certificate of Excellence by the Body of Benchers in recognition of his Selfless Service as Chairman Body of Benchers, 2010 2019
6. Political Experience
(i) Elected into the House of Representatives of Nigeria. 1979
(ii) Deputy Leader, Nigerian Peoples Party Parliamentary Forum. to
(iii) Chairman, Committee on Public Petitions and Member Committee on Judiciary 1983
(iv) Elected Speaker (Pro Tempore) House of Representatives. On 23rd February 1983
(v) Led the Nigerian Parliamentary Delegation to the U.K., United States and Canada in 1980.
(vi) As Leader of the Nigerian Parliamentary Delegation to the United Nations Parliamentary Forum of “Speakers” in New York in September/October 1981, chaired one of the three sessions as Speaker.
(vii) Re-Elected to the House of Representatives on the platform of National Party of Nigeria (NPN) September to December 1983
(viii) Member, Committee on Petroleum and Energy, House of Representatives October-December, 1983, when the military intervention terminated the Alhaji Shehu Shagari’s administration
(ii) The Role of Public Petitions in the Legislative Process (a pamphlet delivered at the Inaugural Session of the Committee on Public Petitions, House of Representatives in the 3rd Republic on 5th August, 1993)
(iii) Redress of Grievances through legislative petitions Committees and other Non-Judicial Processes – presented at the 1982 Annual Conference of the Nigerian Bar Journal.
(iv) Original and Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (Published in “JURISPRUDENCE OF JURISDICTION”, 2005).
(v) Annual Lectures on Criminal and Civil Appeals Procedure to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Lagos (2000-2011).
(vi) A Vibrant Judiciary, Veritable Agent for Enduring Democracy in Nigeria delivered as guest speaker at the 2nd Anthony Cardinal Okojie Annual Lecture, 2009.
(vii) A summary of corrupt practices and money laundering laws in the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
(viii) The Law on International Carriage by Air (Judicial Interpretation and Application and Brief Review of Other Related legislations in Nigeria) August, 2005.
8. Few other Awards
(i) An award of Excellence by the Lagos Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association to mark his appointment as Chairman, Body of Benchers.
(ii) An award of Excellence by His Eminence Anthony Cardinal Okojie, Archbishop, Metropolitan See of Lagos, 2009
(iii) Diamond Jubilee Merit Award from the Old Boys’ Association of Rimi (St John’s) College, Kaduna, 2009 and a second merit award by the Principal, the students and Old boys of the College (of which he was Senior Prefect in 1957) to mark his appointment as Chairman, Body of Benchers in 2010
(iv) An award of Excellence by the Lagos branch of the National Association of Catholic Lawyers in 2010
(v) An award of Excellence from the Asaba Branch of the Nigerian Bar Association, 2010
(vi) Recognition by the Ogwashi-Uku Development Union (ODU) Lagos in 1994, to mark his elevation as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria in 1993
9. Law in Motion
In November 2013, 35 Professors of law, published “LAW IN MOTION, NURTURING DEMOCRACY AND DEVELOPMENT, Essays in Honour of Chief George Uwechue (SAN, FNIALS) (The Owelle of Ogwashi-Uku), Edited by Prof. M.O.U. Gasiokwu”.
10. Honour by Home State – Delta State Government
The Delta State Government honoured him by naming the street beside the new General Hospital, Phase IV, Core Area Asaba: “Hon. George Uwechue (SAN) Street”, in recognition of his achievements in politics and the legal profession.
11. Traditional Title
Honoured with the title Owelle Osowa-Anya of Ogwashi-Uku 1984; the greeting: Owelle -The Law
12. Family
Widower to late Barrister (Mrs.) Justina Uwechue (Nee Osaka), with six children, namely: Barr (Mrs.) Sally Uwechue-Mbanefo, Barr. (Mrs) Ifeoma Uwechue-Wachuku, Barr. George Uwechue (Jr), Mrs. Nwamaka Omole, Mr. Kwentor Uwechue and Dr. (Mrs.) Gabriella Nwobu. Blessed with fourteen grand-children.
Hon. Chief George Uwechue (SAN) FNIALS, C of E
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The retiring Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammad has revealed that the Chief Registrar of the court earns more than justices of the apex court, describing the situation as “unjust and embarrassing.”
Speakingat a valedictory session organized in his honour by the Supreme Court, Justice Muhammad also decried the exclusion of the South East and North Central from the apex court bench by the non-replacement of retired or deceased jurists.
He noted that while the Judiciary budget has increased over the years, service delivery continues to decline.
His words: “It may interest one to know that the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court earns more than the Justices. While she earns N1.2m per month, justices take home N751, 000 in a month.
“The CJN on his part takes home N400, 000 plus. The salary of a Justice, curiously, drops rather than increases when he gets the added responsibility of being a CJN.
“That the unjust and embarrassing salary difference between the justices and the Chief Registrar still abides remains intriguing to say the least.”
He noted that it was allegations of corruption and perversion of justice that informed President Muhammadu Buhari’s decision to order the invasion of homes and arrest of some judges in 2016.
“Not done, in 2019 the government accosted, arrested and arraigned the incumbent Chief Justice before the Code of Conduct Tribunal for alleged underhand conduct.
“With his retirement apparently negotiated, he was eventually left off the hook.
“In 2022, a letter signed by all other justices of the Supreme Court, including the current Chief Justice, the aggrieved protested against the shabby treatment meted to them by the head of court and the Chief Registrar.
“In the event, his lordship Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad disengaged ostensibly on grounds of ill-health.
“My lords, distinguished invitees, ladies and gentlemen, it is obvious that the judiciary I am exiting from is far from the one I voluntarily joined and desired to serve and be identified with. The institution has become something else,” Justice Muhammad lamented.
On funding and independence of the Judiciary, the retiring justice bemoaned that though the budgetary allocation for the Judiciary increased from 70 billion that it was in 2015 to 165 billion presently, “Justices and officers welfare and the quality of service the judiciary render have continued to decline.”
Justice Muhammad, who spent over 40 years in active judicial service, bowed out of the apex court bench on Friday, having clocked the 70 years mandatory retirement age.
He used the opportunity of a valedictory session that was organised in his honour by the Supreme Court, to address what he observed as rot in the judiciary that have continued to affect the justice delivery system in the country.
“Through the years, I rose to become the second most senior justice of the country’s apex court and Deputy Chairperson of the National Judicial Council.
“Considering the number of years I have spent in judicial service and the position I have attained by the grace of the Almighty, I feel obligated to continue the struggle for reforms for a better Judiciary and would be leaning on the earlier submissions of those who had exited before me,” Justice Muhammad stated.
He maintained that the judiciary, as presently structured, gave so much power to the CJN who he said usually take decisions without consulting other justices.
“As presently structured, the CJN is Chairman of the NJC which oversees both the appointment and discipline of judges, he is equally Chair of the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC), the National Judicial Institute (NJI), the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) that appoints Senior Advocate of Nigeria.
“In my considered opinion, the oversight functions of these bodies should not rest on an individual alone. A person with absolute powers, it is said, corrupts easily and absolutely.
“As Chair of NJC, FJSC, NJI and LPPC, appointments as council, board and committee members are at his pleasure. He neither confers with fellow justices nor seek their counsel or input on any matter related to these bodies. He has both the final and the only say.
“The CJN has power to appoint 80 percent of members of the council and 60 percent of members of FJSC. The same applies to NJI and LPPC.
“Such enormous powers are effortlessly abused. This needs to change. Continued denial of the existence of this threatening anomaly weakens effective judicial oversight in the country,” he added.
On the current composition of the bench of the apex court, Justice Muhammad alleged that the refusal to fill the vacant slot of South East on the apex court bench, was deliberate, blaming it on “absolute powers vested in the office of the CJN.”
He further stressed that with his retirement, the North Central zone which he represented, would no longer have a Justice on the Supreme Court bench.
“My lord Hon. Justice Ejembi Eko JSC who also represented the zone retired on 23rd of May, 2022. It has been a year and five months now. There has not been any replacement.
“With the passing of my lord, Hon. Justice Chima Centus Nweze, JSC on 29th July 2023, the South East no longer has any presence at the Supreme Court. My lord, Hon. Justice Sylvester Nwali Ngwuta JSV died on 7th March 2021. There has not been any appointment in his stead for the South East.
“As it stands, only four geo-political regions- the South-West, South-South, North-West and North-East are represented in the Supreme Court.
“While the South-South and North-East have two serving justices, the North-West and South-West are fully represented with three each.
“Appropriate steps could have been taken since to fill outstanding vacancies in the apex court. Why have these steps not been timeously taken?
“It is evident that the decision not to fill the vacancies in the court is deliberate. It is all about the absolute powers vested in the office of the CJN and the responsible exercise of same,” the retiring jurist added.
On the issue of membership of the panel that heard the presidential election appeals by candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and the Labour Party, LP, Mr. Peter Obi, Justice Muhammad, said:
“To ensure justice and transparency in presidential appeals from the lower court, all geo-political zones are required to participate in the hearing.
“It is therefore dangerous for democracy and equity for two entire regions to be left out in the decisions that will affect the generality of Nigerians.
“This is not what our laws envisage. Although it can be posited that no one expected the sudden passing of Hon. Justice Nweze JSC, yet, it has been two years and seven months since previous justice from South-East died and no appointment was made.”
Meanwhile, earlier in the ceremony, the CJN, in his speech, paid glowing tribute to the retiring jurist who he described as a “quintessential Judicial icon with dazzling qualities and alluring stature.”
“His Lordship is one judicial officer that could be blunt, even to a fault; and is never known to be afraid to say things the way they are; and also never shies away from calling a spade by its name, irrespective of whose ox is gored,” the CJN stated.
He decried that with Justice Muhammad’s exit, the apex court bench has further depleted to 10.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Department of State Service (DSS) Wednesday evening freed Abdulrasheed Bawa, the former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
“DSS confirms release of former EFCC chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa, a few hours ago (today 25th October, 2023),” DSS said in a statement.
Bawa reunited with his family amid celebration shortly after his release from DSS custody after 134 days in detention.
The former EFCC chairman was arrested by the DSS in mid-June following his suspension by President Bola Tinubu.
Although DSS spokesman Peter Afunanya said Bawa arrived DSS office to honour an ‘invitation’, he was not allowed to leave until after four months.
Afunanya said the ‘invitation’ by the Nigerian secret police relates to some investigative activities concerning Bawa’s tenure as EFCC chairman.
The Presidency and the DSS did not disclose the outcome of its investigation on Bawa as of the time of filing this report.
Bawa’s removal from office follows a similar pattern that previous EFCC heads – Ibrahim Magu, Ibrahim Lamorde and Farida Waziri – have been in recent times.
President Tinubu, a week ago, appointed a new EFCC chairman Ola Olukoyede to replace Bawa.
The Nigerian Senate confirmed Olukayode as chairman and Muhammad Hammajoda as the Secretary of the anti-graft agency.
DSS confirms release of former EFCC chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa, a few hours ago (today 25th October, 2023).
Peter Afunanya, Ph.D, fsi Director, Public Relations and Strategic Communications Department of State Services National Headquarters Abuja. 25th October, 2023
— Department of State Services (DSS) (@OfficialDSSNG) October 25, 2023
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
This year’s event has as its theme, “Practice Management: The Heartbeat of Every Impactful Legal Career.” The colloquium was held at the exquisite Presidential Hall, C. J. Patterson Building, All Saints Cathedral, Onitsha, Anambra State.
Osigwe’s thought-provoking and enlightening discourse dwelt on the topic, “Advertising: Navigating Today’s Realities with the Current Statutory Provisions of Professional Ethics.”
The former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) General Secretary dissected the intricate dynamics of legal practitioners’ conduct as it relates to promoting their services and attracting clientele.
The central focus of Osigwe’s discussion lay in scrutinizing the rules of professional conduct governing legal practitioners. He examined the guidelines and shed light on what lawyers are permitted to do, and perhaps more crucially, what they are prohibited from doing, in their quest to garner business and build thriving legal careers.
In emphasizing the need for lawyers to maintain ethical standards in the course of practice, Osigwe noted that that even though legal practitioners in practice are engaged in legal business, they are not business people.
His words: “We are part of a profession that has a special obligation to our clients, to the courts, to society, and to the higher cause of justice. Business people do not have such obligations. We do.
“In promoting our legal practice we must ensure that we observe the highest ethical standards in the profession. It should not be an anything-goes situation. To successfully run a practice like a business, one must be an entrepreneur who must act ethically at all nights and refuse to allow the urge to run a profitable practice to enmesh him or her in unethical conduct.”
In a world where the legal landscape is evolving rapidly and the lines between ethical promotion and overzealous advertising can blur, Osigwe’s insights provide a valuable compass for legal professionals navigating the complexities of contemporary legal practice. His presentation at the C. O. ANAH SAN Memorial Colloquium undoubtedly enriched the legal community’s understanding of these critical issues and reinforced the importance of upholding professional ethics in the pursuit of a successful legal career.
The Supreme Court has fixed Thursday for the judgment on the appeals by the presidential candidates of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar, and the Labour Party, Peter Obi, respectively.
The duo is praying the apex court to set aside the judgment by the presidential election tribunal which affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.
According to a Hearing Notice obtained by CITY LAWYER,the judgment on the appeals had been scheduled for tomorrow.
The last proceeding on Monday the apex court reserved judgment on the two appeals for a date to be communicated to the parties.
Apart from faulting the verdict of the Presidential Election Petition Court( PEPC), which affirmed Tinubu’s election, Atiku Abubakar also filed for permission to tender a copy of Tinubu’s academic records released by the Chicago State University( CSU), USA, which he said showed that Tinubu submitted a forged CSU certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC).
The former vice president is also seeking to get a Washington, D.C. court to order the FBI to release documents on President Tinubu’s $460,000 forfeiture case.
While the Labour Party and its presidential candidate,Obi is seeking the quashing of judgment of the lower court.
The lead counsel to Obi and his party, Dr. Livy Uzoukwu (SAN) had prayed the Apex Court to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the lower court, Abubakar Mahmoud, Olanipekun and Olujimi, representing INEC, Tinubu, Vice President Kashim Shettima and the APC, urged the court to dismiss the appeal for lacking in merit.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
When the ceremony for conferment of the coveted rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) holds on November 27, 2023, at least three SAN designates who failed to meet the 90 percent pass mark set by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC) would be garbed with the silk robe, CITY LAWYER can authoritatively report.
Unimpeachable sources who are familiar with the screening process told CITY LAWYER that not only did the LPPC lower its cumulative 90 percent benchmark to award the prestigious rank to the three applicants, it may have taken on board the suggestion by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) that all the 57 advocates who went in for the final oral interview should be appointed.
This is coming against the backdrop of strident and prolonged efforts especially by the influential Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) to restore meritocracy and prestige to the SAN awards. The clamour led to reforms which culminated in the “2022 Guidelines for the Conferment of the Rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria and for Related Matters.”
It is recalled that the LPPC under the chairmanship of the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, had at its 159th plenary session held in Abuja appointed 57 advocates and one academic as Senior Advocates of Nigeria.
A high-ranking source, who participated actively in the screening of the applicants by the NBA General Purpose Committee (GPC) prior to the LPPC final oral interview, told CITY LAWYER that the association strongly canvassed in its report to LPPC that all 57 advocates who scaled the second filtration should be awarded the rank.
Confirming this position, another unimpeachable source told CITY LAWYER that the NBA urged that all applicants who scaled the chambers inspection should be given the award irrespective of their performance at the final oral interview.
It was unclear at press time whether NBA’s recommendation swayed the LPPC to lower its benchmark for the below-par SAN designates, even as CITY LAWYER gathered that at least one of the SAN designates may have scored as low as about 80 percent, 10 percentage points off the cumulative 90 percent pass mark.
CITY LAWYER recalls that BOSAN had written to then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad via a letter dated September 21, 2021, and signed by Prof. Ben Nwabueze (SAN), Chief Folake Solanke (SAN), and Mr. Seyi Sowemimo (SAN), expressing its concerns on the declining standards in the SAN awards process. This quest contributed to the issuance of the 2022 SAN Guidelines aimed to reform the awards. The 2023 SAN awards exercise is the first test of the implementation of the 2022 Guidelines.
The 2022 Guidelines provides in Article 1 that “The award of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) is a privilege conferred as a mark of excellence on members of the legal profession ….”
Setting out the “principles” for the award of the rank which place premium on merit, the Guidelines state in Article 2(b) that “applications will be considered with merit as the primary consideration and without regard to ethnic origin, pedigree, physical disability, marital status, age, religious belief, political views or affiliations.”
Article 24 of the Guidelines deals with “Interview of Shortlisted Candidates,” while Article 24(4) sets out 9 items and their corresponding attainable scores, totaling 100 percent. These include comportment, integrity, quality of presentation, general knowledge of law, and contribution to development of law.
The top-ranking NBA-GPC official told CITY LAWYER that the NBA screening exercise “was very successful. All the candidates distinguished themselves and were all recommended. We had recommended the candidates, having scored them highly. The prerogative of award usually lies with the LPPC. We wish them luck at the interview of the LPPC.”
Speaking after the LPPC announced its final shortlist, the source said: “We were glad the LPPC accepted our recommendations and all the applicants in the advocates category were awarded the rank. We thank God for his mercies.”
When CITY LAWYER contacted Hajo Bello, the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court and Secretary of the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee via a text message, she responded tersely: “I am not privileged to be answering your questions. You may write officially.” Though CITY LAWYER requested an email address to send in an enquiry, the LPPC Secretary had not responded at press time.
Also, efforts to access the LPPC through its official website (https://lppc.gov.ng/) proved abortive as the website is inactive. The website through which the Committee received applications for the awards (https://lppconline.com/) also has no information on its advertised “Contact” link.
It is recalled that controversies have trailed award of the SAN rank over the years, leading BOSAN to canvass that the awards should be paused to allow for reforms. This led to the 2022 Guidelines which sought to tighten the award process and make it more credible and devoid of controversies.
Meanwhile, applicants from the South West Zone dominate this year’s award list, taking the lion’s share of 19 slots. While South East took the second position with 12 slots, it is closely followed by North Central with 10 slots and South South with 8 slots. North West had three slots on the awards list while North East brought the rear with only two SAN designates.
The BOSAN letter to then Chief Justice of Nigeria, who statutorily doubles as Chairman of the influential LPPC, was titled “RE: LEGAL PRACTITIONERS PRIVILEGES COMMITTEE’S LISTING OF 130 LAWYERS AS SHORTLISTED IN THE PROCESS FOR CONFERMENT WITH THE RANK OF SENIOR ADVOCATE OF NIGERIA FOR THE YEAR 2021: REITERATION OF THE BODY OF SENIOR ADVOCATES OF NIGERIA’S (BOSAN) STRONG NOTE OF CONCERN ON THE QUALITY OF THE PROCESS AND PROCEDURE FOR THE CONFERMENT OF THE RANK.” Mr. Abubakar Malami, then Attorney-General and Minister of Justice, was copied on the letter.
The letter reads: “It is not willy-nilly that all candidates that meet the set criteria should be appointed in any given year, as such an approach cannot but result in the degradation of the rank. It is those that prove to be outstanding within the shortlist that should be conferred with the rank. This is the time-honoured rule applied in relation to admissions to all reputable institutions in situations where competition is high and spaces are limited and where it would be inappropriate to accommodate all those persons who appear to have met the criteria.
“There is even a greater need for more stringent approach in cases where appointments are to be made on the basis of academic accomplishments.”
According to BOSAN, “It has now become necessary that we reiterate, respectfully, the concerns raised in the body’s earlier letter. The members of the Inner bar are concerned that the current procedure and criteria for the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria would result in a watered-down perception of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. We are also of the considered opinion that it is imperative that the Committee pauses and reassesses the procedure and criteria for the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria as we fear that that (sic) the process could be reduced to a ‘mere compilation and submission of the listed documentation’ in the next few years, with no attention to excellence or distinction in the practice of law.
“In light of this, we write to reiterate our earlier recommendation that the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria be put on hold to enable the Committee to conduct and publish a credible and comprehensive review of the process for the conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.”
Pledging its support of the review process “in any way possible” and as a “dominant stakeholder” in the entire exercise, the body advised that the review process “should re-evaluate the criteria, guidelines and administrative processes leading to the selection, including the personnel at the SAN/LPPC Administrative Secretariat/Department, proper pre-screening of applicants, competitive processes and independent assessment free of lobbying, all geared towards attaining and sustaining continuous improvements and retaining the dignity, respect and reverence of the prestigious rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria and the legal profession in general.”
It noted the urgency of its Save-Our-Soul letter, adding: “We would like to point out that a comprehensive review of the screening process is an urgent and necessary step to retain the dignity, respect, and reverence of the prestigious rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria and the legal profession in general. The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria is still committed to providing its expertise and support at every stage of the review process and we are anticipating positive feedback and implementation of the recommendations in this letter.”
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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..
A senior lawyer, Echezona Etiaba (SAN) has expressed regrets over the misinformation arising from a session at the Imo State Assembly and National Assembly tribunal sitting in Lagos, wherein he allegedly accused Mr Damian Dodo (SAN) and the judges of corruption.
In a statement, the lawyer explained that at no time during the sitting did he insinuate that Dodo bribed the judges, noting that the situation never arose since the senior lawyer (Dodo) wasn’t even a counsel in the case.
A report by a national newspaper had indicated that the All Progressives Congress (APC) counsel, Etiaba presented two petitions allegedly written by his clients accusing the three-member panel of being compromised.
It also accused Dodo , whom the report alleged to be counsel for one of the appellants of being the conduit to reach the panel headed by Justice Danjuma Mohammed, the presiding judge of Makurdi Division of the Court of Appeal.
But Etiaba who described Dodo as a man of unblemished legal record, stated that he did not mention the content of the said letter, let alone accuse anybody of bribery.
“My attention has been drawn to a news item titled: “Chaos at the Court of Appeal, Lagos”. The only thing correct about the trending news is that I drew the court’s attention to a letter written by our client, (a political party) but the insinuation that the respected Damian Dodo SAN (a legal luminary whose pedigree is unblemished) compromised the Justices of the Court of Appeal on the appeals is an allegation that I don’t believe.
“As much as the letters were handed to me while I was announcing the appearance of my team and I had no time to read same, upon being seized of the facts, I knew that the allegations do not hold water.
“I state categorically that Damian Dodo (SAN) is not representing any of the parties in the appeals before the Honourable Court as regards Hon. Ugochinyere Ikeagwuonu and the justices had just been assigned the cases that morning, thereby making any theory of compromise impossible.
“The embarrassment caused My Lords and my big brother, Damian Dodo (SAN) by this ugly incident is regretted.”
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
MAZI AFAM OSIGWE, SAN, MOURNS THE DEATH OF MR. YINKA FAROUNBI, FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION, IKEJA BRANCH
I’m deeply saddened to hear about the passing of Yinka Farounbi, the former Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association Ikeja Branch from 2014 to 2016. He was a dedicated leader and his contributions will be remembered by all.
During his tenure, Yinka Farounbi demonstrated unwavering dedication to the principles of justice, equity, and the rule of law. His leadership was marked by an unyielding commitment to upholding the highest standards of the legal profession, and he served as an exemplary role model for all members of the branch.
His leadership, contributions and influence extended far beyond his years as Chairman. He was a mentor and guide to many young lawyers, offering them invaluable insights and support as they embarked on their legal careers. His passion for the law and his willingness to share his knowledge enriched the legal landscape, and his impact will be felt for generations to come.
In addition to his professional achievements, he was known for his warmth and affable nature. He was a kind and compassionate man , always ready to extend a helping hand to those in need. His presence at branch events and gatherings was a source of inspiration and camaraderie for all who had the privilege of knowing him.
As we mourn the loss of Yinka Farounbi, we extend our deepest condolences to his family and loved ones. His departure leaves a void in our legal community that cannot be filled, but we will forever cherish the memories of his dedicated service, his wisdom, and his friendship.
In honor of his memory, let us recommit ourselves to the principles of justice and integrity that he held dear. May his legacy inspire us to continue the noble work of upholding the law and advocating for justice.
Rest in peace, Yinka Farounbi, and thank you for your unwavering service to the Nigerian Bar Association, particularly NBA Ikeja Branch. Your contributions will forever be remembered and celebrated.
MAZI AFAM OSIGWE, SAN
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Enugu State governor, Dr. Peter Mbah, has said his administration would earmark high allocation to the education sector in the state even as he assured support for the Nigerian Law School in the areas of new infrastructure and rehabilitation of the existing dilapidated structures in the school.
Governor Mbah gave the assurances, Monday, when the senior management staff of the Enugu Campus of the Nigerian Law School led by the Deputy Director General (DDG), Mrs. Maureen Stanley-Idum, paid a courtesy visit in his office at the Government House, Enugu, to solicit the state’s support to upgrade the institution.
The governor, who further said his government was keen on providing the right infrastructure and conducive learning environment for students in the state, said education was key to achieving and sustaining the legacy projects the administration had rolled out.
According to him, plans had already been activated to review the state’s academic curriculum targeted at providing independent, well-equipped and adequately trained students with modern skills irrespective of areas of specialization.
Promising that the education sector would be one of the major beneficiaries of next year’s allocations in the budget, Mbah said the administration had picked special interest in primary school, through the tertiary education system, pointing at the cut off programme that was designed to encourage early child learning.
“We have a programmme we refer to as Cut-Off Point which identifies the young ones at age three and instills in them the right civic habits and moral values. We are changing the way they learn. We are also interested in our students in the university,” the governor said.
He also noted that before vying for the governorship office, he had interacted with the former Deputy Director General of the campus where he promised to build a state-of-the-art moot court for them, as part of Pinnacle Oil and Gas Ltd’s Corporate Social Responsibility, saying the plan had not been abandoned as he would reach out to the management of the company to remind them of the pledge.
Mbah, who said he would direct his Special Adviser on Project Development and Implementation to inspect the conditions of the institution and activate the process of rehabilitation, added that the state government would not abandon the school especially now that it was in dire needs of intervention.
“I noticed you outlined a good number of pressing needs. You talked about vehicles, the auditorium, and renovation of dilapidated academic building for lecturers, ICT, and library, among others. So, we are going to partner with the Nigerian Law School to see how we can support you on those items you listed. Be assured of our support and commitment,” the governor added.
Speaking earlier, the DDG, who expressed support and solidarity for the governor, said they had visited to identify with him as both a lawyer and a governor who understood the task of leading the state to greater heights.
“It is our earnest prayer that the Lord will increase your capacity as an instrument of peace and social transformation in a way that your administration will be characterized by remarkably improved good governance with attendant positive fruits seen in interpersonal harmony among the people, infrastructural development, social cohesion and security,” she noted.
While underscoring the challenges of the campus and the need to expand its capacity from its current 750 to 1500 capacity, the DDG stated that the institution was battling with the problems of inadequate facilities and infrastructural development, urging the government for immediate intervention.
“The campus faces challenges and lags behind other campuses in terms of inadequate facilities and infrastructural development. Given the vast expanse of land available, coupled with the huge backlog of law graduates who cannot be admitted, it is imperative to develop as quickly as possible, the Augustine Nnamani Campus so as to reap the maximum advantage and benefits from the decentralization of the Nigerian Law School and the citing of the campus in this part of the country,” she added.
While listing some of the challenges facing the campus to include logistics, infrastructure and expansion, Mrs. Stanley-Idum said the “citing of the Campus in Enugu was meant to ameliorate the suffering of our students, especially those from this part of the country who had to travel all the way to Lagos or Abuja for their one-year vocational training in law”.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
A senior Lawyer, Mr. Tochukwu Ohazuruike has asked the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to probe the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President, Mr. Yakubu Maikyau SAN for alleged money laundering.
In a petition he made available to CITY LAWYERand addressed to the EFCC Chairman, Ohazuruike stated that he was writing “to bring to your attention serious contraventions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, Misappropriation of Funds and corruption being perpetrated by the current President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau, SAN, OON.”
The petition is titled “PETITION AGAINST MR. YAKUBU CHONOKO MAIKYAU, SAN OON (THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION), FOR MONEY LAUNDERING, MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS AND CORRUPTION.”
He premised his petition on “His (Maikyau’s) public admission to receiving undisclosed amount of hard currencies in cash from an anonymous Donor on behalf of the Nigerian Bar Association, which he said amounted to about Fifty Million Naira when he converted it, and other conducts of his, which warrants and necessitates our demand for a thorough investigation by your esteemed Commission ….”
Ohazuruike alleged that the NBA President “unilaterally converted the funds into Naira, claiming it amounted to N50, 000, 000. 00 (Fifty Million Naira). He further admitted to have unilaterally deducted N10,000,000 (Ten Million Naira) cash from the said amount for personal use and deposited the remaining N40, 000,000 (Forty Million Naira) into the Association’s account.”
According to the senior lawyer, “These actions, are contrary to Section S. 2(1)(a) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act and S. 9(5)(g) of the NBA Constitution for receiving donations on behalf of the Association.”
He alleged that “in Mr. Yakubu’s voluntary confession, he admitted to have received several donations which he failed/refused to mention the donors and the amounts received for hosting the NBA National Executive Committee Meeting in Kebbi State in March 2023, with no remittance to the Association’s Accounts and in clear breach of the prescribed protocols mandated by the Association’s Constitution, this he did also mention to the National Officers at the 6th hybrid National Executive Meeting which held on 27th April, 2023 where he stated the following as recorded in the minutes of meeting. The records of this meeting should also be available in video as the IT Admin of the NBA by standard records all official meetings.”
Aside from alleged money laundering, Ohazuruike also accused Maikyau of “arbitrary patronage,” lack of accountability, abuse of office, and “unconstitutional hijack of the office of the national treasurer.”
He stated that the evidence against the NBA President “are self-incriminating and littered all over social media in the public domain,” adding that “The EFCC does not require even a single witness at trial and in proof of the case against the NBA President.”
Inviting the anti-graft agency to launch the probe, Ohazuruike wrote: “As a concerned member of the NBA, I urge the EFCC to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into these allegations.”
CITY LAWYERrecallsthat Ohazuruike had launched a spirited battle to stall Maikyau’s NBA Presidency bid. He however told CITY LAWYERthat his petitions to the Electoral Committee of the NBA (ECNBA) and an appeal to the NBA Board of Trustees were dismissed.
It was unclear at press time whether the NBA has been informed about the petition.
THE CHAIRMAN, URGENT Economic & Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC Headquarters, Along Jabi Airport Road, FCT – Abuja.
Dear Sir,
PETITION AGAINST MR. YAKUBU CHONOKO MAIKYAU, SAN OON (THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF THE NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION), FOR MONEY LAUNDERING, MISAPPROPRIATION OF FUNDS AND CORRUPTION
I write as a legal practitioner and member of the Nigerian Bar Association to bring to your attention serious contraventions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, Misappropriation of Funds and corruption being perpetrated by the current President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau, SAN, OON.
His public admission to receiving undisclosed amount of hard currencies in cash from an anonymous Donor on behalf of the Nigerian Bar Association, which he said amounted to about Fifty Million Naira when he converted it, and other conducts of his, which warrants and necessitates our demand for a thorough investigation by your esteemed Commission for the following reasons:
A. Herein are some facts of the alleged Money Laundering:
i. On the 30th of August 2023, during the Association’s Annual General Meeting, Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau openly confessed to have received undisclosed sum in United States Dollars which in his words, he termed as “hard currency” from undisclosed individuals on behalf of the Association, in a manner which contravenes the provisions of Sections 2(1)(a) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022 and 9(5)(g) of the NBA Constitution.
ii. He unilaterally converted the funds into Naira, claiming it amounted to N50, 000, 000. 00 (Fifty Million Naira). He further admitted to have unilaterally deducted N10,000,000 (Ten Million Naira) cash from the said amount for personal use and deposited the remaining N40, 000,000 (Forty Million Naira) into the Association’s account.
iii. In his public confession, he alluded to the fact that prior to his unilateral deduction for personal use, he brought the said undisclosed USD to the NBA office in a bag, and invited the General Secretary of the NBA, Mr. Adesina Adegbite to see the “hard currency” he received on behalf of the Association.
iv. These actions, are contrary to Section S. 2(1)(a) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act and S. 9(5)(g) of the NBA Constitution for receiving donations on behalf of the Association.
v. The Association possesses foreign accounts, particularly a US Dollar account that could have lawfully received donations in foreign currencies with the appropriate record-keeping and procedures and it is clearly expressed in our constitution the right procedure required for receiving donations in Section 9 (f) (g) of the NBA Constitution.
vi. Moreover, there are concerns and unverified reports of numerous donations that Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau SAN may have received in his capacity as President of the Association without adhering to due process or remitting the funds to the Association’s accounts. (The video recording of Mr. Y C Maikyau’s confession is hereto enclosed in this petition alongside minutes of the hybrid meeting held on the 27th of April 2023 where he also mentioned same on a recorded zoom meeting to members of the National Executive of the NBA) https://barristerng.com/full-video-nba-president-maikyau-san-responds-to-allegations-by-national-officers/ https://youtu.be/a-TmjGWgr3Y https://youtu.be/IEwaiM_1urg https://youtu.be/lSvDzBZTMcs https://youtu.be/ZEXu0ZxL3wo
B. LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY :
i. There have been reports of lack of transparency and accountability in the management of expenditures of NBA funds since the inception of Mr. YC Maikyau’s tenure. Members of the Association were denied clear and detailed financial reports at the last Annual General Meeting (AGM) which is contrary to the Association’s constitution and tradition of having same presented by the National Treasurer.
ii. Additionally, in Mr. Yakubu’s voluntary confession, he admitted to have received several donations which he failed/refused to mention the donors and the amounts received for hosting the NBA National Executive Committee Meeting in Kebbi State in March 2023, with no remittance to the Association’s Accounts and in clear breach of the prescribed protocols mandated by the Association’s Constitution, this he did also mention to the National Officers at the 6th hybrid National Executive Meeting which held on 27th April, 2023 where he stated the following as recorded in the minutes of meeting. The records of this meeting should also be available in video as the IT Admin of the NBA by standard records all official meetings.
Here is an excerpt culled from the minutes of the hybrid meeting:
4.17 On the hosting of the last NEC, the President narrated the way the funding for the said NEC came about, and how he went about it before funding came. He said he put in N20 Million first, and subsequently N40 Million came from the Kebbi State Government, and the AGF gave N8.7 Million. He stated that all disbursements have been made. He also narrated the N50Million (in dollars) that came from a donor through the AGF.
ii. Furthermore, disbursement of allowances to National Secretariat staff were made from a private account belonging to one Mrs. Kemi Beatrice during the NEC meeting, in clear breach of extant rules against the age-long practice and standard protocol of using the Association accounts for receiving donations and making payments on behalf of the Association. Payments to vendors during the said NEC meetings were also allegedly routed through different accounts instead of the Association’s official accounts.
iii. There are controversies surrounding the 1.5 Billion Naira access to finance monies secured by the past administration of which there are suspicions that same has been tampered with by Mr. Y.C Maikyau SAN without an authorization from the National Executive Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association contrary to S. 9(5)(g) of the NBA Constitution. (Herein attached are the minutes of the 6th hybrid Meeting of National Officers)
C. ARBITRARY PATRONAGE:
Mr. Maikyau is accused of using NBA funds for arbitrary patronage of his associates, without proper justification or adherence to established financial rules. This raises concerns about cronyism and misuse of the Association resources to engage relatives in handling sensitive matters.
i. There are alleged reports of using the name of the Association to engage various organizations and private Companies for Sponsorship and Partnership for personal benefits without following due process in such engagements and refusing to provide accountable details of such which was also mentioned at the Hybrid meeting to wit: acquisition of Laptops for the Secretariat. The excerpt reads thus:
4.11: The President stated that Ibifuro had a meeting with the Acting ED regarding the supply of Laptops. He explained the model for payment for the Laptops. He also mentioned the Lenovo arrangement stating that his friend has written to the Lenovo Office in France seeking partnership and sponsorship to enable us get Laptops, Screens, Tablets, etc.
ii. Concerns have been raised regarding the inflated costs of bags purchased for the Annual General Conference, which were reported to be significantly higher than the amount approved by the National Executive Committee of the Association. These costs were allegedly inflated by over 50%, with alleged reports of insider dealings, this is amidst several unconfirmed reports of inflated cost for vendors engaged and shady sponsorship deals as regards the 2023 Annual General Conference.
iii. To put the above in proper perspective, the National Executive Committee approved the sum of Four Hundred and Twenty Five Million Naira (N425,000,000) for the purchase of bags for the Annual General Conference, however, over Seven Hundred Million Naira (N700,000,000) was claimed to have been expended for the said purchase which indicates an over 60% illegal inflation in the cost with allegations of inducements by Mr. Maikyau influencing members of the National Executive Committee to approve a budget with an over Two Hundred Million Naira (N200,000,000) in deficit.
iv. Allegations of insider dealings and conflict of interest surrounding the award of various contracts to proxies and relatives of Mr. YC Maikyau and relatives should be investigated. This Mr. Maikyau publicly admitted at the Association NEC Meeting on August 26, 2023 in the award of the NBA IT Consult contract to his Nephew Mr. Solomon Magaji. Below are links reporting this news:
D. UNCONSTITIONAL HIJACK OF THE OFFICE OF THE NATIONAL TREASURER:
It has come to the attention of all members that Mr. Maikyau has unilaterally spent NBA funds without consulting or involving the Association’s Treasurer. This disregard for established procedures is a serious breach of trust and financial governance within the NBA and against its constitution.
i. All the above facts evidently suggest reasons why the purported Audited Report sought to be tendered for adoption at the Annual General Meeting was craftily prepared without the input or involvement of the Association’s Treasurer who would have questioned the unapproved tampering of funds. The Treasurer publicly denounced and disowned the Audited Report before all members and the world at the Association’s 2023 Annual General Meeting.
ii. These brazen acts of Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau, SAN, OON as President of the NBA should be subject to thorough scrutiny himself and anyone found culpable should be made to face the law. Below is a link showing the allegation made by the Treasurer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYvhCGBWu40&pp=ygUNbmJhIHRyZWFzdXJlcg%3D%3D
E. ABUSE OF OATH OF OFFICE:
Mr. Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau, SAN, OON as President of NBA, took an oath of office to serve the best interests of the Association. His alleged actions, including the flagrant abuse of the money laundering act, and other relevant laws and constitution of the NBA appears to be motivated by greed, personal aggrandizement in violation of his oath of office.
CONCLUSION As a concerned member of the NBA, I urge the EFCC to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into these allegations.
The evidences against Mr. Maikyau, SAN, OON are self-incriminating and littered all over social media in the public domain. The EFCC does not require even a single witness at trial and in proof of the case against the NBA President.
I believe that it is essential to uphold the principles of transparency, accountability, and integrity within our Association. Any wrongdoing should be thoroughly examined, and if substantiated, appropriate legal action should be taken and trust that the EFCC will act in accordance with the law to ensure justice and accountability prevails.
Nigerians and indeed the world are watching to see whether the EFCC, especially under the Bola Ahmed Tinubu Administration would match its words with action in the fight against the menace of impunity and corruption in Nigeria. This case presents the EFCC with an opportunity to make bold its stands against impunity and corruption.
Thank you.
Yours Sincerely,
Tochukwu Ohazuruike Principal Counsel
ENCL Minutes of Meeting of the 6th hybrid Meeting of National Officers of the NBA
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The working conditions of Nigeria’s judicial officers again came to the fore today as a Senior Magistrate was seen being ferried to work on commercial motorcycle popularly called ‘okada.’
CITY LAWYERreliably gathered that the Senior Magistrate (name withheld) was compelled to ride on the commercial motorcycle as she allegedly does not have any official vehicle attached to her.
A source who is familiar with the trend told CITY LAWYERthat the judicial officer was heading to Neni Chief Magistrates Court in Anambra State to perform her usual judicial function.
Though there has been a clamour for judicial autonomy and better funding of the Judiciary, the challenges in this area persist.
Speaking on the trendingmatter, a social commentator, Dr. Chukwudi Okoye wrote: “Another Magistrate who dared to take her (Bolikaja) vehicle to work to safe (sic) face the other day got a lesson in vehicle breakdowns that eventually took the Divisional Police Officer of nearby station to rescue her while heading home from work late in the evening somewhere at Nibo.”
On his part, a Lagos-based senior lawyer noted that the trend may put the judicial officers in harm’s way, saying: “This is absolute disgrace to the judiciary and what it stands for. It’s not even safe for the Magistrate who sits over matters of criminals daily. The welfare of the Judiciary as an institution ought to have been considered in this administration of an intellect who knows the implication of undermining same.”
The Anambra State Government had budgeted 2.1% for its Law and justice sector while the social sector accounts for 15.2% of the capital budget size. Sectorial allocation was spread across four broad sectors including the administrative sector, economic sector, law & justice sector, and social sector.
CITY LAWYERwas unable to reach any source at the Anambra State Judiciary at the time of going to press.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
Chicago State University (CSU) has stated that the certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) by President Bola Tinubu did not emanate from the university.
Following over five hours grilling by lawyers to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, CSU’s Registrar Caleb Westberg also said that Tinubu neither applied for a replacement certificate nor received one.
He stated that such duplicate diplomas are currently sourced from third-party vendors, even as he insisted that Tinubu is the same person that graduated from CSU in 1979.
He also told the team of interrogators during a deposition ordered deposition that “The university does not typically keep Diplomas. I have the Diploma that was made available to Mr. Enahoro-Ebah in our possession because Mr. Tinubu did not pick it up.”
“We believe Bola Tinubu who attended CSU is the same person who is the president of Nigeria today”, Westberg said during the deposition done on Tuesday in the office of Atiku’s lawyer, Angela Liu, at West Wacker Drive in Chicago.
Five other lawyers from the firm Dechert LLP joined in the deposition. President Tinubu was represented by Victor P.Henderson and Oluwole Afolabi, who joined the session by zoom from New York.
Michael Hayes appeared for Chicago State University.
Pressed further by the battery of lawyers representing Atiku on why he believes the person who is the president of Nigeria is the same person who attended CSU, Westberg said Bola Tinubu is an unusual name in the US.
He matched the Records in the file against the information provided by the student or on behalf of the student.
On the controversy over whether the student the school admitted in 1977 ffrom South West College was a man on woman, Westberg said Tinubu applied to the university as a male and a letter of admission was issued to a male.
On the certificates tendered in the documents given to Atiku, the registrar restated that the university only has Diplomas that students didn’t pick up in its possession.
“The university does not typically keep Diplomas.I have the Diploma that was made available to Mr. Enahoro-Ebah in our possession because Mr. Tinubu did not pick it up.
“I do not have the Diploma that was submitted to INEC in our possession because he had picked it up.’
“Why would Mr. Tinubu request a Diploma and not pick it up or ask that it be sent to him?”, one of Atiku’s lawyers asked.
Westberg replied: “You would have to ask him, that is Bola Tinubu”.
Here are other things Westberg deposed to: “I’m not aware of any instance where CSU had been requested to certify a document.Mr. Wole Afolabi who was acting for President Tinubu insisted that the documents must be certified. Mr. Wole Afolabi is President Tinubu’s lawyer. Mr. Afolabi and Mr. Orr communicated by email.
“I don’t recall seeing the emails. I don’t know if Jason Carter approved of the certification. Apart from Jason Carter I do not know anyone else who was involved in the process.
“I went into Mr. Tinubu’s student’s file and produced the documents to Mr. Orr. I didn’t know that the documents would be certified. I don’t get involved in legal matters.
“Mr. Tinubu requested that the documents be released to Mr. Afolabi for ‘legal proceedings’ The signature on the consent form is similar to the signature we have on record for Mr. Tinubu.
“All of the certified documents came from CSU’s files. Nothing was handed over to us by Mr. Afolabi except for the FERPA form. CSU had never certified documents for anyone before. It must have been made because there was more of a Nigerian thing.
“The documents were released in pursuance of a FERPA request. I believe Mr. Afolabi requested that the documents be certified. I’m not aware if the stamp affixed by Mr. Orr to the documents was an official document. It is not part of CSU practice.
“Mr. Orr later departed from CSU after these documents were certified.I don’t know if his departure was connected to the certification of the documents; but I don’t think it was.
“Mr. Tinubu’s counsel did not prepare any affidavit for me. He didn’t draft anything for me. My statement that Mr. Bola Tinubu graduated from CSU was based on the transcripts in our possession.
“I have never met Bola Tinubu. I have never seen him. He did not visit our campus. He does not donate money to the school.
“In the US, Diplomas are considered merely ceremonial documents. In some other countries, it may be considered more. In the US, more reliance is placed on transcripts and not on Diplomas.
“I did not rely on information from public records to come to the conclusion that President Bola Tinubu is the person who attended CSU. I am not aware that the FBI contacted CSU on whether Bola Tinubu attended CSU.
“Between 1979 and when I assumed duties, CSU must have had at least 6 Registrars. I never spoke to Ms. Davies. Some policies have changed over the years. When there is a replacement Diploma, it is done by outside vendors. I don’t know who created Exhibit # 6. The institution decided that my name should not be typed on the ‘To whom it may concern’ letter because of the sheer volume of requests I was getting.
“Before CSU, I was at UC, Berkeley and UC, Irving. I’m sure people make mistakes in data entry from time to time. Before this lawsuit I didn’t know anyone called Bola.
“It was possible that someone assumes Bola to be a female and therefore marked the SouthWest Transcript as such.
“I am familiar with the affidavit filed by OLAJIDE Adeniji. I don’t recall his gender.I don’t know if Atiku Abubakar is male or female but I heard is a male. I can’t tell by his name.
“I checked the record and confirmed that OLAJIDE Adeniji and Bola Tinubu were at CSU at the same time. The person said he ran in a closely- contested race against Bola Tinubu for the leadership of the Accounting Student Union.
“I see that he said the same person he ran against is now the president of Nigeria. The Bola Tinubu who attended Southwest College took Accounting courses. The Bola Tinubu who attended CSU also took Accounting courses. I see the address indicated for Bola Tinubu. It’s not far from CSU. I looked at the whole record in making the determination that the Bola Tinubu who is the president of Nigeria today is the same person who attended CSU.
“The entries’1952’ and ‘1954’ could have been made in error. The person who attended Southwest College is the person who attended CSU. The courses taken by Bola Tinubu at Southwest and CSU are consistent.
“Right after the entry ‘F’, the SSN entered indicated in the Southwest transcript is the same as the one that was indicated in CSU records. That is one of the indications that we use to identify students. A Social Security is a unique identifier.
“I recognize Southwest College as a feeder school for CSU. Bola Tinubu graduated with Honours. It’s a GPA distinction. It is awarded to high performing students. Accounting is a rigorous Major. He graduated with Honours. Yes, certain students are more motivated than others.
“The students who are more motivated go on to accomplish greater things in life. I’ve seen that. As far as I know, he’s the president of Nigeria.
“There were materials in Mr. Tinubu’s records that show that he was a male. I see the application to CSU. Mr. Tinubu identified himself as a male. His letter of admission identified him as a male. It says: ‘Dear Mr. Tinubu’
“We know Mr. Tinubu’s Social Security number. It’s contained in his records.
“I see the entry on APC’s website wherein President Bola Tinubu was said to have been born in Lagos on March 29, 1952. I don’t have a copy of the Diploma that was submitted to INEC so I can’t comment on it.
“I am not aware of the fact that in the form that he submitted to INEC he claimed a different nationality or date of birth.
“Yes, our records show that he was born on March 29th. One has ‘1954’ while the other shows ‘1952’ From time to time, people do make mistakes when making such entries”.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The probe panel set up by the University of Calabar to investigate allegations of sexual harassment of female students, misconduct and abuse of office by the suspended Dean of the Faculty of Law, Prof. Cyril Ndifon, has adjudged him guilty of “gross misconduct.”
In a report of the panel obtained by CITY LAWYER,the panel “established the serial violations of some of the extant rules and regulations.” The report is titled “REPORT OF THE PANEL SET UP TO INVESTIGATE ALLEDGED (SIC) MISCONDUCT, SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND ABUSE OF OFFICE LEVELLED AGAINST PROFESSOR CYRIL OSIM NDIFON, SUSPENDED DEAN OF FACULTY OF LAW, UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR.”
The panel was regaled with accounts of sexual harassment by 10 current and former students of the university, even as one of the witnesses, a 200-level student, told the panel that the suspended Dean told her that “she would be answerable to every sexual call put across to her….” CITY LAWYER participated in some of the panel’s hearings via the Zoom platform.
According to the report, “Prof. Ndifon called her to come to the office the next day and when she came, he locked the office and brought out his penis and told her that if she sucked his penis, he would accept her into the Faculty. After much pressure from the suspended Dean and feeling frustrated, this survivor gave in and sucked his penis and almost got choked as Prof. Ndifon held her head while forcing his penis into her mouth.”
The panel report also contains details of “24 mobilized students for law school Admission whose results were not cleared,” indicating that the Nigerian Law School list from the university may have been rigged by the suspended Law teacher.
In one instance, the panel stated that “This candidate’s name is not in the screened list of the final year law students. However, she is mobilized for law school.” In another case, the panel stated that “Further (name withheld) did not take Jurisprudence a core course but is mobilized for law school.”
On “Major Misconduct,” the panel “established that the suspended Dean, Prof. Cyril Osim Ndifon was using his official position to both intimidate and bargain for sexual favour from female students in the Faculty of Law.”
Turning to “Gross Misconduct,” the panel “established that the suspended Dean had been involved in students’ exploitation. Elaborately, he had been perpetrating cruelty against students by forestalling the graduation of especially some female students at the appropriate time by withholding and refusing to release their results and threatening some that they would never graduate from the Faculty or go to the law School.”
The panel also “established that the suspended Dean was compelling the law students to pay for a Faculty Journal that was non- existent for three consecutive academic sessions.”
The panel recommended “That the suspended Dean of law should face the statutory Disciplinary Committee of the University of Calabar for appropriate sanctions applicable to acts of both Major and Gross – misconduct. The panel makes this recommendation in view of Prof. Ndifon’s antecedents in the Faculty of Law, which from the testimonies given by both staff and students are in clear violations of the extant rules and regulations governing the conditions of service of staff of the University of Calabar. He has used his position as a lecturer and his position as Dean of the Faculty of Law for non- edifying purposes, frustrating, traumatizing and jeopardizing the future of some of the students, as well as the lecturers.”
It also recommended that “The suspended Dean should be made to refund over three million naira (N3m) realized from the payments made by the law students for the Law Journal which he neither published nor gave to the students.
“That the acting Dean should without delay arrange internal defense for Barrister Anne Eruegi Agi to defend her Ph.D and encourage same to put in for promotion in the next promotion exercise.
“That the university should make a rule to stop lecturers from asking students to come and see them at odd (after official) hours and if need be, encourage the culture of not locking their offices when consulting with students. This is consistent with global best practice.
“The university should bend backwards so as to come to the aid of some law students who have been roaming around because of the lapses in the Faculty of Law over the years. There should be a call for such to come for supplementary examinations or mop up. This will go a long way to help the University gain the confidence among stakeholders and prove to the wider society that the University cares and is not indifferent.
“Further steps should be taken to clean up the mess in the Faculty of Law. The seeds of discord planted over the years need to be uprooted. The culture of borderization seems to be entrenched both among staff and students. Such is unhealthy for academic standards, discipline and merit…. It is indeed possible with God on the side of the University for old things to pass away and for everything to become new in the Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, Calabar.”
The report stated that Ndifon “was properly invited thrice by the Panel to come and defend himself but he failed to appear. The invitations were done through written memos, text and WhatsApp messages, as well as radio announcements. The panel had to rely on his responses to the 10 point query issued to him by the University as guidance.”
One of the terms of reference for the panel was “To thoroughly investigate cases of sexual harassment and molestation levelled against the suspended Dean of Law by female students and others who may have felt victimized.” Regarding this term of reference, the investigation panel received sworn statements from students and alumni of the Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, three written and signed statements from other survivors of same. Five alumni gave evidence via zoom while four current students appeared in person and gave evidence as follows ….”
CITY LAWYER recalls that some students of the Faculty of Law had protested alleged sexual harassment and other infractions by the suspended Dean of Law.
Though Women Affairs Minister, Mrs. Uju Kennedy-Ohanenye had toldCITY LAWYER that Nigeria’s First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu had waded into the matter, UNICAL Vice Chancellor, Prof. Florence Banku Obi toldCITY LAWYER that the university would leave no stone unturned to get to the root of the allegations.
According to Obi who spoke while receiving the report, copies of the report will be submitted to Ohanenye; Education Minister, Prof. Mamman Tahir (SAN), and the National Universities Commission (NUC).
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.
The Nigerian Bar Association, Lagos Branch has debunked a report by CITY LAWYERthat it has abandoned Ms. Uduak Adams, a young lawyer who was attacked by an irate mob in Lagos over a false kidnapping alarm.
In a rejoinder signed by the Publicity Secretary of the branch, Mr. Omoniyi Onabule, the Branch leadership described the report as “misleading,” assuring that it has been taking steps to care for the survivor.
It is recalled that Ms. Adams had told CITY LAWYERin an interviewthat aside from a visit by some officers of the branch, she had not received any financial support especially to defray her sundry medical bills arising from the injuries inflicted on her during her ordeal in the hands of the mob.
But the Branch Executive disagreed, saying: “We find the publication worrisome because the publisher deliberately turned a blind eye to the statement issued by the Executive Committee of NBA Lagos Branch on the steps taken with regards to Ms. Uduak.
“In fact, in addition to all the official steps taken and reported, we confidently state that the Chairman of the Branch checks up on Ms. Uduak regularly on her well-being. It is unfortunate that this careless publication has necessitated the need to inform members of the personal donation extended to Ms Uduak by the Chairman of the Branch.”
The leadership demanded that CITY LAWYER“immediately withdraws the publication regarding Ms. Uduak and issue public apology failing which the Executive Committee of NBA may take legal action in defending the reputation of the Branch.
“Finally, we urge our members and the general public not to politicize this sensitive issue.”
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
As Nigeria marks its 63rd Independence Day, I extend my heartfelt congratulations to every citizen of this remarkable nation. Today, we come together to celebrate not just a historical milestone, but also the spirit of resilience, diversity, and unwavering hope that defines Nigeria.
Unity has always been at the core of Nigeria’s strength. In a country as diverse as ours, unity is not just a choice but a necessity. It’s a reminder that despite our differences in language, culture, and tradition, we are all bound by a common identity as Nigerians. Let us continue to foster unity, transcending the barriers that may seek to divide us, and together, we can face any challenge that comes our way.
Freedom, the cornerstone of any democratic society, is a precious gift we must cherish and protect. It’s a reminder that we have the power to shape our destiny and hold our leaders accountable. Let us pledge to preserve this freedom, ensuring it reaches every corner of our nation, and guaranteeing equal opportunities and justice for all.
As we celebrate, let us also focus on growth and development. Nigeria is a land of immense potential, from its abundant natural resources to its vibrant human capital. It’s a country capable of greatness. Let us work tirelessly to harness this potential, creating a future where every Nigerian enjoys a higher quality of life and access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities.
In this moment of celebration and reflection, let us unite in prayer for Nigeria’s progress. May our great nation continue to grow, prosper, and shine as a beacon of hope for Africa and the world. Let us pray for leaders with vision and integrity, for peace and security to prevail across the land, and for the betterment of the lives of all Nigerians.
Happy 63rd Independence Day, Nigeria! Let the colors of our flag inspire us to strive for unity, freedom, and growth. Together, we can achieve a brighter, more prosperous future.
With optimism and solidarity,
Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The young lawyer who was nearly lynched by an irate Lagos mob for alleged kidnapping, Ms. Uduak Adams, has been abandoned to her fate by many stakeholders including the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), CITY LAWYERcan authoritatively report. The attack occurred on Thursday, September 14, 2023.
While Uduak has been shuttling between hospitals in a bid to resolve the injuries sustained during the attack, including an appointment with a neurosurgeon, she has not received any financial support from NBA or any of its branches. CITY LAWYER gathered that the young lawyer has been left to defray all her attendant medical bills from her meagre resources.
Uduak had told CITY LAWYER in an earlier interviewthat she was squatting in churches due to lack of accommodation and financial resources.
Asked whether she has been healed of the injuries she sustained during the mob attack, Uduak said: “I am still in a lot of physical pains and psychological trauma. It has not been easy for me. I have sleepless nights, and I now live in fear. I don’t feel safe anymore, especially in Lagos and in Nigeria. I feel so lonely and I am battling with a lot of things.”
It is recalled that about two NBA National Officers had visited Uduak alongside some NBA Lagos Branch officials to pledge their support. NBA Uyo Branch and some individuals have also made public statements indicating their desire to see that Uduak gets justice. While Uduak hails from Akwa Ibom State, she is a member of NBA Lagos Branch.
However, when CITY LAWYERasked Uduak whether she has received any financial support from either NBA headquarters or NBA Lagos Branch towards her medical bills, she said: “I have not received any financial support from NBA National or any of its Branch any where in Nigeria or abroad. I have not received any financial support from any group or stakeholder whatsoever in Nigeria or abroad.”
She however said that “only NBA Lagos has paid only a solidarity visit to me so far. No other group, stakeholder or association has visited. If there is any, I would have mentioned it.”
CITY LAWYER recalls that NBA Uyo Branch had issued a statement vowing to support Uduak in her quest for justice, saying: “The Chairman of NBA Uyo Branch, Augustine Enefiok Udoh Esq. and the Vice Chairman/Chairman of Human Rights Committee of the Branch, Mrs. Angela Mick-Akpabio have reached out to Miss. Uduak Adams, a legal practitioner and a native of Akwa Ibom State based in Lagos State who was recently, tragically and wrongly accused of kidnapping and subsequently subjected to a horrific act of mob violence in Lagos State by being flogged with a horse wipe, struck with planks, and subjected to numerous punches and kicks along Aborishade street, Surulere, Lagos State.
“The Chairman of Uyo Branch thanked the 1st and 3rd Vice Presidents of Nigerian Bar Association, Mrs. Linda Bala and Mrs. Mandy Asagba for the role they played.” It was gathered that the public statement arose from a telephone call to Uduak by one of the branch executives.
Uduak had in an exclusive interview with CITY LAWYERnarrated how she nearly lost her life to an irate mob in Aborishade, Surulere, Lagos following a false alarm that she kidnapped a child.
Meanwhile, the prime suspect and mother of the allegedly kidnapped child, as well as an ‘eye-witness’ had been charged to court by the police and remanded at Kirikiri Correctional Centre by the Magistrate’s Court. The matter has been adjourned to October 30, 2023 for trial.
To join our CITY LAWYER Channel on WhatsApp, click here
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.
Judge Nancy Maldonado U.S. Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago has restated the earlier ruling by Magistrate Judge Jeffrey T. Gilbert which ordered Chicago State University to release President Bola Tinubu’s academic records by tomorrow, Monday, 2nd October, 2023.
According to a trending document obtained by CITY LAWYER,Judge Maldonado reportedly warned that any request for stay of the judgement from Tinubu will be denied.
In a major victory for former Nigerian Vice President Atiku Abubakar, Judge Nancy Maldonado of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has ruled that Chicago State University (CSU) must release all documents about Bola Tinubu, the current President of Nigeria. The order includes all relevant and non-privileged documents, such as Tinubu’s admission records, transcripts, and any other documents related to his education at CSU.
Abubakar had filed a lawsuit in the US court seeking to compel CSU to release Tinubu’s academic records. He argued that the records were necessary for his case in Nigeria, in which he is challenging Tinubu’s victory in the 2023 presidential election.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
J. COYDEN PALMERis a two-time NNPA award-winning journalist and host of the SportsZone Chicago podcast, “What’s Up Cuz?!” with Lance C. Irvin. Born and raised in the Chatham community on the South Side of Chicago, Palmer has over 20 years experience as a community-based reporter, investigative journalist, editor, podcast host and is a “proud member of the National Association of Black Journalists ….” He has appeared in Citizen, Crusader and The Final Call newspapers, in addition to Referee and The Crisis magazines.
In this articleoriginally published on his blog, he claims that the Chicago State University (CSU) certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) by Nigerian President Bola Tinubu is not authentic, saying: “The diploma itself is a fake.”
Giving more reasons to buttress his statement, Palmer said: “On the alleged diploma, the date of graduation is listed as June 27, 1979. The signature of the CSU president shows Elnora D. Daniel. I almost spit out my coffee I laughed so hard when I saw this. Dr. Daniel didn’t become the president of Chicago State until 1998. How do I know? Because I covered her inauguration and her first two years at Chicago State when I was a student reporter for the now defunct school newspaper TEMPO.”
I gotta admit. This one story shows the level of corruption in Nigeria and it makes you cry and laugh at the same time. The President of Nigeria Bola Tinubu, produced a fake diploma from Chicago State University to an election board in Nigeria that claims he graduated from the South Side institution in 1979. CSU officials have confirmed in court that Tinubu did indeed graduate from the university, but cannot confirm the authenticity of the diploma that has now been submitted into evidence in a federal court. U.S. District Judge Nancy Maldonado on Thursday issued a stay on an order that would have required CSU officials to provide documents from the University confirming or denying President Tinubu’s claims. The matter has thrusted CSU into an international political war, in which political opponents of Tinubu and many Nigerian citizens are calling for his removal from office. He was just elected to lead the country back in February.
Let me make this easy for you. The diploma itself is a fake. On the alleged diploma, the date of graduation is listed as June 27, 1979. The signature of the CSU president shows Elnora D. Daniel. I almost spit out my coffee I laughed so hard when I saw this. Dr. Daniel didn’t become the president of Chicago State until 1998. How do I know? Because I covered her inauguration and her first two years at Chicago State when I was a student reporter for the now defunct school newspaper TEMPO. Additionally, on the fake diploma, Dr. Niva Lubin is listed as the President of the Board of Trustees. Dr. Lubin did not even start serving on the board until 1996. I’ve known Dr. Lubin since my days as student at CSU and she is a lifelong resident of Chatham where I grew up.
Furthermore, in 1979, Dr. Daniel was working as a teaching assistant at Columbia University, according to her biography and the resume she submitted when she applied to become the president of Chicago State in 1998. Now 81, retired and living on the east coast, I’d love to know her reaction to the news that the President of Nigeria who is 71 himself claims she signed his diploma. The president of CSU in1979 was actually Dr. Benjamin H. Alexander, who died in 1997 and was the first African American to serve in that role at CSU.
In 1979, Dr. Lubin, now married and going by the name Lubin-Johnson, well she wasn’t even a doctor in 1979. She didn’t become a physician until 1984. So how two signatures of people who were not working at CSU came to be on a document that the president of Nigeria is trying to sell as legit isn’t really a mystery. It is a lie. It is deceit. It is part of what is ruining many African nations and the world as a whole; corruption.
Other inaccuracies on the fake diploma that can easily be spotted by anyone who ever attended CSU, the University logo is all wrong for that time period. Again, I know this because the logo on the fake diploma is the one that was controversial when it was changed in 1999. Myself and my fellow student journalists at TEMPO wrote a story about the change in the school symbol because those against it said it was a waste of money. They claimed changing all the school letterhead and signage to the new symbol would remove financial resources from other needs. President Daniel thought the change would be better marketing for the University so the change was approved by the Board. The University symbol in 1979 was a triangle with two bars. The bars represent the growth of the institution, starting as Chicago Teachers College, then Chicago State College (1967) and eventually Chicago State University (1971). I know this because I had to read that stupid handbook like all freshmen and you learn about the history of the school.
CSU attorney Michael Hayes said the University is prepared to do whatever the court asks of it. He said this international controversy has brought unwanted and unfair publicity to the school. I would debate that claim as CSU does enough stupid stuff that brings bad publicity to itself. However, I must admit, for now at least, it seems that CSU is a victim here of a Nigerian scammer. It wouldn’t be the first time an American institution fell victim to scammers in Africa.
The end is possibly near for President Tinubu, at least in terms of his presidency, if justice actually prevails in Nigeria. When Judge Maldonado makes her ruling next week, in which it is expected that CSU will turnover documents that shows his true student records, the courts in Nigeria will have a decision to make. They either remove their leader for violating laws in Nigeria or look the other way. I hope they understand the whole world will be watching too. Especially at CSU. Nigerians and everyone else deserve the truth. If Tinubu is willing to fake a diploma, what else is he willing to do?
Dr. Benjamin H. Alexander was an activist and educator who served as the President of Chicago State University from 1975-1982.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
Renowned legal scholar and former Dean of Faculty of Law at the University of Lagos (UNILAG), Prof. Akin Ibidapo-Obe is set to bow out of the university after decades of meritorious and unblemished service.
Speaking at a special Valedictory Senate Session in his honour, Prof. Ibidapo-Obe however noted that “I am retired but not tired.” The special session was held on Tuesday, September 26, 2023 to celebrate the cerebral jurist and human rights advocate ahead of his retirement from active university service.
Standing tall and agile among other academics in the hallowed Senate Chamber, the renowned Professor of Public Law, Criminology and Criminal Justice expressed gratitude to the University Senate and UNILAG community for the privilege of growth and career fulfillment.
Earlier in her remarks, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Development Services), Professor Ayo Atsenuwa, who presided over the Senate Meeting as Acting Vice-Chancellor, congratulated Prof. Ibidapo-Obe for his illustrious service to the university and contributions to the body of knowledge. She prayed God to grant him good health and longevity to enjoy the fruits of his labour.
Born on Monday, October 5, 1953, Professor Akinola Ibidapo-Obe obtained his Bachelor of Laws degree from the University of Lagos in 1977. He proceeded to the University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University, OAU) in 1980 where he obtained a Master of Laws degree (with Distinction). He was admitted to the Nigerian Bar in July 1978. His areas of interest and research include African Law, Law and Religion, Human Rights, Criminology and Constitutional Law.
A Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (United Kingdom), Prof. Ibidapo-Obe joined the services of the University of Lagos in 1989. He reached the apogee of research and academic excellence when he attained the coveted rank of Professor in 2011.
According to a news release by the university, “During the course of his outstanding career at the university, Professor Ibidapo-Obe held several positions including Head, Department of Public Law and Dean, Faculty of Law, among others.”
Prof. Ibidapo-Obe is also a member of the CITY LAWYER Board of Governors.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
President Bola Tinubu has prayed a United States federal judge not to direct release of his academic records to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, saying “There is harm in allowing discovery on issues and documents outside the diploma.”
His lawyers also told the court that Tinubu’s records “were illegally obtained previously and have been utilized to attack him.”
In court filing obtained byCITY LAWYER, Tinubu however pleaded with Judge Nancy Maldonado to block all details about him except the diploma certificate. The objection was titled “INTERVENOR’S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S RULING ON THE APPLICICATION FOR DISCOVERY UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 1782.”
Tinubu’s lawyers argued that “Intervenor, Bola A. Tinubu, requests that the ruling by the Magistrate Judge, ordering Chicago State University to comply with document and depositions subpoenas proposed by the Applicant be set aside for two principal reasons. First, the discovery sought is not “for use” in the Nigerian election proceedings and the Nigerian courts have explicitly been unreceptive to the discovery.”
They argued further that the discovery sought, “with one narrow” exception, is not “for use” in the Nigerian election proceedings “and is unduly intrusive because it allows Applicant to conduct a fishing expedition into Intervenor’s private, confidential, and protected educational records.”
Tinubu’s prayers on Monday morning came as part of the ongoing legal battle unfolding at the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago.
Referring to Atiku’s claims in his election petition that “[Tinubu] has demonstrated inconsistency as to his actual date of birth, secondary schools he attended . . . ; his State of origin, gender; actual name; certificates evidencing Universities attended (Chicago State University),” Tinubu’s lawyers wrote: “The assertions in the reply mirror conspiracy theories offered by Nigerian political news blogs that were used to support the Application.”
They argued that “, if the Court views the effect of the Magistrate Judge’s as a non-dispositive and the clearly erroneous standard applies, Intervenor submits that the Magistrate clearly erred in ordering compliance with the proposed subpoenas.”
Saying Atiku is foreclosed from submitting any further evidence on the matter at the Supreme Court, Tinubu’s lawyers stated that “as the Nigerian Election Court wrote in its decision, the evidence sought is inadmissible. (See Dkt. 34, pg. 556.) Because the information was missing from and had to be in the original petition, Applicant has no ability to submit anything further.”
Hinting that Atiku is bent on a “fishing expedition” which intrudes into Tinubu’s privacy, the lawyers stated that “the relevant issue is whether the CSU diploma provided by Intervenor is authentic or a forgery. Applicant’s discovery, however, goes far beyond that issue and strays into conspiracy theories offered on the Internet. A single deposition topic will suffice to answer this question, and it is arguably unnecessary based on both the affidavit of CSU’s registrar and CSU’s court filing.”
Stating that the Magistrate earlier determined that Atiku’s interest “outweighs the privacy interest because Invervnor (sic) put the diploma at issue by submitting it to the INEC,” the lawyers argued that “There is harm in allowing discovery on issues and documents outside the diploma. Intervenor’s records were illegally obtained previously and have been utilized to attack him.”
They stated that ” The unlawful release of documents previously allowed Intervenor’s opponents to sow confusion and spread conspiracy theories. Applicant should not be permitted to conduct discovery on the discovery illegally obtained by Applicant’s allies and Intervenor’s political opponents.” Tinubu’s lawyers include Victor Henderson, Christopher Carmichael and Oluwole Afolabi.
The case was brought by Abubakar in his bid to establish that Tinubu was not eligible to be Nigerian president despite his election in February 2023.
The identity of who was admitted into Chicago State University in the 1970s has been a hot issue after college transcripts emerged that indicated the school admitted a female Bola Tinubu from Southwest College Chicago in 1977.
Magistrate Gilbert has ruled last week that CSU administrators should confirm under oath whether or not the certificate Tinubu tendered in Nigeria was genuine. The officials were also directed to show a certificate issued to a CSU graduate in 1979, with the person’s identification redacted, and to also turn over communications relating to a letter the school issued to Tinubu in 2022.
A man who identified himself as Olajide Adeniji also submitted an affidavitsaying he attended school with Tinubu from 1977 to 1979.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
Senior lawyer and former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Prosecutor at the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), Mr. Jibrin Okutepa SAN has raised concerns over the plight of embattled young lawyer, Miss Uduak Adams.
Uduak had in an exclusive interview with CITY LAWYER narrated how she was almost lynched by an irate Lagos mob over a phantom allegation of kidnapping.
CITY LAWYER gathered that Uduak has been in and out of hospital since the near-death incident, even as she is billed for an appointment with a neurosurgeon to assess the damage to her head.
Okutepa asked whether her principal did enough to ameliorate her accommodation challenges, even as he wondered whether NBA is sufficiently catering for its members.
He also berated “NBA politicians” for turning the incident into a political platform of “notice me,” adding that this smacks of “hypocrisy.”
His words: “Those nurturing political ambitions are at the forefront of sending goodwill messages. It seems to me that NBA politicians have turned the misfortunes of Uduak Etim Adams into a political platform of “notice me”. Everyone is sending messages of concern.
“For me this is hypocrisy. What Ms Uduak Etim Adams needs is not political goodwill messages or political suggestions. She needs money to put herself together and face the challenges of life. Churning out messages of sympathy is as hypocritical as is unhelpful. NBA must not be turned to conventional secular politics where deceits of monumental propaganda and proportions are practiced to get votes.”
Below is the full text of his statement.
Since I listened to the voice message and read the report of a young lawyer Uduak Etim Adams Esq on how she narrowly escaped death in Lagos because she was searching for accommodation and was falsely accused of being a kidnapper, and was almost mobbed to death, I concluded that only God is our protector and defender in Nigeria.
We profess to love ourselves but the majority of people have no love in their hearts. Just shout “thief” in Nigeria, nobody will care to listen to the victim. You can just be killed unjustly. There is mob injustice in Nigeria, but my main focus is not the mob action. God has saved the poor girl, God has protected her.
My main focus is twofold. Where was Ms Uduak Etim Adams working? How come the principal of Ms. Uduak Etim Adams could not do more for her than merely give her transport? Did Ms. Uduak Etim Adams discuss her accommodation plight with her principal? Did she open up to senior lawyers to assist her? As senior lawyers, we must at all times stand in locus parentis for the younger members of the Bar.
I am just curious to know why the principal could not be of help to her, to necessitate her moving around in the manner that led to the unfortunate incident. What branch of the NBA did she belong to? What did the branch do? Did she let any senior know of her challenges? We must be ourselves, keepers. How are we as NBA taking her plight and the plights of others? It could happen to anyone of the lawyers. What are our plans for ourselves as a Professional Association? NBA must look inward and help Nigerian lawyers.
The second point I want to make is the politicization of the unfortunate incident that happened to Uduak Etim Adams Esq. Those nurturing political ambitions are at the forefront of sending goodwill messages. It seems to me that NBA politicians have turned the misfortunes of Uduak Etim Adams into a political platform of “notice me”. Everyone is sending messages of concern.
For me this is hypocrisy. What Ms Uduak Etim Adams needs is not political goodwill messages or political suggestions. She needs money to put herself together and face the challenges of life. Churning out messages of sympathy is as hypocritical as is unhelpful. NBA must not be turned to conventional secular politics where deceits of monumental propaganda and proportions are practiced to get votes.
Those who turned to emergency sympathizers just because of votes are with respect not representing the nobility and good image of gentlemen of the Bar. Let Ms. Uduak Etim Adams and others in her shoes be helped now.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Court of Appeal sitting in Lagos has dismissed an appeal brought by Globacom Limited to upturn a N2, 033,561,222.53 billion arbitral award made against it by Justice Mohammed Liman of the Federal High Court.
In dismissing Globacom’s appeal, the panel of jurists led by Justice J. S. Ikyegh were unanimous that the appeal lacked merit and ought to be dismissed. Others jurists on the panel were Justice I. B. Gafai and Justice Ebiowei Tobi.
In his lead judgment, Justice Gafai affirmed the ruling of Justice Liman and equally resolved all the issues in favor of the respondents.
In his ruling delivered on November 29, 2019 in a suit marked FHC/L/CS/857/19, Justice Liman dismissed the Globacom’s motion seeking to set aside the lower court’s earlier garnishee proceedings.
Dissatisfied with the ruling, Globacom in its Notice of Appeal marked CA/LAG/CV/1385/2019, filed on December 9, 2019, but deemed properly filed on June 30, 2021, prayed the court to allow the appeal and set aside the ruling of the lower court.
Listed as respondents in the appeal were MTN Communications Limited; Sterling Bank Plc; First Bank Plc; Zenith Bank Plc; First City Monument Bank Plc; Wema Bank Plc; Polaris Bank Plc; Diamond Bank Plc; Heritage Bank Plc; Guaranty Trust Bank Plc; Stanbic-Ibtc Nigeria Plc; Standard Chartered Bank Plc and Keystone Bank Plc.
The Appellant argued that the trial Judge erred in law when he held that multiple garnishee proceedings can be pursued concurrently by MTN Communications Limited (1st Respondent) against the Appellant in respect of the arbitral Award obtained against the Appellant.
Globacom further argued that the trial judge erred in law and violated its right to a fair hearing when he dismissed its motion dated July 29, 2019, but filed July 30, 2019, without considering all the legal issues raised by it in the motion.
It argued that the application to enforce the arbitral award was filed on 22nd May 2019 while the Order for the enforcement of the award was made on July 19, 2019, arguing that the court below had no jurisdiction to entertain the application at the time it granted leave to the 1st Respondent to enforce the award.
Globacom also argued that by Section 8(I)(d) of the Limitation Law of Lagos State, MTN (first respondent) had six years to apply to the court for the enforcement of the award, submitting that more than 10 years had passed after the award was published before the application for its enforcement was made and granted.
TOP COURT NEWSreports that Globacom had argued that the order made on July 19, 2019, for the enforcement of the award was therefore made without jurisdiction, and as such, was null and void.
However, in his lead judgment delivered on June 23, 2023, Justice Gafai affirmed the ruling of the lower Court and awarded a cost of N2 million against the Appellant.
The court held that “The hallmark of any garnishee proceeding is twofold: the expeditious attachment of funds belonging to a Judgment debtor in the custody of a third party and the satisfaction of the Judgment sum wherefrom in favor of the Judgment Creditor. It is recognised that the Judgment debtor will become recalcitrant and evasive in satisfying the Judgment sum: which is the reason behind the relevant provisions.
“Sections 83 to 92 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act as well as those in the Judgment (Enforcement) Rules, the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, and the various State High Court Rules to compel a recalcitrant Judgment debtor through a civil process, to comply with a Judgment Order.
“It is indeed even more deserving against a Judgment debtor who saw no reason to appeal against the Judgment and simply ignored the Judgment as if it never was. An adage has it: a drastic situation calls for a drastic solution; which is the reason for the enactment of special statutory provisions and Rules exclusively for the enforcement of judgments by garnishee proceedings.
“It is important to contextualize the Appellant’s arguments on the alleged abusive nature of the 1st Respondent’s latter garnishee proceedings which the Appellant prefers to call “the Lagos Suit” in the light of the peculiar nature of garnishee proceedings.
“As explained earlier, there is no provision in the Sheriff and Civil Process Act or the two applicable Rules referred earlier herein which outlaws a second or another garnishee proceeding if the earlier one failed to satisfy the Judgment sum.
“The recurring argument by the Appellant’s learned counsel that the latter garnishee proceedings were commenced during the pendency of the earlier one is, with due respect, simply oblivious or in total disregard of the legal reality that the proceedings for the Order Nisi before the earlier Court had practically come to an end by the Court’s grant of the Order Nisi and so what was adjourned sine die by that Court was the second stage of the proceedings for an Order Absolute.
“Sadly for the first respondent, the Order Nisi made in its favor by the earlier Court turned out to be very unsatisfactory to the first respondent because out of the total sum of N856, 829, 599.69k (Eight Hundred and Fifty-Six Million, Eight Hundred and Twenty-Nine Thousand, Five Hundred and Ninety-Nine Naira, Sixty Nine kobo) representing the debt recoverable under the Arbitral Award, only the sum of N39,923,557.05k (Thirty-Nine Million, Nine Hundred and Twenty-Three Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty-Seven Naira, Five kobo) was disclosed by the garnishee banks in Abuja: leaving a whopping balance of N816,906,002.64k (Eight Hundred and Sixteen Million, Nine Hundred and Six Thousand, Two Naira and Sixty Four kobo) which was a far cry from satisfying the Award sum.
“It is noteworthy here that at the time the first respondent commenced the second garnishee proceedings, the Appellant had not as yet, as the Record shows, filed an Appeal against the Order Nisi by the Abuja Court. I agree with the learned counsel for the Respondent that the earlier Suit was already conclusive on the funds attached from the Judgment Debtor’s bank accounts.
“It is also striking that the Reliefs sought in both Suits are in reality different contrary to the argument of the Appellant. The latter garnishee proceedings were for the unattached balance of the Award sum and post Judgment interest totaling N2,033,561,222.53k (Two billion, Thirty Three Million, Five Hundred and Sixty One Thousand, Two Hundred and Twenty Two Naira, Forty Three kobo).
“I do not, with respect, agree also with the learned counsel for the Appellant’s argument that there is the risk of the Appellant’s funds garnished more than the Judgment debt. Any such fears, real or imagined, are easily allayed by the protective provisions of Order 8 Rules 5 (1) (b) of the Judgment (Enforcement) Rules. In any case, there is nothing in the Record to warrant such fear.
“If the Appellant is alarmed or outraged by the post Judgment interest claimed by the 1st Respondent, it may appear that it has forgotten the unappealed Panel Orders listed as numbers 5 and 6 in the Award that the Claimant shall not receive any sum as general damages in this matter. And that Award must be paid within 30 days from the date of the ruling. Upon failure, interest will be calculated on all due payments at NIBOR rates as Specified in the Interconnect agreement under Section 6.7 and 6.9.”
“All the issues having thus been resolved against the Appellant, this Appeal ends as one without merit and is accordingly dismissed. The Ruling of the lower Court is affirmed. I award a cost of two million naira against the Appellant.”
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The spokesman for the Supreme Court, Dr. Festus Akande has said that the fire incident that occurred today at the apex court would not affect the presidential election petition appeals filed by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and and Mr. Peter Obi of Labour Party.
CITY LAWYER had reported that a fire outbreak occurred early today at the Supreme Court of Nigeria located at the Three Arms Zone in Abuja, destroying some parts of the court complex.
The mysterious fire forced some workers to raise alarm while others fled the scene.
While many Nigerians speculated on the effect of the fire outbreak on the appeals brought by Atiku and Obi, Akande told Arise TV today that the fire outbreak has no connection with the petition in court.
He noted that the fire outbreak affected a chamber with a computer, equipment and functional library due to an electrical fault, adding: “As a matter of fact, there’s no single connection, and it won’t affect anything in the court.
“This incident occurred in a chamber equipped with a computer and other equipment, as well as a functional library used by any justice occupying such chamber.
“The only thing that was affected were the books and computer equipment in the chamber. Even the books are replaceable.
“Also, it has nothing to do with it because it was from an electrical fault, which could happen anywhere, and there are things that happen daily.”
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The are trending reports that a section of Nigeria’s Supreme Court is on fire. The section is said to house offices of three justices of the court.
Although information still remains sketchy, no reason has yet been given as to the cause of the fire. The offices affected were allegedly completely razed.
This is a developing story.
Small Supreme Court wey we dey manage e reach Amoda Sangodele turn, na fire first everybody resume work on Monday morning.
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.
The Late Justice Centus Chima Nweze of Nigeria’s Supreme Court will be buried on October 20, 2023, CITY LAWYER can authoritatively report.
According to burial arrangements obtained by CITY LAWYER, the cerebral jurist will begin his homeward journey on October 10, 2023 when the apex court would hold a Valedictory Session in his honour at the Supreme Court Complex at 10 am.
A requiem mass will hold the same day at the Holy Trinity Catholic Parish, Maitama, Abuja. Time is 4 pm. Another requiem mass will hold on Friday, October 13, 2023 at 5 pm at Christ the King Parish, GRA, Enugu.
Meanwhile, a “Night of Tribute” will hold for the departed jurist at Amadeo Event Centre, Enugu on 17th October, 2023. Time is 5 pm.
Aside from a Vigil Mass on October 17, 2023 at his country home in Umuezejor, Obollo Afor, Enugu State, the burial rites will climax with a Burial Mass at St. Pius Catholic Church, Umuezejor, Obollo Afor, Enugu State on October 20, 2023. His remains will be interred after the burial service.
CITY LAWYERgathered that Justice Nweze died in controversial circumstances on July 30, 2023 after a prolonged illness. While the immediate cause of his death was attributed to a collapsed organ, it was alleged that the state of his health was one of the triggers for the unprecedented protest letter by Supreme Court jurists to the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad who resigned afterwards.
Born in 1958, Justice Nweze died on July 30, 2023. A statement by the Supreme Court after his demise read: “It is with heart full of grief that we announce the sudden death of our amiable brother and colleague, Hon. Justice Chima Centus Nweze, JSC, on Saturday, July 29, 2023, after a brief illness.
“Justice Nweze was born in Obollo, Udenu Local Government Area of Enugu State, on September 25, 1958.
”He had his LLB (Hons), LLM and PhD in Law at the prestigious University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus in 1983, 1995 and 2001, respectively.
“He was also a recipient of LL.D. Degree; and was an Associate Professor of Law at Ebonyi State University and a Visiting Professor of Law, Enugu State University of Science and Technology.
“His Lordship was a Judge of the High Court of Justice, Enugu State, from 1995 to 2007; Justice of the Court of Appeal from 2008 to 2014; and was elevated to the Supreme Court Bench on 29 October, 2014, where he served until his death.
“Hon. Justice Chima Nweze gave a sterling account of himself in the discharge of his official duties at the Supreme Court.
“He had largely made himself a pliable legal personality that had diligently sunk a pool of enduring legal knowledge and experience in all his judicial pronouncements.
“He had been a formidable ally of his brother Justices, an admirable pillar of support to the staff and management of the Supreme Court; and indeed, a dependable father-figure to all.
“It will be an understatement to say we are all going to miss him dearly. Funeral arrangements would be announced by the family in due course.”
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Funtua Branch, Mr. Alexander Ugbede Ajodo is dead.
Mr. Isah Haruna, the Head of Chambers of his law firm, told CITY LAWYER that “He died last night. Yes, we lost him.”
Announcing Ajobo’s passing in a trending post, Haruna wrote: “On a very sad note but with a total submission to the will of Almighty Allah, I hereby announce the demise of my Principal -in- Chambers and the current Chairman (until his death) of the NBA FUNTUA BRANCH, Barr. ALEXANDER UGBEDE AJODO (a.k.a A. U. AJODO ESQ). He died last night around 12 am at the Intensive Care Unit of UMC ZAHIR HOSPITAL KABUGA, KANO.
You can reach out to his junior in chambers (Isah Haruna Esq, via 08133606649) for any correspondence.
Signed: Isah Haruna Esq. Head of Chambers, A.U. AJODO & CO.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
How Nigeria’s Courts Became “The Lost Hope Of The Common Man”
By Chidi Anselm Odinkalu
When Ogbonnaya Ukeje died in Lagos two days after Christmas Day in 1981, Bode Rhodes-Vivour was a 30 year-old lawyer making his way up the rungs of public service in the Ministry of Justice in Lagos State. Mr. Rhodes-Vivour had been called to the Nigerian Bar a mere six years earlier, in 1975.
In 1989, when Mr. Rhode-Vivour succeeded Nureini Abiodun Kessington as the Director of Public Prosecutions in Lagos State, the case concerning the estate of Ogbonnaya Ukeje was already in its sixth year in the High Court of Lagos. Mr. Ukeje’s daughter, Glady’s, had filed the case in 1983 to challenge her exclusion from a share in her father’s estate merely on the ground that she was female.
In January 1992, Justice Moni Fafiade, who became a judge of the Lagos High Court in 1983, the same year the case originated, delivered judgment in Gladys Ukeje’s case. The case lasted nine years in the High Court alone. Bode Rhodes-Vivour was still a Director in the Lagos State Ministry of Justice.
Two years later, in 1994, when Bode Rhodes-Vivour was appointed a judge of the High Court of Lagos, the appeal by Gladys Ukeje’s family against the decision of the High Court of Lagos in her favour had been pending in the Court of Appeal for two years.
In 2005, five years after the first brief of argument was filed in the Supreme Court Appeal in Gladys Ukeje’s case, Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour was elevated from the High Court of Lagos to the Court of Appeal. By the following year, in 2006, all the parties had filed their briefs of argument.
Four years later, when Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour arrived the Supreme Court, after a five year sojourn on the bench of the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court appeal in Gladys Ukeje’s case had been pending for over a decade.
On 11 April 2014, 31 years after the case was filed in the High Court of Lagos, 20 years after he was first appointed a judge, and four years after his elevation to the court, Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour delivered the judgment of the Supreme Court upholding the right of Gladys Ukeje to a share in her father’s estate.
By this time in 2014, Ahmed Lawan was already something of a phenomenon in Nigerian politics. In 1999, Lawan arrived the National Assembly as the member representing the proud people of Bade/Jakusko constituency of Yobe State in the House of Representatives. He was a member of the All Nigerian Peoples’ Party (ANPP). In 2007, after two terms in the House, Lawan was elected to the Senate by the people of Yobe North Senatorial Zone. In 2019, 20 years after his arrival at the National Assembly and having logged the record for the most durable parliamentary career in Nigeria’s history, Ahmed Lawan became the 14th president of Nigeria’s Senate.
In this capacity, Ahmed Lawan was officially, the third most powerful man in the country. If he desired to extend the duration of his improbable political longevity, Lawan had few realistic options. As the 2023 election season approached, he made his bid for a ticket to the presidency on the platform of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), of which he was a founding member. When the final tally was announced on 8 June 2022, Lawan lost out in the contest, coming a distant fourth.
11 days earlier, on 28 May, the APC had organized the primaries for the Senate. In Yobe North, the seat that Lawan occupied in the Senate, the winner of the primaries was Bashir Machina, a rich businessman and politician, who had also served in the cabinet at the state level. However, as soon as the presidential primaries concluded, a concerted effort began to deny Machina the ticket in favour of Lawan.
To forestall this, Machina sued on 22 June 2022 in the Federal High Court in Damaturu, the capital of Yobe State, asking the court to affirm the outcome of the senatorial primaries that he won. Three months later, on 28 September, the High Court rendered judgment. By the beginning of December, the Court of Appeal had also issued judgment, and on World Anti-Corruption Day, 9 December, 2022, the case arrived the Supreme Court. In less than two months, on 6 February 2022, the Supreme Court issued judgment, implausibly declaring Lawan the winner of senatorial primaries that he did not participate in.
This kind of status-indexed shunt granted to political higher-ups like Ahmed Lawan by Nigerian courts is mostly manufactured or enabled by the judiciary. It is now crippling Nigeria’s courts and the irony is that the only people in the position to end it are the ones complaining.
When he inaugurated a cohort of 72 new Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) on 8 December 2021, then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Tanko Muhammad, reported that 33 or nearly five per cent of the 681 cases considered by the Nigerian Supreme Court during the year were “political cases”. This was a rather a curious category to maintain or report on. Judicial doctrine ordinarily views political cases with reluctance. Nigerian law knows nothing of the sort. It knows of election petitions as are contests over the outcomes of elections, mostly governed by the Electoral Act, which prescribes strict time limits for their disposal. Most likely, this is a category of cases instituted by Nigeria’s politicians seeking to judicialize intra-party squabbles over the spoils of political plunder. Increasingly, it seems, these have become the mainstay of judicial enterprise in the country.
Last week, as he swore-in nine newly appointed Justices of the Court of Appeal, current CJN, Olukayode Ariwoola, reinforced the complaint from the judges that “political cases are taking a monumental toll on our dockets.”
Gladys Ukeje and Ahmed Lawan are both Nigerians. One is female, the other is male. The former is from the south, while the latter is from the north. They both journeyed memorably through Nigeria’s courts, ending up in the Supreme Court with remarkably different experiences. For Gladys, the journey began in Lagos; for Lawan, it began in Damaturu, Yobe State. For Gladys, the journey from the High Court to the Supreme Court took over three decades. For Ahmed Lawan, it was less than eight months.
By assigning priority to “political cases” in a manner that grants swift access to courts for politicians like Ahmed Lawan but no exit from courts to ordinary citizens like Gladys Ukeje, Nigeria’s judiciary sustains a two-track judicial system by which it puts the interests of politicians above those of the citizens whom they are meant to serve. It also encourages the twin evils of undue judicialisation of politics and the politicization of the judiciary. It is little wonder that some have resorted to describing Nigeria’s courts as the “lost hope of the common man”.
By consecrating an Ahmed Lawan into an indispensable citizen while at the same time making a Gladys Ukeje into the expendable citizen, Nigeria’s judges have turned citizens into manure to feed the whims of politicians as a matter of law.
This juxtaposition is everything that is wrong not merely with Nigeria’s courts but with the country and its governance. The country has been judicially rendered in hock to big men. When courts become captured for the purpose exclusively of enabling the whims of big men, they lose the authority of judicial office.
The solution to this is in plain sight. If Nigeria’s judges were to insist on politicians taking their place on the queue of judicial dysfunction, like every other citizen, they will be forced to either find a way to fix the judiciary or else fix their internal party dysfunctions and spare the judiciary from being captured by and for “political cases”.
A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
A Lagos lawyer, Ms. Uduak Adams has narrated how she was almost lynched by an irate Lagos mob over a false allegation of kidnapping. An initial attempt by the police to rescue her was resisted by the mob, leading to a reinforcement.
Uduak, who was called to the Nigerian Bar last year, told CITY LAWYER that she went in search of an apartment to rent when a woman raised an alarm that she had kidnapped her child.
She said that immediately the woman levied the allegation, the mob pounced on her and beat her mercilessly, leading to multiple injuries to her head and body. According to Uduak, the irate mob was aided by operatives of the O’odua Peoples Congress (OPC), a vigilante service that operates in the city. The child was later brought to the scene by his minder, making the mob to retreat.
Meanwhile, the prime suspect, who is the mother of the allegedly kidnapped child, and an ‘eye-witness’ had been charged to court by the police and remanded at Kirikiri Correctional Centre by the Magistrate’s Court, and the matter adjourned to October 30, 2023 for trial.
Her words: “I feel extremely traumatized; it’s scary. I feel unsafe in Lagos and in Nigeria. The psychological trauma is too much, including the physical damage. The fact that videos of what I didn’t do is circulating on social media, it’s shameful; the accusations, having to be bashed for nothing, my dignity as a lady, as a professional and as human and an innocent citizen of Nigeria has been soiled and torn apart.”
An apparently frightened Uduak said that some sympathizers of the accused persons have been pleading with her to drop the charges, even as others were also threatening her.
The young lawyer told CITY LAWYER that the Nigerian Bar Assoacition has waded into the matter, adding: “Generally, I want justice. Let all the people involved be brought to book. I need serious monetary compensation, public apology circulating in national daily, a counter video, compensation for physical, emotional and psychological trauma and for loss of earnings. I have been unable to go to work ever since. I just returned from hospital.”
She confirmed that the voice note obtained by CITY LAWYER on the attack was hers. CITY LAWYER observed that the matter was trending on X (formerly Twitter) with the hashtag, #JusticeforUduak.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
A senior lawyer and former Nigerian civil servant could receive a portion of an enormous sum of damages if a British court rules against Nigeria in a landmark case centred on a multi-billion dollar gas deal.
As part of an arrangement that Nigeria’s government calls “extraordinary” and “corrupt”, Grace Taiga, former Director of Legal Services at the Ministry of Petroleum Resources, allegedly hopes to share in the record-breaking $11.4bn awarded to the offshore company Process & Industrial Developments (P&ID) before England’s High Court.
CITY LAWYER recalls that an Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) witness, Aminu Lawal had told a Federal Capital Territory High Court that “We discovered that on January 30, 2012, the sum of $5,000 (Five Thousand United States Dollars) was also paid into her daughter’s account at HSBC Bank, London, located at Canada Street. The purpose of the payment on the transaction is commission payment. We obtained her statement based on that.” Taiga pleaded ‘Not Guilty’ to the charges.
Court filings and testimonies seen by Al Jazeera allege that Taiga is one of three Nigerians who stand to make money if the court orders Nigeria to pay the award – an outcome that could severely damage the country’s economy. The other two are the businessmen Adetunji Adebayo and Mohammed Kuchazi.
In January 2017, a London-based arbitration panel ruled that Nigeria pay $6.6bn to P&ID as compensation for breaching the contract awarded in 2010. That amount has since ballooned to $11.4bn with interest. But Nigeria has refused to pay, claiming P&ID bribed officials including Taiga to secure the gas contract.
In an eight-week trial that ended in March this year, the government petitioned the High Court to invalidate the arbitration award. The court’s decision is expected within weeks. Analysts say if Nigeria is ordered to pay the damages, its economy could be severely damaged.
“The negative shock would be monumental,” Olusegun Vincent, associate professor of finance at Pan-Atlantic University in Lagos State, told Al Jazeera. “It may take us back to the pre-1999 military era, when Nigeria wasn’t creditworthy,” he said, pointing to the risk that the government would be unable to pay its debt.
‘The P&ID scam’ This scandal began in the late 2000s when the administration of then-President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua planned to address Nigeria’s energy supply crisis by exploiting vast untapped gas reserves in its mineral-rich Niger Delta region.
Seizing the opportunity, P&ID pitched an ambitious project to the petroleum ministry, to build and operate a gas-processing plant near the southern city of Calabar despite having never undertaken a project like that before.
According to Al Jazeera, “Taiga was at the centre of negotiations: She worked on the contract wording, recommended to the late Rilwanu Lukman, the petroleum minister then, that he sign a memorandum of understanding with P&ID in 2009, and witnessed his signing of the gas contract the following year.
“Under the terms of the agreement, the government would provide wet gas to P&ID for free over 20 years. The two parties would then split the processed resource, with the government using its share to help power the country’s energy grid.
“But the project never got off the ground. P&ID never built the plant and Nigeria never provided the company with any gas. P&ID blamed the government for the failure and convinced an arbitration panel it had been wronged.
“The panel awarded the company damages equivalent to the total hypothetical profit the company would have made over the lifespan of the contract – $ 6.6bn plus interest of $1.3m per day from the time the contract was breached.
“Evidence later emerged that Taiga had received close to $10,000 from individuals and companies linked to P&ID ahead of the contract signing. Before the High Court, Taiga acknowledged having received money but said that these payments were merely gifts from a family friend, P&ID co-founder Michael Quinn.
“P&ID said it had done everything in its power to make the project work. However, its inexperience and Taiga’s receipt of undisclosed funds eventually led the Nigerian government to believe that it had been the victim of an elaborate fraud.”
Addressing the United Nations General Assembly in 2019, then-President Muhammadu Buhari vowed to confront “the P&ID scam”, which he said was “attempting to cheat Nigeria of billions of dollars”.
Anticorruption campaigners seem to agree with him. “The story of how a small offshore company with no meaningful track record, no website, and only a handful of employees managed to win a multibillion-dollar gas contract raises red flags for corruption that call for careful scrutiny,” Helen Taylor, senior legal researcher at the British NGO Spotlight on Corruption, told Al Jazeera.
The High Court will adjudicate these points. If Nigeria loses the case, the country would be legally bound to pay P&ID what amounts to eight times its 2023 federal health budget.
‘Part of the family’ How the proceeds would be divided, meanwhile, has long remained confidential. Taiga, who had previously denied in affidavits that she would receive any money from the award, finally told the High Court under oath on February 16: “I do have expectations.” Asked by Nigeria’s lawyer how much she expected P&ID co-founder Brendan Cahill to share with her, she said: “I did not put my mind on a particular ceiling.”
In one document dated October 2017, Cahill recorded a “commitment” of $200,000 to Taiga; in another, dated May 2019, the figure was put at $500,000. Al Jazeera has seen both documents, which form part of the evidence before the High Court. Cahill, an Irish businessman who founded P&ID alongside the now-deceased Michael Quinn, said that these were not firm commitments. “I sought to reassure her that she would be looked after to some degree,” he told the court. “I didn’t specify how or when.”
In court, Taiga denied having secretly helped Quinn and Cahill when she handled the gas contract at the petroleum ministry. But she added that she now saw herself as “part of the family” that is P&ID.
“It’s remarkable that this Nigerian government official who helped broker the controversial gas deal with P&ID now belongs to the close-knit beneficiaries of this opaque offshore company,” said Taylor. “Far from clearing up this conflict of interest, the obscure arrangements for paying her a cut of P&ID’s profits are deeply compromising to her credibility as a former public official.”
A billion-dollar promise and ‘lots of uncertainty’ For his part, Adetunji Adebayo, executive chairman of Nigerian gas company GFD Energy and middleman for P&ID during settlement negotiations with the government, could be entitled to $1.4bn. In an affidavit dated May 2022, Cahill wrote that “Mr Adebayo was promised 10 percent of the income from the arbitration” but added that there was still “a lot of uncertainty around the amount, if any, that will be paid out.” Adebayo did not appear before the High Court.
Mohammed Kuchazi, who as P&ID’s commercial director assisted the firm in its relationship with the petroleum ministry, told the court that he believes himself to be entitled to 3 percent of the award – some $340m – as per an agreement he said he reached with Quinn. Cahill confirmed the existence of that deal in his affidavit.
In his own affidavit, Kuchazi wrote that he had been friends with Lukman, the minister, since the 1960s. Before entering business, Kuchazi had been a Nigerian politician.
Asked for further comment, Kuchazi’s lawyer Eric Ifere told Al Jazeera that his client’s entitlement to “a 3 percent commission” was supported by a written agreement with P&ID. He declined to share that document.
The Nigerian government has accused Adebayo and Kuchazi of having bribed Nigerian officials on P&ID’s behalf. The company and Kuchazi denied the accusations before the High Court.
Adebayo, Taiga, and P&ID did not respond to Al Jazeera’s requests for comment.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
Three chieftains of the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) have dragged the Federal Government before the Federal High Court over imposition of a Proof of Ownership levy on all vehicle owners.
In the 34-page court processes obtained by CITY LAWYER, the plaintiffs urged the court for “A DECLARATION that by virtue of Section 86 (1) of the Personal Income Tax Act 2004 that sets up the Joint Tax Board (JTB), the power it purportedly exercised to impose yearly fee for annual renewal of Proof of Ownership (POC) Certificates on vehicle owners, is ultra vires, unlawful and unconstitutional.”
The plaintiffs are Mr. John Akpokpo-Martins, Chairman of NBA-SPIDEL; Ms. Funmi Adeogun, Secretary of NBA-SPIDEL, and Mr. Francis Ogunbowale, NBA-SPIDEL Governing Council member. The defendants are the Federal Government, Joint Tax Board, and Governor of Lagos State.
The plaintiffs also urged “A DECLARATION that the imposition of annual renewal of Proof of Ownership certificates on vehicle owners amounts to multiple taxation and therefore, illegal, in view of the fact that tax agencies and other agencies of Governments usually issue certificates of proof of ownership to vehicle owners at the point of registration of vehicles.”
Outlining four other declarations sought, the human rights activists are seeking “An order striking down the provisions of section 73(1), (2) & (3) of the National Road Traffic Regulation No. 101, Vol. 99 of 25th of December 2012, on the ground of being in violent breach of Item 63 of Part I of the 2nd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution and section 1(1) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, and therefore unconstitutional.”
They are also seeking an “order of injunction restraining the Defendants, their agents, servants and privies from harassing, disturbing and or interfering with the rights of freedom of movement of Nigerians using their vehicles in any part of the federation of Nigeria on the ground of non-payment and renewal of proof of owenership certificates in respect of their vehicles.”
It was unclear at press time whether the matter has been assigned to any judge for hearing.
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.
The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) has debunked the claim by NBA Benin Branch that it relied on a repealed law when it tackled Edo State Chief Judge, Justice Daniel Okungbowa on the setting up of the State Local Government Petition Tribunal.
The branch had carpeted NBA-SPIDEL on its positionthat it “has taken due notice of the confounding reports from Edo State of the somewhat neglect of the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State to mandatorily constitute the 5-man election tribunal(s) as compelled by the provisions of section 78 of the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment Law.”
But in a rebuttal made available to CITY LAWYER, NBA-SPIDEL wrote: “We ask, if the 2013 amendment which allegedly provides for 3-man election petition tribunal(s) was the existing law in 2018, pursuant to which law therefore did the office of the Edo State Chief Judge constitute 5-man election tribunal(s) in 2018? In other words, why did the very learned office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State constitute 5-man election petition tribunal(s) instead of 3-man tribunal(s) in 2018 in light of the 2013 amendment which provides for 3-man election petition tribunal(s) in Edo State?
“Curiously, why did NBA Benin branch not bring the existence of the 2013 amendment to the attention of the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State in 2018, to properly direct the mind of the Honourable Chief Judge from constituting illegal 5-man election petition tribunal(s) then?
“Indeed, could everyone in the highly educated Edo State have been so comprehensively misled as to the real state of the law in 2018?”
Restating its position, the association wrote: “NBA-SPIDEL therefore states without equivocation that it stands by its earlier statement and is certainly sure-footed on its reliance on Section 78 of the Electoral Law of Edo State pursuant to the recognition granted to the 2012 and 2017 amendments by the extant 2022 amendment Law.”
Chastising the branch leadership for wading into the matter, NBA-SIDEL wondered why it held itself out as the mouthpiece of the tribunal, saying: “Finally, NBA-SPIDEL believes that the office of the Chief Registrar of the Edo State High Court is the appropriate authority to respond (if at all) to our earlier statement. With utmost respect, NBA Benin branch has no duty to respond to NBA-SPIDEL on this issue for very obvious reasons. The NBA does not and should not operate in this way. With due respect, the statement of the much-respected NBA-Benin branch was certainly pugnacious. However, NBA-SPIDEL takes it in good faith.”
RE: NBA RAPS EDO CHIEF JUDGE OVER ELECTION TRIBUNALS; A RIPOSTE TO THE STATEMENT OF NBA BENIN BRANCH.
The statement of NBA-Benin branch signed by her chairman and secretary, respectively, on the matter of the constitution of election petition tribunal in Edo State by the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State, has come to the attention of NBA-SPIDEL.
In the said statement, the well-respected NBA Benin branch (the Lion bar) stated that NBA-SPIDEL placed reliance on an extinguished or repealed section 78 of the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment Law ( hereinafter simply referred to as the electoral law) in SPIDEL’s statement made on the 19th of September, 2023, with respect to the constitution of election tribunal in Edo State by the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State.
Though we admit that it certainly looks incongruous for a branch and a section of the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) to trade public statements on an issue, however it is ethically germane that NBA-SPIDEL robustly respond to the statement of NBA Benin branch to protect its integrity, set the records straight, and put the issues in proper perspectives.
NBA Benin branch stated that contrary to the assumption of NBA-SPIDEL, that section 78 of the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment Law was extinguished or repealed by an amendment that came into force on the 17th day of April, 2013. With utmost respect to our respected NBA Benin branch, we find it difficult to agree to that suggestion having regard to the state of the law and facts pertaining to this issue that are within our purview.
For the records, the extant applicable law on this issue is the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission (Re-enactment) (Amendment) Law, 2022 …. section 2 of the said enactment is hereby referenced.
More importantly, section 4 of the said enactment provides that “The Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment (Re-enactment) Law 2012 and the amendment Law 2017 and the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment (Re-Enactment) (Amendment) Law 2022 (hereinafter in this law referred to as the “the principal Law) are hereby amended as provided for in this law.”
A careful and fecund appraisal of the above-referenced section 4 of the extant electoral law indicates that the said section 4 mentioned or referenced all past/previous amendments to the electoral law i.e, the 2012 and the 2017 amendments.
NBA-SPIDEL holds the view that the reference, recognition, and mention of the 2012 and 2017 amendments by section 4 of the 2022 electoral law expressly excludes any other purported amendment, (inclusive of a 2013 amendment) not recognized, referenced and/or mentioned by the said section 4 of the extant law of 2022.
NBA-SPIDEL also holds the considered view that by the deliberate exclusion and/or non-statutory recognition of, and/or the non-legislative reference to any 2013 amendment as forming part of the extant 2022 law, the purported 2013 amendment is by implication not in existence or never even existed.
NBA-SPIDEL is fortified in its view above, due to the fact that in 2018, the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State acting pursuant to the then extant Edo State Local Government and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Law i.e. as amended in 2017, rather constituted 5-man election petition tribunal(s) to hear and determine petitions arising from the then local government election instead of 3-man election petition tribunal(s).
NBA-SPIDEL believes that the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State would have expectedly constituted 3-man election tribunal(s) in 2018 if the the-NBA-Benin-referenced 2013 amendment was actually in existence in 2018.
NBA-SPIDEL and discerning Nigerians are interested in knowing why the office of the Honourable Chief Judge did not constitute 3-man election petition tribunal(s) in 2018?
We ask, if the 2013 amendment which allegedly provides for 3-man election petition tribunal(s) was the existing law in 2018, pursuant to which law therefore did the office of the Edo State Chief Judge constitute 5-man election tribunal(s) in 2018? In other words, why did the very learned office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State constitute 5-man election petition tribunal(s) instead of 3-man tribunal(s) in 2018 in light of the 2013 amendment which provides for 3-man election petition tribunal(s) in Edo State?
Curiously, why did NBA Benin branch not bring the existence of the 2013 amendment to the attention of the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State in 2018, to properly direct the mind of the Honourable Chief Judge from constituting illegal 5-man election petition tribunal(s) then?
Indeed, could everyone in the highly educated Edo State have been so comprehensively misled as to the real state of the law in 2018?
Has NBA Benin branch by this intervention not inevitably declared the entire acts and decisions of the 2018 Edo State Election Petition Tribunal void and unlawful ab inito? What did NBA Benin branch do to ensure that the provisions of the 2013 amendment were scrupulously adhered to in 2018?
Conclusively, NBA-SPIDEL has no doubt that NBA Benin branch will inevitably come to the conclusion that something is definitely wrong somewhere if she decides to interrogate and investigate the seeming lacuna in the extant enactment and the previous constitutions of election tribunals in Edo State? More importantly, this conundrum points to the fact that there is really more than meets the eye in all these. NBA-SPIDEL therefore urges NBA Benin branch to set up a committee to unravel the mystery in the interest and promotion of the rule of law, legislative integrity, judicial impartiality and the sustainability of our hard-earned democracy.
Arising from all these, NBA-SPIDEL is therefore of the considered view that either the NBA-Benin-referenced 2013 amendment is contrived, or the 2022 amendment law tells a lie about itself? Nonetheless, the extant law on this matter is the Edo State Local Government and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Amendment law, 2022. Imperatively, the 2022 electoral law and its provisions override all other purported amendments not referenced, recognised, and/or assumed by it.
NBA-SPIDEL therefore states without equivocation that it stands by its earlier statement and is certainly sure-footed on its reliance on Section 78 of the Electoral Law of Edo State pursuant to the recognition granted to the 2012 and 2017 amendments by the extant 2022 amendment Law.
NBA-SPIDEL unfortunately finds it difficult as the NBA Benin branch would want, to place reliance on a purported 2013 amendment not recognized nor referenced by the extant 2022 amendment law. NBA-SPIDEL is therefore undeniably justified in not placing reliance on the purported 2013 amendment when in fact, the exalted office of the Chief Judge of Edo State failed, neglected and/or refused to constitute the 2018 election tribunal(s) pursuant to the purported 2013 amendment.
Finally, NBA-SPIDEL believes that the office of the Chief Registrar of the Edo State High Court is the appropriate authority to respond (if at all) to our earlier statement. With utmost respect, NBA Benin branch has no duty to respond to NBA-SPIDEL on this issue for very obvious reasons. The NBA does not and should not operate in this way. With due respect, the statement of the much-respected NBA-Benin branch was certainly pugnacious. However, NBA-SPIDEL takes it in good faith.
Dated this 21st day of September, 2023.
John Aikpokpo-Martins Chairman
Funmi Adeogun Secretary
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The embattled Treasurer of the Nigerian Bar Association, Caroline Anze-Bishop has called for an “independent audit” of the association’s finances in order to determine its true status.
In a statement she personally signed and made available to CITY LAWYER, the NBA National Officer debunked several accusations made against her by NBA President, Mr. Yakubu Maikyau SAN during the recent NBA Annual General Meeting , saying: “I equally demand for an independent audit of our Financial Books to ascertain or debunk Mr. Presidents allegation of Financial Fraud against all National Officers and the tarnishing implication that we are Crooks. I believe our true BPF and general financial position will be revealed and all Crooks apprehended. I am not a thief and I daresay an immediate audit of our Account will corroborate my claim and certify me clean, so I strongly demand for an immediate Audit thereof.”
Saying that the anti-graft agencies may soon swoop on the association, Anze-Bishop wrote: “May I also State that when Mr. President single handedly undertook to receive an anonymous donation of undisclosed sums in US Dollars and further undertook its conversion at an undisclosed rate to Fifty million Naira N50M, then unilaterally appropriated ten million naira (N10M) to himself, and also single handedly deposited or attempted to deposit the alleged balance of forty million naira N40m in our Account and so on and forth; in clear contradiction of Section 9 (5) (a) and of the Treasurer’s primary Mandate, he simply confirmed the fact that he’s been acting as the Treasurer of the Bar, and doing my job at will with impunity.”
She denied the claim by Maikyau that the National Officers resolved to share the balance of N40 Million received from Kebbi State Government, saying: “I know for a fact that there was never ever a meeting of National Officers where a resolution to share any monies (or the said N40 million as falsely alleged by Mr. President) was ever reached. The open public rebuttal of the Assistant General Secretary (who takes down the minutes of meeting) squarely amplifies this truth.”
She debunked the claim that Maikyau funds his personal aides, saying: “You will easily find in the NBA Staff salary schedule of the Association that Mr. President retains not less than 3 Aides on the payroll of our Association at the moment, contrary to his publicized claim on the floor of the AGM that he personally pays ALL his aides from his personal purse.”
Similarly, she denied the charge that the National Officers were only gunning for the association’s Bar Practising Fee, saying: “Mr. President alleged that National Officers are fighting him because he refused to share the BPF with us. May I state here that this is totally false and mischievously toned to distract members from focusing on his Alpha Male style of Leadership exposed.”
The embattled Treasurer also denied lobbying for foreign visits, adding: “Mr. President has on these very critical issues played the Victim, The Prosecutor, Judge and Executioner: I hereby challenge Mr. President to bring forward his evidence in support of this weighty allegation made before the whole world against us as it ridicules and cast aspersion on our integrity as Constitutionally Elected Officers of the NBA and the Nigerian Bar Association at large.”
Continuing, Anze-Bishop wrote: “With due respect, I request Mr. President to cease and desist from inveighing me in his blanket denigration of National Officers, and to right away retract these false statements and issue a public apology against my Person and all distinguished National Officers of the Bar.”
Querying whether she is “expected to vet Financial Memos and recommend them in absentia” due to Maikyau’s cost concerns, the embattled Treasurer demanded an Extra-Ordinary General Meeting to resolve her petition to the AGM, saying: “I hereby call for the convening of an Extraordinary General Meeting (Egm) Pursuant To Section 10(4) & (7) Of The Nba Constitution, 2015 (As Amended) (since the inconclusive AGM was adjourned sine die) so that we reach a logical conclusion of the meeting and issues abandoned on the Agenda of that day.”
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.
Judge Nancy Maldonado of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has placed an immediate stay on the release of President Bola Tinubu’s university records after he pleaded severe and irreparable consequences to his life.
CITY LAWYER recalls that Judge Jeffrey Gilbert had ordered Chicago State University to release Tinubu’s academic records to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar.
But Tinubu had, through his lawyers, urged Ms. Maldonado, a district judge, that the September 6 order by Judge Jeffrey Gilbert, a magistrate, should be delayed. The judge agreed that the matter might be too severe for Mr. Tinubu to bear and granted a stay until further argument on the matter. “This needs to be handled with care,” Mrs. Maldonado said.
The judge gave Mr. Tinubu’s lawyers until Monday to file a full brief on the matter before the court. Atiku Abubakar’s lawyers said they would reply to the brief by 11:00 p.m. on the same day.
“I may ultimately adopt the magistrate’s recommendation and allow the discovery to go forward, or I can ask all parties to file briefs afresh,” the judge added.
At issue has been the subpoena application filed by Abubakar seeking to obtain records of Tinubu at Chicago State University, following widespread inconsistencies with the Nigerian president’s academic records already in the public domain.
Abubakar’s application was granted in a judgement issued on Tuesday by Gilbert, who ordered the production of the documents as well as the deposition of the school’s administrators. Abubakar plans to use the records to demonstrate Tinubu’s ineligibility for president, relying on the constitutional section that disqualifies a candidate who submitted a forged certificate to the electoral office INEC.
CSU officials have insisted that Tinubu attended the school, but they they have also said they couldn’t authenticate his certificate under oath because they couldn’t tell where he found it.
Tinubu initially argued that the documents should not be released to Abubakar because they would not be tenable before the Nigerian Supreme Court, where Abubakar now intends to file them as part of his appeal against a tribunal verdict that certified Tinubu’s election on September 6.
Abubakar submitted his appeal to the Supreme Court on September 19, the same day Judge Gilbert ordered CSU to release Tinubu’s records within two days.
But Peoples Gazette reported that as the 48-hour deadline loomed on Thursday afternoon, Tinubu suddenly approached Ms. Maldonado, seeking a delay, and suddenly elevating the desperate situation of the matter to include potential damage to Tinubu’s life.
“Severe and irreparable harm will be done to Bola Tinubu if the records are released,” Mr Tinubu’s lawyer argued at an emergency appeal before Judge Nancy Maldonado of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago.
If the records are released, harm will be done and cannot be taken back to the bottle, Tinubu’s lawyer added during the court hearing that began at 3:00 p.m. via telephone conference and lasted about 40 minutes.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
A senior lawyer and former Oyo State Attorney-General, Mr. Mutalubi Ojo Adebayo SAN has restated his “resolve to institute legal actions against the Government of Osun State and its Judicial Service Commission if they fail, neglect and refuse to clear and settle all the arrears of allowances they owe the judicial officers in the State on or before 30th September,2023 .”
Osun State Government had in its response to the earlier threat urged Ojo “to avoid distractive and interloping activism,” adding that “As we believe he is not politically recruited, he should adopt other dignifying route rather than usurping labour dispute question which only the unions and their employers can undertake.”
But in a statement made available to CITY LAWYER, Ojo vowed to press on with the lawsuit, saying that “The Governor and the Government of Osun State should be reminded that those allowance are deserved earnings and rights of the judicial officers for the lawful services they have rendered to the state and which has become due just debts that the government must settle and pay without further delay.”
The statement by the Osun State Government partly reads: “We can add for him that the Adeleke administration inherited from the two previous governments of the All Progressive Congress a whopping salary, pension and employment related debt to the tune of 100 billion naira. This is outside another state debt of over 400 billion naira. The Adeleke administration has however commenced payment of such salary and pension debt amidst cash crunch and equally competing demands for state expenditure.
“We are constrained to therefore urge the lawyer to avoid distractive and interloping activism. As we believe he is not politically recruited, he should adopt other dignifying route rather than usurping labour dispute question which only the unions and their employers can undertake.
“As we assume the lawyer has good intention, he can rework his threat into an appeal to the State Governor to continue his ongoing phased payment of outstanding liabilities inherited from the previous administrations. He may further commend the Governor for acting for all Osun people by devising strategies to complete abandon projects and gradual payments of outstanding liabilities.”
RE : OSUN URGES LAWYER TO DROP LEGAL ACTION THREAT
I read with amusement the press statement issued by the Chief Press Secretary to the Governor of Osun State, Mallam Abdul-Rasheed Olawale , who I must admit is a Gentleman per excellence.
However, while I truly acknowledge the fact that Senator Nurudeen Ademola Jackson Adeleke, the Governor of Osun State has truly hit the ground running in delivering the much needed dividends of democracy to the people of the State who gave him the mandate to lead them, but that should not be an excuse for the Governor to treat the Judicial Officers in the state ( both serving and retired) with disdain as if their allowances and just entitlements are largese , favour and privileges that are at the discretion or whims and caprices of the Governor and the Government of Osun State to settle or pay as he deems fit.
The Governor and the Government of Osun State should be reminded that those allowance are deserved earnings and rights of the judicial officers for the lawful services they have rendered to the state and which has become due just debts that the government must settle and pay without further delay.
Also, it beats me so hollow that Osun State Government failed to understand elementary issue of civic and political education that governance is a continuum and also that the debts are owed the judicial officers are debts owed by the Government of Osun State and not personal debt of any person. The amiable People’s Governor, Senator Ademola Adeleke was fully aware of the state of debts of the Osun State Government when he was begging for the votes of the people of Osun State during the electioneering campaign period and for which the people of the state entrusted to him by voting him into office.
I must hasten to add that if the Governor of Osun State could find it comfortable and convenient to settle and clear all the arrears of salaries and severance packages of numerous past political appointees in the State just recently, I could not understand the rationale behind the continuing refusal of the government to also pay at once all the arrears of allowances that are being owed the judicial officers in the state, more so that the allowances due to the judicial officers are indeed far lower than the humongous sum of money paid to all the past political appointees in the state.
The Governor and the Government of Osun State would be doing themselves great public relations and will continue to earn and enjoy the goodwill of the people of the state and will also be threading the path of honour , decency, civility and nobility if they clear and pay without further delay all the arrears of allowances due to the judicial officers in the state so that the Osun State Government can be taken off and free from the opprobrium of disgrace and condemnation they are currently earning and attracting to themselves both nationally and globally as a result of the unprecedented and undeserved shabby and indecent treatments that the state has meted out to the judicial officers in the state.
I reiterate that I shall make good my resolve to institute legal actions against the Government of Osun State and its Judicial Service Commission if they fail, neglect and refuse to clear and settle all the arrears of allowances they owe the judicial officers in the State on or before 30th September,2023 .
DATED this 22nd day of September,2023
JCI Senator Mutalubi Ojo Adebayo,SAN Asiwaju of Ita-Ege and Idi-Aro
MAZI AFAM OSIGWE, SAN, CELEBRATES CHIEF EMEKA OBEGOLU, SAN ON THE OCCASION OF HIS FIFTIETH BIRTHDAY
Dear Akajiugo Emeka Obegolu SAN
I warmly wish you a happy birthday as you turn fifty (50) years.
It brings me immense joy to extend my heartfelt birthday wishes to a distinguished legal luminary and a cherished friend.
Your journey through the legal profession has been resoundingly remarkable.
Your dedication, professionalism, and unwavering commitment to justice is commendable. Your tireless commitment in charting new areas and advocating for justice have earned you the well-deserved distinction of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria. Your achievements have not only enriched your professional colleagues but have also touched countless lives, making you a true trailblazer in your field.
Beyond your professional accomplishments, your exceptional qualities as a friend truly set you apart. Your warmth, kindness, and genuine concern for others have created a network of friendships that spans far and wide. Your willingness to offer guidance, support, and a listening ear has been a source of solace and inspiration for many, including myself.
As you ascend the fifth floor of life, I not only reflect on your remarkable career, doggedness, loyalty, and excellence but also on the bonds of friendship you have nurtured over the years. Your ability to bring people together, bridge divides, inspire, teach and foster camaraderie is a testament to your character and the respect you command.
May this birthday be a reminder of the countless lives you’ve touched, the legal legacy you’ve built, and the enduring friendships you’ve cultivated. Here’s to wish you, my good friend High Chief EMEKA Obegolu SAN, a true legal personality and an even truer friend!
May your day be filled with joy, laughter, and the warmth of those who hold you dear. I wish you many more years ahead filled with continued success, excellence, good health, and the unwavering support of friends and loved ones.
Happy Birthday, Chief EMEKA Obegolu SAN!
Warm regards,
Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
Chief Joe-Kyari Gadzama SAN has congratulated Justice Amina Augie (JSC) as she retired from the Supreme Court Bench yesterday.
A congratulatory massage personally signed by Chief J-K Gadzama SAN and sent to her partly reads: “This auspicious day is a wonderful time to reflect on your lordship’s many ground-breaking accomplishments of the past years.
“As a Chief Magistrate in the Sokoto State Judiciary, Your lordship had always been applauded for the sterling qualities of hard work, integrity and unreserved commitment to national growth and development. This is evident by the numerous awards and decorations your lordship had earned over the years.
“Your lordship’s immeasurable contributions to the advancement’ of the Judiciary and our dear nation Nigeria, through many years of meritorious national service is indeed commendable. Your lordship’s quest for justice, equity and fairness is worthy of emulation by us all and generations to come. I have had the great privilege to be taught by your lordship at the Nigerian Law School from 1985-1986 and have appeared several times before your lordship at the Supreme Court. Your Lordship remains my mentor even after a glorious retirement from the beach.
“Indeed, the mark Your lordship has left on the judiciary and the entirety of the legal profession will serve as a reference point and inspiration for lawyers across the globe. As Your Lordship celebrates this gargantuan milestone, it is my earnest prayer that the many years ahead be blessed with divine grace, good health and prosperity.”
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
A United States District Court in the Northern District of Illinois has granted the request made by the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar, for the release of President Bola Tinubu’s academic records by Chicago State University.
In a ruling obtained by CITY LAWYER and delivered by US Magistrate, Judge Jeffrey Gilbert on Tuesday, the court ordered Chicago State University to provide “all relevant and non-privileged documents” to Atiku Abubakar within two days.
The ruling acknowledged Tinubu’s lawyers’ argument against lifting their client’s privacy privilege and clarified that only “non-privileged documents” should be produced.
“This matter is before the Court on Atiku Abubakar’s Application Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782 for an Order Directing Discovery from Chicago State University for Use in a Foreign Proceeding (“Application”) [ECF No. 1]. For the reasons discussed below, the Application is granted,” Gilbert said.
Atiku had initiated the legal action in pursuit of an order compelling the university to release Tinubu’s academic records, THE GUARDIAN reports.
Following the affirmation of Tinubu’s victory by the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, Atiku and his Labour Party counterpart, Peter Obi, submitted 86 grounds of appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking to overturn the judgement.
In separate appeals filed on Tuesday, the two candidates asked the apex court to set aside the PEPT ruling and nullify Tinubu’s election, describing the verdict as erroneous.
Atiku’s appeal primarily focused on 35 grounds in which he contested the tribunal’s decisions on electronic result transmission, Federal Capital Territory votes, and other aspects.
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.
The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) has raised eyebrows on the alleged failure of the Edo State Chief Judge, Justice Daniel Okungbowa to properly constitute election petition tribunals for the 2023 Edo State Local Government Elections.
In a statement made available to CITY LAWYER, the association noted that it “has taken due notice of the confounding reports from Edo State of the somewhat neglect of the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State to mandatorily constitute the 5-man election tribunal(s) as compelled by the provisions of section 78 of the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment Law.”
Noting that “there is no registry of the election tribunal that has been opened to the public anywhere in Edo State as of this moment,” NBA-SPIDEL stated that “NBA-SPIDEL does not want to believe that this is a calculated attempt to short-circuit the electoral process or abridge the rights of voters and candidates with subterfuge. NBA-SPIDEL does not also want to believe that the very Honourable office of the Chief Judge that is draped with so much diligence, vigilance and knowledge of the law, would miss the clear wordings in section 78 that prescribed a five (5) man tribunal as to ab initio constitute an illegal tribunal. That is our dilemma.“
THE FAILURE, NEGLECT AND/OR REFUSAL OF THE HONOURABLE, THE CHIEF JUDGE OF EDO STATE, HONOURABLE JUSTICE D. I. OKUNGBOWA TO LAWFULLY CONSTITUTE THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL(S) IN EDO STATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE EXTANT LAW: A CALCULATED OR AN INNOCOUS ACTION?
The Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (SPIDEL), is the Section of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), dedicated to promoting the rule of law, economic development, and the growth of public interest law in Nigeria. Our vision is to make public interest and development law an integral part of our national life and development, ensuring due observance of the rule of law, checking the abuse of office and acts of impunities by public agencies and advocating for the advancement of law and its application to the development of public institutions and the society. Thus, NBA-SPIDEL has taken due notice of the confounding reports from Edo State of the somewhat neglect of the office of the Honourable Chief Judge of Edo State to mandatorily constitute the 5-man election tribunal(s) as compelled by the provisions of section 78 of the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law and the Edo State Independent Electoral Commission Establishment Law. For the avoidance of doubt and ease of reference, section 78 is hereby reproduced;
“There shall be established for the State one or more election tribunal to be known as Local Government Election Tribunal which shall to the exclusion of any court or tribunal have original jurisdiction to hear and determine petitions as to whether any person has been validly elected to the office of chairman or vice chairman or councilor.
The composition of the election tribunal shall be made by the Chief Judge in consultation with the President of the Customary Court of Appeal (presently, there is no President of the Customary Court of Appeal in Edo State).
The tribunal shall be a judicial tribunal of five members including the Chairman and four other members. The report before us indicates that the Honourable Chief Judge was said to have by a press release dated the 31st day of August, 2023 and signed by B. O. Osawaru, Esq. Chief Registrar of the Edo State High Court constituted the Edo State Local Government Election Petition Tribunal to be chaired by Honourable Justice A. T. Momodu. Sadly and perplexingly, the Election Tribunal constituted vide the said press release is made up of only the chairman, Hon. Justice A. T. Momodu and 2 other members only. Sadder still and most tragic, is the fact that the press release made reference to section 78(2) of the extant law, yet, the supposed constitution of the election tribunal was in total disregard to the letters of the law! Furthermore, it is a known fact that the Local Government Election was held on the 1st of September, 2023, and that section 85(1) of the Edo State Local Government Electoral Law limited the time within which a petitioner is statutorily required to file his/her petition at the election tribunal. For the avoidance of doubt, section 85(1) provides that “an election petition shall be presented within 30 days from the date on which the result is announced.” As of today, the 19th day of September, 2023, there is no election petition tribunal in Edo State that is, 18 days after the announcement of the election results, and 14 days to the close of the statutorily window within which to present a petition before the tribunal. NBA-SPIDEL investigations also confirmed that there is no registry of the election tribunal that has been opened to the public anywhere in Edo State as of this moment. Therefore, no petition has been filed to the best of our knowledge to challenge any of the declared results in Edo State. NBA-SPIDEL does not want to believe that this is a calculated attempt to short-circuit the electoral process or abridge the rights of voters and candidates with subterfuge. NBA-SPIDEL does not also want to believe that the very Honourable office of the Chief Judge that is draped with so much diligence, vigilance and knowledge of the law, would miss the clear wordings in section 78 that prescribed a five (5) man tribunal as to ab initio constitute an illegal tribunal. That is our dilemma. NBA-SPIDEL therefore call on the Honourable, the Chief Judge of Edo State, Hon. Justice D. I. Okungbowa to, as a matter of urgency and in the overall interest of the good people of Edo State constitute proper election petition tribunals immediately in accordance with the clear provisions of section 78 of the Edo State Election Law. The people, the constitution, the legal profession and rule of law expects no less from the Honourable, the Chief Judge. We have no doubt however, that the Honourable Chief Judge will do the needful in the interest of the people of Edo State and in the protection of the rule of law as a judicial officer guided by the extant code of conduct of the National Judicial Council, and the respect for the oath of office solemnly subscribed to by his very Honourable self.
Permit us to observe that constituting a single tribunal to handle all petitions from the entire state is akin to stifling access to justice. We strongly suggest most humbly therefore that tribunals be constituted for each senatorial district of Edo State. Much time has been lost, but with good faith and deliberate actions, much can be salvaged. Dated this 19th day of September, 2023.
John Aikpokpo-Martins Chairman
Funmi Adeogun Secretary
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Acting Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, has assured the public that the police “is fully committed to collaborating closely with other relevant authorities to conduct a thorough and comprehensive investigation into this heinous act while relentlessly pursuing the cause of justice.”
In a statement on the attack on a joint patrol in Imo State, the police chief urged “anyone who may possess information related to this incident to come forward and actively assist in the investigative process and/or send in information anonymously through the NPF Social Media handles @PoliceNG, or through mail at pressforabuja@police.gov.ng.”
TRAGIC ATTACK ON OPERATIVES IN IMO: NPF COMMITTED TO INTER-AGENCY COOPERATION TO BRING CULPRITS TO BOOK
As IGP Orders Clampdown on Non-State Actors, Condoles with Families, Relatives of Deceased Officers
The Nigeria Police Force deeply mourns the recent attack on security operatives in Imo State, an event that has resulted in the tragic loss of precious lives of officers from various security agencies who have been dedicated to ensuring peace and protecting lives in Imo State.
This incident, which occurred on Tuesday 19th September, 2023, in Oriagu, Ehime Mbano Area of Imo State, serves as a stark and painful reminder of the daily risks and sacrifices that our security personnel willingly embrace in their unwavering commitment to ensuring the safety and security of our communities. The security agents affected by this senseless act of violence, comprising Police Officers, the Military, personnel of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), and the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) were diligently responding to a distress call from the area which turned out to be fake, and targeted at luring them into the ambush.
The Inspector-General of Police, Ag. IGP Kayode Egbetokun, has however assured the public that the NPF is fully committed to collaborating closely with other relevant authorities to conduct a thorough and comprehensive investigation into this heinous act while relentlessly pursuing the cause of justice. He assures that the Force would redouble its efforts to bring the culprits to book and guarantee the safety of our officers and the security of our communities, while earnestly imploring the public to remain calm and vigilant. He further urged the public to extend their cooperation to law enforcement agencies in the collective pursuit of peace and order in Imo State and other parts of the country.
In the same vein, Ag. IGP Olukayode Egbetokun, equally extended thoughts and prayers to the families of the fallen heroes, pledging that the sacrifices made by their loved ones will not be in vain.
The NPF urges anyone who may possess information related to this incident to come forward and actively assist in the investigative process and/or send in information anonymously through the NPF Social Media handles @PoliceNG, or through mail at pressforabuja@police.gov.ng.
ACP OLUMUYIWA ADEJOBI, mnipr, mipra, FORCE PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER, FORCE HEADQUARTERS, ABUJA
20th September, 2023
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Enugu State Election Petition Tribunal sitting in Enugu has fixed tomorrow, September 21, 2023 for judgment in a Governorship Election Petition involving Mr. Chijioke Edeoga and Gov. Peter Mbah.
CITY LAWYER recalls that the Tribunal sitting in Enugu had reserved judgment on the matter brought by Edoga, the governorship candidate of Labour Party (LP), challenging the victory of Peter Mbah, candidate of People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in the March 18, 2023 gubernatorial poll in the state declared by the Independent National Electoral commission (INEC).
Justice Murayo Akano-tribunal, after taking the final addresses of the petitioners and respondents, reserved judgment for a date-to-be communicated to the parties.
Mbah had during the trial poked holes in the allegations of forgery of his National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharged certificate, over-voting, and falsification of results.
There was also a drama in court as the Respondents – Mbah, PDP, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) – opposed application by the petitioners to amend their prayer in their final written address seeking to be declared winners of the Rivers State governorship election rather than Enugu gubernatorial election.
In adopting his final written address before the Justice M. K. Akano-led tribunal, Mbah, through his counsel led by Wole Olanipekun SAN, described the petitioner’s reliance on NYSC discharge certificate as of “no moment.”
Olanipekun argued that not only should the issue of NYSC discharge certificate not have arisen in the first place since it is neither a qualification for the position of governor as listed in Section 177 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) nor an educational qualification, which could be considered as a document required in aid of qualification, the petitioners also failed to prove a case of forgery against him.
His words: “The fact that NYSC certificate is not a requirement for contesting election to the office of governor is one that has been judicially settled. And in this regard, we refer your Lordships to the Court of Appeal decision in Obi-Odu v. Duke (2005).
“The gross and net effect of the legal reality that NYSC certificate is not a requirement for qualification to hold office as governor is that the mens rea (knowledge/intention) of the alleged offence as pleaded has not been proven and also that the entire point is non sequitur.”
Furthermore, citing several judicial authorities, the final written address equally argued that NYSC certificate, not being an educational qualification or a qualification for the office of Governor, Dr. Mbah did not refer to it in the affidavit he deposed in the submission of his INEC form and therefore could not be counted against him. “Thus, where no reference is made at all to a document, even if accompanying an affidavit, that document is indeed an orphan, and sadly so,” they said.
Mbah’s counsel pointed out that the petitioners’ witnesses from the NYSC testified against the petitioners and in favour of Mbah by admitting that the NYSC mobilised the governor for national service, approved his suspension of service to go for his Law School programme, and also reposted him to Udeh & Associates to complete his service after the Law School.
They held that having fulfilled the obligations, it was mandatory on the NYSC to issue Mbah with a certificate, hence the case of forgery could not have arisen. “The fact that the petitioners themselves tendered a certified true copy of the said certificate certified by NYSC themselves, puts a lie to the claim of forgery, because prima facie shows that they hold a copy of it and that NYSC is the custodian.
“NYSC certified a true copy of what is in its custody. PW1 (NYSC Director) tried to put forward a narrative that the discharge certificate was not issued because the Respondent (Mbah) allegedly did not participate in Community Development Service (CDS), suggestive of the fact that withholding the certificate was a penal action, yet, no document of a formal report of absence at CDS, a query to the Respondent, a trial or investigation, and formal communication of sanction to the Respondent was tendered.
“Section 2 of the NYSC Act mandates the NYSC to issue a certificate of national service, using the word ‘shall’. See Bamaiyi v. Attorney General of the Federation (2001) on the mandatory implication of the word ‘shall.’
“Therefore, it cannot be reasonable in a situation where proof must be beyond reasonable doubt to state that such mandatory statutory responsibility was not performed because of a punitive measure, yet no formal record of same was tendered before this honourable tribunal. This is a massive hole in criminal allegation of forgery being advanced by the Petitioners.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Obi, has appealed against the tribunal judgement which upheld the victory of President Bola Tinubu.
The Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) Atiku Abubakar has also filed an appeal against the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court.
Obi in a 50 grounds notice of appeal obtained by CITY LAWYER and by his lead counsel, Dr. Livy Uzoukwu, SAN, challenged the decision of the presidential election tribunal.
The notice of appeal partly read, “Take notice that the Appellants being dissatisfied with the decisions in PETITION NO: CA/PEPC/03/2023 MR. PETER GREGORY OBI & ANOR. v. INDEPENDENT NATIONAL ELECTORAL COMMISSION & ORS. (consolidated with Election Petition Nos: CA/PEPC/04/2023 and CA/PEPC/05/2023), contained in pages 3-327 of the Judgment of the Court of Appeal sitting as the Presidential Election Petition Court, Holden at Abuja, Coram: H. S. Tsammani, Stephen Jonah Adah, Misitura Omodere Bolaji-Yusuff, Boloukuroma Moses Ugo and Abba Bello Mohammed, JJ.C.A. (“the Court below”) delivered on the 6th day of September 2023, and more particularly stated in paragraph 2 of this Notice of Appeal, do hereby appeal to the Supreme Court on the Grounds set out in Paragraph 3 and will at the hearing of the appeal seek the Reliefs sought in paragraph 4 herein.”
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.
Like a thunderbolt, the Evidence (Amendment) Act of 2023 emerged, streaking through the legal firmament in Nigeria with awe. The Evidence (Amendment) Act shall, where the context so admits, be referred to as the Amended Act.
There must be very few lawyers who were aware of the process leading to its enactment, given the surprise that attended its publication in legal circles. It is also doubtful if there was ever any public hearing conducted by any of the chambers of the National Assembly to assemble and articulate the views of the general public and stakeholders over the bill before its enactment into law. If this is correct, a critical legislative stage must have been omitted.
JUSTICE ALABA OMOLAYE-AJILEYE interrogates the new law.
AN OVERVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE EVIDENCE (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2023
BY
HON. JUSTICE ALABA OMOLAYE-AJILEYE, (rtd) PhD
Introduction
Like a thunderbolt, the Evidence (Amendment) Act of 2023 emerged, streaking through the legal firmament in Nigeria with awe. The Evidence (Amendment) Act shall, where the context so admits, be referred to as the Amended Act. There must be very few lawyers who were aware of the process leading to its enactment, given the surprise that attended its publication in legal circles. It is also doubtful if there was ever any public hearing conducted by any of the chambers of the National Assembly to assemble and articulate the views of the general public and stakeholders over the bill before its enactment into law. If this is correct, a critical legislative stage must have been omitted.
The importance of a public hearing as a legislative process cannot be over-emphasised. Public hearings play a crucial role in the process of enacting laws by providing an avenue for citizens and stakeholders to express their views and concerns about the proposed legislation. This helps in ensuring transparency, accountability, and inclusivity in the legislative process. Public hearings also allow lawmakers to gather diverse perspectives, identify potential flaws, and make informed decisions that better reflect the needs and interests of the public. It also fosters public engagement, enhances the legitimacy of laws, and contributes to a more democratic and well-rounded legislative process.
From the endorsement of the Act, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR., assented to the bill on the 12th day of June 2023. It is embodied in the certification of the Act by the Clerk to the National Assembly, Sani Magaji Tambawal, that the bill was passed by the Senate on 17th May 2023, while, shockingly, the House of Representatives was said to have passed it on 22nd December 2023! Surely, there is something incongruous here.
The amendment affects eight sections of the Evidence Act, 2011 (hereinafter called the Principal Act). The affected sections are Sections 84, 93, 108, 109, 110, 119, 255, and 258 of the Principal Act. The said sections directly relate to electronic evidence in one way or another.
It is stated in the Explanatory Memorandum of the Amended Act that the amendment is intended to bring the Evidence Act, 2011 in tandem with global technological advancements. It is also made applicable to all judicial proceedings in or before courts in Nigeria. In this modern age, it is a laudable effort to attempt to bring the provisions of any law to be in harmony with modern technology. What should be of more considerable importance, however, is how to facilitate the admissibility of the evidence generated by electronic devices.
Should anyone request my views on the subject of this amendment, I would share two thoughts. First, the National Assembly stands to be commended for considering the necessity to amend Section 84 of the Evidence Act. Since 2011, when the old Evidence Act was repealed and replaced with the Evidence Act, 2011, there has been a clamour for the amendment of Section 84, arising from the complexities encountered in its application. Indeed, one major challenge to the admissibility of electronic evidence in Nigeria is the inadequacy of the provisions of Section 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011. Despite the boldness and assertiveness of the section, its provisions do not adequately address some fundamental admissibility issues. A careful study of the Amendment Act, however, shows that what the National Assembly has done in respect of Section 84 is no more than tinkering with the said section. What is required of Section 84 is not a peripheral or cursory amendment but a deep-seated legislative effort that addresses the basic underlying challenges posed by the said section to the admissibility of electronically-generated evidence. One’s excitement also dwindles against the backdrop of the discovery that the provision of Section 84(1) of the Principal Act is reframed in Section 84B of the Amended Act, without repealing Section 84(1) of the Principal Act. This has a high prospect of aggravating the intractable state of the law and its application, as it appears we now have two sets of provisions covering the same subject, one from the United Kingdom (i.e., Section 84(1) of the Principal Act), and the other from India (i.e., Section 84B of the Amended Act).
Second, I would also commend the lawmakers over the introduction of the provisions relating to electronic authentication techniques, digital signature, e-Affidavit, and e-Gazette, but would quickly add that what we have so far in the Amendment Act, is nothing but an exercise in tokenism, in the absence of e-Commerce legislation that holistically addresses electronic transaction issues once and for all.
Amendment of Section 84 (1) and Introduction of Non-obstante Clause.
Section 84(1) in its original form stipulates that a statement contained in a document produced by a computer shall be admissible in evidence if it is shown that the conditions in subsection (2) of the section are satisfied concerning the statement and the computer in question. It reads:
84(1) In any proceeding a statement contained in a document produced by a computer shall be admissible as evidence of any fact stated in it of which direct oral evidence would be admissible if it is shown that the conditions in subsection (2) of this section are satisfied in relation to the statement and computer in question.
As a way of historical background, it is to be recalled that the whole of Section 84 of the Principal Act was a reproduction of Section 5 of the UK Civil Evidence Act, 1968, and Section 69 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, 1984 of the United Kingdom (UK), PACE Act, 1984. Section 5 of the UK Civil Evidence Act[1] was repealed in 1995, that is, sixteen years before the enactment of the Evidence Act, 2011. Section 69 of the PACE Act was also repealed by Section 60 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act, 1999. That was twelve years before the enactment of the Evidence Act, 2011. It follows, therefore, that when Section 84 was incorporated into the Evidence Act, 2011, Nigeria simply adopted a provision that had already been repealed in the UK. Section 5 of the UK Civil Evidence Act was repealed following the recommendation of the UK Law Commission that the framework under which Section 5 was enacted had become outdated following developments in computer technology and that there was no need for having a different regime for computer-generated documents.[2] The UK Law Commission, therefore, recommended a presumption for admitting electronically-generated evidence, stipulating that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the court will presume that mechanical instruments or electronic devices were working in order at the material time when they were used.[3] This has remained the law in the United Kingdom to date.
While Section 84(1) remains in force, the Amended Act introduces a similar provision with a non-obstante clause in Section 84B in the following words:
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record, which is printed on a paper, stored, or recorded on optical or magnetic media or cloud computing or database produced by a computer shall be deemed to also be a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceeding, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated in it of which direct evidence would be admissible. (The words highlighted mine).
The above provision is a re-enactment of Section 65B(1) of the Indian Evidence Act 1875 (as amended). This implies that the legal framework for admissibility of electronically-generated evidence in Nigeria now, interestingly, encompasses both the repealed UK[4] and Indian[5] legal regimes.
The Scope of the Non-obstante Clause in Section 84B of the Amended Act.
What is significant in the adoption of Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act (as amended), which is now Section 84B of the Amended Act, is the introduction of the non-obstante clause: “Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act.” My first task here is to attempt to determine the scope of the clause in the new Section 84(B).
The word “notwithstanding” is defined as “without prevention or obstruction from or by”, “in spite of”[6] or, more simply, “despite”.[7] The statutory phrase ‘notwithstanding any other law’ has been explained in many cases in Nigeria, one of which is N.D.I.C. v. Okem Ent. Ltd. (2004) 10 NWLR (Pt. 880)107 paras. E-F), where the Supreme Court stated that when the term “notwithstanding” is used in a statute, it is meant “to exclude an impinging or impeding effect of any other provision of the statute or other subordinate legislation so that the section may fulfill itself.”[8] Generally, when the Legislature incorporates a non-obstante clause in a statute, it intends such a statute or section to prevail over or override any contrary law.[9] The Amended Act in Section 84B typically signals this intent but to a limited extent. Special note must be taken of the fact that the non-obstante clause in Section 84B, affects only “information contained in an electronic record which is printed…or copied…” In clear terms, the non-obstante clause enables that “any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or cloud computing or database produced by a computer shall be deemed to be ALSO a document.”[10] (Capitalised word mine).This means, it simply provides additional items such as “copies” and “printouts in optical or magnetic media or cloud computing “ to be included in the definition and proof of “document.” In short, the non-obstante clause in Section 84B of the Amended Act does not override any portion of Section 84 of the Principal Act but simply expands the scope of the meaning of “document.” And, more relevant to the admissibility issue is that the four conditions stipulated under Section 84 (2)(a-d) of the Principal Act, remain applicable to “a statement contained in a document produced by a computer” (Section 84(1) of the Principal Act) as it is to the admissibility of electronic records under Section 84B of the Amended Act with equal force. It follows that with the limited scope of the non-obstante clause in Section 84B, admissibility or proof of electronic records must follow the script of Section 84(2) of the Principal Act. In other words, a proponent of an electronic record is still required to fulfill all the conditions prescribed under Section 84(2)(a-d) of the Principal Act. For the avoidance of doubt, the phrase, “if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question” in Section 84B of the Amended Act, refers to the conditions under Section 84(2)(a-d) of the Principal Act. The direct effect of this is that our courts may still have to continue to contend with all the challenges associated with the admissibility of electronically-generated evidence under Section 84. Put more succinctly, as far as the issue of admissibility of electronically-generated evidence is concerned, Section 84B has altered nothing.
Amendment of Section 84(2) (a), (b), (c), and (d)
Section 84(2)(a) is amended by inserting the word “electronic records” after the word “document.” The amended Section 84(2)(a) now reads:
“That the document or electronic records containing the statement was produced by the computer during a period over which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period, whether for profit or not by anybody, whether corporate or not, or by any individual.
A new Section 84(2)(b) now exists as the Amended Act substitutes Section 84(2)(b) with another one. What we have as new Section 84(2)(b), however, is no more than a redraft of Section 84(2)(b) of the Principal Act with the removal of the words “information of the kind contained in the statement” and replacement of same with the words “information of the kind contained in the electronic records.” The new Section 84(2)(b) now reads:
“(b) That over that period there was regularly supplied to the computer in the ordinary course of those activities information of the kind contained in the statement or electronic records of the kind from which the information so contained is derived.
The words “electronic records” are also inserted after the words “document” and “statement” in Section 84(2)(c) and Section 84(2)(d) respectively. The same insertion of the words “electronic records” is effected in Section 84(4)(a) and (b) along with Section 84(5) after the words “document” in the two subsections.
The amendment of Section 84(2)(a),(b),(c ), and (d) by mere insertion or substitution of the words “electronic records” in the subsections may be said to be cosmetic. This is because Section 84(1) of the Principal Act already provides for the admissibility of “a statement contained in a document produced by a computer.” Section 258 defines ‘Statement’ as including “any representation of fact whether made in words or otherwise.” ‘Document’ is also widely defined under the same section as it includes amongst other things, “any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks or by more than one of these means, intended to be used or which may be used for the purpose of recording that matter.” “Computer” is defined as any device for storing and processing information. Undoubtedly, the combined effect of the definitions of “computer,” “document,” and “statement” under Section 258 of the Principal Act supports the assertion that the concept of “statement contained in a document produced by a computer,” in Section 84(1) of the Principal Act is wide enough to cover “electronic record” since electronic record must necessarily be a product of a computer. Any attempt to draw a line between “a statement contained in a document produced by a computer” and “electronic record” is a distinction without a difference.
One argument that can be advanced in favour of the inclusion of “electronic record” as an amendment to Section 84 of the Principal Act, nevertheless, is that the inclusion serves the useful purpose of simplifying the law regarding the status of electronic records, especially, with the clear definition of the term “electronic record” in Section 258 of the Amended Act as “data, record or data generated, image or sound stored, received, or sent in an electronic form or microfilm.”
Secondly, it is well-known that computerised operating systems and support systems cannot be moved to the court. The information is stored in these computers on magnetic tapes (hard discs). Electronic record produced therefrom has to be taken in the form of a printout. S.84B of the Amended Act, therefore, renders admissible, without further proof or production of the original in evidence, the printout of an electronic record contained on a magnetic media, subject to the satisfaction of the conditions mentioned in sub-section 84(2) of the Principal Act.
Information in Electronic Form – Section 84A
One of the innovations introduced by the Evidence Amendment Act, 2023 provides for recognition of electronic records. Under Section 84A, it is stated that any document which is required by law to be in writing, typewritten, or in printed form, will be considered to be valid if it is rendered or made available in electronic form and accessible for subsequent reference in the future. It is reproduced hereunder:
84A. Where any law provides that information or any other matter shall be in writing or in the typewritten or printed form, then notwithstanding anything contained in such law, such requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied if such information or matter is-
(a) rendered or made available in an electronic form; and
b) accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference.
The fact that the provision of Section 84A(a) is just finding its way into the pages of our statute book in 2023 is a reflection of how the law in this country lags behind technology. In this regard, our courts, commendably, have been proactive enough to acknowledge and recognise records in electronic format long before now, without waiting for any amendment. For instance, in Continental Sales Limited v R. Shipping Inc.[11]the Court of Appeal, as far back as 2012 (the case was decided on 26th April, 2012), accepted service of a notice of hearing through email as proper service. His Lordship Ogunwumiju, JCA, (as she then was), in respect of a computer-generated mail held thus:
“The spurious argument that the service of notice was not in writing cannot fly. Email is a form of communication that is set down in writing. It is not oral. The fact that it is electronic is immaterial. It is not in the air. It can be downloaded and as real as a hard copy of the letter or mail in your hand.”[12]
In a similar vein, the Supreme Court, in Compact Manifold & Energy Services Limited v Pazan Service Nig. Ltd[13] accepted the service of a hearing notice by the use of a short message service (SMS) as a proper service. In his lead judgment, Galinje, JSC held:
I agree with the lower court that at this age of information technology super highway, it will be foolhardy for any litigant to insist on being served with a hard copy hearing notice. Once a notice is sent to the GSM numbers supplied by the litigants, that is sufficient.[14]
In concurring with the lead judgment, Okoro, JSC., also stated: …at this age of information technology, the service of hearing notice through text message by the registrar of a court is good and sufficient notice.[15]
It is hoped that our courts will leverage Section 84A and continue with this dynamic approach to interpreting the provision of the said section by extending the magnanimity of the section to cover online transactions that dominate this current age, in the absence of e-commerce legislation. Today, contracts are formed in cyberspace and not just on papers and documents. They are also signed electronically. Where the offer and acceptance of such a contract are expressed in electronic form or through an electronic record, such contract ought, in the language of Section 84A(a), “be deemed to have satisfied the requirement” of writing. In order words, such a contract shall not be deemed to be unenforceable solely on the ground that electronic form or means was used to execute it. This is expedient, taking into account the growing reliance on electronic means for commercial transactions. In the Indian case of Trimex International FZE Ltd. Dubai v. Vedanta Aluminium,[16] the Supreme Court of India held that where the offer and acceptance had been made by the parties through e-mail the same shall not affect the implementation of such a contract.
Section 84A(b) – accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference.
The second requirement of accessibility under Section 84A(b) is desirable because of the peculiar nature of electronic evidence. It is known that electronic data is intangible, and by its very nature, transient. Thus, it is expedient to require it to be secured and be available for future reference.
Electronic and Digital Signatures
The word ‘signature’ is not a modern invention. Its meaning predates the advent of the computer age. It has always been understood as a person’s distinctive name or mark that he uses on a document.[17] Electronic signature, is, however, a product of advancement in technology. Without necessarily defining an electronic signature, Section 93(2) of the Principal Act merely acknowledges and approves the legal effect of an electronic signature as equivalent to a hand-written one. The said Section 93 is now amended by adding the words “or digital signature” after “electronic signature” in subsections 1-3 thereof. Under the Principal Act, only electronic signature is mentioned. The new Section 93(2) of the Amended Act now mentions “digital signature.” It reads:
93(2). Where a rule of evidence requires a signature or provides for certain consequences if a document is not signed; an electronic signature or digital signature satisfies that rule of law and avoids those consequences.
One significant feature of the Amended Act is the legislative attempt at defining both electronic and digital signatures. The Principal Act conspicuously omits the definition of electronic signature. In a way, this gap has been filled. Section 258 of the Amended Act defines “electronic signature” as: “authentication of any electronic record by a subscriber by means of the electronic techniques specified in the Second Schedule and includes digital signature”, while “digital signature” means an “electronically generated signature which is attached to an electronically transmitted document to verify its contents and the sender’s identity.”
Some observations can be made here. First, going by the two definitions of “electronic signature” and “digital signature” in Section 258 of the Amended Act, it may be difficult to distinguish between the two, as it is stated, that “electronic signature includes digital signature.” This also suggests that a digital signature is a form of electronic signature. Electronic signature encompasses digital signature. Second, a digital signature is further described as an “electronically generated signature”. This also tends to blur the distinction between the two terms.
There is a reference in the definition of digital signature to “electronic techniques specified in the Second Schedule.” This is curious, as neither the Principal Act nor the Amended Act exhibits any schedule to be referred to. I dare say, this is yet another evidence of a casual approach adopted in the enactment of the Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2023.
Be that as it may, The United Nations Commission on International Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law on Electronic Signatures provides a good guide in ascribing meaning to the concept of electronic signature. Nigeria, however, is yet to give favourable consideration to or adopt the Model Law which was established in 2001 for countries of the world as a model legislation to facilitate the use of electronic signatures. Article 2(a) of the UNCITRAL Model Law defines electronic signature as:
“data in electronic form in, affixed to or logically associated with, a data message, which may be used to identify the signatory in relation to the data message and to indicate the signatory’s approval of the information contained in the data message. [18]
In simple language, an electronic signature is a way of representing a signature on an electronic document. The term refers to several different methods of capturing a signature on an electronic document or device. There is no specific way or form electronic signature takes. Indeed, section 93(3) of the Principal Act, 2011 broadly states that electronic signature may be proved in any manner, including by showing that a procedure existed by which it is necessary for a person, to proceed further with a transaction to have executed a symbol or security procedure to verify that the electronic signature is that of the person.
The above points are well adumbrated in my book, Electronic Evidence, (2018. updated, 2019)[19], where it is further stated thus:
At a basic level, therefore, any mark or method that captures a person’s intent to approve or accept the contents of an electronic document constitutes an electronic signature of that individual. The nature of the mark or how it was created is not important. What is important is proving who made the mark and the fact that the document was not changed subsequently. Section 17(2) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015 places the burden of proving that the electronic signature does not belong to a purported originator of such electronic signature on the contender.
The following are some of the simple ways of affixing an electronic signature: (a) a manual signature transmitted by facsimile. This is where a handwritten signature on paper is scanned to an image and the image is placed on a document electronically,[20] (b) typing a name in a document electronically,[21] (c) using a personal identification number (PIN),[22] (d) using a password,[23] (e) biometric measurements, such as measuring a person’s physical characteristics e.g. height, weight, voice recognition, retinal scan, facial recognition, and even DNA patterns,[24] (f) biodynamic measurement[25] – series of measurements which record the behaviour of the person as he performs that action: the speed, rhythm, pattern, etc., and (g) clicking “I agree”, “I accept” [26] (h) alphanumeric string or asterisk[27] to confirm an intention to enter into online transactions, amongst other means.
In respect of digital signatures, this is more complex than the different forms of electronic signatures listed above. In a well-articulated work published in Richmond Journal of Law and Technology, Stephen E. Blythe[28], explains the various steps involved in digital signature thus:
Many laymen erroneously assume that the digital signature is merely a digitized version of a handwritten signature. This is not the case, however; the digital signature refers to the entire document. The technology used with digital signatures is known as Public Key Infrastructure, or “PKI.” The first step in utilizing this technology is to create a public-private key pair; the private key will be kept in confidence by the sender, but the public key will be available online. The second step is for the sender to digitally “sign” the message by creating a unique digest of the message and encrypting it. The third step is to attach the digital signature to the message and to send both to the recipient. The fourth step is for the recipient to decrypt the digital signature by using the sender’s public key. If decryption is possible, the recipient knows the message is authentic, i.e., that it came from the purported sender. Finally, the recipient will create a second message digest of the communication and compare it to the decrypted message digest; if they match, the recipient knows the message has not been altered. Because PKI verifies the source of a message and its contents, digital signatures are the most advantageous type of e-signature.[29]
From the foregoing, it is clear, a distinction can be drawn between electronic signature and digital signature.
Authentication of Electronic Records and Proof of Digital Signature
The Amended Act has not adopted any particular mode of digital signature for authenticating electronic records. By the combined effect of the provisions of Section 84C(1) and 2 (a) of the Amended Act, any person may authenticate an electronic record by affixing his digital signature on it or through an authentication technique that is considered reliable. A digital signature or an authentication technique will, however, only be considered reliable in any of the situations specified in Section 84C(3) (a), (b), and (c). The first situation is where the signature creation data can be linked to the signatory or the authenticator and no other person. (Section 84(c)(a) refers). A digital signature will also be considered reliable if any alteration to it after affixing such signature is detectable, and, thirdly, if any alteration to the information made after its authentication by the digital signature is detectable (Section 84C (b) and (c).
Under Section 84D of the Amended Act, if the digital signature of any person is alleged to have been affixed to an electronic record, the fact that such digital signature is the digital signature of the signatory must be proved. To prove the authenticity of the digital signature, it is sufficient to show that at the time of affixing the signature, the signature creation data was under the exclusive control of only the signatory and no other person and stored in such an exclusive manner as may be prescribed.
e-Affidavit and e-Gazette
Sections 108 and 109 of the Principal Act are amended. Section 108 (2) acknowledges affidavits electronically deposed to. A copy of such an affidavit is required to be filed in the court registry and “may” be recognised for any purpose in court. This is against section 108(1) which stipulates that an original affidavit filed “shall” be recognised for any purpose in court. It may be said that while a court must accord recognition to an original affidavit, the recognition to be accorded an e-affidavit is discretionary. Section 109 of the Amended Act also recognises affidavits deposed to through audio-visual means.
In a significant initiative, the Amended Act introduces the e-publishing of Government Gazettes. According to Section 255(2) of the Act:
Where a law provides that a rule, regulation, notification, or any other matter be published in the Federal Government Gazette, the requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied if the rule, regulation, notification, or any other matter is published in the Federal Government Gazette or Electronic Gazette.”
Electronic Gazette is defined under Section 258 of the Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2023 as an “official Gazette published in electronic form.” Government Gazettes reflect official publications of all enactments, rules, regulations, notices, and acts of Government. Gazettes validate and authenticate various kinds of Acts, Laws, Rules, Orders, and Government decisions. With e-Gazettes, accessibility to government activities and publications will be highly enhanced.
Power of the Minister of Justice to Make Rules
Section 255(1) of the Amendment Act confers a discretionary power on the Minister of Justice, who is also currently, the Attorney-General of the Federation to “make regulations generally prescribing further conditions with respect to admissibility of any class of evidence that may be relevant under this Act.” Reference to “any class of evidence” in this subsection will undoubtedly include electronic evidence which, in recent times, has emerged as a genre of evidence in a class of its own. The extent to which the exercise of this power can go in filling the legislative gap of making the laws of the country keep pace with technological advancement is debatable. This leads me to the conclusion of the matter and why I consider the Amended Act an exercise in tokenism.
Conclusion
As of today, there is a total absence of a comprehensive legislative framework for electronic commerce in Nigeria. The National Assembly has a noble duty to perform here to urgently do something to arrest this unpleasant situation. All over the world, due to the growing use of technology, laws are being enacted to protect customers and consumers who engage in e-commerce or online transactions. Sadly, there is none in existence in Nigeria. This is despite the deliberate efforts of international organizations to assist member nations in drafting model laws for them to domesticate. Incidentally, Nigeria belongs to quite a number of these international organisations.
For instance, as far back as 1996, the United Nations Organization (UNO) drafted the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Model Law[30] on Commerce to assist member nations in framing legislation that would enable and facilitate e-transactions. The Model Law also covers a wide range of subjects, such as legal recognition of data messages, admissibility and evidential weight of data messages, retention of data messages, recognition of data messages etc. In the year 2000, Law Ministers and Attorney-Generals of Commonwealth jurisdictions at their meeting for the year recognized that common law rules of evidence were not adequate to deal with technological advancement in the world and felt the need to modernise same. An Expert Group was constituted which, ultimately, came up with a draft of the Commonwealth Model Law on Electronic Evidence which member countries were encouraged to adopt to meet new technological possibilities. Virtually all nations around Nigeria have taken advantage of the existence of the Model Laws to enact their domestic legislation to take care of electronic transactions.
For instance, following the availability of these Model Laws, South Africa, in 2002, enacted Electronic Communication and Transactions Act, in conformity with the UNCITRAL Model Law on Commerce. In 2008, Ghana enacted the Electronic Transactions Act (722), 2008, which is an adaptation of the UNCITRAL Model Law. Kenya enacted the Electronic Transactions Act in 2007 and the Information and Communication Act in 2008. Zambia enacted her Electronic and Communications and Transactions Act in 2009. Tanzania enacted the Tanzania Electronic Transactions Act in 2015. Regrettably, Nigeria, as of the time of writing, has yet to enact its law on electronic transactions.
Nigeria should not be satisfied with the Evidence (Amendment) Act, 2023 whose provisions are a far cry from the UNCITRAL Model Law and its Commonwealth counterpart. It is hoped that the National Assembly will urgently address this issue to place Nigeria on the same pedestal as other nations of the world that are evolving their laws in line with technological advancements.
[1] Section 84 is also substantially the same as the repealed Section 69 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, 1984 of the United Kingdom, otherwise known as PACE Act, 1984.The said section was repealed by Section 60 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999.
[30] The UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce was adopted by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) in 1996 in furtherance of its mandate to promote the harmonization and unification of international trade law, so as to remove unnecessary obstacles to international trade.
Justice Omolaye-Ajileye is a retired judge of the Kogi State High Court. He is affiliated to Baze University, Abuja
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Chairman of the 2023 Nigerian Bar Association Annual General Conference Planning Committee, Mazi Afam Osigwe SAN has lauded the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Garki and Lokoja branches on their 2023 Law Week.
MAZI AFAM OSIGWE, SAN FELICITATES NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION GARKI BRANCH ON THE OCCASION OF THE 2023 LAW WEEK
I extend my warmest greetings to you on the occasion of your Law Week, themed “Keeping the Pace.” It is truly inspiring to witness your dedication to upholding the principles of justice and the rule of law in our society.
Your commitment to excellence in the legal profession is commendable, and I do not doubt that this week’s events will be both enlightening and enriching. As you deliberate on the theme of “Keeping the Pace,” may you find new ways to adapt to the ever-evolving legal landscape and continue to champion justice for all.
I wish you a successful and productive Law Week, filled with insightful discussions, networking opportunities, and a renewed sense of purpose in serving our community.
Warm regards,
Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN Chairman, 2023 Nigerian Bar Association Annual General Conference Planning Committee
MAZI AFAM OSIGWE, SAN FELICITATES NIGERIAN BAR ASSOCIATION LOKOJA BRANCH ON THE OCCASION OF THE 2023 LAW WEEK
I extend my warmest greetings to you on the occasion of your Law Week with the theme “True Democracy and the Role of Legal Practitioners in Nigeria.”
Your commitment to upholding the principles of democracy and the invaluable contributions of legal practitioners in Nigeria is truly commendable. In a nation where the rule of law is paramount, your dedication to justice and fairness is essential.
I believe that this Law Week will serve as a platform to engage in meaningful discussions, share knowledge, and further strengthen the legal profession’s pivotal role in the development of Nigeria’s democracy. Your efforts in promoting justice, equality, and accountability are integral to a thriving society.
I wish you a successful and insightful Law Week, filled with enlightening discussions and meaningful connections. May your endeavors continue to shape a more just and democratic Nigeria.
Warm regards,
Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN Chairman, 2023 Nigerian Bar Association Conference Planning Committee
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) has described as “shocking and greatly disappointing” the alleged role played by the Minister of Women Affairs, Barr. Uju Kennedy Ohanenye in the ongoing investigation of suspended Dean of Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, Prof. Cyril Osim Ndifon.
Ohanenye has come under a barrage of criticisms from critics for allegedly discouraging “survivors” in the sexual harassment scandal from testifying before the probe panel instituted by the university authority.
In a statement obtained by CITY LAWYER, the global women’s rights body stated that “The Minister of Women Affairs, Barr. Uju Kennedy Ohanenye, by her professional calling and the expectations of her ministerial office, owes a duty of leading the charge towards protecting women from all acts of abuse, including encouraging and supporting victims of sexual and gender-based violence to break the culture of silence and get justice, hence the alleged distasteful manner in which she interrogated the vulnerable and possibly traumatized students is shocking and greatly disappointing.”
Signed by its Country Vice President/National President, FIDA Nigeria, Mrs. Amina Suzanah Agbaje, FIDA also stated that it “totally condemns the alleged sexual harassment of female students by the embattled Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, Prof. Cyril Osim Ndifon as reported recently in various news platforms.”
The full statement reads:
SEXUAL HARASSMENT OF FEMALE STUDENTS AS AN INSIDIOUS FORM OF GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE MUST BE STOPPED!!!
FIDA Nigeria strongly condemns in its entirety and in the strongest terms possible, all forms of gender-based violence against women, particularly those against female students in secondary and tertiary institutions by staff of the institutions, such as teachers and lecturers. In this vein, FIDA Nigeria totally condemns the alleged sexual harassment of female students by the embattled Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, Prof. Cyril Osim Ndifon as reported recently in various news platforms.
We vehemently denounce these acts as vile and an ugly menace that must be eradicated from our institutions of learning, and our society at large. Students are in school to be educated and must be guided and protected while learning, not to be intimidated and taken advantage of because of their vulnerability and/or gender.
It is alarming that sexual harassment of females particularly in tertiary institutions has assumed a perilously critical dimension, constituting a horrifying kind of violence targeted at violating the fundamental human rights of a person. It is a form of sexual victimization of an individual using unequal power relations. This pandemic is so vile and encompasses acts revolving around explicit or implicit sexual overtures including unwelcome sexual remarks or physical advances, and inappropriate promises of reward in exchange for sexual favours in the workplace, professional or social setting amongst others.
These acts have been criminalized by the Violence Against Persons Prohibition (VAPP) Act 2015 and indeed, the extant VAPP Law of Cross Rivers State. Being that the state and all persons of goodwill are under a duty to give effect to these statutory provisions against all forms of violence, including desisting from aiding and/or abetting of same in any manner or to any degree, FIDA Nigeria therefore unequivocally condemns the alleged intimidation of some of the students who bravely spoke up on the alleged Ndifon’s case, currently under investigation.
The Minister of Women Affairs, Barr. Uju Kennedy Ohanenye, by her professional calling and the expectations of her ministerial office, owes a duty of leading the charge towards protecting women from all acts of abuse, including encouraging and supporting victims of sexual and gender-based violence to break the culture of silence and get justice, hence the alleged distasteful manner in which she interrogated the vulnerable and possibly traumatized students is shocking and greatly disappointing.
FIDA Nigeria is keenly observing, and shall not hesitate to proceed against such perpetrators, and all persons or individuals who support such acts of violence either by their utterances or actions/ inaction, or who may try to suppress the reportage of these sort of violence meted out to persons. We remain steadfast on our mandate to protect, promote, and preserve the rights of vulnerable women and children using the instrumentality of law, strongly supporting and standing behind all survivors of violence of any kind, including those of sexual harassment and all forms of gender-based violence, and encouraging them to speak up on these crimes as their voices are meant to be heard, and justice delivered for the crimes perpetrated against them.
In conclusion, as the probe panel constituted to further investigate all facets of this case against the embattled Dean Prof C. Ndifon continue in their task, FIDA Nigeria is closely monitoring the proceedings and shall not stand by and watch perpetrators and supporters of these heinous crimes whether highly placed or not, harass, cower, intimidate, badger, suppress and or attempt to wriggle their way out of facing justice and shall follow this matter intently to ensure that justice is gotten at the end of the day, as no one is above the law.
Therefore, we call on the Government, NAPTIP, Law Enforcement Agencies, Civil Society Organizations, and indeed everyone to stand up against this scourge that has slowly crept into the fabric of our nation and ensure that all forms of violence in whatever form it presents itself is stopped!!
We also call on all Students to Stand Tall and Speak their Truth!
Signed
Amina Suzanah Agbaje, (Mrs.) Country Vice President/National President FIDA Nigeria
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.
Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf of Kano State has sacked the Commissioner who threatened judges presiding over governorship elections petition tribunal in the state.
CITY LAWYER recalls that in a video which has gone viral on social media, Commissioner of Land and Physical Planning, Adamu Kibiya, was heard asking the judges to choose between their lives and their work while delivering judgement.
“People voted for us and some people are attempting to do injustice. We want to tell the judges that we will not accept this. Any judge that is willing to deprive us of our rights will regret it. Whatever will happen, we won’t care…,” he had said during a protest organised by members of the ruling New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) in the state.
But while addressing journalists at Government House, Kano, on Friday, Commissioner of Information, Baba Halilu Dantiye, said the governor had directed the immediate dismissal of Kibiya.
Dantiye added that the governor had also approved the sack of his Special Adviser on Youth and Sports, Aliyu Yusuf Imam, popularly known as ‘Ogan Boye’ over unguarded utterances.
Oga Boye was reported to have made “unguarded and disrespectful statements against Vice-President Kashim Shettima.
The commissioner for information said the utterances made by the Kibiya and Oga Boye do not represent the position of the State Government.
“While condemning the unfortunate threat to the Judges and the disrespect shown to the VP, we wish to make it categorically clear that the views expressed do not represent the official position of the State Government under the leadership of His Excellency Alh Abba Kabir Yusuf.”
“It is important to emphasise that neither of the two officials have any clearance to speak on behalf of government and none of them serves as official spokesperson of the government.
“Kano State Government under HE Abba Kabir Yusuf holds the judiciary in very high esteem and expresses tremendous amount of respect to justices and all judicial officers. Beside the good understanding between the government and people of Kano State and Vice President Kashim Shettima, the Kano State Governor HE Alh. Abba Kabir Yusuf deeply respects the person and office of the Vice President His Excellency Alh. Kashim Shettima GCON and will not condone any lota of disrespect on the Vice President or any other Nigerian leader.
The government has also directed that, henceforth, no official of government should speak on any matter outside the purview of their MDAs without express clearance and permission.
“Henceforth, Unguarded and inflammatory statements will not be condoned. The Ministry of Information is directed to ensure that all media outlets in the state especially radio stations are complying with the extant guidelines provided by regulatory agencies.”
“While expressing our faith in the judicial process, believing very strangly that justice will prevail at all the levels of judicial processes, the Kano State Government wishes to call on all residents in the state to remain law-abiding and continue to go about their normal businesses without any hindrances”, the commissioner added.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Minister of Women Affairs, Bar. Uju Kennedy Ohanenye has warned that she would “jail” anyone who engages in perjury in the ongoing investigation of suspended Dean of Faculty of Law, University of Calabar, Prof. Cyril Ndifon.
In a statement she made available to CITY LAWYER, the minister “insisted on the need for justice to be vigorously pursued towards resolving the on-going sex scandal at the University of Calabar.”
According to the minister who had come under a barrage of criticisms from activists for allegedly dissuading some of the alleged sexual harassment victims from testifying, “Whoever that lies on the Calabar sexual case will go to jail. I will personally sue the person and jail he or she, whether the Vice Chancellor, Professor or the alleged victim.”
The statement was accompanied by a video where the minister restated her resolve not to spare anyone who gives false testimony at the hearing.
Ohanenye had told CITY LAWYER in an earlier interview that the First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu has waded into the matter, vowing that justice must be done.
Meanwhile, the Nigerian Bar Association Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL) has urged Ohanenye to refrain from alleged tampering with witnesses in the matter, saying: “SPIDEL vehemently condemns this blatant abuse of power by Minister Uju Kennedy Ohanenye which has culminated in the harassment and exploitation of young law students at the institution. We view this not just as a simple Ministerial failing, but recognize it as an issue of professional misconduct and a reflection of broader societal challenges that must be addressed promptly and effectively.
“SPIDEL calls for a thorough and impartial investigation into these allegations and insists on accountability, transparency, and appropriate action to address this deeply concerning matter. We stress that the reputation of the legal community, the rights of the victims, all other students, and the integrity of the investigative panel are at stake.”
In a statement made available to CITY LAWYER and signed by Mr. John Aikpokpo-Martins and Ms. Funmi Adeogun, its Chairman and Secretary respectively, the body urged the University of Calabar, the Nigerian Police, and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission (ICPC) “to conduct a comprehensive and impartial investigation into these allegations of misconduct, sexual harassment, and abuse of office so that the matter will be settled once and for all.”
It noted that the allegations against Ndifon “not only compromise the integrity of legal education but also infringe upon the rights and well-being of the affected individuals. SPIDEL states that it is disheartening that allegations of this nature have persisted against Prof. Ndifon for years.”
The NBA-SPIDEL “empathizes with the students who have shown immense bravery in coming forward to share their experiences and calls for their protection and support throughout this process. We also urge the University of Calabar to stay focused on conducting a fair and transparent investigation, ensuring that all parties involved have the opportunity to be heard.”
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has resolved to sue the Lagos State University Teaching Hospital (LASUTH) and Evercare Hospital in Lekki, Lagos over the death of its member, Late Mrs. Ijeoma Chizoma Oparanozie.
The lawsuit will be spearheaded by one of its sections, the NBA Section on Public Interest and Development Law (NBA-SPIDEL).
The 40-year-old corporate lawyer and her niece were fatally wounded when their car was hit by a somersaulting vehicle around ELF axis in Lekki, Lagos. Her six-year-old son narrowly escaped death with head injuries. She will be buried today at Umugakwo, Umuoba Uratta, Owerri North local council of Imo State after a requiem service.
In a notice obtained by CITY LAWYER, fiery human rights activist and Chairman of NBA-SPIDEL, Mr. John Aikpokpo-Martins recalled that the Section dispatched a three-member fact-finding team to Lagos for a discreet investigation of the matter, adding that “We shall be empaneling a legal team to institute an action as soon as possible.”
Noting that “The committee just turned in its report this morning,” he urged “members from Lagos to please volunteer,” adding: “We sincerely appreciate members of the fact-finding committee, Ms. Obi Ajegbo, George Nwabunike, and Adekunle Adeniyi, who are automatically co-opted to the legal team.”
CITY LAWYER recalls that Oparanozie died in controversial circumstances, with the family alleging medical negligence.
Mrs. Chinwe Chiazor, the elder sister of the deceased, told CITY LAWYER that though Evercare Hospital did medical investigation which indicated that the deceased needed urgent surgery, it took hours deliberating on payment and refused to perform the surgery unless it received a N10 million fee for both patients. According to Chiazor, though the N10 million was later paid, the hospital then raised the fee to N30 million.
The family also claimed that following the transfer of the deceased to LASUTH after negotiations broke down at Evercare, the medical team also failed to give the deceased any medical attention for almost four hours.
When CITY LAWYER contacted Evercare Hospital via its verified telephone number, one Robertson directed our Correspondent to send an email to the hospital “on your letterheaded paper and our Legal Team will respond if necessary.” LASUTH could not be reached for a response at the time of going to press.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
In this article, MR. M. T. MOHAMMED, the immediate past Chairman of Nigerian Bar Association Kaduna Branch, argues that NBA President, Mr. Yakubu Maikyau SAN has discharged his mandate creditably, urging aggrieved National Officers to resolve disputes through constructive dialogue and adherence to established norms
In the midst of internal disputes and controversies within the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), there emerges a need to scrutinize the actions and statements of key national officers – the 3rd Vice President and the Treasurer. As the immediate past Chairman of a branch and a close observer of these developments, I feel compelled to delve into the details of these issues and provide an objective analysis. While I am not advocating for the President or taking sides in these matters, my proximity to these national officers and the evidence at hand allows me to offer a comprehensive perspective.
UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT Let us begin by examining the situation with the 3rd Vice President, who recently penned an article titled “SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT.” In this piece, she expressed her disappointment in not being included in the Conference Planning Committee and alleged a lack of representation at the Annual General Conference (AGC). Her grievances revolve around a perceived sense of entitlement – the belief that she should have a seat at the table.
The 3rd Vice President’s lamentations about not being part of committees raise an important question: Should national officers be content with their roles, or is there a legitimate need for them to seek additional responsibilities? The NBA Constitution, in fact, does not mandate the President to include national officers in the Conference Planning Committee, though it may be beneficial for collaboration. The National Executive Council (NEC) approved the President’s selection, effectively resolving any disputes about committee membership. It is perplexing why the issue of the 3rd Vice President’s inclusion in the committee has gained such prominence, especially in the absence of demonstrated exceptional organizational skills.
Furthermore, the 3rd Vice President’s claim of having no knowledge of the conference plans is contradicted by pictorial evidence that shows all national officers attending a briefing session. During this session, the Alternate Chair of the Conference Planning Committee provided extensive information and addressed concerns raised by the national officers. The assertion of ignorance appears to be a falsehood, casting doubt on the Vice President’s credibility.
PROTOCOL AND PETTINESS At the same briefing session, a rather petty dispute emerged among the national officers regarding the order of mention in titles. One Vice President took offense when the Alternate Chair referred to the national officers as “Honourable GS and other national officers.” This incident highlights the recurring issue of protocol within the NBA, where the order of precedence has been a subject of contention. It is worth noting that these matters should ideally be reserved for formal gatherings.
QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP The quality of leadership within the NBA has also come under scrutiny, particularly regarding the conduct and language used by the 3rd Vice President. While she claimed to represent herself and other national officers whose responsibilities she believes are being usurped, she failed to show restraint in her choice of words. Referring to colleagues as “ass-licking Officers” is not only derogatory but also unbecoming of a high-ranking officer in the association. This type of language is not in line with the standards of professionalism and civility that should be upheld.
THE “FAMILIARIZATION TOUR” CONTROVERSY Shifting our focus to the contentious issue of the “familiarization tour,” it is important to note that the 3rd Vice President embarked on this tour without the President’s approval. The President, citing his interpretation of the NBA’s constitution, made it clear that he would not endorse or finance such trips unless there was a crisis. The President’s stance is consistent with the constitution, which does not mention “familiarisation tours.”
The question arises: Why did the 3rd Vice President proceed with the tour against the President’s explicit instructions? The President’s interpretation aligns with NBA practice, and there is no precedent for familiarization tours in the association’s history. This move by the Vice President can be viewed as insubordination, even when considering her own account of events.
It is essential to respect the President’s interpretation of the constitution and the established norms of the NBA. The National Executive Council (NEC) would likely prefer to uphold the President’s viewpoint on this matter.
UNDERSTANDING THE DUTIES OF NATIONAL OFFICERS To clarify any misconceptions, it is crucial to note that issues related to Human Rights do not fall under the purview of the 3rd Vice President, as claimed in her article. The NBA Constitution clearly outlines the duties of the 3rd Vice President, which do not encompass Human Rights matters.
Additionally, the role of the 2nd Vice President in coordinating branches under their jurisdiction, as exemplified during the author’s tenure as Chairman, illustrates that such coordination can occur effectively without the need for familiarization tours. Modern communication tools like phone calls and WhatsApp platforms suffice to coordinate branches in the absence of crises.
PRESIDENT’S DISCRETION AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS National Officers must remember that the NBA Constitution grants the President the discretion to assign additional responsibilities to any officer. The President’s decision to assign duties to an officer is based on their capacity and competency. Those who believe the President wields too much power have the option to initiate constitutional amendments. It is important to note that the President is not responsible for the constitutional framework but rather operates within the parameters defined by the constitution.
THE DISAPPOINTING TREASURER Turning our attention to the Treasurer of the Association, it is evident that she holds one of the most critical roles among national officers. The Treasurer’s duties, as outlined in the NBA Constitution, are extensive and encompass a wide range of responsibilities, including financial management.
Unfortunately, the Treasurer’s performance has fallen short of expectations. Her duties extend beyond the preparation of financial reports, yet she appears to limit her role to this aspect. Furthermore, the Treasurer has demonstrated a misunderstanding of her role by insisting on her consent for financial transactions and refusing to sign reports that she did not prepare. Such actions seem to be motivated by a desire for personal gain, as she aims to contest for another national office in 2024.
NEGLECTED DUTIES AND A LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY The Treasurer’s failure to fulfill several key duties outlined in the constitution is a matter of concern. These include ensuring that branch members pay their annual practicing fees, compiling and circulating lists of fee payment statuses, and presenting quarterly management reports to the National Executive Council. The absence of these essential functions raises questions about accountability and adherence to constitutional obligations.
CONCLUSION It is essential for all national officers to uphold the highest standards of professionalism, civility, and adherence to the NBA Constitution. Disagreements and disputes should be resolved through constructive dialogue and adherence to established norms and procedures.
I plead with the 3rd Vice President and the Treasurer (indeed all national Officers) to cooperate and support our amiable President, Yakubu Chonoko Maikyau OON, SAN in his giant stride and in his determination to reposition and transform NBA. We are all living witnesses to his remarkable achievements within one year in office. The medical outreach alone (among others) introduced as part of the annual conference in collaboration with Kebbi State Government is a wonderful experience which put smile on the faces of many and relief to many deserving members and the less privileged among the citizens. This was achieved at no cost to the NBA. This isn’t the first laudable project the President has implemented at no cost to the NBA. For the first time in the history of NBA, NEC meeting was held in Kebbi, Kebbi State at no cost to the NBA. NBA President should not be distracted.
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the official stance of the Nigerian Bar Association.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
I am delighted to extend my heartfelt congratulations to you on the monumental occasion of the launch of your 2023 endowment initiative, “Igbo Apprenticeship System: A Panacea For Mentorship Growth And Development In The Legal Professional.” This is an extraordinary endeavor that not only underscores your unwavering commitment to the legal profession but also promises to have a transformative impact on the broader legal community.
Your visionary approach to fostering mentorship and professional development within the legal sphere is both commendable and timely. The Igbo Apprenticeship System, as you’ve aptly named it, stands as a beacon of hope and guidance for aspiring legal professionals, offering them a structured path to success.
Your dedication to this cause and your tireless efforts in ensuring its realization deserve the highest praise. You have poured your heart and soul into crafting a program that will nurture the next generation of legal luminaries. Through mentorship, guidance, and your profound expertise, you are sowing the seeds of excellence within the legal community, paving the way for future achievements and breakthroughs.
This endowment launch is not just a celebration of your hard work; it is a celebration of your vision, your leadership, and your unyielding belief in the power of mentorship. It serves as an inspiration to us all, reminding us of the significant impact that one individual can make in shaping the future of an entire profession.
As you embark on this transformative journey, may your passion continue to burn brightly, and may the Igbo Apprenticeship System flourish, leaving an indelible mark on the legal landscape. Your contributions to the legal profession are invaluable, and I do not doubt that your initiative will be a resounding success.
Once again, congratulations, Otu-Oka Iwu, Abuja, on this momentous achievement. Your dedication to mentorship, growth, and development in the legal profession is a source of pride and inspiration to us all. I eagerly look forward to witnessing the profound impact of your endeavors in the years to come.
Warmest regards,
Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
In this article, ace Judicial Editor HENRY OJELU tracks the humble beginnings and meteoric rise of the newly sworn-in Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Lawal Pedro SAN and concludes that his recent appointment as the Chief Law Officer of Nigeria’s commercial capital is a fitting reward for hard work and diligence
In 1987, Mr. Lawal Mohammed Alade Pedro, SAN, was just an ordinary State Counsel (Level 8 Civil Servant) in the Lagos State Ministry of Justice. Fresh from the prestigious Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria with a 2nd Class Upper Degree in Law and the Nigerian Law School, his initial plan was to spend just two years in the Ministry and move back to private practice.
That plan was however put on a pause button as the young hardworking Lagos boy applied his heart to the job and rose to become the Solicitor-General of Lagos State and Permanent Secretary Ministry of Justice in 2008.
In the same year, he was conferred with the prestigious rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN. He thereby became the first State Counsel in the Public or Civil Service of Lagos and any State in the Federation of Nigeria to be conferred with the rank of SAN.
Today September 13, 2023, His Excellency Babajide Sanwo-Olu the Governor of Lagos State appointed him as the Attorney General and Commissioner of Justice. Again, the first of his kind to rise from State Counsel to become Commissioner in the same Ministry. Pedro’s rise is indeed a story of hard work, perseverance and dedication to duty. No doubt, he deserves an award or honour for this feat.
ROYAL BLOOD Born on October 6, 1961 in the Brazilian Quarters Area of Lagos Island to the families of Libento Momo Pedro and Ojutiku-Ewunmi-Oshodi and Ambose Branch of Akinsemoyin Royal Family of Lagos, Pedro attended the Christ Church Cathedral Primary School, Broad Street, Lagos from 1966 to 1972.
He proceeded to Anwar-Ul-Islam College formerly (Ahmadiyya College) Agege Lagos (1973 -1979) and Methodist Boys High School, Lagos (1980 -1981) where he obtained his West African School Certificate and Higher School Certificate respectively.
FIRST TASTE OF LAW PRACTICE Upon graduation from the Ahmadu Bello University in 1985, Pedro attended the Nigerian Law School and was called to Bar in 1986. He had his mandatory National Youth Service, NYSC, from 1986-1987 as a Legal Officer in the Ibadan Western Regional Office of First Bank of Nigeria Plc. Thereafter he cut his teeth as a Barrister in the famous Chambers of Dele Akinmusuti & Co. which had offices in Ibadan and Lagos.
PASSION FOR SERVICE When Pedro joined the Lagos State Ministry of Justice in December 1987, one of his major goals was to master the law and its application in upholding justice and equity. While some of his privileged contemporaries settled for less tasking roles, Pedro crisscrossed virtually all the directorates in the Lagos Ministry of Justice where he acquired knowledge and experience.
As a young State Counsel, Pedro was always among the first to resume duty and the last to leave office. He never rejected any file or posting or saw any extra task as too demanding. Within a few years of joining the Ministry, the files of his many successful litigations in court on behalf of the Lagos State Government was already attracting the attention of his bosses.
Aside from his personal case records, Pedro also made very huge contributions to the successful litigation of many landmark cases by successive Attorneys-General that headed the Ministry. These efforts earned him well deserved promotions culminating in him being appointed as Head of Civil Litigation Department in 2001. Pedro also led the team that successfully prosecuted the alleged killer of Mrs. Kudirat Abiola, wife of the acclaimed winner of the 1993 Presidential election, Chief Moshood Abiola.
As Director of Civil Litigation for many years, Pedro handled many cases that involved the State Government including land matters and administration which formed bulk of the cases litigated upon, resolved and settled in collaboration with the Lands Bureau. He was also a member of the State Land Excision Committee.
FLOODS OF RECOGNITIONS In recognition of his exceptional hard work and dedication to duty, Pedro was elevated ahead of his seniors at the Bar and Service in the Justice Ministry to the position of Solicitor-General and Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Justice in 2008.
As a further validation of him deserving more than just a promotion in the Ministry, Pedro was awarded the prestigious rank of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria in December 2008.
OUTSTANDING SERVICE UNDER THREE ATTORNEYS-GENERAL Pedro had the rare privilege to have served under three Attorneys- General of Lagos State. When former Vice President, Prof Yemi Osinbajo, SAN was Attorney-General of the State, Pedro was his Director of Civil Litigation and recorded many landmark victories in court on behalf of the state government.
When Mr. Olasupo Shasore, SAN, took over the office, Pedro was his Solicitor-General. As Solicitor-General to Shasore, Pedro was among the team that came up with lofty programmes in the Ministry, some of which are pathfinders for other states.
When Mr. Adela Ipaye also became an Attorney-General, Pedro was his Solicitor-General and Permanent Secretary. Under Ipaye, Pedro amongst other things, fought for retention of vote of charge known as ‘State Cases and Brief’ in which cases involving the Lagos State government were expeditiously prosecuted.
RICH RESUME OF OTHER SUNDRY DUTIES Pedro served in various committees on Physical planning and urban development in the State. He was responsible for most of the litigations in courts on Physical Planning matters and policy. As Solicitor-General of the State, he was a statutory member of State/Local Government Joint Account Committee (JAC).
As Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Justice he was responsible for processing the clearance for appointment of Obas and other Traditional Chiefs in the State for the Attorney-General before the Governor’s approval. He also served as a member of the State Business Ways and Means Committee aimed at improving service delivery and efficiency by reducing the cost and time of doing business in Lagos State.
SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER Although Pedro was working for the Lagos State Government, he was never afraid to stand his ground when he believed that the government was wrong or liable in any legal dispute. He was never afraid to speak truth to power. One instance of this rare disposition of a government officer was when Justice Habib Abiru who is now at the Court of Appeal delivered a judgment against the Lagos State Government. Being the Director of Civil Litigation at the time, Pedro was directed to appeal the judgment but he insisted that there was no basis for appeal because that would be a waste of taxpayers’ money.
President Bola Tinubu, who then was the Governor of Lagos State and an ardent respecter of the rule of law, with the support of the Attorney General at the time, accepted his decision. Pedro suggested to the state government to find another solution to the problem because there was no basis for clogging the court system with an appeal that he knew was dead on arrival.
Another instance of Pedro’s stand for justice irrespective of whose side he is on, was when the Ministry of Justice introduced the Community Service Scheme. A seminar was recommended to be held on a week-day for magistrates to understand the scheme -a situation that would have required that the entire magistrate court in the state be shut down.
Pedro vehemently kicked against the date for the conference and insisted that it was unwise to hold it on a day that would have made the Judiciary close down the whole of the Magistrate court, especially because some inmates of correctional centres could have a call over, and if the magistrates did not sit on that day, persons presumed innocent would still have to be returned to custody. Although some persons in government grumbled over his position, the then Chief Judge agreed with him, and the event was held on a Saturday. Many other instances abound where Pedro proved himself as not just a proponent of the rule of rule for the transformation of the society but one who stands by the truth and does what is right at all times.
MEDIATION EXPERT, AUTHOR Pedro is not just a regular law practitioner, he is also a Fellow, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Nigeria and was an examiner of the Institute and a Certified Mediator. He is also avid writer an author of law books, prominent amongst his publication is a book titled “Jurisdiction of Courts in Nigeria” which is currently a bestseller in Nigeria.
ACTIVE ROLE IN PARTY POLITICS As a member of All Progressives Conference, APC, Pedro served as the Legal Director in the Independent Campaign Group (ICG) of the party in 2019 and again in 2023 as the Legal Director in the Independent Campaign Council (ICC) of the party in Lagos State for the election of Tinubu/Shettima and Sanwo-Olu/ Hamzat. He was the immediate past Chairman of the Appeal Panel for the Local Government Primary Election in Lagos State.
RETURN TO BASE With Pedro’s return to the Lagos State Ministry of Justice as Attorney-General and Commissioner of Justice after eight years of successful adventure to pursue the private practice dream his paused, Lagosians can be rest assured that the right man with the drive to dispense justice and equity to all, is in full charge of the very crucial department of government. As one who was among the team that laid the foundation for the many law reforms and innovations that Lagos State is witnessing today, Pedro is definitely coming to office knowing quite well what he is coming to do. He is a tested and trusted hand and will surely ensure justice for all.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee has released a shortlist of 69 applicants for award of the coveted rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).
The LPPC is now inviting the public to raise possible petitions against any of the shortlisted applicants.
Some of the names on the 69-man shortlist include Folashade Abosede Alli, Abiola Isiaq Oyebanji, Bomo Olakunle Agbebi, 7. Daniel Osinach Uruakpa, Felix Ota Offia, Lawrence Bankole Falade, Kingsley Osabuohein Obamogie amongst others.
According to a notice obtained by CITY LAWYER, the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC) by this notice announced the shortlisting of Applicants who qualified after the Advocates 1st and 2nd Filtration Stages, Academic pre-qualification, Academic 2nd filtration Exercise, the Independent Appeals Hearing and Chambers Inspection Exercise.
The final stage of the process will see the LPPC interview the applicants before announcing a final shortlist of awardees for the 2023 conferment exercise.
“All qualified shortlisted Applicants are graded under two-category systems by the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee, namely Advocates and Academic Applicants respectively.
The shortlisted Applicants in the two categories are follows:
SHORTLISTED ADVOCATE APPLICANTS IN ORDER OF SENIORITY AT THE BAR
1 FELIX OTA OFFIA, ESQ
LAWRENCE BANKOLE FALADE, ESQ KINGSLEY OSABUOHEIN OBAMOGIE, ESQ FOLASHADE ABOSEDE ALLI, ESQ ABIOLA ISIAQ OYEBANJI, ESQ BOMO OLAKUNLE AGBEBI, ESQ DANIEL OSINACH URUAKPA, ESQ OSELOKA GODWIN OSUIGWE, ESQ BABATUND E ADEOYE, ESQ BABSEYI SIGISMUND JOSEPH, ESQ EMMANUEL MOSES ENOIDEM, ESQ KEHINDE OLUFEMI AINA, ESQ NGOZI CHIDO OLEHI, ESQ AARON CHILEOKWU OKOROMA, ESQ IBRAHIM DALHATU ANGULU, ESQ OLAYIWOLA EMMANUE L AFOLABI, ESQ SULE SHU’AIBU,ESQ ABIODUN OLANREWAJU OLALERU, ESQ ALFRED OLUFEMI ATTEH, ESQ KAZEEM ADEKUNL E SOBALOJU, ESQ SHEHU WADAABDULLAHI, ESQ BAMIDELE IBIRONKE OLAWOYE,ESQ OLUWASEYILAYO AKINKUNMI OJO, ESQ FUNMI FALANA, ESQ FELIX TAMARA UDENKE MEFA OKOROTIE, ESQ OLUWAGBENGA SEUN AJAYI, ESQ FRIDAY RAMSES AKU ONOJA, ESQ JOHN AGADA ELACHI, ESQ BOLA RAZAQ GOLD, ESQ PAUL KASIMANU WAMAD UEMENE, ESQ RAFIU OYEYEMI BALOGUN, ESQ OLUWOLE ALADEDOYE, ESQ PAUL YN OSOBHASE ABHULIMEN, ESQ JONATHAN TAIDI GUNU, ESQ TOCHUKWU JUDE ONYIUKE, ESQ OLUKAYODE ABRAHAM AJULO, ESQ CHRISTPHER ADAPAR UMAR , ESQ CHIBUEZE OGECHI OGBONNA,ESQ YEMI ADEWALE M’SBAUDEEN ADESINA, ESQ OMOYEMI LATEEF AKANGBE, ESQ OLUMIDE AKIN WALE OLUJINMI , ESQ MUSA ADAMU ALIYU, ESQ FIDELIS CHUK WUNONYE MBADUGHA, ESQ ONYEMAECHI CHKWUDI ADIUKWU, ESQ IKECHUKWU PHILIP ONUOMA, ESQ YAKUBU PHILEMON, ESQ JOHNNY UGWUGWAYE AGIM, ESQ ALIYU LEMU IBRAHIM, ESQ 49 . ISAIAH BOZIMO, ESQ
PRISCA OZOILOESIKE, ESQ YAHAYA DAN’ASABE DANGANA, ESQ ADEOLA OLUWASEUN ADEDIPE, ESQ ADEDAYO SAMUE LADEDEJI, ESQ CHIKAOSOLU OJUKWU, ESQ MUSAAHMED ATTAH, ESQ AYOTUNDE FOLUSO OGUNLEYE, ESO OLAYEMI BADEWOLE, ESQ SHORTLISTED ACADEMIC APPLICANTS IN ORDER OF SENIORITY AT THE BAR
PROF. JOHN ALEWO AGBONIKA PROF. OSY CHUKWU CHUKWUNYERE NWEBO PROF. NLERUM SUNDAY OKOGBULE PROF. NNAMDI ONYEKA OBIARAERI PROF. MOHAMMED LAWAL AHMADU PROF. NATHANIEL AHAGBUE INEGBEDION PROF. VIOLET AIGBOKHAEVBO PROF. BABATUNDE ADETUNJI ONI PROF. CHIMA JOSEPHAT UBANYIONWU PROF. GANIYU ADEYEMI OKE PROF. BENEDICTA LOPEZ DAUDU PROF. OMONIYI BUKOLA AKINOLA “The General Public is at liberty to comment on the integrity, reputation, and competence of the above-listed Applicants.
Any complaint(s) presented to the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee must be accompanied by a verifying affidavit deposed to by the author before a Court of Record in Nigeria” the Notice reads.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
The First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu has waded into the sexual harassment case against suspended Dean of Faculty of Law, University of Calabar (UNICAL), Prof. Cyril Ndifon, CITY LAWYER can authoritatively report.
Meanwhile, the Minister for Women Affairs, Mrs. Uju Kennedy Ohanenye has told CITY LAWYER that no less than 10 persons have called to threaten her over the sexual harassment scandal.
Following a two-day sitting by the probe panel set up by the university authorities, no less than six current and former students of the university as well as a UNICAL lecturer have testified that Ndifon sexually harassed them. Twenty-seven witnesses including students and lecturers have appeared before the probe panel, nearly all accusing Ndifon of sexual harassment, marginalisation or financial misfeasance. The panel has invited the embattled Law teacher to testify at 10 o’clock today.
Ohanenye told CITY LAWYER that the First Lady has ordered a thorough investigation into the allegations, adding that the First Lady has also assigned her Special Adviser on Women Affairs to follow through on the matter.
The Women Affairs Minister said she is however being “scandalized” due to her commitment to get to the root of the matter. She stated that her quest to thorughly investigate the matter was being misconstrued, adding: “How can I want the man to go free if he has committed such hideous crime” I only want the truth to prevail especially after hearing from the 3 girls that the VC sent me their numbers.
“I equally sent an official memo to acknowledge the extra one week the VC said they would (need to) round up the investigation and told her to please go on and send the report to me, Minister of Education and to the SA to First Lady on Women.
“I can never as a mother support evil on innocent children, and will take a drastic action if the man is found guilty. Let the truth prevail and let justice be done to put an end to this menace.”
Though Ohanenye told CITY LAWYER that she had also spoken with Ndifon who vowed that there are no specific sexual harassment complaints against him,
Meanwhile, the UNICAL Vice Chancellor of the University, Prof. Florence Banku Obi has told CITY LAWYER that the mandate of the panel remains intact. She stated that she rebuffed the minister’s directive to hands-off the probe, noting that the mandate of the panel goes beyond sexual harassment.
She said that she has approved a two-week extension requested by the panel to conclude its probe, adding: “I told the Honourable Minister that I would send her a comprehensive report. But she cannot give me a deadline to submit the report. The mandate of the panel encompasses both sexual harassment and other academic issues as raised by the protesting students. It is an internal issue of the university. When the panel submits its report, I will submit it to my supervisors. I know the Honourable Minister is interested in the sexual harassment aspect; I will present that aspect of the report to her. We have not foreclosed any aspect of the investigation.”
An online petition seen by CITY LAWYER had accused Ohanenye of tampering with some of the witnesses, even as it urged citizens to call the minister to order.
The petition reads: “Prof. Ndifon saga, Faculty of Law UNICAL: +234 803 801 xxxx. Please let’s feel free to generously call Uju Kennedy, Nigeria’s Minister of women affairs and ask her why she’s interfering in an ongoing panel of investigation to investigate sexual harassment and violation of UNICAL regulations.
“She’s calling young students who testified, intimidating them and offering favours in exchange for SILENCE.”
In an audio tape made available to CITY LAWYER, the Women Affairs Minister was alleged to have told a survivor that “If your VC makes you go and lie against somebody you will go to jail. Trust me, I personally will put you in jail. I want you to be very careful because your future is at stake.”
The minister however told CITY LAWYER that the allegation of interference is false, saying: “What I want here is justice. I do not know him. I even had to send him a text message to introduce myself when initially he didn’t pick my call.
“I did not want to take the issues on face value. Prof. Ndifon told me that nobody has accused him of rape or sexual assault. I then asked the Vice Chancellor to provide me with contacts of the alleged survivors. I spoke with three of them and none admitted that they were raped or sexually assaulted.
“When I confronted the Vice Chancellor with their testimonies, she said they were now focusing on academic fraud. I have taken up the matter with the Education Minister. Prof. Ndifon has asked us to send him a formal letter and he would come and testify. I remain unshaken. We will get to the root of all this to see that justice is done.”
CITY LAWYER recalls that the embattled Law teacher has since dragged the university to court, alleging a witch-hunt by the Vice Chancellor. He urged the court to reinstate him to his deanship position.
To join our CITY LAWYER ROUNDTABLE on WhatsApp, click here
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.
