JUDGMENT

ESCHEW JUDGMENT WITHOUT JUSTICE, AFAM OSIGWE URGES JUDGES

In this piece to herald the 2022/2023 Legal Year of Rivers State Judiciary, senior lawyer and former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) General Secretary, MAZI AFAM OSIGWE SAN urges the nation’s Judiciary to reverse public perception that judges deliver judgments that do not give justice, even as he called on the Bar to be ready to defend the Judiciary when necessary

IT IS IMPERATIVE TO ONLY APPOINT JUDGES WHO GIVE JUST JUDGMENTS

The imperativeness of appointing judicial officers who shall judge rightly, give just judgments and not pervert justice was at the center stage today (23/11/2022) during the opening of the 2022/2023 Legal Year and Re-dedication service of the Rivers State Judiciary. To underscore this, the first lesson was taken from Deuteronomy 16: 18-20. It was read by the Governor of Rivers State, His Excellency Nyesom Ezenwo Wike.

The passage reads:
“You shall appoint judges and officers in all your gates, which the Lord your God gives you, according to your tribes , and they shall judge the people with just judgement. You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality, nor take a bribe, for a bribe binds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous. You shall follow what is altogether just, that you may live and inherit the land which the Lord your God is giving you”.

As I wish the Rivers State Judiciary, lawyers , judiciary workers and all court users a productive and result-driven Legal Year, may I remind all members of the legal community in Nigeria of the truth of the statement made by one-time Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Dahiru Musdapher, on Monday, the 19th day of September, 2011, that the society is not entirely satisfied with the judiciary (I dare say lawyers too). According to His Lordship, “Hard as it may be to accept, we feel it is less important to focus on whether this assessment is fair or not. The important thing is for us to transparently come to terms with the prevailing realities accept the gap in expectations, and do our utmost to bridge it”.

More Nigerians readily agree that many of our courts do not give justice I.e. they deliver judgments that do not give justice, waste a lot of time, are corrupt, are places where judicial power is easily abused and the poor oppressed. Many believe the judiciary does not protect the indigent, as the rights and interests of the citizens are no longer perceived to be a priority for the courts. Many believe the delays and increasing cost of litigation have cost the judiciary of its description as the “last hope of the common man”. Many will readily point at many things that are wrong with the justice delivery system while acknowledging their successes. Lawyers, judges, law enforcement officers and court staff are routinely blamed for these problems. The people lament the penchant of the legislature in amending the constitution and electoral laws to give pre-eminence to electoral matters at the expense of commercial disputes, human rights violation and criminal cases. There is therefore a huge gap between peoples’ view of the type of justice to expect in the country and what obtains in our very courts.

“More Nigerians readily agree that many of our courts do not give justice i.e. they deliver judgments that do not give justice, waste a lot of time, are corrupt”

The expectation of a justice delivery system that is efficient, effective, even-handed and cost-effective is not baseless, as the effectiveness or otherwise of the justice system of any social order and reflects the confidence the public has in it. It also shows the extent to which state and authorities are able to achieve regulative capability among the citizens. Sadly for Nigeria, the common man, the rich and the state do not have confidence in the justice system.

It is a commonly agreed position that Nigeria can only attain the much desired socio-economic and political development, stability and sustainability if it has an effective and efficient justice system. Such justice system will guarantee the maintenance of laws and regulation of the state, citizens behaviours and relations. Nigerians are groaning under the weight of depleted public revenue occasioned by profligacy, waste in governance, misplaced priority, terrorism and insecurity, lack of transparency in the management of public funds, corrupt practices, gross violation of human rights, prolonged detention without trial, disobedience of court orders, intimidation of judicial officers etc. Accordingly, Nigerians expect that the only thing that could guarantee them some degree of enjoyment of their fundamental rights as well as accountability in government is effective administration of justice. We hope that all of us will join hands to ensure we enjoy effective justice delivery in Nigeria.

This piece is not to suggest that the judiciary has not done well or acted in the overall best interest of Nigeria, but to show that more remains to be done. Indeed, the effects of interference, intimidation, insufficient funding /lack of financial autonomy among others on administration of justice are not lost on one. Intimidation and lawlessness by members of the executive especially law enforcement agencies abound. They show contempt to court orders when they are not in their favour or do not please them. The legislature is not left out in this trend.

The judiciary, in a democratic polity like Nigeria must be properly insulated from undue political pressures and the attendant political manipulation or executive interferences. Access to judges outside official channels has been one of the greatest problems that further threaten the independence of the judiciary in Nigeria.

We can get it right only if we choose. Right persons must be appointed as judicial officers. There should be an objective of assessing them without undue reliance on the number of judgments they deliver. They should be insulated from all forms of interference and intimidation. The Bar must of course be there to speak on their behalf when they cannot. The constitutionally enshrined financial autonomy must be respected. Lawyers have a pivotal role to play in all this.

#fortheloveoftheprofession #dedicatedtojustice
#lawyers
#nigerianbarassociation

MAZI AFAM OSIGWE, SAN
23/11/2022, Port Harcourt

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

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

NNAMDI KANU: FG APPEALS JUDGMENT, SEEKS STAY OF EXECUTION

The Federal Government has appealed the judgment of the Appeal Court freeing the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Mazi Nnamdi Kanu.

The government, in a motion for a stay of execution filed on Wednesday at the apex court, is asking the court to stay execution of the Appeal Court judgment of October 13. The Appeal Court had acquitted the IPOB leader and barred any lower court from entertaining further charges against him.

In a seven-ground Notice of Appeal filed by the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Federal Government faulted the lower court’s decision and prayed that it should be set aside.

The Federal Government argued that the Court of Appeal erred when it faulted the manner by which Kanu was brought back to face trial after he allegedly jumped bail and fled the country.

It contended that the Court of Appeal also erred when it struck out the pending charges against Kanu on the ground that the trial court no longer possessed the requisite jurisdiction to continue the trial because of the manner by which Kanu was returned to the country after allegedly jumping bail.

CITY LAWYER recalls that a three-man panel of Appeal Court Justices led by Oludotun Adefope-Okojie had on Thursday, October 13, while delivering judgment in Kanu’s appeal on his extraordinary rendition, declared it as unlawful.

The court also quashed the charges bordering on terrorism and treasonable felony preferred against him by the Federal Government.

The Appeal Court held that the Federal Government breached all known local and international laws in the forceful rendition of Kanu to Nigeria, thereby making the terrorism charge against him incompetent and unlawful.

The judgment was marked CA/ABJ/CR/625/2022 and filed by Kanu’s lawyers against an earlier ruling by Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Justice Adefope-Okojie while delivering judgment declared Kanu’s abduction from Kenya and his subsequent return to Nigeria as illegal and unlawful. The court proceeded to quash the seven counts left of the initial 15 counts filed by the Federal Government.

Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court had in an earlier ruling quashed eight out of the 15 counts, leaving seven for determination.

But the Appeal Court in its ruling held that the Federal Government violated all laws in the forceful rendition of Kanu to Nigeria, thus invalidating the charges.

“By the illegal abduction and extra-ordinary rendition of the appellant, there was a clear violation, by the respondent (Federal Government) of international treaties, conventions, as well as the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights,” the court held.

The court added that having flagrantly breached Kanu’s fundamental rights, the Federal Government lost the legal right to put him on trial, adding the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to try the appellant on the retained counts of the charge. “No court can try him going by the circumstances of the extraordinary rendition,” the court held.

Justice Adefope-Okojie declared that “having resolved issue one in favour of the appellant, which deals with jurisdiction, the appeal succeeds.

“The order of Justice Binta Nyako which ordered the appellant to answer to counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 15 is set aside, terminated and dismissed. Appellant is accordingly discharged.”

The apex court is yet to fix a date for the hearing of the motion for stay of execution.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

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

SUPREME COURT ORDERS SHELL, OTHERS TO MAINTAIN STATUS QUO IN N800BN SUIT

The Supreme Court has ordered all parties to maintain the status quo in a contempt proceeding filed against the Managing Director, Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria (SPDC) Osagie Okunbor, and three management staff of the company.

A five-man panel of the Apex Court led by Justice Kudirat Motonmori Kekere-Ekun gave the order on Thursday while delivering judgement on appeal number SV/CV/398/2022 filed by Osagie Okunbor and others over alleged disobedience of the orders of the Court. Other members of the panel are Justice Chima Centus Nweze, Justice Uwani Musa Abba Aji, Justice Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumju, and Justice Adamu Jauro.

Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun in her lead judgement held that the pending applications filed before the court are contentious and cannot be taken now. The Apex Court also ordered parties to file written addresses and to maintain the status quo pending the hearing of all the contentious applications.

The contentious applications before the court are, an application dated April 4, 2022, seeking an order staying further committal proceeding in Appeal Number, CA/OW/489/2020; an application dated April 21, 2022, seeking an order setting aside Ex-Debito Justitiae, Notice of Appeal filed in Appeal Number SC/CV/393/2022 and an application filed on April 29, 2022 asking the apex court for an order striking out ex debito justitiae, Notice of Appeal filed in appeal No. SC/CV/393/2022. The matter has been adjourned till November 3, 2022, for hearing.

The Court of Appeal sitting in Owerri, Imo State had ordered the Managing Director and the other three management staff of Shell Petroleum Company to appear before it to show cause why they should not be committed for contempt of court.

The three-man appeal court presided over by the Honourable Justice Rita Pemu had on March 23, expressed displeasure with the management of Shell for disobeying two court rulings against the company. The judge held that Shell had disobeyed the lower court ruling while the Appeal Court also ordered Shell to deposit the N800 billion judgment sum against it into the court’s account, an order the company also allegedly disobeyed.

Still dissatisfied, the alleged contemnors, through their counsel, Chief J. J. Onanigbo Okpoko, SAN appealed the ruling.

Shell had applied for a motion seeking an order staying the execution of the Federal High Court judgment in Appeal Number CA/OW/498/20 and Appeal Number CA/OW/490/20 respectively.

On the other hand, counsel to 1st to 88th respondents, Mohammed Ndarant Mohammed, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria prayed the court to ignore the motion for an order staying execution and urged the court to mandate the appellants to deposit the money in an interest-yielding account pending the final determination of the appeal.

Mohammed also raised the fears the appellants were preparing to close shop in Nigeria and relocate to another country, which would jeopardize the judgment if nothing was done, according to a THISDAY report.

It had previously reported that the Owerri Appeal court had ordered Shell to deposit N800 billion (about $2b) in 48 hours over alleged oil spillage.

This comes after Shell appealed a November 2020 Federal High Court ruling that ordered Shell to pay 800 billion naira ($1.95 billion) to 88 communities of Egbalor Ebubu in Rivers state, who had accused the company of an oil spill that damaged their farms and waterways.

The three-man panel had on Monday, March 14, ordered Shell Plc to stop selling any assets in Nigeria until a decision is reached on its appeal of the nearly $2 billion penalty.

The judges said Shell, acting through its agents or subsidiaries was restrained from “selling, allocating, vandalising or disposing off any of its assets/properties pending the determination of the appeal.

Disappointed with the ruling Shell approached the apex court seeking for stay of the execution of the decision until the appeal is determined.

To join our Telegram platform, please click here 

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

  • EDITOR'S CHOICE
  • Jan 09, 2022
  • 0
  • Comments Off on MAGODO: ‘SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT MERELY DECLARATORY,’ SAYS OKUTEPA

MAGODO: ‘SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT MERELY DECLARATORY,’ SAYS OKUTEPA

Fiery senior lawyer and former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Lead Prosecutor, Mr. Jibrin Okutepa SAN has queried the manner of execution of the Supreme Court judgment in the Magodo Shangisha GRA Scheme II, Lagos lawsuit.

Arguing that the judgment was merely declaratory, the senior lawyer said that while judgments of the Supreme Courts are to be given effect by all, “can that judgment be enforced in the manner it was attempted to be done without first positive orders vide fresh action?”

In a post he made today on the CITY LAWYER WhatsApp forum, Okutepa argued that the “legal confusion” was caused “by the manner the reliefs granted by the Supreme Court were couched by the plaintiffs in the case.”

His words: “First the action from what I read was in a representative capacity. Second the reliefs sought and granted by the Supreme Court were declaratory in nature.

“Declaratory judgments are different from other judgments that made positive orders. Declaratory judgment is a judgment from a court that defines the rights of the parties regarding the legal question presented. Declaratory judgments differ from other judgments because they do not order a party to take any action or award any damages for violations of the law.

“Granted that under the Constitution judgments of the Supreme Courts are to be enforced by all persons and authorities in any part of Nigeria, can that judgment be enforced in the manner it was attempted to be done without first positive orders vide fresh action?”

Continuing, he said: “Is that judgment to be enforced in Lagos without the input of the High Court of Lagos State whose judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court? Can we indeed say that that judgment was judgment of the Supreme Court or the Judgment of the High Court of Lagos State as affirmed by the Appellate Courts?”

It is recalled that the Lagos State Government has been engaged in a face-off with the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mr. Abubakar Malami SAN on the enforcement of the Supreme Court judgment on the Magodo Shangisha GRA Scheme II, Lagos. This led the Lagos State Government to engage the judgment creditors in a negotiation towards finding an amicable resolution to the crisis.

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