ANXIETY, AS ODUAH, OLANIPEKUN ISSUES MAY TOP NBA-AGM TODAY

• ODUAH KEEPS MUM, BATTLES TO SECURE CTC OF COURT ORDER
• PRESSURE ON AKPATA TO STEM ANTI-OLANIPEKUN PROTESTS
• LAWYER ASKS NBA TO RESCIND NAMING OF NBA BUILDING AFTER AKEREDOLU

There is palpable anxiety as lawyers troop to Eko Atlantic City for this year’s Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Annual General Meeting (AGM) which kicks off at noon today.

This may not be unconnected with the face-off between Mrs. Joyce Oduah and the NBA leadership as well as the controversy that trailed NBA’s demand that Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN recuse himself as the Chairman of the Body of Benchers (BoB)pending a probe of allegation of professional misconduct against Ms. Adekunbi Ogunde, a Partner in his law firm.

Though a Federal High Court sitting at Abuja had nullified the ratification of Oduah’s suspension by National Officers, both NBA and the estranged General Secretary have given varied interpretations to the ruling.

While Oduah’s Lead Counsel, Mr. Muritala Abdul-rasheed SAN told CITY LAWYER that his client has fully bounced back to her position as General Secretary following the annulment of the ratification by the National Executive Council (NBA-NEC), the Lead Counsel to NBA, Mr. Godwin Omoaka (SAN) countered this position, saying Oduah remains suspended.

Efforts by CITY LAWYER to know whether Oduah will attend the meeting to reclaim her seat proved abortive, as calls to her verified telephone number were not answered. She also did not respond to text messages.

On his part, Abdul-rasheed did not also respond to calls and messages, though he promised to return CITY LAWYER’s calls. He did not do so at press time.

CITY LAWYER gathered that Oduah has been battling to obtain a certified copy of the court’s ruling. An impeccable source told CITY LAWYER that this proved abortive as at yesterday, adding that “her lawyers will continue the quest today.”

An unimpeachable source at NBA HOUSE told CITY LAWYER that NBA President, Mr. Olumide Akpata has come under pressure to quell any anti-Olanipekun protests at the Annual General Conference. This may not be unconnected with speculations that there are plans to stage protests to force the former NBA President to quit the BoB position pending a determination of NBA’s petition against Ogunde.

There are indications that the matter may be raised under “Any Other Business.”

Meanwhile, a senior lawyer and former Secretary of NBA Lagos Branch, Mr. Seth Amaefule has urged the association to rescind the naming of a wing of NBA building after Ondo State Governor and former NBA President, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu SAN.

He prayed the meeting as follows: “That the naming of the Wing of the NBA Building situate at Ogo Aro Crescent, Area 2 Garki CBD, Abuja housing the NBA Human Rights Institute named after His Excellency Arakunrin Oluwarotimi Akeredolu, SAN (Past President of NBA and present Executive Governor of Ondo State) be set aside by this Annual General Meeting on the ground that this is not a name associated with human rights activism and public interest litigation in Nigeria.”

Click here to download the petition.

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.

PROTEST RESTRICTION: ACCESS TO JUSTICE CARPETS POLICE

*Says restriction is ‘unconstitutional’

Leading human rights group, Access to Justice (A2J) has berated the Nigeria Police for restricting protests to the Unity Fountain, Abuja.

Describing the restriction as “unconstitutional,” A2J said it “amounts to an unwarranted interference with, and infringement of the fundamental rights of citizens to assemble peacefully and to express themselves as enshrined in Sections 40 and 41 of the Constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights.”

In a statement made available to CITY LAWYER, A2J said such restriction “has been ruled unlawful and unconstitutional by a decision of the Court of Appeal in Inspector General of Police v. All Nigeria Peoples Party and 11 others (2007) where the court held that the procurement of a police permit before a protest could hold was inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and therefore an illegality.”

Below is the full text of the statement.

RESTRICTION OF CIVIL PROTESTS IN FCT ABUJA TO SPECIFIC SITE BY THE NIGERIAN POLICE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND INFRINGES ON RIGHT TO ASSEMBLY, MOVEMENT AND EXPRESSION

On July 17th 2018, the Nigeria Police announced the restriction of protests in the Federal Capital Territory to the Unity Fountain, Central Business District, Abuja. The Police force said the restrictions were informed by the need to avert an occurrence of incidences similar to those which trailed the protests of October 30th 2018. It would be recalled that on October 30th 2018, officers of the Nigerian Army encountered and opened fire on a procession organized by members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) to protest the unlawful (and protracted) incarceration of their leader, Sheik Ibrahim El-Zakzaky, by the Nigerian Government as well as the killing of several members of the sect by officers of the Nigerian Army on October 27th 2018.

The Police Force said it was aware of the fundamental rights of Nigerian citizens to peaceful assembly and movement as enshrined in Chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution and the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights but however said that that these rights could be restricted or limited on grounds specified in the constitution.

The decision of the Police Force to restrict protesters from venues other than the Unity Fountain amounts to an unwarranted interference with, and infringement of the fundamental rights of citizens to assemble peacefully and to express themselves as enshrined in Sections 40 and 41 of the Constitution and Article 7 of the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights. Police restrictions on this right by specifying conditions of its exercise has been ruled unlawful and unconstitutional by a decision of the Court of Appeal in Inspector General of Police v. All Nigeria Peoples Party and 11 others (2007) where the court held that the procurement of a police permit before a protest could hold was inconsistent with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and therefore an illegality.

The reference by the Police to the need to avert the re-occurrence of the experience of the “protests of October” 2018 involving members of the Islamic Movement of Nigeria (IMN) is fear-mongering rattle, and a clearly unjustifiable blackmail to crackdown on politically unpopular assemblies. The shooting and killing of unarmed Shiite members by operatives of the Nigerian Army is a brutal testament of the military’s lawlessness, but it was not the exercise of the right of peaceful protest that caused it. It was simply caused by the rash, violent and repressive reaction of the military, under-pinned by the culture of impunity rooted in its psyche.

Nigeria expects its police force to act with responsibility, accountability and respect for democratic rights and not to follow in the footsteps of, or replicate the impunity characteristic of Nigeria’s military forces. In fact, had the police exercised its responsibilities diligently, it would have avoided the October 2018 calamities. Had it asserted its rights to manage the protests of October 2018, the military would not have inserted themselves into the course of those catastrophic events, since the management of civil protests is essentially the responsibility of a civilian police. Allowing the military to supplant it and take over its functions in controlling the exercise of a democratic right of civil dissent represents a massive failure on the part of the police force. Furthermore, the police force has grievously failed in the duty to bring the soldiers who horrendously killed unarmed protesters during the October 2018 protests to account, but have rather moved quickly to charge to court, again, IMN protesters over their recent protests a few days ago at the premises of the National Assembly.

By restricting the movements of protesters on the grounds it claims, the Nigerian Police fails to objectively assess and address the chain of events and factors which turn peaceful protests into violent actions; the police’ new policies stigmatize protesters rather than challenge and confront those who authorize inflammatory and brutal actions that escalate tensions during a civil protest, mismanage protest situations and kill scores of unarmed protesters.

The right to protest or assemble cannot be reduced to the right to assemble at only a specific place or time. The right is an aspect of political participation recognized by human rights treaties, and accommodates the freedom to assemble or protest in public spaces, accessible by members of the public. If law enforcement authorities are allowed the right to stipulate places where protests can be held, they would likely do so in a manner that effectively takes away the right, or denude it of meaningful content. The new policy limiting the place where protests can hold to only one place is just as unconstitutional as requiring a police permit before a protest can hold. While fundamental rights can be restricted on established grounds, only a legislation can establish the scope of the restriction, and courts must be satisfied that the purposes of such legislation are rationally related to the restriction. The Nigeria Police Force has not identified a law that authorizes it to limit the places where protests can hold. And it does not have legislative powers to make powers in that respect.

Consequently, Access to Justice calls on the Inspector General of Police to:
a. Immediately reverse the decision restricting public protests by persons or groups to the Unity Fountain, Abuja.
b. Order an immediate investigation into the October 30th 2018 killing of IMN protesters and bring to justice all persons who arbitrarily shot and killed scores of protesters and other civilians during the clashes.
c. Establish more constitutional guidelines for managing public protests that do not interfere with the free exercise of the right to peaceful assembly, movement and expression and instate safeguards to avoid the breakdown of law and order during future protests.
Joseph Otteh Daniel A. Igiekhumhe

Convener Programme Officer

Please send emails to citylawyermag@gmail.com. Copyright 2018 CITY LAWYER. 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.