THE OSUN STATE GOVERNORSHIP ELECTION ADJUDICATION PROCESSES AND THE ACT OF DANCING IN TURNS by SHABA Mafu

His customized cap hung firmly on his head with accustomed ease. He moved his strong bones with the flexibility of a woman in his dancing spree. It was time for jubilation over the electoral victory at the tribunal. This is the dancing Senator, Ademola Adeleke. He won the victory of the electoral tussle at the tribunal sitting in Osogbo which delivered judgment in his favour on the 22nd of March, 2019. But to the utmost chagrin of the jubilant Senator, he did not know that joy has a slender body that breaks too soon. This is the present status of his political travail.

The Osun State gubernatorial election was conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in Osun State on the 22^nd of September, 2018. The election was won by Adegboyega Oyetola of the All Progressives Congress (APC), as declared by the electoral Umpire, the INEC.  The result was flatly rejected by the governorship candidate, Senator Ademola Adeleke and his political party, the Peoples Democratic Party. They cited irregularities and outright connivance of the electoral Body with the governing APC at the elections. In the elections, Ademola claimed he won the first round before INEC declared it inconclusive and ordered a supplementary election in the seventeen Units cancelled polls. This took place on the 27^th of September, 2018. Consequently, the results of the re-run election added to the first round, produced the APC candidate, now the Governor as the winner of the election.

Ademola and the PDP gravely dissatisfied, headed for the tribunal. The Governorship Election Petition Tribunal awarded victory to Senator Ademola and the PDP in its ruling. They cited that there was no need for the re-run elections that held after the first round of elections, and therefore nullified all the results from the 27 polling units where the re-run was conducted. On the strength of this judgment,  Ademola was declared the winner of the election. Expectedly, he dusted more of his caps in anticipation of resumption of duty as the Governor of the great State of Osun.

Ademola himself, his supporters and his political party, the PDP rolled out drums on the streets of the ancient but glorious streets of Osun State. Senator Ademola went berserk as he temporarily forgot his esteemed status in the society being a distinguished Senator of a great country called Nigeria. He twisted his heavy trunk with the ease of a regular drunkard in the village. He laughed and smiled alternately with the entire mandibles at the mercy of the scorching sun. His hands and legs moved perfectly to the rhythm of the music as his rotund stomach was not left out of this magical twist. He exuded joy! Of the truth, Senator Ademola Adeleke is a very good dancer who knows how to express moments of joy within reasonable limit.

The newly sworn Governor, Adetogboyega Oyetola must have withdrawn to his cyst because of the shock of the tribunal judgment on the election. His eyes must have welled up with tears as he would soon pack home from the office already adorned with his official pictures neatly carved with sophisticated artistry. But his party, the APC vowed to challenge the judgment of the Tribunal at the Appeal court. Off they went. It was the antidote that punctured his swelling emotions.

On Thursday, 9^th May, 2019, the Appeal Court sitting in Abuja in a 4-1 Panel judgment repealed the judgment of the Tribunal.  They cited that the absence of Justice Obiora at the Tribunal on the 6^th February, 2019, who eventually read the lead judgment of the tribunal, was an aberration and therefore held that his absence alone nullifies the entire proceeding of the case. The Appeal Court also held that the nullifying of the 27^th September, 2018 supplementary election was wrong. It  also pointed to  the tribunal that the absence of the records of usage of ballot papers and other details on Form EC8A, the result sheets in 17 polling Units where the polls were cancelled by the Tribunal was not an issue of non-compliance that should warrant the deductions of votes polled by the APC and the PDP in those Units. The Appeal Court on these grounds declared the judgment of the Tribunal as a nullity while ceding the victory to the incumbent Governor Oyetola Gboyega.

Oyetola, in the circumstance rolled out his drums in his area of major influence in the State. It was the turn of APC, the supporters and the Governor to dance. At the Tribunal level, PDP and Ademola danced. At the Appeal Court level, the baton of dancing was handed to APC and Oyetola. It is turn by turn at each stage. Yes! that is the style of Nigerian judicial system. No uniform outlook on matters like this. The Electoral Act is probably only to conduct elections. Subsequent issues arising thereafter are left to the power of argument and citations of the lawyers and the discretion of the Judges at different levels of adjudication.

PDP has danced. APC is presently dancing. It is a common saying that “he who laughs last, laughs best”. In this case, who danced last, would dance best. The PDP and Ademola have vowed to challenge the judgment of the Appeal court at the Supreme court. We would not know who will dance last. I think PDP would have danced with caution and not acted like the proverbial antelope who danced himself lame while the main dance was yet to come. APC should dance with caution. The Supreme court judgment is clearly unpredictable, just as it is generally in the Nigerian judicial system. The funniest aspect of all these is that the Supreme Court alone has the supreme wisdom and knows all things in judicial matters. They are never wrong! So the judgment of the Supreme court shall be binding on the winner or loser of the gubernatorial case in Osun State.

The Nigerian judicial system makes both appellants and defendants dance turn by turn as the case goes higher and higher, until the final and ultimate dancer emerges.

BAYELSA STATE LEGISLATURE AND THEIR LIFE PENSIONS BILL PROPOSAL by SHABA Mafu

I read with utter consternation the frivolous demand of the Bayelsa State members of the House of Assembly advocating for life pensions bill for ex-members as part of the juice to be placed on the political table in that glorious State of Bayelsa. To demonstrate their high level of their low-thinking, they went as far as asking for a compelling amount of Five-hundred thousand Naira monthly pension for ex-Speakers and some other provocative amounts to the Deputy-speakers and ordinary members of the House after their retirement from “meritorious service” of the State spanning a paltry period of eight years of sometimes unproductive and less impactful activities.

This irrational demand is purely in contrast with the ethos of democratic practice which is representation of the people purposely for their welfare and security. The essence of political representation is not for exploitation of the masses from vantage position as demonstrated by these Bayelsan legislatures. The members of the Bayelsa State House of Assembly have acted in deliberate aberration; an action diametrically opposed to common sense in governance and tenets of democracy.

The response and reaction of the Governor of the State, Seriake Dickson is worth commending. It gives a spark of hope that we still have reasonable people in the midst of those infested with moral meningitis. The Governor flatly rejected this anti-people and disgraceful proposed bill. He would in the final analysis have assented to the bill if it was passed, but he rejected it with all sense of responsibility and moral decency. He was actually the medical personnel that aborted the ill-conceived proposed bill by legislative prostitutes.

Another great Bayelsan of repute is the ever-bubbling Comrade Eva, an activist of the Niger-Delta extraction. He lambasted the obnoxious bill of these legislatures. His anger was so clearly manifested that he recommended public flogging of these greedy and childish politicians at one of the river fronts in Bayelsa State. He berated them that those who did not even know how the State was created wanted to use the opportunity as public officers to reap where they did not sow He further stated that carrying placards to denounce this disdainful act was not enough to contain the pettiness of these car-boy politicians (so Comrade Eva called them) but insisted on an opprobrium on them. He defended such treatment as a legacy which the upcoming Bayelsan politicians, and by extension the politicians from the Niger Delta would learn from and take caution.

The proposed bill of these greedy politicians calls for complete condemnation by all well-meaning people of Bayelsa State and Nigeria at large. Some State Governors in Nigeria are shamelessly owing their workers as much as twelve months salaries, and the pensioners owed as much as over 30 months pensions, and gratuities. On the contrary, those who claim to represent the masses are there working out their ill-fated pensions design with their own selfish template, besides their fat salaries they do not ordinarily qualify or work for.

There are some states where the cumulative amount of both the State Bond and the statutory Retirement Savings Account of the Contributory Pension Scheme is paltry Four Million Naira. If such a retiree opts for Programmed Withdrawal or Annuity, as the case may be, being their pension payment option, such pensioner would be placed on ridiculous pensions with attendant multiplier effect of poverty. The monthly pension for some of the pensioners  who had served a State for 35 years is nothing but an advanced programmed poverty. A Speaker who may have cornered himself to be one, is proposing to earn as much as N500,000 per month as his monthly pension upon his exit as a Speaker. This is daylight robbery and outright exploitation of the already impoverished tax payers.

The Nigeria Labour Congress, Trade Union Congress, Civil Society Organizations, Rights activists should raise their voices against this and similar obnoxious bill whenever and wherever it surfaces, either at the federal or State levels. Looking further, even the monthly salaries of the members of the outgoing National Parliament  is certainly very outrageous and disappointing. These are people who hardly form quorum in their plenary. Even when they managed to attend sessions, half of the period is spent on self-serving legislative activities, thus producing no reasonable and robust legislation for the country.

The constitution of this country needs to be reviewed or overhauled so as to address some of these stinking anomalies perpetrated by these legislatures and other folks in the same fold.

ATIKU’S SEARCH FOR JUSTICE AT THE ELECTION TRIBUNAL

The unanimous declaration of the three witches in William Shakespeare's play, MACBETH, that “fair is foul and foul is fair”, means anything goes as far as we achieve our aim. Atiku seems to disagree with the assertion of Shakespeare’s witches that foul is not fair. Atiku standing on this premise is seeking justice in election tribunal in what he termed his “stolen mandate” of his presidential ambition.  The witches had resolved to meet “upon the heath when the hurlyburly’s done, when the battle is lost and won”. Atiku has pledged to meet the APC in court as the elections have been lost by the Peoples Democratic Party and won by the All Progressives Congress represented by Atiku, and Buhari respectively.

The presidential election, the ultimate battle for the seat of the national government, Aso rock, was conducted on the 23^rd of February, 2019, with the results released on the 27^th of same month. The incumbent Muhammadu Buhari polled the total votes of 15,131,847, to defeat Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party who polled the total votes of 11,267,978. The latter was squarely defeated with about four Million votes according to the announcement of the Electoral Management Body, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). This bitter pill is evidently too difficult for Atiku to swallow with the water of peace; hence he is headed for the Presidential Elections Petition Tribunal.

The presidential candidate of the PDP, like every Nigerian, has the constitutional right to seek redress in competent courts of jurisdiction. .Atiku who has penchant for peace and obedience to the rule of law has decided to toe this legal path. He has gathered his Legal Team ably led by the experienced Livy Ozoukwu (SAN). Atiku has defied the assertion of the witches that foul can never be fair in this circumstance. He has commenced the preliminaries of the suit by the court granting him access to examine some sensitive materials used in the conduct of the presidential elections. The full blast of the legal tussle will begin in not too many days to come.

With all objectivity and every sense of responsibility, it will be a very tall dream for Atiku to realize his intention. This is based on the antecedence of similar cases that have gone beyond the Tribunals even to Supreme Courts.

Retrospectively, when Late Chief Obafemi Awolowo of the defunct Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) approached the supreme court for interpretation of a fraction of two-thirds of 25% of nineteen States, and that late Shehu Shagari won the elections by polling higher votes but could not be returned elected because he did not meet the constitutional requirements, the Court decided otherwise in favour of the declared winner of that election. Awolowo polled 4,906,851 votes, while Shagari polled 5,688,857 votes as announced by the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) on September 26, 1979.. As brilliant and persuasive the arguments of Chief Awolowo were, the court never ordered even a re-run. Shagari won the case and was even contested and re-elected in the 1983 presidential polls.

Similarly, the then presidential candidate of the Congress for Progressive Change (who is incidentally the current president of Nigeria, under the APC) Muhammadu Buhari, dragged the Peoples Democratic Party to court when he contested with late Umaru Yar’adua in 2007. Yar’Adua polled 2,4638,063 votes against Buhari’s 6,603,299 votes. Umaru in his sincerity even confessed that the elections conducted that year was not devoid of obvious flaws. Despite that confession, the Court did not upturn the results in favour of Buhari. Buhari contested against Goodluck Jonathan in 2011. He (Buhari) cited widespread manipulations and electoral violence, and headed for the courts again. His plea was thrown to the dustbin. So in both cases, he lost with bleeding nose.

In one of our classes in Political science, am erudite Scholar, Professor Authur Davies, of blessed memory, asserted that when it comes to judgment on cases involving Presidential elections, the Court would rather use its discretion in handling such cases. No court would pass a judgment that would result in protracted national crises and avoidable catastrophe. Recently, Chief Olisa Agbakoba in his comment (in PUNCH Newspaper online) on Atiku’s move accused Buhari of removing Walter Onnoghen replacing him with the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mohammed Tanko.  He further complained that the “burden of proof to succeed in the election petition is unfairly huge” and that he was ‘worried about the historical precedent as no petition on presidential election result has ever succeeded”

Atiku’s approach to the Courts might end in mere academic exercise and for record purpose just like others before it. It will be just a mirage and loud burst of hope for those anticipating him becoming the president of Nigeria following the recently conducted election. It may be a point of reference for further research for the Electoral Umpire on how to improve on their performance in subsequent elections in the country. But for the Court to upturn the election, and declare him the winner might be a dream to be realized in the next millennium or in the utopian world. The Court will not even order a re-run, worse still  It is good Atiku goes to Court, because the lessons that will be learnt there will be for the benefit of the entire nation. It could be Atiku’s further contribution for better electoral processes in Nigeria.

PRESIDENT BUHARI AND HIS DEATH SENTENCE ORDER ON BALLOT BOX SNATCHERS.

The postponement of the 2019 general elections originally scheduled to hold on the 16^th of February, 2019, has added another feather to its dynamism. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) postponed the elections with one week, which is now to hold on the 23^rd of the same month of February. The events that had filtered in to the polity within this one week of postponement had been better imagined. There had been series of condemnation of the Electoral Body over the postponement. The leading political parties in the election, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) have been trading blames over who instigated the shift in polls. The National Chairman of the APC, Comrade Adams Oshiomole even swore with the Holy Koran when he accused the INEC of colluding with the PDP before the election was postponed. This was to say that INEC was working in favour of the opposition party to win the general elections. INEC has denied this allegation flatly, and only cited logistics as the main reason for the postponement.

But in another twist, while the political parties have been re-strategizing, holding caucuses meetings, executive meetings and whatnots, to perfect their plans for the forthcoming 23^rd February polls, the APC obviously held theirs with the expected massive attendance of party stalwarts and stakeholders. In the meeting, the presidential candidate of the party, and the incumbent Executive President of the country, Muhammadu Buhari gave a deadly order to the Army, Police and other security agencies to summarily terminate the lives of ballot box snatchers during the 23^rd February, 2019 elections. This order was given, primarily and possibly to drum sanity into the electoral system by meeting deliberate criminality with brute force. While this may appear to be a quick and decisive solution to such criminal act, there are a lot of implications of such a weighty statement coming from the Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s Armed Forces. Expectedly, the Army and the Police have issued separate statements that they will follow the order of their Commander to the letter.

The issues that bother on this order are numerous. There is an electoral provision to deal with such criminalities. A convicted ballot-snatcher faces a two-year jail term or the fine of Five Hundred Thousand Naira or both – but never a death sentence. But again, such provisions were hardly adhered to. Ballot-snatching had unfortunately become part of our electoral process. There was an instance were ballot snatchers summarily executed twenty-six innocent voters in the course of snatching ballot boxes as stated by the presidential spokesman, Garuba Shehu when he was defending the statement of his Boss on the execution order. The Death sentence may be in order to find a more telling action to forestall the re-occurrence of that dastardly act. Arguably, if the security operatives were at alert to their responsibilities, such criminals would not have had a field day perpetrating their crimes where elections were taking place. There might be probable connivance with the security operatives at that instance of the committance of such crime.

Without recourse to any doubtful disputations, we have heard several instances of extra-judicial killings in Nigeria, particularly by the Nigerian Police, at the slightest provocation which they generally blame on “accidental discharge”. We have heard of instances where lives were sniffed out of innocent Nigerians because they refused to part with as low as twenty Nigerian Naira bribe. The attitude of the police particularly, to the Nigerian populace is at best very appalling and horribly unfriendly. The call of President Buhari for summary termination of lives by the Security forces may not be taken with discretion by these forces. This directive will further exacerbate the already tensed political atmosphere and the volatile security situation already been witnessed in the country. If the Police, for instance, which does not seem to know the simple ethos of weapon- handling, are now given this terse charge by the President, it might be a way of possible vendetta to those who had looked for an opportunity to deal with a private enemy, now using the cloak of ballot box snatching as a guise. I can assure Mr. President that some hypocrites might even love to kill for the joy of it to ensure that they actually ‘carried out’ the presidential directive, where and when it is actually needless to do so Certainly, lives will be lost because an ordinary argument in the polling centre could be misread to be ballot-box snatching attempt by overtly overzealous security operatives. I exercise utmost fear that perhaps the security agents may have hidden sympathy for a political party, then this order becomes leverage to get rid of their political opponents.

Much as the President takes it as sole responsibility for his government to conduct a free, fair and credible election, he would have taken cognizance of the kind of security forces he was giving such costly order to. My main concern is the Nigeria Police. The Acting Inspector-General of Police, Mr Muhammed Adamu should as a matter of urgency train his men of all the hierarchy and categories interpret and emphasize to them the good intention of the President. The president is not looking for corpses to justify his statement. He only meant that there should be sanity, security and decorum in the discharge of our civic responsibilities on the election days. Elections can actually hold without anyone dying or being shot. The security Agencies are to provide SECURITY to all. I believe that is the crux of the President’s directive to the Security operatives.

Those who had perfected plans to snatch ballot boxes on the election days should have a rethink and kill that thought right away. If you dare the statement of the President, you may not truly be alive to seek justice or seek for redress - trust our security operatives!. It is a condemnable act to snatch boxes during elections. If your candidate is popular enough, he will win without getting into any forms of criminality. All those hired to perpetuate this nefarious act should know that neither the President nor the Security Agents are joking. Be wise!

INEC AND THE ELECTION POSTPONEMENT OF 2019 GENERAL ELECTIONS.

The postponement of the general elections scheduled to hold today, 16^th of February 2019 has taken most Nigerians in a shock. Many have prepared for the elections. Everyone has been fully mobilized. Many schools both of the government and the private Schools have been shut down since on Wednesday as part of the preparations for the elections, basically to ensure the safety of students and workers in the schools alike. The President of the country, Muhammadu Buhari had made a national broadcast assuring the preparedness of the country and even of the electoral umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of its readiness for the election.  Everything appeared set for the exercise. The international observers have also been fully mobilized. Peace Accord has been signed by all the presidential aspirants. The Nigerian Police has declared restriction of movements from 6am to 6pm today for the elections.

Like a thunderbolt from the blues, in spite of all assurances and preparedness, the Electoral Body suddenly began to meet late on Friday 15^th February and coming up with a decision culminating in the postponement of the election with one week. Though this is not the first time general elections are postponed in Nigeria, but that should not be a norm when it is avoidable.

In the build-up to the 2019 general elections, various instances of violence have been recorded in several parts of the country. For instance, some few days ago the lives of sixty-six innocent Nigerians were sent to their early graves by unknown gun men in Kaduna State. In Anambra and Imo States, INEC materials have been reportedly set ablaze. This includes the Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) and Card Readers. These are sensitive electoral materials.  There were other incidences of arson particularly of INEC materials. iNEC offices have suddenly turned to a harmattan zone where fire burns freely.

Earlier, the ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) has raised an alarm that some powerful forces are colluding with some other enemies of Nigeria to ensure that the elections are scuttled, likely paving way for an interim government. But I say the wishes of the evil people will never come to pass in Nigeria. Nigeria is bigger than any individual or a group. Nigeria is greater than any part of the country.

Much as I personally condemn the postponement in its entirety because I expected that INEC Research Team should have been able to figure out some of the possibilities for the eventual postponement, they may still have convincing points for the postponement. They cited logistics reasons for the postponement.  I wish to suggest to the electoral body to put all factors into consideration to ensure the full success of the February 23, general elections.

At present, there is mutual suspicion between the leading political parties, the All Progressives Congress (APC ) and the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party( PDP). There is apprehension in the entire country, probable higher level of violence than before the postponement o the election. There might be more ruthlessness by political thugs as they may be used by politicians to ensure victory by all means. The Security of the nation should be stepped more than ever before.  But in all these Nigerian must survive.

In all, INEC must be fully responsible for whatever becomes the outcome of these elections, because all necessary support by the government, NGOs, international Community were given to this Body. Then why the sudden postponement?

ONNOGHEN: THE CACOPHONY OF JUSTICE AND THE FATE OF NIGERIA - by Professor Dejo Olowu

My little contribution is to assist the non-lawyers and independent watchers of current proceedings to distill the issues beyond the muddy waters being thrown up and about to achieve political ends.

By virtue of Nigeria's colonial legal heritage, judicial precedents (decisions of the higher courts made on earlier cases) take a prime position in the determination of new cases on similar or related facts. The courts, therefore, rely heavily on the settled principles of the law in arriving at their decisions in subsequent cases.

There has been so much hullabaloo about and around the indictment of the eminent occupant of the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), in the person of Mr. Justice Walter Onnoghen. Understandably, the indictment occurring at a politically volatile period (less than 40 days to a vital presidential election) in Nigeria was bound to generate rowdy and opportunistic responses from legal minds and non-legal minds alike.

However, to help our objective understanding and analysis of the state of the law in Nigeria, recourse must be made to the causa celebre, that epic piece of judicial precedent from which all subsequent extrapolations should be made on the present scenario. That point of reference is NGANJIWA v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA (2017) LPELR 43391 (Court of Appeal).

The Honourable Justice A.O. Obaseki-Adejumo, Justice of the Court of Appeal (JCA) formulated the following principle in the Ngangiwa Case:

"It must be expressly stated that if a judicial officer commits theft, fraud, murder or manslaughter, arson and the likes,...WHICH ARE CRIMES COMMITTED OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS [emphasis mine], he may be arrested, interrogated and prosecuted accordingly by the State DIRECTLY without recourse to the NJC (National Judicial Commission).

.. These classes of criminal acts are not envisaged and captured by the provisions of PARAGRAPH 21, PART 1 OF THE THIRD SCHEDULE (to the Constitution).

On the other hand, if any Judicial Officer COMMITS A PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT WITHIN THE SCOPE OF HIS DUTY and is investigated, arrested and.......subsequently prosecuted by security agents without a formal complaint/report to the NJC, it will be a usurpation of the latter's constitutionally guaranteed powers under Section 158 and Paragraph 21 Part 1 of the Third Schedule, thereby inhibiting, and interfering with and...... obstructing the NJC from carrying out its disciplinary control over erring judicial officers as clearly provided by the Constitution.''
The simple question that all honest people of clean conscience must ask the coterie of Onnoghen's Amen corner is: what is the category of Onnoghen's wrongdoing?

Failure to declare his personal fiscal assets as statutorily required is a wrongful act OUTSIDE the performance of his duties as a judicial officer. His wrongful act was and remains a criminal offence for which the apparatus of State must act. The NJC has no role in dealing with that.

However, as I already mentioned, these are highly volatile and flammable times. Every action or omission of the Federal Government of Nigeria headed by Mohammadu Buhari will be turned into a weapon of mudslinging against Buhari’s electoral chances. That is the reason for all the pandemonium that has been unleashed on Nigerians these past few days.
Of course, the high volume of count-me-in SANs supporting the CJN will most likely sway the minds of innocent watchers into believing that there is indeed a vendetta against the CJN. There is none and there can be none.
The same Buhari confirmed Onnoghen as CJN despite all the opposing forces that felt he lacked the moral uprightness and integrity required for that office.

But we cannot be shocked or surprised by the outrage and outbursts of those opposed to the trial of a roguish CJN for his roguish act(s): they need him and his roguish system to perpetuate the distribution of judicial largesse and crooked elevations to the Bench and Bar in Nigeria. That is the way the Nigerian judicial and legal architecture now works in the larger part. Corruption oils the system...for those who run by it!

What more? The same judicial system created and nurtured by Onnoghen is the very one that will handle his indictment. Throw up a knife a thousand times and it will come down resting on its flat side. Why so much chaos when Onnoghen will carry the day in his own judicial system? What will however not go away is the moral albatross that will hang on his neck for the rest of his natural life. He'll remain a tainted CJN regardless of how he ends his career.

And talking about electoral calculations, Buhari does not and will not require an Onnoghen or any court to serve any ulterior purposes after the February 2019 elections. Buhari winning the election fair and square dispenses with the need for a subservient adjudicator. Handing over the presidency of Nigeria to Buhari’s closest challenger will be farewell to the sanity of governance that the Buhari administration has set on a steady path since 2015. Nigerians cannot afford to choose profligacy over thrift, we cannot afford to elect a photo-op president over one whose soul is about how to rescue our commonwealth from entrenched vultures.

The 2019 election is and will be all about the very survivability of the Nigerian nation. We must not hand over the polity to those who will mish-mash our treasury and national resources with their insatiable quest for wealth, debauchery and lascivious lifestyle.

CONFUSION REIGNS SUPREME BETWEEN ETHICAL LAWYERS AND UNETHICAL LEGAL PRACTITIONERS by M.A. OLUWALAMBE, ESQ.

Believe the explanation that appeals to your morality or lack thereof.......
HON JUSTICE ONOGHEN, CJN V FRN: 
The position of law
By M. A. Oluwalambe, Esq.

I have read and watched some lawyers expressing a legal opinion on the proposed arraignment of the CJN by the CCB at CCT For offence relating to declaration of assets as required by law.

Some argued that the arraignment at CCT directly without first recourse to NJC is unlawful and they placed reliance on the case of Nganjiwa vs FRN. My opinion shall be solely on the legality of the said arraignment.

Let me start by reproduction of some of the provisions of the Constitution of Nigeria. Fifth Schedule, part I of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended provides in paragraph 11 thereof as follows:

 11.1. "Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, every public officer shall within three months after the coming into force of this Code of Conduct or immediately after taking office and thereafter -
a. at the end of every four years; and
b. at the end of his term of office, submit to the Code of Conduct Bureau a written declaration of all his properties, assets, and liabilities and those of his unmarried children under the age of eighteen years.

11.2. Any statement in such declaration that is found to be false by any authority or person authorised in that behalf to verify it shall be deemed to be a breach of this Code."

The same law provides that no public officer shall maintain any foreign account.

The issue is whether these constitutional provisions apply to the Chief Justice of Nigeria?

Fifth Schedule, part II of the 1999 Constitution as amended provides for the categories of persons recognised by law as public officers. These include:

5. "Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justices of the Supreme Court, President and Justices of the Court of Appeal, all other judicial officers and all staff of courts of law."

Also, Paragraph 12 of part 1 of the fifth schedule to the 1999 constitution provides:

12. "Any allegation that a public officer has committed a breach of or has not complied with the provisions of this Code shall be made to the Code of Conduct Bureau."

in view of the above constitutional provisions, the Chief Justice of Nigeria is a Public Officer. And the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers as contained in the Constitution of the Federal Republic is applicable to him.

No provision of any law makes such allegations of breach of the declaration of assets to be made to NJC.

Some of the acts that amount to a breach of the code of conduct are in Paragraph 11.3, Part 1 of the fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution:

 "Any property or assets acquired by a public officer after any declaration required under this Constitution and which is not fairly attributable to income, gift, or loan approved by this Code shall be deemed to have been acquired in breach of this Code unless the contrary is proved”

Therefore, the argument put forward that the Federal Government ought to have petitioned NJC before arraignment of the CJN at CCT relying on the judgement Of the Court of appeal in the case of NGANJIWA v. FRN is not valid in this case of Mr. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen, CJN, in accordance with the Constitution and Nganjiwa's case.

Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen CJN is both judicial officer and a public officer and he can act in the two capacities as such, His Lordship can, however, be prosecuted by the Code of Conduct Bureau CCB and a conviction by the tribunal can be a basis for NJC's recommendation for removal.

The judgement of Court of Appeal in the case of NGANJIWA V FRN  is mostly relied upon by the lawyers opposing the arraignment of CJN at CCT, I also rely on the position of the Court in the same case but the case is distinguishable from the  Hon. Justice Onoghen case, this position is in line with the judgement of the said court. 

Part of the judgement of the Court of Appeal in the case of NGANJIWA V FRN is as follows:

"It must be expressly stated that if a judicial officer commits theft, fraud, murder or manslaughter, arson and the likes, which are crimes committed outside the scope of the performance of his official functions, he may be arrested, interrogated and prosecuted accordingly by the State DIRECTLY without recourse to the NJC. These classes of criminal acts are not envisaged and captured by the provisions of Paragraph 21, Part 1 of the Third Schedule."

It means that it is not in all cases of allegations of crime against a judicial officer must be first recourse to  NJC.

In my humble opinion, the offences relating to the declaration of assets against a judicial officer need not be first reported to NJC before prosecution doing otherwise is a breach of the Constitution and rule of law.

Therefore, as NJC has duties and powers to control and discipline judges as judicial officers so also the CCB has powers under the law to prosecute a judge for an offence committed as a PUBLIC officer, not as a judicial officer.

The arraignment of Justice Onoghen, CJN at CCT directly without first recourse to NJC is legal because he is to be arraigned for an offence committed as a PUBLIC officer not as a judicial officer because offence relating to declaration of assets cannot be said to be committed within the scope of performing judicial function.

M . A. Oluwalambe, Esq