At the opening of the 55th Annual General Conference (AGC) of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Abuja on Sunday, August 23, he appeared with a package more than a few Nigerians had awaited for far too long. The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed told the august gathering that the nation’s judiciary was on a mission to reform and reinvent itself.
It was time, he insisted, for the judiciary to leave its current manual mode of operation behind, embrace a paperless administration of justice and show the bad eggs in the system – both judicial officers and workers – the exit door.
The new spirit, the nation’s number one judicial officer assured, was aimed at one immediate gain: elimination of unnecessary delays in hearing and determining cases, especially those bordering on corruption.
Justice Mohammed spoke at a time, change had freshly filled the air. President Muhammadu Buhari was just nearing three months in office since he rode to power largely on a campaign anchored on zero tolerance for corruption.
Incidentally, President Buhari was at the same AGC as the special guest of honour. And so it was a perfect time for the judiciary to volunteer its readiness to enlist in the president’s war to free the nation from the vice-like grip of graft. And Justice Mohammed did just that in no uncertain terms.
The CJN and the President of NBA, Mr. Augustine Alegeh (SAN), assured Buhari that the judiciary and the nation’s community of legal practitioners were at one with him in his unwavering desire to punish treasury looters and other kindred characters.
It has been some four months since. And true to President Buhari’s pledge, the nation has witnessed a shaking in the quarters of a lot of men of power and means. A lot of arrests spearheaded by the nation’s economic police, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), have been made and charges have been preferred against some of those who were allegedly established to have dipped their hands in the public till. Most of them served in the President Goodluck Jonathan administration.
One of the most prominent names in this category is Col. Sambo Dasuki, who served as National Security Adviser. He was accused of diverting billions of dollars voted to procure arms to combat insurgents in the North East and other threats to the nation’s peace and security. Twice he has been arrested, twice he has been charged to court and twice he has been admitted to bail by the courts.
It is not just Dasuki alone that has been caught in the arms-funds web. Investigation into the alleged laundering of the arms cash has led to the arrest of the former Chairman of Daar Communications Plc, Chief Raymond Dokpesi, among others. They are all now having their days in court after securing their bail on terms many insist are excessive.
Buhari’s anti-graft radar has also focused on the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA). At the end of the scrutiny of the agency’s books, its former Director-General, Mr. Patrick Ziakede Akpobolokemi was arrested by EFCC and charged with diverting billions of naira belonging to the agency. He was granted bail. But when he returned for his trial before Justice Ibrahim Buba of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos on December 14, Akpobolokemi was seized by a team of EFCC men and bundled into their waiting vehicle when he reportedly resisted being arrested for a second time – just about three days after fulfilling the conditions for his bail and walking out of detention. He is now facing fresh charges in two separate courts.
But the case of the senator representing Ogun East Senatorial District, Mr. Buruji Kashamu appears the most dramatic of all. The senator’s headache actually started in the dying days of the Jonathan administration. The Federal Government claimed there was an extradition request for the senator by the United States of America. Kashamu fought hard and tough in court to crush the determination of the Federal Government to ship him off to the U.S. to face trial for alleged drug peddling.
And then things appeared to have died down with the respite the senator got from his triumph over the Federal Government in court, which ordered the parties to maintain the status quo till a ruling was delivered on the fundamental rights suit the senator filed. But that only proved an ephemeral victory. Despite a court order barring the Federal Government from arresting and sending the senator for trial abroad, operatives of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) unrelentingly mounted a siege to Kashamu’s Lekki home for days. The senator ran into his bedroom and holed up himself, threatening to end his life if the NDLEA attempted to break in.
Buhari later took over the reins of power and inherited the case. The Kashamu-FG battle became fiercer. But the courts subsequently sided with Kashamu. Both Justices Okon Abang and Ibrahim Buba of the Federal High Court in Lagos sustained the senator’s argument that the effort by the Federal Government to extradite him offended the law. A fresh attempt by the Federal Government to send the senator to the U. S. for trial also hit the rocks in Justice Gabriel Kolawole’s court in Abuja. The Federal High Court judge dismissed the proceedings, holding that the fresh suit was instituted in disobedience to the orders of judges of the Lagos division of the court. And the dust settled, although the Federal Government has reportedly appealed the judgements of the courts stopping the extradition of the senator.
The anti-corruption war has also been fiercely staged at Senate President Bukola Saraki’s quarters. It first began like a splash of water on Saraki’s wife, Toyin after her husband emerged the president of the upper chamber of the National Assembly against the wish of his party, All Progressive Congress (APC). Mrs. Saraki was invited for questioning by the EFCC over alleged money laundering during her husband’s tenure as governor of Kwara State.
Then, it became a flood. The Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) quickly dusted the file containing the asset declaration form Saraki submitted as governor and claimed that he was dishonest in listing what he owned. He was taken before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) for trial. Saraki cried “politics” and challenged his trail at the CCT on grounds of jurisdiction. His fight to stop his trial amounted to nothing both at the Federal High Court and the CCT. He then attempted to stay his trial while he appealed. The prosecution, however, successfully, fought Saraki’s attempt with the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015. The tribunal upheld the prosecution’s submission that the act prohibited a stay of proceedings.
Saraki was dissatisfied and appealed. Again, he lost at the Court of Appeal, which ordered him to return to the CCT for trial.
The Senate president climbed further with his complaint to the Supreme Court. He also invited the apex court to order the CCT to stay action on his trial. He got the court’s ears. He won part one. The apex court stayed action at the CCT. Now, the substantive appeal has been argued at the Supreme Court, which has fixed judgement for February 2016.
But long before Saraki began to spar with the Federal Government in Court, the Buhari wind had hit the Sule Lamido family. The former governor of Jigawa State and two of his sons, Aminu and Mustapha, were arrested by the EFCC for allegedly stealing huge sums from the coffers of the state.
They were eventually charged before Justice Evelyn Anyadike of the Federal High Court in Kano. When they applied for their bail on July 9, the court ordered that they be remanded in Kano Prisons till September 28 when a ruling would be delivered. The trio was led to prison. They remained there until they were able to make a fresh application for bail before Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court, Abuja, who held court as a vacation judge. The governor, who had alleged that he was being persecuted for his political conviction, eventually was admitted to bail on self-recognition. His two sons were also released on bail. Their case is still rolling in the judicial mill.
Yet, two others arrested and charged with different offences have since been set free. Coincidentally their arrests and trials started with the Yar’Adua-Jonathan administration and ended with Buhari’s rule. When he was arrested, the EFCC decided to bring a 40-count charge against former Aviation Minister, Mr. Femi Fani-Kayode. He challenged the competence of the charge. The Federal High Court in Lagos upheld his objection in part and quashed 38 of the counts. The Buhari administration eventually inherited the prosecution of Fani-Kayode for the remaining two counts. But at the end of the trial, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia of the Federal High Court in Lagos held that the prosecution’s case was “feeble” and failed to furnish “copious evidence” linking the former minister with the offence. Fani-Kayode was set free.
Former Governor of Bayelsa State, Mr. Timipre Sylva’s walk to freedom, however, triggered a lot of controversy. Shortly before the primary election of APC in the run-up to the last inconclusive governorship election in Bayelsa, Mr. O. J. Nnadi (SAN) showed up before Justice Evoh Chukwu of the Federal High Court, Abuja. He announced appearance in court on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) of the Federal Ministry of Justice, Mr. Muhammed Diri on June 1. Nnadi informed the court that the Federal Government was withdrawing the charge against Sylva in order to “consolidate” it with two separate cases before two other courts against the former governor.
Surprised at the sudden turn of events, EFCC Assistant Director, Legal and Prosecution, Mr. J. O. Ojogbane, opposed the move. But Justice Chukwu upheld Nnadi’s application, holding that the attorney general of the federation was constitutionally empowered to withdraw the charge.
Many observers of the anti-graft war were unimpressed, with some claiming that the Buhari administration was the face behind the mask in a bid to give the former governor a clean bill of moral health to contest APC’s governorship primary.
Perhaps, aware of what was on the way, the counsel hired by EFCC to prosecute the case for it, Mr. Festus Keyamo, had earlier withdrawn from the matter.
In a letter to EFCC, Keyamo said: “Kindly recall that sometime in 2012, the commission briefed my chambers to prosecute Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/23/2012; Between: The Federal Republic Of Nigeria V. Timipre Sylva.
“Since then, we have diligently prosecuted the charge and successfully opposed the bid of the accused person to quash the charge in limine. The court ruled in our favour for the trial to commence and the Court of Appeal also refused to stay proceedings in the trial.
“However, certain recent developments (in respect of which I would prefer not to elaborate) have necessitated my decision to withdraw from further prosecution of the said charge. This is because these recent developments may hamper my effective, efficient and vigorous prosecution of the charge, duties that are expected of every prosecutor.”
And that was the beginning of the end of the whole trial. What was suspected eventually happened. Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja finally conducted a judicial burial for the entire Sylva trial when he dismissed the 50-count charge as constituting an abuse of court process on November 26. It was wrong for the Federal Government to file a multiplicity of charges against the former governor on the same facts, the judge held.
Sylva subsequently moved on to contest the December 5 governorship poll in Bayelsa.
Even so, it is easy to guess that the new regime of anti-corruption trials is far from waning. The Federal Government continues to reassure on its resolve to bring all those suspected to have stolen public funds to book through the courts. The nation waits with bated breath. But many are already measuring the extent to which Buhari can prosecute his anti-graft war with the handling of the corruption trials so far seen in the last four to six months.
So, how helpful have the courts, which Buhari says he relies on to punish alleged treasury looters and recover stolen funds, been so far? Well, there can be no easy straightforward answer. Although most lawyers agree that the judiciary has not done badly in the conduct of corruption trials, their parameters of assessment differ. That is hardly surprising. It is the way of lawyers. It is a question of practice and professional orientation.
Asked to do a performance assessment of the judiciary in the anti-corruption fight by the Buhari administration, Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee on Anti-corruption, Prof. Itse Sagay (SAN) did not mince words in delivering his verdict. The judiciary, he insisted, had performed commendably in the fight to wrestle corruption in the nation to the ground. The judiciary, the eminent lawyer assured, was a very willing partner with the Buhari administration in the battle to end graft in the country.
“The leadership of the judiciary is really at par in this regard with the president. The chief justice himself is passionate about having a clean judiciary, to clean up the administration of justice system and seeing that all corruption cases are prosecuted from the beginning to the end in a short time without any frivolous interferences, which Senior Advocates have perfected over the last years, sabotaging the prosecution of criminal cases in order to share the loot with their clients, which they have been doing shamelessly because of the weak capacity, enjoying a life of luxury, buying private jets at the expense of the suffering masses of this country. So, yes, the judiciary is ready and we’re going to make them more ready. We have certain agenda, certain plans that are going to make them even more ready to participate in the struggle. I tell you the chief justice is in the driver’s seat,” Sagay said.
Mr. Gordy Uche (SAN) could not agree more with Sagay’s assessment of the performance of the judiciary in hearing of corruption cases. The judiciary, he maintained, deserved to be applauded for creditably discharging its responsibility under very daunting conditions.
But he did not just let the matter go like that. He viewed the situation from a trial lawyer’s perspective. For him, where the prosecution fails to do its work properly, the courts would have no choice but to throw out the case. And he thinks this is largely the situation with most of the corruption trials so far. Uche wondered why the prosecution in most corruption cases was more interested in filing charges carrying too many counts that make proof difficult. A government that fails to do the right thing in the trial of allegedly corrupt defendants, he insisted, should not blame the judiciary for performing an impartial role in dispensing justice by setting those whose cases were not proved free.
Uche has support in Mr. Aham Njoku, a pro-rights lawyer. For Njoku, the courts deserved to be commended for their conduct of corruption trials so far. He, however, suggested that some of the courts might have been leaning too much in support of the state in the conduct of the trials.
He faulted the courts for imposing excessive bail conditions in most of the graft trials. The essence of bail, he submitted, was to ensure the availability of the defendant to stand trial. He cautioned against actions capable of giving the impression that the courts were an appendage of the executive in the hearing of corruption charges. The judiciary, he insisted, must continue to see itself as an independent arm of government with the mandate to do impartial and unbiased justice.
Well, whatever the case may be, one thing is certain: Buhari’s anti-graft war can only succeed to the extent that there is a judiciary that is ready and willing to do its work with a sense of urgency and impartiality and there is a prosecution that is prepared to do its job with diligence and base its charges on provable evidence.
About The Nigerian Blogger
0 comments :
Post a Comment