judiciary
Who the cap fits
BY DANIEL BULUSSONESQ
Based on the rotation formula of the extant constitution of the NBA (as amended), the contest for the seat of the president has been zoned to the North with two very competent and worthy senior advocates going for it, in the persons of A.B Mahmood (SAN) a pristine, immaculate gentleman and Chief J.K. Gadzama (SAN) a hunter and farmer who rose from a one bedroom apartment to legal stardom and success.
At the NBA Kaduna branch monthly general meeting held on 6th May 2016, both aspirants spoke to members on why they are the right persons for the job, this column would place emphasis on the policies promised as they affect young lawyers spread across the nation.
A.B. Mahmood’s (SAN) policy is to set up a regulatory committee in the NBA that would seek to promote professionalism in the way law firms are managed and operated.
According to him, it is one thing to be a lawyer; it is another to run a law firm. The regulatory body would ensure that only lawyers capable of providing a comfortable (packaged) environment for lawyers under their employ and pay a minimum benchmark for young lawyers will be allowed to operate as law firms in Nigeria.
In order for the Nigerian legal profession to compete favourably with its international counterparts, we must improve on the way we do things; we must sanitise the system with professionalism for the betterment of young lawyers in the country. He further promised to provide entrepreneurship education for young lawyers to help in self-sustainability and aid growth in the legal profession.
The learned silk concluded by saying he is not a magician and won’t promise what he cannot do; that his promise is professionalism for the benefit of all.
Chief J.K. Gadzama (SAN) a consummate Bar man believes that charity begins at home but does not end there. A good winner and good loser at the same time, he has not missed the International Bar Conference in 10 years and his firm has always sponsored a young lawyer to attend the conference with him, the law firm has under its employ 40 young lawyers, with several interns who are paid handsomely and their welfare taken care of.
The law firm also sponsors 60 young lawyers quarterlyto mentorship programme across the nation and hopes that it continues for a lifetime. He says he is quite aware of the importance of young lawyers’ welfare and would surely cater for them by advocating a minimum wage to be paid to them. He promises a student wing at the NBA Secretariat to avail Law student’s access to information and activities of the NBA.
The learned silk concluded by promising to also re-invigorate, re-strategise, re-boot, and re-load the NBA.
Who then does the cap fit? A difficult question if you ask me. The outgoing administration under the leadership of Augustine Alegeh (SAN) has done well by opening the polls to every lawyer who pays his practicing fees and branch dues as at when due. Now young lawyers who make up close to 40%of the entire profession can decide who they want to lead them to a new dawn.
The beauty of a welfare package can only be felt when there is a channel for it to reach young lawyers across the nation, and this channel is the Young Lawyers Forum. Unfortunately, some young lawyers don’t even know that a forum like this exists and this is bad.
There is need for every branch to have a Young Lawyers Forum and for the incoming president to ensure that the interest of many is taken into consideration as against the interest of a few in the appointment of members into the Young Lawyers Forum Governing Council.
One thing I am certain of is that young lawyers seek professional working environment and career development, minimum wage, an all-inclusive Young Lawyers Forum, viable welfare package like the availability of soft, flexible loans and reduction of our mandatory fees as the burden is overbearing etal.
The right person for the job is one who can assure us of the above and still be accessible to young lawyers when he eventually begins to steer the wheel of the Nigerian Bar Association.
Democracy thrives because the majority decides; it is not about the scoffs and cheers during campaigns, but the votes cast on election day come 23rd and 24th July, 2016.
I wish all contestant the very best of luck and Godspeed!
Do send your comment{s}, observation{s} and recommendation{s} to [email protected] or like us onwww.facebook.com/younglawyerscolumn
Limit of impartiality
By Adelanwa Bamgboye
The issue of whether or not a man can be a judge in his own cause is currently challenging the interpretative skills of the chairman and members of the Code of Conduct Tribunal, (CCT) Abuja. The chairman of the tribunal, Mr. Danladi Umar, is in the eye of the storm and this may lead to a divergence of judicial opinions.
The CCT was last Wednesday asked to take a very hard decision in a motion in which Mr. Danladi Umar, the chairman has been ask to recuse himself.
The motion filed by the defendant, Mr. Rashid Owolabi Taiwo, a retired comptroller of customs is seeking for an order that the CCT chairman should disqualify himself from the tribunal panel that will try (defendant).
Taiwo is standing trial over alleged false asset declaration and corruption.
The retired customs comptroller alleged that Umar in 2012 once demanded a bribe of N10 million from him to pervert the cause of justice in a criminal matter filed against him by the federal government.
When the case came up Wednesday, Fatima Hameed who represented the prosecutor said that she did not come to court with the casefile and asked for 14 days to respond to the allegation made against Umar.
The tribunal adjourned the case indefinitely immediately after Owolabi wrote the petition against Umar alleging that N10 million was demanded as bribe from him by the latter.
It was gathered that the tribunal only heard the case twice since 2013 when the suspect was arraigned.
Taiwo said he would never get fair trial and justice from the CCT boss, having implicated him in the bribery scandal which led to the ongoing trial of his (Umar’s) Personal Assistant (PA) Ali Gambo Abdullahi for criminal offence at an Abuja High Court.
He alleged that the CCT boss had become biased against him for dragging him (Umar) to the anti-graft agency on his demand for N10 million bribe and the part payment of N1.8 million; hence he could not get justice before the Umar-led tribunal as required by law.
Today, research has shown that the two principles of alterem audi partem and nemo judex in causa sua are inadequate to spell out the requirement of natural justice.
The Latin expressions “alterem audi partem” means “hear the other side” while “nemo judex in causa sua” means “no man shall be a judge in his own cause.”
The rule of law espoused in the expression “nemo judex in causa sua” envisaged that there might be a situation in which the judex (judge) would attempt to be a judge in his own case, and this is exactly the situation the CCT chairman has found himself.
On the same day, in another Abuja High court, the EFCC insisted that Umar was freely implicated in the N10 million bribery allegations.
The anti-graft agency told the Abuja High Court last Wednesday that the Personal Assistant to the CCT chairman, Malam Ali Gambo Abdullahi named the CCT chairman as the beneficiary of the N1.8 million part payment made by Owolabi though a bank transaction in respect of the bribery saga.
During a trial within trial by Justice Christiana Orji, the EFCC said the denial by Abdullahi much later after his first statement of September 9, 2013 in which he freely implicated the CCT boss was a mere afterthought.
Testifying before Justice Orji, an operative with the EFCC Abdulmajeed Ibrahim who led the investigation into the bribery allegation told the judge that Abdullahi freely made the statement on September 2013 to the effect that the CCT boss allegedly demanded N10m bribe from the ex-customs boss and that he (Umar) asked him to act on his behalf.
Ibrahim told the court that the denial made by the said Abdullahi in another statement cannot invalidate the first statement of 2013 because it was voluntarily made by Abdullahi who was standing trial in a criminal matter.
The witness who was led in evidence by EFCC counsel, Mr. Andrew Akoja, urged the court to disregard and reject the denial of Abdullahi that he did not give the bribe money to Justice Umar.
Also testifying, another detective with EFCC, Mr. Bala Mohammed, told the court how he was invited in 2013 to participate in the investigation of a petition of one Rasheed Taiwo Owolabi concerning a N10m bribe allegedly demanded by the CCT boss.
The witness told Justice Orji that the Personal Assistant to the CCT boss who is currently standing trial on criminal offenses was invited on August 12, 2013 and he volunteered a statement to EFCC.
Mohammed claimed that Abdullahi was investigated in an open hall freely and that there was no duress, intimidation, harassment or coercion in the cause of the investigation.
The witness insisted that the statement of Abdullahi was made on his own volition and that he freely signed before the head of the investigating team countersigned.
Bala also stated that the issue of duress raised by Abdullahi was an afterthought and uncalled for because he (Abdullahi) was granted bail in his own self-recognition.
Another EFCC witness, a Superintendent of Police, Mr. Reuben Omosieho, corroborated the evidence of other witnesses to the effect that the statement of Abdullahi in the N10m bribery allegation was freely, voluntarily and fairly made.
The witness told the High Court that there was nothing unusual in Abdullahi when he was brought before him to suggest that the statement was made under duress or under any inducement.
Justice Christiana Oji has however adjourned Abdullahi’s case till June 14 for him to enter his defence in the trial within trial being conducted by the court over his claims that he made the statement against the CCT boss under duress and inducement.
Meanwhile, Umar has adjourned the trial of Mr Rasheed Owolabi Taiwo, to May 26, 2016 even as the defendant has asked Umar to disqualify himself from the tribunal panel that will try him.
This issue should not however create any problem for the jurists at the appellate court.
NBA presidency: South West lawyers support Gadzama
By Adelanwa Bamgboye
The South West Lawyers Forum (SWF), weekend pledged to support the bid by Chief J. K. Gadzama (SAN) to lead the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) as its president in the forthcoming NBA elections.
Aside from other aspirants vying for different posts, Gadzama was the only presidential aspirant that addressed the forum.
The pledge is coming on the heels of the adoption of Gadzama by North East Lawyers Forum as its sole candidate.
A screening committee set up by the influential Arewa Lawyers Forum (ALF) and chaired by Dr. Garba Pwul (SAN) had also recommended Gadzama for adoption by the ALF.
Also at the weekend, two pillars of Egbe Amofin O’odua, Chief Bandele Aiku (SAN) and Asiwaju Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) gave their blessings to Gadzama’s presidential aspiration. Aiku had prayed for Gadzama and offered his blessings towards his ambition when the aspirant paid the revered Egbe leader a visit at his country home in Ibadan.
On his part, Awomolo had in a letter he sent to the SWF, expressed “great pleasure” over current efforts to resuscitate the comatose umbrella union of Yoruba lawyers “after the last Bar election that caused the Egbe a humiliating defeat.”
Throwing his clout behind Gadzama’s bid, the influential Egbe elder added: “Chief J. K. Gadzama, SAN, is a good colleague and worthy of our relationship.”
Gadzama had earlier addressed a large audience at the Ibadan branch of NBA.
Responding to remarks by Gadzama at the forum’s meeting held at Ile-Ife over the weekend, protem chairman of the forum, Chief A. A. Ayodele said: “We have listened to our distinguished visitors and colleagues and their submissions. I want to assure you that the West will give you appropriate support.” He added that the forum would fashion out a “symbiotic relationship” with Gadzama for its support.
Speaking earlier, Gadzama said he had served the Bar under various regimes, adding: “I wear the shoe, I know where it pinches. I know the issues, I know the challenges. I want to sustain the work that Alegeh (SAN) has done. But apart from that, I want to give vibrant, courageous, purposeful leadership that will ensure that the NBA remains the conscience of the nation, the eye of the blind, the ear of the deaf, and the mouthpiece of the voiceless.”
Build more facilities to decongest prisons – Okocha
By Clement Oloyede
OCJ Okocha is a former president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). He is the chairman, Council of Legal Education (CLE), Nigerian Law School and former member, National Judicial Council (NJC). In this interview, he speaks on the appointment of judges, the anti-corruption war and other topical issues. Excerpts:
The CJN has said that lawyers can now be appointed as judges even up to the Supreme Court. What is your reaction? Are you “personally” looking forward to this?
The learned Chief Justice of Nigeria has only restated what has already been stipulated in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. It is most gracious of His Lordship. As you will see from the constitution, the qualification for appointment as a judge or a justice, even as a chief justice or chief judge, as the case may be, is basically stated to be practice as a legal practitioner for a certain period of years. In practice however, only three persons had hitherto been appointed to the Supreme Court Bench directly from the Bar, namely the Honourable Justice Teslim Elias, the Honourable Justice Augustine Nnamani and the Honourable Justice Daniel Ibekwe. I do hope that the provisions of the constitution relating to the matter will now be applied as stipulated and as may be appropriate.
On the question whether I am personally looking forward to this, let me say again that I had long ago decided to be a legal practitioner, and to remain at the Bar. I am not interested in a career on the Bench.
Some movements in the legal profession are constantly clamouring for the abolition of the title of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). What is your take on this?
The so-called clamour is ill-advised. All well-meaning and right thinking members of the legal profession agree that there is great merit not only in the institution of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, but also in the retention of the rank. It is a rank which was instituted to honour persons who have distinguished themselves in the practice of law, either as advocates properly so-called, or as academicians and law teachers who have by their written works and teaching capabilities contributed to the development of the practice of law. I must recall that at the Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) held in Kaduna in the year 2010, the Academic Forum of the NBA, under the chairmanship of Professor Ernest Ojukwu, SAN, organised a session of the conference to debate the matter. I was privileged to chairman the session, and arguments were heard for and against the call for the abolition of the rank. At the end of the day an overwhelming majority of the participants at the session voted for the retention of the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria. I am aware that in furtherance of that and other resolutions reached at that NBA conference session, the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee has since continued to fine-tune the conditions for qualification to be appointed a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, and I am satisfied that appointments now being made are properly articulated.
What is your suggestion on the perceived delay in our justice delivery?
Delays in our justice delivery system are real and palpable, not just perceived. The answer, the solution, and the required elimination hang on the following, namely:-(1) The proper establishment of courts, and by this I refer to the proper establishment of more courts, at all levels, taking into account the requirements of each state and of the federation, based on need and the volume of cases, including appeals filed before such courts. Some states need more courts than others, and some divisions of the federal courts need more judges and justices than others.
(2) The appointment of fit and proper persons to serve as adjudicators in such courts be they Customary Courts, Sharia Courts, High Courts, Court of Appeal or Supreme Court. Fit in all the terms of the word, including physical, mental and intellectual fitness; and persons with proper, again in all terms of the word, and with the zeal for the hard work which adjudication requires, and also persons who are not corrupt or prone to be corrupted.
(3) The provision of the required men, equipment and materials to enable the judges do their work with ease, e.g. trained stenographers, adequate recording and reproduction machines, etc. We should also include adequate security for the judges and the courts, as these days we hear of courts being unable to sit or being relocated because of fear for the safety of judges and other adjudicators.
What is your take on Alternative Dispute Resolution as a way to reduce cases in our courts?
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is always helpful, especially with respect to commercial disputes, to avoid taking every dispute to court. But we all know that ADR cannot be adopted for several other matters that are to be taken to court, such as criminal cases. Even the ADR matters invariably end up in court, so the rules and practices in respect thereof need to be fine-tuned to enable us reduce the number of cases that still come to court after ADR mechanisms have been adopted and applied.
What about plea bargain?
Personally, I do not believe in plea bargains. The law must be definitive in its stipulations, and in its application. Nigeria still has the great problem of corruption, and plea bargain, as a mechanism for punishment of criminal offenders, will be abused and misapplied by the criminal elements in the justice delivery system.
What is your opinion on the prerogative of mercy (as enshrined in sections 175 and 212 of the1999 Constitution as a means to decongest the prisons?
The exercise of the prerogative of mercy as provided for in the constitution was not designed to aid the decongestion of prisons, but to grant pardon to deserving persons who had been convicted of criminal offences. You may not know it, but the majority of persons detained in our prisons are not even convicted criminal offenders, but those awaiting trial. The solution to the problem of congestion in the prisons is to build more prisons, and expand existing facilities in existing prisons. It may interest you to note that some states do not even have prisons. E.g. Bayelsa State, which was carved out from the old Rivers State.
A recent report that a Federal High Court Judge in Kogi State sentenced a former chairman of a local government council in the state to two years for each of the 77 count charge (with the sentences to run concurrently) has met with derision from the masses that the judiciary may not be ready to support the war against corruption. What is your view on this?
The masses, i.e. the general members of the public, do not know how the courts operate, and what principles are to be applied in the sentencing of convicted persons. If the judge who passed sentence applied the wrong principles, or applied the principles of sentencing wrongly, the prosecutor is entitled to appeal against the sentence. Period.
What is your assessment of the anti-corruption war of the present government?
The anti-corruption war of the present government appears to be lopsided, and apparently targeted at particular individuals in the opposition political parties of today, while corrupt persons who are in the present government are apparently being shielded and made to look as “sacred cows”. The war against corruption must be total, and devoid of partisan political considerations. Sadly, that does not appear to be the case. Furthermore, the anti-corruption agencies of the State, the EFCC, the ICPC, and even the police, do not appear to be fully and properly equipped to fight corruption in Nigeria, and their capacities and capabilities in that regard do not seem to me to be satisfactory.
