By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

The UDHR was the first document in history to explicitly define what individual rights are and how they must be protected. The Preamble of the document outlines the rights of all human beings: “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people …”

Thus, for the first time in history, human rights were assembled and codified into a single document. The Member States, or sovereign states that are members of the United Nations, came together in agreement to protect and promote these rights. As a consequence, the rights have shaped constitutional laws and democratic norms around the world, such as the Human Rights Act of 1998 in Britain; the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in the United States; the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1983 and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as altered) [“the Constitution”]; both in Nigeria; etc.

1. What led to the Human Rights Day (HRD)?

The United Nations General Assembly established Human Rights Day in 1950 to commemorate the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) on December 10, 1948. Human Rights Day is observed by the international community every year on 10 December. It commemorates the day in 1948 when the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The formal inception of Human Rights Day dates from 1950, after the Assembly passed resolution 423 (V) inviting all States and interested organizations to adopt 10th December of each year as Human Rights Day. When the General Assembly adopted the Declaration, it was proclaimed as a “common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations”, towards which individuals and societies should “strive by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance”.

2. NBA as a key stakeholder on HRs:

The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) is a professional body of lawyers in Nigeria and it plays a significant role in promoting and protecting human rights in the country. NBA is an avowed defender of HRs through advocacy for the rule of law in Nigeria, emphasizing the need for justice, equality, and fairness in the legal system; legal aid and pro bono services; human rights committees; Public Interest Litigations, and through collaboration and linkages with HRs organizations globally and locally.

3. NBA’s Aims and Objectives in its Constitution:

The NBA, by its aims and objectives, as embodied in its Constitution, expresses its overarching vision to uphold the regime of HRs in its operations. Section 3 (11) and (12) of the NBA Constitution, 2021 provides thus:

1(1). Promotion and protection of the principles of the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights, human rights, and people’s rights.

4. 1(2). Creation of schemes for the empowerment of newly qualified members and members living with disabilities, and for the provision of assistance to aged or incapacitated members of the Association.” [Emphasis supplied].

We hold the view that above is the framework that sets up the vision and mission of the NBA in relation to HRs.

4. NBA HRs Institute (NBA-HRI):

The Nigerian Bar Association Human Rights Institute (NBA–HRI) was established to effectively and efficiently promote and protect the rule of law, the independence of the legal profession, and to advance human rights enforcement in Nigeria. It will promote respect for human dignity, and translate human rights into specific guidelines for putting those principles into practice. The Institute provides technical development programmes and is also a resource development framework for advocacy in the Nigerian Bar Association. The Institute has a human rights desk in all the 120 branches of the Nigerian Bar Association across the country. The Human Rights Institute at the branch level is chaired by the Vice-chairman of the NBA of each branch. The Institute is governed by 15 members of the Governing Council saddled with the responsibility of supervising and controlling its affairs. The 1st Vice President of the NBA is the Chairman of the Council. The Institute also has four full-time staff that run its activities daily.

The role of the NBA-HRI is to empower lawyers to manage issues relating to the protection of the fundamental human rights of citizens as guaranteed by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and international instruments to which Nigeria remains a signatory. Also, to participate in the education on human rights, publish regular reports on issues relating to human rights and carry out other related functions in regard to the Human Rights Institute. The NBA-HRI is primarily concerned with the promotion, protection and advancement of human rights in Nigeria and its work is predicated on the standards embodied in the various international and regional human rights instruments ratified by Nigeria in addition to existing local legislations. The mandate of the NBA-HRI is certainly midwifed by the NBA objectives contained in its Constitution as already identified above.

The Strategic objectives of the NBA-HRI include:

To develop human rights policies and programmes for the Nigerian Bar Association.

To implement and advocate for the implementation of the National Action Plan on Human Rights.

To collaborate with the Human Rights Committee of the NBA at National and Branch levels in the implementation of human rights policies and programmes.

To promote, protect and enforce human rights under a just rule of law.

To adopt and implement standards, practices, and instruments regarding human rights accepted and enacted by the comity of nations.

To promote and protect the independence of the Judiciary and the legal profession in Nigeria

To develop programmes relating to rule of law and advocate for compliance with principles of rule of law and due process.

To monitor and ensure strict compliance with all court orders by governments, institutions, agencies, and individuals.

To gather and disseminate information concerning issues relating to human rights, judicial independence, and the rule of law.

To establish and maintain relations with other national, regional and international Human Rights organizations.

To promote the objects, principles, and aims of the Nigerian Bar Association

To collaborate with other organs of the NBA in developing and improving the image and status of the NBA and members of the legal profession in Nigeria.

• To promote compliance of the Nigerian government with regional and international treaty obligations on human rights.

To engage in promoting accountability from public officials.

5. The nature of hrs crisis in Nigeria

The crises beleaguering HRs in Nigeria are multi-faceted. They are hydra-headed and like the octopus have many tentacles. We shall x-ray some key areas of these crises affecting HRs in Nigeria.

1. Judicial Crisis:

The judiciary is a member of the trinity of government. Following the Legislative and Executive Arms of Government which make and implement laws respectively, the judiciary, as per the courts, is constitutionally vested with the powers to interpret laws. It has the mandate to hold power accountable through checks and balances in relation to the other arms of government. In an ideal situation, the judiciary ought to be the last hope of the common man. Right from the colonial era, through the various civil and military regimes since independence, there is no doubt that the judiciary has been at the forefront of the fight for HRs through epoch-making landmark decisions that shaped constitutional jurisprudence, particularly as touching HRs. Such decisions as: Olawoyin v. A-G., Northern Region (1961); Nafiu Rabiu v. Kano State (1980) 8-11 SC 130; Ransom-Kuti v. A.-G. Federation (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 6) 211; Chief Gani Fawehinmi v. General Sani Abacha (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) 228; Ogugu v. State (1994) 9 NWLR (Pt. 366) 1; Uzoukwu v. Ezeonu II (1991) 6 NWLR (Pt. 200) 708; and a legion of other cases, have shaped the landscape and advanced the frontiers of the our legal system in the area of Human Rights practices.

However, our judiciary, particularly in recent times, has become bedeviled with so many interfering crises which have, in turn, affected HRs drastically. Some of the challenges are identified below:

Political corruption through the interferences and undue influences by the Executive and Legislative arms of government, undermining public confidence;

Stifling of independence of the judiciary;

Favouritism of the elite and affluent at the expense of the marginalized. This erodes the ideals of equality before the law (See Section 42 of the Constitution);

Delay in hearing suits especially Fundamental Rights Enforcement actions despite the provisions of the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure Rules for expeditious disposal of Fundamental Rights Enforcement causes;

Threat of violence or harassment of the judges and justices or their relations;

Infrastructure failure such as lack of adequate power supply leading to incessant adjournment of cases;

Inability of the judicially to hold the security agents accountable;

More value is placed on property and assets than on human beings. You can get an order to arrest a ship than to release a citizen wrongly detained.

By Suyi Ayodele

The Oxford English dictionary defines ‘portable’ as “able to be easily carried or moved…” Now, I am using ‘portable’ to qualify Yoruba queens – wives of obas – who are now easily snatched by any loudmouth in town with enough careless cash. A Queen Dammy dashed out of the Aafin in Oyo and landed on the laps of dirty-looking musician Okikiola in Lagos. It is not an isolated case. In Ile Ife, in Ilesa, in Iwo, it happened. Wives of our kings have become snacks (guguru and epa) in the mouths of street urchins. It is sad.

The happenings between Habeeb Okikiola Badmus, popularly known as Portable, and Queen Dammy, the ex-wife of Oba Lamidi Olayiwola Adeyemi III (October 15, 1938- April 22, 2022), the late Alaafin of Oyo, run contrary to the Yoruba ethos of Omoluabi. It is a sad commentary about the future of the Yoruba race, its culture, worldview and respect for age-long traditions.

I could not resist every video of the sordid episodic events not because I cherish them but just to keep abreast with the development and see when sanity would come calling! The question I keep asking myself over the matter is: how did we get here as a race? This is highly disturbing. Couldn’t these two kiss-and-tell spalpeens drag each other without involving the late Alaafin; thereby bringing shame to the entire Yoruba race?

Who are the parents of these ruffians? What about the elders in their communities? Are the two completely out of control, or nobody cares about them? If they are beyond redemption, can’t the race they are denigrating do something?

There are taboos in Yorubaland. One of them is that no man sleeps with the wife of a deity. Yoruba Obas are deities. The Alaafin has as part of his oriki, like every other Oba, “Aláse, ekejì òrìsà” (Sovereign, second in command to the gods). Alaafin is a combination of death (ikú), disease (àrùn), and loss (òfò). He doesn’t die; he lives. He can only change position. Then why these insults on his memory?

The other taboo that speaks to the Portable and Queen Dammy tango is that no mortal has an amorous affair with the wife of a Babalawo and lives to tell the story. By Yoruba cosmology, an Oba is the head of all principalities and powers, Babalawo inclusive. Whether ex, live-in or legal, no man touches the consort of a king and boasts about it later the way Portable is doing. The repercussions are too grave. Here is just an illustration.

In the days of our fathers, three different men had amorous affairs with Orò, the wife of Òrúnmìlà. The affairs produced three different children, all boys. But the defiants did not live to tell the story. Òrúnmìlà, who newly married his wife, Orò, was about to go in to her when he received the Macedonian call to come to Òyán by post because of a calamity in the town. He went with his wife, and they had a child there.

When the child was weaned, and Òrúnmìlà was about to get a second benevolence, another summons came from another distressed town, Ònkò, and pronto Òrúnmìlà again left with his wife. They also had a male child there. Later, Ilé-Ifè called on Òrúnmìlà for another assignment and he went back with his wife and had another male child.

So, when Òrúnmìlà was asked to come to the rescue of another town, he decided to leave Orò behind at Ilé-Ifè. He calculated that he would not stay too long and gave provisions that would sustain his family for the 17 days he planned to spend at the new place of assignment called Olókun. However, after three months, when Òrúnmìlà failed to show up, the 17-day provisions he left for the wife got exhausted and hunger set in.

To salvage the situation, Orò joined a party of women firewood hewers. On their way to the forest, Orò met Òndàáró, who gave her money, slept with her and produced a male child. After weaning that child, she went back to the forest, met another man, Òngòósùn, who also had affairs with her and she had another male child. On yet another trip, Orò met Olúkoóló who gave her money and had carnal knowledge of her. The affair led to the birth of another male child. When each of those men knew Orò was the wife of Òrúnmìlà, they disappeared.

Òrúnmìlà did not return to Ilé-Ifè until after 16 years. He met his wife and the six children. Three of them were for him and the remaining three for the concubines. Òrúnmìlà kept quiet, adopting the Yoruba philosophy of Àgbàlagbà se’nú kodoro (Let the elderly widen his stomach). He taught five of the children, the three from concubines and two of his own, Ifa divination and when they had learnt enough, he sent the three children from other men to other lands to go and practice their trade.

After their departure, Orunmila entered his inner recess. He invoked the power of Ifá and killed Òndàáró, Òngòósùn and Olúkoóló. He fulfilled the wise saying that Akìí fé aya Babaláwo j’ayé (Nobody marries the wife of a Babalawo and lives thereafter), òkìkí gèè n’ílé eni fé’ya Èkejì Òòsà (Wailing and lamentation in the home of the one who dates the king’s wife).

Professor Wande Abimbola blamed the fate of Orò on Òrúnmìlà. The Àwíse Àgbáyé said that Òrúnmìlà was responsible for what happened because when he consulted Ifá, and a sacrifice was prescribed for him before he married Orò, he did not sacrifice the whole goat prescribed but half of it (See Ìjìnlè ohùn Enu Ifá, Apá Kejì, pg. 51). That notwithstanding, the three randy men were not allowed to gloat over their amorous relationships with Òrúnmìlà ’s wife.

If we may ask, what happened that Queen Dammy left Oyo Palace? How, in the first instance, did a character like her get into Alaafin’s harem? We cannot question the late Kábíyèsí. By the appellation, Kábíyèsí, it means that his authority cannot be questioned. I will not do that here, either. But I am worried about the loss of our traditional values.

The rate at which Oloris divorce kings in Yorubaland calls for sober reflections. What happened to the traditional rites of passage for would-be Oloris? Is it normal for our Obas’ wives to dash out of the palaces into the hands of scapegrace like we have in the Portable and Queen Dammy matter? How many Portables are waiting out there for the next Olorì? As far back as 1964, the late Hubert Ogunde enjoined us to think deeply; Yòrùbá Ro’nú. When are we going to do just that? Exactly WHEN?

The issue of Omoluabi concept brings us to the position of the leader of UK’s Conservative Party, Kemi Badenoch, on the parlous state of Nigeria. The reactions of Vice President Shettima, and the unofficial defender of Nigeria, Femi Fani-Kayode (FFK) speak more to the level of intolerance for truth by our leaders.

If Vice President Shettima and FFK were to have their ways, they would change the spousal name of Kemi Badenoch to “Badmouth’! The questions to ask are: what is more painful to Vice President Shettima and FFK in Kemi Badenoch’s statement of facts about Nigeria?

Is it the obvious fact that Badenoch said that corruption had finished off Nigeria? Or she said that she is not a Nigerian but Yoruba? Or, that she had nothing in common with the North of Shettima, which the UK politician said is the haven of insurgents?

Badenoch grew up on the streets of Lagos before she went to the UK. She was already an adult before she ventured out of Nigeria. She is in a good position to make comparisons. Our elders say that when a child has not seen another man’s farm, he boasts that his father’s farm is the largest in the community. The UK politician has seen both the Nigerian farm and the British farm. She knows which is better managed; better administered and has the potential to grow.

What are the issues she raised? First, Kemi Badenoch said she ran away from Nigeria and adopted the UK as “my country”, and would not want to come back to Nigeria, where she “saw firsthand what happens when politicians are in it for themselves, when they use public money as their private piggy banks, when they pollute the whole political atmosphere with their failure to serve others.” We may wish to ask Shettima and FFK if these are not statements of facts. Is it not true that in Nigeria today, there is no difference between the public till and the private purses of our politicians?

Badenoch added that while growing up in Nigeria, “fear was everywhere. You cannot understand it unless you’ve lived it. Triple-checking that all the doors and windows are locked, waking up in the night at every sound, listening as you hear your neighbours scream as they are being burgled and beaten, wondering if your home would be next.” Is that not correct in Nigeria of today?

The eight years that Shettima was governor of Borno State, what was the level of security there? Even now, would the Vice-President venture in Borno without the full compliments of all the nation’s security architecture providing land and air surveillance and protection? Can FFK drive from Abuja to his hometown, Ilé-Ifè, unaccompanied by armed-carrying policemen?

If we go by common sense and the present situation of things in Nigeria, who does Nigeria need most between Kemi and the duo of Shettima and FFK? Would the nation have preferred to have more politicians without clear-cut ideologies; ones who jump from one political bed to another at the slightest change of power, or a Badenoch, who sees the truth and says it? Today, the people in power, who were once described as the direct descendants of the devil itself, are FFK’s buddies! Is that the man who will tell us the type of people Nigeria wants and does not want?

And if the duo of Shettima and FFK are asking Badenoch to drop her Nigerian name, Kemi, what do we ask them to drop? The fog of pretence that has shut their eyes to the naked truth? Truth is always bitter! Badenoch said that as a Yoruba lady, she identifies more with her Yoruba ancestry than the entire country, Nigeria, emphasising that she had nothing in common with the North.

As it is typical of FFK, he threw caution to the wild wind and used indecorous language by asking Badenoch to “Do us a favour by shutting your foul mouth, dropping ‘Kemi’ as your name & changing it to ‘Aunty Jemimah’ instead.” He stated that Nigeria does need nor want her! What banality!

She said: “I find it interesting that everybody defines me as being Nigerian. I identify less with the country than with the specific ethnicity Yoruba. That’s what I really am. I have nothing in common with the people from the north of the country, the Boko Haram area, where the Islamism is. Those were our ethnic enemies and yet you end up being lumped in with those people.”

Up North, how many genuine northerners are happy with the havoc Boko Haram and other insurgents are wreaking over there? How many of our brothers and sisters up North are free to go home? Shouldn’t that be a wake-up call to Shettima and other leaders of the region to tackle the problem headlong instead of calling for a change of name for a lady who simply said it the way it is?

And to worsen the matter, FFK said that Badenoch was doing “PR for the House Ni*gers Association & the racist, fascist scum that constitutes the far-right wing of your adopted country.” Does it occur to FFK that here in Nigeria, nobody gets to power without playing the ethnic card? Is the former minister oblivious of the fact that In Nigeria, patriotism takes the back seat, while selfishness is at the forefront? Does he not know that this accounts largely for why we are where we are today as a people?

In case FFK pretends not to know, may we bring it to his hearing that here, everyone has their selling formula. General Muhammadu Buhari sold himself by calling all of us corrupt. He said he was the only ‘Saint’ around; we bought the dummy and for eight years, the Daura-born retired General showed us shege, as corruption wore three-piece suits, walking our streets with impunity! The best Buhari did was to pick his teeth!

FFK’s current friend and leader, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, bellowed “Yooba l’okan; Emilokan.” He approximated a whole race to himself and got what he wanted. So, what is wrong in Kemi displaying the torn, unwashed undergarment of Nigeria per second if that is what titillates her audience?

There has been nothing she said that is false. What her homegrown critics have been saying is that she shouldn’t have spoken ‘this’ and ‘that’ truth. that runs contrary to the ethos of Omoluabi as a Yoruba lady. If you ask me, I will tell you that Nigeria needs more people like Badenoch and less of Shettima and FFK, for a better country!

By Sonnie Ekwowusi

Stakeholders can take advantage of Afe Babalola- Dele Farotimi conundrum to call for a Summit of lawyers, court personnel (Court Bailiffs, Court Registrars, Court clerks etc) and judges and Magistrates to try to fix the Nigerian judiciary.

Is the Nigerian judiciary beyond redemption? I don’t think so. So, let the stakeholders do something. Let us do something. Heaven helps those who help themselves.

The Nigerian judiciary, as you and I know very well, operates in a bubble or facade. Everything is wrong with the Nigerian judiciary starting from the filing of court process in court, getting the baillif to effect service, applying for certified copy of judgement or ruling, securing a date in court, applying for bail, the police adjudicating on civil cases in Police Stations, getting lawyers to come to court, getting judges to sit, 70% of awaiting trial inmates (ATM) in our Correctional Centres languishing in various detention without any succour coming from anywhere. I can go on and on.

So, let’s do something. Senior lawyers keeping quiet over the oddities plaqueing the legal profession in Nigeria are doing great de-service to the legal profession.

Is it Frank Fanon or ex-US President J F Kennedy who said the hottest place in hell should be reserved for those who keep quiet in times of great moral crisis.

So, senior lawyers should no longer keep mum over the judiciary mess in Nigeria.I am still pained by the damage I incurred flying from Lagos to Abuja to try to attend to two court cases just two weeks ago.

Before leaving Lagos I called the Registrars of the two courts and they assured me that their respective courts would be sitting. But upon arriving at the two courts on the fateful days fixed for the matters the courts were not sitting. No apologies from the Registrars. Nothing. Nada. I had spent a gruelling one week in Abuja incurring expenses. I had taken risks flying to and fro Abuja.

I am suggesting for a Summit of all stakeholders next year. The NBA could facilitate such a Summit or an NGO could shoulder the responsibility of organising such a Summit.

Keeping quiet is not the solution. Pretending that all is well is not the solution either. Gossiping on Social media is NOT the solution. Accusations and Counter accusations are no solution. Insulting others is not the solution. Cooling off in one’s comfort zone is not the solution

Sonnie Ekwowusi

PS: Making money is the only purpose of being a lawyer. It includes justice dispensation, using justice as a fine thread to knith the society. It includes using law as that social engineering often spoken about in legal jurisprudence to fix society