Home Blog Page 882

Private school teachers beg to feed families

PRIVATE school teachers have taken to the social media to beg Nigerians for alms to feed their families.

For most of the teachers, the last time they received any semblance of payment from their schools was in April with many getting between N5,000 and N10,000.

With the school lockdown in its fourth month and no sign of schools’ reopening following the surge in COVID-19 cases in the country, the fear that they and their loved ones may die from hunger should they continue to be silent on their ordeals.

Their cry for help at the weekend moved well spirited Nigerians on micro-blogging site, Twitter, to do giveaways solely targeting private school teachers. One of such gestures was that initiated by influencer, @Mazigburugburu1 which indicated that N400,000 will be shared at N25,000 each to 16 private school teachers who must show proof that they were private school teachers.

Stating why they should be chosen for the gift, some of the teachers posted their identity cards, pictures with pupils, last credit alert received among other things.

One of them, Afolabi Awodeyi, a Post Graduate Diploma (PGD) holder in Computer Engineering who said he lectured at a Polytechnic before the lockdown claimed he earned N7,000 per course in a semester (four months.)

“I have not won anything before. This is one of my lecture notes in the Polytechnic where I earn N7,000 for a course in a semester not a month. I take four courses every semester and that amounts to N28,000 per semester not per month. A semester= four months

“I would love to go into catfish farming and production and I have done my survey and financial analysis but to even see startup capital is another problem,” he said. (The Nation)

Foreign Minister, Onyeama Tests Positive For COVID-19

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Geoffrey Onyeama has tested positive for the Coronavirus (COVID-19) and has gone on self isolation.

Onyeama disclosed this via his twitter handle on Sunday.

“Did my fourth COVID-19 test yesterday at the first sign of a throat irritation and unfortunately, this time, it came back positive.

“That is life! Win some, loose some. Heading for isolation in a health facility and praying for the best,” Onyeama twitted.

The Foreign Minister is among Members of the Presidential Task Force for COVID-19.

A News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) report said that all his aides  have been directed to go for COVID-19 testing immediately.

Buhari Wishes Oyeama Speedy Recovery

President Muhammadu Buhari has wished the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Geoffrey Onyeama, quick recovery as he goes into isolation after testing positive to Covid-19 on Sunday.

President Buhari described the minister as a strong pillar of his administration, commending him for tirelessly working to stem the spread of coronavirus in the country as a member of the Presidential Task Force on Covid-19, and ensuring the safety of Nigerians abroad.

Senior Special Assistant to the President, Media & Publicity, Garba Shehu, quoted Buhari as saying, “The country is eternally grateful to Geoffrey Onyeama for his diligence in attracting international support for Nigeria to defeat the coronavirus pandemic and boost the economy. I wish him speedy recovery.”

On Justice Rahila Cudjoe and AVM Usman Muazu reports, Kaduna govt got it wrong, claims Atyap group

By Sule Tinat Bodam, Secretary-General
Atyap Community Development Association

1. On 29th June 2020, Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye, Special Adviser on Media and Communication to Governor Nasir Ahmad El Rurai, issued a statement informing the public that the Kaduna State Government had set up a White Paper Committee on 1992 Zangon Kataf Crisis. According to Adekeye, the main assignment of the White Paper Committee is “to draft a White Paper on the two reports of the Rahila Cudjoe Commission of Inquiry into the Zangon-Kataf riots of February and May 1992.” As an adjunct to this, the Government White Paper Drafting Committee “will also consider the 1995 report of the Zangon-Kataf Reconciliation Committee, chaired by Air Vice Marshal Usman Muazu.” Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye ignorantly or deliberately claims that the recommendations of the aforementioned Reports “have not received comprehensive response or attention”. The facts below will show that this statement is calculated to misinform the public, as it is quite false.

2. The Government claims that “no White Paper was drafted” by the administrations that set up the Cudjoe Commission and AVM Usman Muazu Reconciliation Committee. While this could apply to the Cudjoe Commission, it is not true that a White Paper was not produced on the AVM Muazu Committee report. The evidence for the existence of a White Paper on the Muazu Committee Report is in a Press Release by the Office of the Executive Governor of Kaduna State of Nigeria, Ref. No. GH/KD/S/315, dated 4th July 2000. The Governor who authorized the issuance of the above referenced document is still both alive and sound. That White Paper is available in Government House Kaduna, and we ask the Government of Governor Nasir Ahmad El Rufai to make the original White Paper on the AVM Usman Muazu Reconciliation Committee public without tampering with the contents.

3. By making such claim that the reports of the Cudjoe Commission and AVM Usman Muazu Reconciliation Committee “have not received comprehensive response or attention”, the El Rufai administration seeks to give the wrong impression that previous administrations of the Kaduna State Government did not address the recommendations made by both panels. On the contrary the Federal and Kaduna State governments over the years took several far reaching decisions on the recommendations in those reports and implemented them. It is therefore imperative to clarify these matters for the information of the public, for it is indeed very strange that the El Rufai government wants to exhume and draft a White Paper on Cudjoe Commission report written 28 years ago, most of the issues of which have been resolved and reconciliation achieved between the Atyap Community and the Hausa Community of Zangon Kataf town. The question arises as to what the El Rufai government seeks to achieve by drafting a White Paper over a report whose recommendations were implemented by the Federal and Kaduna State Governments, and on which any other remaining issues have been overtaken by events, unless the El Rufai administration has other ulterior motives for setting up its White Paper Committee.

4. In paragraph 2 of its statement the Kaduna State Government claims that: “Violent clashes broke out in Zangon-Kataf LGA on 11th June 2020 between two communities that were reportedly disputing ownership of farmlands whose place in the conflict is mentioned in the 1992 and 1995 reports.” Also at paragraph 7, the Kaduna State Government, intent on tying the happenings of 10th and 11th June 2020 in Zangon Kataf to the Cudjoe Commission’s report of 1992, again claims that “Following skirmishes a week earlier, disputes over the same farmlands again led to an outbreak of violence and killings in Zangon-Kataf and Kauru LGAs on Thursday, 11th June 2020.” These claims are false and completely at variance with what actually happened on 10th and 11th June, 2020. Contrary to paragraph 2 of Adekeye’s statement, there were no “violent clashes” between any communities in Zangon Kataf and Kauru LGAs on 11th June 2020. What happened was a peaceful demonstration by youth demanding an investigation into the gruesome murder of a young teacher the previous day. On 10th June, 2020, 32-year-old Yusuf Musa Magaji, son of retired Reverend Musa Magaji, was shot and then slaughtered on his farm in Zangon Kataf Urban District. Yusuf’s brutal murder was the twelfth in a long string of such murders perpetrated by Fulani individuals and groups against Atyap men and women since 2017, which had been reported to the security agencies in Zangon Kataf LGA and Kaduna State, without any response from the authorities. What was worse, the individuals that personally threatened to kill Yusuf Magaji had been reported to the Magajin Gari of Zangon Kataf, who had been witness to the purchase of the farmland by Reverend Magaji while he was residing in Zangon Kataf town 2009. Following the deliberate slaughter of Yusuf Musa Magaji and the subsequent discovery of his corpse by a combined team of Security Officers and Chiefs, Elders and Youth of Atyap Chiefdom, on 11th June 2020 the youth staged a peaceful demonstration, and the soldiers sent from Jos shot and killed one youth and shot and critically injured 12 others, on the same day, after which a 24-hour curfew was imposed on the same 11th June, 2020. It should be stated for the avoidance of doubt that:
(i) The events of 10th and 11th June 2020 were over a criminal homicide or the premeditated killing of a young person.
(ii) Investigation of the crime is on-going although there is clear evidence that the three prime suspects of the murder reported officially to the Police are still walking about free; more so that several such murders in Atyapland since 2017 were treated with extreme levity by the Government of Kaduna State.

5. In fact, in trying to justify the setting up of the Government’s White Paper Committee, Mr. Adekeye mischievously falsified the findings of the Cudjoe Commission. The Commission had stated at paragraphs 20, 21 and 22 of their Report of June 1992, that “the three immediate causes” of the 1992 riots were: the relocation of the Zangon Kataf weekly market; its handling by the authorities and the police; and reactions to the provocative actions of Alhaji Danbala A. T. K. of Zangon Kataf town at the new market on 6th February 1992. As for “the remote causes” the Cudjoe Commission stated at paragraph 24 that it was the “inadequacy of the old market situated in the heart of Zango town”; and at paragraph 25, “the second remote cause is entrenched in the socio-economic set-up peculiar to Zangon Kataf.” Other remote causes in paragraphs 26-28 included “religious intolerance and disregard for each others (sic) customs and traditions by both the Katafs and Hausas”; “mutual suspicion between both communities”; and issues related to “mixed marriages between the Hausas and the Katafs”. The only remote cause related to land was that of Hurumi (communal grazing area), over which the Commission ignored all evidence presented by the Atyap in favour of Hausa claims that a former Hausa/Fulani District Head took the land from the Katafs and gave to the Hausas in 1920. The other remote cause was a dispute over a small piece of land called “Baradawa”, the Atyap ceremonial ground, which the Cudjoe Commission established a Court of competent jurisdiction had ruled in favour of the Atyap in 1984, and over which the Atyap held a Kaduna State Local Government Certificate of Occupancy No. KCH/A/000768 dated 20th August 1986 issued by the then Kachia Local Government, of which the present Zangon Kataf LGA was a part. Where then is the connection between what the Cudjoe Commission wrote and Muyiwa Adekeye’s manufactured fables that what happened in 2020 was over the same land as in 1992? The AVM Usman Muazu Committee had recommended that the Kaduna State Government should investigate whether a former District Head had set aside a piece of land for public use (hurumi) and when, and when that public land became the private farmlands of the Hausa/Fulani of Zangon Kataf, and the legality of those actions. That recommendation has never been carried out. What is more pertinent is whether the action of a District Head (being an appointee of a Governor) in 1920 or 1927 supersedes the delineation of the official boundary of Zangon Kataf Urban District authorised by the Governor of Kaduna State on 11th August 1995, which was mutually agreed by both the Atyap and the Hausa Fulani in the presence of the Governor.

6. The September 1992 Cudjoe report stated that there was “only one immediate cause to the riots of the 15th and 16th May 1992 in Zangon Kataf and that was the uprooting of crops on Hausa farmlands which eventually the Hausas retaliated against, by uprooting crops on some Kataf farmlands” (para. 23). The Cudjoe Commission then contradicted themselves in paragraphs 24 and 25 by rejecting all evidence presented to them and turned around to blame only the Atyap for the uprooting of crops.

7. In considering the remote causes in the September 1992 report, the Cudjoe Commission threw all sense of fairness, balanced consideration of evidence and indeed the very elementary principle that there are two sides to a conflict, ignored the provocative letters and actions of the Hausa, and not only blamed the Atyap, but accused, tried and found them “guilty”, and then enumerated the names of the Atyap to be arrested and jailed. After stating their findings at paragraphs 37, 38 and 39 that neither ACP Juri Babang Ayok (Rtd), Mallam Bala Dauke Ade, nor Gen Zamani Lekwot (Rtd) were involved in the riots, Justice Cudjoe still “reasoned” that because they were “mentioned” by some Hausa witnesses, and that they and several others “did not intervene to stop the riots”, she was quite satisfied that they were “already detained and should be tried in connection with the riots”. Justice Cudjoe did not recommend a single Hausa person, including those who admitted shooting Atyap persons during the riots, and those the Police testified were shooting people with machine guns, for investigation or trial. All the Atyap persons the Cudjoe Commission pointed at on the basis of allegations by “witnesses” were detained, tried, jailed, and sentenced to death or life imprisonment. Is the Kaduna State Government White Paper Committee set up to dredge up the discredited Cudjoe report in order to try and jail the Atyap leaders a second time?

8. In paragraph 3 of the government’s statement read by Adekeye it is stated that the riots of February 1992 led to 95 deaths, and 1,528 deaths in May 1992, 305 in Kaduna, Zaria, Ikara etc. While it was indeed regrettable and unfortunate that people lost their lives, the contents of the two Cudjoe reports show that they derived their figures of casualties from one individual named Ibrahim Kutumbi Chakaikai resident of Zangon Kataf, who claimed to have derived the list from relations of the deceased. There were no subsequent investigations by the Police or any authority admissible in law to verify the claims contained in the memoranda the Cudjoe Commission stated it relied on to arrive at the figures it published in it reports.

9. Adekeye’s claim that the “reports have not received comprehensive response or attention”, is patently false and contradicted by the facts. Most of the Cudjoe Commission’s recommendations were for visiting harsh retribution on the Atyap, and the General Babangida government did so, using Decree No. 2 of 1985 and passing Decree 55 (1992) to oust the jurisdiction of the courts and deny the Atyap the rights of fair hearing and appeal.
a) It is on record that certain Atyap individuals named in the September 1992 Cudjoe report at para. 110(ii), (iii) a. and b. were arrested, detained, tried and sentenced to death, life imprisonment and various other jail terms, and they served their terms. The Okadigbo tribunal, acting as anti-riot policemen, assumed that every Atyap mentioned by the Hausas was guilty and proceeded to jail them. Men of conscience as Godwin Alaye Graham-Douglas SAN, in disgust at the travesty of justice perpetrated by Okadigbo, resigned in protest from the tribunal (The African Guardian, February 15, 1993, 31-33). Between 1992 and September 1994 the Babangida regime, exercising dictatorial powers enshrined in Decree 55 also ignored the judgement of the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights that the fundamental human rights of the Atayp Elders had been violated (African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Communication 87/93Constitutional Rights Project (in respect of Zamani Lekwot and 6 Others) Nigeria: Gross violation of Human Rights in Zango Kataf, Taken at the 16th Session, Banjul The Gambia, October 1994).
b) Cudjoe’s recommendations at para. 110 (v) b. and c. on payment of compensation to the Hausas of Zangon Kataf for losses they sustained were fully implemented by the government. The Commission specified the mode of such compensation at Para. 110(xxiii) a. b. c. and d. Facts from the records of the Government’s Zangon Kataf Resettlement Committee show that even after most of the returning Hausa/Fulani had misapplied their compensation monies and failed to use them for rebuilding their houses, the Government had to take over the building of the houses, in addition to increasing the compensation paid to the Hausa/Fulani.
c) The Cudjoe Commission at para 110 (iv) c. recommended the rebuilding of Zango town, with all the facilities and amenities of a modern town, and it was completely rebuilt by the Federal Government.
d) Recommendations relating to some policemen at para. 110 (vii) a. were implemented and some were dismissed from the Nigeria Police Force.
e) The Commission recommended at para. 110 (vii) c. the building of a Police Station and Police Barracks in Zango town, and it was done.
f) The Cudjoe Commission made recommendations at para. 110 (xii) c. and d. that we reproduce verbatim:
110(xii) c. “Chiefdoms should be granted to all deserving ethnic groups in Southern Kaduna State, if it is adjudged that such a grant will guarantee peace and stability in the State.”
110(xii) d. “As a deterrent to others, the Katafs should be made to tow the line and be the last to be considered for the grant of Chiefdom among the Southern Kaduna ethnic groups; provided the Katafs show remorse and penitence by words or deed.”
This recommendation was implemented by Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa’s administration in 1995 after the AVM Usman Muazu Report, and thereafter by the administration of Alhaji Ahmed Mohammed Makarfi from 2001.
g) At paragraph 87 (i)-(iii) the recommendations of the Cudjoe Commission (June 1992) on all prominent Katafs to be tried by tribunal and jailed by the Federal Military Government were implemented with extreme prejudice, even when the Commission had found that they had no foreknowledge and were not involved in the riots as stated in paragraphs 37, 38 and 39 of the report.
h) In paragraphs 45-49 of the Report of September 1992, the Cudjoe Commission recommended severe punishment for the Atyap leaders for not going to the venue of the riots to tell rioters to withdraw.
i) The Commission recommended the trial and jailing of eight (8) Village Heads and eight (8) village representatives for writing a letter to the Governor, but exonerated the Izala group of Zangon Kataf that wrote a letter to the Sultan declaring a jihad in Katafland.

10. Nowhere in the two Cudjoe Reports did they recommend verification of land claims or reconciliation of the two communities; and certainly did not pretend to be concerned with peace building in the area. How the El Rufai administration proposes to use this very negative, vindictive and bellicose Cudjoe Commission Report as a basis for finding “lasting peace” in Zangon Kataf is simply mind boggling.

11. In paragraph 4 of the Kaduna State Government statement read by Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye he stated that “the elected government of Kaduna State, led by Alhaji Dabo Lere, did not produce a White Paper to set out its official position on the recommendations of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry.” The Dabo Mohammed Lere government could not write a White Paper on the Cudjoe Commission report because that report could not in any way meet the basic requirements of fair hearing, did NOT stand the most rudimentary test of justice, and was neither judicial nor judicious in its operations, conduct and procedure. The Dabo Lere government found that the Cudjoe Report was so bad and biased that it was embarrassing as it had turned from a fact finding to a fault finding panel. No single Hausa man was held responsible for what happened. The Atyap had nothing to do with the subsequent sitting of the Commission, and Cudjoe’s Commission resorted to using hearsay, memoranda from one side and newspaper reports to pass judgments on the Atyap using words like “confrontational”, “could have stopped the Katafs but failed to go to Zangon Kataf” etc, as the bases for their judgments.

12. With regard to the non-issuance of a White Paper, it must be reiterated that when the Kaduna State Government found the proceedings, conduct and report of the Cudjoe Commission to be fault finding, biased, contentious, discredited and embarrassing, it set aside. It was due to the fact that the Cudjoe Report could not serve a basis for peace and stability that the Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa administration set up the AVM Usman Muazu Committee. When the Hausa/Fulani and Atyap representatives on the AVM Usman Muazu Committee completely disagreed on the question of a White Paper on the Cudjoe Report, the Committee at para. 22.03.iv) stated: “In fact unlike the Cudjoe Commission of enquiry, a Reconciliation Committee is not expected to find faults and apportion blames.” Mallam (Now Professor) Kabiru Mato was a member of the AVM Muazu Committee and was party to demanding for a white paper on the jaundiced Cudjoe Report. Is it then a coincidence that the El Rufai administration of which the same Professor Kabiru Mato is a prominent member, is now setting up a White Paper Committee on the Cudjoe Commission report, a move that the AVM Muazu Committee had advised was not conducive for reconciliation and healing process? The AVM Usman Muazu Committee was thus aptly titled The Committee For Reconciliation And Search For Lasting Peace for Zangon Kataf Community.

13. Muyiwa Adekeye said at paragraph 6 of the Kaduna State Government’s statement claimed that the “AVM Muazu committee stated that it could not resolve three burning issues: Ownership over farmlands, Release of White Paper on the report of the Cudjoe Commission of Inquiry, Release of detainees”. By this tendentious statement Muyiwa Adekeye presumes to stand the truth on its head, and pretends that nothing happened after the AVM Muazu Committee submitted its report.

14. Just like with the Cudjoe recommendations, with respect to the AVM Usman Muazu report, the recommendations have been implemented; or are in the process of being implemented, and where they have not been fully implemented, the problem lies with the Kaduna State Government and obstructionist antics of some individuals based in Kaduna.
i. The Muazu Committee, having observed that there were Sharia Courts and a Sharia Court of Appeal for the Muslims in Kaduna State, and no equivalent for the non-Muslims, recommended the setting up of Customary Courts and a Customary Court of Appeal in Kaduna State and it was implemented by the Kaduna State Government.
ii. The Committee at paragraphs 2.03 and 2.04 recommended the creation of a Chiefdom for the Atyap and the administration of Col. Lawal Jafaru Isa implemented it.
iii. At the AVM Usman Muazu Committee sitting, the Hausa Community of Zangon Kataf at paragraph 10.02 formally acknowledged that Zangon Kataf town is located in Atyap land, and requested for the creation of a Zangon Kataf Urban District when the Atyap Chiefdom was created, and the Kaduna State Government under Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa implemented it.
iv. The Hausa community of Zangon Kataf demanded for the creation of a Zango Kataf Urban Electoral Ward for only Hausas of Zango Urban, to separate them from Zonzon Ward, and it was done.
v. The Atyap Traditional Council appointed a representative for the Hausas of Zango Urban, and a representative of the Fulani in the Chiefdom on the Atyap Traditional Council, and this has remained so to this day.
vi. On the status of Zangon Kataf town, because of the false propaganda that has been waged by those against peaceful relations and integration of the communities, it will be necessary to quote the AVM Muazu report at para. 18.00
“18.00 STATUS OF ZANGON KATAF TOWN
In considering elements necessary for peaceful, harmonious living and lasting peace, the two Communities are agreed on the need to define and restate the role and implication of Zangon Kataf town as follows:
i) Zangon Kataf town as the place where the Hausa/Fulani live and have their farmlands;
ii) Zangon Kataf town as a District Headquarters for all the communities in the district;
iii) Zangon Kataf town as the Administrative Headquarters for the purposes of siting projects;
iv) Zangon Kataf town as the potential Headquarters in the event of the creation of a new Local Government;
v) Zangon Kataf town as the Headquarters in the event of the creation of Kataf Chiefdom;
vi) Zangon Kataf town as the Headquarters in the event of the creation of the Zangon Kataf Urban District.”
Shockingly, in utter disregard to the AVM Usman Muazu Committee’s recorded agreement by the two Communities quoted above, when the Gazette documenting the creation of the Atyap Chiefdom was published, a “Printer’s devil” stated the chiefdom headquarters as “Samaru Kataf”, which the Atyap rejected.

15. The Kaduna State Government in 1999 approved the siting of the Atyap Chiefdom Headquarters at “Atak-Jei Samaru Zangon Kataf”, after both Hausas and Atyap had met and greed on it, and awarded the contract for the construction of the Agwatyap’s Palace vide document Reference No. KD/KSTB/S.8/VOL.III/421, dated 15th November, 2000.

16. In several letters and petitions written by a group called Zangon Kataf Development Association signed by one Abubakar Ibrahim Zango, purportedly “on behalf of the Hausa/Fulani of Zangon Kataf”, threatened mayhem and breakdown of peace unless the Kaduna State Government demolished the Agwatyap’s Palace and relocated it to Samaru Kataf. This Zangon Kataf Development Association made false claims that the palace is on Zangon Kataf Urban District land which they further falsely claimed was inhabited by “100% Hausa-Fulani Muslims”. The Kaduna State Government under Col. U. F. Ahmed vide letter Ref. No. SEC.750/VOL.IV/890 dated 10th March 1999, asked the Chairman, Zangon Kataf Local Government to investigate and report on the matter. In his letter to the Secretary to the State Government, Ref. No. ZKLG/S.I/68, dated 18 March 1999, the Chairman, Zangon Kataf Local Government stated:
“2. I wish to inform you that I have had discussions with the District Head of Zango Urban District, Alh. Muhammadu Bala, on the above subject matter. In the discussion, he made it clear to me that it is not true that Alh. Ibrahim Abubakar Zango wrote the letter…on the mandate of the Hausa/Fulani Community resident in the Zango Urban town…The District head also denied the claim that the “Community has not attained a level of reconciliation with the Kataf Community as he (Ibrahim) himself does not reside in Zango Urban District nor does he visit the town often, to enable him make such misleading assertion about the level of reconciliation.
“3. On the issue of farmland still claimed to be in the control of some Kataf people, the District Head explained that His Royal Highness, the Agwatyap, Mal. Bala Ade Dauke, has since intervened in the issue, where he has warned/advised the Atyap (Kataf) people, who still occupy or are in possession of farmland belonging to the Hausa people, to release or hands-off them immediately. This warning/advice is being complied with by the Kataf people; which has led to the much achieved reconciliation and peaceful co-existence among the two (Kataf & Hausa) tribes in the town.

17. Because of continued agitations and obstructions by some Kaduna based Hausa-Fulani, the Kaduna State Government subsequently issued two statements in 2000 and 2001 to clarify issues. On 4 July 2000, the Office of the Executive Governor of Kaduna state issued a Press Release No. GH/KD/S/315 signed by Malam Lukman Musa, Chief Press Secretary, in reaction to the religious mobilisation embarked upon by Abubakar Zango and his group, which purported to demand that government should relocate the Hausa Fulani to another territory inhabited entirely by Muslims if the Agwatyap’s Palace must be in Zangon Kataf Urban District, the Government stated:
“His Excellency the Executive Governor, Alhaji Ahmed Mohammed Makarfi held a meeting today Tuesday, 4th July, 2000 with the Zango/Atyap people on urban fadama land dispute between the Communities.
2. At the end of the meeting the following decisions were taken:
(i) That Government will not in anyway temper (sic) with Zango Urban land.
(ii) That Government will implement other decisions contained in the White Paper on the issue.
(iii) Similarly, Government will implement all other Reports on the issue and not on the basis of tribe or religion.
3. Kaduna State Government warns that it will not entertain further agitations on the Urban/Fadama land dispute.”

18. As the Kaduna State Government proceeded with implementing the contents of the White Paper on the Muazu Committee Report and various committees set up towards realising peace in Zangon Kataf, the Kaduna based groups intent on torpedoing the peace process increased their desperate acts of sabotage and anti-Atyap and anti-government propaganda. On the false claim that the Agwatyap Palace was located on Zango Urban land, the Government stated in a paid advertorial dated 20 April 2001:
“So much fuss is also being made by the so-called leaders [Kaduna based Zangon Kataf Development Association] in respect of the location of the headquarters of the Atyap Chiefdom, which to the best of the knowledge of government is Samarun Kataf territory. Authorities of the Chiefdom are therefore at liberty to locate the Chief’s palace anywhere within the radius of Samarun Kataf territory.”
The site of the Agwatyap’s palace was located outside Zango Urban District, in Unguwan Gaiya District in which Samaru Kataf is located, even when the Muazu Committee had recommended that it should be inside Zango Urban town to foster unity and communal integration.

19. The AVM Usman Muazu Committee recommended at para. 17.00 that the State Government should “set up High Powered Committee with relevant technical personnel to resolve the ownership of disputed farmlands” as part of the reconciliation process. The Military Administrator of Kaduna State, Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa, set up the High Powered Committee with himself as the Chairman. In company with Commissioners, Permanent Secretaries and State Government surveyors, the Military Administrator personally went to Zangon Kataf on 11 August, 1995, and invited equal numbers of representatives of both Hausa and Atyap Communities, to a meeting at the Government Secondary School Zangon Kataf, with Bajju, Ikulu, and Anghan Community representatives serving as witnesses.
a) The Military Administrator, Col. L. J. Isa, in company of representatives of the Hausa/Fulani and Atyap Communities, accompanied by all witnesses, with the aid of the Technical Staff/Surveyors of the Bureau for Lands, Surveys and Country Planning, with the proceedings being video-taped, walked round the entire land area of Zango Kataf town, with members of the two communities pointing out the boundary lines and points, with the government surveyors planting stones and Beacons and taking the coordinates to demarcate the land area of what later became the Zango Kataf Urban District, and the two communities agreed without any exception. The Survey Division of the Kaduna State Bureau for Lands, Surveys and Country Planning produced two Maps, A Plan Shewing Control Surveys Of Zangon Katab Urban Area, Zangon Kataf Local Government Area, Kaduna State, 1995; and a comprehensive and detailed Survey Plan Shewing Zango Kataf Urban District at Zangon Kataf Local Government Area, Kaduna State: Area = 669.0 Hectares (1,653.3 Acres), June 1996. The Maps show the Area outside Zango Urban District for the “Proposed Atyap Chiefdom Headquarters and Township Development Area” to be in Ungwar Gaiya and Ungwar Wakili Districts. These Maps are available at the relevant Departments of the Kaduna State Government Service. Between 1996 and 2002 all issues of payment of compensation for land acquired for the construction of the Palace were ironed out at several meetings mediated by the Zangon Kataf Local Government Lands Department, the Atayp Traditional Council and the Districts Heads of Zango Urban and Unguwan Gaiya District. Contrary to the claims in the Statement signed by Mr. Adekeye, there is absolutely no dispute between the Hausa Community and the Atyap Community over Zango Urban District land.
b) The Military Administrator demarcated a Buffer Zone measuring 50 metres on both sides of the boundary line demarcating Zangon Kataf town, which later became Zangon Kataf Urban District, and both sides undertook that no one was to farm on the Buffer Zone, and beacons were placed to delineate the Buffer Zone, and it was agreed by both sides. On June 3, 1996 the Zangon Kataf Local Government Council reported that the issue of the Buffer Zone had been laid to rest. No Atyap individual or group has ventured into the Buffer Zone, and those raising issues over it are Zangon Kataf Urban Development Association members living in Kaduna, against whose meddling previous District Heads of Zango Urban District have complained several times to the Atyap Traditional Council, the Zangon Kataf Local Government, and the Kaduna State government.
c) Further to this, the Kaduna State Government approved the designation and demarcated the valley and wetlands (fadama) around Zango town to be irrigated, and to be allocated and used jointly by both Hausas and Atyap, and representatives of the Communities agreed, subject to compensation being paid to the land owners. Through letter SEC.750/VOL.IV/628 dated 16th July 2000, the Secretary to the State Government instructed the Permanent Secretary, Bureau of Lands and Surveys, Kaduna to carry out the survey and demarcation. Several assessments have been made for payment of compensation for the irrigation site, but to date no such compensation has been paid by the Kaduna State Government.
d) The AVM Usman Muazu Committee recommended at paragraph 11.04 i) and iii) that in pursuit of reconciliation Government should expand Zangon Kataf town and create an integrated layout to be allocated to Atyap, Hausa and any other Nigerians, to build residential houses and live together. This layout was approved by the KDSG and communicated to the Surveyor General of Kaduna State, and the Zangon Kataf Local Government Council by the Commissioner of Water resources and Chairman Committee on Zangon Kataf Land Disputes, through letter Ref. No. MWR/ADM/S/69/S.1/VOL.1/20, dated 15th December 2000. The survey and layout Plan titled Proposed Tak Jei Residential Layout Zangon Kataf LGA T.P.O 860 was completed and signed by Alh. Magaji S. Hunkuyi, Honourable Commissioner, Ministry of Lands, Surveys and Country Planning on 12th April, 2010, and Approved by the Executive Governor of Kaduna State, Arc. Mohammed Namadi Sambo on 12th April 2010. In accordance with the recommendation of the AVM Usman Muazu Committee that the Chiefdom headquarters be in the expanded and integrated settlement, the Agwatyap’s Palace is situated within the Government Approved Layout. Surprisingly on 4th January, 2018 the Ministry of Local Government, who’s Commissioner was Professor Kabiru Mato, wrote a letter Ref. No. MLG/BM/I/S.7/VOL.I/186, signed by Barr. Hassan M. Lawal, Director Boundary and Chieftaincy Affairs for the Hon. Commissioner, saying that “It has come to the attention of His Excellency the Governor that a Layout Committee has been constituted by the Atyap Traditional Council for the proposed Takjei Unity Housing Layout”. It is strange that the El Rufai administration should make the above statement when they know that the design of the Layout had earlier been completed and approved by the former Governor of Kaduna State, Arc. Mohammed Namadi Sambo, on 12th April 2010.
e) At the Parley convened and chaired by the Military Administrator of Kaduna State, Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa, on 11th August 1995, at Government Day Secondary School Zangon Kataf, after a long admonitory speech by the peace-making Governor, the Agreement on creation of Atyap Chiefdom, Zango Urban District, religious freedom and rights to farmlands and property was worked out. The Atyap were asked to nominate three Elders to restate what they wanted the government to do for them to maintain peace and good neighbourliness. The three Atyap Elders led by Adi Along Angulu stated that they wanted Atyap Chiefdom; they wanted their dignity restored to them through equity, and for discrimination against the Atyap and punishment of their leaders stopped. They pledged that the Atyap would abide by the Peace Agreement. The three Hausa Community Elders led by Alhaji Mato Zango asked for a Zango Urban District for the Hausa/Fulani; freedom to practice their religion; right to their farmlands and their own Zango Ward and Councillor separate from Zonzon Ward. They also pledged to abide by the Peace Agreement.
f) The Military Administrator repeated each statement in the Agreement, which were affirmed by the participants. The then District Head, Mallam Bala Dauke Ade undertook to ensure that the two communities would do their part to implement the letter and observe the spirit of the Agreement. An Islamic Cleric, the Imam of the NNPC Mosque Kaduna, stood, repeated the contents of the agreement and prayed for its successful implementation. The Vicar General of the Catholic Archdiocese of Kaduna, also restated the contents of the Agreement, prayed over and blessed the two communities to ensure its peaceful implementation. The proceedings were video-taped by the Government House crew, and the video tapes are available.
g) Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa’s administration approved the sum of Four Million Naira (N4,000,000.00) as compensation for the irrigation land, which was subsequently increased to Forty Million Naira (N40,000,000.00) by the Arc Mohammed Namadi Sambo administration. The two communities met and agreed to accept the compensation, but some Hausa individuals came from Kaduna and insisted that the Zango Hausa community must not accept the payment.
20. In 2015, Gov Nasir El Rufai set up the Committee to Stamp Out Attacks on Southern Kaduna Communities (the General Martin Luther Agwai Committee). The report states inter alia:
“LAND AND BOUNDARY ISSUES
“The attention of the Committee was drawn to a number of land and boundary disputes in the State and their role in generating violent conflict in the state.
“7. The Demarcation of Zango Urban District
“Findings
1. The post-1992 Zangon Kataf Crisis Peace Committee agreed that the Zango Urban community should not own land beyond the stream before entering the town from Samaru-Kataf.
2. The then government decided to pay the sum of N4 million as compensation to the affected people. This was not done.
3. The government of Namadi Sambo reviewed the compensation sum upward to N40 million. It still has not been paid.
4. The land has since its excision been used as community land for irrigation farming by both Hausa and Atyap people.

“Recommendation
“Government should pay the N40 million compensation to put the matter to rest.”
Kaduna State of Nigeria, White Paper on the Report of the Committee to Stamp Out Attacks on Southern Kaduna Communities, 1st February, 2016, Chapter 6, Land And Boundary Issues
S/No. COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATION GOVERNMENT DECISION
7.35 Government should pay the N40 million compensation to put the matter to rest. Government accepts the recommendation

The Government has not implemented its decision as contained in the White Paper it published in 2016.

21. In paragraph 7 of their Statement, the Kaduna State government said that:
“Following skirmishes a week earlier, disputes over the same farmlands again led to an outbreak of violence and killings in Zangon-Kataf and Kauru LGAs on Thursday, 11th June 2020.”
Contrary to the above claim, Yusuf Magaji was killed not over a disputed farmland. Yusuf was killed on land his father had purchased from a Hausa family of Zango Urban in 2009 at the cost of N400,000.00 and the transaction was duly documented with witnesses. There was also no dispute over farmland in Kauru LGA. The events of 11th June 2020 had nothing to do with the skirmish of 5th June 2020. The skirmish of 5th June 2020 was over the uprooting of crops by some Hausa people from Zangon Kataf town at Gidan Zaki, about two (2) kilometres away from the boundary of Zangon Kataf Urban District. The skirmish of 5th June at Unguwan Zaki was amicably settled on the spot by the Atyap Traditional Council, Zango Urban Elders and Security Agents. The peaceful demonstration of 11 June 2020 was over the brutal murder of Yusuf Musa Magaji. The statement that there was “an outbreak of violence” over farmlands is a repeat of a fallacy.
22. Muyiwa Adekeye in paragraph 8 insists on repeating the falsehood that “one of the factors identified by the Justice Cudjoe Commission as an immediate cause of the 1992 carnage in Zangon-Kataf is still a trigger for murder and unlawful conduct, 28 years after that tragedy”. It has already been shown that paras. 20, 21 and 22 of Vol. 1 of the Cudjoe report states that disputes over farmland were not the causes of the February 1992 disturbances. While at para. 23 of Vol. 2 of Cudjoe’s report the uprooting of crops was given as the trigger of the May 1992 riots, at para. 24 Cudjoe rejected the report of the Department of State Service that the uprooting of crops by Hausas on the farm of Mallam Ishaku at Ungwan Tabo sparked the riots simply because the Commission had already judged and sentenced only the Atyap over the unfortunate riots. The following facts must be stated:
a) Ungwan Tabo is two kilometres from the boundary of Zango Urban District, and Hausas owned no farmland there, a fact Cudjoe ignored 28 years ago.
b) Gidan Zaki, where the Hausa uprooted crops on 5th June 2020, is two kilometres away from the boundary of Zango Urban District, which the Kaduna State government does not want to hear about.
c) That Elders from Zango Urban, Atyap Elders and the security agents settled the skirmish of June 5, 2020, and it was not violent, but Mr. Adekeye’s statement mischievously says it was “a trigger for murder and unlawful conduct” six (6) days later.
d) The “murder and unlawful conduct” was the murder of Yusuf Magaji, whose perpetrators, although reported to the Police and the Kaduna State government, are still going about free.
23. The Kaduna State government says in its statement that it has set up the White Paper Committee to achieve peace and harmony in the State. It has been shown above that the Cudjoe Commission report was vacuous, tendentious, biased and calculated to judiciously murder all the leading Atyap personalities. That was why it was rejected by the Government of Kaduna State and the Atyap people 28 years ago. Revisiting that violently biased report today will not and cannot foster peace. The military dictatorship of General Babangida promulgated a Special Decree to set up a tribunal that was given powers above the Supreme Court of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, to try and sentence Atyap leaders to death. Muyiwa Adekeye and his government cannot pretend not to know that subsequent federal administrations pardoned the unjustly convicted Atyap leaders and set them free. What “peace” does the Kaduna State Government want to achieve today, except they have some predetermined motives they want to serve. Why has the Kaduna State Government not investigated the murder of Yusuf Magaji and the 11 other Atyap cold bloodedly murdered by Fulanis under this administration since 2017?

24. Muyiwa Adekeye carries falsehood to ridiculous levels by claiming in paragraph 11 of his statement that “The events of 11th and 12th June 2020 in Zangon-Kataf and Kauru LGAs offer compelling evidence that these persistent contentions over farmlands is a conflict trigger”. Since 1992, and especially following the AVM Usman Muazu Reconciliation Committee, and the Peace Agreement brokered by Governor Lawal Ja’afar Isa in 1995, there has been peace in Atyap Chiefdom. In furtherance of peace in the land the Atyap chiefdom authorities took several steps, some of which have been enumerated above. In addition:
a) The Atyap Traditional Council in 1996 set up a 14-member committee made up of 7 Hausa and 7 Atyap representatives to identify owners of farmlands in and around Zangon Kataf Urban District. All the Hausa claimants took over their farmlands. Over the years the Hausas have sold more than 80% of their farmlands to private individuals, and all the transactions were witnessed by Hausa Village Heads and District Heads of Zangon Kataf Urban District, and the transactions were documented. The farmland on which Yusuf Magaji was killed was purchased by Reverend Musa Magaji at the sum of N400,000.00, when he was residing inside Zango town, and was duly receipted and documented. Those who threatened to kill Yusuf Magaji if he did not stop cultivating his father’s piece of land were not the previous owners of the farmland. When the death threats were reported by Reverend Magaji and his son to the Zango Village Head who officially witnessed the sale of the land, he dismissed the threats as coming from “rascals”. These facts are known to the Police.
b) A committee set up by the Kaduna State Government chaired by His Royal Highness the Chief of Moro’a, Malam Tagwai Sambo, recommended the accelerated development of the marshland for irrigated farming, but the government did not implemented it.
25. On February 18, 2016, and November 28, 2016, Zango Urban Development Association wrote petitions to Governor Nasir El Rufai on alleged “Unlawful Relocation of Atyap Chiefdom Headquarters and Refusal of Atyap Chiefdom to Vacate Our Farmlands in Breach of the Reconciliation Agreement in 1995”. In the petitions Zango Urban Development Association made several false claims:
(i) That “Zango Urban District was created in 1996 from the old Zango District under Zazzau Emirate even before the creation of Atyap Chiefdom”, and then they attached the Kaduna State Creation of Chiefdoms Edict No. 7 of 30th November, 1995. For the record, Zangon Kataf Urban District was created in 1996 along with other Districts of the Atyap Chiefdom. Their statement that “Ikulu and Atyap Chiefdoms were created thereafter from the old Zango Urban district” is obviously false.
(ii) Their claim that Kaduna State government failed to create a Zango Urban chiefdom exclusively for Hausa/Fulani has no basis, as the contents of the AVM Usman Muazu Committee Report and the Video Tapes of the proceedings of the Parley of 11th August 1995, show that the Hausa/Fulani community asked only for a Zangon Kataf Urban District, and it was created for them.
(iii) Some persons claiming to represent the Hausa/Fulani of Zangon Kataf Urban District kept on writing to ask for creation of a Hausa Chiefdom in Kataf land until the Kaduna State Government exposed their fraud in publications in 2001, and the Zango Urban District authorities denounced them.
(iv) On 3rd April 2012 at the Council Chamber of Zangon Kataf Local Government, Zonkwa, one Alhaji Mohammed Umar from Abuja asked the Kaduna State Peace and Reconciliation Committee to recommend the creation of a Zango Urban chiefdom, and the Hausa/Fulani elders of Zango Urban District at the meeting said that they did not know Alhaji Mohammed Umar.
(v) Between February and November 2016 the Zango Urban Development Association using the District Head’s office at Zango and BZ 22 Sardauna Crescent Kaduna as their addresses, wrote a “Petition on the Unlawful Relocation of Atyap Chiefdom Headquarters and the Refusal of Atyap Chiefdom to Vacate Our Farmlands in Breach of Reconciliation Agreement in 1995.” The petitioners asked the governor to demolish the Atyap Chiefdom palace and take it to Samaru Kataf, and force the Atyap to vacate their ancestral lands in Ungwan Gaiya District, which the Zango Urban Development Association falsely claimed to be located in Zangon Kataf Urban District. They also demanded for the creation of a Hausa/Fulani Chiefdom in Atyapland. The Governor of Kaduna State through the Commissioner of Local Government in letter Ref. No. MCA/BM/1/S.07, dated 6th December, 2016, asked the Atyap Council Secretary to investigate the matter and report to the government. In their response the Atyap Traditional Council stated that the so-called Zango Urban Development Association was not known in the Chiefdom, was spreading falsehoods over non-existent “land disputes” and that there was no agreement anywhere about creating a chiefdom for Hausas out of Atyapland.
26. In April 2017 the District Head of Zango Urban District requested that His Royal Highness the Agwatyap should look into persistent complaints of some land allegedly being illegally held by some Atyap in Zango Urban District. The District Head said he wanted the matters of complaints to be settled permanently. Accordingly, the Agwatyap appointed a committee chaired by AVM Ishaya Shekarri (Rtd), on which the Zangon Kataf Urban District nominated eleven members, including the District Head and Professor Kabiru Mato. A Sub-Committee on land ownership identification was set up by the main committee. When Professor Kabir Mato saw the spurious names being submitted by some of the Hausas of Zango Urban who climed to own land outside Zangon Kataf Urban District, he advised that verification should be done. This led to the appointment of a Verification Sub-committee. Every claimant was asked to go and stand by his piece of land. The Verification Sub-committee had completed the exercise in Ungwan Gaiya District, and it was found that the Hausas had sold virtually all their farmlands. It was when the Sub-Committee was to move to Zonzon District that the uprooting of crops took place at Gidan Zaki, two kilometres outside the boundary of Zango Urban District. There had never previously been any contest over Gidan Zaki lands. In fact, there is no contiguity between Gidan Zaki District and Zango Urban District. It was clearly an attempt to abort the completion of the land verification exercise, which had hitherto been done peacefully and amicably. Hausas going to uproot crops at Gidan Zaki was calculated to start a confrontation, which fortunately, was nipped before it escalated.
27. Since 2017 a pattern has been established, whereby whenever agreement has been reached over any issue and the agreement put in writing and signed by the Hausa living in Zangon Kataf town and the Atyap, some persons would later come from outside Zangon Kataf LGA and instigate the Hausa to repudiate the agreement. Also since 2017, there have been deliberate provocative killings including brutal cold-blooded slaughtering of Atyap to provoke reactions. Those killed were:
1. Victor Daniel Bobai
2. Constance Bulus
3. Monday Tyokpat
4. Simon Dariya
They were gunned down by Fulanis at Samaru Kataf market on Tuesday 17 January, 2017.
5. Danladi Yunana, shot and killed at Kurmin Masara on 20th April, 2018.
6. Bako Laah Khajiit, battered to death on his farm at Majuju, Ungwan Gaiya, on 6/10/2019.
7. Jonathan Yahaya (Agwatyap’s younger brother), slaughtered on his farm at Magamiya on 10/11/2019.
8. Tabat Mba Pama, slaughtered at Gan Gora by two Fulani men he had conveyed on his motor bike on 7/12/2019.
9. Miss Priscilla Nicodemus, shot and killed at Gan Gora market on 17/1/2020.
10. Miss Bridget Yashim, shot and killed at Gan Gora market on 17/1/2020
11. Laraba Namiji, killed on her farm at Magamiya on 12/3/2020.
Not one of these murders was diligently investigated and prosecuted.

28. The Atyap Traditional Council has always taken concrete steps to maintain the peace in the Chiefdom, despite several provocative, disloyal and disrespectful statements and actions targeted at the person of His Royal Highness the Agwatyap. His Royal Highness has bent over backward to engage personally with those attacking his person and desecrating the Atyap Traditional Institution. Even in the face of the various provocations and continued killing innocent people in Atyap Chiefdom, the paramount ruler of the Atyap has not relented in his efforts to maintain peace and harmonious relations in Atyap land.

29. In continuation of their provocative actions, on 5th June 2020, there was a skirmish when some Hausa people from Zango town crossed over Zango Urban District and crossed Zonzon District, and went over to Gidan Zaki farmlands about two kilometres away from Zangon Urban District and began uprooting growing yams, cassava and maize from farmlands belonging to the Ma Zaki villagers. The Atyap Traditional Council and the Security Agencies in Zango quickly intervened and amicably settled the matter, which was reported to the Kaduna State government. No one was injured in that incident. Strangely, on 12 June 2020, Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association Kaduna State branch issued a press release signed by Ibrahim Bayero Zango claiming that what happened on 11 June 2020 was a crisis over farmland. It is unfortunate for the Kaduna State Government, through Muyiwa Adekeye to repeat the claims by Miyetti Allah, in order to avoid investigating the murder of Yusuf Magagji, just as it had deliberately failed to investigate the eleven previous cold blooded shootings and slaughters of Atyap individuals between 2017 and 2019. It is also clear that by tying the events of 10 and 11 June 2020 to the Cudjoe Commission of 28 years ago, the government is creating an excuse to revisit the dead Cudjoe Commission report of 1992 for reasons best known to them.
30. Following the events of 10th and 11th June 2020, Fulani organizations based in Kaduna metropolis, wrote a “History of Zangon Kataf” on 14th June 2020 in which they claimed that a British imposed Hausa/Fulani District Head of Zangon Kataf, posted from Zaria Emirate had “specified a boarder (sic) of 4 miles’ radius, approximately 6.4km for the Hausa Fulani Community of Zangon Kataf in 1927”, which they claim was supposedly documented in a “Zazzau emirate Gazette, (1956).”
31. Within 24 hours of receiving this convoluted “history” written by Miyetti Allah containing such bogus land claims, the Kaduna State Government sent a team of officials from KADGIS, who went to Zango town and were met by a group of Hausa persons who took them far into Atyap villages, as far away as four kilometres beyond Zangon Urban delineated land, falsely claiming that all those Atyap villages were on Zango Hausa farmlands. Some Hausa Elders objected to those barefaced falsehoods and withdrew from the exercise. The leader of the team of “surveyors” was the Senior Special Adviser to the Governor in KADGIS, in charge of allocating lands, and now appointed a member of the White Paper drafting committee.
32. The obvious intent of these actions by the El Rufai administration is to rubbish the Peace Agreement brokered by Col. Lawal Ja’afar Isa as Governor of Kaduna State in 1995, and find excuses to abrogate all the recommendations of that committee implemented and passed into law and gazetted by previous Governments of Kaduna State, by pretending that nothing has been done on the recommendations of the AVM Muazu Reconciliation Committee. We find it a curious coincidence that since Professor Kabiru Mato, from Zangon Kataf, became Commissioner of Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, that the so-called Zango Urban Development Association based in Kaduna, resumed inundating the Kaduna State Government with petitions. The same Professor Kabiru Mato has the dubious distinction of supervising the dismantling of the Southern Kaduna Chieftaincies in 2018 and 2019. Is it a coincidence that Professor Kabiru Mato was in Zangon Kataf on the evening that Mr. Yusuf Magaji was callously slaughtered? It should also be asked whether the Kaduna State Government questioned Professor Kabiru Mato on why he took the COVID-19 palliatives meant for the entire Zangon Kataf Local Government Area to Zangon Kataf town, from where he distributed them, instead of to Zonkwa, the Local Government Headquarters, and why he denied the Atyap Wards the palliatives.
33. Pretending that all the matters already addressed by previous governments and the resolutions reached and implemented by previous administrations in Kaduna state had not happened, the statement by Mr. Muyiwa Adekeye that the government will do its “utmost to bring to closure” to issues that had supposedly “lingered unresolved”, smacks of a grand scheme against the Atyap. Exhuming the dead letter of the 1992 Cudjoe report and invoking a White Paper on that jaundiced and unrepentantly biased report, makes our fears of sinister motives by the Kaduna State Government quite cogent. Why are they writing a White Paper on the Cudjoe commission report after all its recommendations had been implemented by previous administrations? Our fears are reinforced by the fact that Muyiwa Adekeye’s June 30, 2020 statement claims that there was no White Paper on the Usman Muazu Report, when in fact the Kaduna State Government had on July 4, 2000 publicly announced that it would faithfully implement the decisions in the Kaduna State Government White Paper on the AVM Usman Muazu Report. Why then are they writing another White Paper 25 years after the original White Paper was written?
CONCLUSION
From the foregoing it is manifestly clear that the El-Rufai Government of Kaduna State has no justifiable reason to set up another White Paper Drafting Committee when;
(i) The recommendations of the Justice Rahila Cudjoe Commission have been fully implemented.
(ii) The Government of Kaduna State had already produced a White Paper from the AVM Muazu Reconciliation Committee Report, which past Governments of Kaduna State have been implementing since 1995.
(iii) The only outstanding issues on this White Paper are:
a) The actualisation of the Buffer Zone
b) The actualisation of the Irrigation Project
c) Actualisation of the Atak Jei Residential Layout which was produced and approved on 12th April 2010 by the former Governor of Kaduna State which will foster integration in the Community as envisaged by the AVM Usman Muazu Committee.

▪︎ Being text of a press conference by Atyap Community Development Association (ACDA) on Thursday 16th July, 2020 on the planned Kaduna State Government (KDSG) White Paper Committee on the Justice Rahila Cudjoe Commission Report of 1992 and AVM Usman Muazu Reconciliation Committee Report of 1995. 

Part 6 NDDC Corruption Bazaar: Suspend Akpabio, probe N81.5b corruption, SERAP tells Buhari

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has sent an open letter to President Muhammadu Buhari urging him to “use his leadership position to urgently set up a presidential investigative panel to probe grave corruption allegations in the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), including allegations that the agency illegally spent N81.5 billion, on travels, ‘condolences’, consultancy and ‘public communication between January and July 2020.”

The organization also asked him to “immediately suspend Mr Godswill Akpabio, the Minister of Niger Delta Affairs and all those implicated in the allegations pending the outcome of any such investigation. Witnesses and whistle-blowers must be protected and the findings of the investigation should be made public. Where there is relevant admissible evidence, suspected perpetrators should be handed over to appropriate anti-corruption agencies for prosecution.”

In the letter dated 18 July, 2020 and signed by SERAP deputy director Kolawole Oluwadare, the organization said: “These are extremely serious allegations. Nigerians expect that those who run the NDDC should be free of corruption, and should enjoy no impunity. Nigerians who want to see development and prosperity in the Niger Delta will want you to take the lead to get to the bottom of these allegations and take appropriate and decisive action to address them.”

According to SERAP, “A special panel to probe allegations of corruption in the NDDC, and that is able to work closely with anti-corruption agencies would protect the integrity of the forensic audit, remove the possibility of obstruction of justice, and interference in the process by those suspected to be involved in alleged corruption in the NDDC.”

SERAP said: “The investigation by the National Assembly has been controversial, and has reportedly turned into a ‘dirty fight’ between the NDDC and the National Assembly. Similarly, the hearings have reportedly indicted lawmakers of both the Senate and House of Representatives.”

SERAP also said: “Any perception of politicisation and bias in the investigation of the corruption allegations in the NDDC would undermine public trust in the process, and ultimately, the public interest and good government, as well as justice for the victims of corruption in the Niger Delta.”

The letter, read in part: “SERAP is concerned that allegations of systemic and widespread corruption in the NDDC are not only punishable offences but also directly undermine the human rights of Nigerians, especially the people of the Niger Delta.”

“SERAP notes that your government has expressed the commitment to ‘get to the root of the problem undermining the NDDC.’ However, the most effective way to ‘get to the root’ of the corruption problem in the agency, and to ensure and protect the integrity of a forensic audit is to establish a special panel to carry out credible, independent, impartial and effective investigations into the alleged corruption in the NDDC.”

“A decisive action is needed by you and your government to stop the corruption in the NDDC, ensure that anyone suspected to be responsible is brought to justice, and to fully recover stolen, mismanaged or misappropriated public funds.”

“Ensuring an independent, impartial, transparent and effective investigation into the corruption allegations in the NDDC would be entirely consistent with the Nigerian Constitution of 1999 (as amended), the NDDC Act, and Nigeria’s international obligations, including under the UN Convention against Corruption to which the country is a state party.”

“Section 15 subsection (5) of the Constitution requires your government to abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power, including corruption allegations in the NDDC. Similarly, the UN Convention against Corruption requires your government to ensure effective investigation and prosecution of allegations of corruption.”

“Specifically, article 26 of the convention requires your government to ensure ‘effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions’ including criminal and non-criminal sanctions, in cases of grand corruption. Article 26 complements the more general requirement of article 30, paragraph 1, that sanctions must take into account the gravity of the corruption allegations.”

“Your government should send a strong message of intolerance for grave corruption in the NDDC, and show that you are willing and able to enforce important constitutional, statutory and international principles and obligations.”

“SERAP also urges you to instruct the police authorities and security agencies to immediately end the harassment and intimidation of Ms Joy Nunieh, former Acting Managing Director of NDDC, or any other witnesses and whistle-blowers. Suspected perpetrators will escape justice if witnesses and whistle-blowers are intimidated, harassed or threatened. “

“Effective investigation and prosecution will not be achieved if such crucial participants in the investigation are not sufficiently protected to perform their roles unimpeded. Stopping the harassment and intimidation would also ensure that innocent people are not wrongfully punished and that suspected perpetrators would not subvert the course of justice and escape sanctions.”

“We request that you take the recommended action within 14 days of the receipt and/or publication of this letter, failing which SERAP will institute legal proceedings to compel your government to act in the public interest.”

“These allegations and the apparent attempts to weaken the independence, work and freedom of action of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) including alleged deliberate targeting of some directors of the agency have undermined the public’s confidence in the government’s oft-repeated commitment to fight corruption.”

“According to reports, the Central Bank of Nigeria and the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation have indicted the NDDC of illegally spending 81.5 billion between January and July 2020. Further, the Bureau of Public Procurement has also reportedly stated that it did not issue ‘Certificates of No Objection’ to the NDDC for the procurements made by the commission with the money.”

“The breakdown of the N81.5 billion reportedly include: community relations, N1.3bn; condolences, N122.9m; consultancy, N83m; COVID-19, N3.14bn; duty tour allowances, N486m; imprest, N790.9m; Lassa fever, N1.956bn; Legal services, N900m; maintenance, N220m; and oversea travels, N85.6m.”

“Others are: project public communication, N1.121bn; security, N744m; staffing related payments, N8.8bn; and stakeholders’ engagement (Feb 18 – May 31, 2020), N248m. A senator also allegedly used 11 companies as fronts to secure for himself N3.6 billion contract in September 2016. The current managing director of the NDDC also reportedly said that the commission spent N1.5 billion for staff as ‘COVID-19 relief funds’.”

By serap-Nigeria.org

AGF, Malami, Not A Reliable Partner In Anti-Graft War — Sagay, SAN

Commenting on the allegation that Malami was sitting on 600 files, Sagay said he was not surprised, alleging that the AGF was not playing his part in the anti-graft war.

He stated that the AGF was at best lukewarm to the anti-corruption campaign, “if not hostile to it.”

Sagay, who shared his working experience with the AGF, also said Malami had discontinued cases being prosecuted by the EFCC without any rational explanation.

According to him, the Ministry of Justice under Malami had also withheld important documents and refused to cooperate with anti-graft agencies it was supposed to coordinate.

Sagay said, “My own experience with Malami is that he is very lukewarm to the anti-corruption war; he doesn’t play his own part. As AGF, he is supposed to coordinate common platforms involving the fight, common platforms where PACAC, ICPC and EFCC operate; he has not been forthcoming at all.

“There have been occasions where the ministry had withheld information, withheld documents and generally refused to cooperate with the other agencies and various bodies charged with the responsibility of the campaign. Yes, he is lukewarm, no question about it.

“So, I am not surprised that he is sitting on files because I have seen things before. He has entered nolle prosequi for cases being prosecuted by EFCC without any rational explanations.

“I don’t think Malami can be regarded as a reliable partner in the fight against corruption, he is at the very best lukewarm, if not hostile to it.”

Asked why his committee did not complain to the President about the AGF, the PACAC Chairman explained that they did not want to rush things, adding that the anti-graft agencies were still making progress despite Malami’s attitude.

He added, “In spite of that attitude, there is a lot of progress being made. The anti-corruption agencies went on regardless; that is where the whole idea of this insubordination (allegations against Magu) came in. But now, with the way things are, it is obvious that the time has come to reappraise the whole thing and to bring his role to that critical assessment that we are talking about.”

Nigerian Air Force rules out foul play in death of flight officer

The Nigerian Air Force (NAF) has ruled out any foul play in the death of Flying Officer Tolulope Arotile stressing that it is unfortunate her death has taken a political dimension.
Below is the full statement released by NAF.
PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT ON THE DEATH OF FLYING OFFICER TOLULOPE AROTILE

  1. On 14 July 2020, the Nigerian Air Force (NAF), and indeed the entire Nation, was thrown into mourning as a result of the death of one of our shining young stars in the person of Flying Officer Tolulope Arotile, the NAF’s first female combat helicopter pilot. Her unfortunate demise has elicited an overwhelming outpouring of condolences, prayers and support to the NAF as well as the Arotile Family. This has no doubt been so, not just for Tolulope’s outstanding accomplishments at the tender age of 24, but also because of her sterling personal qualities of excellence, hard work, dedication to duty, confidence and courage, which endeared her to her superiors, subordinates and peers in the Service. Unfortunately, because of the peculiar circumstances of the incident that led to her death, a rash of falsehoods, innuendos, conspiracy theories and the likes have been propagated in the public space, especially on Social Media. The NAF sincerely hopes that the findings of the just-concluded preliminary investigation into this unfortunate and painful incident will address the misinformed issues raised in the Social Media on the tragedy.
  2. Moreover, while it would have been ideal for the entire investigation to be concluded before details on the incident are released, the NAF, in sensitivity to public concerns occasioned by the spread of false information, appreciates the imperative to provide more clarity at this very difficult moment. Please note that the details being revealed today have already been communicated to the Arotile Family, who ideally should be allowed to mourn their daughter and sister in peace, but for the unfortunate nature of the sad occurrence.
  3. In line with the normal procedure in the Nigerian Air Force during such occurrences, an investigation was immediately instituted to formally determine the circumstances of the incident. Accordingly, the preliminary investigation has revealed the following details:

a. The Late Flying Officer Tolulope Arotile, a Squadron Pilot at the 405 Helicopter Combat Training Group (405 HCTG) Enugu, attached to the Air Component of Operation GAMA AIKI in Minna, having recently completed her Promotion Examinations, was in Kaduna awaiting deployment for her next assignment. During this period, she stayed with her sister, Mrs Damilola Adegboye, at Sabo Area in Kaduna, visiting the NAF Base whenever necessary.

b. On 14 July 2020 at about 10.55am, Late Flying Officer Arotile received a phone call from her colleague, Flying Officer Perry Karimo, a fellow helicopter pilot from the 405 HCTG, who wanted to discuss arrangements for their return to Enugu, requesting that she comes to the Base so that they could work out the modalities. Subsequently, at about 10.58am, the Late Arotile placed a call through to Squadron Leader Diepiriye Batubo, the Group Operations Officer (GOO) of 405 HCTG, who was in Minna at the time, to clarify issues regarding her deployment. It must be highlighted that the call FROM Flying Officer Karimo as well as the one TO the Squadron Leader Batubo both took place before 11.00am, over 5 hours before the incident which led to her death.

c. Flying Officer Arotile was later conveyed from Sabo to the NAF Base Kaduna by her sister, Mrs Adegboye, where the Deceased dropped her phone for charging at a house in the Instructor Pilots’ Quarters belonging to Squadron Leader Alfa Ekele. Her elder sister later dropped her off at the Base Mammy Market at about 4.00pm, where she proceeded to photocopy and laminate some documents. It was while she was returning from the Mammy Market at about 4.30pm that 3 of her former schoolmates at the Air Force Secondary School (now Air Force Comprehensive School) Kaduna; Mr Nehemiah Adejoh, Mr Igbekele Folorunsho and Mr Festus Gbayegun, drove past her in a Kia Sorento SUV, with Registration Number AZ 478 MKA. It is noteworthy that Messrs Adejoh, Folorunsho and Gbayegun are all civilians who live outside NAF Base Kaduna, but were on their way to visit one Mrs Chioma Ugwu, wife of Squadron Leader Chukwuemeka Ugwu, who lives at Ekagbo Quarters on the Base.

d. Upon recognising their schoolmate, Arotile, after passing her, Mr Adejoh, who was driving, reversed the vehicle, ostensibly in an attempt to quickly meet up with the Deceased, who was walking in the opposite direction. In the process, the vehicle struck Flying Officer Arotile from the rear, knocking her down with significant force and causing her to hit her head on the pavement. The vehicle then ran over parts of her body as it veered off the road beyond the kerb and onto the pavement, causing her further injuries.

e. Flying Officer Arotile was subsequently rushed to the 461 NAF Hospital Kaduna for treatment, while Mr Folorunsho (one of the occupants of the vehicle) who is also an Accident & Emergency Nurse at the St Gerard Catholic Hospital Kaduna, administered First Aid.

f. Flying Officer Arotile was confirmed dead by the On-Call Doctor at the 461 NAF Hospital at about 4.45pm on 14 July 2020, as a result of the head injuries.

g. The trio of Messrs Nehemiah Adejoh, Igbekele Folorunsho and Festus Gbayegun were immediately detained at the Air Provost Wing, 453 Base Services Group Kaduna as investigations began. They were subjected to Toxicology Tests at the 461 NAF Hospital but no traces of alcohol or psychotropic substances were found in their systems. It was however discovered that the driver of the vehicle, Mr Nehemiah Adejo, did not have a valid driver’s license.

h. Traffic Officers from the Kawo Police Station and the Kaduna State Police Command as well as Road Traffic experts from the Federal Road Safety Corp were also called in to provide support during the investigation.

  1. Having carefully considered the foregoing, the preliminary investigation concluded that:

a. The death of Flying Officer Arotile was caused by blunt force trauma to the head and significant bleeding resulting from being struck by the vehicle.

b. Being a civil case, the matter will be handed over to the Nigeria Police with a view to further investigating and charging the suspects to court in accordance with extant laws.

  1. The Nigerian Air Force, being a highly professional and disciplined organization, will not join issues with any individuals or groups regarding the spurious allegations of ‘foul play’ espoused in some quarters. Suffice it to say that Flying Officer Arotile was a pride of the NAF in whom the Service had invested massively in terms of resources, time and energy. Consequently, it is ludicrous for anyone to even remotely insinuate malevolent intent on the part of the Service against one of its most prized assets.
  2. Furthermore, it is extremely sad and disheartening that, rather than allow the Arotile Family and the Nigerian Air Force to grieve for our dearly departed Tolulope in peace, many have chosen to politicize her death, while others are using the incident to push meritless, misguided ethnic and religious agendas. The Nigerian Air Force wishes to implore everyone to respect the sensibilities of all those who have suffered most by this loss, those who really knew Tolulope – her family, her friends and her Nigerian Air Force colleagues. It is of absolute importance that the memory of this Fallen Hero and our precious child is not tainted by the propagation of misplaced sentiments and wild shenanigans. Before I end this august address, may I respectfully, on behalf of the Chief of the Air Staff, the entire personnel of the NAF as well as members of the Arotile Family, express my profound appreciation to all those who in one way or the other have shown concern, support and sympathy over this unfortunate incident. Thank you for your attention.

IBIKUNLE DARAMOLA
Air Commodore
Director of Public Relations and co Information
Nigerian Air Force
19 July 2020

Sad Reminiscences On Ibrahim Magu (Part 2)

By Mike A. A. Ozekhome, SAN

INTRODUCTION

Last week, I wrote on the above topic. I recalled earlier writes-up as to how to re-engineer and re-invent the wheel of the fight against corruption, rather than the gallery play we saw all through the tenure of Magu. These are reminiscences of writes-up I made as far back as 2017 (almost two and a half years ago). On 23rd April, 2017, I wrote in the Sunday Telegraph, recalling my letter dated 31st May, 2017, to the then Acting President, Professor Yemi Osibanjo, SAN(when his boss, President Muhammadu Buhari was indisposed in a London hospital). I was particularly concerned about the relooting of recovered loots, a much more dangerous form of corruption than the first looting. In the said letter (see: https://www.newtelegraphng.com/much-loot-government-recovered-kept-2/), I had said, inter alia, as follows:

“QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS

“Are the serial “discoveries” by EFCC of abandoned and orphaned monies in shops, airports, plazas, high brow apartments, forests, cemeteries, etc, not simply a case of Professor Peller’s abracadabra magic of “the more you look, the less you see”? Do these constitute grand attempts by government to cover up its own indicted officials, thus “fighting” their corruption with sweet smelling Sasarobia perfume, whilst fighting opposition, critical voices and other Nigerians’ alleged “corruption” with pesticides, herbicides and insecticides? Is this not a classical case of double standards, massive covers-up, and grand deception of Nigerians? Do we now have two sets of laws, one separate for members of the ruling party, and another for the opposition, critical voices and other Nigerians? Are Nigerians not already pained and humiliated enough with deaths, hunger, degradation, marginalization, disrespect, humiliation, poor infrastructures, poverty, penury, intimidation, haplessness and disillusionment,  to have this constant circus foisted on them?”

ON MAGU’S SECOND REJECTION BY THE SENATE

Regarding Magu’s second rejection by the Senate which had relied on DSS’ damning report that Magu had “failed the integrity test”, I had argued that going by Section 2 (1) and 2(3) of the EFCC (Establishment) Act, he could no longer stay in office as EFCC Chairman, having equally lost his “acting” capacity. This was how I put it in my press release of 15th March, 2017 (almost two and a half years ago), titled, “ the legal and moral issues of the second and final rejection of confirmation of Magu as EFCC Chairman” (https://www.nigerianbulletin.com/threads/senate-rejection-it-is-over-for-ibrahim-magu-mike-ozekhome-san.235140/):

“The role of the number one anti-Corruption Czar should be more. It should also embody the finest and most edifying virtues of nobility in terms of observance of citizens’ fundamental rights and the all-important rule of law concept. The anti- corruption war has so far been fought without a human face, in the most crude, most bizarre, most discriminatory and most degrading manner that diminishes the humanity and respectability of Nigerians and brings us back into the Hobesian state of nature where life was short, nasty and brutish. The anti-corruption fight has been fought in the most opaque, selective, bestial and humiliating manner, devoid of any scintilla or modicum of decency and respect for our collective and individual civil liberties and freedoms. It has all but reduced Nigeria to a one Party state, with everyone decamping to APC, because once you do that, you are immediately and automatically protected from the inquisition of EFCC and like Naaman the leper who was dipped into River Jordan seven times and became cleansed of his leprosy, such a decampee is cleansed of his political leprosy and antecedental   criminality. EFCC has been acting outside of and above the Law, contrary to its motto, using the most detestable, unorthodox, arm-twisting and extra- legal tactics to intimidate, humiliate and bamboozle hapless opponents, critics of Government, opposition elements and critical voices of reason and dissension. It should never be as bad as this.

Buhari can no longer represent Mangu’s name again, because of the serious moral burden, ethical challenges and legal impediments thus imposed on him with this second definitive rejection, this time after a full screening. Representing his name will raise more questions than answers as to why the insistence on One man. This is unlike the first instance when Senate merely turned him down without any screening. That it was done shortly after the celebrated arrival of President Buhari from his medical vacation makes it more interesting and more significant as it underlines the independence of the Legislature, the Senate. It is high time for PMB to look for another competent Nigerian out of about 180 million people in population. After all, there was once a Nuhu Ribadu, a Mrs Waziri and a Mr Ibrahim Lamorde. Like the cliché goes, soldiers go, soldiers come, Barracks remain.” Of course, as usual, my lone voice crying in the wilderness was ignored.

MY OTHER INTERVENTIONS

Before the above, I had expressed these same concerns and more to Magu (to his face), at seminars organized by the EFCC and Magu himself (to which he graciously invited me). One of such took place on August 19, 2017, at the EFCC Training Centre, at Karu, Abuja (see: http://police.com.ng/index.php/financial-crimes/4675-economic-and-financial-crimes-commission-efcc-war-magu-charges-african-states-on-effective-collaboration). I also had another encounter with him at the Federal High Court, Abuja, during the valedictory service of the former Chief Judge of Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, (https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/12/anti-graft-war-magu-ozekhome-clash-fhc-end-year-event/). This was on 19th December, 2017. In his very presence – before his face – “korokoro eyes”, “anya-anya”. My patriotic calls were not heeded.

THE CHANGING TIMES

In these changing times, the mammy wagon apophthegym, “No condition is permanent”, came to the fore. Magu, the detainer, was himself detained for a mere 10 days, when he appeared before the Presidential Panel currently scrutinizing his tenure. Some said he was sleeping at a preferred nearby mosque. Senator Shehu said he was denied this luxury. How would Magu have felt, if the presidential panel had rushed to obtain a magistrate court order to detain him for 2 weeks in the first instance, in EFCC’s cold dungeon and on the bare floor? As he did serially? And then such detention was quickly renewed for another 2 weeks, on effluxion of the first 2 weeks (as he frequently did)? This, notwithstanding the clear provisions of section 35 (3) of the 1999 Constitution, which permits only 24 hours of detention? How would Magu have felt if he was manacled and shackled, hands and feet, and paraded like a common criminal before the panel, as he was want to do to his many victims? As he did to Olisa Metuh? Metuh and Dino Melaye were even dragged to court, not only in shackles, but also on hospital beds: At a time, the Police even chained Dino, a serving Senator, to his hospital bed. Some Nigerians ululated in joy. After all, corruption was being fought. Magu, through his lawyers, had specifically complained about media trial, and asked the Inspector General of Police for bail on “self-recognition”, or with “a credible surety”. Oh really? So, these are achievable after all? But, Magu never allowed his victims such luxuries. I had clients who voluntarily reported to the EFCC, such as High Chief Raymond Aleogho Dokpesi, former Ekiti State Governor, Ayodele Fayose, former Plateau State Governor, Senator Jonah Jang, former Attorney General, Mr Mohammed Bello Adoke, SAN, Senator Dino Melaye, Femi Fani-Kayode, Senator Shehu Sani, Atiku Abubakar’s son-in-law, Abdullahi Babalele, Barrister Sylvanus Okpetu, Deji Adeyanju, etc. Yet, these mere suspects were immediately hauled into the damp, dingy dungeon of the EFCC and held thereafter for months, by Magu and his EFCC.

NOW THIS

MORE IMPUNITY

These suspects were all denied administrative bail by cold-blooded and vindictive EFCC personnel, until I valiantly fought for their bail and got them released through the court process. Ex-National Security Adviser, Col Sambo Dasuki, was not so lucky.  For nearly five years, he was kept by the EFCC in their gulag, even after 5 courts (including the sub-regional ECOWAS Court), had granted him bail. Till date, leader and cleric of Sh’ia  Muslims, Yakubu El Zakzaky, remains in prison since 2015, in spite of orders by several courts to release him on bail. Specifically, on 2nd December, 2016, and 5th August, 2019, the Kaduna State High Court ordered the release on bail, of El Zakzaki and his wife, Zeenatu. Till date, the DSS still holds them in their dungeon. (see: https://www.premiumtimesng.com). What manner of Government is this?

Mr Godswill Orube (former President Goodluck Jonathan’s Minister of Niger Delta Affairs), had been docked and humiliated, for allegedly stealing N1.965 billion. He was later discharged and acquitted by Justice Olukayode Adeniyi of the FCT High Court, upon withdrawal of the charge by the prosecutor, when the Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, discovered that the N1.9billion was not stolen, but sitting pretty idle and unused in the CBN vaults. But the damage of media trial had been done. No apology came. (see https://punchng.com). Former NIMASA Director-General, Ziakedi Akpobolokemi, was brutally and viciously dragged on the floor by EFCC operatives on 14th December, 2015, even after he had been released on bail by the trial Judge, Justice Saliu Saidu (https://www.thenicheng.com). And guess what? Akpobolokemi was later discharged and acquitted by the Court of Appeal, on June 1, 2018 (see: https://punchng.com/breaking). What restitution did EFCC give Akpobolokemi for the trauma, indignity, humiliation, agony, deprivation, torture, over the years? None?

AND THIS

Dr Bukola Saraki headed the 8th National Assembly as President of the Senate. He was charged before the CCT. On June 14, 2017,  Mr Danladi Umar – led CCT discharged and acquitted Saraki of the entire 18 count charge. The Supreme Court was later to uphold this on July 6, 2018, when it upheld the CCT’s judgment. (https://www.vanguardngr.com). The EFCC lost this case woefully. But, it never apologized to Saraki. Even as the number 3 citizen of Nigeria, he had been messed up for over 3 years. Reason? The EFCC was used by the APC government who saw Saraki as an opposition element, having emerged as Senate President against the wish of President Buhari, Asiwaju Tinubu and his other APC leaders (see https://www.vanguardngr.com). Guess what? The EFCC was later to move against Danladi Umar, exhuming a false allegation of bribery, over which the same EFCC and the Attorney-General of the Federation had earlier completely exonerated Umar. So much for double standards! (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Corruption is the enemy of development, and of good governance. It must be got rid of. Both the government and the people at large must come together to achieve this national objective.” (Pratibha Patil).

LAST LINE

Fellow Nigerians, come along with me every week, to put our heads together on how to make Nigeria a better place. This, always on “The Nigerian Project”, by Chief Mike A. A. Ozekhome, SAN, OFR, FCIArb., Ph.D, LL.D.

How Omoyele Sowore Blackmailed Me and Almost Ruined the Lives of My Family and I

Sometime in 2012, it entered my heart to give back to Nigeria. I had invited some White Christian missionaries to Nigeria, in August 2012, and we visited an orphanage in Abuja, the Hope For Survival Orphanage. I was so shocked by the cramped conditions under which the children lived, that I went out and cried my heart out.

I then vowed that I would build an orphanage that would be as good as the house my children lived in America.

I started building in December 2012. I never stole a dime or did a fundraiser. I paid for this project myself, save for a $1000 contribution by my friend, Pastor Andy Cochran. I was in government for four years as a Presidential spokesman, and now I am perhaps the most vociferous critic of the President Buhari administration. Yet, nobody, not even the Buhari government, can ever say I stole money. My hands are clean, and I am very fulfilled that I set a record, that you can serve in government in Nigeria without stealing.

Work was slow, but I was determined. And then on Valentine’s Day, 2015, a few weeks to the Nigerian 2015 elections, everything came to a most abrupt halt. Why? Because Sahara Reporters wrote a story alleging that I was an armed robber, who robbed a house in Warri, Delta State, and stole money for use in the coming 2015 elections, which was to hold in two weeks.

I was aghast! No one has ever accused me of stealing money in government, let alone with arms. I had not been to Warri in years. The last time I went there was in 2012 when I had a meeting with Pastor Ayo Oritsejafor about evangelism. I felt it had to be a mistake.

So, I wrote to Omoyele Sowore telling him he was mistaken. I gave him the facts. I showed him logs from Aso Rock, where I worked, proving that on the date and time he alleged I was robbing a house, I was in my office. I gave the names of a woman who was once an editor, who had met with me on the day in question. He ignored my mails. No response. The 2015 Nigerian presidential election was in two weeks, and the story made my boss, President Jonathan look bad (which was the intention of the story).

Why would you write a story like that without even verifying whether it was true or not? Both Sowore and his organisation had my contact details. Sowore has phoned me before. He knew how to reach me. How can you write such a damaging story without first reaching out to the person you are writing about? It goes against the ethics of responsible journalism, which say hear both sides, and when in doubt, leave out.More in Home

I quickly engaged a lawyer and sued the man Sahara Reporters mentioned in their story as accusing me of armed robbery. At court, the man swore to an affidavit that he never made such allegations against me to Sahara Reporters and he does not know how they arrived at their claims.

I then sent the affidavits he swore to, to Saharareporters and Omoyele Sowore and they ignored it. The traditional print media carried the story of the denial by the man cited by Sahara Reporters. Yet, both Sowore and his organisation refused to either take the story down or apologise.

I then sued Sahara Reporters in Nigeria, but they dodged service of court papers. So, I travelled to the United States and engaged two lawyers, one in New York and one in California.

I was almost financially ruined. I had difficulty paying my mortgage because of the astronomical cost of hiring a lawyer in America (they bill by the hour). I had to stop work on the orphanage project and focused entirely on fighting to clear my name. My children were too ashamed to go to school because I live in a small Christian community in California. The people in our church had read the story, and I was the subject of malicious gossip. Eventually, I had to leave the church. I was scandalised in the community.

The lawyer in New York wrote Sowore and appealed to him to remove the story and explained to him how financially draining this case could be for both him and I. Sowore would not budge and it looked like I may have had to remortgage my house to get the funds to pay for a long legal battle.

Eventually, the lawyer in New York was able to discover that The Ford Foundation was sponsoring Saharareporters. So, he wrote to them and presented the facts to them. Then, and only then, did Sowore take the story down. He did not do this because he wanted to. He did it, only because he did not want his money threatened.

What mattered to Omoyele Sowore was not my life that he was ruining with his blackmail or my children he was scarring psychologically by falsely labelling their father as an armed robber. His singular motive was to render then President Jonathan unelectable and ensure the election of Muhammadu Buhari, via any means necessary, including lying against innocent people. The only thing that could stop him was a threat to his income.

I thank God that on February 22, 2016, the orphanage, The Helen and Bemigho Sanctuary for Orphans, was declared open in Benin City, Edo state, by Professor Pat Utomi, Senator Ben Murray-Bruce and Arch Bishop John Praise Daniel, to the glory of God. My entire family was there. Foreign friends came. The orphanage is now giving hope to the previously hopeless. However, the orphanage could have been opened earlier, if I did not have to waste multiple millions of Naira trying to clear my name from the reckless lies told against me by Omoyele Sowore, all because, to him, all is fair in elections.

If you saw my photograph from that period, I looked like a person in the last stages of HIV/AIDS wastage. I could not eat. I could not sleep. I was traumatised. My grandparents were so affected by the blackmail against me by Sowore, that I feared it might lead to their untimely death.

My family and I would gather and cry out to God and beg Him to vindicate me. It was the most trying period of my life.

The money I wasted on this venture could have fed and educated orphans. It could have been used to do something more positive and useful to humanity than feathering the nests of already wealthy lawyers both here and in the United States.

However, mine is not an isolated case. It is a pattern or blackmail, and media terrorism engaged in by Omoyele Sowore, using his Sahara Reporters, probably the most dishonest medium on Earth.

I know several persons he has done this to, including and not limited to Pastors, people in business, and ordinary citizens, who he has targeted for destruction to suit his political motives.

I know of a pastor who Sowore targeted because the man had prophesied the death of his political godfather, Nasir El-Rufai, if he should sign his anti-preaching Bill, The Kaduna State Religious Preaching (Regulation) Bill, into law. The pastor is in court against Sahara Reporters and has promised to expose details when the case is concluded.

Today, Buhari, who Omoyele Sowore admitted on camera to bringing to power, is now doing to him what he did to others, and both Sowore and his propaganda website, Saharareporters, want to paint the picture of victims. No, they are enablers. They brought Buhari to power, and as we all know, the first persons a dictator goes after, are those who brought him to power.

Sowore is a woman scorned. He expected to be given a role in Buhari’s government, like Festus Keyamo. However, he forgot that when you sell your brother, even your buyer will not trust you.

That is why it took less than 24 hours for Nnamdi Kanu to get bail. Because he is genuinely fighting for his people. However, it took months for Sowore to get bail. And he still did not make it. The judge herself later said she was “embarrassed” that despite reducing the bail conditions, no one came to bail Sowore. Who will want to bail a blackmailer? Who?

A brutal blackmailer has met his match in a brutal dictator. It is a match made in hell, and both of them should be left to reap what they have sown.

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.”-Galatians 6:7.

Obituary: For Prof Oladipo Akinkugbe (1933 to 2020), By Calixthus Okoruwa

•The late Prof Oladipo Akinkugbe

“Had Sani Abacha made a law that all 30-year old Nigerians be executed by firing squad, Nigerians would have reacted in two ways: One group of Nigerians would have rushed to the courts to make age declarations and affidavits. The second batch would have rushed to the borders.”

This was Prof. Akinkugbe, a scientist of global reckoning, thrilling the audience at the memorial Prof. Oritsejolomi Thomas lecture at College of Medicine of the University of Lagos in 1998. A master of erudition, his lecture was multi-faceted, laced with Economics (he quoted John Galbraith), Politics (such as his liberal references to Abacha above), anecdotes and of course, medicine. He held his audience spell-bound. Naturally the audience was effusive with praise for him afterwards. It was at the lecture that I learnt that he had become a professor in his mid-30s.

I attended the lecture because I had seen his name in the promotional banner at the College of Medicine a few days earlier. After the lecture, I had gone to meet him. I didn’t need to introduce myself to him. Many months earlier I had visited his The Hypertension Center in Ibadan to see him. He didn’t know me then and I didn’t have an appointment either, but these didn’t matter. I did see him without any hassles.

I recall how impressed I was with the sophistication of the center, underscored by its simplicity, its tasteful finishing and academic outlook. Here was a structure that was truly reflective of its ownership.

I had just begun publishing a magazine, Hale & Hearty, at the time. Our maiden edition dealt with infertility and had an extensive interview with one of the leading authorities on the subject of female infertility at the time, Prof. Osato Giwa-Osagie. We decided that the subject of “sudden death” being very topical, as Abacha had only recently died suddenly, would headline the follow-up edition. I was in Ibadan, I told him, to find out if he would be willing to grant us an interview.

I recall that I walked with Prof. Akinkugbe from the Hypertension Center to his house, through a small opening on the low fence which separated both buildings. The surroundings were lined with trees and the lawn around the simple but classy house was undulating and well-kempt. If I had any doubt about his love for architecture before, seeing the landscaping and the quiet sophistication of his residence, erased this completely.

We agreed that I would leave a copy of the maiden edition of Hale & Hearty behind and place a call to him the next day, by which time he would have gone through his calendar, in order to fix a good time for the interview.

By the next day when I called him, his greetings were warm and friendly, something I wasn’t used to in my dealings with people in Lagos. In fact, his first question was whether I had a safe trip back from Ibadan the previous day. I was genuinely taken aback by the simplicity of this world-renowned academic. But I hadn’t seen anything yet.

A week or so later, I was back in Ibadan to interview Professor Akinkugbe. “I can see that you’ve gone to great lengths to make the publication so simple that practically anyone can understand it,” he said in praise to me. It was a treasured commendation. “I was particularly impressed with Professor Giwa-Osagie’s interview. He’s a scientist for whom I have a lot of respect,” he added.

I found out that in addition to his regular laboratory coat, he had assembled two or three other suits. He wasn’t sure which one I would prefer. He had also arranged his office and the lecture room nearby for the interview as he wasn’t sure which venue I would prefer. We settled for the lecture room, because it had a number of models of the heart and blood vessels which he could refer to dramatically, in the course of the interview (for the sake of more impactful photography).

Professor Akinkugbe spent the next two hours or more answering my questions bordering on the heart, the blood vessels, the kidneys, diet, exercise, and so on. We took quite a few photographs as well. It must have been a tiring exercise for him, but he just did not mind. You could literally touch the passion with which he discussed matters pertaining to the heart. And he did this with the tact of an experienced teacher, slowing down to ensure that the more technical areas were well-explained enough to be understood by just about anybody. What struck me was the seriousness with which he took our small magazine. Only a fortnight earlier, he had hosted a specialist conference on sudden death at the center and a battery of newsmen including NTA who showed up uninvited to cover the event, had been turned back. Transmitting valuable knowledge was what was important to him, not vulgar publicity. We bade ourselves goodbye afterwards.

It wasn’t until this memorial lecture at the University of Lagos that I would see the Professor again. As I stood with him after our initial greetings, a much younger professor from the University of Lagos came to him, an envelope in tow. It was his honorarium, the younger professor told Prof. Akinkugbe, who gently and gracefully turned it down. How could he collect an honorarium for speaking in honour of one of the greats of medicine in these parts, Prof. Thomas?

As I drove in his car on the way out of the university, Professor Akinkugbe gently asked me. “What happened?” He was referring to Hale & Hearty magazine and the interview to which he had devoted so much time. And I explained to him the difficulties we had run into. Cash was tied up in in advertisements for which payments just refused to come. Our shoe-string operation was forced to fold up, alongside the lofty and elaborate interview which never saw the light of day. You could see the look of compassion in his eyes as he nodded his head in understanding of the difficulties of entrepreneurship in our country.

Having listened to his delivery of that lecture at the Old Great Hall of the College of Medicine of the University of Lagos and his answers to my interview questions I can only hope that students who were taught by this eminent professor do realize what a great privilege they had.

As his remains are committed to mother earth, this week, I pray for the repose of the soul of this epitome of humility, decency and refinement.

Source: Facebook

Proving R*pe Is Through The Eye Of A Needle

By Victor Anayochukwu Jonah

INTRODUCTION

Cases of rape in Nigeria have recently assumed alarming proportion. Sadly, the chastity and dignity of women and children have been further endangered by some marauding beast disguised as men. The female gender is now coerced into fear of her safety. The increasing cases of rape and sexual based violence suddenly attained its crescendo and have become a daily sad tale inscribed on our national banner. The upsurge in the number of complaints is obviously not met with corresponding convictions in courts. The burden legally bestowed on the prosecution to establish a case of rape is herculean and almost skewed to guarantee failure. Oftentimes, persons charged with the offence of rape capitalize on the inescapable legal loopholes to extricate themselves from conviction whereas the victim is left to relapse into anguish and trauma. Currently, establishing a crime of rape in most states across Nigeria is equivalent to the proverbial camel entering the eye of a needle. This article seeks to bring to the fore these difficulties while charting a new course within the firmament of our laws.

BACKGROUND

The social and conventional media have been awashed with plethora of complaints bothering on rape across the length and breadth of Nigeria in recent times. Most recently was the gory rape and murder of 22 year-old Miss Vera Uwaila Omozuwa who was a student of University of Benin. Not a few Nigerians were enraged by the treacherous act which generated protests across the country. Subsequently, on 12th June, 2020 which has now metamorphosed into our democracy day, President Muhammadu Buhari alluded to this degeneration when he decried the spike in cases of rape thus: “I am particularly upset at recent incidents of rape, especially of very young girls”. On 15th June, 2020 the Inspector General of Nigeria Police (IGP), Mohammed Adamu stated that a total number of 717 cases were reported between January and May, 2020 alone. This data apparently excludes a presumably greater number of cases that were swept under the carpet in the period under review. Some women who were supposedly victims in the past have seized the momentum to speak out and reveal the identity of their violators – sometimes pointing accusing fingers on high profile personalities.

Although, sexual offences are not confined to the female gender, it is unarguable that women and children suffer this indignity the most whilst in the hands of some callous and satanic beings unfit to dwell on planet earth. Even most of our laws have not fully embraced the fact that men are capable of being raped. Hitherto, rape was erroneously blamed on woman for reasons including: indecent dressing, living in solitude, late night outings, purported disrespect to a male counterpart etc. These reasons no longer command any logical or sound reasoning in the face of repeated cases of rape on new born babies, toddlers and very old women. The fact remains that whatever reason or lame excuse perpetrators of these dastardly acts may give for their heinous crime, there is no justification to demean and subject any woman to an object of exploitation in manners that inflict inerasable agony on her psyche.

Generally, Nigeria’s dual penal legislations criminalize rape and prescribe maximum punishment for convicted offenders. Unfortunately, our traditional beliefs, socio-cultural norms and defective criminal justice system have lent willing hands for the escape of these offenders. Often time, families of rape victims prefer to handle these allegations of rape as family matter and shroud them in secrecy. This is often influence by the nauseating stigma and primitive perception the public have over survivors of rape. On the flip side of the coin, the Nigeria criminal justice system is mostly ill-equipped to efficiently make the offenders truly face the full wrath of the law. It is mostly taken for granted that a thorough investigation which arms the security agents with compelling evidence is a precursor to an eventual conviction in a court of law.

Moreover, the often nocturnal and clandestine nature of this crime poses a huge challenge in assembling requisite evidence with which to prosecute the offender. It is not unusual for victims to delay considerably before they summon courage to report the crime – often necessitated, understandably, by the trauma faced by the female victims. Late reporting of rape cases usually make assembling of fundamental evidences extremely difficult, sometimes even untraceable. When the matter eventually gets to court, the capacity of the prosecution becomes key. Most important in the circumstance is the capacity to establish all the legal elements of rape which currently harbours mountainous thresholds and is often difficult to sail through in law. In fact, once the evidences have been damaged or irreparably compromised, establishing rape would be equivalent to a camel passing through the eye of a needle. Indeed, it is common for rape victims and their families to tamper with what would have been glaring evidence of rape before involving security agents. Even when cases are reported, the inefficient, soiled and sordid outlook of the security agents stifles the process and makes prosecutorial success almost unattainable.

It is important to note that law and indeed rape in the legal sense do not kowtow to the suffocating and outlandish outpouring of sentiment. Rape is a legal concept with legal implications. There are other sexual based violence that are codified as offences and attract lesser punishments. The offence of rape on the other hand, is felonious and upon conviction the offender may spend the rest of his lifetime behind bars. A holistic assessment of the encumbrances in establishing a criminal case of rape in Nigeria have often led victims to chicken out and consequently emboldened the offenders to masquerade in liberty and continue to prey on hapless women and children. These challenges are not insurmountable. However, while the commendable spike in agitations may have kick-started revolutionary discourse that would hopefully crystallize into strengthening our laws and rejigging our criminal justice system, women who suffer rape ought to maximize the existing laws to obtain sufficient remedies. This article attempts to succinctly dissect the extent of burden bestowed on the prosecution to proof rape. It calls the attention of Nigerians to appreciate the legal burden and urge victims to be circumspect, in addition to exploring other available remedies. It also appeals to law makers to strengthen our laws pronto. This paper envisions that if our laws and relevant investigative agencies are strengthened and adequately utilized, it would reduce the present difficulties and guarantee easier convictions which would eventually serve as deterrence to perpetrators of these callous acts.

MAJOR ENACTMENTS AGAINST RAPE IN NIGERIA

The major criminal legislation in Nigeria is regionalize between what was known as the former Northern and Southern region of Nigeria. Each region has legislation on criminal procedure that is peculiar to its local circumstances. This however is long overdue for amendments. The Penal Code is applicable to Northern Nigeria while the Criminal Code operates in states within the Southern axis. The provisions of the Criminal Law of Lagos State derive its root from the Criminal Code. The Violence Against Persons Act (VAPPA), 2015 is a courageous legislation that shows a radical departure from the Penal and Criminal Codes; except for it restricted application to the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja and few States that have domesticated it. All these legislations derived their existence from the Supreme law of our land. The 1999 Constitutional (as amended) abhors the indignity of a human person. Particularly, Section 34(1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that:

Every individual is entitled to respect for the dignity of his person, and accordingly no person shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment.

By virtue of Sections 21 & 277 of the Child’s Right Act, 2003 a child is a person below the age of 18 years. On the strength of Section 31 of the Act a person who engages in sexual intercourse with a child shall be guilty of rape. This section invokes strict liability on offenders. It is immaterial if it is the child that initiated the sexual advance and the offender presumed that the child looked matured enough to be above 18. Once it is established that there is sexual intercourse, the offender is strictly liable. Section 32 thereof frowns at other acts of sexual exploitations of a child – which is punishable upon conviction with fourteen years imprisonment. It is instructive to note that this Act makes no distinction between male and female children. No doubt, this Act is laudable. The snag with this Law is that it has not been adopted by some states in Nigeria. Thankfully, it has been adopted in Lagos State and most States in Southern Nigeria.

The definition of Rape as contained in the Penal and Criminal Codes are substantially the same. The discrepancies between them are minute. The verbatim provisions of these legislations will now be reproduced hereunder for clarity.

Section 282 (1) of the Penal Code of Northern Nigeria merely describes acts that tantamount to rape within the region. It provides thus:

A man is said to commit rape who has sexual intercourse with a woman in any of the following circumstances: (a) against her will (b) without her consent (c) with her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her in fear of death or of hurt (d) with her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married (e) with or without her consent when she is under fourteen years of age or of unsound mind.

On the other hand, Section 357 & 358 of the Criminal Code Act (which is in pari materia with the provisions of the Criminal Law of Lagos State) also provides a guide on acts and conducts that amounts to rape.

Any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or girl, without her consent, or with her consent, if the consent is obtained by force or by means of threat or intimidation of any kind, or by fear of harm, or by means of false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act, or, in the case of a married woman, by personating her husband is guilty of an offence which is called rape.

Any person who commits the offence of rape is liable to imprisonment for life, with or without caning.

The foregoing legislations are anachronistic when compared with the provisions of VAPPA. This new Act which was assented to in 2015 is an ambitious legislation that was enacted to cure the mischief, loopholes and inadequacies that have crippled the ancient Penal and Criminal Codes in the aspect of rape and sexual based violence. Section 1(1) of the new Act vividly itemizes acts that give rise to rape thus:

A person commits the offence of rape if: (a) he or she intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person with any part of his or her body or anything else;(b) the other person does not consent to the penetration; or (c) the consent is obtained by force or means of threat or intimidation of any kind or by fear of harm or by means of false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act or the use of any substance or addictive capable of taking away the will of such person or in the case of a married person by impersonating his or her spouse.

The VAPPA also contains laudable provisions that criminalize various forms of sexual based violence in manners that largely take into consideration realities of modern times. A cursory look at the definition section in VAPPA glaring shows that a man is now capable of being raped. Again, rape is not limited to vaginal penetration as is the case in the Penal and Criminal Codes. Unlike the Penal and Criminal Codes, under the VAPPA, the object of penetration has been expanded. Therefore, the use of any part of a human body or object to penetrate the vagina, anus or mouth of another person without a valid consent is rape. Notice that Section 1(1) (a) stands alone and could be married to either subsection (1) (b) or (1)(c). Unfortunately, the VAPPA is not applicable throughout the federation. It is only rape victims within the jurisdiction of FCT, Abuja and the few states that has domesticated the Act that currently benefit from this legislation. It is also worthy of note that the VAPPA has not entirely erased the heavy burden placed on the prosecution to establish the offence of rape but it made huge progress.

QUANTUM OF LEGAL BURDEN PLACED ON THE PROSECUTION IN THE COURTROOM 

Rape is a heinous crime and ought to be condemned by all. Before we venture into the legal burden placed on the prosecution, permit me to re-echo my approval of the statement of the Supreme Court, per I.T. Muhammed (JSC), wherein he expressed the court’s disgust against rapists in the case of Isa v. State (2016) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1508) 243 thus:

A rapist is worse than an animal. He has no moral rectitude. He throws overboard the limit of his legal right and he can, shamelessly, deprive another person (more painfully, female children of underage) of their God given rights of protecting the chastity and sanctity of their body and mind. He is all out to pollute such chastity and sanctity. He has no respect for human beings! He can commit any atrocity. He is a cancer in the society. What a shame!

However, it is pertinent to state that in criminal proceedings a person accused of the offence of rape is presumed innocent until the contrary is proved as encapsulated in Section 36 (5) of the 1999 Constitution. This is very important in the light of the torrential sentiment that is triggered whenever accusations of rape are made on social and conventional media. We must admonish that a person who is maliciously accused of rape (via publications in any media) and subsequently acquitted can sue for defamation and obtain damages. A person accused of rape does not become guilty in law until he is convicted by a competent court of law base on facts and admissible evidence.

The law as we have it today is that a person who wants to establish a case of rape must do that beyond reasonable doubt. This is because rape is a criminal offence that may eventually lead, among others, to the perpetual deprivation of the liberty of an accused person upon conviction. The criminal jurisprudence is predicated on the axiom that it is better to free 99 criminals than to deprive one innocent man his liberty.  The Latin maxim, Ei incumbit probation qui dicit, non qui negat connotes that the burden of proof is on he who asserts, not on he who denies. This notion rings a bell at the mind of a Judge whenever an accused person appears in Court. The above position enjoys statutory backing under Section 135(1) of the Evidence Act, 2011 wherein it provides thus:

If the commission of a crime by a party to any proceeding is directly in issue in any proceeding civil or criminal, it must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

This foundation is significant so as to understand the way the mind of a Judge works when faced with a rape case that threatens to incarcerate a person and smear his reputation with the paint brush of shame. Judges are often cautious in criminal matters. Once the Defendant cast a material doubt in the mind of the Judge, the case would be resolved in favour of the accused person. Except in cases where there are overwhelming and irresistible evidence (generated from thorough investigation) and the prosecution knows his onion; a good defence attorney may capitalize on the possible loopholes in the prosecution’s case and free the accused person. This may be regarded as technical justice, nevertheless our laws recognize it. There are plethoras of judicial approbation of this settled principle of law. In the case of Ankpegher v. State (2018 LPELR-43906 (SC), the Supreme Court held that:

There is no doubt that in criminal proceedings the onus of proof lies on the prosecution throughout the trial and does not shift. In other words, there is no burden on the accused person to prove his innocence. It is also trite that the standard of proof in criminal proceedings is proof beyond reasonable doubt.

The legal position canvassed above is necessary as a prelude to the actual nature of burden bestowed on the prosecution in rape cases. In the locus classicus of Posu v. The State (2011) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1234) 393 @ 414-417, the Supreme Court held thus:

In a charge of rape or unlawful carnal knowledge of a female without her consent, it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the following:

(a) That the accused had sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix.

(b) That the act of sexual intercourse was done without her consent or that the consent was obtained by fraud, force, threat, intimidation, deceit or impersonation.

(c) That the prosecutrix was not the wife of the accused.

(d) That the accused had the mens rea, the intention to have sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix without her consent or that the accused acted recklessly not caring whether the prosecutrix consented or not.

(e) That there was penetration……

The most important and essential ingredient of the offence of rape is penetration. The court will deem that sexual intercourse is complete upon proof of penetration of the penis into the vagina.

To be clearer, a prosecutrix in this context is a female victim of rape on whose behalf the State is prosecuting the accused person. These five elements listed by the Supreme Court above must be conjunctively proved. Each element must be proved independently and/or jointly. Failure to prove any of these elements, the prosecution’s case must fail like a pack of cards. This is no little task for the prosecution. The easiest element is to show that the accused person was not the wife of the prosecutrix. Proving other elements may pose some difficulties unless there are glaring evidences which could either be documentary, real, oral, circumstantial or electronic. Showing that the accused person had sex with the prosecutrix without her consent is not enough. The prosecution must proceed to show that the accused had intention to commit the act without her consent or he was reckless. Most importantly, the prosecution must prove that the accused person inserted his penis inside the vagina of a prosecutrix. However, (though helpful for the prosecution’s case) he need not prove that the accused person deposited his semen or that the hymen was ruptured. What the law requires is merely evidence of slightest vaginal penetration.  Therefore, where the prosecutor finds that from the evidence(s) available, a case of rape cannot be made out, it is advisable to opt for other sexual based violence charges. If the prosecution did not heed, his failure would be guaranteed.

Furthermore, having established the elements of rape, it can be gleaned from the above cited authorities that a person accused of rape cannot be convicted unless there is evidence of corroboration. This is another huge hurdle to cross. What perhaps makes this requirement for corroboration heart rendering is that it is not a requirement of Statute. It is matter of practice adopted from the common law tradition. Although, it seems that the requirement for corroboration is intended to eliminate a remote possibility of the Defendant’s innocence as stated earlier. However, Section 209 (3) of the Evidence Act makes it mandatory that the evidence of a child below the age of 14 must be corroborated. It means that the testimony of a child below 14 years only cannot convict an accused person of rape unless corroborated. The difficulty in proving rape based on uncorroborated evidence reared its ugly head in the case of Edet Iko v. The State (2001) 14 NWLR (Pt. 732) 221 @ 245 wherein the Supreme Court held that the mere fact that the complainant stated that the accused inserted his penis into her vagina is not ipso facto sufficient proof of penetration in the absence of corroborative evidence like a medical report to support the evidence of penetration. Listen to the apex Court explanation:

The danger sought to be obviated by the common law rule……is that the story told by the witness may be inaccurate for reasons not applicable to other competent witnesses, whether the risk be of deliberate inaccuracy, as in the case of accomplices, or unintentional inaccuracy, as in the case of children and some complainants in cases of sexual offences.

While alluding to the case of Ibeakanma v. Queen (1963) 2 SCNLR 2 194-195 The Supreme Court further stated:

It is an established practice in criminal law that though corroboration of evidence of the prosecutrix in a rape case is not essential in law, it is, in practice always looked for and it is also the practice to warn the jury against the danger of acting upon her uncorroborated testimony.

On the other hand, in Posu’s case two friends took turns to have carnal knowledge of the prosecutrix at about 7:30pm. The act was done in the presence of their uncompromised friend who later stood as a witness for the prosecution. The crime was promptly reported and medical examination was conducted which disclose the presence of semen and laceration in the prosecutrix thigh and abdomen. There was also evidence of the prosecutrix torn pant and clothes. The evidence was so overwhelming that even the five Justices of the Supreme Court took turn to lampoon the trial Judge for passing a light sentence of three years imprisonment in a glaring crime of this magnitude. In our opinion, the Prosecution was also complicit for not cross-appealing the sentence passed on the both Ndewenu Posu and Oke Segun (1st and 2nd Appellant). The point sought to be made here is that the conviction was attained because there was the viva voce evidence of the Appellants’ friend who was present at the scene of crime during the act, medical report that corroborated the testimony of the prosecutrix were tendered and admitted in evidence, real evidence of torn and stained pants and clothes among others were also admitted. In this case, the corroboration was the medical report and the Appellant’s friend. Thus, the poser is how often do victims of rape report the act immediately and obtain medical report when the incidence is still fresh? Medical Report evidencing penetration is a sine qua non and good corroboration for proving rape in law. This is considering that unlike Posu’s case, most rape cases do not have a third party to corroborate the victim’s testimony.

Having disclosed these elements, it now clear that based on the peculiar nature of rape -which often inflicts unimaginable trauma, the crime is usually not reported promptly. Victim of rape mostly report their encounter after considerably time would have elapsed. At this time, evidences would have been tampered with. Medical report may not disclose sexual contact with the accused person. Persons who witness the act may no longer be available and willing to testify.  The customary delay in reporting and investigating allegations of rape is the primary reason behind the difficulty in proving glaring cases of rape. Until the National Assembly on whose shoulders it lies, amends the evidential burden on the victims of rape the challenge would continue to stare us in the face. This must also be balanced with the likelihood of some mischievous elements who fabricate allegations of rape against innocent persons to settle scores.

So far, we have made lengthy efforts to convey the attitude of the Court when confronted with an uncorroborated evidence of rape. An uncorroborated evidence of rape may likely fail in our courts. Evidence of corroboration may be a viva voce testimony of a witness or a medical report. Two major factors that limits the possibility of corroboration in Nigeria is the reluctance on the part of victims to report allegations of rape promptly and the fact that most sexual violations are done clandestinely outside the view of third parties who may be a willing corroborator. Although, in exceptional cases the court have held that once the case of the prosecution are weighty and credible enough to lead to an irresistible conclusion that the prosecutrix was rape, the court will convict the accused.(See the case of Ogunbayo v. State (2007) 8 NWLR (Pt.1035) 157). This depends on the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.

EXPLORING ADDITIONAL AND/OR ALTERNATIVE REMEDIES

In the past the Common law principle often described as the rule in Smith v. Selwyn (1914) 3K.B. 93 constituted a cog in the wheel of progress wherein it is disallowed to prosecute criminal allegation simultaneous with civil claim for damages. Currently, there is no statutory or Rule of court that has codified this principle. The principle seems to conflict with the unimpeded constitutional right of Nigerians to access the Courts to redress wrongs inflicted on them. It is safe to argue that this principle has outlived its relevance and should be jettisoned. It means that a victim of rape or sexual offence can commence a civil action against the accused person to obtain damages, and injunctive remedies where necessary.

Most criminal allegations are laden with civil remedies. It is left for the victim to elect whether to pursue the criminal aspect and abandon the civil aspect which is often the case. The victim can also seek civil remedies, whilst the criminal case subsists. Our position here is to encourage the victims to pursue civil remedies in addition to criminal charges. The civil remedy is particularly suggested because it may afford the victim the opportunity to relief the burden in her mind. The victim would be opportune to narrate her story and by so doing gain closure. The financial and injunctive remedies may also serve as deterrence to violators. Unlike in criminal cases, the burden placed on the victims (as claimant or plaintiff) in civil cases is on a balance of probability (See Section 133 (1) Evidence Act, 2011). The burden is far less. The volume of evidence required is reduced significantly.

The civil claims that may be available to a victim of rape include: assault, battery, false imprisonment, adoption etc. In the course of having non-consensual carnal knowledge of a person, most of the foregoing wrongs would have been inflicted simultaneously. It is therefore open to the victim to seek redress in a civil court against the tortfeasor for the civil wrong done. Children are allowed to sue through their next friend i.e parents or legal guardian. The burden of proof is on the balance of probability. This simply means that the court would give judgment in favour of the person whose truth outweighs the other. Here, the victim is not under obligation to corroborate her evidence.

SUMMARY AND COMMENTS

In the light of the arguments canvassed above, we have established that rape is the highest sexual offence known to law and it comes with heavy legal burden to establish. The criminal legislations on rape are old and yearning for fundamental amendments to fit into today’s realities. Some suggestions have been made on the alternative routes to navigate in a bid to assuage the grievance of victims. Because in the end what victims desire is emotional cum psychological healing over and above all the tortuous (sometimes futile) theatrics that often take place in criminal courtrooms. Accordingly, we have proffered the following as a way forward:

  1. The burden of proof in rape cases should be codified with the aim of reducing the quantum of legal burden bestowed on the prosecution. The law should also create and adequately fund a special unit of the Nigeria Police Force to be charged with the responsibility of employing scientific means, among others, to thoroughly investigate allegations of rape.
  2. The social stigma attached to victims of rape must stop to enable persons with similar complaints to boldly report cases to appropriate authorities for timely and effective investigations.
  3. Sex education and body awareness must be taught at home, schools, churches and mosque with the aim of educating women and children on the sanctity of their sexual organs.
  4. All the State Houses of Assembly in Nigeria must adopt the Child’s Right Act, 2003 and the VAPPA, 2015 in their respective States. Specifically, the seeming conservative North should be amenable to changes in this regard.
  5. Rape and sexual violence victims should explore the option of redressing the civil wrongs inherent in these acts as an addition or alternative to criminal remedies.
  6. The Chief Judge of each state of the federation should make special Rules and designate some Courts (within their sphere of jurisdictional influence) for handling of rape and sexual violence cases with the view to ensure quick dispensation of cases and protecting the privacy of children and young persons.
  7. Nigerians must desist from media prosecution. Freedom of expression as enshrined in the Constitution is not absolute. Crimes and civil wrongs may be occasioned when flippant and unsubstantiated allegations are peddled to smear the reputation of another. Where a person’s right stops, another’s begins.
  8. Above all, rapist come from families and homes, parents should educate their children (especially male) on the need to respect the sanctity of the female body. Early tendencies of disregard must be met with commensurate deterrence. If there are no rapists, there would not be rape cases in court.
  9. Before and while prosecuting a rape case, Nigerians should always consult their lawyer.

JONAH, VICTOR ANAYOCHUKWU
LEGAL PRACTITIONER FROM LAGOS
TEL: +234 7030878896
EMAIL: [email protected]