Home Blog Page 894

A royal ruse – In Touch,

GOODLUCK Jonathan has always counted himself a lucky man. He became deputy governor, governor, vice president and president without ambition or prayer, without a campaign or mass appeal, without money or structure. He rode nature’s express. He floated on the wind of fate. He washed up ashore to a feast of kings. He was even better than the character in Jerzy Kosinski’s immortal novel Being There, about a fellow without quality. From tending a garden, he suddenly was, by popular acclaim, going to be the president of the United States. A nondescript soul morphed into the sole monk of the enclave.

Only the paths of royals are so oiled. So, Jonathan must thrill to the moves of Buhari loyalists who are plotting to make him a royal again. They want him to be president and succeed President Muhammadu Buhari. They want him to be not Nigeria’s royal, but theirs. They want to make him a president after the northern heart. It is not because they love Jonathan. It is because he can be their boy and buoy; their sweet heart and southern beau. In a headline report from ThisDay newspaper on October 4, they are saying that Jonathan is a good man and that qualifies him to be president again.

They said, “He handed power peacefully and nursed no bitterness against anyone and therefore will not be a threat to the interest of the north.” It is not only a machination of a hegemon, it is also naïve. When did Jonathan, in the eyes of this same group, become a saint? They are trying to canonise a man who, they told us, had supped with the devil. “Saints preserve us,” noted French writer Balzac. But how do you radicalise a devil into the holy one for Nigeria? Was he the one they campaigned against? The target of their adjectival invectives: They described him as clueless, incompetent, and corrupt?

They rode on his back to the presidency. He was the bogeyman and also the victim. Jonathan fell to them. The clueless man became humbled. I was there at the Eagle Square at the handover. Jonathan put up a brave and sunny front on the day he expected to begin his second act as president. He waved his hand feebly, smiled often and benignly, spoke less, but his body language was subdued. Melancholy draped him.

Buhari gave a hint of embrace. He said Jonathan had nothing to fear about him. He was right. Jonathan has not fallen under his radar, if his minions sometimes have. Recently, he has been a darling of the presidency. He became an ambassador of peace and democracy on its behalf and embarked on a shuttle diplomacy over a coup in a West African neighbour.

Maybe they see him as a pliant soul, a man they could cudgel about. Hence they are seeing him as a better person than an unknown figure who may erupt from the south to give them a headache. They may look at their tenure without pleasure and torpedo any effort by the north to reroute its way to power after another Jonathan term, since he will not be able to run the country for more than four years. He fulfilled a mandatory four-year term in his first coming.

The Buhari loyalists have been out of their depth over who succeeds him in 2023. The clamour has been it should come to the south. The north has had its share of eight years. They also have seen the futility in the mathematics about how many years the north has had the seat since 1999. It is a mischief of numbers. They also are not at peace with the appeal to the northeast. They are therefore in a geopolitical trap. They have to come south, and if they do it must be a person of their choice. Jonathan they think they know. So Jonathan should have it. They think by doing so, they can coalesce the Jonathan followers, the Azikiwes in the southeast, the militants and their kin in the south-south and the southwesterners who saw a shoeless hero.

The move is a patriarchal pandering to zoning. It is zoning without zoning. They want to put Jonathan there, so he may keep watch for them until they return. They want to come like a thief in the night. But we don’t have to watch and pray because we already know the day and the hour. We have seen the signs of the times, and we know that they want to make Jonathan the Judas of the south to betray his people. They want him to be the Uncle Tom of Nigerian politics. By making Jonathan their point man, they believe they are giving the devil his due. That is, if it’s the South’s turn, we will give you but on our terms.

There were two main objections to the Jonathan era, and they account for why he lost in 2015. One, he ran a corrupt government. Two, he ran the war on terror with a supine hand. Today, are the Buhari loyalists saying they want to hand over power to a man who did not run this country with clean hands? Are they saying they have given up on the war on corruption? Many have accused the administration of looking the other way on major issues of corruption. Is it the NDDC probe that seems to have gone into abeyance? Or the series of allegations against mainstays of the administration that now slide into memory? Even it was because of the Jonathan mess that Buhari noted that if we don’t kill corruption, it will kill us. Was it mere opportunistic rhetoric? Is it a surrender of the war on corruption? Are we saying Jonathan should continue where he left off in that department? So, did we vote him out in 2015 then?

The war on terror had initial hope in 2015, and even the administration’s glib spokesman said it would end that year. It is worse today, threatening to make a martyr of a dauntless governor. The chief of army staff has become a sort of buffoon in the fight, with his men dying and mocking him on social media and deserting the force. Billions of Naira flow into it but blood buckets gush out. Jonathan had famously said that Boko haram could be in his kitchen. We are not winning the battles, so the campaign now seems out of reach. To give the Otuoke man another chance is to imply we fell into a “one chance” in 2015 and 2019.

The root of this is to say that it is not about vision, but about power. So, if the Buhari loyalists see power as the only dividend of democracy, so why make such grandiose claims about ending terror and killing corruption? They may even be mistaken about Jonathan. Jonathan does not bow to godfathers. Remember the story of Obj, who turned against Jonathan and made a public show of tearing his PDP card. The Owu chief is too ashamed to queue for another card. He did not de-register from the party. He only tore it as an act of a geriatric impresario. Jonathan did it to Obj, who can he not do it to? If it works out for the Buharists, they will be surprised how the Otuoke man will execute an about-face. They say he has learned his lessons. They may be surprised what lessons he has learnt after he smacks them in the face.

Let who succeeds Buhari be about virtue, not clique; about democracy, not calculating roguery. We are not running a democracy in the guise of feudalism. It is consensus, not caste, that makes a modern state. Jonathan may try his luck if he wants. It is his right as a Nigerian. No one should foist him on us. Not least the same people who disgraced him. If they think Jonathan is the right man, let them not do it in the shadows. Let them come out openly and explain and also answer the questions I have posed here.

To try to foist Jonathan is to see the south and the country as a plaything for a hegemon’s ego. To see democracy as a ruse to use for narrow goals.

Succession goes through a long process. Let the country go through it, not by fiat but by agreement. If they want somebody from the south-south, they can work the process and there are quite a few who can do it from the region. But to stick to one man, and say it is their royal choice makes us feel used. As a writer said, “crowns tumble hourly.” Let no one take the people’s will for granted. (The Nation newspaper)

ZAMFARA GOV, MATAWALLE, RESCUES 11 VICTIMS OF KIDNAP WITHOUT PAYING RANSOM

0

By Mohammed Munirat Nasir

Zamfara state governor, Dr Bello Mohammed Matawalle, has, again, facilitated the rescue of 11 victims of kidnap without paying any ransom as a result of the carrot and stick initiative of his administration.

A statement by his Special Adviser on Public Enlightenment, Media and Communications, Alhaji Zailani Bappa, said governor Matawalle received the 11 rescued victims of kidnap at the Government House, Gusau, in furtherance to his carrot and stick approach to lasting peace in Zamfara State.

The governor assured that his administration will not rest on its oars until total peace is achieved in the state. He directed that the victims be taken to the hospital to ascertain their health status before they will be finally released to their respective families.

The 11 rescued victims expressed total delight and boundless gratitude to governor Matawalle whom they described as the “Ark of Noah”.

The victims, 8 males and 3 females, are from various states which included Bauchi, Niger, Sokoto and Zamfara states.

The rescue of the 11 victims is coming at a time when governor Matawalle summoned a stakeholders’ meeting on 3rd October, to further discuss avenues of achieving peace without blood shed in the state. NNL. (nigeriannewsleader)

BEHOLD! THE WORLD’S OLDEST NATIONAL ASSEMBLY (PARLIAMENT) CALLED ALTHING

By Mike Agunwa (NewsLeader Editor-at-Large)

AlThing parliament in Iceland is the first parliament in history. The parliament was created in the year 930, making it the world’s first legislative body.

The Althing was a general assembly of the Icelandic Commonwealth, where the country’s most powerful Leaders (goðar) met to decide on legislation and dispense justice. A goði was a local chieftain with specific legal and administrative responsibilities.

The parliament currently has a legislative capacity of 63 seats. The political groups that formed the coalition government in AlThing parliament is 34 and opposition parties is 29. They includes: Independent Party (16), Left Green Party (10) and the Progressive Party (8). The opposition Centre Party is (9), Social Democratic Alliance (7), Pirate Party (6), Reform Party (4), People’s Party (2) and Independent (1). The voting system is by Party-list Proportional representation. The last election was held on October 28, 2017, while the next election to the parliament will be held on or before October 23, 2021.

Three Icelanders were given credit for the founding of the AlThing in Iceland: Ulfljotr, Goat hair, and Thorsteinn Ingolfsson who was the son of the first settler in Iceland. A major feature of the Althing was the meeting of the legislative or law council, called the lögrétta. Only chieftains (Gothar) had the right to vote in the Lögrétta, and each brought two advisers into council meetings. When two or more shared a chieftaincy, only one at a time attended the lögrétta and performed the chieftain’s official duties at the Althing. The lögrétta was also empowered to grant exemptions from the law and make treaties with foreign countries.

The first AlThing was held at Thingvellir in the year 1180 Runic Era, and was believed to be a continuation of the Norwegian Thing presided over by Law Speaker, Thorleif the Wise. The judicial body that composed the first AlThing was the Gothar of Iceland who sent 36 of their number to form the first law body. The first order of business at the first Icelandic AlThing, was to choose a Law Speaker. Of special note was the first law passed, which prohibited warships from scaring the Land Spirits with their dragon head prows.

The Speaker of the AlThing, Steingrimur J. Sigfusson, literally the President of the Althing, is the presiding officer (speaker) of that legislature. For centuries, Iceland’s Alþing met every summer at Þingvellir (Assembly Plain), a magnificent rift valley shown to the left. This site is spectacular not only for its historical significance, but also for its beauty. It’s dotted with canyons, caves, rivers, springs, waterfalls, and lakes. The law-council (Lögretta) was the legislative body of the Alþing. The voting members were the goðar. They reviewed and amended existing laws, made new laws, and granted exemptions from the law. They also had the power to make treaties in the few cases that Iceland had dealings with foreign lands.

Iceland was divided into four administrative regions, called quarters (fjórðungar). Each quarter have nine chieftains, called goði (plural goðar). In the middle of the 10th century, three more goðar were added. The goði was the “first among equals”. The original goðar were probably the leaders of the ships carrying settlers to Iceland, and who claimed the land and divided it up among their followers. The goði is believed to have a special relationship with the gods, and he probably was responsible for the pagan religious rites for his followers.

After the conversion of Iceland to Christianity, the goðar maintained a special relationship with the new church, but his secular responsibilities remained intact. The office of goði (called the goðorð) was normally hereditary, but the goðorð could be transferred between individuals. The office of goðorð could be shared. However, only one goði from each goðorð could participate in the official business at the Alþing. The goðorð had no fixed boundaries. Allegiance to the goði from the people was voluntary. A person could chose to support any goði in his district and can change support from one goði to another with only minor formalities. The allegiance was a two way street: the goði looked after the interests of his men, and the men provided armed support to him in times of dispute.

The goðar met in regional þing in the spring, called várþing. Each várþing was presided over by three goðar, and all the supporters of each goði (called þingmenn) were required to attend. All goðar (thirty nine in number) attended each bing, accompanied by at least two advisors. Any other person could choose to attend, but only one supporter can each goði into the Alþing. Þingmenn who could not attend were required to pay a tax to the goði. These funds helped offset travel expenses for those who did attend. In order to be legally fit to attend the þing, a man must be able to ride a full-day’s journey, and bring in his own hobbled horse after baiting, and find his way by himself. Three legal functions were performed at the Alþing: the laws were recited by the law speaker; the laws were made by the law council; and the laws were judged by the quarter courts.

In the years before a written culture developed in Iceland, the law-speaker literally spoke the law, reciting out loud one third of the laws at each annual meeting of the Alþing. Thus, over the course of his three year term, the law speaker would have recited the entire law code. The written law code (Grágás) contains oaths and other formulae composed with rhythmic elements and alliterative patterns, making the laws easier to remember when the laws existed only in oral form. The law speaker was the only official who received a regular payment.

The lawspeaker stands on the Lögberg (in the center of the sketch) and recites the laws, while goðar and other interested parties listen. In the foreground are booths (búðir), temporary stone structures covered with a tent-like tarp that served as both dwellings and meeting places while the Alþing was in session. The law speaker could exert influence, but did not “rule” the country. The power remained in the hands of the goðar. The law speaker was the repository of legal knowledge in the era before the laws were written down. He was consulted on any disputed points of law.

Even after Iceland’s union with Norway in 1262, the Althing still held its sessions at Þingvellir until 1799, when it was discontinued for 45 years. It was restored in 1844 and moved to Reykjavík, where it has resided ever since. The present parliament building, the Alþingishús, was built in 1881, of hewn Icelandic stone.

From the time that the Alþing was established until Christianity was adopted, Iceland was completely pagan. Icelandic law and the heathen religion were tightly connected during this time, as evidenced by the fact that the leaders of the religion and the leaders of the government were one and the same. It’s worth pointing out that the swearing of these oaths probably precluded Christians from participating in court cases until Iceland adopted Christianity in the year 1000

After losing its independence in the 13th century, Iceland eventually won back its autonomy, and the modern Alþingi moved into this current basalt building in 1881; a stylish glass-and-stone annex was completed in 2002. Visitors were allowed to attend sessions (four times weekly October to May) when parliament is sitting.

The Alþing provided the judicial functions through the Quarter Courts and the legislative functions through the Law Council. But no executive functions were provided. Once the court had decided that someone was guilty of breaking the law, the Alþing had no power to execute a sentence. That was up to the injured party, or his or her family or supporters. In addition to the participants in politics and law, the Alþing attracted all sorts of merchants, craftsmen, and peddlers. The annual meeting was the time for marriages to be arranged, alliances to be made, broken friendships to be renewed, gossip and news exchanged. Perhaps one thousand people routinely attended the Alþing, although many more attended important or contentious sessions. Despite the sparseness of the Icelandic population, the Alþing made it possible for Icelanders to know one another to a greater degree and to meet each other more often than any other European country of this time.

As from 1881, Iceland began to practices representative democracy, a principle which holds that power originates with the people who delegate this power to their elected representatives. Every four year, the electors choose, by secret ballot, 63 representatives to sit in parliament. These members of parliament jointly hold legislative powers, and also have fiscal powers, i.e. the power to make decisions on public spending and taxation.

The constitution of Iceland provides for six electoral constituencies with the possibility of an increase to seven. The constituency boundaries are fixed by legislation. Each constituency elects nine members. In addition, each party is allocated seats based on its proportion of the overall national vote in order that the number of members in parliament for each political party should be more or less proportional to its overall electoral support. A party must have won at least five per cent of the national vote in order to be eligible for these proportionally distributed seats. Political participation in Iceland is very high.

Over 80 per cent of the electorate casts a ballot (81.4% in 2013). The current speaker of the Althing parliament is Steingrimur J. Sigfusson, from the Left Green Party. He was elected Speaker since December 14, 2017. NNL. (nigeriannewsleader)

POLITICAL FOES, FRIENDS GATHER FOR ATIKU, RIBADU’S SON AND DAUGHTER’S WEDDING

By Rukayatu Abubakar (Society Matters Reporter)

Political friends and foes, including society’s eminent dignitaries, gathered at the weekend to grace the highbrow wedding of Aliyu Atiku Abubakar, son of Nigeria’s former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar and Fatima Nuhu Ribadu, daughter of former chairman of the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC), Alhaji Nuhu Ribadu, as they become husband and wife.

The colourful wedding was held on Saturday in Abuja at the residence of the bride’s father, Nuhu Ribadu. Dignitaries exchanged warm pleasantries at the occasion and rejoiced with the families of the newly wed.

The occasion which began at exactly 1130am, was chaired by Sheikh Ibrahim Ali Pantami, Minister of Communications and Digital Economy.

Former governor of Kano State governor and a serving federal lawmaker, Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, arrived the venue of the occasion amidst cheers from his ubiquitous political supporters and in company of the father of the groom, Atiku Abubakar, shortly after the wedding kicked off.

As the ceremony progressed, the bride’s hand was formally asked in marriage, on behalf of the Atiku Abubakar family by retired General Aliyu Gusau, a former National Security Adviser and Defence Minister. A dowry of N250,000 had already been paid by the groom’s family.

Nigerians from diverse works of life from across the country were fully present at the event which includes both Atiku and Ribadu. Among them, were the national leader of the ruling All Progressive Congress (APC) and former governor of Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Senate President, Senator Ahmed Lawan.

Others are the former Osun state governor and interim chairman of the APC, Chief Bisi Akande; former secretaries to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Ambassador Babagana Kingibe and Mahmud Yahyale Ahmed; some state governors, top officials of government and close friends of the groom and bride’s families. NNL.

Law, Morality And National Service: The Justices Chukwudifu Oputa and Adolphus Karibi – Whyte Connection

By Amb. Godknows Igali, Ph.D

The closing days of the month of September each year will, for a long time to come, be moments of perpetual memorial for the Nigerian Supreme Court as an institution and its members, past and present.

This is understandably so, as the lives and times of two of Nigeria’s most eminent jurists, moralists and pathfinders, the late Justice Chukwudifu Oputa (1924-2014), and his younger colleague and brother, Justice Adolphus Karibi-Whyte (1932-2020), will for related reasons be remembered and celebrated. For Justice Oputa, this time of the year particularly the 24th of September marks his birthday and on this occasion, it was the 96th Posthumous celebration. Relatedly, the series of passage-rites leading to the final resting of Justice Karibi-Whyte were held on Saturday, 26th September 2020 in the coastal town of Abonema, Rivers State.

SHARED PURSUIT OF PERFECTION

Expectedly, these two events attracted audiences of family, friends, and professional colleagues from Nigeria and around the world. They came in numbers and as it is the norm these days of Covid-19, on Zoom Virtual platforms; all saluting the scholarship, erudition, and idealism of both men. Like many of the Judges of the nation’s appellate judicial system of their time which some writers regard as “a golden era”, both were men of great moral fibre and sterner human refinement. They had both found themselves in the highest judicial echelon during an era when the calling to serve in the apex court in Nigeria or any country for that matter, was understood as the “tour de force” of any mortal activity. To them, the judiciary was more than a vocation but rather to be seen as the most sacred human calling before God Almighty Himself.

The common emotional thrust of most judges of their time, rather ambitiously, was the pursuit of some form of self-imposed perfectionist credo. Their outlook to life and standards in all areas were excessively self-tasking even against all known psychological and philosophical disinclinations towards perfectionism. Despite the fact that one writer puts it that, “the problem of being a perfectionist is that everything has to be perfect. The problem with being human is that nothing is perfect,” yet Justice Oputa and Justice Karibi-Whyte held unrepentantly to the belief that the object of rewarding judicial demeanour is not just the pursuit of some form of sinlessness, but to become somewhat angelic. So, in their shared character traits, they were unassailable with almost a dutiful account of nearly every daily activity of their often-lengthy years. In actual living, they were stoic, spartan and conservative. In particular, they were never found wanting in several matters of morals and dealings with the temptation of money, which the scriptures describe as the “root of all evil.” Indeed, one of their peers Justice Victor Ovie Whiskey, few years ago was remembered to have exclaimed, “I will faint if I ever saw N1m in front of me.”

On matters of learning, that is the study of Law and mastery of the canons, precepts, statutes and constitution of the land, they were simply profound and outstanding. The depth of scholarship was formed as a result of their simple brilliance and unbeaten record of high-level performance in places of study during their formative years.

ABRIDGED HALL OF FAME

In their ranks were many other great Nigerians who came to the limelight from 1954 when the Federal Supreme Court was established, up to the actual take-off of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on Oct 1st, 1963. It is difficult to capture all here, but some of the great Justices whose names are in this vaunted hall of fame include; Olumoyiwa Jibowu, Louis Mbanefo, Charles Onyeama, Chukwuwike Idibe, Joseph Adefarasin, Ademola Adetokunbo, Taslim Elias, Egbert Udo Udoma, Dr. Nabo Graham-Douglas. Others are; Akinola Aguda, Patrick Acholonu, Anthony Aniagolu, Atanda Fatai Williams, Sir Darley Alexander, Dan Ibekwe. There were also such great names as; Justices Kayode Esho, Idris Kutigi, Mohammed Bello, Katsina Alu, Chief George Sowemimo, Niki Tobi, Mohammed Akanbi, Ayo Irekife, Andrew Obaseki, Mamman Nasir, Dahiru Mustapha, etc.

More exciting is the fact that despite the rather sweeping aspersions nowadays, there are so many other eminent judges still alive in retirement, now reservoirs of moral rectitude of the realm. Equally, are no few of their successors still in active service who continue to thrive above the unassailing challenges of moral decadence and rather desperate political ecology. They are heirs of the near-perfectionist mantra of the founding fathers of their profession. Far away from the bright lights of the media and public acclaim, their impact on society and succeeding generations on the practice of law, public good and state-building have been based on the singular record of the highest levels of professional accomplishment and pursuit of truth.

THE OGUTA – ABONEMA ECONOMIC CORRIDOR

Although the lives of no two persons follow exactly the same trajectory, there exists an intriguing casual connection and wide overlap between Justices Oputa and Karibi-Whyte on several fronts.

Justice Chukwudifu Akunne Oputa continues to stand tall even now, six years after his death, perhaps, as the most prominent son of the lakeside town of Oguta – Ameshi, in Imo state. Apart from being one of the most picturesque locations in Nigeria, for a town that is on Nigeria’s biggest inland natural lake after Lake Chad, its waters are connected to the Njaba River, Orashi River, and ultimately the River Niger. Oguta therefore became a natural inland entry port for British Colonial rule into much of the Igbo country. The fact that Oguta provided a unique confluence between its blue waters and the waters of the Orashi River, the major tributary of the River Niger, made it a great point of touristic attraction to which was added its lush tropical forest. These also provided one of the best locations for the growth of palm oil trade, a product much needed in Europe at the time. Accordingly, Oguta became, arguably, the main centre of what the Europeans came to call the “centre of trade” with the hinterland. Very soon, such companies as Royal Niger Company and United Africa Company (UAC) moved in to set up in the area. It also became the early seat of the colonial and missionary incursion into several parts of Nigeria’s South East from the late 19th Century. Through the lake’s waterways connecting all the 27 villages in Oguta and such major Igbo towns as Owerri, Orlu, Amigbo, Okigwe Nkwerre, Mgbidi and covering various locations in Rivers State.

With flourishing trade, Oguta also became one of the central points of Igbo civilization, scholarship and knowledge from the late 19th century. The rich demographic admixture with the geo-cultural and geo-strategic location of the town, made it a centre of all sorts for the generation of a micro-civilization that was peculiar to it. Today, Oguta has become a signpost also for the modern Crude Oil and Gas industry; which along with few other communities, also gives Imo State a seat on the pantheon of oil producing states in Nigeria. So, international oil companies such as Shell Petroleum Development Company, Chevron Texaco Overseas, and few other local oil producers have operations around the area. Going down south, Justice Karibi-Whyte came from the Kalabari stock of the Ijaw ethnic nationality. The Kalabaris, for various reasons, are one of the most educationally advanced sub-groups in all of Nigeria. They boast amongst the first Nigerians to have received western education and therefore have a line-up of some of the nation’s first educated people such as; Dr. G.K.J. Amachree, (first Solicitor General of Nigeria and first black man to be United Nations Deputy Secretary General), Dr. Aroloye Ajumogobia (first Permanent Secretary, Federal Ministry of Education), Amb. Joe Iyalla (pioneer diplomatic patriarch), Dr. Nabo Graham Douglas, (first Queen’s Council along with Chief Rotimi Williams), Prof. Kelsy Harrison (leading global Gynaecologist) amongst many others. Yet still, Karibi-Whyte emerged as one of the greatest sons of Rivers State.

Just like Oputa, Karibi-Whyte grew up along the shores of the Abonema River, which has for centuries created the pathway for Europe’s penetration into the Nigerian hinterland, also in search of goods they called legitimate. This was after abolishing the ignominious slave trade which had gone on for about 400 years. With the founding of Abonema in 1882 when the Kalabari kingdom split into 3 main towns – Buguma, Bakana and Abonema and over 55 other smaller communities, this town became known as “York City” due to its modernist outlook. It also emerged as the nerve centre of Europe’s thriving trade in agricultural produce with the area that was given the name “Oil Rivers Protectorate” in 1886. This was later changed to “Niger Coast Protectorate” in 1893. Abonema, like its other counterparts, soon ended up with prominent Merchant-Warriors, many of whom took on European names such as; Chief Young-Jack, Boy-White, Black-Duke, Bobmanuel, Horsefall, Briggs, etc.

To this day, the town is adorned with historical monuments such as warehouses and quarters of European companies. Again, by dint of nature’s underpinning, Abonema, like Oguta is also one of the main nerve centres of Nigeria’s present crude oil and gas industry which provides the entry into the famous oil-rich Cawthorn Channel and OML 18 on-shore swamps, covering an area of over 1,000 square kilometres.

Interesting enough, between Oguta and Abonema grew a flourishing economic corridor in course of history, as the forbearers of both jurists were central figures. Oputa’s father Uzoukwu Oputa, was a Chief and strongman with 10 wives, and controlled all manner of affairs at about when colonial incursion made its way into the area. With tens of children, the less aggressive but bookish Chukwudifu was the last. Down in the creeks on the Atlantic shores, young Adolphus was also born into two strong families of commercial warlords of the late 19th Century – Boto (Boy-Whyte) and the Iju-Jack group.

FAITH, CULTURE AND MUSCIAL HERITAGE

Besides their love for law and order, and the straddling recurrence of family antecedents, both Oputa and Karibi-Whyte shared a lot of similarities going back to their very formative years. As a result of the socio-cultural ambience in which they both grew, though belonging to one of the most conservative professions, and rising to the highest appellate court, they were men of great religious piety and cultural appreciation. For this, they attracted to themselves, custodial rights and duties over the inherited traditions of their people. Hence Oputa held several traditional titles in Oguta and was one of the highest grades of traditional aristocracy. Also, Karibi-Whyte was the traditional head of Iju-Jack and Boto-Whyte group of houses in Abonema.

These, in no way, impinged on their Christian traditions as they performed life-time service to God’s work in their churches respectively. Both grew up in the Church and in course of life, rose to become high-graded Knights and defenders of the faith. Oputa was Knight-Commander of Saint Mulumba and St.

Gregory, one of the highest Orders within the Catholic Church. Karibi-Whyte, a Knight in the Anglican Church, and was once the Chancellor (Head Legal Counsel) of the entire Church of Nigeria. This again in itself formed their austere outlook to life.

They were great lovers of Classical Music, which they both acquired from their law training in universities and ancient “Inns” of law study in the United Kingdom and growing up in the church. This love for music is imprinted in their progeny with Justice Oputa producing one of Nigeria’s most vivacious entertainers and high-minded pundits, Charles Oputa, better known as “Charlie boy” or in these latter days “Area Father.” Similarly, all of Karibi-Whyte’s children are great patrons of the best performing choral groups, both in Lagos where most of them have their professional practices, and their home town of Port Harcourt.

OBSESSION WITH KNOWLEDGE AND “BOOKISHNESS”

As it was a tradition for most young people of that generation both Christians and Muslims around Nigeria, missionary schools were always the beginning. Oputa began his primary education at the Sacred Heart School, Onitsha before proceeding to Christ the King School, Onitsha. From there, he continued to Yaba High College, Lagos and finally to Achimota College Ghana, where he obtained his first degree in Economics. Achimota College was where other Africans such as the Great Kwame Nkrumah, Edward Akufo-Addo, Jerry Rawlings and John Evan Atta-Mills, all former Presidents of Ghana, as well as Sir Dawada Jawara of Gambia and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, attended. On return from Ghana, he taught briefly at African College along with Prof. Chike Obi and Dr. Pius Okigbo, before becoming the Principal of Kalabari National College, in Abonema. Endlessly searching for knowledge, he read studiously and obtained another Bachelor’s Degree in History from the University of London. Yet still, untired and unfettered, he “crossed the oceans,” as was commonly said in those days, to the United Kingdom to read Law and obtained a degree in 1953. He was also called in same year into the coveted Gray’s Inn as a Barrister.

In a similar vein, Karibi-Whyte had left laurels almost everywhere he had his public education. Having completed his primary education in Abonema in a missionary school as well, he proceeded to attend the Kalabari National College which trained almost all the famous persons from this area that have served Nigeria. In an interesting twist of destinies, Oputa was Karibi-Whyte’s Principal at Kalabari Native College along with his erstwhile classmate Prof. Tam David-West and many others. He went on to work as a Court Clerk for some years before proceeding to the United Kingdom to study, obtaining his degree in 1960 from the University of Hull. Established in 1927, one that has been a training ground for many British statesmen. A year later in September 1961, he was called to the Bar at the Middle Temple Inn. Like Justice Oputa’s Gray’s Inn, this British Bar training had since the 12th-13th century, been vested in many such ancient “Inns” or societies. Still not satisfied, he went on to the University of London to obtain a Master’s degree in Law (LLM) and finally earned for himself a Ph.D. in Law from the University of Lagos where he was already teaching Law.

A TOP LADDER OF PROFESSIONAL APOGEE

Justice Oputa had a very successful practice in law on his return to Nigeria, handling a number of high-profile cases in which it was almost as if he was destined to win always. This continued till 1966 when he was appointed a High Court Judge in Eastern Nigeria. Ten years later, he was elevated to become the first Chief Judge of Imo State and moved on higher to the Nigerian Supreme Court in 1984, until his retirement in 1989. During the period, he left behind some of the most quoted judgements till date. He also earned for himself a name from the former Chief Justice Mohammed Bello as the “Socrates of the Nigerian Supreme Court.” Justice Oputa was practically known for his very studious, philosophical and almost unassailable judgements, which were a great metaphor for wisdom, theology and philosophy. As if to confirm this, Ambassador Godknows Boladei Igali was particularly privileged to encounter Justice Oputa closely in October 2002, shortly after the World Court judgement on Nigeria and Cameroun’s border dispute. While serving as Nigeria’s Consul-General, he was requested by the Cameroun Bar Association to be invited as the Guest Speaker for their Bi-Annual Bar Dinner in 2003 when he came visiting. In an audience that included the Chief Judge of Cameroun, many senior Judges, senior members of the Bar, and senior teachers of the Law, in the coastal town of Limbe (formerly Victoria), Justice Oputa expounded on what he termed the “Raison-d’etre of Judgements.” His conclusion was that a judgement at the appellate level only makes meaning if it could be implemented and not left in doubt. He alluded that it was like “communicating the voice of God.” In this, he used Julius Caesar’s sixteenth century play “Merchant of Venice” as text. Shocking to his audience, he quoted without text, almost all the dialogues between the main protagonist, that is Antonio and the supposed Jewish money lender, Sherlock. In the same manner, he quoted about four pages from Mark Anthony’s “Funeral Oration for Julius Caesar,” in the landmark novel named after that Roman Emperor. And last, he was able to recite off-head the “Beatitudes” listed in “Sermon on the Mount,” as contained in the three long chapters of the Holy Bible in Matthew Chapters 5-7. The impact of this on Cameroun’s top judicial authority is better left to conjecture at a time when they were in conflict in Nigeria as his emphasis were on such virtues as forbearance.

For Justice Karibi-Whyte, it was after his sojourns that he took up an employment with the Rivers State Judiciary as a draftsman in 1973, and rose to become Solicitor General of the State. From there, he moved to the Federal Revenue Court as a Judge, and in the course of time, proceeded to become Judge at the Court of Appeal in 1980. He later joined Justice Oputa, his erstwhile “master” in the Supreme Court in 1984 where he served for 18 odd years.

CHRONICLES OF TIRELESS NATIONAL SERVICE

Besides sitting on the bench and passing out judgements, the Nigerian Judiciary has particularly shown great versatility in its service to the country in other aspects. They have often adapted to varied assignments and functions as the occasion demands, especially in chairing some administrative and pseudo-judicial assignments. Some have served as Chairmen of National Electoral Commissions and Panels of Enquiries, others have been Ambassadors and High Commissioners, while some others have risen up to the occasion in other critical assignments. In these two latter areas, few have performed the multiple roles that both Oputa and Karibi-Whyte played.

In Justice Oputa’s post-retirement life, he was called out by then President Olusegun Obasanjo (OBJ) to take a periscopic back review of human rights abuses during the chequered years of military rule in Nigeria. This came against the backdrop that OBJ himself had been a victim of grave human rights abuses, having been sentenced to death under circumstances that were rather obscure. President Obasanjo who took the reins of power after nearly 31 years of disjointed military rule, insisted on a Human Rights Investigation Commission, in what was similar to South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Committee, then Chaired by Archbishop Desmond Tutu. With such eminent persons as Nigeria’s “Liberation Theologists” and Catholic Bishop of Sokoto, Matthew Kukah by his side, the Commission was intended to help heal the pains of military atrocities.

Like Bishop Tutu who collapsed at some revelations, Oputa and his commission members had their breaking points along the line of the work of the panel. In his dying days at the National Hospital Abuja in 2014, Justice Oputa soliloquized that the report of his panel has been “oputarized”, a sobriquet for putting away a good work to accumulate dust on government shelves, as it is with many other good studies on many national issues.

Outside this relatively recent high-profile function, throughout Oputa’s public career, he performed many other ad-hoc responsibilities including being on Eastern-Central Nigeria Marketing Board and chairing East-Central States’ Commission on Revenue Collection. He also chaired Federal Government Enquiry into Scarcity and Petroleum Products in Nigeria, which led to the establishment of three more refineries – Warri, Kaduna and Port Harcourt II. He was also Chancellor of Imo State University, President Nigeria Red Cross Society, and President Nigeria Society for Prevention of Accidents.

On his part, Karibi-Whyte also had a robust stint in his teaching of Law, rising to the level of an Associate Professor. It was therefore easy for him to fit in to other duties as Chairman of the Nigeria Constitution Conference 1994-1995, which prepared the main backbone for some of the contents of the 1999 Constitution. He was also Chairman, Currency Counterfeit Tribunal; Chairman, Enquiry into Nigeria Agricultural and Cooperative Bank, and Chairman, Civil Disturbances Tribunal. Still at the federal level, he was also Chairman of Unification and Reform of Criminal Code, Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Act and Criminal Procedure Code.

He was also Chairman, Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and served as Pro-Chancellor of the Rivers State University and Committee of Pro-Chancellors in Nigeria. At the international level, he was also appointed Judge of the International Criminal Tribunal of Yugoslavia, a role in which he stood out among the best in a clime where there were several international jurists.

In the annals of law report in Nigeria, Justice Karibi-Whyte remains one of the most quoted justices in Law references. His Judgements were penetrating, legally incontrovertible and lucid with sterling clarity. He combined academics and practice of Law and therefore it was almost impossible to question his thoughts on the main tenets of his decisions, leaving for posterity, precepts and precedents which are almost cast in iron. To this, they both had the highest national honours and several honorary academic awards.

EPILOGUE

It was once said that, “justice is the constant and perpetual way to allot to every man his due.” But how true this is remains rather debatable, as each man seems to have his own perception of what is right and wrong. While even our senior practitioners of law both on the bar and bench are wont to idolize others such as; Lord Tom Denning, a Baron and Jurist of the English Judicial System, and United States’ legal luminary and civil rights activist, Justice Thurgood Marshall, due to their footprints on the Common Law tradition, it is intrusive to note that “what we search for in Sokoto is often in our shokoto.” The Nigerian Judiciary since the mid-20th Century when it started to come of age, has left for us great legacies of worthy service, not only while wearing their hallowed wigs and gowns and on the exalted bench, but on lessons they have left for the society as a whole.

Oputa left this world at the age 90 (even though Area Father thinks “the old man pass 100”) and Karibi-Whyte followed suit at 88 years. Their legacies are emblematic of a generation that appeared holier than even the angels, in a manner that all of society will always remember them. As it was with Oputa’s final resting moments when Owerri and Oguta had week-long celebrations of carnival mood, Port Harcourt and Abonema had their own unique experience. Legal processions, choral concerts and outings of some of Kalabari’s most revered masquerades, with thundering bellows of canons heralding the exit of a great hero. It remains to say “Adieu Opu dau” as you join your elder brother and other friends gone before, to your final rest.

As we remember these two great Nigerians, it is apt to reflect that a viable Justice system as another famous jurist once said “requires rule of law and justice in a judicial system in which the rights of some are not secured by the denial of rights to others.” Our collective challenge as Nigerians is to recognize as a people, our collective humanity and the price we owe each other and be fair and just to one another as citizens of our country. We must therefore, fight inequality and fight injustice together, and hoping that all Nigerians will hold the need for us to build the country, where justice is at the doorstep of all unfeigned.

…Amb. Godknows Boladei Igali is a former Ambassador and Federal Permanent Secretary. NNL.

Restructuring: Buhari Replies Adeboye, Others, Says Won’t ‘Succumb to Threats, Undue Pressure’

0

By Ismaila Chafe

The Presidency has reacted to the calls by some individuals and socio-ethnic groups calling for the immediate restructuring of Nigeria, saying the Buhari administration will not succumb to threats and undue pressure over the matter.

One of the individuals, METROWATCH recalls, is the General Overseer,Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG) Pastor Enoch Adeboye, who two days ago urged the President to restructure to forestall possible break up of the country.

Malam Garba Shehu, the Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, stated this in a statement on Monday morning when he responded to the renewed agitation in some quarters for the restructuring of the country.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the leadership of some socio-cultural groups including Ohaneze Ndigbo and Afenifere as well as Niger Delta agitators and individuals have reiterated the call for restructuring of Nigeria.

According to them, the country needs a home-grown constitution that will usher in new political and economic arrangements based on regional structures or ”the country will break up”.

The presidential aide, however, dismissed the recurring threats as unpatriotic outbursts, saying the Buhari administration would not take any decision against the interest of 200 million Nigerians.

The statement read in part: ”The Presidency responds to the recurring threats to the corporate existence of the country with factions giving specific timelines for the President to to do one thing or another or else, in their language, “the nation will break up.”

”This is to warn that such unpatriotic outbursts are both unhelpful and unwarranted as this government will not succumb to threats and take any decision out of pressure at a time when the nation’s full attention is needed to deal with the security challenges facing it at a time of the Covid-19 health crisis.

”Repeat: this administration will not take any decision against the the interests of 200 million Nigerians, who are the President’s first responsibility under the constitution, out of fear or threats especially in this hour of health crisis.

”The President as an elected leader under this constitution will continue to work with patriotic Nigerians, through and in line with the Parliamentary processes to finding solutions to structural and other impediments to the growth and wellbeing of the nation and its people.”

(NAN)

The cure for the SARS affliction is SARS

The affliction called “the special anti-robbery squad (SARS)’’ has become resistant to every divined antidote. It was set up to treat the pestilence of armed robbery and other violent crimes. But the police unit became the behemoth of organised criminality. It became the canker it was commissioned to extirpate.

There have been many accounts of criminality and extra-judicial exertion by this police unit. But there is only a trickle of detail on the prosecution of these dispatchers of death by the police authorities. I must say, the police leadership is complicit in the SARS menace. The force is aiding its criminal minds in taking flight from justice.

In one year, between March 2019 and February 2020, the police, particularly the ill-reputed SARS, have caused the untimely expiration of 92 Nigerian souls – according to the Council on Foreign Relations (a non-profit US think tank). Some of the prominent reasons for the killings are “refusal to give a bribe, argument and accidental discharge’’.

Sadly, no single police officer involved in these abominable executions has been handed to the whipping post. This is where I am concerned, and why I strongly believe the police leadership is in cahoots with its men on the terrorism against citizens.

An example is the case of Ogar Jumbo, an officer of the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), who was mauled to eternal exit by police officers at Nyanya, Abuja while taking his children to school in March 2019.

Months after the murder, Desmond Jumbo, brother of the deceased, told TheCable, an online newspaper, that the last time his family heard from the police regarding the case was only the day after his sibling was bludgeoned to death.

According to him, “no contact (by the police), nothing; even when he was buried”.

“It was only the day after it happened that the DPO (divisional police officer) visited but many people in the area were very angry with him,” Desmond said.

“He (the DPO) now went back to the Abuja command and lied that they wanted to kill him. And, of course, they were hiding under the excuse that the place was not secure, and they didn’t reach out.

“I am his elder brother and living directly behind the Garki police command, but they didn’t do anything.”

He also revealed that the case against the policemen involved in the murder had been sputtering for some contrived reasons. He said with a note of hopelessness: “The police were not happy; they did not show up in the last hearing.’’

Another interesting instance of police hierarchy conspiracy is that of Kolade Johnson, the football enthusiast, who was felled by the guilty bullets of some SARS operatives at a viewing centre in Lagos on March 31, 2019.

Boluwade, Jonhnson’s elder brother, had said (as of June) the last time the family heard from the police was only two months after his death — when they couriered a condolence letter.

He said with depressing finality: “Since then, no one has showed up. The police have never called the family since then. There was no compensation. It is only the governor that was showing up from time to time.’’ And on the killer police officer, the brother of the deceased wryly said: “They say he is in prison but whenever he comes to court, he is looking like he is in a hotel.’’

Really, it is unimpeachable to say that the Nigerian police is the worst in the world. International Police Science Association and the Institute for Economics and Peace corroborated this fact in their latest World Internal Security and Police Index (WISPI). As a matter of fact, the police are diseased at all levels of their hierarchy.

Okechukwu Nwanguma, executive director of Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC), a group advocating reforms in the force, puts a perspective to police leadership complicity in the criminality of its men in an interview with TheCable.

He explained: “Police brutality is like an epidemic because of the unwillingness of the police to punish the officers involved and also because of lack of adequate legal framework. The moment these cases go to court, there is no way of monitoring and following up.

“There have been cases where police officers charged to court disappear because nobody is monitoring or following up. A DPO was involved in murder and ran away; a court issued an arrest warrant and the police said they did not know his whereabouts. Two years later, the man was located at zone 9 in Umuahia where he was serving in the office of the provost, who is in charge of disciplinary measures.”

So, it is clear as we advocate the amputation of the gangrenous SARS, we must push our luck further by insisting on a purge of the entire police. Our police force is in dire need of vacuuming. The septic characters in the security agency are a bigger problem than the unit upon which they traffic in perfidy. So, if we eliminate SARS without expelling the rotten eggs, we are only deodorising a ghastly matter. They will only regroup under another police outfit.

So, while we apply: Strategic Antidoting and Removal of the Sore (SARS) to the SARS menace, we must look deeper and not soar away on righteous emotions.

Vacuum the police!

Fredrick Nwabufo is a writer and journalist

Twitter: @FredrickNwabufo

How To Prove Payment of Rent and Who Must Prove It.

0

Daily Law Tips (Tip 666) by Onyekachi Umah, Esq., LL.M, ACIArb(UK)

Introduction: 

It is common to find landlords, tenants and their tenancy matters/cases in courts, over non-payment of rent. Most tenancies and landlords survive on rent, so failure to pay or delay in payment of rent has huge consequences. In courts, the eyes of law, is not often the eyes of man. Courts have fixed procedures that must be followed in quest for justice unless where such procedures will cause injustice. Having in mind court procedures, this work examines the burden of proof on landlords and tenants to prove payment of rent.

Courts, Facts and Proof of Evidence: 

Courts in Nigeria expect parties to a case to prove every fact placed before the court, except for facts that are generally known and which the courts have taken notice of (judicial notice). For example, a party in a litigation (land dispute case) must prove his ownership, may be by showing to court his land documents. However, the party does not need to prove that he is a Nigerian, since a property owner must not be a Nigerian and courts know this fact, also he does not need to prove that by the custom/native law of Mgbowo People in Enugu State, that a son can inherit from his father. Generally, courts want proof and will base their judgments on proof. So, no matter how accurate a fact may sound or seem, unless he/she has sufficient evidence to proof such fact, no court will believe him/her. Generally, he who claims anything must prove the existence of what he claims. 

Courts and Proof of Payment of Rent:

Rent is simply an agreed value given to a property owner by a tenant for the period of time the tenants uses the property. It is the fee paid to a property owner by a tenant for the time the tenant uses the property of the property owner. Where there is a case in court and there is need to prove payment or non-payment of rent, the court expects proof of evidence of payment from the part that claims that rent was paid. This will be further examined using the judgment of the appellate courts in Nigeria.  

  1. “…In civil cases the initial burden of proof is on the party who desires that Judgment be entered in his favour based on facts which he assert to prove those facts as required by law. See the following cases:- OKOBULE VS. OYAGBOLA (1990) 21 N.S.C.C. PART 3 PAGE 193. NEPA VS. AKPATA (1991) 2 NWLR PART 175 PAGE 536. SECTIONS 131,132 AND 133 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT 2011. But the burden of proof in civil cases is not static, it shifts depending on the state of the pleading of the parties. See the case of -BUHARI VS OBASANJO (2005) 7.S.C. PART II PAGE 123. The standard of proof in civil cases is on the balance of probabilities or preponderance of evidence. See SECTION 134 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT 2011, and the following cases:- ITAUMA VS AKPE- IME (2000) 7 S.C. PART II, PAGE 24 ENO VS ANI (2004) 1 S.C PART II PAGE 115.  … (tenant) Respondent (has) to prove that he paid his rent as and when due. He could do this by production of the receipt of payment he made as pleaded and testified to at the lower Court. The failure of the (tenant) Respondent to tender in evidence the receipts referred to earlier in his pleadings and evidence is fatal to his case and the only inference that could be drawn from the scenario is that he never paid any rent apart …. Section 167 (d) of the Evidence Act 2011 is therefore applicable in this case because the evidence like receipts which ought to be tendered/produced and is not produced would if produced, be unfavourable to the (tenant) Respondent who withholds it. Per JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA ,J.C.A ( Pp. 11-15, paras. F-B ) ARIGBABU v. OYENUGA (2019) LPELR-47381(CA) 
  2. The evidential burden of proof has thus shifted to the Respondent. He had the legal burden to prove that he paid the rents. He had a duty to tender the receipts of payment which he pleaded. It is only when he has done that he would be held to have discharged the evidential burden of proof on him. To prove he paid rents after the expiration of the initial rent paid, the Respondent adopted his statement on oath as his oral evidence. The deposition in his statement on oath on this point is a repetition of the averment in his pleadings. He did not tender the receipts evidencing the payment of the rent as he pleaded. He thus failed to discharge the burden of proof on him.” Per FOLASADE AYODEJI OJO ,J.C.A ( Pp. 19-21, paras. B-C ) ARIGBABU v. OYENUGA (2019) LPELR-47381(CA) 
  3. In the case of African Petroleum PLC v Soyemi (2008) All FWLR Part 397 Page 117, the Court of Appeal, Lagos per Galinje J.C.A. Para B-D held as follows: In civil cases, the burden of proving a particular fact is upon the party who asserts it and who will fail if no evidence is called upon the issue, regard being had to any presumption which may arise from the pleadings of the parties. This onus is not static. It continually shifts from side to side in respect of a fact in issue until it finally rests on the party against whom judgment will be given if no further evidence is proffered.” Per OLUDOTUN ADEBOLA ADEFOPE-OKOJIE ,J.C.A ( Pp. 16-22, paras. C-B ) in the case of MATOH v. ADMIRAL ENVIRONMENTAL CARE LTD (2015) LPELR-25905(CA)
  4. “As in civil proceedings it is trite law that he who asserts proves and the onus of proof is on him who will fail if no evidence is given on an issue vide Section 135, Evidence Act (ibid) – See also Are v. Adisa (1967) NMLR 304.” Per SYLVESTER UMARU ONU, J.S.C ( Pp. 31-32, paras. G-A) in the case of EZEMBA V. IBENEME & ANOR (2004) LPELR-1205(SC)

Conclusion: 

When a case is filled in court, the plaintiff (the person suing another) must have proof/evidence of the facts he claims. When the plaintiff proves the facts, the duty to disprove them goes to the defendant (the person being sued by another person). Generally, any person that makes any claim must have evidence to back it up. In a case for rent, the person that claims that rent has not been paid, which will be the landlord must prove that he/she has not received any rent. Then, the party that claims that rent has been paid, which will be the tenant, must prove that rent was paid and show evidence of payment/receipts of rent. 

It is never enough to shout and write that payment has been made, there must be proof. Tenants must insist that their landlords issue receipts to them. Where they are no receipts, tenants should keep proof of bank deposits, transfers, cheques for payment of rent, preferably with good descriptions of the purpose of their payments. Click to read my other works on Landlords and Tenants in Nigeria.

My authorities are:

  1. Sections 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 140 of the Evidence Act, 2011. 
  2. Judgment of the Supreme Court of Nigeria (on the burden of proof) of EZEMBA V. IBENEME & ANOR (2004) LPELR-1205(SC)
  3. Judgement of the Court of Appeal (on the burden of proof and proof of rent) in the case of ARIGBABU v. OYENUGA (2019) LPELR-47381(CA) 
  4. Judgement of the Court of Appeal (on the burden of proof) in the case of  MATOH v. ADMIRAL ENVIRONMENTAL CARE LTD (2015) LPELR-25905(CA)

#SabiLaw

#DailyLawTips

#SabiBusinessLaw

#SabiElectionLaws

#SabiHumanRights

#SabiLawOnBeatFm

#SabiLawLectureSeries

#CriminalJusticeMonday

#SabiLawVideoChallenge

Speak with the writer, ask questions or make inquiries on this topic or any other via [email protected] or [email protected] or +2348037665878. To receive our free Daily Law Tips, follow our Facebook Page:@LearnNigerianLaws, Instagram: @LearnNigerianLaws and Twitter: @LearnNigeriaLaw

Please share this publication for free till it gets to those that need it most. Save a Nigerian today! NOTE: Sharing, modifying or publishing this publication without giving credit to Onyekachi Umah, Esq. and “LearnNigerianLaws.com” is a criminal breach of copyright and will be prosecuted.

This publication is the writer’s view not a legal advice and does not create any form of relationship. You may reach the writer for more information.

Powered by www.LearnNigerianLaws.com {A Free Law Awareness Program of Sabi Law Foundation, supported by the law firm of Bezaleel Chambers International (BCI).}

I can go 20 years more till I get justice — Adebo, man who sued Fanta, Sprite

The Chairman/Chief Executive, Fijabi-Adebo Holdings Ltd. and EFAD Ltd (UK).Dr. Emmanuel Ayodele-Fijabi Adebo, shares the travails of his company in exporting Fanta and Sprite drinks manufactured by the Nigerian Bottling Company to the UK in 2007 with GBENGA ADENIJI

What led to the destruction of two containers of Nigerian-made Fanta and Sprite drinks by the UK Customs which you exported to that country in 2007 to sell in your chains of shops in Manchester?

It was the London office of the Coca Cola European Union Group that raised the alarm that some fake Coca Cola products were brought into the UK from Nigeria. It was based on that report that the UK Customs and Excise with the cooperation of the Manchester Trading Standards impounded and destroyed my 2 x 40 feet containers loads of soft drinks. The Fanta and Sprite drinks were destroyed acting on what they called their rights as customs that the products were injurious and unsafe for consumption. Of course, we have a licence to export being registered with the Export Promotion Council. The products that were exported were specified. The Nigeria Customs Service and others were at the yard of Nigerian Bottling Company while the products were being loaded.  I do not know what the NBC was talking about that we did not inform them that we were exporting the products. If we were not exporting the products, we would not have loaded them in containers in the presence of the customs on their premises. Were we taking the containers to Kano or Abeokuta?

The soft drinks were destroyed on the basis that they contained excess sunset yellow and benzoic acid classified as carcinogenic and unfit to be taken with vitamin C (ascorbic acid). How much loss did you incur at the time?

I did not know all that at the time. I had assumed that the products made in Nigeria should be of global standard. I had assumed that there was nothing wrong with any products produced in Nigeria. Even while I was a student in Europe, I had at various times bought Coca Cola products on Liverpool Street. It was not something strange. Of course, the products we took to the UK were not fake. They were produced by the NBC, under franchise from Coca Cola USA. The accusation of the Fanta and Sprite being substandard, due to excess benzoic acid and sunset yellow was new to us then.

The direct cost of the products for the two containers was about N14m. We still had a balance because we deposited about N16m on January 2007. The product was over N12m but we were charged N900, 000 for loading which was signed by the company’s general manager (operations). The shipment was about 4,000 pounds and we also paid the duty in UK. The total amount lost was over N22m. We had some Coca Cola tins earlier but these particular containers contained Fanta and Sprite.  These drinks were in specific demand by our customers in London. My wife was there in England and I came to Nigeria to buy them.

Was the NBC aware that you were taking the drinks to the UK considering its claims that it was unaware and you were not supposed to have done so for they were produced to be consumed locally and not for export?

We did not load the products in trucks, trailers or bags. We loaded them in containers, ready for shipment. It was loaded by them and sealed by customs. If customs seal a container on their premises, was it going to Kano or Abeokuta?

Now to answer your question specifically, did they have to know where I was taking the products to? If I buy garri in Oyingbo, do I have to tell the seller where I am taking it to? Do I have to tell if I am taking it to Kano? They were supposed to produce what could be taken to and consumed in any part of the world.  Were the products labeled ‘not for export?’ There was nothing like that and I assumed that I could export the drinks since my company has an approval and licence to do so from the Nigerian Export Promotion Council.

Your company, Fijabi Adebo Holdings, sued the NBC after the incident and later joined the National Agency for Food and Drugs Administration and Control as a nominal party.  Why did you do that?

When the Coca Cola European Union alleged that the products our trading company, EFAD Limited brought into the UK were fake and unsafe for human consumption which made the UK Customs and Excise to act by destroying the products, we had to query the NAFDAC which plays supervisory roles in safeguarding public health as an agency of the Federal Government. We had to ask what it was doing when products unfit for human consumption were being manufactured in the country. That was why we joined them in the suit. In fact, our initial prayer was to stop the production of Fanta with sunset yellow because it really alarmed us and according to the UK findings, it could cause injury to children and others. Justice Taiwo in 2009 ruled that NAFDAC should go to the premises of NBC and make it reduce the content of sunset yellow in Fanta. They obeyed the order and reduced the content considerably. Before then, you would notice that whenever children drank Fanta, their tongue would be yellowish. If they knew that it was not injurious to consumers’ health, why did they reduce the sunset yellow? After that, we got another ruling against NAFDAC compelling it to henceforth do things right after being negligent by allowing manufacturers do things their way. It was after we concluded those ones that we faced Coca Cola. Our lawyers wrote them and they were so arrogant. They were not interested in our loss as a customer who bought products from them. Their response to our lawyers was a little less insulting. We then thought that if we had been so badly treated in England on issue that was a fault of a manufacturer in Nigeria, I would not come to my country and be so treated. I therefore swore to pursue the case until justice was served.

Would you say what you described as the company’s arrogant response to your plight made you sustain the legal battle for a decade?

My main aim was to save Nigerians. I later got rulings compelling the NBC to reduce the sunset yellow in Fanta and make NAFDAC responsible in discharging its responsibilities. I also got an order for the continuous monitoring of the content of Coca Cola products. The rulings were satisfying to me.  At the time we got the rulings, one would have expected them to act in a normal, serious and corporate manner. But all we got was that we did not tell them we were taking the products to the UK. What law says I should tell them where I was taking the products to? By law, I have a right to export to anywhere in the world? Through the Nigerian company law, I have a limited liability company and also a licensed company in the UK. I brought a shipping company to their premises to load the drinks including customs to check the products. What else do they want me to do?

How financially challenging has it been for you to pursue the legal battle for 10 years?

It is quite substantial but I sued them based on principles. They are rich; they are multinational and oppressors and think that they can write me off. But I know that my God will be with me. I can go 20 years more until I get justice.

What is your next step now that the NBC is challenging the ruling that it should place warning signs on Fanta and Sprite containers, claiming that the level of benzoic acid in the drinks are within the level approved by local regulators?

The same judgment of Justice Adedayo Oyebanji was the order that I was compelled to adhere to in England. I was compelled to fix labels on the Coca Cola of about 3,000 crates that were spared stating they were this and that. I labeled all of them as ordered but the Fanta and Sprite were confiscated. If you look at the order carefully, it is only meant to alert the public on their choice. To state that if you like you can buy it, but this is what is in it. I brought one of the Coca Cola to court. The court did not even address my loss because it observed that I placed emphasis on moral interest than on financial interest. Like I said earlier, I wanted to alert the public. But now, we are also praying the court that based on what it found out, we are entitled to compensation on what we lost as damages. The judgment favoured Nigerians as we had uncovered what the company was hiding from us and exposed the inadequacies of NBC. We brought in specialists from England to buttress our claims in court. After settling that, the second issue is about what we went through. The money we spent to buy the products was not useful to us. We need to get it back. We also faced a lot with the UK Customs and Excise and the Coca Cola European Union. In England, we were portrayed as criminals. It took me almost a year to convince people there that I did not manufacture the products and to explain what happened in order to clear my name and my company’s name.

We are entitled to a refund. If one buys something that is not good, one should be able to return it and get a refund.

Do you agree with the Minister of Health, Prof. Isaac Adewole, that the level of benzoic acid in Fanta and Sprite are in compliance with both the Codex and Nigerian Industrial Standards and thus safe for consumption?

No, absolutely not. I do not agree with him. Let me tell you this. I feel ashamed that a professor of medicine is dabbling into what he does not know. It is not his field. I earned a PhD in political economy. I would not dabble into what I do not know. We have Nigerians who are scientists in the UK. I had interacted with people who know the dangers of the content of the drink. Codex Alimentarius (Latin word for food code) is a food trade-standards organisation formed in 1945. A former Nazi is the father of contemporary codex. Codex was created by World Health organisation and Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations. All members of FAO and WHO who joined the orgnisation are there strictly to attend annual conferences and adopt a convention on food codes. It is not a mandatory United Nations convention. It is a voluntary attendance. They are just to direct or advise. I want the minister to tell Nigerians the country’s representatives at codex? The UK, European Union and the US, from whom NAFDAC took its ideals from, are members of the organisation. Since 1958, the UK, European Union and the US have changed their food codes more than 20 times. Today, sunset yellow is banned in Europe and the UK. It is a dye which if put in a drink and one takes Vitamin C ignorantly with it, can cause a chemical explosion in one’s body. A research was done to discover that. We read in some national dailies that the health minister exonerated the NBC and called for a probe whereas I, the complainant, was not given a chance to see our wise, all-knowing minister. You cannot cut my head in my absence.

What lessons have you learnt from the development regarding the products manufactured in Nigeria for Nigerians?

I have faith in this country. I am from a family that believes in Nigeria. We, however, need to pray that in a country where monkeys are ruling human beings, there must be a change. (PUNCH)

SEE Kenyan Man Who Offered 50 Cows, 70 Sheep & 30 Goats To Marry Obama’s Daughter

When Barack Obama was elected President of the United States, history was made as he was the first African-American president of the country.

Obama who is a member of the Democratic Party is married to Michelle and they both have two daughters, Malia and Ann.

In 2015, a few years after Obama was elected president, his first daughter who was only 16 at the time got an interesting marriage proposal from a Kenyan lawyer, Felix Kiprono.

When Felix Kiprono expressed “interest” in Barack Obama’s daughter Malia, many argued he was either not serious or he was simply a gold-digger, but the Kenyan lawyer quickly dismissed those claims.

“People might say I am after the family’s money, which is not the case. My love is real,” he said in 2015 while hoping to fulfil his ‘dream’ of marrying Malia who was only 16.

To show how serious he was with his proposal, the young lawyer went ahead to offer his intended father-in-law 50 cows, 70 sheep and 30 goats to win his daughter’s hand.

The young man, who is also a student at Oxford University according to his Facebook profile, offered the livestock in order to fulfil his ‘dream’ of marrying Malia.

According to him, he had been ‘interested’ in Obama’s daughter since his first presidential campaign in 2008, when she was just 10 years old.

“I got interested in her in 2008,” he told The Nairobian in 2015. “As a matter of fact, I haven’t dated anyone since and promise to be faithful to her. I have shared this with my family and they are willing to help me raise the bride price.”

The lawyer who was not joking with his intentions soon started working on a letter to officially make his intentions known.

His plan was to give the letter to the local US embassy.

He later heard that Obama would be visiting Kenya soon and decided to tell him about his intentions for Malia in person.

Kiprono even went ahead to write a letter asking the president to bring Malia with him.

He had everything planned out – from how he would propose to how their marriage life would be like.

According to him, there will be no need for fancy hotels as he will propose on a popular hill in Bureti, Kenya, where leaders and warriors are usually crowned.

Then for the wedding, he would “surprise” his new bride with mursik, the traditional sour milk of the Kalenjin people of Kenya.

“As an indication that she is my queen, I will tie sinendet, which is a sacred plant, around her head,” he said.

But the Kenyan lawyer had many hurdles to cross, including the fact that Malia was only 16, and was not accustomed to the kind of life he was offering.

Even so, Kiprono maintained that “Ours will be a simple life. I will teach Malia how to milk a cow, cook ugali (a starchy dish) and prepare mursik (a sour milk) like any other Kalenjin woman.”

Watch: Malia Obama’s Boyfriendhttps://www.youtube.com/embed/VQa3LRuHYQk?autoplay=1&controls=1Related News