By Moses Okezie-Okafor, Esq.
I may not like the lifestyle that Okuneye Idris Olanrewaju, aka Bobrisky, a wealthy Lagos socialite notorious for his cross-dressing ways, has chosen, but it does not change the fact that I believe there was a miscarriage of justice against him in the critical aspects of his trial and sentencing for abuse and mutilation of Naira notes. In particular, I believe the guilty plea that nailed him left much to be desired in terms of practice and procedure relating to plea bargains, especially the benefits to the accused person enjoined under Nigerian law.
I do not want to believe that his lawyers counseled or allowed him to enter a guilty plea without first sitting down with the prosecution to secure easier terms for him, ie, a plea bargain which in my opinion should not involve spending another moment in custody beyond what he had already spent between his arrest and trial. If however they did counsel or allow him to condemn himself gratuitously, all I can say out of professional courtesy is that they did not do well.
I once wrote: ‘A plea of guilty must be a quid pro quo in which both the state and the accused person trade favours, with each getting something valuable in return. Typically, the pay-off is an open and shut (easy) case for the state and reduced charge or punishment for the accused. A plea bargain is not a lazy lawyer’s cop-out from the rigours of a full trial or a ‘generous’ lawyer’s gift to the state to obviate the rigours or costs of a full trial. So, a lawyer should not advise a client to enter a guilty plea in a criminal trial without ensuring that there is equal or greater benefit for his client, particularly in form of reduced or suspended sentencing.’
In the light of my foregoing argument, I have to ask, what was in this guilty plea for Bobrisky? What did he get in return for accepting an offer of a plea bargain from the state to drop his right to a full trial which, given his substantial means, social status and admittedly powerful network, could have ended in a stalemate sooner or later?
The dubious privilege of being Nigeria’s poster boy for jail-time without option of a fine in Naira abuse cases?
I believe it to be the position of Nigerian law that a guilty plea should only be advised when it presents advantages for both the state and the accused, with the latter receiving a reduction in punishment. In the case of Bobrisky, who was given a 6-month custodial sentence for naira abuse, it is arguable that he was not advised of all choices available to him under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.
Under Section 494 of the Act, a plea bargain is a collaborative process in criminal proceedings between the defense team and the prosecution to negotiate a mutually agreeable resolution of the case. This may involve the defendant pleading to a lesser offense than originally charged in the complaint or information, along with meeting other conditions set by the prosecution (including fines, community service, etc) in exchange for a reduced sentence compared to what would be imposed for the initial charge, subject to the Court’s approval.
In other words, the ACJA grants the prosecution the authority to engage in plea bargaining with the defendant, provided the victim consents, either during or after the prosecution’s evidence presentation but before the defense presents its evidence. This legal provision facilitates the expeditious delivery of justice and prevents the wastage of time and resources that a trial would entail.
Considering the nature of Bobrisky’s offence in this instance, that is, spraying of the Naira, I do not doubt that if such a ‘collaborative process’ happened and he was offered all the options at his disposal in a plea bargain, it is more than likely that with proper legal advise and representation a more favorable outcome, like an option of fine or jail limited to time already served could potentially have been negotiated.
I am therefore irked by the decision to advise a guilty plea without securing equal or greater benefit for the client. This nagging irksomeness may be peculiar to me, but it does seem justified in the light of the sentence which the court was forced to impose having been confronted with a fait accompli in the form of a guilty plea simplicita – and with no other resort except the bared fangs of the law, no consent or bargain arrangement between parties and a discretion circumscribed by the mandate to act judicially and judiciously.
It would raise concerns about potential incompetence or professional malpractice that should concern all of us in the legal profession. This is because lawyers have a duty to protect their clients’ rights and advocate for the best possible outcome every time. Failing to do so can negatively impact the client, and while I am not positive that this is the case in Bobrisky’s case, I am concerned at the lack of evidence that it is not. It is therefore essential for lawyers to thoroughly analyze the evidence, the law, and their client’s goals before recommending a guilty plea.
While not wielding Idris Okuneye’s cross-dresser’s lifestyle as a mitigating factor, I am forced to note that he suffers more than the average risk of sexual assault, or at least assaults on his dignity, in custody – even if it be from mere heckling and suggestive threats from other prisoners. The Correctional Services has admitted as much when it put out a press statement trying to reassure concerned Nigerians that they will go the extra mile to safeguard him from such assaults.
The ACJA is a paradigm shift from punishment as the main goal of criminal justice in Nigeria to restorative justice. It has essential features which direct all stakeholders to pay serious attention to the needs of the society, the victims of crime, vulnerable persons and human dignity in general. In fact, the overall tone of the Act puts human dignity in the fore, from the adoption of the word ‘defendant’ instead of ‘accused’, to its provision for humane treatment during arrest, to its numerous provisions for speedy trial, to suspended sentencing, community service, parole, compensation to victims of crime and so on. Sections 8(1), 314, 319, 460(1) and (2) and 468 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 and numerous others all indicate so.
So, when I look at how the ACJA’s emphases has redirected the focus of criminal justice administration in the country and juxtapose same with the processes and outcomes in Bobrisky’s case, I am left wondering who is more vulnerable in a male prison right now than Bobrisky, and whose human dignity, not to mention mental health, is more endangered at this moment and for the next 6 months than he. Morality aside, does an unsentimental examination of his case raise the question, HAS JUSTICE FAILED YET ANOTHER NIGERIAN?
