— Says The Decision to Hand Over Lekki Toll Plaza Was Made Before Panel Sat On February 6, 2021.
— Says Forensic Investigation Not Yet Available, Even To Panel Members
Lagos Judicial Panel Dissenting Members Were Present When Arguments Were Canvassed On The Lekki Toll Gate Application – Adegboruwa (SAN) Replies Joshua.
A human rights lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, has said that Mr. Joshua Tony, a Senior Lawyer with the law firm of Enitan Legal Practitioners & Solicitors, was not correct when he (Tony) he said that some members of the EndSars Lagos State Judicial Panel of Inquiry were not present when counsel canvassed arguments in favour and against the handing over of the plaza to the Lekki Company.
Tony had questioned the rationale behind the decision of some members of the panel to offer a dissenting opinion to that of the majority members of the panel, when infact they [the dissenters] where not present when counsel canvassed arguments in favour and against the handing over of the plaza to the company, he noted that as a quasi-judicial body, the [dissenting] members ought not to have carried on with the opinion
However, in a response titled “JUDICIAL PANEL MEMBERS HAVE THE RIGHT OF DISSENT”
made available to TheNigeriaLawyer, Adegboruwa, SAN, said the application of Lekki Concession Company (LCC) was partly heard four (4) times.
“The application of LCC was part-heard on FOUR different occasions, with exhibits tendered at different times.
“Being a quasi-judicial Panel with multiple members, each of them is entitled to his/her individual opinion, where they all cannot agree on any matter.
“The report of the forensic expert is not ready, even as of this very moment and it is a shock that counsel has stated contrarily without proof.” he said
Explaining how the dissenting opinion was arrived at, Adegboruwa said a conference was held on February 6 during which a decision was reached with four voting against the application while 4 voting for same
He added that agreement was reached for views of all panel members to be read during the panel. However, division set in when the Panel Chairman couldn’t read the application
He said, “When it became clear that Panel members could not agree on a common position on the LCC application, a Conference was held in the Panel’s meeting room, on 6/2/2021, before the open sitting of the Panel.
“Panel members voted four to four, for and against the application of LCC; the Chairperson made the deciding vote on the side of granting the application. So even before the Panel sat, decisions had been reached in the meeting room, rightly or wrongly.
“It was agreed by members of the Panel that the views of those who voted for and against the application will be communicated during the sitting, but the Chairperson declined to mention or read the dissenting views. This prompted the division within the Panel, with those who dissented opting to read out their individual decisions, to which they were entitled by law and procedure of the Panel.
“At the time the Chairperson led four others to sit, votes had already been taken on the LCC application, which application had been taken and concluded on not less than three occasions.”
Furthermore, Adegboruwa expressed belief that Prof. Kayode Enitan, SAN, might not have approved Tony’s article in view of the fact that it contains scathing remarks against presiding officers of the panel
According to him, the decision reached on LCC application by the Lagos panel are interlocutory and can be appealed against.
“I doubt if my Learned Brother Silk, representing the Lagos State Government on the Panel, would have approved of this article, prepared and slanted by a counsel in his law firm, containing scathing remarks against presiding officers of and concerning proceedings in which they both appear, with such manifest misrepresentations.
“In the final analysis, all decisions rendered on the LCC application are interlocutory and are subject to further review, if the need arises.
“I cannot but be baffled, as to the jurisdiction of counsel holding brief as amicus, to claim knowledge of facts otherwise within the privileged information of Panel members.” (thenigerialawyer)
