Tag: ozekhome

“Why we discontinued suit at Supreme Court challenging emergence of Tinubu as president-elect”- PDP

The Supreme Court suit between the 6 states and AG Federation, filed following the manual collation of results contrary to the explicit provisions of the Electoral Act, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Guidelines and Regulations and the manual for INEC officials, has been discontinued.

TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) gathered that the suit was discontinued because it has been overtaken by events since the results have already been announced and a President-elect declared.

According to the counsel to the Applicant, Mike Ozekhome’s Chambers, the discontinued suit will now be a Tribunal matter.

Recall that seven states under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) – Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta, Edo, Taraba, and Sokoto – filed a suit against the Federal Government at the Supreme Court challenging the declaration of All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate Bola Ahmed Tinubu as president-elect, have discontinued the suit.

The Notice of Discontinuance which was signed by their lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mike Ozekhome, says “Take notice that the plaintiffs doth hereby wholly discontinue this suit against the defendant herein”.

In the earlier suit which had the Attorneys-General of the states as plaintiffs and the Attorney General of the Federation as a defendant, the seven states had asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the just concluded general elections as they claimed that the declaration of Tinubu did not follow the Electoral Act and INEC’s own laid down guidelines, particularly the uploading of results to the iREV through the Bimodal Accreditation System (BVAS).

March 4, 2023
NAIRA NOTES: President Buhari cannot overrule the Supreme Court
1. BY MIKE OZEKHOME, SAN
Buhari in his broadcast on Thursday, February 16, 2023, unilaterally varied the apex court’s extant order of maintenance of status quo, by directing the CBN Governor to the effect that “the old N200 banknotes be released back into circulatioN, to circulate as legal tender with the new N200, N500 and N1000 bank notes for 60 days.”

The President then issued a dicta, more in the form of a military Decree, that, “in line with section 20 (3) of the CBN Act, 2007, all existing old N1000 and N500 notes remain redeemable at the CBN and designated prints”.

This order is a clear violation of and disobedience to the existing order of the apex court which had already maintained the status quo ante bellum of all parties involved in the Naira re-design dispute.

Buhari’s broadcast to the Nation therefore literally overruled the Supreme Court of the land, in a way and manner only a military tyrant could ever contemplate

The Supreme Court had on Wednesday, 15th February, 2023, after the first interim order, adjourned the suit originally filed by the Attorneys-General of Kano, Kogi and Zamfara States (other interested parties were later joined) to the 22nd of February, to enable it to hear the entire matter holistically.

Without saying so in many words, every person very well knew that this adjournment was a further elongation of its earlier interim order granted against the CBN and the Federal Government, represented by the Attorney-General of the Federation; restraining it from carrying out its directives that the old naira notes would cease to be legal tender by 10th of February, 2023. The order was to have lasted till 15th February, 2023.

Buhari’s imperious order was a frontal call to chaos, anarchy and national upheaval. It was a direct assault on the authority of the Supreme Court

During the proceedings of that day, the matter was again adjourned to 22nd February, for full hearing. Every Nigerian had expected that the Federal Government would respect this apex court’s position. But President Buhari demurred. He made himself Supreme Leader; an Emperor; Potentate, Mikado and Overlord.

Buhari’s broadcast to the Nation therefore literally overruled the Supreme Court of the land, in a way and manner only a military tyrant could ever contemplate. Buhari’s action is a reminder of the apocryphal saying of autocratic and despotic Emperor Louis XIV, who, on 13th April, 1655, stood in front of Parliament and imperiously declared, “L’Etat C’est Moi (I am the State)”.

To have whimsically and capriciously varied the order of the Supreme Court was to pick and choose what order to obey or disobey

This was to underline the fact that he and he alone, had absolute power over his Nation. His father had abdicated the throne due to mass protests. Louis XIV himself met the same fate. His reign over France and Navarre was short lived. It only lasted for 20 minutes, after which he too abdicated the throne.

Buhari’s imperious order was a frontal call to chaos, anarchy and national upheaval. It was a direct assault on the authority of the Supreme Court, the highest court of the land; and also the head of the entire Judiciary, the 3rd arm of government under the doctrine of separation of powers, most ably popularized in 1748 by Baron de Montesque, a great French Philosopher.

To have whimsically and capriciously varied the order of the Supreme Court was to pick and choose what order to obey or disobey. This breaches the supremacy of the 1999 Constitution provided for in section 1(1) thereof. It also frontally assaults the provisions of section 287(1) of the Constitution which provides that “the decisions of the Supreme Court shall be enforced in any part of the Federation by all authorities and persons, and by courts with subordinate jurisdiction to that of the Supreme Court”.

Surely, no one is above the law; not even President Muhammadu Buhari himself

Once given, an order of the court is binding on all. The Apex Court in ROSSEK V. ACB LTD (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt. 312) 382 at 434 re-stated the law to the effect that: “A judgment remains binding until it is set aside by a competent Court… To hold otherwise is to clothe a party against whom a judgment has been obtained with the discretion to decide, in his wisdom that the judgment is invalid and not binding on him. This to my mind, is an invitation to anarchy. I do not understand the law to be so.” – per Ogundare, JSC.

Also, in STATE v. SOLOMON (2020) LPELR-55598(SC), the Supreme Court held thus: “It is the law that a decision of a Court of competent jurisdiction, no matter that it is seems palpably null and void, unattractive or insupportable, remains good law and uncompromisingly binding until set aside by a superior Court of competent jurisdiction.”

Buhari’s broadcast rather than be re-assuring and balming the frayed nerves of a traumatized citizenry and a beleaguered nation, was the exact opposite; a complete anti-climax

The Supreme Court, in the case of ABACHA V. FAWEHINMI (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) 228 at page 317 E-F, held as follows:- “A Court order must be obeyed and even if it is a nullity, it has to be set aside on appeal against it”. Per NWALI SYLVESTER NGWUTA, JSC (Pp 25 – 25 Paras D – E). See also the locus classicus of GOVERNOR OF LAGOS STATE VS. OJUKWU (1986) 1 NWLR PT. 18, PG. 621.

This is one instance where the apex court should bare its teeth and bite. This is more so because President Buhari had himself acknowledged in his speech, the pendency of the matter before the Supreme Court. Surely, no one is above the law; not even President Muhammadu Buhari himself.

Buhari’s broadcast rather than be re-assuring and balming the frayed nerves of a traumatized citizenry and a beleaguered nation, was the exact opposite; a complete anti-climax. It was a clarion call for total disenchantment, disillusionment, despair and desolation.

This is the first time in my life I watch Nigerians buy money with money – buying Naira with Naira – at exorbitant exchange rates

The speech was not only highly unpresidential; but was vividly insensate and insensitive to the suffering of Nigerian citizens, who, due to no fault of theirs, can neither now use the old currency, nor access the new one.

Banks claim not to have the new currency in their vaults. What manner of government would consciously and deliberately throw its country into a spin, and its citizens under the bus, in a policy that could have been handled with better planning and more decency, efficiency and human face?

This is the first time in my life I watch Nigerians buy money with money – buying Naira with Naira – at exorbitant exchange rates.

When Queen Elizabeth II died in September, 2022, the British government set about changing its governance template to reflect the realities of the moment. It decided to change the portrait of Queen Elizabeth II on the British Pound Sterling to that of King Charles III, her son who had succeeded her.

The effective take-off date of the new Pound Sterling was fixed for middle of 2024; nearly two years from the announcement of the change. There were no violent protests or any upheavals because the citizens immediately bought into the historic and laudable project, as it afforded them enough time to put their house in order.

Are we a cursed Nation, that an otherwise beautiful policy whose fiscal, monetary, economic, and development advantages are unquantifiable should be so mishandled and so grossly messed up as to lead to widespread national protests; burning of banks; destruction; mayhem and killings

How many Nigerians know that Queen’s Counsel (QC)(the equivalent of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) has since been changed to King’s Counsel (KC); and that Queen’s English is now King’s English?

We have seen the ugly scenes of frustrated Nigerians fighting at ATMs; or going completely nude; students and soldiers fighting each other; some POS holders being burnt alive; while Police shot and killed unarmed Nigerians.

Are we a cursed Nation, that an otherwise beautiful policy whose fiscal, monetary, economic, and development advantages are unquantifiable should be so mishandled and so grossly messed up as to lead to widespread national protests; burning of banks; destruction; mayhem and killings. Just what is wrong with us as a Nation? I do not know; or do you?

The Russian Ruble which had been used since the 14th Century is the second-oldest currency in the world, next only to the British Sterling. Following the dissolution and fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Soviet Ruble remained the currency of the Russian Federation until 1992, when in 1993; a new set of coins was issued with a new set of banknotes in the name of the Bank of Russia. There were no killings and mayhem.

Some Nigerians, for political exigencies or correctness, are shamelessly celebrating a bare-faced assault on the common man and woman and the authority of the Supreme Court

Chinese currency comes by two names – the Chinese Yuan (CNY) and the People’s Renminbi (RMB). The distinction is subtle: because while the Renminbi is the official currency of China, the Yuan is the principal unit of account for that currency.

Today, the Renminbi is one of the top-five most-used currencies in the world, in addition to the U.S. Dollar, Euro, Yen, and the British Pound. Yet, the Naira which is not even recognised as a legal tender in any part of the world is being used by the government to oppress and torment its citizens.

The Euro is the new ‘single currency’ of the European Monetary Union. Adopted on January 1, 1999, by 11 Member States. Greece became the 12th Member state to adopt the Euro on January 1, 2001. On January 1, 2002, these 12 countries officially introduced the Euro banknotes and coins as legal tender. Slovenia became the 13th member state to adopt the Euro on January 1, 2007.

Venezuela debuted with a new currency in 2018, a currency that featured six fewer zeros. This was a response to years of spirally inflation.

Though having a cashless economy appears quite inviting, appealing, titillating and tantalizing, it must be appreciated that advanced countries such as the UK, US and the EU that have full complement of infrastructure, still use coins

In December, 2019, eight West African countries agreed to change the name of their common currencies to ECO. This effectively severed these countries from the CFA Franc; and therefore, their former colonial masters. The countries are Benin, Burkina – Faso, Guinea Bissau, Ivory Coast, Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo.

On January 1, 2023, Croatia joined the Euro Zone, replacing its Kuna with the Euro. When these independent countries changed from their original currency to the new Euro, there was no ruckus; no brouhaha; no wahala, donnybrook or rhubarb.

Yet, some Nigerians, for political exigencies or correctness, are shamelessly celebrating a bare-faced assault on the common man and woman and the authority of the Supreme Court.

This was the same way despotic Hitler of Germany was celebrated, applauded and deified during the third Reich, until it became irredeemably too late to retreat. Read the immortal words of Martin Niemoller (1892 – 1984), a German theologian and Lutheran Pastor who bemoaned Hitler’s atrocities and their debilitating effect on millions of Jews.

Though having a cashless economy appears quite inviting, appealing, titillating and tantalizing, it must be appreciated that advanced countries such as the UK, US and the EU that have full complement of infrastructure, still use coins.

A cent in the US, or penny in the UK are still valued and in wide circulation. When last did you see one Kobo, five Kobo or ten Kobo coins in Nigeria? I have not seen any for years. Or have you?
February 17, 2023
NJC: Has a Daniel come to judgment?

BY PROF MIKE OZEKHOME, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIArb, LL.M, Ph.D.

INTRODUCTION

The NJC under the current leadership of the Honourable Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, GCON, the Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria, appears to be a retooled, re-invigorated, renewed and re-engineered NJC. It obviously seeks for justice – pure and undiluted justice. It shows humility and circumspection in handling matters. It bows to the superior reasoning in judgments delivered by competent courts of law. It accepts man-made errors. It does not attempt to play God; or hold aloft a presumptuously stainless banner of infallibility – an attribute belonging only to God Almighty. It does not arrogate to itself sainthood.

NJC should only indict Judges in the clearest of cases and should not allow itself to be used, wittingly or unwittingly, by the other arms of Government (particularly the Executive)

No doubt, it appears the members do read widely. They follow happenings in the land. They gauge the public temperature – especially with the barometer of stake-holders in the justice sector. The NJC just demonstrated these rare qualities in recalling and reinstating the Hon Justices Gladys Olotu and James Agbadu-Fishim. The NJC was mindful of its powers donated to it in sections 6, 153(1)(i), 158, 292(1) and paragraph 21(b) of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, as altered. It had, earlier, duly exercised these powers in reinstating Hon Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia after winning her cases in several courts of law. It was the triumph of justice over brute force; the triumph of the Rule of law, rather than the rule of might or rule of the thumb. The NJC on 17th January, 2022, has also just done the right thing by recalling and reinstating the Hon Justices Gladys Olotu and James Agbadu-Fishim at the NJC’s 100th meeting.

SOME BACKGROUND FACTS
The above Jurists had fully exonerated by courts of competent jurisdictions after having their day in court; going through the ordeal of court trial; public trial, odium and opprobrium; mental torture and psychological trauma, spanning many years. Let us consider the case of a very brilliant Judge like Olotu, who was appointed a Judge of the Federal High Court on July 28, 2000; resumed duties on September 1, 2000; but compulsorily retired on February 27, 2014, after 14 years of meritorious service to her fatherland. Here is a Judge who had been glowingly recommended for elevation to the Court of Appeal Bench in 2013, by no less a person than the legal prodigy, doyen of Edo lawyers and leader of the Bar in the South-South, Chief K. S. Okeaya-Ineh. Her dreams evaporated; at least, temporarily. But, God always rights wrongs. Dissatisfied with her wrongful and premature termination of her appointment, Olotu took her case to the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN), where she lost. She then appealed to the Court of Appeal in search of justice. In a lead judgment delivered by Hon Justice D. Z. Senchi, sitting on a panel presided over by Hon Justice Peter Ige, Olotu not only had her compulsory retirement by the NJC reversed; the Court of Appeal also ordered that she be paid and accorded all her benefits and privileges as a serving Judge of the Federal High Court. The court held that the “finding of the trial court is perverse, wrong and a miscarriage of justice…The decision of the trial court breached the right of the Appellant to fair hearing and such decision is a nullity”.

Hon Justice James Terseer Agbadu-Fishim, a Ph.D holder, author, prolific writer and former Senior Lecturer at the University of Abuja and Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro, Ogun State, had been arraigned in court for allegedly receiving N4.8 million from some senior lawyers, including some SANs, which the EFCC claimed amounted to unlawful enrichment. In his defence before the NJC, the cerebral Judge demonstrated graphically how the said sums were given to him by the lawyers, who had either been his friends for decades, or teaching colleagues. He averred that they never at any point in time had any influence over any of his judgments. Indeed, to his solid credit and character, one or two of the lawyers who gave him some money upon his bereavement and who had appeared before him, lost all their cases. Knowing that he was merely doing his job having taken the judicial oath of office, that never stopped them from providing succour to a friend who was in dire need, having lost his father, mother and in-law in quick succession. Hon Justice Raliat Adebiyi had no difficulty striking out the frivolous charges, following the decision in NGAJIWA V. FRN (2017) LPELR-43391(CA); a decision later upheld on 30th of May, 2022, by the full constitutional court of 7 Justices of the apex court.

The NJC did not bother to appeal Agbadu-Fishim’s victory, even as it did erroneously did in Olotu’s case. I had kicked against such a stance of the NJC appealing judgments which had faulted its disciplinary procedures and actions against Judges, based on insufficient facts. Now, a Daniel has come to judgment in the NJC. They appeared to have heard and worked with my humble opinion generated from a pure heart, in my uncommon defence of a beleaguered and traumatised Judiciary. In my piece dated December 15, 2022, titled, “Re-instatement of Hon Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia: Pristine Justice Finally Served”, which was widely published (see https://saharareporters.com/2022/12/15/re-instatement-hon-justice-ofili-ajumogobia-pristine-justice-finally-served-chief-mike; https://leadership.ng/ozekhome-hails-njc-for-reinstating-ajumogobia/; https://www.vanguardngr.com/2022/12/examining-njcs-reinstatement-of-justice-ofili-ajumogobia/; https://guardian.ng/opinion/reinstatement-of-justice-ajumogobia-and-matters-arising/), I wrote as follows:

“It remains to be said that the Common law or Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence which we operate in Nigeria is accusatorial and not the French model, which is inquisitorial. This means that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty by the State, unlike the latter which is the other way round: a defendant is presumed guilty until he or she proves his or her innocence. Accordingly, to the extent that Hon. Justice Ajumogobia has undergone the rigours of a trial and came out unscathed, it is uncharitable for anyone to insist that she should continue to prove her innocence, as it were.

The role of the NJC in all this also deserves some commentary. This is because, as a constitutional body, its role should be no more than to dispassionately investigate allegations of misconduct against Judges and, where unproven or disproved, it should promptly reinstate them – in case they have been interdicted. Under no circumstances should NJC go so far as to appeal against a decision of a court which exonerates a judicial officer-as it is currently doing in respect of Hon. Justice Olotu and Agbadu-Fishim. This is wrong, and the NJC should discontinue and withdraw those appeals forthwith.

The NJC should only indict Judges in the clearest of cases and should not allow itself to be used, wittingly or unwittingly, by the other arms of Government (particularly the Executive), to hound or persecute hapless Judges. That would be grossly unfair; it amounts to a flagrant affront on the Constitution. Those arms of Government should first cleanse their Augean stables – where confirmed cases of corruption-on-steriods abound – before turning to the Judiciary. This is because, compared to them, the Judiciary – as a body – is a Saint”. And the NJC heard me loud and clear.

I am an Essayist and a prose writer; more, with all humility, in the mould of Chinua Achebe; George Orwell; James Baldwin; Joan Didion; and Elechi Amadi and Chimanda Adichie. I am certainly not a Poet – not a Wole Soyinka; Ola Rotimi; William Shakespeare; John Keats; T.S. Eliot; or John Milton. But, on this particular occasion, let me try my hands on a poem in honour of a reinvigorated and justice-driven NJC. Permit the poem’s obvious inelegance and inadequacy. Please, read on:

“As vocations go, theirs is possibly the most thankless of all;
Sitting in judgment, handing down sentences, reprieving some; yet condemning others, men and women;
But, over-worked, overwhelmed, underpaid, under-rated;
Peanuts they are paid; they retire into penury. Without roof or future, they despair; Suffering and smiling (aka, Fela Anikulapo Kuti), they pretend all is well. But, all is not well at all;
Such is the lot of Judges, since the dawn of time; and across the world.

Harassed by the Legislature; pauperized by the Executive;
Hounded on false allegations by hooded security agents;
Condemned by convention to reticence; and sworn to silence;
They are to be seen and not heard unless when delivering their verdicts.

They occupy the Judiciary, the weakest of the 3 arms of the State;
So said Alexander Hamilton in his Federalist Paper No.78;
Yes, indeed, because, it possesses neither purse nor sword;
Ever at the mercy of other arms, it is always forlorn.

Castigated and vilified by losers; but eulogised and celebrated by winners;
Yes, they do wield the axe of contempt, but it hardly deters;
So, in a curious paradox, they are most vulnerable, despite possessing enormous powers;
Being targeted by agents of the State and bearing the ire of sore losers.

The former includes the EFCC, ICPC, SSS and Policemen (both secret and not-so-secret);
And the Judges’ regulator – made up of fellow Judges -is the NJC;
It’s brief – to probe and punish judicial misconduct – is occasionally flawed;
Leading, ironically, to such injustice which can only be reversed in courts of law.

Such was the unfortunate fate of Justices Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia, Gladys Olotu and Agbadu-Fishim;
There were others – Justices Sylvester Ngwuta (JSC, now late); Niyi Ademola (rtd), H.A. Ngajiwa, and Musa Kurya;
Having been unjustly and wrongfully indicted and removed from office by the NJC, they were exonerated;
Whilst Ajumogobia was recently reprieved, Olotu and Agbadu-Fishim were initially not so lucky. They waited with bated breath and suspended animation for justice to come;
The Sword of Damocles still dangled over their innocent heads as they still lived in dread of the unknown.

Justices Ngwuta and Ademola had been similarly roped-in but escaped fortuitously; Ngwuta died shortly after- the aftermath of his ordeal, many believed; Ademola retired voluntarily after his acquittal;
The case of the former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen (retd); was particularly egregious, having been dispatched from his exalted seat via a mere ex-parte order;
He was humiliated out on completely State-instigated trumped-up charges; The shame of a Nation!

Prompting the question: “where was the justice in all this?”
Is it fair for judicial officers who have served their country well to be so humiliated, traumatised and hounded out of office?;
Is that how to reward them for the yeoman’s job they do?
The answer is obvious — and it was supplied by courts, too – No!

So, the apex court weighed in, in the causa celebre, NGANJIWA V FRN;
As a precedent, the case has changed the narrative, the goal-post of persecution by a vicious Executive;
Henceforth, no judicial officer can be indicted and removed from office unless the NJC says so after first investigating him;
Thus, ensuring that other innocent Judges suffer no such poor fate.

In those dark days, spoke I fiercely and fearlessly in Judges’ defence;
Very few joined me. Most scampered and supported the powers-that-be; in the name of fighting corruption; Courage took flight from them;
I pleaded with the NJC to reinstate the vindicated Justices; for they had been pronounced innocent;
And their exoneration had come through the courts – the last hope of the common man- and woman;
NJC fully agreed with me and fully reinstated them – to my eternal gratitude;
NJC, thank you sirs. Relent not in doing good.

It can safely be said that none of these Jurists suffered in vain;
They have unwittingly made history; and written their names in gold;
Their traducers, on the contrary, now hide their heads in shame;
The would-be preys prevailed; and over them, a light was shown;
The victims became the victors; the preys, the predators; what an oxymoron! What an irony! Life. God, how awesome thou art.

The light of justice – ever bright, luminous, constant; and incandescent;
Unwavering, unflickering, like the Northern Star;
Thus, proving, yet again, the triumph of good over evil;
Light over darkness and the virtue of rectitude over infamy.”

February 15, 2023
Nigerian law firms and foreign names: Matters arising

BY PROF. MIKE A.A. OZEKHOME, SAN, CON, OFR, Ph.D.

Juliet, soliloquizing in one of the most romantic scenes (“The Balcony Scene”) in Shakespeare’s epic, “Romeo and Juliet” (Act 2 Scene 2), said, “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet”. Juliet was telling Romeo that a name is just a name; with no meaning behind it. What matters is what something is; not what it is called. To Juliet, Romeo would still remain the handsome young man, even if he had a different name.

Certain questions criss-cross my mind as I attempt to critically analyze the above quote in the light of some Nigerian law firms and legal practitioners adopting Western/foreign/white-sounding names in preference over their Nigerian names. Why ‘Mungo Park & Clapperton’, instead of ‘Aluko & Oyebode’; ‘Banwo & Ighodalo’; or ‘Ozekhome & Femi?’ Why ‘McCullough & Clyde’; and not ‘Sobowale & Okonkwo’, when the firm is neither owned by, nor affiliated with the former? Why ‘Westborough Partners’; and not ‘Mustapha & Oche’, when none of the partners bear ‘Westborough’? Why ‘Greenfields, Everest & Associates’; ‘Westbrook, Blackberg & Co’; ‘Bracebridge Attorneys’; ‘Bladerstone & Cottingham’; ‘Stone & Cozens LLP’; ‘Woodpecker & Bird Solicitors’; when none of the partners bear such foreign names? Why not simply ‘The Prestige Chambers’; or ‘God is Marvellous LLP’? Why must it be names given to natural persons of Western origin, usually English?

Firms that earn the highest revenues and income across the world do not borrow African or Nigerian names; yet they thrive

The Oxford Dictionary defines a name as “a word or set of words by which a person or thing is known, addressed, or referred to”. Wikipedia defines a name as “a term used for identification by an external observer. They can identify a class or category of things, or a single thing, either uniquely, or within a given context. The entity identified by a name is called its referent. A personal name identifies, not necessarily uniquely, a specific individual human.”

Just google some names of Nigerian law firms bearing foreign names, and you will appreciate my great concerns. Does this mindset suggest a bias against Nigerian names? Cultural cringe? An internalized, but undisclosed inferiority complex, leading to the dismissal of one’s culture as inferior? Is it a belief that Western/foreign names are more polished and easily roll off the tongue? Is it an identity management/destigmatization strategy for foreign businesses with foreign content? Is it believed that the use of such names gives one a particular status? Or is it just a matter of fashion, vogue, fad, fancy, or trend? I do not know. Or, do you?

It is conceded – that name choice is purely within the discretion of founders/partners of a law firm and as permitted by Nigerian laws. But, should native identities, for the sake of profit or fashion, be lost to foreign influence? Names are markers of identity and denote one’s community membership. My concern arises from the fact that, rather than indigenous names, none of these adopted Western/foreign names is associated with the names of any persons within such firms.

Never has it been heard of that Western/foreign Legal practitioners or law firms, for example, ‘Rodriguez Salamasor’ and ‘John Hawthorne’, that for the purpose of doing business, ease of recognition and easier pronunciation of names, or for any other reason howsoever, established a law firm with a wholly indigenous Nigerian or African name

I must not be misunderstood to argue that law firms in Nigeria cannot bear names that are by patent, invented; or abstract, or religious names. Nor do I mean that Nigerians who bear European/foreign names as their indigenous names cannot establish law firms using such foreign names. I also must not be understood to posit that a firm cannot coin a name from the names of its Head or Partners; e.g., MOC, coined from Mike Ozekhome’s Chambers. My concern rather, is when individuals who neither bear such names, nor are in partnership with foreign bearers of such names; nor affiliated to or constitute subsidiaries of the foreign law firms bearing such foreign names, decide, for whatever reason, to take on western or white-sounding names belonging to natural persons, in establishing their law firms.

The reason for these may oftentimes be attributed to fashionability; ease of recognition, spelling, and pronunciation; for international business transactions conducted by these law firms; and perhaps to emphasize the founder’s or partners’ foreign qualifications. I respectfully submit that it is most demeaning to elevate foreign names over native identities. It is equally insulting to posit that ‘Saoirse Whitsborough & Partners’, or ‘Livingstone & Churchill Solicitors’, are better easily pronounced than ‘Gani Fawehinmi’s Chambers’; or ‘Chief Rotimi Williams Chambers’; or Wole Olanipekun & Co; or Mike Ozekhome’s Chambers; or ‘Olisa Agbakoba LLP’; or ‘ Uzoamaka Okeke & Co’; or Aluko & Oyebode; or Udo Udoma & Bello Osagie; or Banwo & Ighodalo; or Olaniwu Ajayi LP. To me, it amounts to sheer cultural cringe to hold that Nigerian names are less fashionable than Western/foreign names.

Conversely, ‘Juggernaut Chambers’; ‘Divine Mercy Law Firm’; ‘Salam LLP’; and ‘Shalom Chambers’, are examples of appealing abstracts; coined or invented names; and religious names, couched in English and other foreign languages. Founders or partners may settle for such where they prefer not to use their indigenous given, middle, or surnames. Names such as ‘Rosenblerg LLP’, ‘Witheresburg & Co’, or ‘Bottomleg & Neck Partners’, have unfortunately become the vogue. I experienced this aberration firsthand. A foreigner wanted to do business in Nigeria. I easily recommended a friend of mine who is an expert in that field of law where I am not. I told him so clearly. His google search revealed my friend’s name, quite alright, but not his law firm. He raised concerns, as he wanted to deal directly with a law firm and not an individual. It was then I got across to my Nigerian bossom friend, who disclosed to me, to my utter amazement, his law firm’s foreign name. I asked him why. He simply said, “oh boy, leave matter”. Really?

My concern is that this practice is not, by the same token, embraced by Western/foreign legal practitioners and law firms, whether practising law in Nigeria, or other African countries. Never has it been heard of that Western/foreign Legal practitioners or law firms, for example, ‘Rodriguez Salamasor’ and ‘John Hawthorne’, that for the purpose of doing business, ease of recognition and easier pronunciation of names, or for any other reason howsoever, established a law firm with a wholly indigenous Nigerian or African name, say, ‘Agbedor, Adekunle & Obiora LLP’ ;a law firm which neither has an affiliation with an Agbedor, Adekunle or an Obiora; nor has a partner with such names. They do not and will never ever adopt Nigerian or African names in establishing their law firms. Why then must we continue on this degrading path? I do not know. Or, do you?

I dare say that the use of foreign names does not constitute any stronger factor in revenue generation than the solid reputation of the driving minds and brains behind such law firms. Many of the biggest law firms in Nigeria bear wholly indigenous names. Firms that earn the highest revenues and income across the world do not borrow African or Nigerian names; yet they thrive. According to the ‘2021 Am Law 100 Report’, the largest law firms in the world are found in the US. They collectively earned $111 billion in total revenue in 2020. Also, in Wikipedia’s compilation of the world’s largest law firms by revenue, referencing ‘The American Lawyer’ in its article titled, “The 2020 Global 200: Ranked by Revenue”, the following US law firms were listed as top generators of annual revenue in the global legal market:

1. Kirkland & Ellis with $4,154,600,000 in revenue; 2,589 lawyers (at the exchange rate of N735 per dollar, that amounts to N3.053 billion Pa).
2. Latham & Watkins with $3,767,623,000 in revenue; 2,720 lawyers.
3. DLA Piper with $3,112,130,000 in revenue; 3,894 Lawyers.
4. Dentons with $2,920,000,000 in revenue; 10,977 Lawyers.
5. Baker McKenzie with $2,899,600,000 in revenue; 4,809 lawyers.
6. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom with $2,632,615,000 in revenue; 1,694 lawyers.
7. Sidley Austin with $2,337,803,000 in revenue; 1,922 Lawyers.
8. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius with $2,265,000,000 in revenue; 2,063 lawyers.
9. Hogan Lovells with $2,246,050,000 in revenue; 2,642 lawyers.
10. White & Case with $2,184,850,000 in revenue; 2,200 lawyers.
11. Jones Day with $2,077,000,000 in revenue; 2,514 lawyers.
12. Norton Rose Fulbright with $1,904,019,000 in revenue; 3,266 lawyers.
13. Ropes & Gray with $1,903,616,000 in revenue; 1,247 lawyers.
14. Greenberg Traurig with $1,641,790,000 in revenue; 2,070 lawyers.
15. Simpson Thacher & Bartlett with $1,618,633,000 in revenue; 996 lawyers.

In the UK, some top law firms are:
1. Clifford Chance with $2,500,000,000 in revenue; 2,489 lawyers.
2. Allen & Overy with $2,160,729,000 in revenue; 2,447 lawyers.
3. Linklaters with $2,093,569,000 in revenue; 2,393 lawyers.
4. Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer with $1,942,013,000 in revenue; 1,812 lawyers.

We should instead, be proud of using the original names of partners. It could also be indigenous, abstract, invented, coined, or religious names; but certainly not foreign or English names

In Canada an article by Statista Research Department shows that the Canadian law firm of Toronto-based ‘Borden Ladner Gervais’, though not a global mammoth, is one of the top generators of revenue in the global legal market, competing with United States law firms. Not a single African or Nigerian name ever featuresin these. Indeed, no Nigerian law firm can boast of 250 lawyers, a minuscule for small-time law firms in the USA, UK, and other Western countries.

None of the above-listed law firms has taken on African or Nigerian names (whether for the ease of conducting foreign transactions; indicating a wide geographical spread of its offices; or for any of the reasons usually given by Nigerian Firms for the preference of western/foreign names). Yet they thrive. Do they not?

Although revenue, as shown earlier, is undoubtedly key to the sustainability and success of any business and constitutes an important tool for law firm owners/ partners to track growth and improve profitability, the name chosen by a law firm does not necessarily affect the ability of a law firm to generate income.

A person is his own name. I humbly submit that the choice of using Western/foreign names, or white/foreign-sounding names in setting up law firms, oftentimes indicates the pitiable perception of one’s name through the blurred lenses of prejudice, inferiority complex, cultural cringe, colonial and neo-colonial mentality.

It is said that “the worst form of colonialism is the colonialism of the mind”. This choice of foreign names is absolutely unnecessary. A colonialism of the mind reflects in another man’s name being preferred to one’s name. We should never again opt for western or foreign names of natural persons. We should instead, be proud of using the original names of partners. It could also be indigenous, abstract, invented, coined, or religious names; but certainly not foreign or English names.

What is in a name? “Though that which we call a rose by any other name would still smell as sweet”, I respectfully submit that naming one’s law firm by the given foreign name of a natural person of western/ foreign descent with whom one shares no tie or affinity whatsoever, would not smell any sweeter than one’s indigenous name; an abstract; or patented name. What is of utmost importance is the value brought to bear on one’s law practice. It is about the content and not the form; the substance and not the shadow.

DISCLAIMER: ALL NAMES (EXCEPT THOSE KNOWN TO ME OR FROM STATED SOURCES) MENTIONED IN THIS PIECE ARE FICTITIOUS. NO IDENTIFICATION WITH ACTUAL PERSONS (LIVING OR DEAD) IS INTENDED OR SHOULD BE INFERRED.

February 4, 2023
How Court of Appeal affirmed Senator Bassey Otu as APC governorship candidate

The Calabar Division of the Court of Appeal has delivered judgment in appeal No. CA/C/337/22, filed by Senator John Owan Enoh against the APC, INEC and Senator Bassey Otu. The court affirmed Senator Prince Bassey E. Otu as the authentic APC Governorship candidate for the upcoming 2023 General elections.

In a unanimous decision on the appeal filed and argued for the Appellant by Chief Awa Kalu, SAN and opposed and argued by Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, for Senator Otu, the 3-man panel of the court consisting of Justice Jimi Olukayode Bada (presiding), Justice Elfrieda Oluwayemisi Williams-Dawodu (who read the lead judgment) and Justice Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, dismissed the appeal filed by Senator John Owan Enoh, as lacking in merit and affirmed the decision of the Federal High Court in Suit No FHC/CA/CS/106/2022, delivered by Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, on 24th October, 2022.

The brief facts of the case are that by an Originating Summons brought before the Federal High Court, Calabar, presided over by Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu, Senator John Owan Enoh had argued that the APC governorship candidate, Senator Prince Bassey Otu, was not eligible to contest for the party primaries held on 26th May, 2022; and that the National Working Committee (NWC) which cleared him to contest, had done so pre-emptorily without such powers. Senator Bassey Otu, through his Counsel Ozekhome, had argued that the NWC, being responsible for the daily administration of the party, had duly exercised its powers in clearing the candidate.

Justice Ojukwu had consequently dismissed Senator Ewa’s suit for lacking in merit. She held that Senator Bassey Otu was never disqualified by the Screening Committee, or the Screening Appeal Committee, which merely gave their initial reports as “not cleared”, and “inconclusive”, respectively. None of the reports said he was “disqualified”, as required by the APC Constitution and Guidelines; for if it were, a “certificate of disqualification” would have been issued to Otu. When the reports of the Committees were questioned through petitions by the same Senator John Owan Enoh, the NWC sat over the petitions and decided that both Committees had erred in their earlier non-clearance. It went ahead to clear Senator Bassey Otu as eligible to contest the election. Justice Ojukwu agreed with the NWC, and affirmed Senator Bassey’s election as the APC governorship candidate for the 2023 General election.

Dissatisfied with this well-considered judgment, Senator John Owan Enoh through his Counsel approached the Court of Appeal, Calabar, urging it to overturn the decision of the lower court. Counsel to Senator Ewa formulated two issues for determination, to wit, whether the Appellant (Senator Ewa) was at all times not qualified to contest the election; and whether the NWC lacked the power, or whether there is a regulation preventing the NWC from looking into the eligibility of Senator Bassey Otu.

On his part, Senator Bassey argued through his counsel that he had always been eligible to contest for the party primaries and election. He argued that the Senator had satisfied all constitutional requirements for governorship candidates; and thus, ought to have been cleared by the Screening and Appeal Committees. He also argued that he was never disqualified as both reports of the Screening Committee and the Screening Appeal Committee had merely stated “not cleared” and “inconclusive”, respectively, without more. When the NWC sat on the appeal, it rightly cleared the Senator for the elections, after which he contested and defeated Senator Enoh by a huge margin of 811-84 votes.

Ozekhome had also argued that there was no provision in the APC Constitution or Guidelines to the effect that without an appeal to the Screening Appeal Committee and the NWC by an affected aspirant, the NWC could not decide on appeals over an internal issue. Given that both decisions of the Committees were challenged by Senator John Owan Enoh himself, the matter had been automatically activated and brought to the table of the NWC. There was therefore no hindrance for the NWC to exercise its undoubted powers, since it was the NWC that set up both Committees in the first place; sat as an appellate body over these Committees; and exercised its powers under section 13 of the APC Constitution. Chief Kalu, SAN, however contented that the NWC had no such powers.

The Court of Appeal on 15th December, 2022, in a lead judgment delivered by Justice Williams-Dawodu, unanimously held that the fact that the NWC cited the wrong paragraph when it exercised its power to clear Senator Bassey was of no moment, as it did not thereby strip it of its powers to do so. This would not be allowed to oust a qualified candidate who was never disqualified by the two Committees; and was also duly cleared by the NWC.

The 3-man panel of the court further held that the NWC is the last appeal body according to the APC Constitution. Therefore, denouncing the clearance by the NWC and holding that it had no power to clear Senator Bassey would amount to mere technicality. It further held that the courts have and will continue to shy away from technicalities, and rather seek to do justice to a case on the merit. Given that both issues for determination were resolved in favour of Senator Bassey Otu, the court held that the appeal failed. It accordingly dismissed it and affirmed the judgment of the trial court. It concluded thus:

“In light of the foregoing, one can agree with the decision of the Court and in consequence, resolve the sole issues against the Appellant; the judgment of the court delivered on October 24, 2022, by Honourable Justice Ijeoma Ojukwu is hereby affirmed.”

December 17, 2022
Ozekhome slams FG over new 7 counts amended charge against Nnamdi Kanu

Human rights lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, has condemned the new 7 counts amended charge allegedly filed by the Federal Government (FG) against the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.

According to reports, the amended charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/383/2015, was entered before the Federal High Court in Abuja, and contained all earlier sustained allegations against the IPOB leader.

As a result of the amended charges, it is to be argued whether the FG could proceed to re-arraign the IPOB leader on the amended charges despite the October 13 judgement of the Appeal Court.

TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) recalls that the appellate court had on October 13 discharged Kanu from the alleged terrorism charge preferred against him by the FG.

Following the new twist, Ozekhome, who is the lead Counsel of Kanu, assured the FG of appearing before Justice Binta Nyako on Monday to “tackle any underhand tactics or results the Federal Government may have planned to achieve by sleight of hand, with a charge which has been pronounced dead like “dodo”; and permanently buried.”

In a statement signed by Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, IPOB’S Lead Counsel, and made available to TheNewsGuru.com (TNG), Ozekhome hinted that the judgment of the Court of Appeal still stands till date as same has not been set aside by the Supreme Court.

“It is imperative to state therefore that on the strength of this judgment, no CHARGE of whatever nature, and under any guise, can ever presented or stand against Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu before any court of law in Nigeria,” the statement asserted.

See the full statement below:

DISPELLING THE FEARS ON THE REPORTED NEW SEVEN- COUNT AMENDED CHARGE FILED AGAINST OUR INDEFATIGABLE CLIENT-ONYENDU MAZI NNAMDI KANU – BEFORE JUSTICE B.F.M. NYAKO OF FEDERAL HIGH COURT, ABUJA.

The attention of the Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’s formidable legal team ably led by the legal Iroko of our time – Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN – has been drawn to the much publicized (but rumored) new 7 count amended charge allegedly filed against our Indefatigable Client- Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu – by the Federal Government (FG). From all indications, the new alleged charge has the same Charge No. FHC/ABJ/ER/383/2015, as the one already pronounced upon and struck out by the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division. The said intermediate court completely discharged Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu; and further prohibited his being tried or prosecuted in any court of law in Nigeria.

The said judgment of the Court of Appeal is extant and still subsists till date; and has not been set aside by any superior court. Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu’ s formidable team ably by the oracle of the Law – Chief Ozekhome SAN – has already promptly appealed to the Supreme Court against the Court of Appeal’s ruling staying execution of its own judgment which had set Kanu free. The Appeal in respect thereto has been duly entered in Appeal No. SC/CR/1394/2022, at the Supreme Court, and is now awaiting a date for hearing.

It is also worthy to note that this judgment of the Court of Appeal still stands till date as same has not been set aside by the Supreme Court. It is imperative to state therefore that on the strength of this judgment, no CHARGE of whatever nature, and under any guise, can ever presented or stand against Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu before any court of law in Nigeria.

Our inquiry this evening upon reading about the phantom charge in the social media, revealed to us that the rumored charge was surreptitiously but clandestinely filed by the Federal Government hours after the judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered on the 13th Day of October, 2022. This was even before it had received a certified true copy of the said judgment of the Court of Appeal.

The filing of the said charge was clearly ill-informed and ill-advised, because the Prosecutor (Federal Government), we presume and may want to believe, was not at that point in time aware of the details, full import and implication, of the well delivered judgment of the Court of Appeal, at the time of filing the said charge. We also want to believe that this is what has led to Federal Government’s abandonment of the charge after it was hurriedly filed.

It is pertinent to note also that the Federal Government did not take any step to either serve the charge on our Client – Onyendu Mazi Nnamdi Kanu – or on our erudite lead Counsel – Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN – after it was filed; even till this moment.

This to doubly assure UMUCHINEKE that our legal team eminently led by the legal icon of our time – Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN – will be in court on Monday, the 14^th of November, 2022, to tackle any underhand tactics or results the Federal Government may have planned to achieve by sleight of hand, with a charge which has been pronounced dead like “dodo”; and permanently buried.

UMUCHINEKE should never lose sleep over this new phantom charge by the grace of God, we are equal to the task in tackling any antics from the prosecutor.

Victory shall be ours, by God’s grace; and we move!

Signed:

Sir Ifeanyi Ejiofor, Esq.

IPOB’S Lead Counsel

11th Day of November, 2022.

November 12, 2022
Court quashes all allegations on corruption, bribery and money laundering against AITEO boss

A Federal High Court in Abuja has quashed all allegations bothering on corruption, bribery and money laundering, brought against AITEO boss and international Billionaire businessman, Benedict Peters, by the British and Nigerian agencies, arising from his ownership of a number of properties.

In a 94 page landmark judgment, the court awarded N200 million damages in favour of Peters (AITEO boss) against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, Abubakar Malami, SAN, and five others.

TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports that the five-year-old legal tussle between Peters and three companies on the one hand and the EFCC, the Attorney General of the Federation and 5 others, the trial judge, Justice O. A. Adeniyi, strongly condemned the action of the Defendants, which by “fraudulent design, suppressed and misrepresented facts in the supposition that the Claimants’ properties, legitimately acquired belonged to Mrs Deziani Alison Madueke, former Minister of Petroleum Resources”.

The case (Suit No FCT/HC/CV/0536/17), was filed on behalf of the Plaintiffs by Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, Chief Emeka Ozoani, SAN, Chief Andrew Oru, Chief Nobis Elendu, Esq, and a crack team of other lawyers, on 11th May 2017; with an amended Statement of Claim filed on 31st January 2019.

Suleiman Jibrin, leading others, represented the EFCC and 6 others; while Farouk Abdullah led others to represent the AGF.

The court condemned the “deceitful sham allegations by the Defendants”; and held that “the unlawful means of conspiracy of the Defendants was to extract by intimidation, coercion, the assets, properties and monies to which the claimants are legitimately entitled.”

the “deceitful sham allegations by the Defendants” and held that “the unlawful means of conspiracy of the Defendants was to extract by intimidation, coercion, the assets, properties and monies to which the claimants are legitimately entitled”.

The Claimants had in the suit claimed against the Defendants, the sum of $5b USD (equivalent of N1.5 trillion at the then exchange rate of 315 to one US Dollar), for the tort of carousel fraud.

In the judgment, the court deprecated the Defendants’ actions in fraudulently misrepresenting and facts in support of their false claims that the properties belonging to the Plaintiffs (Benedict Peters, Collinwood Ltd, Rosewood Investments Ltd and & Walworth Properties Ltd), which had been legitimately acquired, belonged to Mrs Deziani Alison Madueke, former Minister of Petroleum Resources; and were thus allegedly unlawfully acquired.

“These facts which the defendants knew, or ought to know were false, incorrect and baseless, constitute the TORT of CAROUSEL FRAUD”, held the court.

The properties which belong to the Plaintiffs, but falsely and wrongfully alleged to belong to Diezani Alison Madueke are, respectively, 270-17 STREET, UNIT #4204, ATLANTA, GEORGIA; FLAT 5 PARKVIEW, 83-86 PRINCE ALBERT ROAD, ST. JOHN’S WOOD, LONDON; FLAT 58 HARLEY HOUSE MARYLEBONE, LONDON; and, APARTMENTS 4 & 5, ARLINGTON ROAD, LONDON.

Justice Adeniyi held that the EFCC founded its case mainly on an undated and unsigned document that bore no name of its alleged maker, titled, “Highly Confidential Attorney Work”, allegedly issued by one Donald Chidi Amangbo. He held that failure by the Plaintiffs to call the said Amangbo (the alleged maker of the document) for possible cross-examination,rendered the totality of the purported report incredible,unreliable and of no probative value to be relied upon by the court, more so as the purported report was undated, unsigned and had no name of the alleged maker.

The court in agreeing totally with Ozekhome’s submissions, further held as follows :

1.“It is hereby declared that the Defendants, by fraudulent design,suppressed and misrepresented facts in supposition that the Claimants’ properties…. legitimately acquired, belonged to Mrs Deziani Alison Madueke, former Minister of Petroleum in Nigeria, and/or were unlawfully acquired, a fact they knew or ought to know were false, incorrect and baseless, constitute the tort of carousel fraud.

2.”It is hereby further declared that the predominant purpose of the deceitful sham allegations by the Defendants that the Assets/properties… belonged to persons other than the Claimants was directly intended (albeit to inflict economic loss on the Claimants just as much as it was to unlawfully profit the Defendants).

3.”It is hereby further declared that the unlawful means of conspiracy of the Defendants was to extract by intimidation, coercion, the assets, properties and monies to which the Claimants are legitimately entitled.

4.”The Defendants, their operatives, officers, agents, servants in whatever manner and howsoever called, are hereby jointly or severally restrained from interfering with the proprietary rights and/or interests of the Claimants, their agents, alter-ego or privies in relation to the properties listed in this suit.

5.”The Defendants either by themselves jointly/severally, their operatives, officers, investigators, servants, agents, associates and howsoever called, are hereby restrained from interfering/continued interference with the person of the 1st Claimant, either by way of arrest, criminal indictment, charge, interdiction, extradition, or in any other manner infringing on his personal liberty and freedom of movement on the facts and circumstances of this case, especially in the face of subsisting judgments of various courts on the issue.

6.”The sum of N200,000,000 (two hundred million naira) only is hereby awarded as general damages, jointly in favour of the Claimants against the Defendants, jointly and severally, for the unlawful interference, economic loss, loss of corporate goodwill from creditors, expropriation of personal assets and proprietary rights of the Claimants”.

Condemning the action of the Defendants, the court further held that from the evidence led on the record and materials placed at the disposal of the court,it is safe to hold that the Claimants have firmly established proprietary ownership of the four (4) properties to which the instant action relates.The court also found that through the “uncontroverted evidence of CWI,the Defendants were shown to have conspired with the dominant intent of causing the Claimants suffering and damages and in that regard proceeded against the assets and properties of the Claimants before the Federal High Court in Nigeria based on open-source information which are not reliable. By the conspiracy to injure the Claimants,the Defendants mutually sought and obtained a Restraint Order in the United Kingdom for interim forfeiture of the assets and properties of the Claimants and even after becoming aware of the true facts, are yet to release the properties of the Claimants.”

See the judgment order below:

November 9, 2022
Hiring of mercenaries: You don’t have such powers – Ozekhome tells El-Rufai

Constitutional lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, has lampooned Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai over his threat to use mercenaries to combat terrorists, saying he has no such constitutional powers.

Ozekhome, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), described el-Rufai’s threat as a no-brainer as only the Federal Government, in this case, the President, has the constitutional power to embark on such route.

The lawyer made the clarification in an article titled, “Can Mallam Nasir el-Rufai and Northwest Governors Engage Mercenaries to Fight Insecurity?”

El-Rufai, who briefed the media in Abuja, after meeting with President Muhammadu Buhari, over the spate of insecurity in Kaduna State, said state governors from the north will have no choice but to take action to protect the lives and properties of their people, even if it meant bringing in mercenaries.

In response to his own question, Ozekhome said the issue of inviting mercenaries is akin to deployment of the military to repel and contain external aggression.

“It has to do with the command and operational use of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, whether in peace times, war, or under a state of emergency. All of these are solely and wholly vested in the president, with some moderational effect by the NASS.

“See sections 217, 218, 219 and 305 of the 1999 Constitution. These are federal matters. Only the president of Nigeria who doubles as the Commander-in-Chief has the constitutional powers to carry these out. Even the Police is, by virtue of sections 214 and 215 of the 1999 Constitution, squarely under the purview of the Federal Government.

“No state government under our constitutional democracy and legal regime can unilaterally act to invite mercenaries to Nigeria. It is ultra vires their powers. Their only resort is a collaborative rapprochement with the Federal Government. However, they can tackle their state security matters within the permissible limits of our constitutional organogram,” the learned silk explained.

For effect, Ozekhome took a swipe at El-Rufai and his counterparts in the north, saying, “by the way, I thought these are the same Governors that opposed their Southern counterparts when they decided to make anti-grazing laws last year, to protect their territories? They had kicked against such a pre-emptive security measure that was perfectly within the constitutional competence of such states. They always forget that there is always a tomorrow.”

He continued: “I wrote tons of articles and made several television advocacy appearances, denouncing this clueless and unpatriotic stance of these Governors. I had encouraged the Southern states Governors last year to go ahead and promulgate such state laws that are not in conflict with the provisions of the Constitution. Such Governors are constitutionally permitted to set up local vigilante groups to defend their individual enclaves. But no state is ever permitted to extend direct invitations to mercenaries to invade Nigeria under the thin disguise of enforcing security.

“Were these not the same Northern states Governors who had invited and brought in these rampaging bandits and mercenaries from neighbouring countries to help vote them into their various offices during the 2019 elections? Why are they now moaning, mourning and weeping?

“I commend to them the immortal poetic words of a confessional prose of Martin Niemoller (1892-1892), a German theologian and Lutheran Pastor, who had opposed the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler and spent the last 7 years of Nazi rule in concentration camps during the holocaust. He said famously: First, they came for the Communists, I did not speak out, because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out, because I was not Socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out, because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

“Whenever you throw a stone into the market, you may never know who will be the target. When you point one finger at others, the remaining four are pointing at you. When you bring an ants-infested piece of firewood into the house, you should never complain about an invasion of lizards. Let us all be careful. Today is the tomorrow we discussed yesterday. Happy Sunday, Lent and Ramadan seasons to all Nigerians.”

April 3, 2022
Why DSS released Chiwetalu Agu – Ozekhome

Human rights lawyer, Mike Ozekhome, SAN, has revealed why the Department of State Services, DSS, released Nollywood veteran, Chiwetalu Agu.

Ozekhome said Agu was released after they searched his phones and found nothing incriminating.

ThNewsGuru recalls that Agu was first arrested by the Nigerian Army last Thursday for wearing Biafra regalia in Onitsha, Anambra State.

He was arrested in Upper Iweka Bridge by soldiers while carrying out a charity exercise.

Agu was, however, released by the Nigerian Army on Friday, but was re-arrested by DSS operatives.

The secret police was said to have transferred the veteran actor to Abuja for interrogation.

However, Ozekhome said Agu committed no crime to warrant his arrest.

He revealed this in a statement he signed titled: ‘Chiwetalu Agu Released By DSS’.

“Several interactions were held by the chambers with the DSS operatives, who were, however, very civil and very cooperative.

“Agu was released this (Tuesday) evening to Steve Eboh and Monalisa Chinda (Director of Media, Actors Guild of Nigeria), by the DSS at their headquarters in Abuja, after a careful search on his phones showed nothing incriminating,” he said.

October 13, 2021
Trial of alleged killer of Super TV CEO: Family smells foul play, hires fiery lawyer, Ozekhome to ensure fair judgement

…insists owner of apartment where Usifo died was treated with kid gloves by police

…accuses police of unprofessionalism

… decries Chidinma alleged VIP treatment

By Emman Ovuakporie

The family of Late Mr Michael Usifo Ataga who was brutally murdered on the 15th of June, 2021, apparently smelling a foul play on the role the Nigerian police has played, hired a constitutional lawyer, Mike Ozekhome to ensure a fair judgement is delivered.

TheNewsGuru.com, (TNG) reports the family has briefed Ozekhome to protect and defend the interests of the Ataga family and his teeming friends, admirers, kinsmen, and business associates, to ensure that justice is duly served in the matter, and that justice is not only done, but manifestly seen by the public to have been done.

The Ataga family, in its instruction letter to Chief Ozekhome, decried the low level of professionalism exhibited so far by the Police in bringing to book and prosecuting professionally, the perpetrators of this heinous crime that led to Ataga’s unprovoked and cold blooded murder.

Only few days ago, the family of late Ataga had accused the Lagos State Police Commissioner, Hakeem Odumosu, of being complicit in an alleged attempt to protect the killers of Ataga. The family said that they were shocked that the prosecution of the 21-year old prime suspect in Ataga’s murder, one Chidinma Ojukwu of the Mass Communicarion Department, University of Lagos, was arraigned at a Chief Magistrate Court, Yaba, without even being informed about the arraignment coming up.

The family had also revealed that one Babalola Disu, who was arraigned for allegedly preventing the Police from performing their duties and failing to report a crime to the Police, is “highly suspected to have carried out the murder”.

The family premised its suspicion on information they received to the effect that Disu’s short rental apartment was directly opposite the apartment where Ataga was killed.

The family narrated how the said Disu had asked that the carpenter of Air BnB should be called upon to fix his door, only for the carpenter to be told later that it was actually Usifo’s door that was broken.

The family had also accused the Lagos State Police Commissioner, Mr Odumosu, of being complicit in bungling the case of Ataga’s murder through his lack of depth, thoroughness, and professionalism in his investigation of Ataga’s brutal murder.

Recall that Chidinma Ojukwu, a 21-year old Mass Communications student of the University of Lagos, was arrested by the Police on June 23, 2021, for the alleged murder of Super TV owner, 50-year old Usifo, with whom she had a romantic relationship.

Usifo had been found dead on June 15, 2021, with ghastly, multiple stab wounds all over his body, at the said short rental apartment on Adebowale Oshin Street, Lekki Phase 1, Lagos, which Chidinma had personallly booked.

The ghastly wounds showed evidence of sustained torture. Chidinma had voluntarily confessed in her first public outing to stabbing Usifo severally with a knife under the influence of drugs and alcohol, and withdrawing the sum of N380,000 from the victim’s account with his ATM card.

She was later to backtrack on this confession in a carefully arranged televised interview, where she claimed she had allegedly acted in self-defence. Usifo was later buried on July 30, 2021, at a solemn low-key ceremony at the Ebony Vaults, Ikoyi, Lagos, after a funeral service at the Lady Perpetua Help Catholic church in Victoria Island, Lagos.

The Usifo family had also decried the alleged comfortable movement to prison from court and from court back to the prison, of Chidinma in an Uber ride.The family queried why this was done without even handcuffs and without being informed of the intending arraignment

August 16, 2021