BREAKING!!! NBA, SANs Demand Kanu’s Release; Say Buhari’s Action a National Embarrassment
PRESIDENT Muhammadu
Buhari stirred the hornet nest during his first media chat when in his
answer to one of the questions posed to him on the continued detention
of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col. Sambo Dasuki and leader
of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu in disregard to
court orders, said his government could not afford to release them
because the magnitude of the charges against them was too grievous.
While Dasuki is facing multiple charges bordering on illegal possession
of
arms and corruption, alleged diversion
of $2.1 billion meant for the procurement of arms, Mr. Kanu was charged
for treasonable felony.
For instance, Dasuki is standing trial on a five-count charge of
money laundering involving about N84.6m and illegal possession of
firearms before Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court,
Abuja. He was granted bail by the court on self-recognizance.
The second case involving Dasuki is that in which he is being tried
with an ex- Director of Finance and Administration in the office of the
NSA, Shuaibu Salisu and former Director of the Nigerian National
Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), Aminu Baba-Kusa in a 19 count-charge
bordering on criminal diversion of funds.
In this charge sheet, Dasuki, Salisu, Baba-Kusa and two companies –
Acacia Holdings Limited and Reliance Referral Hospital Limited were
charged with conspiracy and criminal breach of trust under the Penal
Code Act and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
(Establishment) Act.
The trial judge, Justice Baba-Yusuf admitted each of them to bail in
a ruling on December 18 at N250m with one surety and adjourned to
January 21 for commencement of trial.
In the third case, Dasuki is being tried with former Minister of
State for Finance, Bashir Yuguda, former Sokoto State governor,
Attahiru Dalhatu Bafarawa, his son and firm – Sagir Attahiru and Dalhatu
Investment Limited – and former Director of Finance and Administration
in the office of the NSA, Shuaibu Salisu in a 22-count charge of
alleged diversion of over 20billion.
Justice Affen, on December 21 last year, granted bail to each of them
at N250m with two sureties and fixed February 2 for commencement of
trial.
In the case of Kanu, he was first arraigned before an Abuja
Magistrate Court by the Federal Government before he was later charged
before a Federal High Court on a six count criminal charge of treason,
importation of illegal goods and possession of fire arms filed against
him by the Department of State Services on the ground that he will not
get fair trial.
This was after the case against him at the magistrate court was withdrawn.
On December 23, 2015, he was docked along with two others Benjamin
Madubugwu and David Nwawuisi but refused to take his plea on the
grounds that he did not have confidence in the court.
Before the new charge was filed, Justice Adeniyi Ademola had ordered
for his unconstitutional release from the custody of the Department of
States Security Service (DSSS), but that order was not obeyed.
Of the cases, that of National Publicity Secretary, Olisa Metu seems
more confounding. According to reports the leadership of the Economic
and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) which has been detaining him said
it is yet to articulate charges against him. Yet it is adamant that
that the man must remain in its custody. Not surprisingly the issue has
split the legal community.
Justifying the continued detention during the media chat, the
President said, “If you see the atrocities these people committed
against this country, we can’t allow them to jump bail. What of the over
two million people displaced, most of them orphans whose fathers have
been killed? We cannot allow that.”
On why Mr. Kanu was still being held, Mr Buhari said: “And the one
you are calling Kanu, do you know he has two passports – one Nigerian,
one British – and he came into this country without any passport? Do
you know he came into this country with sophisticated equipment and was
broadcasting for Radio Biafra?”
Ever since that media chat, mixed reactions have continued to trail
the president’s statement with many Nigerians describing him as a tyrant
and dictator, while others openly support his action.
Most lawyers and activists who spoke on the issue accused the
president of over stepping his Executive powers by openly defying the
judiciary on national television.
NBA insists Rule of law must be respected and Buhari must Obey the Court Orders
Speaking on the issue, President of the Nigerian Bar Association,
NBA, Augustine Alegeh, SAN, said “government has a need to respect the
rule of law. As a matter of fact, there is need for government to be in
the front burner in the respect for the rule of law. Whoever is
unhappy, including government with a pronouncement of the court, has
the opportunity of still going back to that court, for the court’s
decision to be vacated or appeal to a higher court, but not to undertake
to ignore it or carrying on as though nothing has happened or that the
court’s order is not binding. That is an unacceptable principle in the
rule of law”.
Alegeh maintained “an agenda for the respect of rule of law is a must
for the government. For specific cases in court, it’s not the business
of the Nigerian Bar Association to make comments on them, because we
have our members on both side and they can decide to speak on the
matter, but on the general principle of rule of law, as an association,
it is one area we are passionate about, which we feel is very essential.
“So, both government and citizens must subscribe to the principles of
rule of law and doing otherwise is not an option. You cannot pick and
choose which court order to obey, if you try to do that, you are clearly
undermining the principle of rule of law and the obvious consequence
will not help the society in anyway.
We believe that from our interaction with the government of President
Muhammadu Buhari, they do not have an option but to obey court orders.
You must bear in mind that the courts are there to settle disputes
between individuals as well as between government and individuals, so it
is important that all parties respect the rule of law and judgments
and decision of courts as that is one area we will not compromise”.
SANs fault Buhari
Some Senior lawyers who bare their minds on the issue equally
disagreed with the President on the matter, saying the position he took
was offensive to the tenets of constitutional democracy, rule of law
and presumption of innocence of an accused person.
They advised the President to, in future, allow the Attorney General
of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami, SAN, to
handle such topics on behalf of the government.
In his submission, Mahmud Magaji, SAN, stated, “going by provisions
of our extant constitution, the presumption is that a person charged to
court for whatever offence, is innocent until guilt is established.
Unless I am told that the constitution was amended last night. That you
level an accusation on someone does not make the person guilty
automatically. If it is so, why then are the courts there? What we are
practicing is constitutional democracy. Anyway, I did not listen to the
media chat and cannot therefore, speak much on the issue”.
Chief Joe Agi, SAN, said: “I really want to believe that the
President did not mean what he said. I have a feeling that what he
wanted to say was that though granted bail, if there are other cases
against the accused persons, they could be re-arrested, notwithstanding
the pending case.
“It will be totally wrong to refuse to release someone on bail in
the absence of any pending allegation. Clearly, I am so sure that what
the President meant to say was not what he said or what was understood.
We should also appreciate the fact that he is not a lawyer.
“If I am to advise the President, I will say he should in future,
leave such issues to the Attorney General of the Federation to clarify”.
Another SAN who did not want his name mentioned because of his
closeness to the present government, said: “I will say that the
President’s statement is an infringement on the concept of separation of
powers.
“No matter how strongly one feels about the culpability of any
accused person, once an order has been made, the Executive is bound to
obey.
“Even if you have other crime allegation against an accused, you must
first of all respect an order for bail, and maybe re-arrest the person
later to answer to the fresh charge. However, for the President to say
that the accused persons will not be released from detention because of
the gravity of charge against them is an affront on the hallowed
principle of separation of powers.
“Such things were never supposed to be voiced out by any person under
a democratic government, not to even say the President. It is
unfortunate, though the Presidency has come out to clarify. As the
President of Nigeria, one can hardly separate Buhari from the
Presidency.
“Nevertheless, for them to come out to clarify the issue shows deference to public outcry”.
A constitutional lawyer, Mr. Festus Ogwuche, said: “The President got
it wrong. No matter the number of allegations against an accused
person, once the matter has been charged before a competent court, that
court assumes powers to determine whether or not the person deserves
bail.
“Court orders are made to be obeyed, if not, it becomes impunity. No
matter the gravity of the offence, an accused is presumed innocent
until proven guilty. Proper investigation ought to have been conducted
and concluded before a person is charged. Re-arresting someone
immediately after the court has granted such person bail makes mockery
of our democracy which is presumably anchored on the rule of law and
separation of powers”, he added.
Describing the comment as a “national embarassment”, human rights
lawyer, Ebun Adegboruwa, said Mr. Buhari, a former head of a military
junta, which ruled the country in the 1980s with an iron fist, proved by
his open defiance of the judiciary that he remained a dictator at
heart.
“We appreciate the President because he has spoken from his heart and gave us the correct impression of who he is,” he said.
Ebun stressed “Under Section 287 of the 1999 constitution, all
persons exercising judicial, executive or legislative power must have
respect for the order of the court. It is not proper for the president
to choose which order to respect or to obey. Given that the president
assumed office through the rule of law, it is totally uncharitable to be
humiliating the judiciary openly in a presidential chat”.
He said the President’s comment was capable of undermining the judiciary and causing anarchy.
“The reason why this is very difficult is that once we resort to
self-rule, once we resort to a situation where the leadership is
breathing down lawlessness, then anarchy will come because if a
president will not obey a court order, a business man will not obey it,
policemen will not obey it.
“It would be promoting anarchy. I am sure in some quarters the SSS
people are rejoicing. Overzealous security officials and rejoicing, and
perhaps using the President’s comment as reason to put people in custody
and breed impunity.”
While asking the President to apologise to Nigeria for making such a
comment, Mr. Adegboruwa advised judges not to be intimidated by Mr.
Buhari’s comment and to carry on with their job without fear.
Similarly, Lanre Suraju, Chairman of the Civil Society Network
Against Corruption, (CSNAC), said the President’s comment was
“unfortunate”, adding that his utterance was capable of undermining
security agencies in their jobs.
“The utterance of the president only shows that there is a government
agenda specifically and deliberately skewed to perpetually keep the
guy in detention. And that is most unfortunate. That is also not only
pitching the judiciary against the executive, it is also showing that
there would be a measure of arbitrariness on the part of the executive.
“The case of Nnamdi Kanu is also unfortunate. It is an extra-judicial
action. Basically, if he is being charged for treason, there is also
certain conditions that needs to be met before bail can be granted. If
the lawyers of the government have failed to establish the magnitude of
his offence, and the court in its own wisdom has granted that bail, the
SSS has no basis and no reason under the rule of law to perpetually
keep him in detention,” he said.
