Daily Independent Online.
*
Thursday, June 17, 2004.
Making mockery of
the judiciary
Victor Efeizomor, Law Reporter, writes that a dangerous
precedent is being set by the government, in its tendency to defy court orders,
as the practice, apart from bringing the judiciary to ridicule, also poses a
threat to the nation’s democratic experiment.
When
everything else fails in the society, the court, nay the judiciary is regarded
as the last hope of man; the bulwark of the people’s liberty; the
upholder of the rule of law, and the defender of the rights of the people. In
short, the judiciary is regarded generally as the symbol of justice. Its
function, in the main, is to interpret whatever laws that operate in a given
society. It follows that where a piece of legislation is so interpreted,
whoever or whatever institution that is affected by such interpretation is
bound to comply with whatever pronouncement the judiciary makes, whether it
favours him or not is immaterial. By so doing, orderliness in a society is
guaranteed, as the contrary will result in anarchy, that is a situation where
might invariably is right.
This function of interpreting laws,
which of course includes safeguarding the sanctity of the constitution, has of
late been subjected to some assault in Nigeria by, especially, the Federal
Government, represented by President Olusegun Obasanjo in his predilection to
perpetrate illegal or unconstitutional acts as well as disregard court orders.
Legal analysts and lawyers have described the development as worrisome, since
such attitude can only attract contempt and ridicule to the judiciary.
Sometime ago, the venerable Justice
Chukwudifu Oputa, retired justice of the Supreme Court, had had cause to
observe that, “There is evidence everywhere for lack of respect for rule
of law. The problem of “misrule of law” stems from the lack of
morals, integrity, accountability and transparency on the part of the ruling
class. Our nation is in a mess because we have all killed our conscience. We
all, especially our leaders, do not seem to be guided by the principles of
morality, integrity, accountability and transparency.”
Oputa’s observation mirrors
exactly what the government of the day perpetrates: unconstitutional acts
coupled with wanton disregard for the rule of law, by those in authority who,
paradoxically, are supposed to be the custodian of constitutional provisions,
and champions of the consciousness that there’s no alternative to obeying
court orders to the letter.
Indeed, if judicial pronouncements in
this country have ever been treated with levity, what has prevailed since the
birth of the present civil rule, with respect to observance of court orders, is
a mockery of the judiciary. Court orders and judgments have been violated with
impunity by government authorities. The development has prompted Fola
Akinrinsola, a Lagos-based lawyer, to ask, “If the government becomes a
law breaker, it breeds contempt for the law; it invites everyman to become a
law unto himself; it invites anarchy.”
But the judiciary in Nigeria has always
been the sacrificial lamb on the altar of obvious societal imperfections and
contradictions. When politicians rig elections, it is the judiciary that is
called upon to act. Again when politicians loot the nation’s treasury in
their quest to become millionaires and billionaires, it is the judges that are
called upon to head the tribunal to inquire into their activities or to try
them. And when the rights of individuals are trampled upon, it is the same
judiciary which is regarded as the last hope of the common man, that is called
also to interpret the law in order to right the wrongs. In this circumstance,
if the judiciary is indeed the go-between when parties feel that their rights
have been infringed, why then are the decisions, judgments and orders of the
court not obeyed?
The most recent of this worrisome
development is the long-drawn legal battle between the Federal Government and
the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), led by Comrade Adams Oshiomhole. Before the
commencement of the nationwide strike called by labour, last week Wednesday to
protest the increase in the pump prices of petroleum products, the Federal
Government had gone to challenge NLC’s right to mobilise Nigerians to
embark on such action. Justice Roseline Ukeje, Chief Judge of the Federal High
Court, who presided over the matter, ordered that both the NLC and the Federal
Government should comply with the court’s earlier order of February 9,
2004 in which it ruled that both parties should revert to the January 2003
status quo. The suit filed by Chief Afe Babalola, SAN, on behalf of the Attorney
General of the Federation and the Federal Government had as defendants the NLC
and its president, Comrade Oshiomhole, the Trade Union Congress (TUC, the
Petroleum Products Pricing and Regulatory Agency (PPRA) as well as Depot and
Petroleum Marketers of Nigeria. The suit sought to restrain the defendants from
embarking on and continuing any strike or mass protest on the June 9, 2004,
pending the determination of the substantive suit. Ukeje, in her ruling, said
the entire arguments on both sides were an abuse of court processes, as there
was a similar suit pending before her, which prompted the order she made on
February 9, 2004 directing that the status quo be maintained, i.e. that
government should revert to the pre-January price of N38 per litre of fuel and
that NLC should not embark on any strike action. She directed that that order
be complied with.
But neither the NLC nor the Federal
Government complied with the decision of the court as labour went ahead to
commence the strike. On its part, the Federal Government has not ensured the
reversion to the status quo, which means that the court order has flagrantly
been defied. Labour’s defiance may be understandable. It obeyed the
previous court order, while government disregarded it. So this time, it insisted
government must comply first. Up till now, though NLC has suspended the strike,
government is yet to ensure compliance with the Federal High Court’s
ruling.
Another instance of government’s
willful disobedience of court order was when an Ikeja High Court judge, Justice
Joseph Oyewale, ordered the Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI) in Lagos
to produce Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, erstwhile Chief Security Officer to the
late Head of State, General Sani Abacha, in court. Mustapha and four others are
standing trial for their alleged attempt to murder The Guardian
publisher, Mr. Alex Ibru, but the trial has been stalled since about two months
ago when Mustapha was forcefully taken away from Kirikiri Maximum Prison by the
DMI and State Security Services (SSS) operatives for his alleged involvement in
“security breaches” in the country.
Subsequently, Justice Oyewale has also
made two separate orders asking the Federal Government to provide Mustapha in
court to answer to the charges preferred against him, yet the order has not
been obeyed by the authorities. In this circumstance Justice Oyewale appears to
be handicapped, because ordinarily, it is government, through its agencies,
that enforces court orders.
The chairman of the Economic and
Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Alhaji Nuhu Ribadu is currently facing
contempt proceedings at a Federal High Court for refusing to admit to bail the
detained former Managing Director of Bank of North, Alhaji Shettima Bulama who
has been granted bail by the court since three months ago. The development
followed an application by Bulama’s counsel seeking an order for the
issuance of “Form 48” against Ribadu for disobeying a court order
admitting his client to bail. Bulama who has been in detention since September
2003 was on March 5, 2004 granted bail by Justice Dan Abutu, an order that the
EFCC has refused to comply with.
Despite the criticisms that trailed
Justice Wilson Egbo Egbo’s orders, legal analysts still contend that they
ought to have been obeyed and subsequently properly challenged in court, since
an order of court remains valid, until it is set aside by an appellate court.
Yet the learned controversial judge’s ex parte
order, July 22, 2003, restraining the former Senate from passing the amended
Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) Act into law was ignored. The
Senate, then under the leadership of Senator Anyim Pius Anyim, himself a
lawyer, apparently viewed the order as amounting to undue interference in the
legislative function of the Senate. Consequently, Egbo Egbo threatened to
arrest Anyim, and the entire leadership of the Senate for contempt.
For the Anambra State Governor, Dr.
Chris Ngige, since a High Court judge issued an order in January 2004, for the
restoration of his security aides following their withdrawal in very suspicious
circumstances, the order is yet to be complied with. It should also be noted
that the Inspector General of Police, Mr. Tafa Balogun, who that order was
directed to is also a trained lawyer.
Legal
practitioners generally are not comfortable with this development as it is seen
as constituting a threat to the judiciary, the rule of law and of course the
administration of justice. It is therefore understandable then when the
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) warned the Federal Government and the Nigerian
Labour Congress (NLC), prior to the just suspended nationwide strike called by
labour, to obey the Federal High Court’s ruling, as to do otherwise would
amount to contempt of court. General secretary of NBA, Mr. Dele Adesina while
speaking on the development said the practice where court orders are not obeyed
is likely to erode the confidence reposed on the judiciary. He fears a
situation where such would result to a situation where citizens would take laws
into their hands. He added that it is also capable of endangering the
democratic experiment in the country.
