| NEWS
|
National
Metro
Africa
World
Business
|
|
|
| OPINION
|
Editorial
Columnists
Contributors
Letters
Cartoons
Discussions
Outlook
|
|
|
| SPORTS
|
Home
Abroad
Golf Weekly
Results
|
|
|
| FEATURES
|
Focus
Policy & Politics
Arts
Media
Science
Natural Health
Law
Education
Weekend
Friday Review
Executive Briefs
Fashion
Food & Drink
Auto Wheels
Friday Worship
Saturday Magazine
Sunday Magazine
Ibru Ecumenical Centre
Agro Care
|
|
|
|
|
Why Navy stalls generals' trial over missing ship
From Madu Onuorah, Abuja
THE refusal of Naval officers to sit in trial over their colleagues may be a major reason for the stalling of the court-martial of three Real Admirals over the missing oil tanker, MT. African Pride.
Another reason is the inability of the Naval authorities so far, to meet up with the rules and regulations laid down by the Armed Forces Decree 105 (as amended), now Armed Forces Act A20 of the Laws of the Federation of Nigeria (AFA A20 LFN) 2001 on convening a court-martial.
The concern is that the trial may be bogged down by technicalities because of the presence of top-class lawyers and Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN) as counsel to the officers on trial.
The Guardian was told last night that the most senior officers of the military believe that the three Rear Admirals were being "punished unduly" while the Navy is being overbearing by drafting officers from the Army and the Air Force into a trial considered purely naval affair.
The three officers, relieved of their duties and redeployed to the Headquarters Naval Training Command (NAVTRAC), Naval Base Apapa, venue of the Court-Martial are Rear Admirals Francis Agbiti, former Chief of Training and Operations (CTOP); Anthony Bob-Manuel, former Deputy Commandant, Command and Staff College, Jaji and Babatunde Kolawole, former Flag Officer Commanding, Western Naval Command.
In the last weeks, attempts to issue a Convening Order by the Convening Officer and Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Samuel Afolayan, have failed because of the refusal of officers appointed into the Court-Martial to honour such draft. First Commandant, Nigerian Army Armoured Corps and School, Maj.-Gen. M.A. Garba and Air Vice Marshal Steve Hedima, Deputy Commandant, Nigerian Defence Academy, declined to serve. They were replaced by the Commandant, Command and Staff College, Jaji, Air Vice Marshal Sam Odesola and Chief of Plans, Navy Headquarters, Rear Admiral Anthony Oni. But these officers have also declined to serve. This left only three officers - Chief of Defence Intelligence, Rear Admiral Joseph Ajayi and Maj.-Gen. Patrick Akpa, Chief of Policy and Plans, Army Headquarters and Commandant, National War College, Rear Admiral Amos Adedeji as the only officers high up enough in rank to serve.
Section 133, sub-section 3 (b) of the AFA A20 LFN 2004 states that "where an officer is to be tried, the President shall be above or of the same or equivalent rank and seniority of the accused and the members shall be of the same but not below the rank and seniority of the accused." Also, 133 sub-section (1) states: "Subject to the provisions of sections 128 and 129 of this Act, a court-martial shall be duly constituted if it consists of the President of the Court-Martial, not less than two other officers and a waiting member.
Besides the convening officer of the Court-Martial, Vice Admiral Afolayan and the Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Alexander Ogomudia, only six officers are qualified to be President of the Court-Martial to try the three Rear Admirals. This is because one of the officers on trial is a member of Course 9, Nigerian Defence Academy (NDA). However, because provisions of Section 134 Sub-section (1) of the Act which states that "the officer who convenes a court-martial shall not be the President or a member of that court-martial", Admiral Afolayan and Gen. Ogomudia cannot preside.
The six officers, who belong to Course 8 and who could head the Court-Martial are the Chief of Army Staff, Lt.-Gen. Martin Luther Agwai; Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Jonab Wuyep; Chief of Training and Operations, Defence Headquarters, Maj.-Gen. S.A. Adejumo; Director- General, National Institute of Policy and Strategic Studies (NIPPS), Maj.-Gen. Martins Osabor; Commandant, NDA, Maj.-Gen. Abel Akhale and Chief of Defence Intelligence, Rear Admiral Joseph Ajayi. Of these officers, only Admiral Ajayi is willing to serve.
Drafting senior officers of Course 9 to serve as members of the Court-Martial has become difficult because they have reportedly stuck together in solidarity with one of their own. One of the officers told The Guardian: "It is inconceivable for any of us to take part in the trial, especially as we know the integrity and disposition of these accused officers. In fact, we refuse to be used to disgrace one of our own."
There are even indications that the accused Rear Admirals would object to the presence of some officers in the Court-Martial.
According to a senior serving officer: "They are to take advantage of the provisions of section 137, sub-section (1) which states: "An accused about to be tried by a Court-Martial shall be entitled to object on any reasonable grounds, to any member of the court-martial or the waiting member whether appointed originally or in lieu `of another officer. (2) For the purpose of enabling the accused to avail himself of the right conferred by sub-section (1) of this section, the names of the members of the Court-Martial and the waiting member shall be read over in the presence of the accused before they are sworn in, and the accused shall be asked whether he objects to any of the officers."
If and when the Court-Martial is to start, the accused officers are entitled to be given, among others, the following documents: The Convening Order from the Chief of Naval Staff which is the authority for the court to sit, charge sheet, notice of trial, list of exhibit and prosecution witnesses and summary of evidence of prosecution witnesses.
Under the Armed Forces Decree 105 (as amended), a.k.a AFA LFN 2004, the decision of Court-Martial is subject to be challenged in the Court of Appeal as "cases arising from a court-martial shall be lodged with the registrar of Court of Appeal within 10 days of promulgating the findings of a court-martial." The General Court-Martial is treated as if it is the equivalent of a High Court.
|
|
|
|
|
| BUSINESS SERVICES
|
Property
Appointments
Money Watch
Market Report
Capital Market
Business Travels
Maritime Watch
Industry Watch
Energy Report
Insurance
Compulife
|
|
|
|
|
