Your Excellencies,

It is a common knowledge that the American and French governments have been desperately lobbying the governments of Nigeria, Benin, Togo, and Ghana to agree to sign new defense pacts that would enable them to redeploy their soldiers expelled from Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger. Some of the troops have been redeployed to Chad but France and United States prefer countries of the Gulf of Guinea that are more strategically located to serve their interests in the central zone of the Sahel. Of the countries in the Gulf of Guinea, Nigeria turns out to be the most strategically located.

There are indications that the Nigerian Government may be favorably disposed to the proposed defense pact. However, there is a widespread apprehension that signing of the pact by Nigeria would have wide ranging implications for defense and internal security of the country. On 22nd December 2023, the last of France’s 1,500 troops deployed in Niamey and two other bases in the tri-frontier of Niger were marched out of the country.

On March 16th, 2024, Niger Republic suspended the military agreement with the United States signed in 2012, which allowed the US to station about 1100 US troops and civilian personnel permanently in Niger, to operate from two American bases in the country. American Airbase 101 is located in Niamey while Airbase 201 is located near the small northern city of Agadez, about 920 kilometers southwest of Niamey.

These French and American bases were used by the French and the Americans to carry out manned and unmanned surveillance flights and other operations in the Sahel. The bases had become the focal points for Western intelligence and surveillance operations in West Africa. The American and French troops were expelled because their presence did not serve any useful purpose. Instead, they were using the defense pact to carry out surveillance operations in the region to serve their geopolitical strategic interests. As a result of this expulsion, the Gulf of Guinea countries especially Nigeria, are being pressured to compromise their sovereignty by harboring these foreign troops who would come to serve the interests of NATO to the detriment of the national interests and security of the countries of the Gulf of Guinea. Nigeria’s civil war experiences when France overtly supported the Biafran secessionists, and the ambivalence of the US should provide our leaders with food for thought.

It is important to remember that Nigerians have consistently opposed defense agreement with foreign countries since the 1960s when the Balewa administration was forced to abrogate the Anglo-Nigerian Defense Agreement, because the agreement 2 contained a clause which allowed the Royal Air force to overfly and test its aircrafts in Nigeria. The Agreement also allowed the Royal Air Force to station maintenance staff in Nigeria. The Balewa administration was pressured to abrogate the Agreement because public opinion perceived it as an impairment of Nigeria’s freedom of action which might draw the country into hostilities against it wishes. This remains true. In 2001, in his bid to ostensibly re-professionalize the Nigerian army, President Obasanjo almost unilaterally signed the “Military Cooperation Agreement Between the US and Nigeria.”

To its credit, the Ministry of Defense responded appropriately by opposing the agreement arguing that, the ministry was not involved in the negotiations between Nigeria and the US, neither were the service chiefs, who could have provided input relating to the syllabus and doctrinal content of the programme. In fact, the agreement was highly criticized by Lt General Victor Malu, the Chief of Army Staff at the time, when the US military officers demanded for Nigeria’s strategic doctrine and unfettered access its strategic military locations. According to General Malu, those were “exclusive to Nigerians only” adding that “a friend today can be an enemy tomorrow.”

Malu was not alone in protest against the agreement. His immediate boss and Chief of Defense Staff, Vice Admiral Ibrahim Ogohi also told a visiting US Air College delegation to his office that “what Nigeria needs is logistic support and not training.” In November 2007, the US renewed its attempt to set up its Africa Command (AFRICOM) in Nigeria. This move was rejected by the National Council of State. Incidentally President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was a member of the Council of State at the time.

The latest proposal to relocate the America from Niger to Nigeria coming not long after the suspension of Niger from ECOWAS, with Nigeria’s active collaboration as a result of disagreement between Niger and the US, has many serious implications not only for Nigeria - Niger relations but also for Nigeria’s national security and that of the West African region in general. According to the late Major General Joseph Garba, Nigeria’s former Minister of External Affairs, Nigeria’s neighbors are a matter of colonial heritage and socio-cultural diversity; but it is in our Nigeria’s interest to deliberately cultivate the friendship of our neighbours.

This posture has been and must continue to be a major feature of Nigeria’s foreign policy. This is even more so because historically, there has always been a noticeable degree of suspicion of Nigeria’s intentions among its French - speaking neighbors, arising no doubt from the mutual suspicion which seems to have always characterized Nigeria’s relations with France. Therefore, in this circumstance Nigeria must be bold enough to reject the proposal, if for no other reason than to return a good turn. At least since independence Nigeria and Niger have maintained relatively cordial relations that have always helped in stabilizing the sub-region on several occasions.

The two countries have come to the aid of one another during their moment of crises. The new military rulers in Niger jettisoned the security cooperation agreement between Niger and the United States because of the “attitude of the US delegation which visited Niger recently “in denying the sovereign rights of Niger’s people to choose their 3 partners and allies capable of really helping them to fight terrorism.” General Michael Langley, head of the African Command (AFRICOM) had expressed “concern” that Niger was cultivating close ties with Russia and Iran. Other reasons given for the abrogation of the agreement included the fact that the presence of the American troops in Niger was illegal. According to Amadou Abdramane the spokesperson for the Niger’s Military Council, “it was not democratically approved and imposes unfavorable conditions on Niger.” As the “Agreement” was simply a list of demands drawn by the US Embassy in Niger and sent to the Mahamadou Issoufou’s administration for its consent, which it willingly gave.

The Agreement for example provides that all United States personnel be accorded the privileges, exemptions, and immunities equivalent to those accorded to the administrative and technicalstaff of a diplomatic mission under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961; that United States personnel may enter and exit the Republic of Niger with United States identification and with collective or individual travel order. It is important to clearly state that there are only dangers and no gains from such military operations.

The American operations in Niger Republic for example were ostensibly to pre-empt and uproot terrorists from the Sahelian region. The result has so far been quite unimpressive, if not a complete failure. It is apparent that the presence of American troops and other intelligence personnel in Niger Republic is not serving any useful purpose. This is for the simple reason that terrorism, far from abating, has in fact risen dramatically since the US began its operations in the region. Data sourced from the Pentagon, indicate that “with 2,737 violent events, the western Sahel (Burkina Faso, Mali and Western Niger) experienced the largest escalation in violent event linked to militant Islamist groups over the past years of any region in Africa, a 36% increase.” …” Fatalities in the Sahel involving militant Islamist groups rose even more rapidly, 63%, resulting in 7,899 fatalities.

Niger in particular in particular “saw a 43% increase in violent events in the past year. “All told, …attacks linked to militant Islamist groups in the Sahel have jumped 3,500% since 2016.” “At a minimum, more US security assistance isn’t leading to more security and all signs suggest it plays a role in making matters worse.” (Elizabeth Shackelford) “The Sahel now accounts for 40% of all violent activity by militant Islamist groups in Africa, more than any other region in Africa. …Militant Islamist violence in the Sahel is also responsible for the displacement of more than 2.6 million people.” Are these results worth the erosion of sovereignty? We the signatories of this open letter believe strongly that the economic and environmental impacts of hosting foreign military bases are profound and far-reaching. Economically, the presence of these bases could potentially divert government funds and resources away from critical areas such as education, healthcare, and infrastructure development toward maintaining and securing these military installations.

This redirection of resources could stunt economic growth and exacerbate poverty in a country where much of the population already lives under challenging conditions. 4 Moreover, hosting foreign troops often leads to increased prices and living costs in local areas, disproportionately affecting the lower-income population. Environmentally, the construction and operation of military bases can lead to significant degradation of the local environment. This includes deforestation, soil erosion, water contamination, and loss of biodiversity, which are detrimental to agricultural communities and indigenous populations. The long-term environmental damage could further hinder economic opportunities and sustainable development. Historically, the presence of foreign military bases has often led to strained relations not only with neighboring countries but also within the host country itself, as seen in numerous global instances. Public opinion in Nigeria has consistently shown a strong resistance to foreign military alliances that compromise the nation’s sovereignty and independence.

The controversial history of foreign military presence in Nigeria, dating back to the abrogation of the Anglo-Nigerian Defense Agreement in the 1960s, serves as a significant historical precedent highlighting the potential risks and public discontent associated with such agreements. This historical awareness and skepticism are echoed in the present day, where there is considerable public apprehension towards the re-establishment of foreign military bases. In conclusion, as stewards of Nigeria’s sovereignty and guardians of its national interests, it is incumbent upon our leadership to heed the lessons of history and the voice of its people.

The relocation of foreign military bases to Nigerian soil represents not just a potential compromise of our sovereignty but also sets a precedent that may lead to unforeseen geopolitical, economic, and social consequences. We, the signatories of this open letter, urge you to consider the broader implications of such agreements and to prioritize Nigeria’s long-term peace and security over short-term strategic alignments.

By standing firm against the pressures to house foreign bases, Nigeria can affirm its commitment to self-determination and foster a more stable and prosperous future for all its citizens. Let us choose a path of cautious diplomacy and strategic independence, ensuring that our nation remains a beacon of stability and a model of sovereign integrity in Africa. Yours faithfully,

1. Abubakar Siddique Mohammed Centre for Democratic Development, Research and Training (CEDDERT) Zaria.

2. Kabiru Sulaiman Chafe Arewa Research and Development Project (ARDP) Kaduna.

3. Attahiru Muhammadu Jega Bayero University, Kano.

4. Jibrin Ibrahim Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD) Abuja. 

5. Auwal Musa (Rafsanjani) Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) Abuja.

6. Y. Z. Ya’u Centre for Information Technology and Development (CITAD) Kano

The nation has been agog with news of the ongoing face-off between the EFCC and the immediate past Governor of Kogi State, Alhaji Yahaya Bello and the others over the (EFCC)’s attempt to arrest Bello in connection with alleged official corruption involving the sum of 80.2 billion naira which he allegedly misappropriated while in office for eight years as Kogi State Governor.

Accusations and counter-accusations have raged back and forth between both camps (with not a few officious by-standers proffering gratuitous, ill-informed advice in the guise of opinions). As usual, the truth is always the first casualty. In this case, it is worsened by the fact that the matter is the subject of on-going litigation before at least two different courts: a High Court in the former Governor’s home State of Kogi and the Federal High Court in Abuja. The situation has been compounded by the order of injunction granted by a Kogi State High Court restraining the Commission from arresting or attempting to arrest the former Governor. The alleged breach of the order so irked the judge who issued it that he apparently had no option but to cite the EFCC boss for contempt. That order has been stayed by the Court of Appeal. Because these proceedings are ongoing, no more will be said on them.

Let me stress here that I am neither on the side of Yahaya Bello, nor that of the EFCC, or the Government of Kogi State whose funds are allegedly at the heart of the dispute. I will not cry more than the bereaved. My intervention here is limited to the legal ramifications and propriety of the steps taken so far by both sides of the divide. 

BACKGROUND

Before Bello’s Abuja house was raided in a gestapo-like manner on April 17, 2024, Bello had, believing that his fundamental human rights were being threatened, approached a Kogi State High Court seeking an interim restraining order against the EFCC (Commission) pending the determination of a substantive suit before the court.

Justice Isa Abdullahi (presiding), who was satisfied with the grounds upon which the relief was sought, on February 9, 2024, gave an interim restraining order against the EFCC from taking any action against Bello, pending the determination of the substantive matter.

The Commission, dissatisfied, approached the Court of Appeal, Abuja, on March 11, 2024, requesting the appellate court to set aside the interim restraining order. It argued that the lower court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to assist Bello escape his deserved justice. It also argued that Bello could not stop the Commission from carrying out its statutory duties, nor use the lower court to escape its invitation, investigation and possible prosecution as the court’s order directed.

The Appeal Court adjourned hearing to April 22, 2024, while refusing to hear EFCC’s application for a stay of the order of interim injunction. In further affirming its earlier interim orders, the Kogi State High Court on April 17, 2024, delivered judgment in the substantive suit and directed the Commission to first seek the leave of the Court of Appeal before taking further steps against Bello. It granted some injunctive reliefs against the Commission “from continuing to harass, threaten to arrest or detain Bello”. The court directed the Commission to file a charge against Bello in an appropriate court if it had some reason to do so. The Commission later obtained a warrant of arrest against Bello from the Federal High Court presided over by Justice Emeka Nwite. On April 22, the anti-graft agency filed a notice of withdrawal of its appeal, predicating it on the ground that events had overtaken the appeal; while admitting that the appeal was filed out of time.

Bello’s team promptly challenged the arrest warrant by the Federal High Court and Justice Emeka Nwite has adjourned for his ruling on the propriety of his warrant of arrest against Bello.

WHEN AND HOW TO SUMMON A SUSPECT FOR INVESTIGATION BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES

I condemn any brute and sensational arrest of a suspect such as Bello. It does not matter the station of life of such suspect, whether high or low. Hooded DSS operatives once did it to some Justices of the Supreme Court and other Judges on 8th October, 2016, when they viciously and savagely broke into their homes in the wee hours of the morning. I had condemned it in very strong words. (See https://www.bellanaija.com/2016/10/falana-ozekhome-melaye-react-to-arrest-of-judges-by-dss/) (October 10, 2016). Some of the victims like Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, JSC (of blessed memory) never recovered from the shock. He later died. Others took early premature retirement. Was the Commission therefore right in attempting to arrest Bello in the manner it did as some commentators have approved in their writeups? I think not. The relevant provisions of the law such as Sections 8(1) of the Anti-Torture Act, 2017; Section 6 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015 (applicable in Abuja, the FCT); and Section 35(2)&(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, the sum total of which enjoin the fair and humane treatment of a suspect whether during his /her arrest, investigation, detention pending trial and arraignment. Was a bench warrant necessary against a suspect on whom charges had not been served as in the Bello scenario? I think not. Let us look at some decided cases on this.

In USANI V. DUKE [2006] 17 NWLR (Pt.1009)610 the Court of Appeal held thus:

"A bench warrant is a discretionary power of a court invoked to secure the attendance as in this case of an unwilling witness under the threat of contempt of court to give evidence on any area of a suit within his knowledge. It is not a discretion which is exercised as a matter of course. The court has to be satisfied that there is absolute necessity to procure the appearance of the witness in court. The lower tribunal based its refusal to issue bench warrant on non-compliance with section 229(2) of the Evidence Act." Per ADEKEYE, J.C.A. (P. 38, paras. B-E)”.

In APUGO V. FRN (2017) LPELR-41643 CA, the Court of Appeal eruditely held that:

“Section 382 (4) and (5) of the ACJA provides for how to serve a Charge and notice of trial on a Defendant, who is not in custody, … In this case, the Respondent had filed a motion exparte under section 382(5) of the ACJA 2015 to serve Appellant by substituted means. That motion was not argued, but the trial court jumped the gun and ordered for the bench warrant to arrest the Appellant: and when it found out that that was wrong, it suspended the implementation of the bench warrant (instead of setting it aside) the trial court yet still ordered the Appellant to appear on the next adjourned date to answer to the Charge against him, pursuant to section 87 of the ACJA 2015. As earlier discussed and held above, I do not think the trial court had the vires to make such order, in the circumstances as I think it went beyond its role as impartial adjudicator, to that of the Prosecutor or Police or EFCC to forcefully produce the Accused person, without serving him with any charge or notice of trial. See NWADIKE v. State (2015) LPELR- 24550 (CA), Ededet v. State (2008) 14 NWLR (Pt 1106) 52. I do not think section 87 of the ACJA 2015, can apply without recourse to section 382 of the same Act which requires a Defendant to be served personally or by substituted means with the charge or information and notice of trial. I believe it is upon compliance with section 382 (3) (4) and (5) of the Act where there is a pending charge, that the trial court can have the powers to apply the section 87 of the Act which says: “ A court has authority to compel the attendance before it of a suspect who is within the jurisdiction and is charged with an offence committed within the state Federal or the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, as the case may be or which according to law may be dealt as if the offence had been committed within jurisdiction and to deal with the suspect according to law”. Per MBABA J.C.A J.C.A (Pp. 46-48, paras. F-F)’’.

See also sections 113, 131, 394, 398 and 399 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015. 

These domestic laws are reinforced by a regional (in fact, continental) statute - the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights - Article 7 of which obliges the State (and all other persons) to respect the rights of every individual to have his (or her) cause heard. This right encompasses the following, inter alia:

(i) The right to appeal to competent national organs against violating his fundamental rights;

(ii) The right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent tribunal;

(iii) The right to defence including by Counsel of one’s choice;

(iv) The right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal.

The importance of this statute is often overlooked by many Nigerians because, apart from the Constitution, it is superior to virtually every local or municipal law - including the EFCC (Establishment) Act itself. See ABACHA VS FAWEHINMI (2000) 6 NWLR part 660, pg 228, where the Supreme Court held that the Charter possesses “greater vigour and strength than any other domestic statute… (accordingly if there is a conflict between it and another statute its provisions will prevail over those of the other Statute”)

It is in this context that I believe the Commission’s tactics in attempting to arrest Bello ought to be situated. While no one quarrels with the Commission’s full mandate to tackle economic crimes, the way and manner in which it does so must however, not portray any impunity or suggest that it is above the law. After all, the Commission’s motto is “No one is above the Law”. To that extent, the fact that the person at the centre of the present controversy is a former Governor is irrelevant: it merely hugs the headlines for that reason. Afterall, he has since lost his immunity under section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, upon vacating office. However, once a person has been charged to court as Bello has, he becomes the subject of the court which becomes seized of the matter. His availability in court is thereafter controlled by the trial court, and not another through a bench warrant. 

Many a time, it is argued that the court cannot restrain government agencies from arresting, investigating or prosecuting suspects. This is far from the truth as it depends on the facts of each case. For example, the Court of Appeal in OKEKE v. IGP & Ors (2022) LPELR-58476(CA) 1 at Pp. 9 paras. A, Per NWOSU-IHEME, J.C.A (as she then was), relied on a decision of the same Court to hold that the Police can be restrained from the improper use of its powers. In the unreported case of LUNA V. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE RIVER STATE POLICE COMMAND in Appeal No CA/PH/216/2004, the Port-Harcourt Division of the intermediate court held:

“... Notwithstanding the power of the Police as spelt out in Sections 4 and 24 of the Police Act, where this Power is improperly used, the Court can stop the use of the power for that improper purpose, as that would no longer be covered by Section 35(1) (c) of the 1999 Constitution. In other words, an order restraining the Police from arresting on some particular occasion or for some particular improper purpose may be made by the Court.” 

THE EVILS OF MEDIA TRIAL

The Yahaya Bello case evinces a clear case of media trial which should never be. The notion “Media Trial” or “Trial by Media” got its name in the United States of America during the period of 19th Century and became familiar with the Indian legal system in the famous, case of K.M Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1962 SC 605.

I have, on my part, always kicked against media trial, for it presumes a person guilty even before his trial in open court. At the first National Anti-Corruption Stakeholders’ Summit held in 2017 with the theme, “Building national anti-corruption consensus in a multi-agency Environment”, which was organised by the Commission at the EFCC Academy, Karu, Abuja, I made the following remarks:

“…. All my life that is what I have done. I take it very seriously when we talk about the issue of rule of law. I do not believe in media trial. For example, a case is being investigated in EFCC, the suspect is being interrogated, tomorrow it is in a particular newspaper as to the statement made by that suspect. That suspect may never be tried. Even if he is arraigned and tried, he may never be found guilty but you have destroyed his image, his reputation. We should run away from that, it is not good. There is the need in this anti-corruption war to make an example; just one example with one person in government. I am aware of many, many petitions against people in this government”. See Nigerian Tribune edition of 28th March, 2017. (https://tribuneonlineng.com/stop-media-trial-suspects-ozekhome-tells-efcc/).

I had also in 2017, written to the Commission and presented a paper at CACOL Roundtable, titled “The A-Z and 24 “Dos” and “Don’ts” of how to fight corruption”. (See Daily Times of 24th April, 2017 – https//issuu.com/dailytimes. ng/docs/dtn-24-04-17/19). This paper is still relevant today, as it represents my contribution to the fight against corruption which I personally believe in. But, such war must be within the confines of the law. At the time of my lecture, the Commission under Ibrahim Magu had not made any attempt to try government functionaries; and I challenged it to do so. I do not know, whether it was my wakeup call that made the Commission to finally start charging people in government, especially Governors and Ministers, to court. Or, do you? I had also clashed with the former Chairman, Magu, on this sore issue on 19th December, 2017, at the Federal High Court, Abuja, at its end of year event. (See: https://www.vanguardngr.com/2017/12/anti-graft-war-magu-ozekhome-clash-fhc-end-year-event/) 

THE DANGER INHERENT IN MEDIA TRIAL

Media trial which has become the order of the day in Nigeria is simply the act of using media coverage to vilify and portray a suspect or an accused person as a criminal, even without trial. In the context of Nigerian jurisprudence, a trial is an avenue to challenge the innocence of an accused person. A Media trial is an improper use of the media to tarnish the image of an accused person before, during or after a trial. It is used to dampen the resilient spirit of an accused person. The Commission used this craft greatly, especially during the tenure of Ibrahim Magu; and it greatly chipped away some nobility in its patriotic war against corruption. 

The public applauds media trial. The downtrodden guffaws when the rich also cry. With this, there are more media convictions than actual convictions in the courtroom. Unfortunately, Yahaya Bello, has become the latest victim of media trial. If he is eventually acquitted, people will attribute his non-conviction to “a complicit judiciary”, (the whipping orphan). 

Bello’s present ordeal may have undoubtedly brought some people immense joy. This submission has been tacitly corroborated by the Commission’s Chairman, very hard working and dedicated Mr Olanipekun Olukoyede, who stated, in a now-viral video, that the former Governor of Kogi State declined to come to the agency’s office because he complained that a female Senator had allegedly gathered journalists together to humiliate him anytime he appeared in the office of the agency for interrogation. Obviously, Bello was scared of media trial; so he avoided it. The evils of media trial are galore. 

Media trials, especially in places like Nigeria, can be highly dangerous and prejudicial to a fair trial for several reasons:

1. Presumption of Innocence: Under the provisions of Section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution, every accused person is presumed innocent until he is found guilty. Media trials often disregard the principle of “innocent until proven guilty.” When suspects are portrayed as guilty before they have had a fair trial, it can prejudice public opinion and undermine the legal process. The Muhammadu Buhari government specialised in this Goebel’s propaganda style under its “Name-and-shame” mantra. Such removes the Anglo-Saxon accusatorial system we operate and whimsically substitutes it with the French inquisitorial system. 

By the provisions of section 36(5) of the 1999 Constitution, every person who is charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. This is unequivocally the position of the law, and has not changed. Article 7(1) (b) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights 1981, also guarantees the presumption of innocence when it states as follows: every individual shall have the right to fair-hearing, that is; to have his cause heard including a right to an appeal, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court or tribunal, and also the right to defence, including the right to be defended by Counsel of his choice. These are provisions that guide the trial of any person suspected to have committed a crime. It further extends to the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal Thus, the presumption of innocence is the legal principle in criminal cases that one is considered innocent until proven guilty. This therefore means that until a judicial pronouncement is made, a suspect or defendant as the case may be should be treated with dignity as an innocent citizen. Anything to contrary would amount to a breach of the fundamental rights of the individual. See the cases of Tosin .v. State (2023) LPELR-59635 (CA); Onyeka .v. State (2023) LPELR-60520 (CA) and OLALERE .V. STATE (2022) LPELR-58103 (CA). 

2. Mob Mentality: Inflamed by sensationalized media coverage, the public can form strong opinions and even resort to mob justice. This can lead to violence, whether against the accused or others associated with them.

3. Interference with Legal Proceedings: Judges do not live on the island, Venus, Moon, Neptune or Mars. They live on earth and interact with members of the society. Media attention can influence judges, potentially leading to unfair trials. It can be difficult for a defendant to receive a fair trial when public opinion has been heavily influenced against him by biased media coverage. In the case of Rajendra Jawanmal Gandhi v. State of Maharashtra, (1997) 8 SCC 386, the Supreme Court of India noted that a trial by press, electronic media, or public agitation is the exact opposite of the rule of law. It held further that Judges should protect themselves from such pressure and scrupulously adhere to the rule of law since failure to do so could result in a miscarriage of justice. Parties are entitled by the Constitution to a fair trial in a court of law by an unbiased tribunal that is not swayed by popular culture or media coverage.

4. Violation of Privacy and Dignity: Suspects, especially those who are later found innocent, can suffer irreversible and irreparable damage to their reputation, mental health, and livelihood due to intrusive media coverage. See section 37 of the 1999 Constitution.

5. Impact on Investigation: Media trials can jeopardize investigations by prematurely revealing sensitive information or influencing potential witnesses or suspects.

6. Undermining Trust in the Justice System: When the public perceives that justice is being served through media sensationalism rather than through fair legal processes, it can erode public confidence and trust in the judiciary and law enforcement agencies. This is the situation our judiciary has found itself. When a wealthy man who is accused of looting the state treasury is acquitted of corruption-related charges, some members of the public readily accuse the judiciary of complicity. Because some Nigerians do not trust the judiciary, they believe, courtesy of media trial, that the judiciary is a tool of the ruling class to consolidate or legitimize their hold on power and the society.

7. Political Manipulation: In some cases, media trials may be used as a tool by powerful interests to manipulate public opinion, discredit political opponents, or distract from other issues. The ongoing trial of the former CBN Governor, Mr. Godwin Emefiele, is a perfect example. Virtually all the bad economic policies of the President Buhari government have been attributed to the leadership of the apex bank under Emefiele and the Bank Managing Directors. Was this really the case? Was Buhari not in charge? 

There are many instances when suspects who had been subjected to needless media trial were later vindicated by courts of law. Let us see some examples:

(i) The siege and break-in through the roof on the residence, ‘abduction’ and subsequent arrest and arraignment by the EFCC in a clearly orchestrated media trial of former Governor Rochas Okorocha of Imo State. He was later discharged and acquitted. 

(ii) The trial and subsequent discharge and acquittal, only last month, by the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, of the former Director-General of NIMASA, Mr Patrick Akpobolokemi, after over eight years on trumped up charges of conspiracy, stealing and fraudulent conversion involving the sum of ₦8.5billion. The court, coram, Justice Ayokunle Faji, upheld his Counsel’s no-case submission that the Commission had failed to make a prima facie case requiring him to enter his defence in respect of four out of six charges laid against him by the Commission. This was after eight years of gruesome trial and media hype, with Akpobolokemi, being physically dragged on the ground in one instance.

The discharge and acquittal earlier this year of the erstwhile Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice under the Administration of the former President Goodluck Jonathan, Mr Mohammed Bello Adoke and some companies by the Federal High Court, Abuja (Ekwo, J) and the High Court of the FCT (Kutigi J), on charges of money laundering and abuse of office after over four years of hyped media trial which the latter court strongly condemned and for which it excoriated the Commission for the slip-shod manner in which it undertook what, to all intents and purposes, was a persecution rather than precaution. The investigation into the alleged offences was anything but diligent, forcing the Commission’s own Counsel (to his credit) to throw in the towel and admit that he could not, in all honesty, support their continuing trial. I had gotten vacated and set aside the Bench warrant earlier issued against Adoke by Danlami Zama Senchi (now of the Court of Appeal). I was the one who also argued Adoke’s bail applications before Justices Inyang Ekwo and Idris Legbo Kutigi.

Also apposite are the nasty experiences of former Senator Dino Melaye whose cases I also handled; and that of the Supreme Court Justices way back in 2016 (even though the latter was perpetrated by a sister agency, the DSS) .

What about late High Chief Aleogho Raymond Dokpesi? He was later discharged on a no case submission after over eight years of horrid trial in which I secured his bail in 2015! The cases of Col. Sambo Dasuki, El Zakzaky and Elder Godsday Orube are well too known to enlist elucidation here.

The Commission surely had full knowledge of the ex-parte order made by the Kogi State High Court which had restrained the Commission from arresting Yahaya Bello. Yet, it laid a siege on Bello’s Abuja residence. The entire drama (which played out in the full glare of television cameras) was nothing short of disdain for the rule of law and the sanctity of court orders. It is trite law that, until a valid and duly issued court order is set aside either by the same or another court of superior or co-ordinate jurisdiction, it must be obeyed and complied with to the hilt. 

The proper remedy open to the Commission which disagreed with the order was to challenge it and seek its reversal at the appellate court as it later did, and certainly not to flout or disobey it under any disguise. Needless to say that disobedience to court orders is a feature of self-help only in a society where anything goes; where life is poor, solitary, nasty, brutish and short, to quote the English Philosopher, Thomas John Hobbes. We must never allow Nigeria to degenerate to such a nadir state where government institutions disobey court orders with impunity. That is a ready recipe for organized disenchantment.

Indeed, so important is obedience of court order that it is given constitutional imprimatur in Section 287 of the 1999 Constitution. 

In this regard, in FCDA V KORIPAMO-AGARY (2010) LPELR-4148 (CA), Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili, J.C.A (as he then was) held that: 

“The Court frowns at disobedience of its orders; particularly by the executive branch of government and has used rather harsh language such as 'executive lawlessness', in describing such acts of disobedience. On the application of an aggrieved party, the Court has in appropriate cases, not hesitated to exercise its coercive power to set aside such acts done in disobedience of its order and restore the parties to the position they were before such disobedience. The rationale for this course of action by the Court is to ensure the enthronement of the rule of law rather than acquiesce in resorting to self-help by a party. The Court also has the power of sequestration and committal against persons disobeying its orders. It is an overgeneralization and therefore wrong to say that an act done in disobedience of a Court order is an illegality”. 

See also ALL PROGRESSIVE CONGRESS & 2 ORS V HON DANLADI IDRIS KARFI & 2 ORS [2018] 6 NWLR (Pt 1616) 479, 493 SC and EZEKIEL-HART V EZEKIEL-HART [1990] NWLR (pt 126) 276. where the Supreme Court upheld the same principle. 

By the same token, it is also settled that once the court is seised of a matter, it becomes dominus litis (master of the proceedings) and no party is allowed to take any step that will either overreach the court or the other party or present the court with a situation of fait accompli or complete helplessness in which whatever orders it makes might either be rendered nugatory or unenforceable. Such will be an affront on the court. See Ojukwu v. Governor of Lagos State (1986) 3NWLR (Pt 26) 39.

CONCLUSION

The judgment delivered by the High Court of Kogi State on April 17, 2024, finally vindicated Yahaya Bello on this issue as the court pointedly held: 

"Thus, the serial action of the Respondent, dating back to 2021, right up to 2024, targeted against the applicant, has corroded their legitimate statutory duties of investigation and prosecution of financial crimes. These collective infractions on the rights of the applicant border on infringement of his fundamental right from discrimination”. 

Central to the court's rebuke is the condemnation of the anti-graft agency's reliance on media sensationalism, characterized as a form of trial by public opinion. The court firmly asserted the principle that the agency's role is not to act as both prosecutor and Judge simultaneously; but rather to present evidence within the confines of due procedure. This critique underscores the imperative of upholding the rule of law and granting individuals, including Bello, their rightful day in court devoid of extrajudicial influences.

Beyond the specifics of Bello's case, there is need for a paradigm shift whereby agencies such as the EFCC, Police, ICPC, DSS et al, adopt a more public-friendly stance akin to their counterparts in advanced jurisdictions such as the United States, the United Kingdom and many European states. The importance of viewing law enforcement as a Service rather than as a Force, underscores the necessity of cultivating public trust and confidence through transparent, law-abiding practices. I hereby emphasize and advocate (as I have always done), strong institutions; not strong men. 

We must, therefore, strike a balance between reporting matters that are of public interest and respect for the dignity of persons. In India, the Law Commission in its 200th report, “Trial by Media: Free Speech versus Fair Trial under Criminal Procedure (Amendments to the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971)”, has recommended a law to debar the media from reporting anything prejudicial to the rights of the accused in criminal cases, from the time of arrest to investigation and trial.

No individual, regardless of his position or authority, is above the law. There is no exception in the sense that even those who are protected from prosecution by the immunity clause in section 308 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, will after vacating the office be answerable like all other citizens and subject themselves willingly or unwillingly to the law. By holding both governmental and non-governmental actors accountable to the law, a commitment to fostering a culture of accountability and respect for individual rights is built and maintained.

Be that as it may, the laid down procedures must be followed accordingly. Where such laid down procedures are not tenaciously complied with, it will become an agency of government dictating its own rules, procedures and modus operandi. This is only typical of an autocratic, despotic and dictatorial government which we do not operate. It is in the light of this that the Commission and all other agencies established by laws must ensure that they conduct their operations within the ambit of the laws that established them. The concept of rule of law entails that all actions of government must be carried out as spelt out by the law without any form of self-help. In an ideal society where everyone, the leaders, the followers and the law enforcement agencies follow the law, a pattern develops where there can be a reasonable expectation of what will occur in any given situation. And ultimately, this provides security and safety as people do not need to panic out of uncertainty or feel worried about any situation since what will happen is readily predictable. 

In the light of these considerations, there is need for a reevaluation of law enforcement practices and a renewed dedication to upholding the rule of law. There must be a balance of the imperatives of justice with the protection of individual rights, particularly in the face of media scrutiny and public pressure. 

For now, citizen Yahaya Bello wears the toga of victimhood and not of aggression. He should be allowed to have his fair day in court without the present needless ruckus and brouhaha.

Real Madrid manager, Carlo Ancelotti, has confirmed that he will start two different goalkeepers for their next two matches.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Ancelotti revealed that Thibaut Courtois will start this weekend’s LaLiga clash with Cadiz.

Courtois has been out with ACL and meniscus injuries, but is now fit and available for selection.

However, Ancelotti will start Andriy Lunin for next week’s Champions League semi-final second leg against Bayern Munich.

“Courtois will play tomorrow, Lunin will play vs Bayern on Wednesday,” Ancelotti said.

When asked who will play a potential Champions League final, he replied: “I don’t know.”

[DailyPost]

A Magistrate Court in Wuse Zone 2 Abuja has ordered the Federal Capital Territory Internal Revenue Service (FCT-IRS) to seal a company – Ifedi A.K. Nigeria Ltd, over the failure of its management to file the mandatory annual returns.

Magistrate Janada Balami issued the order on Friday, May 3, after the lawyer to FCT-IRS, Michael Towolawi applied orally to have the company sealed to compel it to attend court to answer the complaint filed against it by the FCT-IRS.

In her ruling, Magistrate Balami said the oral application to seal up the property located at No 6, Rudolf Close, Off Katsina-Ala Street, Maitama, Abuja was granted to compel the attendance of the defendant in court on the next adjourned date.

She proceeded to adjourn to May 16.

When the case was called, the company, named as the sole defendant, was not represented.

Towolawi told the court that the company has consistently failed from 2019 to 2023 to file its annual returns in violation of Section 81 of the Personal Income Tax Act, LFN, 2004, and amended in 2011.

He said all efforts to make the company comply with the law proved abortive as all notices served on the company, which were duly acknowledged, were not acted on.

Towolawi said a notice to prosecute was also served on the defendant on March 6, 2024, but without any response.

[TheNation]

 

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission has submitted additional proof of evidence against the former governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Godwin Emefiele.

During the court hearing on Friday, Emefiele’s counsel, Olalekan Ojo requested an adjournment to review the new evidence before continuing the cross-examination of John Ikechukwu Ayoh, the second prosecution witness.

Ojo accused the EFCC counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, of engaging in “trial by ambush” and not being diligent in their prosecution.

He told the court that he just received the additional proof of evidence from the EFCC.

He said the new proof of evidence was filed on Thursday, saying he needed to study the additional proof of evidence to cross-examine the prosecution witness.

He told the court, “My lord, there is a need to adjourn this case. We were just served these huge documents by the EFCC in court.

“The prosecution keeps dumping documents on us at every sitting. This is trial by ambush.”

Sharing the same sentiment, the counsel to the second defendant, Adeyinka Kotoye, also said he was served the additional proof of evidence five minutes after arriving in court.

In his defence, Oyedepo argued that they provided documents from a former aide to Emefiele in preparation for his testimony, saying it did not affect the ongoing cross-examination.

He added that it was unfair to describe the service of processes by the prosecution as “ambush by trial”.

Oyedepo emphasised that the additional evidence submitted were documents obtained from the phone of a former aide to Emefiele, John Adetona, who is set to testify as a witness.

He also clarified that these documents were provided in advance for Adetona’s future testimony and that he was not scheduled to appear in court on the present or upcoming hearing on May 9.

“The witness (Adetona) whose device the documents were printed from has not given evidence before the court,” Oyedepo said.

“In preparation for his testimony which is not coming up today or May 9, the prosecution rather waiting for the defence to formally demand the hard copies the prosecution team printed the documents out.

“How does that amount to prosecutorial unfairness?”

Oyedepo, however, requested that the court instruct the defence counsels to conclude their cross-examination of the second prosecution witness.

He clarified that the introduction of new documents does not hinder or impact the ongoing cross-examination of this witness.

However, Emefiele’s lawyer disagreed, stating that he needed time to review the new documents as they may contain valuable information for use during cross-examination.

In his ruling, the presiding judge, Rahman Oshodi, agreed with the defendant’s counsel.

Oshodi then adjourned the matter to May 9.

Emefiele and his co-defendant, Henry Omoile, are currently being tried in a Lagos high court on a 26-count charge.

Both the former CBN governor and Omoile pleaded not guilty to all the charges against them.

[Punch]

…Advocates setting up of Africa incident response mechanism and cybersecurity framework

The International Police Organization, INTERPOL, has appointed Nigerian Police Commissioner, CP Ifeanyi Henry Uche, as the Chairman of the African Heads of Cybercrime Units comprising heads of 54 countries.

This is just as he has advocated for the establishment of African Incident Response Mechanism and Cybersecurity Frameworks on Police-to-Police basis to eliminate the bottlenecks impeding free flow of resources. 

CP Uche who is the Commissioner of Police in charge Nigeria Police Force National Cyber Crime Centre (NPF -NCCC) is taking over from Ratjindua Tjivikua, head of Cybercrime of Namibia after his tenure expired.

Speaking at the closing of the Africa Working Group Meeting on Cybercrime on Friday, CP Uche said, “The high penetration rate of new technologies in Africa increasingly exposes the sub-regional cyberspace as potential targets for cybercriminals as most African countries still have low levels of commitment to cybersecurity. 

“It is important that we join the operational sub groups created by INTERPOL to bolster our collective efficiency in the fight against cybercrime in the subregion.

He said, “Resource sharing, the level of information and intelligence among African law enforcement is still at its lowest ebb largely blamed on extant domestic laws. 

“I advocate for the establishment of African Incident Response Mechanism and Cybersecurity Frameworks on a Police-to-Police basis to eliminate the bottlenecks impeding free flow of resources. 

“We must leverage the INTERPOL NCB 1/247 communication network and existing capabilities with regard to sharing of classified intelligence.”

Uche said this should be done with “Establishment of Specialized Cybercrime Units, noting it is rather unfortunate that most African countries do not have a specialized Cybercrime Unit dedicated for the investigation of Cybercrime and cyber-enabled crime. I implore member states to under-study the Nigeria police model of the Nigeria police Force National Cybercrime Center (NPF-NCCC).

“Investment in Technology, Infrastructure and Capacity building through a deliberate effort by member states to make the multi-million-dollar commitment in acquiring the much-needed technology and digital solution as a prelude to efficient cybercrime response and prevention. We must begin to look inwards by developing indigenous technologies to address our peculiar socio-cultural challenges.

“Legislative support to push the advocacy and lobby the governments to make and enforce robust cybersecurity laws and regulations that address cybercrime effectively. This includes laws on data protection, online privacy, electronic transactions, and cybercrime prevention.

“With the Fourth Industrial Revolution and emergence of Al and IOT, the undeniable reality is that the global cyberspace is undergoing profound and rapid changes given the penetration of new technologies and growing interconnection of the system. 

“Though this evolution offers opportunities for innovations, diversification, and cost optimization, it also carries with it increased exposure to new and devastating risks of imminent cyber-attacks. These attacks permeate and affect the entire global digital ecosystem equally with no exception to geographic belts hence it affects businesses of all sizes both in public and private sectors in all regions at a breakneck speed.

“Cybercrime poses a significant threat to our societies, economies, and security”,  he said. “it is imperative that we work together to address this growing challenge. As Chairman, I am committed to lead from the front, fostering the much-desired collaboration among our member Units to enhance our collective ability to prevent and investigate cyber crimes effectively in Africa.

“I consider this as a call to champion the enthronement of a new charter of technological renaissance and home-grown cybersecurity ethics in Africa and a paradigm shift from absolute dependence on external solutions to African nurtured technological initiatives, adaptive to our Socio-Political ecosystem.

In her remarks at the event, Minister of State, Police Affairs, Hajia Imaan Suleiman Ibrahim said, “The Government of Nigeria is fully committed to reforming our police force, recognizing that cybersecurity is an integral component of our national security agenda. 

“We understand that a secure cyberspace is essential for our immediate and long-term development objectives. Therefore, we are dedicated to enhancing our cybersecurity capabilities, investing in the necessary resources, and fostering collaboration both domestically and internationally.

“Consistent with the Renewed Hope Agenda of Mr President, we are working assiduously to move beyond mere conversations to working with key stakeholders to strengthen Nigeria’s cybersecurity legal and regulatory frameworks. 

“We are working to enhance the provision of the requisite tools, equipment, and facilities to strengthen the cybersecurity architecture of the Nigeria Police Force, and we remain committed to regional and international cooperation mechanisms.”

[Vanguard]

The court of appeal in  Abuja has ordered the stay of proceedings in the contempt charge instituted by Yahaya Bello, former Kogi governor, against Ola Olukoyede, chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

A Kogi state high court presided over by Isa Jamil Abdullahi, had ordered Olukoyede to appear before it on May 13 to show why he should not be committed to prison for allegedly disobeying its order restraining the EFCC from arresting or taking any action against Bello.

However, the EFCC chairman filed an appeal against the court summon.

Olukoyede filed two motions — one seeking a stay of execution of the summon — and another one asking to serve processes on Bello via substituted means by pasting the process at his  Abuja residence on No 9 Bengazi Steet Wuse Zone 4.

In its ruling on Friday, a three-member panel of justices led by Joseph Oyewole granted the two motions.

The appellate court fixed May 20 for the hearing of the substantive appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/413/2024.

BACKGROUND

On February 8, Bello instituted a fundamental rights enforcement suit, asking the court to declare that “the incessant harassment, threats of arrest and detention, negative press releases, malicious prosecution” by the EFCC — “without any formal invitation — is politically motivated and interference with his right to liberty, freedom of movement, and fair hearing”.

The former governor also sought an order “restraining the respondent by themselves, their agents, servants or privies from continuing to harass, threaten to arrest or detain him”.

On February 9, the Kogi high court granted an interim injunction restraining the EFCC from “continuing to harass, threaten to arrest, detain, prosecute Bello, his former appointees, and his staff or family members, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive originating motion for the enforcement of his fundamental rights”.

On March 12, the EFCC filed an appeal against the interim injunction because the court could not stop the commission from carrying out its statutory responsibility.

The Kogi high court delivered judgment on the substantive motion on notice on April 17 wherein the presiding judge granted an order restraining the EFCC “from continuing to harass, threaten to arrest or detain Bello”.

However, the judge directed the commission to file a charge against Bello before an appropriate court if it had reasons to do so.

The judgment coincided with the recent “siege” laid on the  Abuja residence of  Bello by EFCC operatives seeking to arrest him.

The commission had also obtained a warrant of arrest against the former governor from the federal high court in  Abuja.

At the scheduled arraignment on April 18, Bello was absent.

At the court session, Abdulwahab Mohammed, counsel to Bello, told  Emeka Nwite, the presiding judge, that the court lacked jurisdiction to grant the warrant of arrest in the first instance.

He referenced the February 9 interim injunction issued by the Kogi high court, adding that the appeal filed by the EFCC was still pending.

However, the EFCC has filed a notice to withdraw the appeal.

In the notice filed on April 22, the anti-graft agency said the withdrawal was predicated on the fact that events have overtaken the appeal.

The commission also admitted that the appeal was filed out of the time allowed by law.

CONTEMPT OF COURT

Bello approached the Kogi high court, seeking an order to issue and serve the respondent (EFCC chairman) with “form 49 notice” to show cause why an order of committal should not be made on him.

The judge, after listening to the arguments of the applicant’s counsel, the submission and the exhibits attached in the written address, granted Bello’s prayers and ordered Olukoyede to be summoned to appear before the court to answer the contempt charge.

[]TheCable]

In line with his commitment to significantly leverage gas to grow the economy, President Bola Tinubu will commission three critical gas infrastructure projects being undertaken by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and partners.

The projects support the federal government’s effort to grow value from the nation’s gas assets while eliminating gas flaring.

The delivery of the projects was accelerated from the inception of the administration in keeping with the overall objective of deepening domestic gas supply as a critical enabler for economic prosperity.

THE PROJECTS

The projects lined up for commissioning include:

(1) AHL Gas Processing Plant 2 (GPP - 2) - 200mmscf/d

This project is an expansion to the Kwale Gas Processing Plant (GPP - 1), which currently supplies about 130MMscf/d of gas to the domestic market. The processing plant is designed to process 200MMscf/d of rich gas and deliver lean gas through the OB3 Gas Pipeline. This additional gas supply will support further rapid industrialization of Nigeria. The plant will also produce about 160,000 MTPA of Propane and 100,000 MTPA of Butane, which will reduce the dependency on LPG Imports. The AHL Gas Plant is being developed by AHL Limited, an incorporated Joint Venture owned by NNPC Limited and SEEPCO.

(2) ANOH Gas Processing Plant (AGPC) - 300MMscf/d

The ANOH gas plant is an integrated 300MMscf/d capacity gas processing plant designed to process non-associated gas from the Assa North-Ohaji South field in Imo State. The plant will produce dry gas, condensate, and LPG. The gas from ANOH gas plant will significantly increase domestic gas supply, leading to increased power generation and accelerated industrialization. The ANOH Gas Plant is being developed by ANOH Gas Processing Company, an incorporated Joint Venture owned by NNPC Limited and Seplat Energy Plc on a 50-50 basis.

(3) ANOH-OB3 CTMS Gas Pipeline Project

The project involves the engineering, procurement, and construction of 36”x23.3km ANOH-OB3 Project. The Transmission Gas Pipeline will evacuate dry gas from the Assa North-Ohaji South (ANOH) primary treatment facility (PTF) to OB3 Custody Transfer Metering Station (CTMS) for delivery into the OB3 pipeline system. About 600MMscf/d is estimated to be available from two separate 2 x 300MMscf/d capacity gas processing production trains from AGPC & SPDC JV.

When commissioned, the projects will increase gas supply to the domestic market by approximately 500mmscf/d, creating a better investment climate and promoting balanced economic growth cumulatively.

Chief Ajuri Ngelale

Special Adviser to the President

(Media & Publicity)

May 3, 2024

It was former Presidential Spokesperson, Dr Reuben Abati that wrote an article about demons in Aso Rock Villa, and this has remained a reference. 

Demons are spirits which are not visible and cannot be felt by anyone. They are in our midst at all times either as our friends, brethren, blood relatives or our very close associates. In other words, a demon is a complex being.

Just like the demon, corruption is in our midst all the time. It is a complex being too. 

Perhaps, it was in his realization of the existence and potency of this corruption demon in the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) that its Chairman, Mr Ola Olukoyede, lamented publicly about what he called "the craze for gratification, and quest for bribes by some of the commission’s investigators."

Olukoyede alluded to the fact that EFCC investigators were corrupt and he could not hide it. He said "Public opinions about the conduct of some of our investigators are adverse. The craze and quest for gratification, bribes and other compromises by some of our investigators are becoming too embarrassing and this must not continue."

He went on to sound a note of warning, saying that he will not hesitate to wield the big stick against any form of infraction by any staff of the Commission, adding that "the image of the Commission is too important to be placed on the line by any corrupt officer."

That was in January this year, three months after he assumed office. We are in May now, no big stick has been wielded against anyone in the EFCC. It is still business as usual.

Apart from labeling EFCC investigators as corrupt, Olukoyede also harped on the need for the anti-corruption agency to conform with international best practices in law enforcement, saying, "We are a civilised anti-graft agency. Arrest and bail would henceforth be done in line with the rule of law."

Olukoyede, a former Executive Secretary of EFCC cannot be said to be oblivious of happenings in the Commission. He worked with Ibrahim Magu and saw how Magu was arrested in a Gestapo-like manner at the entrance of the Wuse II, Abuja office of the anti-graft agency. 

After he was removed from office as EFCC secretary, Olukoyede saw how Magu's successor, Abdulrasheed Bawa, was arrested and detained for over 100 days. He also knew how previous EFCC Chairmen before Magu, were humiliated out of office.

Therefore, Olukoyede wanted the EFCC under him to function in accordance with the rule of law. He even ordered in November last year, that sting operations at night be stopped in all the commission’s commands. He gave the directive in reaction to the raid of off-campus hostels of the Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU) Ile Ife by operatives of the agency in which 69 students were arrested.

But it appears that the demon of corruption in the EFCC have made Chairman Olukoyede to forget all that he said few months ago. If he has not, he will not be the one to mount the podium and stand in front of television cameras to defend the April 17 invasion of the Abuja residence of the former Governor of Kogi State, Alhaji Yahaya Bello, despite the pendency of a Court Order restraining the anti-graft agency from arresting him.

If not for those demons of corruption in the EFCC, I am sure that as a lawyer, he will know that once a court gives an order, it must be obeyed until set aside by a higher court. He will also be mindful that after appealing against a decision of the court, anything that will amount to overreaching the court must not be done by all parties.

He will also know that once an accused person is charged to court, he or she 7can no longer be arrested or declared wanted by the prosecuting authority except the court so directed.

Most importantly, someone who was sermonising about the EFCC operating in line with the rule of law will not stand before the press to discuss charges already filed in court against an accused person, thereby acting like he was inciting the public against the accused person and indirectly passing judgement on him.

On Yahaya Bello, it is on record that no formal invitation was made by the EFCC. Rather, the Chairman only called the former governor on phone and offered to bend the rules for him by allowing him into the Chairman's office as a VIP. 

Also, in seeking to protect his reputation and fundamental rights, Yahaya Bello filed Fundamental Rights Enforcement in Kogi State High Court on February 8, 2024 and on February 12, 2024, the Court granted an order restraining the EFCC from inviting, arresting, or prosecuting Yahaya Bello pending the determination of the Originating Motion. 

Despite this order, the EFCC filed Charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/98/2024 against Yahaya Bello on March 6, 2024 and went ahead to obtain a warrant of arrest on April 17, 2024. 

As at today, EFCC is at the appeal court, challenging the April 17, 2024, judgement of Justice I.A Jamil, in suit no HCL/68/M/2020, restraining EFCC from arresting, detaining and prosecuting Yahaya Bello except as authorised by the Court.

Also, application to vacate the warrant of arrest issued against Yahaya Bello, will be determined by the Federal High Court in Abuja on May 10, 2024. 

Methinks if the EFCC will follow the position of its Chairman on the rule of law, no further action will be taking on the matter until the court decides otherwise. 

There will also be no need for the Commission to be at the defensive as it is now, defending why it had to disperse pro-Yahaya Bello protesters while according those who protested in its support a red carpet reception.

This is more so that emotion and sentiment apart, Yahaya Bello cannot be said to be running from investigation and prosecution. He is only using provisions of our laws to protect himself, and no one can blame him for that.

Perhaps, Yahaya Bello is acting like an antelope that was fleeing when he saw the Central Police of the Animal Kingdom pursuing a goat. When the antelope was asked why it was scared since it is not a goat, the antelope said; "With the way our law enforcement agents operate, by the time I am arrested, humiliated and detained for two weeks, I will look like a goat in the eyes of the public when paraded."

It is therefore the EFCC that needs to focus on proving its allegations against Yahaya Bello in court and in doing this, the anti-corruption agency must operate within the ambit of the laws and stop engaging in campaign of intimidation and harassment against Nigerians. After all, an accused is presumed as innocent until convicted by the court.

But will the demon of corruption in the EFCC allow common sense and the rule of law to prevail, at least for once?

Olayinka, a journalist writes from the topmost part of Oke Agbonna in Okemesi Ekiti

Earlier this week, I teased on my social handle about my encounter with a deity. Of course, not in the sense that one might meet a deity in the groove of a village forest.

Yet, those who have met this man – who know him – might agree that Sam Amuka, fondly called Uncle Sam, is a deity of sorts. The trail that forged the seasons of his career goes back many decades to his years at Daily Times which at its prime, was Africa’s leading journalism shrine.

On Sunday I went to see Uncle Sam, to talk about my new book, Writing for Media and Monetising It. I had dispatched a copy to him in advance, but the ritual would be incomplete without a libation.

So, I took along an extra copy and went to his Anthony Lagos residence, where he has lived like a regular Joe for many decades. As I waited for him upstairs on the balcony of his house, I glanced back and forth between the Sunday newspapers strewn on a cane table, and a silver tray with a big flask, teacups, a box of Lipton and assorted teas, a bottle of honey, skimmed milk and over a dozen of packets of Kemps cracker biscuits. 

It wasn’t long before Uncle Sam emerged from the corridor, his imminent presence announced by the barking of a puddle that first accosted me when I climbed the stairs. The puddle was not here when I visited a few years ago.

“Superstar!” Uncle Sam teased, as he came out.

I replied, smiling, that 88 was good on him. He corrected me: “I’m 89!” He then tore a packet of Kemps crackers and sat on the bed-shaped cane chair to my right, waiving the young man who had followed behind to make him some tea. 

The young man took out two Lipton tea bags, and after pouring hot water from the flask went on to add not one or two, but I think three teaspoons of honey. Then, he grabbed the tin of skimmed milk. I looked at Uncle Sam, thinking the young man was mistaken and expecting he would ask him to stop. He didn’t. Instead, he looked approvingly, even expectantly, munching his Kemps.

At 59, in my obsession to live a long, healthy life, only God knows how many things I have given up. I can’t remember the last time I used any sweetener, gluten-free or not, for my tea or pap, much less milk. I was puzzled to see an 89-year-old man having his tea not just with plenty of honey but also topping the brew with spoonsful of milk. 

Uncle Sam smiled as he took the steaming teacup from the young man, stirred it gently, and took a sip. As if to create the perfect ambience for his refreshment, he turned on music stored in a flash drive that was plugged into a player. 

“You don’t know I’m called Daddy DJ?” he joked in response to my puzzled look.

Sam Amuka, I know. Uncle Sam, I know. Who doesn’t? He is the Jimmy Breslin of Nigeria’s journalism. Writing about Breslin, who died seven years ago at 88, Tom Wolfe described him as, “The greatest columnist of my era.” And that, from Wolfe, a master of the craft in his own right, says a lot. 

In a tribute to Breslin, The Guardian wrote that he was the champion of the trials and troubles of the ordinary people in New York. “He filled his columns with gangsters and thieves, whom he knew first-hand from drinking in the same bars. He told stories that smacked of blarney behind their anger.”

And Breslin himself once said, “Rage is the only quality which has kept me, or anybody I have ever studied, writing for newspapers.” That was Sad Sam, the tempered version of which we now know as “Uncle Sam.”

But “Daddy DJ?” I was meeting him in that incarnation for the first time this Sunday morning. Yet, it made no difference. I could see a common thread of empathy and humanity binding the three persons in one man. I was happy and comfortable to share the story of my new book, in-between sips of my own tea – sugarless, milk-less – and yes, also in-between mouthfuls of Kemps cracker biscuits which I had not tasted for a very long time.

I did not start out to write a self-help book. As my career as a journalist crossed the 35-year mark and I inch closer to the sixth floor of life, it became increasingly difficult to ignore suggestions to share my experience in a more permanent form. I’ve been writing for the media since I was 22 and even managed to write a book on Nigeria’s anti-corruption war in 2008. But the urge to share more has increased. 

In yielding, I wondered what I could do differently. In recent times, I have been invited by universities and professional groups to speak on the challenges facing journalists and young writers, especially in light of the extraordinary explosion in the use of artificial intelligence in the workplace, at school and at home. 

Decades after TIME magazine famously predicted that journalism could be on its death throes and it turned out that the death was exaggerated, the technology appears to have sparked the second panic wave. 

So what? I thought perhaps it might be useful to combine my speaking experiences with decades of writing a weekly column now enriched in both audio and visual formats to serve the needs of a younger generation of content providers, especially students and those in the earlier stages of their writing career, trying to find their way. And not just trying to find their way – but also, trying to earn some extra money or attract value, while doing so.

The book title clearly suggests a media bias – media here meaning traditional and social media. That is deliberate as audiences in these areas are my primary focus. Whether you are still in school, just starting out on a writing career path or are, in fact, in the middle levels of your career, you would find this book useful. 

It draws not only on my personal experience – struggles and triumphs – I also interviewed professionals across age brackets who generously shared their experiences with me.

For me, writing this was like walking back through the years of my career, beginning from when there was even no career but just the dream to become a writer someday, to my schools when I was formally introduced to the craft, through many changes along the way, a good number of which I didn’t even see coming. 

You don’t have to wear my shoes or tread my path. But this book is a good guide for common obstacles many literary content providers face in the new world as they try to find their own way.  

I set out to do an online course largely on journalistic writing for value, not to write a book, but ended up with a resource that will benefit a much larger variety of audiences than I had envisaged. 

Uncle Sam listened patiently. When I finished, he asked one question, with a worried look: “How will you get this book out, and get people to read it?”

No easy answer. Research increasingly suggests declining interest in reading, especially among younger populations. I replied that I did what I could to make the book simple, anecdotal and relatable. 

“I’m hoping,” I told Uncle Sam, “that young people would see something of themselves in my stories and the stories of others across a generational spectrum and from it, chart their own course.” 

He didn’t seem fully persuaded, but he was in earnest for me – for us – to find a way. 

How can one claim to be a journalist, for example, without reading Peter Enahoro’s You’ve Gotta Cry to Laugh, Babatunde Jose’s Walking a Tightrope or Alade Odunewu’s Allah De? Or even the more recent Battlelines: Adventures in Journalism and Politics by Olusegun Osoba, to mention a few?

What is in a book is the thing that might just change your life; but you’ll have to read it to find it. On that, deities whether in journalism, carpentry, medicine or the good old craft of fortune-telling, might agree.

Azu Ishiekwene is the Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP.