Comparison of Advocacy Experience & Skills of Candidates For The Office of President Of The NBA

by Legalnaija | Jul 17, 2018 | Uncategorized

NOTE: ALL INFORMATION IN THIS POST IS COPIED
FROM THE PUBLIC PROFILES OF THE CANDIDATES AS MADE AVAILABLE ONLINE. IT IS
INSTRUCTIVE TO NOTE THAT SOME CANDIDATES DID NOT PROVIDE SOME OF THE REQUIRED
INFORMATION IN THE SAID PROFILES.

PAUL
USORO, SAN

Paul
has been involved in virtually all major transactions and regulatory reforms in
the Nigerian communications sector and was involved in the first-ever and
all-round successful Nigerian Digital Mobile Spectrum Auction conducted in
2000. The transaction earned the Federal Government of Nigeria
US$855,000,000.00 for 3 Digital Mobile Licences.

He Has
been the primary adviser to the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) in
most of its reform initiatives till date and Served as the
only African and the sole Legal practitioner in the six-member Auction
Control Team for the Global Systems of Mobile Communications (GSM) Spectrum
Licence Auction that introduced Econet Wireless Networks Limited (now Airtel),
MTN Communications Limited and NITEL GSM to the Nigerian market.

Paul Usoro’s additional core ICT regulatory
and transaction experiences are highlighted hereunder:

i.      Acted as sole
legal consultant to the NCC in respect of the Mobile Number Portability;

ii.    Preparation,
on behalf of NCC, of a National Carrier Licence and an International Gateway
Licences for NITEL, a hitherto unlicensed monopoly;

iii. Acted
as lead legal consultants to NCC for the Second National Operator licensing
processes, including the auction and preparation of the 3 SNO licences; the process
produced Globacom Limited as Nigeria’s Second National Carrier;

iv.  Preparation of
the Interconnectivity Agreement between NITEL and licensed private network
operators;

v.    Represented NITEL
in the negotiation of the Construction and Management Agreement for the laying
of the SAT-3/SAFE/WASC trans-continental fibre-optic cable project which spans
the sub-Saharan African Continent and extends to Far East Asia through Southern
Africa, with European landing points. 
This was the first trans-continental cable project in sub-Saharan
Africa.

Paul Usoro was appointed by the Akwa Ibom
State Government to manage its portfolio investment in Airtel in 2001 and  henegotiated this investment, valued as at
the date of entry at the sum of US$75,000,000.00.  Akwa Ibom State Government cashed out most of
its investments in this enterprise in 2006, in the transaction by which Celtel
BV successfully invested over US$1,000,000,000, by way of share purchase from
existing shareholders and injected fresh capital into Airtel (“Celtel
Transaction”), which transaction was chiefly negotiated by Paul.

Paul led the
Airtel Shareholders Committee in negotiating the Celtel Transaction as the
Committee Chairman, which, at the time, ranked as one of the biggest private
sector equity transactions in Nigeria’s history. Paul represented the interest
of all the shareholders which included three Nigerian State Governments and
blue-chip corporate citizens like First Assets Limited, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of First Bank of Nigeria Limited. It is a testimony to Paul’s
leadership quality that Celtel BV insisted after the Transaction that he
remains on the Board even though Akwa Ibom State Government whom he initially
represented had about sold out completely from the Company. 

In 2010, Celtel
BV sold out its equity entirely to the Bharti-Airtel Group of India resulting
again in the reorganization of the Airtel Board.  Again, Bharti-Airtel, the new 65% owners of
Airtel insisted that Paul remains on the Board of the Company where, as at
date, he chairs the only Committee of the Board i.e. the Audit Committee. A
founding Secretary General, Telecommunications Law Association, Mr Usoro was
named ‘Best Pan African Telecoms Lawyer of All Times’ by the IT and Telecom
Digest, Nigeria’s leading and one of Africa’s foremost ICT magazines.

Matters Reported in The Nigerian
Weekly Law Report

A.
SUPREME COURT:

1.   A.G Rivers
State v A.G Akwa Ibom State (2011) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1248) 31 (SC)

2.   Engr. Frank
Okon v INEC (2015) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1463) 113 (SC)

3.   INEC v Umana
(No. 1) (2016) 12 NWLR (PT 1526) 260 SC

4.   INEC v Umana
(No. 2) (2016) 12 NWLR (Pt 1526)289 SC

5.   PDP v Umana
(No. 1) (2016) 12 NWLR (Pt 1526)299 SC

6.   PDP v Umana
(No. 2) (2016) 12 NWLR (Pt 1526) 307 SC

7.   Udom v Umana
(No. 1) (2016) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1526) 179 SC

8.   Udom v Umana
(No. 2) (2016) 12 NWLR (Pt 1526) 270 SC

9.   A.G Lagos v A.G Federation (2003) 12 NWLR (Pt.833) SC

10.  A.G Ondo v A.G Federation (2002) 9 NWLR (Pt. 772) 222 SC

11.  Societe Bancaire (NIG.) Ltd v De Lluch (2004) 18 NWLR 341 SC

12.  Nitel v Okeke (2017) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1571) 439 SC

B. COURT OF APPEAL:

13.  Archibong v State (2006) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1000) 349 (CA)

14.  A.G. Federation v A.G. Abia State & Ors (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt. 784) 542
(CA)

15.  A.G. Abia State v A.G. Federation (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt. 940) 542 (CA)

16.  Idiok v State (2008) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1104) 225 (CA)

17.  SEC v Osidero
(2009) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1134) 377 (CA)

18.  Habeeb Bank v
Opomulero (2000) 15 NWLR (Pt. 690) 315 (CA)

19.  Technip v AIC
Ltd (2011) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1270) 326 (CA)

20.  Union Bank v
Sadiku Lawal (2008) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1087) 613 (CA)

21.  NITEL v Ugbe
(2002) 3 NWLR (Pt. 753) 1 (CA)

22.  Mobil v Yusuf
(2012) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1304) 47 (CA)

23.  Leasing Company Nigeria Ltd v Tiger Industries Ltd (2007) All FWLR (Pt.
347) 659 (CA).

Matters Reported in Law Pavilion
Electronic Law Report

COURT OF APPEAL

1.    
Star Deepwater Petroleum & 3 Ors v AIC Ltd Limited & 3 Ors
(2010) LPELR – 9165 (CA)

2.    
NITEL v Emos Dynamic Nig. Ltd (2008) LPELR – 4618 (CA)

3.    
Hon. Iquo Nyong of PDP v Elder (Dr.) Ini Akpan of Achan Congress
Party (AC) & 3 Ors (2008) LPELR – 4656 (CA)

4.    
Scanad Nigeria Ltd v Prima Garnet Communication & Anor (2014)
LPELR- 23313 (CA)

5.    
Hon. Minister of Environment & Anor v County & City Bricks
Development Co. Ltd (2011) LPELR – 4256 (CA); (2011) All FWLR (Pt. 644) 66

6.    
Edet Udo v Akpabio (2013) LPELR-22119(CA)

7.    
Nigerian Agricultural Co-op & Rural
Development Bank Ltd. Anor. v Mbio Oku Ikot Oku Odung Multi-Purpose Co-op
Society Ltd. & ORS. (2013) LPELR-20202(CA)

8.    
Gordon Tom Iwok & Ors. v. University
of Uyo & Anor (2010) LPELR-4345(CA)

Ogundipe v NITEL
(2015) LPELR – 24920
(CA).

PROF.
ERNEST OJUKWU, SAN

The Teacher as often called has been into
active legal practice over the years. From 1984-1985, he served his NYSC in the
Legal Aid Yola. He was Counsel, Law Firm of GNA Atulomah and Co, Aba from 1985-
1988. Counsel, Law Firm of GNA Atulomah and Co, Aba. He was partner to Ekenna
Nwajei Nwauche & Ojukwu Aba from 1988- 1992; Partner, Nwonye and Ojukwu,
Aba from 1992-2001 –2014; presently partner, OJUKWU FAOTU & YUSUF
(OFY-Lawyers), Aba, and Abuja and was appointed  in 2014 as a Senior
Advocate of Nigeria. He is a Pioneer, Clinical Legal Education in Nigeria. Over
12 Law Clinics were established in Nigerian Universities under his watch.

As a Member, NBA Committee on the review of
the Legal Practitioners Act & Legal Education Act 2011, Ojukwu produced a
new draft for the Committee and that draft is currently pending before the
National Assembly today. In addition to the Legal Practitioners Act, Ojukwu
also submitted to the Bar draft bills on Legal Education and Legal Services
Commission. These are also presently before the National Assembly. In 2006, the
NBA under President Olisa Agbakoba SAN requested an amendment in place of a
completely new Act and Ernest Ojukwu submitted a new Legal Practitioners
(Amendment) Bill which was submitted to the National Assembly. He Proposed the
introduction of a Mandatory Continuing Legal Education for the Bar at the NBA
Annual General Meeting Ilorin 1998. As a Member of NBA NEC, he proposed a
resolution dated 3^rd November 2003 for NBA NEC to “direct the
General Secretary NBA to publish on or before the 31^st day of
December 2003 the list of co-opted members of NEC and Branch representatives in
accordance with section 9(a)(iv) and (v) of the NBA Constitution.” He also
Organised as Chairman NBA Aba Branch, the 1^st Law Reform Workshop in
Abia State in 1998.

ARTHUR
OBI-OKAFOR, SAN

Under the tutelage of Chief Ikeazor, SAN,
Arthur Obi Okafor, as a young Counsel was exposed to the best of litigation,
practice and procedure in diverse aspects of Nigerian law. He was led by Chief
Ikeazor in some of the most-celebrated cases in our law reports, such as;
Chinemelu V. C O P (1995) 4 NWLR (Part 390) 467 @ 484 and Anatogu v. Iweka II
(1995) 8 NWLR (pt. 415) 547 among others.

Arthur Obi Okafor is a litigation lawyer par
excellence. With a large clientele from different walks of life, he has
concluded many high profile and contentious civil and criminal litigations,
cutting across diverse areas, including election petitions, land matters,
receivership, company proceedings etc. at the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal,
Federal and State High Courts and other superior courts of record. In
furtherance of his strong belief in making justice accessible, he consistently
offers his experience and expertise to indigent members of the society by
handling their matters pro bono. Below are some of the celebrated cases of the
Supreme Court that he participated in:

1.        Onuorah
v. KRPC Ltd. (2005) 6 NWLR (Pt. 921) 393.

2.        Balonwu
v. Governor of Anambra State 2009 18 NWLR 13 (Pt. 1172).

3.        Peter
Obi v. INEC (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1046) 565.

4.        Edward
Nkwegu Okereke v. Nweze David Umahi & Ors. (2016) LPELR-40035(SC).  

5.        Ikechukwu
v. Nwoye (2015) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1446) 367.

6.        Ilobachie
v. Ilobachie (2005) 13 NWLR (Pt. 943) 695.

7.        Odedo
v. I.N.E.C (2008) 17 NWLR (Pt. 1117)554. 

He was recently appointed Chairman of the
Administration of Criminal Justice Reform Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association.
In addition to the above, Arthur Obi Okafor is also an Assessor with the Delta
State Multi-Door Court House for listing Arbitrators, Mediators and
Conciliators.

Photos From The Communications Sector Stakeholders Forum Where Paul Usoro SAN Delivered A Lecture

by Legalnaija | Jul 17, 2018 | Uncategorized

In a stakeholders’ forum held at the Nigerian Air Force Conference Centre, Jabi, Abuja today, July 17, 2018. The leading NBA Presidential Candidate Paul Usoro, SAN was on ground to deliver a thoughtful lecture on the “Legal Framework for Telecommunications Infrastructure Rollout”.

He spoke on the need for Stakeholders to be more proactive by taking the necessary steps to protecting the telecoms infrastructure. He therefore called on the Government to be conscious of the role telecommunication plays in the socio-economic growth and development of the nation.

Paul Usoro further went on to state that there should be a commitment towards ensuring that the telecoms infrastructures are expanded and incentives need to be developed for investors to encourage rapid expansion of telecommunication infrastructure across the nation.

The forum was well attended by notable guests such as Prof. Umar Garba Danbatta  (Executive Vice Chairman, NCC), Prof. Abiola Sanni (Tax Consultant) who presented a paper on the topic “Harmonization of Taxation/Regulation on Telecoms Infrastructure”, Mr. Sunday Dare – Executive Commissioner (Stakeholder Management), NCC and many others.

Withdrawal from excess crude accounts; did the president act beyond his powers? | Eloho Yekovie Esq.

by Legalnaija | Jul 17, 2018 | Uncategorized

Abstract

There
has been a lot of partisan rowdiness amongst Nigerians following the President’s withdrawal of $496 million from the
Excess Crude Account, without prior approval of the National Assembly or
appropriation. The primary issue is whether or not President Buhari had acted
ultra vires and in the process violated the tenets of the Constitution?

Introduction

According to Investopedia, “Excess Crude Account
is a Nigerian government account used to save oil revenues above a base amount
derived from a defined benchmark price”.

The Excess Crude Account was
established in 2004 during the President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration,
and its objective is primarily to protect planned budgets against shortfalls
due to volatile crude oil prices. By delinking government expenditures from oil
revenues, the Excess Crude Account aims to insulate the Nigerian economy from
external shocks. It also seeks to protect public expenditure from being
patterned on the boom and bust cycle of the international oil market.

Recently,
controversies steered up as President Buhari approved the withdrawal of $462
million from the Excess Crude Account (ECA) to the United States for the
procurement of 12 Super Tucano fighter jets(aircrafts) to fight insecurity in
the country without prior approval of the National Assembly.

The
Presidency held that a letter was sent to the National Assembly on 13^th
April 2018, stating that, the U.S. government had given a payment deadline for
the aircraft purchase, hence, the need for the hasty approval and payment and
also that   the money be included in the
2018 Appropriation Bill/budget which is yet to be passed by the National
Assembly. It was also submitted that the decision of the President was also
informed on the ground that there was an earlier resolution passed to that
effect by the state Governors at NEC meeting held on 14^th December
2017 that up to $1billion from the Excess Crude Account may be utilized to
address the security emergencies in the country.

IMPLICATIONS
OF THE PRESIDENT’S ACTIONS

There has been lot of debates on this
debacle as to the legality of the Withdrawal of $496 million by the President
without approval from the National Assembly. From the foregoing, the fact that
the President had given an anticipatory approval for the withdrawal of the cash
and paid before a public announcement of the approval shows demonstrable
evidence of crass Executive Lawlessness which has hindered the progress of our
democracy over the years. This act by the President is an utter disregard for
the constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria thus an impeachable offence as
held by Senator Chukwuka Utazi who prayed the senate for Section 143 of the Constitution
to be invoked so as to initiate the impeachment process of the President.

Under Sections 80 (2), (3) and (4) of
the 1999 Constitution, which states that:

“(2) No moneys
shall be withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation except
to meet expenditure that is charged upon the fund by the Constitution or where
the issue of those moneys has been authorized by an Appropriation Act,
Supplementary Appropriation Act or an Act passed in pursuance of Section 81 of
this Constitution.

“(3) No amounts of money shall be
withdrawn from any public fund of the Federation, other than the Consolidated
Revenue Fund of the Federation unless the issue of those amounts of money has
been authorized by an Act of the National Assembly.

“(4) No amounts of money shall be
withdrawn from the Consolidated Revenue Fund or any other public fund of the
Federation, except in the manner prescribed by the National Assembly,

The
inherent role of the National Assembly is clarified i.e., the government is not
allowed by the Constitution to spend any money that has not been duly
appropriated for or without due authorization. In the letter written to the
National Assembly, two pertinent questions should be considered; the first is
that if the money expended is included in the 2018 Appropriation Budget, does
it not legalize the unconstitutional act of Mr. President retrospectively? On
the other hand, in the said letter informing the National Assembly of its
expenditure, there was no mention of any legal authorization from the National
Assembly as required by law; instead the President stated that he granted “anticipatory
approval”, is he legally empowered to make any such approval?

This entire
scenario makes a joke of the government and projects the importance of
separation of powers which is a device that guards against abuse of power or
political liberty from any arm of government. Inherent in this doctrine of
separation of power is the principle of checks and balances. The separation of
these powers serves to check each organ and balance their operations without
encroachment of one by the other as affirmed by the Supreme court in UNONGO V APER AKU(1983 2 SC NLR 332 at
361).

By
this action, the President has technically suspended the Constitution,
plundered the inherent powers of the National Assembly which is a master of its
own household as submitted by Kayode
Eso, JSC (as he then was) in AG BENDEL STATE V A.G FEDERATION (1981) 10 SC 1 AT
198 albeit, the exception to this sovereignty is where the powers of the
legislature have been specifically restricted by the constitution.

Furthermore,
in law, one of the twelve maxims of Equity says that, “where there is a wrong,
there is a remedy”, and in this case it applies as the Judiciary is well
furnished to remedy the wrong occasioned by Mr. President. Interestingly, the
Judiciary having been empowered by Section
6 of the constitution is at the apex of this checks and balances; it has
the principal duty of inquiring into the legalities of acts of the executive
and the legislature. Any question as to whether the executive has acted intra or ultra vires or has complied with the procedures, manner or form
prescribed by law is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. This
supervisory role of the judiciary over the executive was affirmed by the
Supreme Court in GARBA V UNIVERSITY OF
MAIDUGURI (1981) 3 NCLR 47. Thus, the judiciary should rise to the occasion
as usual and invoke its constitutional powers to ensure that the monies
expended are duly refunded to the Excess Crude Accounts by the Presidency.

Concluding
Remarks

To this
end, the powers conferred upon the executive under the constitution are too
wide and enormous that it has puff the members of the executive. This had led
to deleterious maneuvers which have crippled democracy in Nigeria. There is the
need for a review of the immunity guaranteed to Chief executives so as to limit
the immunity to civil actions and lift the veil of immunity as well to criminal
actions.

In future,
instead of going down the path of illegality, the President should lobby and
cajole lawmakers on a matter this important and urgent. In as much as the
government wants to tackle security challenges, it shouldn’t violate the
Letters and Spirit of the Constitution, so there will be no room for bad
precedence.

Eloho Yekovie Esq. is an Associate of Triax
Solicitors, an indigenous Law Firm with offices in Abuja and Bayelsa state. We
are a niche expertise Law firm which comprised of young, hardworking legal
practitioners who are making waves in their core areas of competence as well as
in continuous legal education and development.

Please
visit our website www.triaxsolicitors.com or info@triaxsolicitors.com

DAY 4 PUTTING YOU FIRST PAUL USORO, SAN’S REFORM MANIFESTO FOR PRESIDENCY OF THE NBA

by Legalnaija | Jul 17, 2018 | Uncategorized

PUTTING YOU FIRST PAUL USORO, SAN’S REFORM MANIFESTO FOR PRESIDENCY OF THE NBA

by Legalnaija | Jul 16, 2018 | Uncategorized

INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (continued)

V. NBA National Electoral System and Succession Plan.  No institution succeeds on a long-term basis without proper succession planning that ensures, amongst others, continuity of programmes and activities.  The NBA has no such succession plan.  Our current model changes the entire leadership every two years without any form of succession planning and it is no wonder that programmes, no matter how laudable, remain at the mercy of succeeding administrations and are indeed prone to being jettisoned by such new administrations. Indeed, even our national electoral system requires review and quite some tweaking.  Currently, our national elections bring out different lawyers with their respective and disparate manifestoes and agenda for the  various offices.  Usually, there is no alignment of plans between the various contestants for the different offices. Thus, it is not uncommon for the Presidential candidate’s agenda for financial management to be fundamentally different, illustratively, from the respective agenda of the General Secretary, Financial Secretary and Treasurer for the same financial management. Upon election, these disparate persons, with their differing and uncoordinated agenda and plans are expected to miraculously coalesce and work together as a team. Such forced coalition does not always work, and I believe that we need to review the electoral system in a manner that would not only ensure some level of succession planning that guarantees continuity of programs but also be far more harmonious and coordinated than our present riotous experience.  Very early in my tenure, I would encourage a roundtable dialogue of all stakeholders in that regard aimed at reforming the national electoral processes. I would also establish Standing Committees for the review of our Constitution and for the conduct of our National Election that would build on all our previous experiences and have sufficient time to deliberate upon and implement required reforms in our electoral system as well as our Constitution.    

Paul Usoro SAN FCIArb Reflections – NBA Electoral Reforms

by Legalnaija | Jul 16, 2018 | Uncategorized

“Non-Inclusive Bar”

If I had any doubts as to the need and urgency for NBA electoral reforms, those doubts have been completely erased by my recent experiences in the run-up to the 2018 NBA Elections.  As is commonly known, I am contesting with two others for the office of the NBA President and as part of my consultations in the different Branches of the Association for votes, I was in Port Harcourt recently where my supporters had planned an interactive cocktail party for me at the NBA House. 
For those who may not know, lawyers’ events are routinely held at the Port Harcourt NBA House upon payment of the prescribed rental amount and my supporters had duly paid for the evening some days ahead of the event and sent out notices and invitations therefor.  Barely an hour to the event, the following unsigned disclaimer was circulated electronically to all members of the Branch and beyond:
“Disclaimer: Pls note that the branch is not in approval of the cocktail invite from Paul Usoro, SAN at the NBA House.  Pls discountenance same.  However, you may attend at your own frolic for conviviality sake.  PH branch supports the adopted candidate of the EBF.  Thanks.”
I understand that, prior to the circulation of this malicious “disclaimer”, there were unsuccessful direct and subterranean attempts to get the Branch Executive to resile on the rental contract in order to scuttle the event. It was after the failure of these attempts that the perfidious “disclaimer” was issued, not by the Branch Executive, but by some faceless cabal. Happily, the Executives and members of the Branch and beyond rightfully ignored this malodorous “disclaimer” and attended the cocktail party in their numbers and turned it more into a celebration of our presidential vision. 
The question that plagues my mind is, what level of desperation would drive lawyers to such electoral rascality, bare-faced misinformation, intimidation, bullying and hooliganism?  What level of desperation would make lawyers discard and forget all about the hallowed constitutional rights and freedom of expression and association of their colleagues?  What is in the NBA Presidential Elections in particular that makes some of us to behave the same as if not worse than the intolerant and totalitarian Nigerian political class that we routinely and roundly condemn and deprecate? What really is the difference between the faceless cabal in Port Harcourt that engineered the disclaimer and the political authorities in some States and even in the center who contrive ways of denying opposition political parties the use of stadia and other facilities for political rallies and conventions? 
Incidentally, that Port Harcourt incident is not isolated.  I had some weeks earlier attended the Port Harcourt NBA’s monthly Branch meeting and was graciously given the platform to felicitate with my colleagues and say a word or two about my Presidential plans.  Just before I launched into my address, my good friend and colleague, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, raised a point of order to the effect that the Eastern Bar Forum had adopted a candidate (I am, like thousands of lawyers from the eastern region, not a member of the EBF) and therefore I should not be allowed the platform to address my colleagues.  Should you be wondering, like I did, at what forum I was, let me assure you that this wasn’t a monthly meeting of the Eastern Bar Forum (“EBF”) but a meeting of the NBA at the Branch level holding at the NBA House!  Happily, wise counsel prevailed after a very respected past President of the Bar rose up in my defense to the applause and approval of everyone other than my friend, the mover of the point of order.
It is not quite clear to me why the EBF and the supporters of its adopted NBA Presidential candidate are resorting to this low level of bullying and intimidation in an NBA Election.  These, I must again point out, are not isolated incidents. In another State in the NBA Eastern Zone, a Branch Chairman who is an apostle of the EBF adoption connived with court officials to deny my supporters and I access to a courtroom where we were scheduled to have an interactive session.  But for the timely intervention of a senior lawyer in government, we were almost forced to scout for an alternative meeting venue.  I ask again, what is in these elections that drives leaders of the Bar to such desperation of wanting to forcefully muzzle contrary NBA political groups, opinion, thoughts and ideas? What is the driving force that makes us want to deny other lawyers the right of holding contrary political opinion and positions forgetting that our profession is itself anchored on plurality of thoughts and opinion and the freedom to express them in our adversarial submissions?
Just before concluding, I would relate one final incident of this now pervasive political intimidation, blackmail, bullying and intolerance in our NBA polity. Recently, I had dinner with my supporters in Abuja.  It was a very well attended event and it afforded me the opportunity to interact with my colleagues.  There were several speakers at the event and one of them was a visually impaired colleague who had been my friend for a bit of time; he’s from the NBA’s Eastern Zone and believes wholly in our vision.  My friend spoke passionately and very stirringly about our NBA project and urged everyone to queue behind and vote for me.  The following day I received this text message from my friend:
“I thought that NBA politics is a fair game and not otherwise! To my dismay, I have received whole lots of taunts ever since the PUC dinner, merely because I support NBA’s only best interest.  God help us.”
He’s not the only one who’s been bullied in this manner; so many others of my supporters, particularly from a section of the NBA’s Eastern Zone, send me similar reports of threats, intimidation and bullying tactics that are deployed against them solely because they speak up in my support.  What kind of lawyers would taunt a colleague simply because he chooses an NBA political direction that is different from theirs?  What has the NBA politics turned us into?  How much longer before we start spilling blood in the name of NBA Presidential politics – because that’s where we’re headed!  Really, what makes our colleagues so mindlessly desperate that we’ve forgotten all about democratic principles, anchored on freedom of choice, not to mention our respective rights to hold different political opinions and beliefs and belong to such political associations as we please?
I truly believe that we must urgently address these issues and reform our NBA electoral processes if we must avert the imminent catastrophe of bloodshed and violence which stares us in the face.  The current road that we travel leads to perfidy and we cannot continue on it.  We must retrieve and restore our Bar values as learned friends and colleagues and maintain a professional friendship and brotherhood that abhors NBA political violence, rascality, bullying, thuggery, intimidation, blackmail and smear campaigns.  We must return to the Bar values of political decorum, decency, empathy, tolerance and accommodation of diverse views and positions.  Only by so doing can we restore our dignity as lawyers and set examples and standards for national politics and politicians.  We can start that process by voting wisely come 27/28 July 2018.

Tribute in honour of late chief Gani Adetola Kazeem SAN (1948-2018)

by Legalnaija | Jul 13, 2018 | Uncategorized

Yesterday 12th July, 2018 witnessed a landmark event, where high standing members of the Labour Union and officials at the Judiciary arm of the Nigerian Government spoke as one in paying tribute to a fallen hero, Chief Gani Adetola-Kaseem SAN.

Under the distinguished chairmanship of Hon. Justice B.A Adejumo, OFR, President, National Industrial Court of Nigeria, the 5-hour symposium titled ‘The development of labour jurispudence: the role of chief gani adetola kaseem san’, began smoothly with Prof. Hakeem A. Olaniyan as lead speaker for the event. Other discussants included Comrade (Dr) Ayuba Wabba, President, Nigeria Labour Congress, Seyi sowemimo SAN, Secretary, Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria, representatives from the NBA, representatives from other sections of the Nigerian Labour congress and Ahmad Adetola-Kaseem Esq., son of the deceased.

Late Chief Gani was a devout and conscientious Muslim during his life time. He performed the holy pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina in 2002. He was a legal adviser to a number of Muslim communities and associations like the Somolu muslim community, Gbagada Muslim community both in Lagos and istijabah prayer group of Nigeria. He conducted a number of cases in courts for either persecution or defense of Muslim institutions and interests.

He was the lead counsel in the famous Abdulkareem v. Lagos State (2016) 15 NWLR (pt. 1535) 177 case, popularly known as the Lagos Hijab case. He represented the Muslim students’ society of Nigeria at the High Court, Court of Appeal and had already filled a brief of argument at the Supreme Court, before his death, with relation to the hijab case. He was a patron of the Muslim lawyers’ association of Nigeria, Lagos State branch and received a number of merit awards notably from Somolu Muslim community’ which also conferred on him the title of Turaki Adeen of Somolu and the league of Imams and Alfas of Ijebu Land in recognition of his selfless service to Islam.

The lead speaker began by reviewing some notable cases the deceased had fought during the course of his life, some of which INCLUDED UDOH V. ORTHOPAEDIC MANAGEMENT BOARD (1993) NWLR (PT. 304) 139 SC; ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT BOARD V. GARBA & ORS 14 NWLR (PT.788) 538 SC; MEDICAL AND DENTAL PRACTIONERS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL V. OKONKWO (2001) 7 NWLR (PT. 711) 206 SC; DR JEREMIAH ABALAKA V. FEDERAL MINISTER OF HEALTH & 2 ORS (2006) 2 NWLR (PT.963) 105 CA.

According to the lead speaker “baba, during his life organized a significant number of seminars and workshop especially for medical practitioners whom he became familiar with by virtue of his being the counsel to the ‘medical and dental practitioners’ disciplinary tribunal’ for a long time. He got some of us interested in aspects of law and medicine as he prepared us to become resource persons in these workshops. Baba got resounding ovations for his seminars and workshop for medical and dental practitioners’, which owing to popular demand, were staged across the nation. Baba was also a highly respected figure amongst labour law practitioners, an area significantly traversed by him in his practice.  Baba ‘s relationship with labour and significant intellectual contribution to the evolution of National Industrial Court as the superior court original jurisdiction in labour and related matters is partly the reason why this event is holding. We are grateful to the organizers for repaying good with good.”

Other notable figure that were present included Professor Chioma Agomo, Former dean of Law, UNILAG; Nyma Akashat-Zibiri, Lawyer and TV personality; Biobelemonye Josiah, President, Joint Health Sector Unions(JOHESU), and a host of other VIPs.

Day 2: Paul Usoro SAN’s Reform Manifesto For Presidency Of The NBA

by Legalnaija | Jul 13, 2018 | Uncategorized

INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
I believe that the NBA, at the national level, is in need of urgent and far-reaching reforms if it must retain its relevance not only in the larger society but even to its members.  These reforms will, at the minimum, achieve four significant and immediate goals, to wit, (a) enhance efficiency in the operations of the Association; (b) engender confidence and trust amongst its members (or, as some would say, win back the confidence and trust of members who are disengaged); (c) transform the NBA into a sustainable institution; and (d) increase the moral equity of the NBA to enable it effectively influence required reforms in the justice subsector and remain a respected watchdog of the society.
As my set-out point, it is my position that no institution or organization can be deemed or classified as successful if it fails to adhere to corporate governance principles, the cornerstones of which are transparency and emplacement of established and well-defined processes and procedures coupled with strict adherence thereto. The NBA, as currently constituted and operated, lacks these basic ingredients and characteristics of an institution – and this has been confirmed by the recent KPMG Diagnostic Report on the NBA. In driving the goal of building an institution out of the NBA, we need to entrench these governance principles and thereby not only guaranty efficiency in the administration of the Association but also boost the confidence of our Members and external stakeholders.  Entrenching these principles will also clothe us with the moral toga to challenge and speak truth to power, particularly in instances of financial and/or administrative malfeasance, misappropriations and misconducts.
The specific programme strands that shall enable me deliver on this agenda, if elected as President of the NBA, shall include the following:

10 Credibility Questions For The Police Complaints Commission

by Legalnaija | Jul 13, 2018 | Uncategorized

Yomi Shogunle is an Assistant Commissioner Of Police in charge of the Police Complaint Commission. Despite the cries of many Nigerians on the escalating rate of extortion and unlawful actions by his officers, rather than look objectively at the allegations of unlawful behaviour, he has consistently claimed the allegations are false and fabricated.

RUFUS N.GODWINS, HEAD OF RIVERS STATE CIVIL SERVICE DECLARES SUPPORT FOR PAUL USORO

by Legalnaija | Jul 12, 2018 | Uncategorized