Senator Elisha Cliff Abbo, representing Adamawa North, should hide his head in shame. But more importantly, the senator should be charged to court for assault; and the victims he assaulted should also bring an action against him in torts of assault and battery, claiming exemplary damages against him in both cases. Of note, while in criminal law (I will use criminal code act to illustrate here) assault also connotes battery; in the law of tort, assault and battery give rise to two different actions.
Section 252 of the Criminal Code Act defines assault thus: “A person who strikes, touches, or moves, or otherwise applies force of any kind to, the person of another, either directly or indirectly, without his consent, or with his consent, if the consent is obtained by fraud, or who by any bodily act or gesture attempts or threatens to apply force of any kind to the person of another without his consent, in such circumstances that the person making the attempt or threat has actually or apparently a present ability to affect his purpose, is said to assault that person, and the act is called assault.”
Senator Abbo, realising that he was caught red-handed in the video evidence now a universal property, has owned up to committing assault and battery against the ladies. In section 253 of the code: “an assault is unlawful, and constitutes an offence unless it is authorised or justified by law.” On his part, learned author, Gilbert Kodilinye defined assault as: “any act which puts the plaintiff in fear that battery is about to be committed against him.”
With respect to battery, Kodilinye defined it as: “the intentional application of force to another person.” Without doubt, the undistinguished senator committed assault on the two ladies in the video, and also battery on the one he pummelled with his miserable hands. Considering the weighty evidence available in public domain, the senator may prefer to settle out of court. Such a move should be allowed on the principle of restorative justice. To strike such a face saving deal, the ladies should ask for at least a hundred million naira in damages, considering the gravity of the unprovoked assault and battery visited on them.
In Read vs Coker (1853) 138 ER 1437, also reported in Law of Tort by Ese Malami, the defendant had a business disagreement with his partner, who then ordered his workmen to throw out the plaintiff. They surrounded him, rolled up their sleeves and threatened to break his neck, if he doesn’t leave the premises. Considering that there was threat of violence, with intent to commit battery, the court held there was an assault.
On battery, in the case of Ballard vs MPC (1983) 113 NLJ LR 1133, reported also by learned author Ese Malami, the court held there was battery. There the plaintiffs who were feminists were attacked by police during a demonstration. One of them was felled down and carried away, another was felled down and poked with a baton in the stomach and over his eye, while the third was hit on the head with a baton. From the video evidence, Senator Abbo, evidentially assaulted the ladies and battered one of them.
Since the senator has accepted his misdemeanour, what should be negotiated is the quantum of damages payable, whether the matter goes to court or not. In Ya’u vs Dikwa (2001) F.W.L.R. 1833-2039, (Part 62) the Court of Appeal held that: “(general damages) are implied by law in every breach of legal rights, its quantification however being a matter for the court.”
The court in Dikwa’s case further held: “Due to the indeterminate nature of the quantum in general damages, what will be awarded in one case by the trial court may vary from that awarded in another. The award would differ from individual to individual, being dependent on the trial court’s discretion.” It is my considered advice that in negotiating the quantum of damages Senator Abbo should pay to the victims, the report by Senator Shehu Sani in March 2018, about the humongous earnings of senators should have a weighty influence on what should be paid.
According to the distinguished senator, “I think what we can say is that the running cost of a senator is N13.5 million every month.” He went on: “Though no specific instruction on what the fund should be used for, lawmakers must provide receipts to back up their expenses from the running costs.” He also informed the general public that “The running cost is in addition to funds earmarked for each senator for constituency projects.” So there will be more than enough for Senator Abbo to pay his victims handsomely.
Only after such an assault on the senator’s pocket will common sense return to him. If he prefers to have his day in court, I believe the courts would be minded to grant humongous damages, as there is no sign yet that the 9th senate will not collectively assault our common treasury like their predecessors. If the court slams Abbo with a nine figure in damages, there is no doubt he can afford to pay. After all, by the report of Senator Shehu Sani on the 8th senate, a 100 million naira paid out in damages would be recouped in a matter of months.
Of note, Senator Abbo’s sins are no more grievous than those committed against our public treasury by members of the senate and House of Representatives. What the senator did to the ladies is no different from what his colleagues in the national assembly are doing to our public treasury. For no just cause, without any form of provocation, public officials in our country take pleasure assaulting Nigerians by plundering their common treasury.
For me, such assault is as serious as that done on the poor lady in the video. At the root of the reprehensible behaviour of senator Abbo is the culture of impunity. It is impunity that had hindered our country from making progress on all fronts. When public officials turn public treasury to private vaults, it is impunity. For them, like Abbo, the Nigerian laws are ineffective, and so they ride roughshod over it without consequences.
The truth is Abbo almost got away, if not for technology. Even his police orderly condoned the impunity, because his superiors also engage in impunity. The orderly enjoined by law to prevent the commission of crime, choose to engage in criminal act at the behest of the senator, because he sees other persons engage in acts of impunity without consequences. Not long ago, President Buhari ordered a serving Inspector General of Police to proceed to Benue state to perform a public responsibility. In an act of impunity, the then IGP ignored the president, without consequences.
END
Be the first to comment