Atuche’s discharge…..Nation

• Again, natural justice loses to technical justice

The recent discharge, on technical grounds, of Mr. Francis Atuche, former Managing Director of Bank PHB, bodes ill for the justice system and for the nation as a whole.

Mr. Atuche was facing a N25.7 billion, 27-count charge of stealing and conspiracy at the Lagos High Court. Also charged with him was his wife, Elizabeth, and Mr. Ugo Anyanwu, a former Chief Financial Officer of Bank PHB. The presiding judge, Justice Lateef Lawal-Akapo, ruled that the charges brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) lacked merit.

The judge claimed that the court was bound by rulings of the Court of Appeal in similar cases involving Messrs Okey Nwosu and Erastus Akingbola, where charges brought had been struck out owing to lack of jurisdiction. The appellate court had ruled that criminal cases involving the capital market were the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal High Court.

Although the EFCC argued that it had challenged the Court of Appeal’s rulings and applied for an adjournment in Atuche’s case, Justice Lawal-Akapo pointed out that he could not go against a subsisting ruling of the appellate court, and thus dismissed the commission’s application in his ruling.

Once again, serious charges preferred against prominent Nigerian citizens have failed because of legal technicalities rather than substantive issues. The accused were not set free because they were found to be innocent of charges of stealing and conspiracy, but because the presiding judge found that his court lacked the jurisdiction to try the case. Whether or not acts of theft and conspiracy were indeed committed, is the crucial question.

It appears that the strategy of focusing upon technical rather than substantive issues has become a dominant theme in Nigeria’s judicial process. The ostensible ill-health of accused persons entitles them to extended periods abroad treating themselves while the case waits. Crimes that are supposed to be punished with incarceration now have the option of ridiculously low fines. At worst, the convicted thieves are ordered to return what they stole without spending a day in jail. Barefaced corruption and theft become the less-serious offence of contract-splitting, and consequently attract short custodial sentences. A few months of “bed-rest” in exclusive hospitals is substituted for years of imprisonment.

This sustained subversion of the legal process is a reflection of deep-rooted flaws in the country’s legal system. It exposes the suspect competence of prosecutorial agencies like the EFCC, which allow themselves to be repeatedly ambushed by clever lawyers determined to bog them down in a minefield of technicalities that take years to determine, and distract the court from focusing on the substantive issues. The judges themselves cannot be absolved of blame; far too many of them appear to be content to grant endless requests for adjournment and allow disputes over jurisdiction to drag on, instead of forcing counsel to concentrate on the case.

The tragic consequence of these shortcomings is that the courts are failing to live up to their status as the last resort of the common man. In the Atuche case, the damage done to shareholders and customers of Bank PHB was certainly not the consequence of technicalities. Savings were lost, livelihoods destroyed, and individuals ruined. Public funds that could have been put to better use were diverted towards saving the bank from collapse. Given the amount of suffering caused, the resort to legal technicalities to determine guilt or innocence is an obscenity.

The EFCC must ensure that it revives its prosecution of the individuals it has charged. The commission should speed up the resolution of its appeal against the cases of Nwosu and Akingbola; if a favourable ruling is obtained, it must take the Atuche case to the Federal High Court.

A legal system in which fine points of law have become more significant than issues of right and wrong is a disgrace to Nigeria.