John Austin defines law as ‘a rule laid down for the guidance of an intelligent being by an intelligent being having power over him’. In other words, the law by the privileged few is the law of society. It is an instrument for the protection of their disproportionate share of the national resources. Although the constitution says we are equal before the law, but as George Orwell reminded us a long time ago, ‘we are equal but some are more equal than others’. This is why human laws have been said to be the expression of political relation of the individual within society. Plato says ‘they are like spider’s web which catches the small flies but the great break through’. In Nigeria as elsewhere for the underprivileged and disconnected, ‘equality before the law’ is a myth. If those assigned the ignoble role of perpetuating injustice whimsically call theirs a noble profession, I don’t think we need to begrudge them for dressing themselves in borrowed robes. We know who lawyers are and they know themselves.
But as our noble Itse Sagay pointed out last week, what makes the difference in all societies are the few noble men among those destined by virtue of their profession to perform ignoble role. Unfortunately, the current Supreme Court judges by virtue of their recent bizarre judgment in Rivers and Akwa Ibom, in which they pretended not to understand the difference between authenticating voters through accreditation with card reader machine and actual voting, do not in his view belong to this few gem of society.
For him, the ‘perverse verdict’ reached by the Supreme Court judges through an application of technicality that is in conflict with justice, in Rivers and Akwa Ibom are ‘a major setback to democracy and the rule of law’, especially when according to him, ‘everybody knows that there were no elections in those two states and “that people like Wike climbed into the governorship seat over dead bodies and over blood of human beings’. He seems to be saying such verdicts have parallels only Plato’s ‘forest of monkeys rather than habitable place for men’. Sagay, a very decent man is concerned about the pursuit of justice.
But Wike and his group did not approach the Supreme Court to seek justice. They were out to protect their resources. In the pursuit of their objective they have also demonstrated they are not afraid of blood. In fact they had threatened more blood in case the Supreme Court upheld the Appeal court’s verdict of a re-run. Wike spilled the beans with his reaction to Sagay’s attack. ‘The people of Rivers State’, he said will ‘never give up their sovereignty’ and ‘will prevent APC desperate attempts to politically dominate our people and plunder the resources of [our] land’. He made it clear ‘Niger Delta states would prevent outsiders from having a foothold on their land in future’. Having earlier narrated how he secured his victory, he declared with an offensive finality that Sagay cannot ‘re-litigate a settled matter’, because his victory was settled. The not particularly distinguished Supreme Court judges gave Wike and his group what they wanted.
Sagay also spoke so passionately about the Nigerian judiciary as if we do not know it has been largely dominated since independence by those driven by greed to pursue justice by juxtaposing lies with truth as if both are complimentary and judges whose verdict sometimes give an impression they are anarchists. In an attempt to destroy the Action Group (AG) in 1961, the judiciary supported the illegal probe of the National Bank which was a ‘regional issue over which the federal government had no power’. Following the intra-party AG feud in 1962, it shamelessly ruled in favour of S. L. Akintola, the embattled premier of the west, a verdict later upturned by the Privy Council in London, the then highest judicial body. In 1962, it colluded with NCNC/NPC coalition to illegally declare state of emergency on the West.
The Nigerian judiciary also in 1962 demonstrated its bankruptcy through its ignoble role in the Balewa-contrived Coker Commission of Inquiry into Statutory Corporations in the Western Region and the prosecution and conviction of Awo for treasonable felony.
Those allegedly driven by their greed or ambition to serve as government lawyers were Chief Michael Okorodudu who had just decamped from AG following the loss of his contract as Western Region commissioner in London, Kehinde Sofola, NCNC member and opponent of Awo in his Ikenne town and Sobowale Sowemimo, who till them worked as a junior under Fani-Kayode who upon becoming leader of opposition after decamping from AG started calling for the declaration of state of emergency in the west.
In 1963, the judiciary betrayed the NCNC and the Igbo by claiming the census crisis was ‘a political issue’. Realising that there was no way they could achieve power constitutionally with the census returns, the East lost faith in the country and started thinking of secession.
In 1966, the self- serving judiciary advised Ironsi to take over power instead of swearing in the most senior surviving minister following the disappearance of the Prime Minister Balewa. In May 1967, the leading members of the judiciary drafted the Unification Decree 34 with all its known consequences for a heterogeneous and multi-ethnic society.
In 1993, the judiciary was used by Babangida to justify the annulment of the 1993 election. For a prize, it provided an escape route for a totally discredited Babangida regime by crafting an Interim Government decree which paved the way for the installation of Ernest Shonekan to spite MKO Abiola another Egba man who had won a national election. In 1994 when Justice Dolapo Akinsanya threw out Babangida’s interim contraption along with Shonekan, the judiciary rallied round Abacha who ruled with iron fist for five years.
If PDP has ravaged the nation these past 16 years, it was not without the support of the judiciary. It supported vote rigging. (Mike Igini, a former Edo Resident Electoral Commissioner told Channel Television last week how some SANs claimed improvement in our electoral system will deprive them of easy source of money). Its senior members supported those who wrecked the banking sector. They feature prominently in the privatisation programme and the fuel subsidy scam. They shielded many lawbreakers who have since moved from desecrated Governors’ lodges to the hallowed chambers of the National Assembly as lawmakers.
All our woes stem from the greed and ignoble actions of men of the noble profession. In office, ex-President Jonathan claimed he was not to be held responsible for the slow pace at which the wheel of justice grinds in our country. Last week, President Buhari identified the judiciary as the only threat to his war against corruption ‘because of long adjournments currently being imposed on all cases of corruption’. The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has called for the reform of the judiciary and in fact canvassed for the establishment of special courts to try corruption cases.
Unfortunately, unlike the other arms of government, the executive and the legislature, that periodically test their legitimacy through elections, the judiciary is answerable to none. In fact we have been warned of a possible descent into chaos and anarchy if those performing ignoble acts are sanctioned. Last week, scores of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SANs) followed their colleague detained for an ignoble act to court to sue EFCC. Chief Kehinde Sofola a second Republic Attorney General and one time vice president of the Body of Benchers during the June 1993 crisis issued a statement saying Nwosu’s NEC ought to have obeyed Justice Bassey Ikpeme’s unpatriotic ruling. He has elsewhere expressed the view that the executive cannot probe the judiciary because ‘the executive, the legislature and the judiciary are equal’. Yet he is on record as having declared that ‘the primary duty of the judiciary is to protect the judiciary’. It will appear our nation is at the mercy of those who perpetrate ignoble acts under the cover of a ’noble’ profession.
NATION
END
Be the first to comment