Headlines
Anti-graft War: NBA Warns Buhari Against Selective Approach
The Nigerian Bar Association said on Monday that the number of convictions secured or volume of assets recovered was not the right index for measuring the success of an anti-corruption war.
It rather urged the Muhammadu Buhari administration to adopt proactive strategies in fighting corruption, and do away with discriminatory or selective approach to prosecute his administration’s mantra of anti-corruption.
The association in a statement by its President, Mr Paul Usoro (SAN), commemorating this year’s International Anti-Corruption Day, also urged the government not to allow the anti-corruption war to be tainted by corruption.
It urged the citizens to stand up against corruption and blow the whistle when necessary while it also urged the government to embrace automation, the rule of law and transparency in order to rid the country of the scourge of corruption.
It said measuring the success of the anti-graft war using the number of convictions or volume of assets recovered from looters as an index would corrupt the criminal justice system.
According to him, this would only induce corruption and abuse of prosecutorial rights.
He said, “By using these as our primary index for determining our success in fighting corruption, we set targets that induce corruption and abuse of prosecutorial rights.
“We thereby make a statement that the end justifies the means and, in the process, encourage and advocate convictions and purported recovery of assets no matter how crooked, corrupt and undermining of justice the processes may be for attaining those goals.
“The end result is that we pay more attention to and celebrate these corrosive and corruptive processes while giving scant attention and regard to proactive measures that could actually stem and block the avenues for corruption.”
He urged the Buhari administration to abolish media trial for suspects while its anti-corruption war must not be perceived as discriminatory or selective.
Usoro said, “It is gratifying that President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, has consistently made it the credo of his government to fight corruption, right from his first term in office. That is commendable.
“The fight must however not be selective or discriminatory in nature; it must not even be perceived to be selective or discriminatory.
“The trial of persons for corrupt practices must itself not be tainted with corruption. Media trial of persons charged with corrupt practices, for example, amounts to corruption itself.”
He added, “Abuse of prosecutorial powers is perhaps one of the worst forms of corruption and so are the intimidation, blackmail, harassment and coercion of judicial officers in order to secure pre-determined judgments that quite often subvert justice and indeed amount to injustice. Indeed, the subversion of justice by any means whatsoever amounts to extreme corruption.”
He urged the government to put in place a mechanism that would engender transparency as a way of effectively fighting graft.
He said, “In other words, financial and economic corruption thrives where there is lack of transparency, impunity in public service, political non-accountability and pervasiveness of administrative malfeasance.
“Proactive measures that promote transparency and eliminate administrative malfeasance generally curbs corruption and abuses.
“Automation also helps greatly in stemming these tendencies and the attendant corruption and the more we can automate our processes in all the branches of government – executive, judiciary and legislature – the greater our success would be in tackling corruption through the elimination of some of those human elements and abuses that encourage and foster corruption.
“The NBA advises government at all levels and in all branches to embrace such proactive measures in the fight against corruption.
“Impunity and abuse in public service must be abhorred and so must political non-accountability and a lack of transparency in public administration and the management of our affairs.”
The Punch
The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Tuesday, gave the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra, Nnamdi Kanu, until November 5 to defend the terrorism charges filed against him or risk waiving his right to do so.
The trial judge, Justice James Omotoso, advised Kanu to consult legal practitioners experienced in criminal law to assist with his defence or to formally appoint a lawyer to represent him in court.
Justice Omotosho’s decision followed Kanu’s continued refusal to open his defence, insisting that there was no valid charge pending against him.
Kanu, who represented himself during Tuesday’s proceedings, told the court that he would not return to detention unless the charges against him were properly presented.
He argued that his continued detention by the Department of State Services was unlawful, maintaining that he had not breached any known law.
He also accused the court of disregarding the Supreme Court’s judgment which, according to him, condemned his extraordinary rendition from Kenya.
He demanded that the trial judge immediately discharge him from custody.
When reminded that the Supreme Court had ordered a fresh trial, Kanu maintained his position that the terrorism charge was invalid and incompetent.
Citing Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, he argued that there was no existing law creating a terrorism offence in Nigeria.
“In Nigeria today, the Constitution is the supreme law. There is no valid charge against me. I will not go back to detention today. The Terrorism Prevention and Prohibition Act has been repealed. I cannot defend myself under a repealed law,” Kanu said.
He further challenged any lawyer to show him a valid charge, urging the court to “take judicial notice” of what he claimed was the repeal of the terrorism law.
“I cannot be tried under a law that has been repealed. Prosecuting me under such a law is a violation of my fundamental rights,” he insisted.
After several attempts to persuade him to enter his defence, Justice Omotosho adjourned proceedings until November 5, 2025, giving Kanu the final opportunity to either defend the charge or forfeit his right to do so.
During the session, counsel for the Federal Government, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN), informed the court that some documents served on him by Kanu were unsigned and not endorsed by the court, arguing that they held no evidential value.
There was drama in the Senate on Tuesday following the recent threat by Donald Trump, the President of the United States to take military action against Nigeria over alleged persecution of Christians.
It started when Godswill Akpabio, the Senate President, was addressing reports by an online platform alleging that he had publicly rebuffed Trump over his recent comments and had said Nigerians were “not complaining” about their condition.
The visibly displeased Senate President denied ever making such statements, describing them as “false and malicious.”
He condemned the publication, saying it was an attempt to create diplomatic tension and discredit the National Assembly.
“The fake report claimed I said Nigerians are not complaining that we like the way we are living. That is completely false. I have petitioned the police and the DSS,” he said.
Akpabio said, “Somebody will sit in the comfort of his room and fabricate a report, attaching fake pictures from 2023 when I visited Port Harcourt with senators for a completely different event, and then claim that the Senate President replied President Trump.
“Who am I to answer Trump?” Akpabio asked jokingly.
The issue, however, sparked heated reactions on the floor of the Senate as Akpabio, and his deputy, Barau Jibrin, openly differed on how the Nigerian legislature should respond.
While Akpabio dismissed reports that he had already reacted to Trump’s comments, declaring, “Who am I to answer Trump?”, Barau quickly interjected, insisting that he was not afraid of the American leader.
“I’m not scared of Trump. I will say my mind. I’m a Nigerian. Nigeria is a sovereign nation,” Barau said passionately.
The Deputy Senate President added, “I’m a parliamentarian, the Deputy Senate President, I can speak. Don’t be scared of Trump. You can say your mind about Trump. We are a sovereign nation.”
The exchange, which briefly lightened the mood in the chamber, underscored a divide in tone between both presiding officers on how Nigeria’s parliament should handle the diplomatic row.
“It is the Presidency that will respond to President Trump, not the Senate President. But who is that person that would ascribe a comment to me when I was never contacted?”
Akpabio urged security agencies to investigate and prosecute those behind the viral story, describing it as an effort to “cause friction and bring the Nigerian Senate into disrepute.”
“I believe the Cybercrimes Unit of the police, the DSS, and others should find that character out. This is meant to sow division. Social media should not be allowed to break Nigeria,” he added.
The Senate President, however, noted that the Red chamber would take an official position on Trump’s remarks once the federal government had clarified its stance.
He said, “When the executive responds, we will take a position as a Senate. Until then, no one should speak for this institution.”
Over the weekend, Trump declared via social-media that Nigeria faces “an existential threat” to its Christian population and warned that the U.S. may deploy troops or conduct air-strikes if the Nigerian government fails to halt the killings.
He instructed the Pentagon to prepare for possible action and threatened to cut all U.S. aid to Nigeria.
In tandem, the U.S. re-added Nigeria to its “Country of Particular Concern” list for religious freedom violations.
The Nigerian government rejected the designation and the characterisation of persecuting Christians, insisting that Nigeria protects religious freedom for all.
Source: businessday.ng
China, on Tuesday, opposed US President Donald Trump’s threat to carry out military action against Nigeria over the alleged persecution of Christians, as it backed the Nigerian government in leading its people to follow a development path in line with its national conditions.
Trump Saturday said if the Nigerian government continues to allow the killing of Christians, the US will immediately stop all aid and assistance to the West African country, and may go for military action to wipe out the Islamic terrorists.
Asked for her comments on Trump’s threat, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told the media that the Nigerian Foreign Ministry issued a statement, stating that the US’s claims did not reflect the current realities in Nigeria, and the government had remained committed to fighting terrorism, strengthening interfaith harmony, and protecting the lives and rights of all its people.
As a comprehensive strategic partner, China firmly supports the Nigerian government in leading its people to follow a development path in line with its national conditions, Mao said.
“China opposes interference by any country in the internal affairs of other nations under the pretext of religion or human rights and opposes the arbitrary use of sanctions and threats of force,” she said.
On the reports that Venezuela is seeking missiles and drones following a dozen US strikes on the boats in the region on the suspicion that they carried drugs, Mao said China is opposed to the use of force in the name of fighting drug cartels.
China supports enhanced international cooperation in combating transnational crimes, but opposes the use of threats of using force in international relations, and actions that undermine peace and stability in Latin America and the Caribbean, she said.
China is against unilateral so-called law enforcement operations against vessels of other countries that exceed reasonable and necessary limits, she added.
“We hope the US will carry out normal law enforcement and judicial activities within bilateral and multilateral legal frameworks,” Mao said, without mentioning whether China will support military equipment to Venezuela.
“China’s normal exchanges and cooperation with Venezuela are conducted between sovereign states, without targeting any third party, nor are they subject to interference or influence by any third party,” she said.
Source: orissapost
