Daybreak, Politics, Entertainment, Sport

Tag: Malami Abdullahi

  • Trial Of Nnamdi Kanu’s Co-Defendants: Court Fines AGF Malami N200,000

    Trial Of Nnamdi Kanu’s Co-Defendants: Court Fines AGF Malami N200,000

    By Okechukwu Keshi Ukegbu

    Article 1(1) of the United Nations Convention Against Torture explains that torture means ” any act by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mentally, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind,when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions”.

    Conventional security agents in Nigeria, and those providing ancillary policing functions such as vigilantes, community police formations, among others have a history of deploying torture as a means of extracting confessions from suspects, albeit under duress.

    This negates the provisions of Section 28 of the Nigeria Evidence Act, which stipulates that” A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature”.

    Conventional security services or those claiming to provide security services in various locations have adopted both physical and psychological methods of torture on victims. These include continuous blows with either fists, gun butts, matchetes or heavy sticks; sexual torture such as rape, threat of imminent rape, insertion of broomsticks or broken objects into victims genitals; forced positions; pouring of contaminated water which may sometimes contain faeces and urine.

    Others are suspension or hanging in the air through a hook or some other hard object in the roof of an isolated room; deprivation of food and water for a long period of time; flogging with horsewhips, cane or electric cable; nakedness; rudeness and obscene insult.

    Torture strongly contravenes several local and international legal instruments on human rights such as articles 4 and 5 of the African Charter on Human And Peoples’ Rights which provide that” Human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and integrity of his person. No one may be arbitrarily deprived of this right”; Every individual shall have the right to be respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be probihited.

    Also, chapter 4 of the 1999 Constitution provides the following rights to a Nigerian citizen: right to life, human dignity( freedom from degrading treatment, torture) and personal liberty; right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty; right to remain silent; right against self- incrimination; right to fair, open and impartial judicial process, among other rights.

    To ensure that the menace of torture is addressed in Nigeria, all international treaties should be domesticated. The federal government, as a matter of urgency, should ratify international treaties containing safeguards against torture and other illtratments, including International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its first Optional Protocol; and the UN Convention against Torture; the excesses of local vigilantes, community police formations or any other group claiming to provide policing functions for communities should be strictly checked by judicial processes.

    The appropriate quarters should not hesitate to apply punishments when necessary to erring groups, even to the extent of disbanding such groups. Their functions should be restricted to providing intelligence to the police, and they should not be allowed to carry firearms to avoid abuse. On the other hand, recruitment of members into these groups should strictly be based on credibility, and individuals with questionable characters and no visible means of livelihood should not be recruited into those local security arrangements.

    Conventional security agents should be exposed to some academic trainings in human psychology, the constitution to enhance civilian- police relations, and respect for human rights. Also, locations where persons are secretly detained should be unraveled and get rid of.

    It is also suggested that the” teeth for tat” principle should be applied here in the sense that in the course of torture, the victim dies, the perpetrators should be brought to book and made to face the full wrath by paying with heads through sentencing to death by hanging.

    If the above recommendations are strictly applied, the incidence of torture in Nigeria will be highly checked.

  • NGF Accuse AGF, Malami Of Supporting Consultants In $418m Paris Club Payments

    NGF Accuse AGF, Malami Of Supporting Consultants In $418m Paris Club Payments

    The Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF) on Monday said the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation (HAGF), Abubakar Malami, was working against the public’s interest by insisting on the payment of $418 million to private consultants from the accounts of state governments.

    The consultants are claiming a percentage of Paris Club refunds as payment of services they said they rendered to the states and local government.

    The Federal Government had determined to pay the consultants from state accounts but a Federal High Court on Friday restrained it from making such deductions until all issues relating to that matter were fully determined.

    In a statement signed by the spokesman of the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, Umar Gwandu, on Friday, the AGF suggested the states and local governments had acted in bad faith for taking the case to court.

    The deductions were ratified by several court judgements, the AGF said, and the Federal Government only had to step in to avoid forfeiting any of its assets, since it was also a defendant in the lawsuits against the states.

    But on Monday, the NGF, in a statement signed by its spokesperson Abdulrazaque Bello-Barkindo, said the AGF’s actions “raises questions of propriety and the spirit of justice.”

    “The HAGF is supposed to be the chief arbiter in all matters concerning Nigerians, especially the poor masses of this country. It is incumbent upon him to, not just ensure that justice is done, but that justice is seen to have been done,” the statement said.

    “The undue haste, with which the statement was issued even before the service on the AGF of the court processes and the order dated 5th November, 2021restraining the Federal Government, seems to suggest that there is a special relationship between the Office of the HAGF and the consultants over and above Nigerian citizens, whose interest the HAGF as the Chief Law Officer of the Federation is statutorily bound to always protect. The statement also suggests that the restraining order issued last Friday not only unsettled preconceived plans and angered the unnamed ‘government officers’ referred to by the media aide.

    “The media aide to the HAGF justifies the deductions on the basis that they are made pursuant to four court judgments; two of which are consent judgments and/or that the NGF/States and LGAs consented, expressed no objection to the payments and had already paid part of the debts to the said contractors and consultants. The statement by the media aide to the HAGF however conveniently and deliberately failed to name the judgments under reference and whether they are on appeal or challenged in any other way. He also failed to specify which of the four judgments authorized payments and in what proportion to each of the contractors.

    “While it is very easy to argue as the AGF does, that the NGF and ALGON took no early steps to appeal as they should have done, it is important to inform the Nigerian public that State governors have since appealed and are challenging the judgments in various courts. Interestingly the AGF has been served all these processes, nevertheless, this was ignored and payment was authorized to be made and has been processed with unprecedented speed not common in the public service. It must be stated that between the NGF and AGF, the latter is in more vantage constitutional position and has a legal responsibility and burden to defend public interest. The AGF should have therefore initiated appeals against the said judgments once his attention was drawn to them, because public interest was at stake involving huge sums of money meant for the provision of public services. It must be noted that the state governments were not parties to any of the said judgments. It should be further stated that the Office of the AGF failed to professionally defend the cases leading to those judgments and the courts commented on that unprofessional attitude.

    “While we are constrained not to comment on a subject which is sub-judice, we have a responsibility to the public to respond in some detail to the statement issued by the Office of the AGF in order to put the records straight. Any discerning legal mind would find no difficulty in concluding that the so-called judgments under reference are dripping with too many irregularities bordering on competence and lack of jurisdiction which are the bases why some of them are being challenged on appeal and in other courts. No diligent public officer would act on such judgments by recommending payment.”

    The NGF also noted that the AGF had recommended payments to some contractors allegedly based on judgments that did “not make any monetary award or on claims that were struck out.

    “The AGF may need to explain to Nigerians why these particular judgment debts are given unusual attention and priority and processed with supersonic speed over and above all others; some of which preceded these so-called judgments and have been pending for settlement by the AGF for several years.

    “While it is convenient to say that part of these judgment debts have been paid with the release of USD$86,546,526.65 and N19,439,225,871.11 in 2016 and $100m in 2018 to the contractors with the concurrence of the NGF; that does not detract from the fact that they were payments wrongly made which ought not to have been made even if they were products of consent Judgments. States can still go after the contractors to recover the funds wrongly made. It should concern the HAGF that ALGON disowned the contracts claimed by RIOK and the same was duly communicated to him requesting him to prevent the use of LG funds to ‘settle dubious and illegal claims’

    “Was the AGF not concerned that several contractors are laying claim to legal fees for the same Paris Club Refund? Was it lost on the AGF on the detailed procedure available under the law how legal fees can be claimed in deserving cases?

    “One of the strange payments made is that of USD$47,831,920 million to Panic Alert Security Systems Ltd/George Uboh for allegedly reviewing a 16-page judgment for the then factional NGF. Can the Office of the HAGF point to any consent judgment awarding that sum to PANIC Alert? Did the NGF’s letter of 20th January, 2020 relied upon by the HAGF ever recommend the payment of any sum?

    “LINAS and NED Nwoko in this scheme are walking away with US$68,658,193.83 state funds allegedly for legal consultancy services. Is the AGF not aware that the work alleged to have been done by him was already contained in a FAAC Reconciliation Committee Report constituted in 2005 submitted in 2007 with recommendations on how states and LGAs should be refunded the over charges from the Paris Club Refunds.

    “Dr. Ted Iseghohi-Edwards has been paid the sum of USD$159m in promissory notes, yet he had his matter in Suit No FCT/HC/CV/1353/18 struck out on November 10th, 2020. Furthermore, the legal basis for his claim is rooted in SUIT NO FHC/ABJ/CS/130/13: LINAS INTERNATIONAL LTD & 235 ORS V FGN which clearly stated that he cannot benefit under the judgment because he was not a party in the case and cannot enforce the terms of the judgment. Contrary to the representation of the AGF, the EFCC’s report on TED was negative. The report not only recommended his arrest but a forfeiture of any of his assets associated with the Paris Club Refund. The AGF ignored these recommendations.

    “RIOK to whom the AGF supports and recommends the payment of USD$142,028,941.95 was also excluded by Justice Ademola in the Judgment in the LINAS case. This was confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Appeal No CA/558/2017. That is the appeal now before the Supreme Court (SC). Which Judgment then is the basis of the AGF recommendation that RIOK be paid the sum of $142,028,941.95. There is also no evidence of execution of any contract by RIOK. Curiously, the Department of State Security (DSS) is alleged to have confirmed 50% execution. The Court and EFCC stated clearly that it is not the responsibility of the DSS to ascertain the execution of contracts as they do not have the expertise. ALGON disowned the contracts. Why will the AGF insist on them? It is not true that the EFCC in its report recommended payment to the contractors. It did not.

    “In the case of payments recommended and paid to Prince Orji Nwafor Orizu US$1,219,440.45, and Olaitan Bello – US$215,195.36, it remains a mystery. These two lawyers are alleged to have performed legal services for RIOK and its associated companies and not for the states or LGAs. Why they are paid from State resources is only imagined.

    “The AGF also claims he intervened to pay the contractors to avoid execution of the judgments against the federal government resources. That is absolutely not true at all. Assets of the FGN were not at any time threatened. The NGF is not aware that there is any existing mandamus issued by any court in favour of the contractors against the Federal Government. The only application for mandamus by PANIC Alert is pending for hearing at the Federal High Court and parties have since joined issues.

    “The AGF also says that the NGF and LGAs seek to transfer their liability to the FGN. That is not true. There is no liability to transfer in the first place and none exists; neither has the NGF provided any undertaking or indemnity to the FGN to act on its behalf as represented by the AGF.

    “The AGF has consistently stated that this administration is an avid respecter of the rule of law. This is one case in which this commitment should be fully and completely demonstrated. Let the AGF remain neutral and protect scarce public resources. Let him advice the contractors to wait until all appeals and litigations in court are concluded. That is the true test of observing the rule of law. There is no other way, uncomfortable as that would appear. State resources needed for critical development should not under any guise be frittered away as payments for contracts whose veracity and authenticity is still a subject of litigation and disputation. These contractors are impecunious and cannot restitute the states/LGAs if the appeals or other litigation are determined against them.

    “We call on the general public to be alert and vigilant. The debt relief granted Nigeria by the Paris Club in 2005 was meant to enable her have a respite and use the resources saved for meaningful development. It was not for distribution to private persons to fund their luxurious lives; neither can Nigeria justify her borrowing funds all over the world to fund capital projects and turn round to disburse state resources to individuals in a manner that offends all public sensibilities.

    “We urge all those appointed as gatekeepers to our laws to ensure that the laws of our land are respected and protected. Let professionalism, reasonable caution and due diligence prevail on this matter, please.”

  • States have no valid claim on VAT collection, it’s on exclusive legislative list – Malami

    States have no valid claim on VAT collection, it’s on exclusive legislative list – Malami

    Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami has said that states in the country do not have any valid claim on Value Added Tax collection.

    Malami made the statement in an interview on Channels Television on Friday September 24, amid a faceoff between some states and the Federal Inland Revenue Service on VAT collection.

    According to him, the responsibility, right and constitutional powers to legislate on collection of VAT is exclusively and constitutionally vested in the national assembly and not in the state.

    He said;

    “A lot has precluded the state from collecting value-added tax. One, generally speaking, as you rightly know, the issue of the value-added tax is an issue on the exclusive legislative list.

    “And the implication of being in exclusive legislative list matter is that only the national assembly can legislate on it. The question that you may perhaps wish to address your mind on is whether there exists any national legislation that has conferred the power on the state to collect VAT. And my answer is ‘no’.

    “In the absence of a law passed by the national assembly in that direction, no state can have a valid claim to collection of value-added tax.

    “The responsibility, right and constitutional powers to legislate on collection of VAT is exclusively and constitutionally vested in the national assembly and not in the state.

    “Where the national assembly has not passed any law in that regard authorising the state to collect VAT, then it goes without saying that no state can arrogate unto itself the powers to collect VAT.”

    The AGF also said that it will be “reckless” for any state to go ahead to collect VAT, despite the court judgement asking parties involved in the case to maintain status quo.

    Malami added;

    “I don’t see any state perhaps taking the law unto its hands without allowing the judicial process to take its natural course and in breach of the prevailing legislation.

    “I don’t see the states acting arbitrarily and setting a very bad precedence as far as governance is concerned with particular regard to the fact that the matter is receiving judicial determination.

    “I can’t understand. I can’t perhaps bring that thought into consideration that I believe it could amount to a high level of recklessness on the part of any state government to be operating in breach and to be operating a lawless governance style as far as the Nigerian state is concerned.”

  • Empty Vessel makes the loudest noise -Malami replies Canadian Minister, Madu

    Empty Vessel makes the loudest noise -Malami replies Canadian Minister, Madu

    The Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, has criticised the Solicitor-General of Alberta in Canada, Kelechi Amadi, over his comment on the arrest of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB).

    In a post on social media, Madu had said if Kanu was truly abducted from Kenya, then Malami was a disgrace to the rule of law.

    But in a statement, Dr Umar Gwandu, Special Assistant on Media and Publicity to the minister, issued on Malami’s behalf on Wednesday, the minister described Madu as ignorant.

    “Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami (SAN) has described the ideas attributed to one Kelechi Madu as outrageously ignoramus opinions that are eccentric and weird to the legal profession.

    “It is unfortunate for someone who claims to be a lawyer of a status of a Solicitor General of a provincial State of Alberta in Canada to fault the internationally recognized manner through which Nnamdi Kanu who jumped bail was re-arrested and brought back to face trial,” the statement read.

    Malami also insisted that there was no illegality in the arrest of the IPOB leader.

    According to him, “It was abundantly clear that bench warrant was lawfully and judiciously procured through judicial process by a competent court of law, whose bail condition Nnamdi Kanu breached with impunity. There was no illegality in the entire process and the question of illegality does not even arise.

    “It is a common principle of the law that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands. Where was the so-called Madu when Nnamdi Kanu was inciting violence against the country? Why, as a lawyer, would Madu support a fugitive who jumped bail and accused of terrorism and treasonable felony? What stopped Madu from voicing out dissent on the atrocities of Kanu and their group?”

    The AGF said it was important to educate Madu that both Nigeria (his country of birth) and Canada where he practises law, are signatories to the Multinational Treaty Agreement where, among others, fugitive fleeing justice in nations with similar agreement could be brought back to face justice.

    “It is a pity that as a Solicitor General of a province, Madu failed to keep himself acquainted with the provisions of general laws of the country where he stays as well as international laws,” said Malami.

    The AGF urged the Canadian public officer to go back to educate himself in matters of the law, adding that Madu only left for Canada after failing to succeed in his country of birth.

    “As the saying goes ‘an empty vessel makes the loudest noise’. We advise the so-called ‘learned man’ to shelve his arrogance and learn to study the law books before opening his mouth to disgrace himself before the right-thinking members of the society thereby attracting to himself criticism that may propel doubt about his suitability for the job he claims to be doing now, after moving out of his country of origin in which he fails to excel,” he added.

  • $700m looted cash returned in four years, says Malami

    $700m looted cash returned in four years, says Malami

    More than $700 million cash stolen from Nigeria was returned to the country in the last four years, Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami said yesterday.

    He said the stolen funds were returned by the United States (U.S.), the United Kingdom (UK), Bailiwick of Jersey, Switzerland and Ireland.

    The minister also said that developing countries in Africa lose over $148 billion to corruption annually, tracing the loss partially to Illicit Financial Flows (IFFs).

    Malami made the disclosures in Abuja at the International Conference on Illicit Financial Flows (IFFs) and Asset Recovery organised by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).

    He was represented by Senior Special Adviser to the President on Justice Sector Reforms, Juliet Ibekaku-Nwagwu.

    The minister said: “Nigeria, through proactive and collaborative efforts with other countries has recovered and ensured the return of over $700 million from the United States, the United Kingdom, Bailiwick of Jersey, Switzerland, and Ireland in the past four years.

    “We are still working with our international partners and other countries to ensure that all Nigeria’s assets that are identified are recovered.”

    He said the government was working to ensure that the recovered assets were for the benefit of all Nigerians through investment in social development programmes and infrastructure.

    Malami said he was, however, worried about how IFFs have become rife and growing at 20.2 percent annually in Africa because of weak national and regional capacity to stem the tide.

    He said the illicit movement of huge funds out of Africa has resulted in underdevelopment and insecurity across the continent.

    He added: “No doubt, the impact of such criminal flow of funds means lack of health and education services, low levels of growth, high level of poverty and lack of infrastructure in many African countries.”

    On the need to give a multilateral approach, he said: “There is no doubt that international and regional cooperation is key in achieving this goal as no one country can do it. Therefore, we must all work together.

    “This is what the Financial and Accountability, Transparency and Integrity (FACTI) Panel’s report released in February 2021 is telling us.

    “How we meet the recommendations of the panel in order to achieve the 2030 Agenda for sustainable Development is a global and regional challenge.”

    Foreign Affairs Minister, Geoffrey Onyeama, who was represented by the Permanent Secretary of the ministry, Ambassador Gabriel Aduda, said the ministry was working assiduously to ensure the return of stolen funds and assets to Nigeria.

    Onyeama said IFFs were responsible for many of the societal ills and underdevelopment facing the country.

    Saying that the Federal Government was not folding its arms, he said: “Illicit Financial Flows deny developing countries of vital resources that belong to them; resources that should have be spent on their development priorities. It reduces tax revenues, hinders development endeavours, undermine constituted authorities and threaten the stability and sustainable development of all affected states.

    “IFFs also provide the financial network that supports terrorist activities, fuels conflict and leads to internal displacement and refugees conditions, divert money from public priorities and hampers government effort to mobilise domestic resources.

    The ICPC Chairman, Prof. Bolaji Owasanoye said the effect of IFFs on developing countries in Africa was huge.

    He said the need to tackle the menace, which falls under the mandate of the Commission, has become paramount in order to shore-up the dwindling revenue of the Federal Government.

    The ICPC boss said: “Estimates of the quantum of IFFs lost globally vary but it is generally agreed that a significant proportion of the loss is suffered by developing countries.

    “African countries are particularly affected by loss through IFFs thus depriving the continent of much needed resources for development.”