In a recent media outburst, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mr Nyesom Wike, taunted me for losing a case, which he had won at the Supreme Court. Even though I appear regularly in domestic and regional courts in Africa, Mr Wike dubbed me “a television lawyer”.
I did not join issues with him on that occasion because Wike is the only life bencher in Nigeria who has never handled a case in any trial court or appellate court. Another reason for ignoring Wike’s vituperations is that it is no crime if a lawyer loses a case in any court. In other words, only a corrupt lawyer wins all cases in all courts.
A couple of days ago, Wike subjected me to another scurrilous attack in a press conference held in Abuja to showcase the Ministry of the Federal Capital Territory. In the course of the press conference, he veered off and was alleged to have accused me of lying about the defection status of certain legislators during an appearance on Channels TV.
While referring to a recent Supreme Court ruling that addressed the issue of defection, stating, “A few days ago, the Supreme Court settled this matter of defection.” He then said, “If someone of Femi Falana’s calibre can go on national television and lie, it is very serious. Lies can cause a lot of crises.” He expressed concern that such misinformation, especially from a respected legal figure, could escalate tensions if not addressed.
Specifically, Wike accused me of lying against the Supreme Court over its decision on the defection of 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly. Contrary to Wike’s assertion, I did not lie against the Supreme Court in respect of the judgment in question. All I said was that the matter of the defection of the 27 legislators was raised suo motu and determined by the eminent justices of the apex court.
My comment was based on the undeniable fact that the vexed issue of the defection of the 27 legislators was pending in the Port Harcourt judicial division of the Federal High Court at the material time. In addition, there are video tapes and a sworn affidavit where the 27 legislators had confirmed their defection from the People’s Democratic Party to the All Progressive Congress.
It is public knowledge that Wike had praised the Supreme Court to high heavens and held a thanksgiving service to celebrate the decision on the defection of the 27 legislators. However, he decided to attack me for commenting on the same judgment without any legal justification.
I wish to state, without any fear of contradictions, that my fundamental right to criticise the decisions of courts is guaranteed by Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended and article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights.
I would have ignored the minister’s latest gratuitous attack but for the fact that he had recently called on the Body of Benchers to discipline lawyers who had the temerity to criticise the judgments of Nigerian courts.
However, unlike Wike, who calls judges names whenever they disagree with his politics of opportunism, I have always criticised the judgments of domestic and regional courts with the utmost decorum and in good faith.
While Wike believes that it is a professional anomaly to criticise the decisions of Judges, the Supreme Court of Nigeria has always welcomed the criticism and review of its judgments because the justices believe that they are prone to make mistakes like all mortals. It is undoubtedly clear that Wike is not familiar with the case of Adegoke Motors Limited v Dr Babatunde Adesanya 2 1989 3 NWLR (Pt 109) 250 at 274, where Oputa JSC of blessed memory said, “We are final not because we are infallible; rather we are infallible because we are final.”
About five years ago, the then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, said to lawyers, “As critical stakeholders in the task of justice delivery, you have the responsibility of drawing our attention to where things are going wrong or on the verge of going wrong.” Justice Muhammad further stated that it would not be out of place for lawyers to subject justices in the country to criticism where necessary as a step to ensuring improvement in the justice delivery system.
From time to time, many respected justices commend my criticism of the judgments of courts and the defence of the judiciary. It is on record that at a recent valedictory service held in Abuja, a retiring justice of the Supreme Court referred to one of my critical comments pertaining to the Nigerian Judiciary.
In the light of the foregoing, Wike deliberately set out to incite the Supreme Court against me as the allegation levelled against me by him is spurious and tendentious in every material particular. Since he has become the unsolicited defender of the judiciary, I challenge him to report me to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee for professional misconduct.
No doubt, the decision of the Supreme Court is final on defection of legislators from the political party that sponsored them to another political party. In their wisdom, their lordships said that defection can only be proved with the production of the register of members of political parties. My fear is that this decision will be waived by unpatriotic politicians to justify political prostitution in Nigeria.
In the interest of political stability and national morality, I have respectively called on the Supreme Court to continue to rely on the cases of the Attorney-General of the Federation 𝐯. Abubakar (2007) 10 NWLR (PT.1041) 1 at 178, Dapialong v Dariye (2007) 8 NWLR (Pt 1036) 332 and Abegunde 𝐯. Ondo State House of Assembly & Ors (2015) LPELR-24588(SC), where it had been held that the consequence of a defection by a legislator is the automatic loss of his or her seat in the legislative house.
- Falana (SAN), a lawyer and human rights advocate, writes from Lagos
Join Informant Online WhatsApp Channel With Link Below: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaihFajBadmT29ufud2
