Connect with us

Featured

Archives: How Gen Buhari Forced Justice Jinadu Out of Office

Published

on

Disobedience of the order of courts did not start today. This is the story of how a judge fought the duo of Gen Muhammadu Buhari and Odigie Oyegun in 1984 and sacrificed his job to save the integrity of the judiciary against the Military junta’s disobedience of court orders. Excerpts:

It was supposed to be a simple case of enforcement of human rights, and one of the several cases that he had to attend to in the normal course of his work. But it was the case that set Justice Yahaya Jinadu of the High Court of Lagos State and the Supreme Military Council under the leadership of General Muhammadu Buhari on collision, and which the judge, rather than compromise the integrity and independence of the judiciary, offered himself as a sacrificial lamb, and ended his carrier as a judge.

It all started on January 24, 1983, when Lagosians and entire Nigeria woke up to the sad news that the NET Building was up in flames. The popular 37 storey- building was the tallest building and the pride of the nation. It was the building that belonged to Nigerian External Communications, an agency of government. The men of the fire fighters were immediately contacted and they rose up to the occasion.

At the helm of affairs of the Fire department was Alhaji Adamu Akokhia who was the Chief Fire Officer of the Federation. He immediately got his men under the Divisional Fire Officer in charge of Lagos, Mr Seidu Garba and other men together and they confronted the inferno. Although they could not save the building, that saved more than 600 men from roasting while they lost two persons to death.

Despite their valour, Akokhia, Garba, and 19 fire fighters were arrested by the police and charged before Chief Magistrate A. Atiba at the Tinubu Magistrate Court, Lagos, for the murder of the two persons that died in the NET Building fire. Two weeks after being in detention for murder, they contacted their lawyer, Chief Gani Fawehinmi  to defend them. On February 16, 1983, Chief Fawehinmi filed an application for the enforcement of their fundamental human rights before Justice Charles Bada of the Lagos High Court. On the same date, Justice Bada, after hearing the application granted the release of all the accused persons.

They all happily went back to their homes and resumed back to work. However, 28 days after their release, both Akokhia and Garba again received a letter from the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs, placing them on interdiction for the offence of murder which a court of competentent jurisdiction quashed 28 days earlier. The letter was signed Mr R.A Akanni, on behalf of the Permanent Secretary, Mr John Oyegun (former APC Chairman).

Justice Jinadu now 90 years old

The two approached Chief Fawehinmi again. Two days later, Chief Fawehinmi filed a Writ of Summons and Statement of Claims before Justice Yahaya Jinadu, seeking to quash the interdiction of the two civil servants. The cases were filed separately namely Suit No LD/578/83 and Suit No LD/579/83 respectively. At the hearing of the first case (Akokhia), Chief Fawehinmi and the State Counsel representing the defendants, Mr Moshood Adio agreed before the court that since the two cases were similar, the outcome of the first should determine the second one.

On February 20, 1984, Justice Jinadu ordered the reinstatement of Akokhia. However, when it got to the case of Garba, the defendant’s counsel, Adio reneged on his agreement and opted to contest the case. In the course of the trial, on April 11, 1984, Garba received another letter from Mr Oyegun that he had been dismissed.  An alarmed Fawehinmi immediately filed a contempt of court application, seeking the court to commit Oyegun to jail. In the application, Chief Fawehinmi said that it was wrong to terminate the employment of his client while he was still challenging his suspension in court. “it amounts to an undue interference with the administration of justice and violent encroachment on the constitutional rights of this court and the applicant”, he argued.

He then continued: “Any attempt by any litigant in any action, either overtly or covertly to prevent any other person, be he litigant, or not, to exercise or continue to exercise his vested constitutional right of resorting to a court of law for adjudication of grievances amounts to contempt of court”.

On April 24, 2004, Justice Jinadu ordered the plaintiff to serve Mr Oyegun the contempt application against him so as to avail him the right to defend himself. On May 9, 2004, the matter came up again and the defendant’s counsel asked for more time to file a defence. Although Chief Fawehinmi objected to further adjournment, the judge granted the application till May 16.

The late Chief Gani Fawehinmi SAN, defended Seidu Garba to the Supreme Court

It was in the course of these adjournments that the military government came up with Decree No 17 of 1984 on June 27, 1984 and backdated it to December 31, 1983. The decree made it practically impossible for any sacked public officer to challenge his sack in a court of law. Section 3(3) of the decree stated thus: “No civil proceedings shall lie or be instituted in any court for or on account of or in respect of any act, matter or thing done or purported to be done by any person under this decree and if any such proceedings have been or are instituted before o or after making this decree, the proceedings shall abate, be discharged and made void”.

Despite this decree however, the case continued in court. On July 16, Mr Oyegun again refused to appear before the court. Justice Jinadu therefore found him guilty of contempt of court but cautioned and discharged him on condition that he withdrew the sack letter issued to Seidu Garba not later than 1.00pm on July 18.

The case came up again on July 23 and again, Mr Oyegun had not complied with the order of court. Mr Dele Awokoya who stood in for Chief Fewhinmi urged the court to deliver its judgement on the substantive case. However, the lawyer to the defendants, Mr Adio stood up and informed the court of an appeal he filed on July 19 before the appellate court, seeking to dismiss the case in view of the new Decree 17. The trial judge asked Adio if the order of the court have been complied with.

Justice Jinadu further asked whether the contemnor was in court to which Adio’s reply was in the negative. The judge thereafter adjourned the matter till 12 noon for his order to be complied with. He said he would hear the application by 1.00 pm. Oyegun, the contemnor neither complied with the order nor appeared in court. He adjourned till the following day. Even at that, Oyegun refused to appear in the court. The judge again asked Mr Adio the whereabout of the defendant to which he replied despondently that he could not find Mr Oyegun.

An angry Awokoya, who stood in for Fawehinmi addressed the court:  “The stage is now set for which the authority of the court must be preserved. The excuses being given by my learned friend that he could not locate the defendant is a brazen method of scandalizing the court. The court has duty to see that its orders are enforced. Instead of the permanent secretary obeying the order of court, he has contemptuously and irresponsibly, without any justifiable reason, disobeyed the orders of this court”.

Mr Adio thereafter went ahead with his application that the court lacks the jurisdiction to hear the case. He quoted section 6(6)(a) of the constitution, section 221 and section 51 of the High Court Laws of Lagos State. He also quoted the infamous Decree 17 that ousted the powers of court. “The effect of section 3(3) of Decree 17 is that is dead completely. If a statute says there is no jurisdiction in certain event, it is impossible for the court to have jurisdiction. If the court has no jurisdiction to entertain a matter, all proceedings on the matter are a nullity”, he argued.

At this junction, Justice Jinadu quipped in and asked: “ If a law says nobody should bear a child, then anyone pregnant should not bear the child. Is that not absurd?” After several arguments, the court dismissed the application the following day. Despite the dismissal, the judge did not wield the big stick against Oyegun. Rather, he summoned the bailiff to explain his efforts to serve the defendant. The Bailiff, Mr Kayode Oduwole explained to the court all his efforts at effecting service on Oyegun both at home and office which was to no avail.

Chief Oyegun and President Buhari. Journey started in 1984

The next day, July 27, Justice Jinadu delivered his judgment where he upheld the jurisdiction of his court since the matter before him was not dismissal but interdiction. He furthermore declared Seidu Garba’s interdiction illegal and ordered that he be reinstated back to his job. The court thereafter still gave Mr Oyegun till July 30 to appear before him and like earlier orders, it was flouted. The judge thereafter asked that Mr Adio, Oyegun’s lawyer should serve the defendant.

Meanwhile, the leadership of the Advisory Judicial Council and the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice George Shodeinde Showemimo called Justice Jinadu to his chambers at the Supreme Court where he advised that he should adjourned the case till after Hajj which Justice Jinadu was scheduled to attend and then proceed on his leave. The CJN advised that a ditch was being dug for Jinadu and that he should not fall into it with his eyes wide open.

Justice Jinadu’s reply was that he was protecting the integrity and independence of the judiciary. He said to adjourn the matter indefinitely will be contrary to the oath he swore to uphold justice. On August 3, the matter came up in court and when asked for the whereabouts of the defendant, he lawyer, Mr Adio in his reply was unruly to the court. After several warnings, the court ordered that he remove his wig and gown and step out of the bar. However, again, maturity prevailed as the judge rather than sending Mr Adio to prison, reprimanded him.

The case came up again on August 3. Oyegun as usual was not in court. Justice Jinadu again asked Mr Adio if he had filed a return he ordered. Adio became unruly and replied the judge in a very rude manner. : “I don’t understand what a return means, I am not a party to the order. I will not carry out any order..” At this juncture, the judge had had it to the brim. His patience stretched beyond limit. He ordered Adio to remove his wig and gown and step out of the bar. Adio complied and moved to the dock.

It took all the maturity in him not to commit Adio to Prison that day. In a short ruling, Justice Jinadu wrote: “It has never happened in all my experience at the Bar and on the Bench, for a legal practitioner to behave in such a defiant, arrogant, and outrageous way in which you have behaved this morning. I shall therefore adjourn this matter till Thursday, August 7 to enable you carry out the order of this court as explained to you by the registrar”. The judge allowed Adio to go free despite the insult on the court.

At this juncture, the Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Adetunji Adefarasin who had been watching from the sidelines, decide to intervene. He summoned Justice Jinadu to his office and called two senior judges to the meeting as well. They are Justice Candide Ademola Johnson, and Justice Charles Bada. At the meeting, the Chief Judge revealed that he was in receipt of a letter the Federal Ministry of Justice forwarded to Dodan Barracks complaining about Justice Jinadu. The three judges after reviewing the case agreed that Justice Jinadu should have known that there were unseen hands behind the conduct of Adio. That being the case, he should know what to do in the next adjourned date.

However, when he got to the office, he found out that Adio had filed the returns the court ordered. Shortly after, The Chief Judge called him on phone to come to his office with the case file. He complied and returned the file. The Chief Judge again called him to minute on the file: “I have no personal interest in the matter and I do not want to handle it any more”, Justice Jinadu complied. The following day, August 7, the trial judge announced in court that the file has been returned to the Chief Judge.

Chief Fawehinmi was shocked: “I am worried about the rule of law in this country. All the orders made are being ignored. The rule of law is being bastardised and brutalized! This is a dangerous precedent!”, he said. The following day, all newspapers carried the story in their front pages. The Sketch in an editorial condemned the withdrawal of the case from the trial judge. “The truth is that the rule of law is being bloodied with marked consistency by the authorities in this country.. When decrees are made ousting the jurisdiction of ordinary courts, when trials are being conducted in secret, when judges trained to administer justice are subordinated to military laymen, what respect can the authorizes say they have for the rule of law?”, The Sketch asked.

From this moment, administrative intrigues took over. The Chief Judge, Justice Adefarasin, who initially asked Justice Jinadu to return the casefile to him denied he did so, saying that Justice Jinadu voluntarily returned the file. Justice Adefarasin’s rebuttal came when Justice Jinadu was out of the country on holy pilgrimage to hajj. Justice Ishola Oluwa who just retired issued a press release on the unfairness of the Chief Judge  in making his comments when he knew Justice Jinadu being out of the country could not reply. “I wish to emphasize that Justice Jinadu is now on Holy Pilgrimage to Mecca and therefore not in a position to remind the Chief Judge about the exchange of correspondence between him and Justice Adefarasin on this matter. I have as a friend of Justice Jinadu’s a duty to say that If I were the Chief Judge, I would wait for him to be back from Mecca before reading a statement to the open court wherein it is not mentioned that Justice Jinadu had without reservation written the Chief Judge to maintain his stand that the file was indeed withdrawn by Justice Adefarasin”, Justice Oluwa stated.

Chief Fawehinmi also filed a suit in court challenging the withdrawal of the case from Justice Jinadu by the Chief Judge. Justice Adefarasin however dismissed the case as “misconceived and an abuse of court process”. He later transferred the case to Justice Abdulraheem Bakare.

On September 12, 1984, the Advisory Judicial Council, in a letter summoned Justice Jinadu to appear before it to answer to some queries viz:

Addressing a state counsel of the Federal Ministry of Justice in January, 1984 that he was drunk,andDisrobing a Principal State Counsel during the proceedings of a case in the court.

He was to appear before them the following day, September 13, 1984.

Justice Jinadu complied and defended himself before the panel. The following day, September 14, 1984, the Advisory Judicial Council, in a letter signed by Justice Sowemimo as chairman AJC, reprimanded Justice Jinadu, asking him to apologise to the Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Adefarasin publicly in a letter. He was also to appear before a panel comprising of the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, President of the Court of Appeal, Attorney General of the Federation, and the Chief Judge of Lagos State, to tender his apology orally to them and then await disciplinary action that would be meted out to him. What this means in short, is to totally humiliate him before an eventual dismissal.

Rather than apologise, Justice Jinadu opted to proceed immediately on retirement. He immediately forwarded his notice of retirement to the Military Governor of Lagos State through the Chief Judge of the State. He gave a six month notice to enable him conclude the part heard matters before him. He then wrote a reply to the Advisory Judicial Council where he explained thoroughly the facts of the case. In concluding his letter, he said:

Gen Buhari in 1984

“I believe the judiciary has an important role to play in this country as it is the last hope of the common man. The Judiciary has to be firm, fair, and courageous and must not employ any form of double standards. It is not right in my view to regard or treat courts of justice as extension of the Federal Ministry of Justice;

Above all, your letter asked me to apologise in writing and in addition to appear before you, the President of the Court of Appeal, and the Attorney General of the Federation to apologise verbally. This verbal apology appears to me to appease the lawyers in the Ministry of Justice through the Attorney General of the Federation, otherwise what is the necessity of a verbal apology after a written apology. I cannot be a part of this humiliation and disgrace to the judiciary and as no condition is permanent, I have done the only honourable thing for a reasonable, upright, and disciplined judge to do. I categorically deny the allegation made in your letter against me that I lied;

I wish to emphasize very strongly that I did not tell lies. Accordingly I cannot see how how I can continue to serve as a judge under such a system. I have already given notice of my retirement from service. I cannot condone any attempt to destroy the judicial system in this country using me as a scapegoat”.

Rather than allowing the judge the six months’ notice that he gave, the Supreme Military Council under General Muhammadu Buhari directed him to proceed on his retirement immediately, not minding the part heard cases before him.

The matter subsequently went before the Court of Appeal where a three man panel that consisted of Justice Adenekan Ademola, Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi, and Justice  Owolabi set aside the judgement of Justice Jinadu and decared that Saidu Garba was lawfully fired. Not satisfied, Garba proceed to the Supreme Court.

On October 26, 1986, the Supreme Court, in a lead judgement delivered by Justice Kayode Eso declared that Decree 17 has no effect on the case of Seidu Garba. The apex court thereafter set aside the judgement of the Court of Appeal, and reinstated Garba, thereby vindicating Justice Jinadu. Other members of the panel included Justices Andrew Otutu Obaseki, Saidu Kawu, Abdul Ganiyu Olatunji Agbaje, and Philip Nnaemeka Agu.

Celebrating the courage of Justice Jinadu, The Guardian Newspaper, in its editorial of November 1, 1984 titled “Justice Jinadu: A tribute to courage” said: “Not many men ever utter words so power-packed or so profound that they recommend themselves for perpetual remembrance. But then, not many men qualify for remembrance. Mr Justice Yahaya Jinadu, formerly of the High Court of Lagos State, shines like a hundred diamonds on both accounts. Said he as he bowed out of the nation’s judiciary: I cannot condone any attempt to destroy the judicial system in this country using me as a scape goat;

Those eternal words may one day go down as the epitaph of this remarkable Nigerian. Remarkable because he is one of the few in public life ever to demonstrate that the exigencies of bread- not to mention the butter on top of it-will never corrupt them into desecrating the sanctity of a respected principle”

Justice Jinadu is still alive, hearty, happy and well. He is 92 years old. General Buhari is back as President of Nigeria, while Mr John Oyegun is the immediate past Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), the ruling party, and the judiciary…….

*Source*: Salute to courage. The Story of Justice Yaya Jinadu by Akinola

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Featured

Okuama Massacre: Military Declares Eight Persons Wanted

Published

on

By

The Defence Headquarters has declared eight persons wanted over their roles in the recent killing of 17 military personnel in Delta State.

The military released the list on Thursday at a briefing in Abuja.

Those declared wanted are Prof. Ekpekpo Arthur, Andaowei Dennis Bakriri, Akevwru Daniel Omotegbo (Aka Amagben), Akata Malawa David, Sinclear Oliki, Clement Ikolo Oghenerukeywe, Reuben Baru, and Igoli Ebi.

During the briefing, the Director, Defence Media Operations, Major General Edward Buba, called on Nigerians especially residents of Delta and adjoining states to assist the military with credible information that would lead to the arrest of eight persons allegedly responsible for the killing of seventeen soldiers in Okuama community in Delta State.

General Buba says the military remains determined to fish out the perpetrators of the heinous act in Delta State, reaffirming its commitment to rescue all kidnapped and abducted victims in Nigeria.

Continue Reading

Featured

How CJMR Has Championed Restoration of Justice to Unjustly Incarcerated, Condemned – Founder, Olujobi

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo

“At CJMR, we stand firm on our scriptural foundation: ‘Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, ensure justice for those being crushed. Yes, speak up for the poor and helpless, and see that they get justice…,” Pastor Olujobi 

Most citizens of the world are endowed with milk of human kindness, and are ever ready to lend a helping hand to folks in need, either for cash or kind. One of these citizens is a Nigerian of special breed, filled with compassion and zeal to assist wrongfully detained persons to regain their freedom. He is Mr. Hezekiah Olujobi, who is leading the fight against wrongful detention and elongated detention without trial with his Non-Governmental Organization, the Centre for Justice, Mercy and Reconciliation (CJMR).

The CJMR as stated, is NGO dedicated to promoting human rights and advocacy within the Nigeria Correctional Service and strengthening the rule of law in Nigeria Criminal Justice System, according to the Founder, Mr. Olujobi.

“Our area of focus are Advocacy, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Investigation, Cases review, Rehabilitation of individual upon freedom and Restorative Justice in Criminal Matter,” he added.

The CJMR as an organization, was established in 1999, and was officially registered in 2009. It has since then accumulated an enviable and proven track record of facilitating the release of individuals from death row, some of whom had been unjustly incarcerated for 18 to 28 years.

“Additionally, over 600 inmates have been freed from illegal detention after 4 to 12 years without trial. The organization has also established a Halfway Home that has benefited over 300 individuals.

“Our activities cut across the Correctional service in South West: Oyo, Odun , Ogun and Lagos States. We still have over 100 cases for intervention including 10 people on death row whom we strongly believed they are victims of wrongful conviction,” Olujobi stressed.

Hezekiah Olujobi, also known as a Pastor, for his vocation as a preacher of the gospel, who is the founder of CJMR, is currently working on two books to project the work of the organization so far.

The first, “Their Stories Behind Bars,” is a collection of narratives from individuals wrongfully sentenced to death and how the organization helped secure their rrlease, while the second book, “Their Hurts and Unforgettable Memories,” delves into the stories of victims and offenders, exploring their deep hurts and the healing process through restorative justice.

The following stories below as told by Pastor Olujobi, carefully epitomizes how far the NGO has gone to put smiles on the faces of individuals, who have otherwise lost hope of ever living their lives among free people again

Olaniyi Emiola’s Wrongful Conviction: My Belief in His Innocence

Olaniyi Emiola was sentenced to death based on witness testimony that was a case of mistaken identity. The armed robber apprehended at the crime scene insisted he was not the person being referred to and claimed he did not know Emiola at all. However, one of the victims, who recognized Emiola by the name “Abija,” insisted that he was the culprit. Emiola was known in the streets as “Abija,” not “Niyi,” yet the robber mentioned a “Femi Niyi,” not “Abija.” The man in question is Olaniyi Emiola, not Femi Niyi. During the trial, it was claimed that the robber identified the house of their leader to them, who is known as Abija,

In this controversial case, the conclusion of judgment of my noble lord, Hon Justice Jimoh of the Tribunal Court, was as follows:

“It is our considered judgment that the discovery of the second accused in the house pointed out by the first accused to the prosecution, and the discovery of the stolen items in the house shown to the police by the first accused, are admissible and well taken. Referencing R. v. Garbett (1847) 2 C & K 474 and R. v. Treacy (1945) 30 CAR 93, with these authorities in view, the second accused has been properly identified and linked with the commission of the crime charged.

Since the prosecution has adduced sufficient evidence to place the second accused at the scene at the material time, his alibi defense is logically and physically demolished.

This was established by the Supreme Court in the cases of Patrick Njovens vs. The State (1973) 5 SC 17 at 65 and Christian Nwosisi v. The State (1976) 6 SC 109 at 112.

It is my considered judgment that since the defense of the second accused has failed and, by the acceptable evidence of the prosecution witnesses, the accused has fallen into the warm embrace of the law, and I so hold.

SENTENCE: OLANIYI EMIOLA – The sentence of the Tribunal upon you is that you be hanged by the neck until you are dead or suffer death by firing squad, as the Administrator of this State may direct. May the Lord have mercy on your soul.”

This was the judgment that sent a man to darkness and anguish, leaving him to await execution in a solitary cell for 11 years without the right to appeal, luckily for him, the abolition of execution was announced in Nigeria.

Reprieve came when we visited Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison in 2007. We investigated the matter by analyzing the entire judgment and all the contents of the case file. We took up his case, amplified his voice of innocence, and refuted all the arguments in light of the existing facts recorded in the judgement.

Olaniyi Emiola was finally set free in January 2011, after 17 years had been wrongfully taken from his life.

One can only imagine what would have happened if execution had not been abolished in Nigeria.

CJMR’s Advocacy visit to the Oyo State Attorney General

The organisation has also taken its advocacy to the Attorney General’s office in Oyo State, and achieved certain parameters as represented in the narrative below:

“On Wednesday, March 20, 2024, the Committee for Centre for Justice Mercy and Reconciliation (CJMR) conducted an advocacy visit to the office of the Oyo State Attorney General. The purpose of the visit was to highlight the plight of numerous inmates who have been denied justice and are enduring the prolonged anguish of indefinite trials for capital offenses.

The primary goal of the visit was to bring to the Attorney General’s attention specific cases of individuals who appear to have been wrongfully accused of capital offenses and have been languishing in detention since 2015 without legal advice. Additionally, there are those who have been repeatedly taken to the High Court since 2017 without the prosecution presenting a single witness.

In a recent development on March 18 and 19, 2024, the Oyo State Chief Judge, Honorable Justice Iyabo Yerima, visited the custodial centers in Ibadan and Oyo. She firmly resolved not to address any capital offense cases, maintaining her stance throughout the jail delivery exercise. Consequently, 32 inmates were released from Agodi and 38 from Oyo, totaling 70 releases from facilities that house 1,250 and 827 inmates, respectively. The data clearly indicates that a significant proportion of detainees charged with capital offenses remain unaddressed.

Pastor Olujobi further noted that “During the CJMR’s visit, seven recommendations were proposed to enhance the efficiency of justice delivery by the Attorney General’s office, and a list of 32 individuals awaiting legal advice was submitted.”

The Attorney General, known for his humility and activism, pledged to collaborate with the CJMR.

He further acknowledged that “It is a profound injustice for individuals, even those apprehended with substantial evidence, to be detained indefinitely, risking the degradation of evidence and waning interest or resolve of witnesses. The slow turn of the justice system’s wheels can erode its very foundation.

“Similarly, it is an injustice for an innocent person to endure punishment due to procedural delays or inefficiencies.

The presumption of innocence until proven guilty is a fundamental principle of democratic societies, yet it is undermined when the process to establish innocence is plagued by excessive delays. The time for change is now.

Olujobi is also of the view that “The judiciary must move beyond a confessionary-based approach to prison decongestion and focus on those unjustly detained for capital offenses.”

From Darkness to Light: The Unraveling of Injustice and the Triumph of Freedom for Olusola Adepetu after 26 years behind bar

In this scenario, the police conducted a comprehensive investigation, and the defense attorney performed admirably. However, despite these efforts, the judge appeared to succumb to public pressure, reminiscent of Pontius Pilate’s historical decision, resulting in Olusola Adepetu being wrongfully sentenced to death.

Tragically, this miscarriage of justice led to the loss of 26 years of Adepetu’s life.

The appellant, a native of Ondo state was 34 years old at the time of his arrest, a father of 4 children with a broken home.

He was the owner of Olusola Naturalist Hospital. He was a Guru in herbal traditional-medicine, very popular with radio and television advertisements.

He cures all manner of ailment, he was a highlife socialite, he was a member of special marshal of Federal Road Safety Commission, due to the nature of his work as herbal traditional medicine healer he was highly connected with people in high places who always patronized him and in the world ravaged with deceases people always throng his office to seek healing for their ailments.

He is not a medical doctor but always referred to as Doctor Olusola.

All of a sudden, the light of his fame and popularity went off, he was enveloped with thick darkness. For a good 26 years he never walks under the moon nor is beaten by rain.

What happened?

His girlfriend was murdered in a mysterious way, three days later, her dead body was recovered by the police at the Express way, Sanyo, Ibadan and deposited at mortuary in Adeoyo state Hospital. Who must have done this?

Nobody knows till today. The relations who were in the shop of the father of his girlfriend who saw him when he came to pick the deceased and the bar man who saw him the previous day with the deceased pointed touch light on him.

Upon his arrest, rumors went round the whole city like wildfire and consumed the heart of men, same Radio and Television stations where his advertisements were being jingled, announced his arrest, all kinds of rumors went round the city, his case became a celebrated case.

He was consumed by the public adverse opinion.

With all kinds of rumors, the death of the lady was attributed to ritual killing, some said he cut the breast of the lady, some said he cut her private part for the ritual purpose.

At every court adjournment the whole court room and the premises will always be filled up with people. The case attracted the public interest. Like Pontius Pilate, the judge has no choice than to deliver the innocent man as a sacrificial lamb not for the world but for his likely hidden sin.

Light shines on his path again, when we unravel the case file documents with the dissenting judgement and the man regains his freedom after 26 years.

The critical question is: Who will advocate for the poor and helpless? It is us;
The Chief Judge, Attorney General, Commissioner of Police, and all stakeholders must be involved. And this where CJMR comes in, and the organization are doing it.

“We therefore call for wholesome assistance from all and sundry to sustain the tempo, and help our people, who graciously need the assistance,” Olujobi concluded.

Continue Reading

Featured

Binance Executive Detained in Nigeria Escapes from Custody

Published

on

By

One of the two Binance executives detained in Nigeria for alleged tax evasion and other offences, Nadeem Anjarwalla, has escaped from lawful custody, according to PREMIUM TIMES report.

Our sources said Mr Anjarwalla, 38, escaped on Friday, 22 March, from the Abuja guest house where he and his colleague were detained after guards on duty led him to a nearby mosque for prayers in the spirit of the ongoing Ramadan fast.

The Briton, who also has Kenyan citizenship, is believed to have flown out of Abuja using a Middle East airliner.

It remains unclear how Mr Anjarwalla got on an international flight despite his British passport, with which he entered Nigeria, remaining in the custody of the Nigerian authorities.

Authorities are also said to be working to unravel his intended destination in a bid to get him back into custody.

An Immigration official said the Binance executive fled Nigeria on a Kenyan passport. He, however, said authorities were trying to determine how he obtained the passport, given that he had no other travel document (apart from the British passport) on him when he was taken into custody.

Another source said the two officials were held at a “comfortable guest house” and allowed many rights, including the use of telephones, a privilege Mr Anjarwalla is believed to have exploited to plot an escape.

When contacted Sunday night on the escape of the Binance executive from detention, the Head of Strategic Communication at the Office of the National Security Adviser, Zakari Mijinyawa, said he would enquire and revert. He has yet to do so as of the time of filing this report.

Mr Anjarwalla, Binance’s Africa regional manager, and Tigran Gambaryan, a US citizen overseeing financial crime compliance at the crypto exchange platform, were detained upon their arrival in Nigeria on 26 February 2024.

A criminal charge was filed against the two executives before a Magistrate Court in Abuja. On 28 February 2024, the court granted the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) an order to remand the duo for 14 days. The court also ordered Binance to provide the Nigerian government with the data/information of Nigerians trading on its platform.

Following Binance’s refusal to comply with the order, the court extended the remand of the officials for an additional 14 days to prevent them from tampering with evidence. The court then adjourned the case till 4 April 2024.

Also on 22 March, the Nigerian government approached the Federal High Court in Abuja and slammed another four-count charge on Binance Holdings Limited, Mr Anjarwalla and Mr Gambaryan, accusing them of offering services to subscribers on their platform while failing to register with the Federal Inland Revenue Service to pay all relevant taxes administered by the Service and in so doing, committed an offence, contrary to and punishable under Section 8 of the Value Added Tax Act of 1993 (as Amended).

The defendants were also accused of offering taxable services to subscribers on their trading platform while failing to issue invoices to those subscribers to determine and pay their value-added taxes and, in so doing, committed an offence contrary to and punishable under S.29 of the Value Added Tax Act of 1993 (as amended).

Count Three of the charges accused the three defendants of offering services to subscribers on their Binance trading platform for the buying and selling of cryptocurrencies and the remittance and transfer of those assets while failing to deduct the necessary Value Added Taxes arising from their operations and thereby committing an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 40 of the Federal Inland Revenue Service Establishment Act 2007 (as amended).

The last count of the charges wants the defendants punished for allegedly aiding and abetting subscribers on their Binance trading platform to unlawfully refuse to pay taxes or neglect to pay those taxes and, in so doing, committing an offence contrary to and punishable under the provisions of S.94 of the Companies Income Tax Act (as amended).

The Nigerian government had, in the past three months, been cracking down on suspected money launderers and terrorism financiers, some of whom it alleged are using the Binance platform for criminal activities

The Nigerian government said over $21.6 billion was traded by Nigerians whose identities were concealed by Binance.

Source: Premium Times

Continue Reading

Trending