By Magnus Onyibe

In response to the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) proposal for a 70% tax on the excessive profits banks made from naira devaluation in 2023 – profits which increased by at least 51% due to President Bola Tinubu’s economic reforms – there has been a noticeable rise in banks’ philanthropic activities.

The proposed excess profits tax, or windfall tax on foreign exchange gains, floated four months ago, appears to be part of the government’s strategy to address its declining revenue base. This is critical as the cost of governance continues to outpace income. For instance, Nigeria’s 2025 budget, totaling ₦49.7 trillion, relies on borrowing ₦13.08 trillion, while ₦15.33 trillion will be used to service the country’s enormous debt, which stands at an estimated ₦134.3 trillion. Only ₦34.82 trillion of the budget is expected to come from royalties and taxes.

To reduce the country’s dependence on borrowing, President Tinubu brought in Taiwo Oyedele, a former PwC West Africa tax head, to overhaul Nigeria’s outdated tax administration system, which the president has described as a relic of colonial times. Oyedele’s assignment, aimed at strengthening the system and generating more revenue, aligns with the government’s goal of improving infrastructure and services through increased fiscal resources has been welcome by most Nigerians who are looking forward to a better country with more robust infratructure which only more revenue can faciliate.
But there is a snag which is that some Nigerians are worried about the implications for the income accruing to their states from the federation account which they suspect will be reduced

The excess profits tax proposal seems to have been seen by the president’s tax reform committee, which includes private-sector experts, as a readily available source of additional revenue. Many of these experts, familiar with banks’ financial records through previous auditing roles, likely identified the windfall profits as an easy target.

While banks initially resisted the proposal, they were cautious not to do so too publicly. Prominent figures like Olisa Agbakoba, a former Nigerian Bar Association president, and Mustafa Chike-Obi, chairman of the Bank Directors Association of Nigeria (BIDAN), voiced criticism. However, the Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria (CITN), led by its president Chief Segun Agbeluyi, supported the move.

Subsequently, United Bank for Africa (UBA) chairman Tony Elumelu and First City Monument Bank (FCMB) CEO Ladi Balogun engaged with the presidency in consultations. Their temperate and conciliatory approach during interviews, following the initial announcement of the tax, helped ease tensions between banks and their regulator, the CBN, shifting the debate away from public confrontation.

The issue of the proposed excess profits tax was eventually moved from public discussion to private negotiations in boardrooms. This stands in sharp contrast to the uproar triggered by the four tax reform bills introduced by the Taiwo Oyedele-led committee, which are currently being debated in the National Assembly (NASS). These bills propose significant reforms to Nigeria’s colonial-era tax system, as highlighted by President Tinubu in his first media address since assuming office on May 29, 2023.

Before the lawmakers went on their annual recess, the bills had sparked intense controversy, particularly among northern lawmakers who felt the proposed changes, especially to Value Added Tax (VAT), would disproportionately benefit the south. This contentious debate deepened the longstanding ethnic, religious, and regional divides between northern and southern legislators, overshadowing traditional party lines and amplifying non-partisan tensions.

As the situation edged toward a potential crisis, a truce was brokered at the Aso Rock Villa. Legislators were urged to set aside their disagreements and take more time to review the bills thoroughly, enabling them to suggest reasonable amendments. President Tinubu, in numerous public statements, expressed his willingness to incorporate these adjustments before the bills’ final passage.

The vigorous debate surrounding these tax reform bills raises questions about how much more contentious the removal of petrol subsidies might have been had it been subjected to a similar public debate. If the tax reforms have ignited such a high level of scrutiny, one can only imagine the political turmoil that might have ensued over discussions on petrol subsidies or the unification of the dual naira-foreign exchange window.
This is where a very thin line separates leaders from being democrats or monarchies. That is because if as democrats they allow extensive and unending debates on critical development issues, action will never be taken. But if they ram policies down the throats of legislators , such leaders would be adorned with the toga of dictatorship or as one who is monarchical.
Therein lies the dilema and a justification for the aphorism “ uneasy lies the head that wears the crown”
And it is at times like that, that Executive Orders which are easier ways of making laws while bypassing the legislators are viable options. But they are restrictive and tenous as they lack wide coverage and the longevity that are inherent in laws passed via a due legislative process.

However, President Tinubu appears to recognize the critical importance of timing in politics. With a limited four-year term, he seems determined to implement key reforms early to gain public confidence and lay the groundwork for potential re-election.

Returning to the matter of banks and the excess profits tax, it seems likely that a compromise was reached between the CBN and the banking sector, possibly facilitated by the Bankers’ Committee—a coalition of bank managing directors. This may explain why the excess profits tax has not yet been enforced, appearing instead to have been put on hold.

One of the driving forces behind the foreign exchange gains tax is the urgent need to generate revenue to sustain governance amidst soaring costs. This includes ₦15.81 trillion allocated to debt servicing, with the country’s debt estimated to have reached ₦77 trillion by the time the Tinubu administration assumed office. Expanding the tax base has thus become a necessity.

In this context, banks, under pressure to meet new capital base requirements of ₦500 billion for international operations and ₦200 billion for regional operations, may have directed the government’s tax authorities to explore the potential of taxing electronic transactions. This includes levying charges whenever Nigerians transfer or receive funds electronically in their bank accounts.

The recently introduced Electronic Money Transfer Levy (EMTL) requires banks to deduct ₦50 on electronic transfers or receipts of ₦10,000 or more. With 231.1 million bank accounts in Nigeria as of July last year, the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System (NIBSS) estimates that this levy could generate as much as ₦484 billion over three years. While this has the potential to be a significant revenue source for the government, it raises the question: will it come at the expense of already overburdened Nigerians?

Because the charges are relatively small—a minor percentage of the transaction amount—most bank account holders seem not to feel the pinch yet. This contrasts sharply with the public uproar that followed the removal of the petrol subsidy on May 29, 2023, which sent shockwaves through the economy. While the dust from the subsidy removal is gradually settling, the EMTL could create another source of tension between the government, banks, and the public. The question remains: is such friction unavoidable?

It appears banks are aware of the backlash before the tax that is currently in abeyance was imposed and the potential backlash of the EMTL when the banking public become conscious of it. In what seems to be an attempt to improve their public image and foster goodwill among customers, they have embarked on large-scale Cause Related Marketing (CRM) campaigns in past four (4) months or so. These efforts aim to balance corporate interests with public good, blending their business strategies with socially beneficial initiatives.

This is not the first time banks have faced criticism. When the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) proposed the excess profits tax on foreign exchange gains, I authored an article titled “Banks FX Gains Tax: How CSR Could Have Averted It”, published on August 13 last year. In the piece, I reflected on how proactive Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) measures might have softened the blow of public disapproval. For instance, banks had previously undertaken commendable initiatives, such as renovating the National Arts Theatre and contributing to the CACOVID initiative, which provided medical and economic relief during the pandemic.

During the public launch of my book, “Leading From The Streets: Media Interventions By A Public Intellectual 1999–2019”, three months ago, I highlighted the stark contrast between the significant profits banks were declaring and the struggles of other sectors and ordinary Nigerians. I suggested that banks could demonstrate their commitment to the greater good by waiving certain fees, such as charges for SMS alerts and printed statements. Such small gestures could go a long way in fostering goodwill and mitigating criticism.

“Corporate Nigeria demonstrated admirable resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the guidance of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), banks and major corporations, through the CACOVID initiative, provided essential support to Nigerians. This effort earned them public praise and bolstered confidence in their commitment to societal well-being.”

I shared this perspective on May 8, several months before the proposal to amend the 2023 Finance Act on July 17, which the Senate approved on July 23. Had bank executives heeded earlier advice to ease the financial burden on their customers, the FX gains tax—now a significant source of concern for them—might never have been introduced. It seems this realization prompted banks to intensify their Cause Related Marketing (CRM) efforts, aligning their brands with various social issues affecting vulnerable communities, whether they are customers or not.

Historically, Nigerian banks have been active in philanthropic initiatives. Available data shows that they have invested significantly in education, healthcare, economic empowerment, and environmental sustainability. For example:
• Education: First Bank of Nigeria established the First Bank Education Endowment Scheme to provide scholarships for undergraduates. Similarly, Zenith Bank launched the Zenith Bank Scholarship Scheme, and GTBank set up its own scholarship initiative to support university students.
• Healthcare: Access Bank initiated the Maternal Health Services Support (MHS) program to improve maternal healthcare, while the UBA Foundation created the UBA Health Initiative to deliver medical aid and health education to communities.
• Economic Empowerment: Stanbic IBTC introduced the Business Incubator Program to foster entrepreneurship and small business development. Fidelity Bank also rolled out the SME Financing Scheme to provide financial support to small and medium-sized enterprises.
• Environmental Sustainability: Ecobank developed the Forests for Life program to promote sustainable forest management and conservation.

Despite these longstanding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) efforts, public perception of banks remains largely negative. This is partly because banks continue to generate massive profits during periods of widespread economic hardship, like in 2024, when firms were shutting down and individuals struggled due to the impact of socio-economic reforms.

Banks have increasingly realized that CSR alone is not enough to earn public trust. It’s not just about supporting communities but also about visibly engaging with them—a principle that CRM embodies. Unlike CSR, which encompasses broader goals like philanthropy, sustainability, and ethical practices, CRM is a targeted marketing strategy. It seeks to foster an emotional connection between the public and a brand by aligning with specific societal causes.

In light of the proposed tax, banks have shifted their focus from merely advertising their products to associating their brands with public causes. For example:
• UBA has expanded its educational support to include training for the visually impaired in the use of Braille, showcased through televised campaigns.
• Access Bank and Fidelity Bank have also reoriented their advertising strategies over the past four months to highlight their support for social causes rather than solely promoting products and services.
Hitherto the sponsoring of Fashion Week by Gtbank, Tech Week by Zenithbank and Marathan Race by Access bank annually in Lagos had been the most immersive experience of CSR involving those tier -1 banks with their publics.

But banks have learnt that by embedding their brands into social goodwill, they aim to improve their image and strengthen their relationship with the Nigerian public. However, time will tell if this goodwill can endure. The recently introduced Electronic Money Transfer Levy (EMTL), though currently unnoticed by many due to its modest charge of ₦50 per transaction, could soon spark public dissatisfaction. If this happens, banks might once again find themselves at odds with their customers, as was the case with the unpopular fees for SMS alerts.

As the conventional wisdom goes: ‘a stitch in time saves nine’

Magnus Onyibe, a public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, (2003-2007) sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.

To continue with this conversation and more, please visit www.magnum.ng.

By Hezekiah Deboboye Olujobi

The judiciary holds a pivotal role in society, often described as the guardian of justice and the arbiter of disputes. However, the metaphor of the pen as both a tool that can save lives and one that can destroy them encapsulates the duality of judicial power. While judges have the authority to uphold justice and protect the innocent, there are instances where their decisions have led to grave miscarriages of justice, resulting in the wrongful conviction of individuals, some of whom have spent years, if not decades, on death row.

The Pen That Saves Lives

In an ideal scenario, the judiciary serves as a protector of the innocent and a mechanism for upholding the rule of law. Judges are tasked with interpreting the law fairly and impartially, ensuring that justice is served. When judges exercise their discretion with compassion and integrity, they can indeed save lives. For example, in cases where mitigating circumstances are considered, judges may opt for rehabilitation over punishment, allowing individuals to reintegrate into society and contribute positively. Additionally, in cases where defendants have spent years behind bars without concrete evidence except for a confessional statement, judges may consider granting the defendant a second chance.

The Pen That Destroys Lives

Conversely, there are numerous documented cases where judicial decisions have led to catastrophic outcomes for innocent individuals. The phenomenon of wrongful convictions is a stark reminder of the fallibility of the judicial system globally. Factors contributing to these injustices include inadequate legal representation, prosecutorial and police misconduct, reliance on unreliable witness testimony, and systemic biases.

Case Studies of Misjudgment

1. The Case of Olusola Adepetu

Background: Olusola Adepetu was wrongfully convicted of murder in Nigeria, a case that highlights the severe flaws in the judicial process. Adepetu was accused of killing a man based on circumstantial evidence and public sentiment rather than concrete proof.

Circumstances of Conviction: Adepetu’s conviction stemmed from a combination of public outcry and inadequate investigation. The prosecution relied heavily on witness testimonies that were influenced by community bias and fear rather than factual evidence. Despite having a competent legal defense, the trial was marred by procedural irregularities and a lack of due process.

Time on Death Row: Adepetu spent 22 years on death row in Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison, enduring the psychological and emotional toll of being labeled a murderer. His life was put on hold, and he faced the constant threat of execution. He was also subjected to the harsh realities of prison life, which included overcrowding, violence, and inadequate healthcare.

Appeals and Dissenting Judgment: After years of legal battles, Adepetu’s appeal to the Supreme Court was denied. However, a dissenting judgment from one of the justices pointed out that he had been denied a fair trial, which became a crucial piece of evidence in his fight for exoneration. This dissent highlighted the need for a thorough review of the evidence and the judicial process that led to his conviction.

Release and Aftermath: In 2016, after relentless advocacy from legal aid organizations and the Centre for Justice Mercy and Reconciliation, Adepetu was finally exonerated. His release was bittersweet; while he regained his freedom, he faced the daunting task of rebuilding his life after decades of wrongful imprisonment. The emotional scars and the impact on his family were profound, as his children had suffered educational setbacks and social stigma due to his wrongful conviction.

2. The Exoneration of Olaniyi Emiola

Background Olaniyi Emiola was wrongfully convicted of armed robbery in 2011, a case that underscores the dangers of relying on unreliable witness testimony.

Circumstances of Arrest: Emiola was accused by neighbors who believed he was involved in a robbery that occurred in their community. The accusation was based on hearsay and the mistaken belief that he was the perpetrator. Despite the lack of concrete evidence linking him to the crime, he was arrested and charged.

Trial and Conviction: During the trial, witnesses testified against Emiola, claiming they saw him at the scene of the crime. However, the real perpetrator, who was later apprehended for another crime, admitted to the jury that he had committed the robbery and did not know Emiola. Despite this, Emiola was convicted and sentenced to death, highlighting the failures of the judicial system to adequately assess the credibility of witness testimonies.

Time on Death Row: Emiola spent 17 years on death row, enduring the psychological trauma of living under the constant threat of execution. His family faced significant hardships during this time, as they struggled with the stigma of having a family member on death row and the financial burdens associated with legal fees and prison visits.

Exoneration: In 2011, after persistent advocacy and the revelation of new evidence, including confessions from the real culprits, Emiola was exonerated. His release was a moment of triumph, but it came with the realization that his life had been irrevocably altered. His wives had left him, and his children had grown up without their father, facing their own challenges as a result of his wrongful conviction.

3. The Case of Kareem Olatinwo and Others

Background: Kareem Olatinwo, an elderly man, was wrongfully convicted of armed robbery along with his son and two laborers. This case illustrates the complexities of witness testimony and the influence of external factors, such as land disputes, on judicial outcomes.

Circumstances of Arrest: Olatinwo and his co-defendants were accused of robbing a property where they were actually the victims. The case was heavily influenced by dubious witness testimonies and a lack of concrete evidence linking them to the crime. The motive for their arrest was suspected to be related to a land dispute, which complicated the judicial proceedings.

Trial and Conviction: The trial was characterized by a lack of rigorous scrutiny of the evidence presented. Olatinwo’s past criminal record was used against him, despite the absence of any direct evidence linking him to the robbery. The prosecution relied on testimonies from individuals who had their own motives for testifying against Olatinwo and his son.

Time in Prison: Olatinwo and his son were sentenced to death in 2001. Olatinwo’s health deteriorated during his time in prison, and he ultimately died while still incarcerated in 2015. His son and the two laborers remained on death row, facing the psychological and emotional toll of wrongful imprisonment.

Appeals and Release: After years of advocacy, the appeals for the two laborers succeeded in 2014, leading to their release. The legal team used the reasoning from the Court of Appeal, which expressed doubts about the credibility of the witnesses. In 2021, Olatinwo’s son was also released after a lengthy battle, but the case raised critical questions about the reliability of witness testimony and the responsibility of judges to ensure fair trials.

Conclusion

These case studies illustrate the profound impact of wrongful convictions on individuals, families, and society as a whole. They highlight the need for reforms in the judicial system, including better training for judges, improved legal representation for defendants, and mechanisms for reviewing wrongful convictions. The emotional, psychological, and social ramifications of these injustices are far-reaching, emphasizing the importance of a fair and transparent judicial process. The stories of Olusola Adepetu, Olaniyi Emiola, and Kareem Olatinwo serve as powerful reminders of the human cost of judicial errors and the urgent need for reform.

Centre for Justice Mercy and Reconciliation

The **Centre for Justice Mercy and Reconciliation** is a grassroots organization dedicated to advocating for victims of wrongful convictions and illegal detention in Nigeria’s custodial centers. With a remarkable track record of achievements, our organization works tirelessly to provide legal assistance, raise awareness about the issues of wrongful convictions, and support the reintegration of exonerated individuals into society.

Through our efforts, the Centre has been instrumental in highlighting the flaws within the judicial system and pushing for necessary reforms. We engage in community outreach, legal advocacy, and collaboration with other organizations to ensure that justice is served and that the rights of the wrongfully convicted are upheld.

By advocating for those who have been wrongfully convicted, the Centre for Justice Mercy and Reconciliation plays a crucial role in restoring hope and dignity to individuals and families affected by judicial errors, striving to ensure that the judiciary serves as a true protector of the innocent and a pillar of justice in society.

For more details about our work and initiatives, you can visit our website at [www.cjmr.com.ng](http://www.cjmr.com.ng). We also welcome partnerships and support from individuals and organizations committed to justice and human rights. For inquiries, you can contact us at +2348030488093 or +2348025782527.

By Hon Femi Kehinde

There was an interesting anecdote about a group of failed business entrepreneurs who at a meeting to formally dissolve and disengage with their business as a result of the current economy tide, resolved to move into another line of business. One of them instantly suggested that they setup an High Court where they would be selling and granting injunctions through Ex-parte applications at an exorbitant fees. Perhaps to recoup their huge loss. Funny though as it may sound and naively too, it epitomizes a public perception of the Judiciary and perhaps our entire legal system.

It is certainly impossible for a private person to set up a Court, be it inferior or superior Courts of Record. Section 6 of the Nigerian Constitution, certainly abhors their cynical thoughts.

In 1962, Chief Samuel Ladoke Akintola took the matter of his removal as Premier of the Western Region to the High Court under Justice Quarshee-Idun, a Ghanaian, then as the Chief Judge of the Western Region, who rather than listen to the matter and throw the Western Region into further crisis, sent it to the Federal Supreme court for the interpretation of Section 33 (10) of the Western Region Constitution. The Federal Supreme Court interpreted the Section in favor of Akintola and declared his removal null and void.

This piece is certainly dedicated to a Judicial Icon of that era – Justice J.I.C Taylor as a sweet memorabilia.

In Nigeria legal folklore, the name ‘J.I.C’ (John Idowu Conrad) Taylor will ever remain ever green like a constant star, in our juridical firmament.

J.I.C was the fourth child of Eusebius James Alexander Taylor, a famous and successful lawyer, a nationalist who was then referred to as the “Cock of the Bar”, and whose family house was at No. 5 Victoria Street, Lagos, very close to Tinubu Square, which in the Lagos of early days was referred to as the most important street in Lagos – “Ehin Igbeti” or the bulwark of Lagos, but now known as Nnamdi Azikiwe street.

J.I.C’s mother, was Remilekun Alice Taylor (Nee Williams) and was thus, a first cousin, through his mother, to the Late Chief F.R.A Williams, another legal titan and contemporary at the Bar.

J.I.C was born, on the 27th of August, 1917 and died on the 7th of November, 1973 at the age of 56 Years. Within this short span, J.I.C lived a worthy, glorious and exemplary life, that would still remain unmatched and unparalleled in Nigeria’s history of incorruptibility at the bench, judicial independence, strict interpretation of the law, restraint, courage, uncommon judicial boldness and untainted integrity.

J.I.C Taylor, had his early education at the Methodist Boys High School Lagos, before being sent to England by his father, to complete his Secondary School Education at the Culford School, Bury Saint Edmunds, at Suffolk. He thereafter, proceeded to King’s College England in 1936 to read Law, before transferring to Brasenose College, Oxford in 1937, where he made a Second-Class Degree in Jurisprudence. He was subsequently called to the Bar at the middle Temple on the 14th of January, 1941.

Within a space of 15 years, J.I.C Taylor had become one of the great Legal luminaries at the Nigerian Bar, and was prominent in the ranks of Bode Thomas, F.R.A Williams and Fani Kayode, who had formed a law partnership of Thomas, Williams, Fani Kayode & Co (Solicitors), S.L.A Akintola, Chief Chris Ogunbanjo, Michael Odesanya, who had also formed a partnership of Samuel, Chris & Michael (Solicitors) in 1952.
Obafemi Awolowo had also in Ibadan, around this period, formed a law Partnership with Chief Abiodun Akerele, then known as Awolowo, Akerele & Co (Solicitors) in Oke-Ado, Ibadan. In Law practice, Obafemi Awolowo was described then as a terrible cross-examiner.

J.I.C in law practice, was a very resourceful lawyer of impeccable integrity. He was extremely knowledgeable in law and was a delightful personality at the Nigerian Bar. He was blessed with a great command of English Language, which is the potent tool of the legal profession and very eloquent with a diction that was impeccable. He was not given to frivolities or undignified practice.

Like his father, Eusebius, he had a weakness. He was easily provoked and tended therefore to lose control in court whenever he was angry. The Late Chief F.R.A Williams in advocacy with Taylor was always happy to take advantage of this weakness. The Late Fani Kayode too, though a friend to J.I.C, had also taken advantage of this weakness, whilst appearing with J.I.C in some instances, but nevertheless, admitted that he was a meticulous and dogged advocate.

J.I.C Taylor as a seminal figure at the Nigerian Bar had appeared in many “causes celebres” – celebrated cases that have gone down in our legal jurisprudence, as hallmarks. These cases, includes the case of King’s College students, who had demonstrated during the Second World War against the colonial authorities on account of poor administration of their school and also appeared in the Sedition Trial of the Editors to the Daily Commet and the West African Pilot of Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, the Sedition Trial of Anthony Enahoro of 1947, the case of Prince Adeyinka Oyekan and Others and Oba Adeniyi Adele in 1952, in which the ownership and legal status of the “Iga Idunganran”, which was the traditional residence of the Oba of Lagos was in question.

He also appeared in the case of Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani and the African Press Ltd, (publishers of The Tribune Newspaper) In 1953, Zik Enterprises Ltd (Publishers of the West African Pilot) and Others V. The Hon. Obafemi Awolowo in 1955. By way of a little digress, Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani who was in 1960 made the Chairman, Nigerian Railway Corporation, had earlier been member, Board of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) and Nigerian Coal Corporation, Enugu (NCC) and was also made Pro Chancellor and chairman of the Governing Council of the University of Ibadan. He was then, a close confidant to the Late Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe and was resident in Ibadan. He had earlier been accused of unbridled nepotism in the appointment of people to the Nigerian Railway Corporation.
Dr. Okechukwu Ikejiani, was a lover of cars and was noted to have had on his stable a car known as “Thunderbird”, perhaps the best of his time, on the streets of Ibadan. He admitted at the Adefarasin Panel, on the affairs of the Nigerian Railway Corporation, late in 1966, that – “I love cars”.

In 1956, at the age of 39, J.I.C Taylor was appointed a Judge of the High Court of the Western Region. In 1960, he was elevated to the Supreme Court and he descended from the Court in 1964 to become the Chief Justice of the High Court of the Federal Territory of Lagos.

When Lagos state was created in 1967 and Brigadier Mobalaji Johnson became its Military Governor, J.I.C Taylor became its first Chief Justice. Whilst in office as the Chief Justice of Lagos State, an incident happened, which stood him out as a very bold, courageous and independent judge. J.I.C Taylor, then Chief Justice of Lagos State, had been invited to a State dinner by the Military Governor of the State- Brigadier Mobolaji Johnson and the invitation was brought by one of the Governor’s aides. Justice Taylor, after reading it, endorsed a brief note to the governor at the back of the invitation card, informing him that he would be unable to attend, because the Lagos State government had several cases pending before him and it would therefore, in the circumstances be most inappropriate for him to honour the invitation. That simple (unprecedented though) act of judicial boldness and courage, best captures the essence of the man- as a man among men, and a judicial icon and oracle.

Perhaps, in other climes, this feat could only have been surpassed, by the great Alfred Thompson Denning- commonly known as Lord Denning, who was an English Lawyer and Judge, with degrees in Mathematics (First Class) and Law in 1920 and 1922 respectively at the Oxford University. He had also, like J.I.C Taylor, descended from the House of Lords, to return to the Court of Appeal, as Master of the Rolls in 1962, a position he held for 20 years. In Denning’s 38 year career as a Judge, he was known as the people’s judge, a judicial activist and a man with a great penchant for justice. Denning in an instance had once said- “unlike my brother Judge here, who is concerned with the Law, I am concerned with Justice.” He died on the 5th of March, 1999, at the ripe old age of 100 years, at the Royal Hampshire County Hospital, Winchester, England.

Another true essence of J.I.C Taylor was displayed when he was made the Pro Chancellor of the University of Lagos, while still serving as the Chief Justice of Lagos State. J.I.C as the Chairman of the Governing Board of the University of Lagos was a hard nut to crack, with a huge principle and unsurpassed integrity. Other members of the Governing Council were Col. (now Maj. General Rtd) Olufemi Olutoye, and now Oba of Ido Ani, in Ondo State, (the Military Member), Mr. (now Chief) S. Ade John (Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Education,) Mallam Nuhu Bayero, Professors- F.O Dosekun, O.J Fagbemi, C.O. Taiwo, A.B Aderibigbe, A. Akinsanya and Mrs. B. Olumide.

According to Professor Saburi Biobaku, then as Vice Chancellor of the University had said of J.I.C- “attending council meetings of those days before the resignation was like going into a battle field” but described him however, “as a brilliant lawyer, a forthright judge, a strict disciplinarian and a stickler for procedure.” As Vice Chancellor, he briefed the then Pro-Chancellor once every week, but would rather wait for him at the office of Mr. R.A Bakare, the then Registrar of the Lagos State High Court, for the briefings. Nobody visits him in chambers.
J.I.C Taylor at the Council meeting of the Governing Council of the University of Lagos, on the 20th of September 1970 tendered his resignation as the Chairman of the Council, due to some inappropriateness, bothering on the interpretation of procedure, with regards to the appointment of persons in the University and ruled that his resignation should not be discussed.
As a judicial conservative, J.I.C Taylor believed in the principle of “lex lata” i.e. what is the strict interpretation of the law, rather than “de lege ferenda”, i.e. what the law ought to be, with a view, to be future law.

Despite a stern and principled life that bordered on asceticism, J.I.C was a sociable, principled, highly urbane, unassuming and cultivated man. Even though reserved and would rather prefer the company of a few select friends, he was a great sportsman and was prominent in the game of cricket between 1947 and 1949. He was a motor racing enthusiast and had a high collection of motor racing cars, including an “Aston Maria”. He was a very skilled ball room dancer and a lover of Juju music of the Late Akanbi Wright, alias Akanbi Ege, I.K Dairo, Adeolu Akinsanya alias Baba Eto and latter day Juju exponents- Ebenezer Obey and King Sunny Ade. J.I.C so much loved the music of Akanbi Ege, that he in fact financially supported him.

In the late 1950s, his only son was struck down by Polio. He was so much affected by this, according to the Late Fatai Williams, a one time Chief Justice of Nigeria, that- “he visited the boy who was then, no more than a toddler, everyday at the University College Hospital in Ibadan. Eventually, he became a recluse and hardly went anywhere”. J.I.C breathed his last to join the saints triumphants on the 7th of November, 1973 at the age of 56 years, while still serving as the Chief Justice of Lagos State.

In this season of anomie, this period of judicial mudslinging and irreverence, where are the likes of Justice John Idowu Conrad Taylor, Justice Kayode Eso, Justice Andrew Otutu Obaseki, Justice Bolarinwa Oyegoke Babalakin, that was a stickler for time, Justice Chukwudifu Oputa, Justice Teslim Olawale Elias, Justice Namman Nasir, Justice Sir Darnley (Omowale ) Alexandra – the Jamaican born Nigerian Chief Justice of the Federation, Justice Idigbe, Justice E.O Morgan, E.A Coker, Fatai Williams, Olumuyiwa Jibowu, J.A Kester, S.O Lambo, Louis Mbanefo, Adetokunbo Ademola, Udo Udoma, Quarshie- Idun- a Ghanaian Chief Justice of the Western Region and a host of other eminent jurists, who had contributed immensely to the development of Nigerian Case Law and jurisprudence, by adapting very admirably the principles of English common law to the Nigerian environment? Uniquely too, Justice Mamman Nasir, elevated to the Supreme Court in 1975, had also descended from the Court in 1978, to become the President of the Court of Appeal until 1992, when he retired.

J.I.C had set a very high ethical standard on the administration of Justice in Nigeria and greatly inspired many Nigerian Lawyers and Judges, who will not be found with the filthy lucre of unexplainable and ill-gotten wealth. The question had always been- where are these ethical standards of the olden days of J.I.C.?

As a parting epitaph on his passage, the then Head of State and Commander in Chief of the Armed forces of Nigeria- General Yakubu Gowon, in November, 1973, had described J.I.C in the following sweet terms- “In an age in which corruption, intrigues, backstabbing and the love of office and power are fast becoming virtues, Justice Taylor stood out from the crowd, with a detachment that has brought immense dignity to the high office of judge”

What a very apt epithet, to our contemporary Justice System and executive lawlessness, as was beautifully decried in the popular case of Ojukwu V. Lagos State Government.

J.I.C Taylor, may your soul continue to Rest in Peace.

Hon. (Barr.) Femi Kehinde. MHR
Legal practitioner and former member House of Representatives, National Assembly, Abuja 1999 – 2003, representing Ayedire/Iwo/Olaoluwa Federal Constituency of Osun State.