Over
time, I’ve developed a habit, maybe bad, of re-reading
old newspapers, with the aim of redigesting
and analysing them if necessary. No wonder, a lady once called me the news scavenger. The 17th day of December, 2013 was definitely
not to be different. With thoughts of the acquittal of BG in mind, I quickly
launched the bookmarked pages of my favourite newspapers, cursorily read
through and paused at the story of Bode George's acquittal, with keen attention
on the part where he took time to thank his stars for his
"vindication".
The
news of his acquittal by the Apex Court of Nigeria didn't come as a surprise. Rather,
a sense of expectation had filled my mind knowing full well the facts of that
case and the likelihood of his legal
vindication. Legal I said, legal!
Caveat!
This piece has absolutely nothing to do with the wisdom, rationale or otherwise
of the Supreme Court’s ruling because of I am certain that such venture would
only be akin to an idle rant. More so, it’s the Supreme Court; The Infallible
Supreme Court! Besides that, I agree in part with the Court's reasoning and
basis for the decision. I'd focus my
attention on BG's statement entitled "Glory to God Almighty", where
he claimed to have been vindicated by the goodness of the Lord".
It
beats my imagination as much as it overwhelms me that we now live in a society
where shame now wears a proud face and crime now puts- on the holy garb of
grace and righteousness. An era wherein people are free to steal, loot, kill,
defraud, embezzle, and vandalize to make money and they boldly showcase their
wealth, even in holy places, simply
because they got away and were never caught.
We
now live in a society where individuals with sterling and enviable qualities
are perceived as senseless, stupid and total failures with a grossly negligible
view of life. How sickening!!!
It
sickens the mind to note that the average Nigerian believes crime and
criminality isn't such a bad thing after all, so long he makes good money in
the end. As a result, individuals feel free to amass for themselves, wealth
large enough and meant for an entire nation.
It
is as much a shame as it is grotesquely appalling to hear such a statement in a
flagrant display of shame. Knowing full well the fact that his acquittal was
basically 'technical' and for the sake of not laying down a dangerous
precedent.
High
lighting the rationale behind his acquittal, the Court in its superior wisdom,
per Justice Fabiyi stated that
“The charges framed against the appellant in respect of
splitting contracts and disobedience of guidelines in Exhibit PR is unknown to
any law written at the material
time. They rest on nothing in the face of the provisions of Section
36(8) and (12) of the 1999 Constitution”
No
doubt, the wisdom and sanctity of this particular ratio cannot be faulted on
the 'Law' basis on which it was hinged. It is of sound legal reasoning in line
with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and most laws of the world as well
as common sense.
What remains a mystery to me and is how every
other offence for which BG and others were charged such as “Abuse of Power” and
“Disobedience of Lawful Order” under the Lagos State Criminal Code Law (enacted
in 1914) was lumped together and practically swept under the carpet. Surely,
these two offences existed in a “written
law at the material time”. They do not rest on nothing in the face of the
provisions of Section 36(8) and (12) of the 1999 Constitution.
More
importantly, it does not derogate from the fact that such offences bothering on
corruption are basically crimes against morality and not law in actual sense.
Also, notwithstanding the fact that splitting Contract as an offence now, was never one under the Public
Procurement Act 2007 such act, whatever name styled still bothers on corruption.
It offends morality and a perpetrator of same should be made to feel the heat
of some moral guilt. Such a person should hide his head in shame rather than scamper
to the Press to herald the 'hand of God' in his affairs. God is pure, and has
absolutely nothing to do with corruption of any sort. A breach of a moral code is a breach;
irrespective of the fact that if offends no written law at the time. His comments
about vindication and being saved by God from the claws and machinations of his
detractors couldn’t be more embarrassing and distasteful.
For
instance, the mere fact a rapist, serial killer and arsonist escapes the law
simply because those acts were
performed only a few days or maybe months before a legislation criminalizing
those offences are enacted does not automatically mean he remains enrolled on
the list of saints or that his crime against morality becomes any less
detestable. There couldn’t possibly be a more ironic scene than of such a
person thanking God for his vindication.
Imagine
a cyber fraudster alluding to his moral uprightness simply because cyber crime
as a relatively new offence in the late 90s had zero legislation of the issue.
With
decisions like this, one is forced to wonder how successful the fight against
corruption would eventually pan out.
PS:
For the records, Congratulations to him for the successful removal of the tag
"Ex-convict" and its attendant benefits
from his appendage!
This author surely would go to heaven..
ReplyDeleteThanks for the Vote. #I just hope the Angels are listening though...
DeleteI must confess this is a very nice piece. It makes for a very interesting reading. However, I'm not sure if you are a lawyer, if you are not, I think you should be forgiven for some of your conclusions that are a little far from the truth. We should make efforts to enlighten you more on these. However, if you are a lawyer, I think you might want to look at your reasoning again (With due respect please).
ReplyDeleteLet me just generally and from the onset state that I am not in any way in support of corruption in this country. I am not a politician, in fact, I detest PDP to which we all know BG belongs. I am also not holding his brief here. All I'm doing here is just to shed a little light on some of the things that you have written.
First, while we all expect any law in the society to conform with the morals of the society, we must note that morality and law are two different things that can't be used interchangeably.
Secondly, I am not aware of any anywhere in the world that restricts a person from thanking his God after his vindication. There's therefore no ground for being sentimental over this.
Thirdly, from the reasoning of the SC above that you quoted, do you think the court should have held otherwise?
Fourthly, you also made reference to some laws of Lagos State. If you are vast in criminal jurisprudence you would have known that he could not have been charged properly under those laws.
Lastly, have you thought of where he was tried? Who prsecuted him? Under what law? The authority of the prosecution to prosecute him etc?
Trust me, I am not stating all these because I'm a friend oF BG neither am I saying it based on what I have read on the internet or on the pages of newspaper. I'm giving you nothing short of a first hand information.
If BG goes on trial 100 times based on the same facts and circumstances, he will always come out a free man. Not because he is a saint, but because the law would rather allow ten guilty men to walk away than for an innocent man to be wrongly convicted.
Just my thought.
Firstly, I'd begin by appreciating not just your comments alone, but the civility shown in your presentation.
DeleteSecondly, I've always been irked by total concurrence with my ideas in my posts. Thus, a reaction like yours to a large extent douses that irritation.
That said, let me consider your first issue first. The fact of the nature of law and morality being totally different can't be new to any lawyer or student who knows his onions. I've worked tediously over time to grow from the latter to the former and all thanks to God, I have! My write up here could never be taken to quarrel against BG's acquittal on its legal basis. Granted, the decision of the apex court ought to, must be and was founded on Law not morality. Rightly so too. The simple message from the piece is that recourse should always be made to good and bad(forget relativism), posterity and of course the notion that we live in a Social, and not a Legal world where Everything has to be decided on the basis of Law'. If it has to be law alone, how is it homosexuality is roundly condemned in many societies, in spite of zero legislation criminalising same? Need I ask about bestiality and Racism too?
This idea however has nothing to do with the Supreme Court's decision. I've got no qualms with the acquittal of BG. The facts lean in his favour. My work is strictly directed to BG's thanksgiving issue and to the bulk of Nigerians who would also toe such a part to go an a thanksgiving-spree simply because they got away with a wrong.
On your second issue, as much as there isn't a place in the world where anyone is restricted from thanking his God, it still doesn't hide the fact that it bodes evil for our society that even with guilt and soiled hands, people still make bold to publicly "thank God". What for? Could it possibly be for getting away, for beating justice, or successfully 'achieving' an evil plot? Shouldn't it rather be about hiding in the PRIVACY and confines of your room to ask for forgiveness and maybe redemption? The spate of corruption in government offices is so rife that one needs no telling what must have transpired between BG and his co-accused persons.
To your third issue/ question, the answer you seek lies in the post. One needs no special reading to decipher it. But for the sake of clarity, I'd point it out. Hear this;
"No doubt, the wisdom and sanctity of this particular ratio cannot be faulted on the 'Law' basis on which it was hinged. It is of sound legal reasoning in line with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution and most laws of the world as well as common sense".
Just before that, it also appears thus;
"More so, it’s the Supreme Court; The Infallible Supreme Court! Besides that, I agree in part with the Court's reasoning and basis for the decision.
contd...
ReplyDeleteAs to the question of Court with jurisdiction, the simple rule that the nature of offence and the statute contravened ie whether Federal or State, determines the Court with jurisdiction is elementary.The offences for which he was charged at the Lagos State High Court were both under the Public procurement Act and the Criminal Code Law of Lagos State. From your argument, its easy to deduce that you are of the opinion he ought to have been tried in a Federal High Court. But that argument, however, seems to have its foundation on the apparent ignorance of the fact that under Section 251(2) and (3) CFRN 1999,and section 7(4) Federal High Court Act, exclusive jurisdiction was only conferred on the FHC in respect of Civil causes and NEVER in respect of Criminal matters under the Exclusive legislative list in S. 251(1) CFRN '99.Thus, both the FHC and the HC has Jurisdiction to try BG in this instance.See Momodu v. State(2008)All FWLR (pt 744) 47.
Before I drop this issue, maybe we should take a while here to ponder on one question. How is it the counsel for the Accused persons never objected to the jurisdiction of the Court up to the Supreme Court. More so, if they did, how come the Supreme court never ruled on that issue, knowing too well the fundamental nature of Jurisdiction in legal proceedings? If the answers don't point us in the right direction here, then not even the Stars that led the three wise men can.
For every other issue, I guess the answers are deducible from all I've laboured to say.
Finally, my friend, commission of an offence or sin is what requires penance, remorse and forgiveness. Not Conviction by a court of Law.
Having obviously committed an offence, you need not be convicted by a court of law through diligent prosecution to become ashamed, remorseful and quietly ask God for forgiveness,or go for confession rather than 'thanking' him! Even if not convicted by a competent Court of law, a 'sinner' parodies the concept of thanksgiving by hastily rushing to the mountains to herald the notion that God was his accessory after the fact or aided his crime.
Don't forget too uncle Zimmerman- was never convicted for murder but he now lives a different life owing to the fact of the Soceity's perception of him as a "grave sinner".
So,even if he goes free a zillion times, we owe him a zillion and one Congratulations, but not without knowledge of the irony of his thanksgiving stunts.
Wow! Gud job dear
ReplyDelete