By Judith Ezeudogu

Mr Raphael Chima, a businessman, on Tuesday, dragged his wife, Joy, before a Customary Court in Jikwoyi because she frequently beats him.

He made the allegation in a divorce petition he filed against her before the court.

“My wife physically abuses and harasses me. She slaps me at the slightest chance. She abuses me mentally,” he said.

He also told the court that his wife was disrespectful to his parents.

The petitioner told the court that his wife has long abandoned their child to him, that he has been the only one caring for the child without the help of his wife.

He prayed the court to grant him the custody of the only child of the marriage and dissolve the marriage between him and his wife.

The respondent, Joy denied the allegations.

The presiding judge, Dada Oluwaseyi, advised the couple to explore reconciliation.

Oluwaseyi adjourned the matter until July 27, for report of settlement or hearing. (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

Edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Taiye Agbaje
A High Court of the Federal Capital Territory sitting in Bwari has abruptly closed a case filed by the Nigerian Police against the National Chairman, All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), Chief Edozie Njoku, and another over alleged conspiracy to alter a judgment of the Supreme Court delivered by retired Justice Mary Peter Odili.
Justice Mohammed Madugu, who gave the order due to failure of police prosector, Rinasomte Ezekiel, to produce other witnesses in court, directed Njoku and Chukwuemeka Nwoga, the defendants in the charge, to open their case.
Justice Madugu observed that the defendants were charged to court on Nov. 22, 2022 by the police.
He said Ezekiel had made the court to see the urgency of the matter, and assured that he would close his case within two weeks.
The judge, however, expressed dismay that since Nov. 22, 2022, the police lawyer had only called two witnesses, with several adjournments.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that on July 4, Justice Madugu had threatened to close the case of the prosecution if he failed to produce his remaining witnesses in court on the next adjourned date.
At a resumed trial, the judge, based on the oral application by the police lawyer for a 5-minute stand down, magnanimously stood the matter down for an hour to enable the prosecution counsel to call his witnesses.
However, upon resumption of sitting, Ezekiel informed the judge that his remaining witnesses said they would not appear before the court.
He said the witnesses asked him to inform the court of their pending application before the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court for the matter to be transferred to another court.
When asked by the judge about his opinion on the development, Ezekiel said “everybody has freedom of expression” and that he aligned himself with the application of the witnesses.
Ezekiel sought an adjournment pending the time the CJ would take action on their application.
Reacting, the defence counsel, Panam Ntui, opposed the application for an adjournment.
He said the court had indulged the prosecution for so long a time, stressing that “even some of their excuses are untenable and lack any iota of probative value.
“This latest antic is aimed at delaying proceedings, and shouldn’t be allowed.
“It is on record that from November 2022, when the defendants were arraigned, the prosecution said in two weeks, he would be closing his case.”
Ntui argued that criminal case is of public interest and not for self aggrandizement of the prosecution counsel.
“The prosecution counsel had at four different occasions pleaded for an adjournment including this stand down today.
“Even when the prosecution asked for five minutes, the court granted over an hour stand down for the prosecution to call his remaining witnesses.
“This court still has an inherent jurisdiction to go on with this matter except at a time, transfer to another court is endorsed by the CJ,” he said.
The lawyer urged the court to close the case of the prosecution, having failed to call his witnesses.
“We are ready to open our defence,” he prayed the court.
Justice Madugu, who ordered that the police case be closed for lack of diligent prosecution, directed the defence to open their case.
Meanwhile, Ntui called Njoku, as his first defence witness to give evidence-in-chief.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

======
edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Taiye Agbaje

Avocats Sans Frontieres (ASF) France, on Tuesday, began a two-day training for 30 members of the National Committee Against Torture (NCAT) on the legal framework on torture and effective implementation of the Anti-Torture Act, 2017.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the Nigerian Government Inaugurated the NCAT on Sept.11,2022 with the aim to eliminate torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.
Angela Uzoma-Iwuchukwu, the Country Director of ASF France, who stated this during the opening ceremony, said participants were drawn from the law enforcement agencies, judiciary, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), among others.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that NCAT was set up by the former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, as one of his commitment to torture prevention in the country.
Uzoma-Iwuchukwu said the essence of the training was to provide capacity support to NCAT to enable it perform its function efficiently in terms of torture prevention in the country.
The country director said the organisation, also known as Lawyers without Borders France, had been able to support at least 2, 000 victims of torture across various states in the country.
She disclosed that the organisation was able to secure a judgment on Monday at ECOWAS Court, Abuja in favour of Mr Sunday Ayodeji whose leg was amputated due to a gunshot by a police officer in Kaduna State.
According to Uzoma-Iwuchukwu, the torture victim, whose case was handled on pro-bono basis by ASF France under the European Union (EU) and Agence française de Développement (AFD) funded SAFE Project, was awarded N60 million damages with an order for the immediate return of his confiscated possessions.
She called on the government to do more in the implementation of the Anti-Torrure Act in Nigeria.
She said at the end of the two-day training, members of the committee would have been better schooled and supported, having their capacity built by experts to take on from international best practices to be able to do their work better as a committee against torture.
Ms Leann Johnston, the acting High Commissioner, Australian High Commission, said the training by ASF France was part of development programme her country was supporting in Nigeria.
She said the commission was interested in promoting human rights globally and supporting local programmes that help to support victims of toture, among others.
The Executive Secretary of NHRC, Chief Tony Ojukwu, said Nigeria had taken legislative, judicial and other measures to implement the United Nations Convention against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) as well as the Optional Protocol to the Convention (OPCAT).
Ojukwu, represented by Director, Monitoring Department, Okay Agu, said the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Anti-Torture Act 2017 and Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act, 2015, further demonstrated Nigeria’s commitment to protect all persons from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.
He said this was also to ensure that persons, irrespective of their circumstances, were treated with utmost dignity.(NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

======
Edited by Sadiya Hamza

By Ebere Agozie

Some Abuja- based Legal Practitioners have warned that Law Enforcement Agencies should not turn to debt collectors.

The Legal Practitioners gave the warning at a news conference on Friday in Abuja.

The press briefing was aimed at addressing vital issues across various sectors of the country as it affects government policies, the rule of law as well as the economic stability of the nation.

Mr Pelumi Olajengbesi alleged that the Economic and financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is deviating from its core mandate.

“The commission is beginning to give priority to matters bordering on contracts and commercial transaction as the commission is now deployed for debt recovery and ancillary matters.

“The position of the law is very clear. EFCC, ICPC, Nigeria Police Force and other law enforcement agencies are not debt recovery agencies.

“The commission of Financial Crimes in Nigeria pursuant to Section 6(b) of the EFCC Act (Supra) does not extend to the investigation and/or resolution of disputes arising or resulting from simple contracts or civil transactions as in this case.

“Accordingly, we urge the EFCC and other law enforcement agencies to desist from intermeddling in civil and contractual disputes between parties.”

Mr Ganiyu Bello, on his part, frowned at what he termed as double taxation, adding that taxation must take into cognizance the hallowed characteristics of being fair and transparent.

“One of the fundamental issues that raised the hope of investors, Small and Medium Scale Enterprises and business owners in this present administration was the principle against double taxation which was contained in the inaugural speech of the President on May 29.

“Sadly, as enthusiastic as this may appear, the extant laws in Nigeria has subjected citizens to various double taxation policies which is one of the many reasons why economic instability persists in the country.

“For instance, the trite position of the law is that owners of business names duly registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission is not under a legal duty to pay tax over the business name; rather such a person is expected to pay Personal Income Tax pursuant to Section 2 of CITA.

“Unfortunately, it is now a compelling practice for Business names to separately obtain Tax Identification Number (TIN) which consequently expose them to payments of tax while the proprietors of such business names equally pay Personal Income Tax resulting in double taxation.

They also called for law reforms and amendments for effective justice delivery in the country.

Mr Henry Kelechukwu said that another fundamental issue that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency is the massive overhaul or amendments of Nigerian laws by the National Assembly.

“It is not in contention that there have been numerous contradictions and irreconcilable differences in our extant laws, part of which are now responsible for abuse of office by public office holders.

“This serves as a clog on the rule of justice for citizens, particularly against errant public officers and offices.

“For instance, the position of the law and unarguable tradition in the public sector is that a public or civil servant is expected to retire from active service after 35 years in service or upon attaining the age of 60 years.

“However, the new Police Act, 2020 under Section 7 (6) provides that a person who is appointed as the Inspector General of Police shall hold office for a term of 4 years.

“The question that now begs for an answer is what happens in a situation where an officer of 59 years old is appointed as the IGP, would he retire at the age of 60 or would he hold office till the age of 63 when his tenure will expire?

He noted that sadly, the nation has witnessed an occasion where an IGP held on to the provision of Section 7 (6) to hold the office of IGP beyond the age limit stipulated for a public officer.

“Another statute which begs for the urgent intervention of the National Assembly is with regards to the provision of the Sheriff and Civil Processes Act particularly as it affects some sections of the Act.

“For instance, Section 84 of Sheriff and Civil Processes Act makes it mandatory for a judgment creditor to obtain the consent of Attorney General before enforcing judgment particularly monetary judgment, against the government or any of its agencies.

“This provisions has proven to be a hindrance to the rule of justice as many litigants and victims of tyrannical system and conducts of errant officers have not been able to enjoy the fruit of their judgment to achieve satisfactory compensation against the government and its agencies for abuse and violation of human right.

“This has equally encouraged constant violations of human rights as officers are not made to pay for their unruly attitude,” he said.

They, therefore, called on the National Assembly to, as matter of urgency, take a critical appraisal and review of laws with the aim of carrying out a massive amendments that will meet the contemporary challenges of the nation and her citizens. (NAN)

Edited by Vincent Obi

By Taiye Agbaje

A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday, ordered the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) not to take further action in respect of the oil mining lease suit filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter.

Justice Inyang gave the directive shortly after counsel to NMDPRA, Ama Etuwewe, SAN, sought an adjournment to enable him respond to Mobile’s application.

“You also know that when parties have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court, they stay all actions until the determination of the matter.

“That is the essence of the ex-parte motion, the interlocutory application, sought in the suit,” he said.

Upon resumed hearing in the case, Etuwewe informed the court that he was only briefed about the matter the previous day after his client was served with the originating process on June 22, and the interlocutory application on June 27.

The senior lawyer said he would need 14 days to respond to the processes served on them.

Justice Ekwo then restated that since neither of the parties would be prejudiced by adjourning the matter, “you stay on your own and don’t disturb each other”.

Ituah Imhanze, who appeared for Mobil, thanked the court for giving the directive that parties should not overreach each other pending the hearing and determination of the suit.

Although Etuwewe told the court that proper parties had not been joined in the suit, the judge asked him to respond to the plaintiff’s application first.

Justice Ekwo, who gave the defendant 14 days to respond to Mobile’s motion, also gave seven days to the oil company to file their response after it must have been served.

He adjourned the matter until July 27 for hearing.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mobil, the oil giant, had, in the ex-parte motion marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/844/2023, sued NMDPRA as sole defendant.

In the motion dated June 16 and filed June 19 by its lawyer, Prof. Fabian Ajogwu, SAN, Mobil prayed for two orders.

“An order of interim injunction restraining the defendant, its agents from imposing any sanction, penalties or fines on the plaintiff/applicant or doing anything or taking any step or actions to frustrate the interest of the plaintiff/applicant in respect of its operations in Oil Mining Leases 67, 68, 70 and 104, or otherwise related to the subject matter of this suit before this honourable court, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction.

Giving seven grounds why its motion should be granted, the lawyer argued that the company is the operator of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd}/ MPN Joint Venture in OMLs 67, 68, 70 and 104 and its field facilities and operating facilities are interconnected by a network of pipelines with high degree of dependency and integration.

Ajogwu argued that the Petroleum Industry Act by virtue of Section 8 (d) and 318 provided that the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission should consider and be in charge of integrated operations and should consider integrated operations as upstream operations and grant relevant approvals in that regard.

He said that Mobile made an official application to the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission for consideration as an integrated operation via a letter dated Dec. 6, 2022.

“The application was considered and approved by the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, the only statutorily appropriate authority and the approval communicated to the plaintiff/applicant via a letter dated Feb. 2, 2023,” he said.

Ajogwu, however, said that the NMDPRA, through letters dated March 28 and May 8 challenged and sought to nullify the approval granted by commission.

He said the commission claimed oversight functions over aspects of the Mobil’s integrated operations which the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, by its letter of Feb. 2, had already claimed oversight authority and granted approval on.

The senior lawyer alleged that NMDPRA further threatened to sanction the oil company, its chairman and managing director and any other officer for any contravention of its directives or regulations.

He further alleged that a conflict had thereby ensued from the regulatory bodies claiming oversight over integrated petroleum operations which Mobil currently operates.

Ajogwu, who accused NMDPRA of ramping up pressure on his client to comply with its directives and submit to its regulatory authority, also alleged that the defendant had further made damning allegations of economic sabotage and crude oil theft against Mobil.

He prayed the court to grant their reliefs to ensure that Mobil’s “operations are not jeopardised by heavy and unlawful sanctions, and reputational damage by the defendant.” (NAN)(www.nannews.ng)

=========
Edited by Sadiya Hamza