By ABDULWAHAB  ABDULAH

Chief Francis Egele, is the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Bayelsa State. Egele who has been in legal profession for almost three decades was in private practice until his current appointment. In this interview he sheds light on why the Bayelsa state government had to take a bold step in enacting a law prohibiting kidnapping in the state. He explained that in spite of the criticisms that trail the state government’s decision on the law, the decision was the best for the state to contain orgy of kidnapping.

Also, he disclosed that the land disputes between Bayelsa and Rivers state is purely an issue of law and equity, adding that the issue will be resolved through the instrumentality of the law. The commissioner also rated the present administration as a respecter of the law.

Excerpts:

Can you shed light on what propelled the state governor, Seriake Dickson to initiate the bill against kidnapping to the state assembly?

First and Foremost we are very legalistic in whatever we do in this state. The issue of kidnapping, the grundnorm of it must come from the constitution we operate. The constitution clearly states that nobody should be deprived of his liberty.

Though, the constitution did not give out penalty, but outlawed it. The issue of kidnap is a very serious offence that endangers development in our areas. Apparently when we talk of development in economy like Nigeria, you don’t stand up on your own to develop.

*Chief Francis Egele

Definitely, you must have business partners and technology to come and help in developing your area. It is only when you are ok that you may not talk of laws that take care of  such situation like kidnapping.

We do not want to encourage a situation where foreign as well as Nigerian investors are kept away because of kidnappers. Now the Kidnappers have turned it to a trade where they kidnap for ransom.

Even in the bible, kidnap is made an offence, where there was a sanction for it. The sanction in the bible is that such person that kidnap should be stoned to death. The hallmark of my argument is that laws are made to govern situation, which is the jurisprudence of the law.

What we have done is to deter those people who have seen kidnapping as a trade against our developmental ideals.

Considering the situation in Nigeria, where several condemned men and women fill our prisons without implementing their death sentence. Do you think this new law on kidnapping in Bayelsa state will fly?

I don’t have any doubt about it. It will definitely works. Our judges can be ranked among the best in the world. They  carry out their jobs fearlessly. Like I said, if the laws say this is how something suppose to be done, we don’t  need to mix morality with law. If there is death penalty and there is no option of fine, then there is no option than to sentence the person accordingly. So,  there is no two way to it. What can save such situation is when the court did not find the culprit guilty.

The current agitation in the world was to abrogate death penalty, especially when your governor is a lawyer. So why imposing maximum punishment for such offence?

Like I said, the law is meant to deter. If you  look at the criminal code, the offence of armed robbery also attracts death penalty. The United Nations or its agencies can call for the abrogation of death penalty because of the level of their development,  where they impose minimal penalty on offences.

We are yet to develop to that point, so we must put a law in place to deter such persons from carrying out their dastard act. Laws are created for different situations and purposes. So, what the human rights crusaders are asking for cannot be generic.

We cannot say we will be living in barbaric situation and  not curb crimes. There are certain people  in the society that are ready to live in the prison. So, if you do not give sanction that will deter them, they will always commit such offence that will only take them to the prison, where the government will continue to feed them. Definitely, the law will either be abrogated or amended if the situation improves. So, the background of the governor as a lawyer has nothing to do with the law, but the society.

Considering the security situation in some northern states, do you think this anti-kidnapping law is capable of adressing issue of terrorism?

There is no relationship of the law with terrorism, because the criminal code has taken care of that right from the beginning. Terrorism comes in different dimensions. So, if you said somebody is terrorizing your life, is kidnap not part of it? We are very particular about kidnapping which was our headache here.

The implementation of the new law on kidnapping may lead to controversies in Bayelsa state, whenever the governor  appends his signature to a death sentence for convicted kidnapper while those condemned to death for armed robbery are not executed. What kind of reaction you think this will generate?

I know my governor very well, he is a progressive, principled and a positivist when it comes to the issue of law. For Bayelsa now, I don’t know if we have anybody on death roll. However,  if there is pending judgment on death sentence and that is not a subject of appeal, he will definitely append his signature.

The boundary crisis between Rivers and Bayelsa states  has reached its peak. Can you shed some light on this?

As we are talking, Rivers state is making a mistake, perhaps they don’t know that after the creation of Bayelsa state out of Rivers state, the Supreme Court made it clear in the assets declaration case between the two states as per Onogen, JSC, as he then was, that the old Rivers state is gone.

In effect, Rivers and Bayelsa States are created on the same day, that is 1st of October 1996. The question begin answer is that on the creation of Bayelsa state and Rivers state on October 1st 1996, has there been any boundary delineation between the two states? The answer is no.

This is because the only existing administrative plan which Rivers is relying on was made in 1992, which encompasses Bayelsa state. So, the map only shows the different between Rivers state and the other states, not between Bayelsa and Rivers. Apparently, on the creation of the two states, there must be a boundary that must be done.  And the national boundary commission did that and came out with the 11th edition, which Rivers state is now disputing.

They have the rights to quarrel, what did the Supreme Court say at the end of the day? It said that both parties should go back and get a map that will delineate the two states. That is the exercise we went into, before they withdrew from it. There is one issue I want to address which borders on the argument from Rivers state that the money coming out from the disputed areas, particularly in sector 4 where the problem is, was being collected by Bayelsa state to their exclusion.

My argument is that the rule of equity only demands that if there is a dispute between two people or states, the money coming from there shall be shared equally or put in an escrow account. But from October 1996, when the two new states were created, oil revenues have been collected exclusively by Rivers state, without any reference to us, until 2005.

That means Rivers state had collected the money for nine years. Since there was no boundary between the two states, equity demands that since state ‘A’ had collected the revenue for nine years, the other state should also collect it for nine years.

Escrow account

So, we have been collecting the money from 2005 till date and we just make only seven years till date. We still have two years to go before that equity will rest. There is no way anybody could pay any money into an escrow account for now, otherwise, Rivers state will be made to refund what it had collected and pay it into an escrow account and we too will be ready to pay the funds collected into an escrow account too.

So, we are also entitle to our own dues. By this, the Revenue Allocation Commission and Bayelsa state do not owe them (Rivers) any apology. So, this situation will continue until there is boundary delineation between the two or we equalised on the nine years for which they have earned the revenue.

What efforts is the state making to review some of the old laws still in existence  in the state?

There are committees put in place by the government to review some of theses laws. As we are talking, the committees are working to give us new criminal and civil procedure laws. We want to bring our laws in tandem with what is obtained presently in the society. The civil procedure rules we have now was partially borrowed from Rivers state. But there is a new one that was done, however, we are reviewing it now.

Issue of corruption in the judiciary has been a source of concern to all stake holders. What is your take on the problem and how do you think the situation can be remedied?

Corruption is something that is endemic in our society. This came because of greed and lack of principles from majority of our people. If you take a job, you should learn to live by it. Just like those of us in practice. Now if I realised that my salaries are not up to my standard, I opt out of the system.

That is how it supposed to be. I wouldn’t say categorically that the judiciary is corrupt, this is because most of these things that people say are unseen. The only thing is that whenever any officer is found guilty of corruption, such officer must be charged to court. Corruption is what we condemned totally.

The judiciary also has the right to protest and lodging in whatever are militating against it. One major issue that could come up for discussion is their (judges) emoluments, which is not good enough. I am of the view that majority of our judges and legal officers are not well paid.

The problem is actually from the executive arm of government. If you look at the budget, you can see what goes to the executive, what goes to the legislature and the judiciary. When people complain about delay in cases, one fails to realize the workload of these judges. So, part of ways to address the situation is for the employment of more Judaical officers. Nigeria has the capacity to pay. It is only that Nigerians are corrupt. So, we need to do something about their (judicial officers) pay and see whether there will be an improvement.

How would you rate the performance of the Bayelsa state government on rule of law in the last one year?

I have not seen a government that is as legalistic as Bayelsa state government now.  You cant believe that within a period of one year,  for every action we take, we guide it by the law. We make ourselves culpable with such laws.