By Abdulwahab Abdulah

ALHAJI Lateef Femi Okunnu, SAN, was a federal commissioner for works under the administration of Gen. Yakubu Gowon. A notable Lagosian, he led Lagos State delegation to the 2005 political reform conference during former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration. In this interview, he spoke on the crisis in the judiciary, particularly Justices Kastina-Alu/ Ayo Salami saga; the role of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, and the way forward.

He also spoke on some other national issues such as the menace of Boko Haram, social insecurity, the altercation between former president Olusegun Obasanjo and former head of state, Gen Ibrahim Babangida and concludes that they did not behave like statesmen.

WHAT do you think can be done by Nigerian masses in ensuring that their economic rights are justiciable?

The best alternative is for the masses to speak up and rise in protest against bad governance. They should not keep quiet, they should protest the iniquity going on in the country.

They should protest over the reckless spending. Such issue cannot be legislated upon, because it is those people that would legislate that are behind the squandering of the nation’s resources. So, this is a social issue, which you can not legislate. However, we have so much legislations and too many laws, but little implementation to make the masses happy.

When a legislator (House of Reps) earns N11 million salary and allowances a month and a Senator earns about N13 million per month and ordinary worker is asking for N18, 000, you can see the differences. So, there must be a rethink and a reversal of the situation. They must cut down all these salaries and allowances in both the executive, the legislature and the judiciary.

This leads me to the recent exchange between the former president Olusegun Obasanjo and Gen Ibrahim Babangida, over their performances while in office. What is your view on their actions?

First of all the two of them displayed small minds. It is not for them to praise themselves over what they did while in office. However, I do not see any permanent legacy left behind by the two of them.

Ask yourself what Babangida did that can last for years, except SAP. The same goes for Obasanjo. People said he brought GSM. The test I have for him is NITEL. Is NITEL working? No, it is dead. Mobile phone are being used by house boys in Togo.

It was overdue in Nigeria and it did come. The test of his performance is NITEL, not GSM phones. What else can he boast of? Some said he paid our debts. Have we not incurred more debts to finance projects? In their altercations, they said so many things that showed that they have small minds.

Obasanjo said when he was military head of state in 1976-1979, he completed Jebba or Shiroro Dams, he was not the one that started either of them. Gowon’s government started them. But Obasanjo was proud to talk about the projects he started but completed by Shagari’s administration.

We started Shiroro and Jebba Dams, he did not mention them. So, the basic things is for them to leave everything to history, it is history that will judge them. My feelings about the two of them is that having risen to the office of the president or head of state of Nigeria, they are expected to behave like statesmen.

It also belittles them to become political party leaders or become partisan. They should have remained statesmen above party politics. They should be friends or fathers to all political parties. It demeans the office of president when they now joined political party.

The judiciary has been enmeshed in crisis over the exchanges between the immediate past Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN and the suspended President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Ayo Salami, what is your comment?

An average Nigerian regards the judiciary as the last hope of the common man and this hope is vanishing . These men, (I would not call them gentlemen); Justice Kastina-Alu and Justice Salami have brought the judiciary into its lowest ebb.

They almost destroyed the judiciary and the trust the people have in the system. If they were men of honour, the allegations they hurled against each other warrant the two of them to have resigned before now. They have almost totally destroyed the judiciary.

The accusation against the retired chief justice in arresting the judgement of the Appeal Court in Sokoto is unexpected. It is unprecedented, it has never happened, especially in a common law countries like ours. You do not arrest a judgement of the lower bench at the higher bench, especially when such decision is not part of a court proceeding.

You need to allow the lower bench come to its own judgement and if either party before the court is not satisfied, you will either affirm the judgement of the court, vary it or reverse it. That was what Justice Kastina-Alu should have done.

By arresting the judgement not been delivered, the part of honour for him was to resign as Chief Justice, rather than bring the judiciary down. For Justice Salami making everything public, turning the issue into politics, the part of honour for him too, right or wrong was to resign. Either of them was free under these circumstances from criticism.

Salami should have resigned and make his case known later in his memoir and likewise if Kastina-Alu has a case to make, he can do that also in his autobiography.

This would have been better rather than commission another body headed by Justice Umaru Abdullahi, a retired president of the Court of Appeal to review allegations against the CJN. As if that was not enough, the report of the panel was handed over to another body headed by a Federal High Court Chief Judge for review. Haba!

Untidy process

It made the whole process untidy and ridiculous. A junior cannot try his senior, it was not right. As, I have said, the controversy should not have been blown open.

Don’t you think the positions maintained by the two senior members of the Bench made the whole scenario appear as if they are interested parties in the political cases before the courts?

I don’t think it was a question of partisanship as such. Even, the National Judicial Council, NJC, held that the appeals in Ondo, Ekiti and Osun governorship tussles have no political undertone. It said, nothing was found to suggest there was corruption in the process.

Ok, what of the Sokoto’s debacle?

Also, I would not say there is anything political there too, but the failure of the judiciary to make a right decision. As I said, the retired CJN ought not to have arrested the Court of Appeal judgement.

He should have allowed the court to deliver the judgement and allow interested party to come up with their appeal and decide on it. I believe this can never happen in English legal history and it had never happened in the Nigeria legal history.

This crisis has almost pitched the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA and the Bench against each other. What is your view as a senior member of the Bar?

The whole thing is sad. I read the interview of the president of the NBA, Joseph Dawodu, SAN, to the extent that he frowned at the swearing in of the new silks by the out gone CJN, contrary to the usual practice where they are sworn in after the annual vacation ceremony.

Justice Kastina-Alu should have allowed the new CJN to conduct the swearing-in of the new senior advocates. There is no compulsion that he must be the one to perform the oath on them. That is one of the little minds of those in the helm of affairs. It was most unfortunate.

However, the new CJN has an uphill task, knowing full well that he is having a very short time in office. Justice Musdapher should find a way of straightening all the rough edges and restore the confidence of the people back into the judiciary.

Now, what is your position on the decision of the NJC to suspend Salami and do you think there is any remedy?

The NJC under the retired CJN, to my mind made its decisions unwisely. This is because Justice Salami had gone to court to file an action, challenging the panel’s recommendation.

And it is a fundamental principle of law that no party in an action pending before the court should do anything that would jeopardise the judgement that may be delivered by the court. No doubt, it may be difficult to reverse Salami’s suspension.

Now, an acting president of the Court of Appeal has been appointed, because of the controversy generated, I don’t see Salami returning, except a court of law makes a pronouncement on it.

Good picture of judiciary

The whole issue does not represent a good picture of the judiciary. It reminds me of what happened recently in Pakistan when the military dictator, Musharaf suspended the chief judge. The lawyers went into the streets, though, they were molested, but that was parts of what brought down the dictator.

Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, former CSO to the late Head of State, Gen Sani Abacha, in one of his testimonies in court said some members of the National Democratic Coalition, NADECO traded off the mandate purportedly won by late Chief M.K.O. Abiola in the June 12, 1993 election,by allegedly collecting money. What is your comment on this as a Yoruba leader?

First of all, I don’t like the word Yoruba leader used for me. I am a Nigerian, I don’t believe in the sectionalisation. There is no doubt that I am a Yoruba man, but I see myself as a Nigerian first before any other thing. I wish most of us take pride in saying we are Nigerian rather than a Hausa, Yoruba or Ibo.

My reaction is that any issue of corruption must be condemned no matter who perpetrate it. However, on the issue of collecting money, those who are alive among the top members of NADECO, have denied it.

Al-Mustapha has no proof, he was not there when anybody allegedly collected bribe. It was all about what he heard or he suspected happened. He did not see them carry Ghana must go bag containing money. He only said he saw them smiling while they were living. So, he is neither here nor there.

The threat of terrorism being perpetrated by Boko Haram sect has posed a great security challenge to this government. What is your take on this?

The government has made itself helpless, because the government has no proper security apparatus. The failure of the security of the government allowed Boko Haram to grow wings. They know what to do. Those who are trained on security issues know what to do; they don’t need to be told.

But that was part of the failure of governance in Nigeria. I don’t know what the Boko Haram stand for. If what they stand for is what they profess, as Muslims, they should turn their backs on western knowledge. Well, to me they are not talking for Islam.

This is because, Prophet Muhammad had injunction from Allah to read and acquire knowledge. That was Allah’s message to Rasululillah. He said, read, which means to acquire knowledge. So, for anybody to say knowledge is haram in Islam, such person is practising different Islam. The prophet even said seek knowledge.

So, you should seek for knowledge everywhere, no boundary. Knowledge is not forbidden in Islam, may be they have other grievances; it is for the government to establish proper intelligence on this. Is it about poverty, unemployment or others ?

Are you in support of the call for amnesty for the Boko Haram members?

Amnesty for what offence? Nobody knows the offence they have committed to warrant amnesty. I don’t know what they stand for. Niger Delta amnesty is a different kettle of fish.

They accused all of us of living in an affluence on their own wealth, when they are living in poverty. No water, no good roads, whereas other parts of the country are enjoying from the wealth that comes from that same region.

On environment, the oil spills kill their means of livelihood, the aquamarine. What they are fighting for in the Niger Delta is well spelt out and we are yet to address their grievances. All these amnesty and training are just palliative.

They want active participation in exploitation of oil in their areas. The active participation as recommended by the 2005 political reformed conference in Abuja, which ex-president Olusegun Obasanjo refused to implement because he was more interested in actualization of third term agenda.

But Boko Haram, I do not know what their agenda and grievances are. If we know, then we can look at it whether the grievances are genuine. So, asking for amnesty when we don’t know what their problems are is like putting the cart before the horse.

As a Muslim, don’t you think the claim by Boko Haram of being Islamic militants is a dent on image of Islam?

There is no stigma because some people are claiming to be Muslims to attack others, when they don’t possess the attributes of Islam. It is the ignorant people who say this. Since, what they are doing is anti Islam, it cannot be a stigma to Islam.

They may have their own grievances, let them come and express it. Islam don’t say don’t acquire knowledge or you should go and kill fellow human being. The phenomenon today is that Muslim kills another Muslim even in Ramadan and Eid day. They are not acting according to the dictates of Allah and the Quran. You have no authority to kill human being neither do I.