admin
.By Prof. Wole Soyinka
I have no hesitation in admitting
that I have a personal, formative interest in the health of the Nigerian
judiciary, deeper perhaps than the average Nigerian.
At a critical junction in the life
of this writer, a judge resolved to give primacy to the call of conscience,
affirm his professional integrity and defend the supremacy of law in defiance
of state interference. He refused to bow to external pressure in adjudicating a
case whose conclusion, had this accused been found guilty as charged, would
have been life imprisonment. That individual, the late Justice Kayode Eso, has
narrated the event in his autobiography – The Mystery Gunman – with his noted
wit and judicial poise.
The Deputy Premier of the then
Western Region of Nigeria had summoned the judge to his residence, lectured him
on his duty to protect the interests of the government against the accused.
Justice Eso listened politely, re-affirmed his commitment to the rule of law,
and took his leave .
It would be most surprising if my
own brush with the law has not crossed my mind since the predicament of Omoyele
Sowole, journalist and former presidential candidate, began.
The Nigerian judiciary was not
thereby, nor is today, a model of perfection. Nonetheless, exemplars such as
Justice Eso have succeeded in creating, in some of us, an exceptional respect
for the Bench, instilled a conviction that the law, despite its lapses, demands
respect, autonomy and obedience. Much of the judiciary across the continent
remains constantly under siege – Nigeria is no exception.
Needless to say, it often strikes me
that the “learned brotherhood” could do more to protect, and assert
itself. Apart from the obvious and numerous scandals of moral deficit that
require constant internal purgation, there are instances where it does fail to
protect itself even from putative and/or illegal power .
Take the assassination of the
Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, Bola Ige, on his
way to a UN appointment.
The presiding judge on that case
cried out against unseemly interference from “least expected quarters”. He kept
a diary of coded names and times, two pages of which came into my possession.
His cries petered out in void. Justice Abass, feeling vulnerable and isolated,
bowed out of the case. The judiciary lamely acquiesced, certainly with a huge
sigh of relief in some sectors. A robust opportunity lost to burnish the image
of the law. I was left aghast.
From tragedy to slapstick
tragi-comedy – let us pull up an eyewitness account from the Nigerian PM News
of Thursday, September 2014:
“ Temperamental Ekiti State
Governor-elect, Ayodele Fayose, slapped a court judge today for being rude to
him and then ordered his thugs to beat him further .
The action of Fayose and his thugs
triggered some pandemonium in the court, with judicial workers and others
running into safety. The sitting of the Ekiti State Governorship Election
petitions tribunal could also not hold.
Immediately, thugs numbering about
20 pounced on Justice Adeyeye, beat him up and tore his clothes, while his
co-workers scampered and shouted for help.
Following the development, judicial
workers hurriedly shut down the court premises thereby preventing any court
proceeding for hours before the police fired tear gas canisters to disperse the
hoodlums.”
For a week, two weeks, then forever,
I waited to see what would be the response of the judiciary. There came none.
Naively, I thought, surely, this
institution would rise and defend its very existence through some form of
action, even if merely symbolic. Not a squeak. Not even after that governor
left office and thereby lost his immunity. What to me appeared to be the
collapse, not just of a pillar, but of the edifice of human culture, appeared
to be no more than a blip on the judicial template .
There are of course more effective
ways of degrading a judiciary than merely brutalising a judge, and leaving his
judicial robes in tatters. One of the most effective, increasingly optimised in
Nigeria, is simply by not only ignoring, but treating its orders with disdain,
encouraging its agencies to trot out cynical excuses for disobedience while
laughing all the way to the citadel of power. In that regard , there does
appear to be an undeclared contest among succeeding governments, intensified
since the return of the nation to civilian government in 1999, for placement in
the Guinness Book of Records as the most notorious Scofflaw in the field of
democratic pretensions. Or could it be an anticipation of a proposal I made at
the Athens Democracy Forum some months ago, calling for an annual award – such
as an Order of Demerit – for such an achiever?
Perhaps, we have finally attained
maximum saturation, and there is no need for any further recordkeeping. It is
extremely difficult to imagine a further lowering of the bar of disdain for law
than we have witnessed under the present regime. The degree of cynicism in the
conduct of state security agencies has attained a level of consistency that is
surpassed by only one other previous government – but it is a close call. Not
only does a security agency refuse to obey a court order to release a suspect
after fulfilling his bail conditions, that agency manufactures one childish
pretext after another, including a claim that no one had shown up to receive
the detainee.
“His sureties have yet to show up to
collect him”, declared the DSS, prime candidate for special featuring in my
“Interventions” series, periodically dedicated to the theme of The
Republic of Liars. Are we speaking here of a full grown adult, a journalist and
former presidential candidate, or an overnight bag awaiting the rightful
claimant in a LOST AND FOUND department?
The nation continues to undergo the
chagrin of having the rug pulled from under her feet while waiting in the long
queue for judicial redress against the strong -arm culture of state, as well as
unlisted power interests. For instance, Lagos State, the former federal capital
territory, and still the acknowledged commercial capital of the nation, once
found herself denied statutory allocation for several years, despite repeated
court declarations that such withholding by the central government was
unconstitutional and should be remedied forthwith.
That President took sadistic
pleasure in simply playing deaf. It took his successor to end the abuse and
restore the full entitlements of that state, a disobedience that went beyond
mere churlishness but affected the development and welfare of the indigenes of
that state. And so on, and on, waiting in vain for that day when the Rule of
Law becomes commonplace, and its benefice is not doled out by the drop to
famished mendicants.
So, finally, what do thuggery and
court disobedience have in common? Everything! They are both Scofflaw
manifestations . Unilateral declarations of Supra-Law delusions.
One is simply a more structured,
more hypocritical version of the other. One knows itself for what it is, while
the other tries to camouflage its abnormality under a higher purpose, the more
elastic the better. Such is that often specious alibi labelled “national
security”.
Is Sowore Myetti Allah? As for those
agencies that actually think to inhibit social revolution by fastening on the
alarmist association of the word ‘revolution’, half the citizens of this nation
should be in permanent detention. From pulpit to minaret, from clinic to fish
market, from student club to motor park , the wish for drastic transformation
of this nation is staple discourse.
Perhaps, we should begin with its
application to that institution whose decisions affect both society and
individuals with such finality, for good or ill – the judiciary.
.Prof. Wole Soyinka is a Nobel
laureate Szczyt Luxerise
