Dozie Ikem Ezeife, Esq.
The
latest pre-occupation of some Nigerians is a hearty justification of the
continued detention of Mohammed Abacha. Much as one may detest Sani Abacha and
his offspring for the General’s kleptomania, if we claim to be advocates for a
better Nigeria, we must speak out against injustice although our efforts benefit
those we despise. An article credited to Abdulsalam Olatubosun Ajetunmobi in
nigeriaworld.com entitled: Mohammed Abacha and breach of trust saddened
me.
Mr.
Ajetunmobi took the members of the Northern Senates Forum to task for calling on
the Presidency to release Mohammed Abacha from prison. Mr. Ajetunmobi was unable
to separate emotion from legality. He was unable to separate his angst with the
Northern states for passing the infamous Sharia criminal legislation from the
legality or otherwise of continuing to detain an innocent Nigeria. The backbone
of the Nigerian criminal justice system, nay all other democratic systems around
the world, is the notion that one is innocent unless proven guilty. The fact
that people are asking the government to respect the constitutional rights of
Mohammed Abacha does not mean that they are necessarily condoning his late
father’s kleptomania. You cannot punish Mohammed Abacha because of his
father’s misdeeds. You cannot also detain him without any pending criminal
charge just to force him to abide by a civil contract he struck with the
government. You do not enforce civil obligations with a criminal process. That
is an abuse of the criminal process. It is the deprivation of civil rights of a
citizen and also a criminal act. You cannot lay claims to the moral grounds by
resorting to the same type of illegal acts that Sani Abacha is now infamous for.
He had a reason for working outside the law and outside the bounds of common
decency; he was a military dictator in a non-democratic military regime. What is
Obasanjo’s reason for this unlawful arm-twisting exercise on Mohammed Abacha?
By continuing to detain Mohammed after the apex court ruled that he should not
stand trial for his alleged complicity in the murder of late Chief (Mrs.)
Abiola, the federal government has shown itself as being the same as a Bakassi
or OPC outfit. Self-help criminal process is not the domain of a legitimate
government.
Mr.
Ajetunmobi termed his “diagnosis” as grim. I beg to differ. His
“diagnosis” is absurd, to put it most charitably. Having concluded at the
outset that Mohammed Abacha was guilty of complicity in his father’s crimes,
Ajetumobi embarked on a bizarre analysis of a duty of care. I suspect that Mr.
Ajetumobi is not a lawyer and therefore does not know that duty of care (at
least the way he defined it) is a civil and not a criminal concept. The
consequences of a breach of a civil duty of care, is the award of civil monetary
judgment and not criminal incarceration.
The
problem we have in Nigeria today, especially amongst those of us that address
issues affecting our polity, is that in our rush to pick a fight with a section
of our society, we muddle up several issues that have no nexus with our target.
It therefore makes it difficult for us to make the point that we set out in the
first place to address. Mr. Ajetumobi is obviously upset with our brothers and
sisters from the north. He is perhaps also not happy about the Sharia imbroglio.
Rather than delve into the real cause of his anger, he uses Mohammed Abacha as a
fodder or maybe a punching bag. If we can make an effort not to mix apples and
oranges, we may be able to better present out points.
We
should desist from convicting people “charged” with or “alleged” to have
committed a crime on the pages of newspapers. It is unfair. If the government
have concrete proof, such proof should be presented to the appropriate forum so
that the accused can defend himself. Calling for the stoning of Mohammed Abacha
because he was “confronted” with 121 charges of alleged financial crimes is
utterly macabre. Mere accusation is not proof. It is certainly not a conviction.
Mohammed Abacha has no obligation to prove his innocence. He is presumed
innocent. The onus is on the Nigerian government to establish his guilt.
Meanwhile, since the charges against him are not for capital crimes, he should
be out on bail. The government has no right to continue to detain him after he
was duly granted bail by the trial court.
Dozie
Ikem Ezeife, Esq.
Attorney-At-Law