LAW
Text by: The Southern Post
A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Adeyinka Moyosore Kotoye, has advocated for the decentralisation of the country’s judicial system, saying that what is obtainable now is quasi unitary in nature.
Kotoye (SAN) spoke on the topic, “ The Law, the Bar, the Society” last Thursday at the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Ijebu Ode Branch Annual Lecture and inauguration of a new executive of the bar under the chairmanship of Chief (Dr.) Fassy Yusuf and held at Chief Chris Ogunbanjo Centre, Erunwon town, near Ijebu Ode.
Other members of the new NBA executive are the Vice-Chairman, A. D. Sosanwo, Secretary, Mrs Elsie Adepitan – Olaniyi; Assitant Secretary, Adegboyega Titilayo Motunrayo; Financial Secretary, Abraham Sokefun; Welfare Secretary, Mrs. Ogundile Adebowale (Mrs): Social Secretary, Mariam Ogunmoye; Treasurer,Adegbenle Joseph; Provost, Akindehinde Azeez Oyebola and Public Relations Officer (PRO), Atinuke Ibidapo Adebajo.
Kotoye argued that Sections 271 (1 & 2), 276 (1 & 2), 281 (1 & 2) of the constitution, dealing with the appointment of the Chief Judges and High Court Judges of a state, Grandi Khadi and members of the Sharia Court of Appeal of a State, President and Judges of the Customary Court of a State. are anachronistic in nature and a complete aberration to the fundamental principles of Federalism.
He said vesting the power of recommendation in the National Judicial Council (NJC), completely eroded the status of each state, as an independent entity/unit in a federating structure.
“What we have now as law on appointment of judges is unitary in nature, pointing out that it limited the ambit of the legislative authority of the various state Houses of Assembly, on such matters as provided for at Sections 270 (2) (b); 275 (2) (b) and 280 (2) (b).
“This is more so, given the composition and powers of both the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) and the National Judicial Council (NJC) at Paragraphs 12, 13, 20 and 21 of the 3rd Schedule of the Constitution.”
Kotoye contended that there is no reason why states should not be allowed to develop their own appellate structures, similar to what obtained in the old Western Region.
He argued that matters covered at Sections 241 (1) (a – f), 242 (1 & 2), 248, 254 (a – f), 260 – 269, should be within the purview of the state, except where it involves the Federal Government.
He suggested that two or more states, may agree, by way of a memorandun, to establish a joint appellate structure.
“A region or a zone, like the south west, may also undertake this jointly. This is one sure means of reducing the burden of the different Appellate Courts workload”, he argued.
“Matters relating to customary law like chieftaincy, obaship disputes etc. should be limited to that region or that state Appeal Court. Such cases have no business being taken to Abuja. This way there would be considerable reduction in the number of cases that go to Abuja.”
He charged the NBA to lead the crusade to effect this change in the nation’s judiciary.
Kutoye also advocated devolution of powers down to the local and state governments explaining that some matter listed in the exclusive list should be devolved under concurrent list.
He said: “ there is no reason why matters like aviation, bankruptcy and insolvency, banks borrowing of money within Nigeria, construction, copyright, designation of securities in which trust funds may be invested, election to the office of Governor and Deputy Governor and any other type to which a person may be elected under the constitution, evidence, fingerprints, identification and criminal records, fishing and fisheries, incorporation, regulation and winding up, insurance, labour, mines and minerals, patents, trademarks, trade or business names, industrial designs and merchandise marks,pensions, police, prisons, public holidays, railways, stamp duties contained at Items 2 – 7, 11, 13, 19, 22, 23, 28, 29, 32 – 34, 39. 43 – 46, 48. 51, 55. 58 – 67, are included in the exclusive legislative list.
“I believe that they should be made concurrent, so that states may also have powers to go into those areas too.
“For instance, provision of rail services has the potential of increasing economic activities. generating income and increasing the employment rate, if states are allowed and encouraged to provide same within their territories.
“Two or more states or a zone like the South West, may thereafter make arrangements to link each other by train. This will also enhance migration of labour and increase mobility. The rate of commerce will increase and so on”, he contended.
He condemned the country’s electoral process which at the moment is designed to operate from top to bottom.
He suggested a bottom to the top approach adding “I suggest that we revert to the electoral cycle of 1998, during which the first election conducted was that of the local government, followed by the Gubernatorial and various states Houses of Assembly election which held on the same day, whilst the Presidential and National Assembly elections that also held on the same day, was used to conclude the process.
Kotoye disagreed with the idea being canvassed by some functionaries in the present administration proposing that the election into the 774 local government councils, should continue to be conducted by INEC.
“It is not only retrogressive but also a complete anathema to the avowed principle of Federalism, anywhere in the world. As a matter of fact, the appropriate thing is that. each state, should have its own electoral laws, that will regulate/govern all its electoral processes, including Gubernatorial and Houses of Assembly election”, he argued.
The Chief Judge of Ogun State, Justice Mosunmola Dipeolu, who was the chairman of the event, urged lawyers to entrench rule of law and nobility of the profession in their service to the society.
Justice Dipeolu who was represented by Justice O.A.B. Onafowokan, in an opening remarks stated that a society’s true freedom requires the rule of law and justice and a judicial system in which the rights of some are not secured by the denial of the rights of others.
She said the bar owes it a duty to protect, serve and ensure that the rule of law is upheld and justice entrenched, adding that this is why “ lawyers are tagged as ministers in the temple of justice, a phrase that should tug at the conscience of every lawyer as he stands to attend to the services he was paid for.”
No comments:
Post a Comment