‘Politicians guilty of contempt must face penalty’
Kayode Ajulo is a lawyer and civil rights activist. He says in this interview that the comments made by senior citizens against the Supreme Court over the 2015 election disputes are contemptuous of the court. He also speaks on the anti-corruption war of President Muhammadu Buhari. Excerpts: You recently wrote to the Attorney General of […]
Kayode Ajulo is a lawyer and civil rights activist. He says in this interview that the comments made by senior citizens against the Supreme Court over the 2015 election disputes are contemptuous of the court. He also speaks on the anti-corruption war of President Muhammadu Buhari. Excerpts:
You recently wrote to the Attorney General of the Federation seeking for fiat to prosecute politicians who criticised the Supreme Court judgments on the election disputes. Can you throw more light on this?
Yes, we have written to the Attorney General of the Federation to give us fiat to prosecute those who made utterances that is in contempt of court. We believe that whosoever has offended the law must be made to face the penalty. One of the things that are holding the country together is the people’s faith in the judiciary; the belief that injustice meted to them would be reversed through the judiciary. That is why if you lose an election today, instead of taking to the streets, you say let us go to court. Without the confidence there would be anarchy.
What do you have to say about the card reader, which is a source of the disputes?
The Supreme Court as the highest court of the land has pronounced on the card reader and it is final. Card reader came into being as a policy statement of INEC. You cannot use a mere policy of a body to undo our law, which was made through our representatives in the National Assembly. INEC is a creation of the constitution and it is performing its functions through the provisions of the constitution and Electoral Act. There is hierarchy of our laws. The constitution is the highest law of the land. It is like the municipal having a policy that everybody should be paying N50, which is quite unlike when you now make a law. All over the world, if you want to know which of them is stronger, it’s the constitution, followed by the law before policy. The position of the Supreme Court on the card reader is that without the Electoral Act, you can’t use a mere policy or directive to displace the law of the entire country. So I think with every sense of responsibility that the Supreme Court is in tandem with established precedents. So whosoever wants to use that to accuse and disparage the Supreme Court, I think we are not going to allow that. We are lawyers and I think that a lawyer should be able at every time to uphold the law. What you have to understand is that on the issue of the card reader, the law must take its course even if heavens would fall.
What would be your next reaction if the Attorney General of the Federation fails to respond to your application for fiat after seven days?
In the letter to the Attorney General, we already let him know what we are going to do if he fails to give us the fiat. After the seven days, our laws allow us to file direct criminal complaint before a court of law. So we have served him a letter that failure to accede to our request, we are going to court. This is a function of every lawyer in the land; we as ministers in the temple of justice, we are ready to uphold and respect the sanctity of that institution. We are not saying that they are guilty; we are just taking them to court to see whether they are liable. If they are liable, then apply the greatest punishment.
But Section 39 (1) of the constitution has guaranteed freedom of expression. Don’t you think it applies to what the politicians were alleged to have done?
In every right, no right is absolute. That is why in the sub-sections of that law it talks about limits to that law. Yes you have freedom of expression, remember that there is a law on libel. Inasmuch as I have right to express any opinion on any issue, but that right stops where another person’s right begins. So they have the right but it should be exercised fair enough not to disparage or bring another person to disrepute. There is also law of contempt. There is right to life.
How do we change the perception of corruption in the judiciary?
I agree with you that there is that perception. But that perception should not be used as an excuse to cast aspersion on the judiciary. Out of every 12 disciples, there is a Judas. There is that perception of corruption everywhere in Nigerians, even in the presidency, the church, civil servants, and lawyers. What should be done is if you find anybody to be corrupt, bring them out. Not to generalise by saying all Nigerian politicians, soldiers, police or journalists. That is not to say that there are no corrupt persons amongst them, but to cast aspersion on an entire group of an institution is wrong and criminal. So on that perception, in my first letter to President Muhammadu Buhari, it talked about how to cleanse the judiciary as a way to clear the perception. And funny enough it is those that are always accusing the judiciary of corruption that are the ones that normally run to the courts for one relief or the other.
How do you view the policies and anti-corruption fight of the present administration?
Honestly, I am disappointed. I have not less than 250 promises of the administration during the campaigns. I cannot count up to five that they have done for nine months, and that is very unfortunate. Herdsmen are killing scores of people, the President and Commander-in-Chief has not said anything about it.
On the anti-corruption fight, how many funds have they recovered and which account are they paying them? The anti-corruption fight appears to be one-sided, that if you have a case once you defect to their political party, that is the end to that corruption question.