Man accused of murdering sisters, 4 and 3, at Easter appears in court

A man accused of murdering two young Melbourne sisters on Easter Sunday has appeared in court.

Charles Amon Mihayo, 35, has been charged with two counts of murder after Savannah, four, and Indianna, three, were found dead at a Watsonia home on Sunday afternoon.

Mihayo, of Watsonia, appeared in the Melbourne magistrates' court on Tuesday morning.

He was remanded in custody for a committal mention in August.

Mihayo is known to the girls, police said on Sunday.

Photographs of the smiling sisters, captured in matching outfits and holding hands, were released by the family on Sunday.

The family says it is devastated by the loss and say the girls will be missed forever.

“We are utterly devastated at the loss of Savannah and Indianna,” said a statement released by police.

“The girls will be forever missed, loved and never forgotten.”

Floral tributes and messages of sympathy were left outside the Watsonia home on Monday.

Police have not revealed how the children died.

Courage of Zimbabwe human rights lawyer captured in film

Beatrice Mtetwa grew up on a Swaziland farm with nearly 50 siblings. An average day involved waking at 4am, working in the maize fields, preparing breakfast for her family, walking barefoot to school over an hour away, preparing dinner, doing chores and, finally, going to bed. Now 54, she believes it was her childhood struggles that helped make her who she is today: a fearless human rights lawyer in Zimbabwe, dedicating her life to representing those persecuted under the Mugabe regime, and whose story has been captured in a new documentary.

For over two decades, she's proven indefatigable in her fight against injustice. In 2009 Mtetwa became the only African other than Nelson Mandela to win the prestigious Ludovic-Trarieux International Human Rights Prize. Now, her courage in the face of almost insurmountable obstacles has been captured in a film – Beatrice Mtetwa and the Rule of Law – due to have its UK premiere in London on Tuesday 18 June.

UK: Veils in court, legal aid and masturbation laws

The full face veil courted controversy this week after a judge ruled that a Muslim woman must remove her niqab while giving evidence but may wear it at other times during her trial. "Judge Peter Murphy delivered a judgment on Monday that is learned, readable and persuasive. It is also, in my view, wrong," writes Joshua Rozenberg. He continues:

Murphy correctly identified the balance that he had to strike. But he then struck it in the wrong place. He rightly said that the jury must be able to see the defendant if she gives evidence. But he did not think she should have to remove her veil at other times. "While it remains true that juries scrutinise defendants throughout the proceedings and take note of a defendant's reaction to the evidence as it is given throughout the trial," the judge said, "I am not persuaded that this is of sufficient importance to require a restriction on the defendant's right to wear the niqab."

Nwabueze: confab ‘ll be meaningless without legal backing

Foremost constitutional lawyer and senior advocate of Nigerian, Prof Ben Nwabueze (SAN), has said the ongoing National Conference will be meaningless except there is a legal backing that will make its outcome binding on the nation.

Addressing reporters in Umuahia, the Abia State capital, Prof Nwabueze said the outcome of the conference must become a law for it to have meaning.

The legal icon was in the state with other members of Igbo Leaders of Thought to congratulate the governor on his election as the Southeast Governors ‘Forum chairman.

Prof Nwabueze said he was among those who agitated for the conference – with the belief that it was what the people needed to transform the country to a better place for the citizens and visitors.

The constitutional lawyer said he had explained in his write-ups the type of confab he expected to see.

According to him, he expects a conference that should “have a legal basis and framework, which must (also) have the competence to be legally binding”.

The renowned constitutional lawyer said the confab should have the competence to adopt a constitution, which would be a superior law of the land.

Prof Nwabueze said he advocated this for the conference but was not seeing this happening at the conference.

He said: “Though what I advocated for is not what is happening, all hope is not lost. It could still be salvaged. This is what I am working on right now, and there are some things Mr President can do to get it right.

“…If he (Dr Jonathan) does what requires some measure of courage, because of the stand of the National Assembly on the conference, the situation would be salvaged.”

The constitutional lawyer noted that if President takes the right step on the conference, he would be showing the nation that he has put pressure on the members of the National Assembly to pass the bill into law.

This, Prof Nwabueze said, would give the outcome of the conference the legal backing it needs to become binding on the people.

He said the National Assembly could repeal the current constitution, which became a law through Section 9 schedule of Decree 24 of 1999 by making the schedule to disappear and by so doing the constitution would disappear.

He said once decree 24 is repealed the schedule would disappear with the constitution and once it does that with the legal backing of the national assembly through an executive bill which would have been passed into law, the outcome of the CONFAB will now be the new constitution.

The senior advocate of Nigeria however warned that making the decree that makes the constitution a law to disappear should be done in a systematic way, “So that the national assembly will not also disappear like the constitution”.

Prof Nwabueze noted that Section 4 of the constitution gives the national assembly the right to make the constitution to disappear, “As it was done in 1963 instead of waiting for two thirds majority of the national assembly to do that”.

Soldiers, police deployed as rainstorm destroys prison wall

A large number of policemen and soldiers have been deployed in the Kirikiri Maximum Prisons, Lagos, after a rainstorm collapsed its fence last Sunday, the PUNCH has learnt.

Our correspondent learnt that after the building collapsed, prisons officials rallied around and ordered the inmates into their cells.

It was learnt that the prisons authorities subsequently called on sister security agencies to fortify the prison to prevent a jailbreak.

Some corrugated sheets and wood, it was learnt, had been used in providing temporary cover, while the activities of inmates have been under close watch since the collapse of the fence.

Our correspondent learnt that over 50 armed policemen and soldiers have been guarding the prison for over a week, while some other prisons officials serving in other units have also been deployed in Kirikiri.

The Public Relations Officer, Nigerian Prisons Service, Lagos State Command, Mr. Biyi Jeje, confirmed the story to our correspondent on the telephone

Jeje said with the high level of security at the prison, it was impossible for any inmate to escape.

He said, “The perimeter fence fell last Sunday during the rainstorm but we have been able to secure the area. We have many policemen, soldiers, dogs and prisons officials on guard. The place is very secure and no one can escape.

“Even if you visit the prison, you will think it is a barracks because of the large number of security personnel. Very soon, the fence will be rebuilt.”

Presently, there are over 750 inmates at the prison which houses inmates charged with or convicted of capital offences such as murder and armed robbery.

Indians say criminal justice system cannot cope with rape cases

Survey finds nine in 10 say the crime is a 'very big problem', while three in four say laws too lax and police not strict enough

A new poll shows that Indians view rape as a big problem in their country and think the criminal justice system is inadequate to deal with it.

The national survey was conducted by the Pew Research Centre one year after the December 2012 gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old student in New Delhi unleashed a wave of public anger about sexual violence in India. The results were published Tuesday.

The survey shows nine in 10 Indians agree that the crime of rape is a "very big problem." About eight in 10 say the problem is growing.

And despite some legal reforms after the Delhi case, about three in four Indians say laws are too lax and faulted police for not being strict enough in investigating rape cases.

The survey was based on 2,464 face-to-face interviews with adults across India between December 2013 and January 2014. It found the concern about rape cuts across gender and party lines, and is shared by urban and rural Indians.

Some 91% of men said rape was a very big issue, and 89% of women.

The nationwide outcry following the Delhi gang rape led the federal government to rush legislation increasing prison terms for rapists and criminalising voyeurism, stalking, acid attacks and the trafficking of women.

In September, a special fast track court sentenced four of the perpetrators of the Delhi case to death. And earlier this month, a court sentenced to death three men who raped a photojournalist inside an abandoned textile mill last year in Mumbai, India's biggest city, under a new anti-rape law. The woman who was attacked survived.

The Pew poll found that only 7% of Indians rated the current laws as "about right" in dealing with cases of rape, and only 6% said the police investigated rape cases adequately. Some 18% thought the laws were too tough.

Court Strikes out Criminal Charges against NAICOM Boss

A Federal High Court in Lagos has struck out a criminal charge filed by the federal government against Commissioner for Insurance and Chief Executive Officer of the National Insurance Commission (NAICOM), Fola Daniel.

Daniel was charged before Justice Okon Abang over an alleged misrepresentation of facts involving Alliance and General Insurance Limited.

Justice Abang had struck out the charge following an application for withdrawal of the case filed by the Director of Public Prosecution of the Federation (DPPF) on behalf of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Mohammed Bello Adoke (SAN).

The application was based on the constitutional powers vested on the AGF to institute and to discontinue criminal cases.

Daniel was charged to court on a six-count charge bordering on criminal misrepresentation of facts and deliberate falsehood.

A private prosecutor, Chijioke Ndubuisi, had filed the motion together with a six-count charge against Daniel at the court and subsequently wrote for a fiat of the AGF.

The AGF declined the fiat but instead elected to do the prosecution.
In the said charge accompanying Ndubuisi’s motion, it was alleged that Daniel deliberately made a number of misleading and malicious misrepresentations against an insurance company, Alliance and General Insurance Limited to a number of public officers and agencies with the intention of damaging the reputation of the said insurance company.

It was further alleged that Daniel committed the same offences against Fidelity Bond Group, by representing that the Group had infracted the Insurance Act of 1997.

A part of the six-count charge against Daniel stated that he “did present information to the Minister of Aviation that there is no subsisting court order against the commissioner prohibiting the commission from enforcing its regulatory functions, which information you (Daniel) knew to be false in any material particulars and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 89 (1) and (2) of the Insurance Act, 2003.

“That you Fola Daniel on or about 7th August 2012, whilst being in the employment of the National Insurance Commission knowingly informed the chairman of the Revenue Mobilisation Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC) that Fidelity Bond Group and A&G Insurance Plc had been prohibited from doing business, the information which you know to be false and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 89 (1) and (2) of the Insurance Act and punishable under section 89 (2).”