MURDERED BANKER; COURT PICKS DECEMBER 23 FOR FINAL ADDRESSES

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Arowolo, 31, was charged to court for allegedly stabbing his wife, a banker, to death.

He was arraigned on December 21, 2011 on a one-count charge of murder and had pleaded not guilty.

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Mrs. Olabisi Ogungbesan, alleged that the accused murdered Titilayo on June 24, 2011 at their residence at No. 8, Akindeinde Street, Isolo, Lagos.

Ogungbesan, while adopting the prosecution’s written address on December 4, had asked the court to convict Arowolo for the offence.

The DPP argued that the prosecution had proven its case against the accused, beyond reasonable doubt.

“The evidence we have led as to the fact that the deceased is dead, is not in doubt.

“The only person that was with the deceased before her death, at the material time, was the accused,” she said.

According to her, Arowolo admitted that he struggled with the deceased with a knife, which led to her death and thereafter, escaped from the crime scene.

Ogungbesan said the pathologist, Prof. John Obafunwa, had testified that the deceased was stabbed 76 times.

The trial judge, Justice Lateefat Okunnu, fixed the date on Thursday, due to Arowolo’s absence in court when the prosecution and the defence adopted the addresses.

The discharge and acquittal of Bode George

The Nigerian Judiciary over the last few years has come under considerable public focus on matters of alleged corrupt enrichment by some judges.

In the current political dispensation, however, the allegations of corrupt enrichment by judges of the various courts in the country have assumed disturbing proportions, even as the anti-corruption agencies, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related offences Commission (ICPC) are accused by some people of looking the other way while high profile officials of the government are allegedly involved in corrupt practices.

Seven judges that are yet to be named by the EFCC are alleged to have acquired massive choice houses  and huge financial assets from suspicious transactions related to their handling of high profile political cases.

In the last few days however, the image of the Nigerian judiciary further nosedived going by the widely condemned decisions the Abuja High Court and the Supreme Court reached on two different corruption cases involving high profile individuals, one of them the chieftain of the ruling national party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Bode George, and also the former minister of the Federal Capital territory Malam Nassir el Rufai who was cleared of alleged abuse of power while he held forth as the Minister of Federal Territory whereupon he was accused of illegally cornering public landed assets to his family members.

Of these two celebrated verdicts that were given last week, that of the Supreme Court came as a rude shock to most people because the impression it created is that provided anyone charged before the court of law has enough financial muscle to hire some of the most expensive lawyers, he will certainly be set free from allegations leveled against him.

The Supreme Court and the Abuja High Court’s verdicts given last week which exonerated Chief Bode George and El-Rufai have demonstrated that the judiciary is on trial, not necessarily through bribing the judges but through choreographed manipulation of the court system and setting up of some technical loopholes through which Nigerian judicial officers can hide to perpetrate any illegality in the name of technicality.

The nation’s highest court said Bode George was wrongly charged with contract splitting, an offence the apex court said was never an offence. But the question some people are asking is: what happens to the groundswell of allegations that contracts at the Nigerian Port Authority (NPA) were split and probably awarded to unqualified persons meaning that Nigeria may have lost huge revenue through this process?.

The Supreme Court, in setting aside the conviction of George, who was a former Chairman, Board of Directors of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) and five former members of the board, subsequently quashed their conviction and discharged and acquitted them on charges of contract splitting.

At the Lagos High Court, George, architect Aminu Dabo, Captain Oluwasegun Abidoye, Alhaji Abdulahi Aminu Tafida, Alhaji Zanna Maidaribe and Engineer Sule Aliyu were on October 26, 2009 convicted and sentenced to 30 months imprisonment by Justice Olubunmi Oyewole.

They were tried and convicted under Sections 104, 203 and 517 of the Criminal Code Laws of Lagos State 2003 for offences relating to abuse of office, disobedience to lawful order issued by constituted authority and conspiracy to commit offence.

Specifically, George and others were alleged by the prosecution to have exceeded the limit of authority to award contracts by splitting them, while also inflating their prices. The case was brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

But the Supreme Court justices were unanimous in deciding that George and others were unjustly subjected to trial and conviction which they have already served at the Kirikiri Maximum Security Prisons in Lagos.

The court held that the offences for which the appellants were convicted were not known to law as at when the offences were said to have been committed. The question to be asked again is how did the Supreme Court reach its decision?

Why, for instance, was this not in issue but only resurfaced as a bone of contention at the Supreme Court, or are there certain information in that case that were hidden from the public at the lower court and Appeal Court?

For instance, media reports stated that Justice John Afolabi Fabiyi, who read the lead judgment in appeal SC/180/2012 filed by George, observed that even when the prosecution’s evidence showed that all the contracts awarded were appraised by experts employed by the Nigerian Port Authority (NPA) and that the experts recommended the contractors to which the contracts were awarded, the prosecution led by Festus Keyamo failed to either call any of the experts as witnesses or prosecute them.

The Supreme Court therefore held that Federal Government’s circular, which the appellants were accused of disobeying “stipulates that breach of same shall be met with disciplinary action. This may be in form of administrative action against an officer, who breaches the rules.”

Justice Fabiyi held that disobeying the directives in the circular marked exhibit P3 “is not made an offence by any Act of the National Assembly or law of a state House of Assembly or even the content of exhibit P3.”

According to the Supreme Court, section 203 of the Criminal Code of Lagos State, on which some of the charges were brought was not in tune with the provision of section 36(12) of the Constitution.

“In view of the constitutional infraction, the entire trial, conviction and sentence of the appellant remain a nullity and must be set aside,” Justice Fabiyi said. The decision in George’s appeal was applied to that of others except Tafida, who raised a separate constitutional issue in his appeal.

Justice Kumai Bayang Aka’ahs, who read the lead judgment in the appeal by Tafida, marked: SC/217/2012 also faulted the trial and conviction of the appellant.

“Contract splitting, which formed the basis of the offences charged, was unknown to law at the material time. The public procurement Act, which made contract splitting an offence punishable with term of imprisonment was enacted into law by the National Assembly in 2007 long after the appellant had ceased to be members of the NPA.

“The Act was not made to take retrospective effect. Even if this was the case, it would have been contrary to section 36(8) of the Constitution. Counts 59, 60, 64, 65 and 67 (of the charge) therefore constituted a gross violation of section 36(12) of the Constitution.

“Sections 104 and 203 of the Criminal Code are at variance with section 36(12) of the Constitution. They are therefore unconstitutional and are declared null and void.

“The interpretation of a penal legislation or any statute for that matter should not be left to the whims and caprices of the judge called upon to interpret the legislation. Any conduct which carries a sanction of imprisonment must be expressly stated in written law and not left to conjecture or inference by the court,” Justice Aka’ahs held.

He consequently nullified the trial and conviction of the appellant.

This decision of the Supreme Court has not been well received by many who believe that technicality ought not to have taken the better side of the approach adopted by the justices but that the Supreme Court ought not to have provided the impression that the judiciary should close her eyes to grand scale allegations provided the framing of the charges does not meet up with extant charges in the laws of the land.

Another curious judgement is that of the Abuja High court which set the former minister free even when findings appear to show that actually government landed assets belonging to the now defunct Nigerian Electricity Company were revoked and allegedly cornered by former minister’s cronies. The Nigerian Judiciary over the last few years has come under considerable public focus on matters of alleged corrupt enrichment by some judges.

In the current political dispensation, however, the allegations of corrupt enrichment by judges of the various courts in the country have assumed disturbing proportions, even as the anti-corruption agencies, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related offences Commission (ICPC) are accused by some people of looking the other way while high profile officials of the government are allegedly involved in corrupt practices.

Seven judges that are yet to be named by the EFCC are alleged to have acquired massive choice houses  and huge financial assets from suspicious transactions related to their handling of high profile political cases.

In the last few days however, the image of the Nigerian judiciary further nosedived going by the widely condemned decisions the Abuja High Court and the Supreme Court reached on two different corruption cases involving high profile individuals, one of them the chieftain of the ruling national party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Bode George, and also the former minister of the Federal Capital territory Malam Nassir el Rufai who was cleared of alleged abuse of power while he held forth as the Minister of Federal Territory whereupon he was accused of illegally cornering public landed assets to his family members.

Of these two celebrated verdicts that were given last week, that of the Supreme Court came as a rude shock to most people because the impression it created is that provided anyone charged before the court of law has enough financial muscle to hire some of the most expensive lawyers, he will certainly be set free from allegations leveled against him.

The Supreme Court and the Abuja High Court’s verdicts given last week which exonerated Chief Bode George and El-Rufai have demonstrated that the judiciary is on trial, not necessarily through bribing the judges but through choreographed manipulation of the court system and setting up of some technical loopholes through which Nigerian judicial officers can hide to perpetrate any illegality in the name of technicality.

The nation’s highest court said Bode George was wrongly charged with contract splitting, an offence the apex court said was never an offence. But the question some people are asking is: what happens to the groundswell of allegations that contracts at the Nigerian Port Authority (NPA) were split and probably awarded to unqualified persons meaning that Nigeria may have lost huge revenue through this process?.

The Supreme Court, in setting aside the conviction of George, who was a former Chairman, Board of Directors of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA) and five former members of the board, subsequently quashed their conviction and discharged and acquitted them on charges of contract splitting.

At the Lagos High Court, George, architect Aminu Dabo, Captain Oluwasegun Abidoye, Alhaji Abdulahi Aminu Tafida, Alhaji Zanna Maidaribe and Engineer Sule Aliyu were on October 26, 2009 convicted and sentenced to 30 months imprisonment by Justice Olubunmi Oyewole.

They were tried and convicted under Sections 104, 203 and 517 of the Criminal Code Laws of Lagos State 2003 for offences relating to abuse of office, disobedience to lawful order issued by constituted authority and conspiracy to commit offence.

Specifically, George and others were alleged by the prosecution to have exceeded the limit of authority to award contracts by splitting them, while also inflating their prices. The case was brought by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

But the Supreme Court justices were unanimous in deciding that George and others were unjustly subjected to trial and conviction which they have already served at the Kirikiri Maximum Security Prisons in Lagos.

The court held that the offences for which the appellants were convicted were not known to law as at when the offences were said to have been committed. The question to be asked again is how did the Supreme Court reach its decision?

Why, for instance, was this not in issue but only resurfaced as a bone of contention at the Supreme Court, or are there certain information in that case that were hidden from the public at the lower court and Appeal Court?

For instance, media reports stated that Justice John Afolabi Fabiyi, who read the lead judgment in appeal SC/180/2012 filed by George, observed that even when the prosecution’s evidence showed that all the contracts awarded were appraised by experts employed by the Nigerian Port Authority (NPA) and that the experts recommended the contractors to which the contracts were awarded, the prosecution led by Festus Keyamo failed to either call any of the experts as witnesses or prosecute them.

The Supreme Court therefore held that Federal Government’s circular, which the appellants were accused of disobeying “stipulates that breach of same shall be met with disciplinary action. This may be in form of administrative action against an officer, who breaches the rules.”

Justice Fabiyi held that disobeying the directives in the circular marked exhibit P3 “is not made an offence by any Act of the National Assembly or law of a state House of Assembly or even the content of exhibit P3.”

According to the Supreme Court, section 203 of the Criminal Code of Lagos State, on which some of the charges were brought was not in tune with the provision of section 36(12) of the Constitution.

“In view of the constitutional infraction, the entire trial, conviction and sentence of the appellant remain a nullity and must be set aside,” Justice Fabiyi said. The decision in George’s appeal was applied to that of others except Tafida, who raised a separate constitutional issue in his appeal.

Justice Kumai Bayang Aka’ahs, who read the lead judgment in the appeal by Tafida, marked: SC/217/2012 also faulted the trial and conviction of the appellant.

“Contract splitting, which formed the basis of the offences charged, was unknown to law at the material time. The public procurement Act, which made contract splitting an offence punishable with term of imprisonment was enacted into law by the National Assembly in 2007 long after the appellant had ceased to be members of the NPA.

“The Act was not made to take retrospective effect. Even if this was the case, it would have been contrary to section 36(8) of the Constitution. Counts 59, 60, 64, 65 and 67 (of the charge) therefore constituted a gross violation of section 36(12) of the Constitution.

“Sections 104 and 203 of the Criminal Code are at variance with section 36(12) of the Constitution. They are therefore unconstitutional and are declared null and void.

“The interpretation of a penal legislation or any statute for that matter should not be left to the whims and caprices of the judge called upon to interpret the legislation. Any conduct which carries a sanction of imprisonment must be expressly stated in written law and not left to conjecture or inference by the court,” Justice Aka’ahs held.

He consequently nullified the trial and conviction of the appellant.

This decision of the Supreme Court has not been well received by many who believe that technicality ought not to have taken the better side of the approach adopted by the justices but that the Supreme Court ought not to have provided the impression that the judiciary should close her eyes to grand scale allegations provided the framing of the charges does not meet up with extant charges in the laws of the land.

Another curious judgement is that of the Abuja High court which set the former minister free even when findings appear to show that actually government landed assets belonging to the now defunct Nigerian Electricity Company were revoked and allegedly cornered by former minister’s cronies.

By Mr Onwubiko  Head, Human Rights Writers 

Association of Nigeria

COURTS WITH CIVIL JURISDICTION IN NIGERIA

In MADUKOLU V. NKEMDILI(1862) SCNLR 341, Court is said to have jurisdiction where:

The court is properly constituted in terms of numbers and qualifications of members of the bench.

The subject matter of the case is within its jurisdiction

The case is properly instituted by due process of law

Fulfillment of any condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction for instance service of pre-action notice etc.

These following Courts have civil jurisdiction in Nigeria, the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, Federal High Court, High Court of the FCT, High Courts of various State in the Federation, Magistrate Court, National Industrial Court, Customary Court of Appeal of the of the FCT, Customary Court of Appeal of a State, Sharia Court of Appeal of a State, Area Court, District Court etc

They are either established under the Constitution or by a specific state legislation.

 We shall limit our discussion to the establishment, composition, appointment, qualification, jurisdiction and constitution of the Supreme ourt.

Supreme Court

Establishment: S.230, 1999 constitution

Composition: Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of Nigeria and such number of justices not exceeding 21 s. 230 (2) 1999 constitution.

Appointment : all the Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of the Federation on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC) and subject to confirmation of the Senate S. 231(1) -(2), 1999 Constitution

Qualification: must be qualified and has been so qualified to practice as legal practitioner in Nigeria for a period not less than 15 years S. 231(3), 1999 constitution

JURISDICTION: Supreme Court has both original and appellate jurisdiction

Original Jurisdiction

Dispute between Federation and a State

Dispute between States, S. 232 (1) (2), 1999 constitution

Dispute between National Assembly and any State House of Assembly

Dispute between National Assembly and a State of the Federation, S.232 1999 Constitution, S. 1 Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act, 2002.

In AG FEDERATION V. AG. ABIA STATE AND 36 ORS (2002) 6 NWLR (part 763) pg. 264,  before the National Assembly can institute any suit there must be a resolution passed by the simple majority of members in the sitting approving the suit, S. 2, Supreme Court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act 2002.

Parties in the suit shall be:

National Assembly, Speaker of the House of Assembly  (in a suit involving state House of Assembly) S. 3 supreme court (Additional Original Jurisdiction) Act 2002.

Appellate jurisdiction

 The Supreme Court have exclusive appellate jurisdiction over appeals from the Court of Appeal S. 233, 1999 constitution.

Appeal to the Supreme Court could be as of right of with leave.

APPEAL AS OF RIGHT S. 233(2) a-f

Grounds of appeal involves question of law alone

Question involving interpretation or application of the constitution

Question on chapter 1v ( fundermental rights

Appeal against sentence of death

Question involving validity of election of the president or vice or the office has ceased or the office is vacant.

Such other matter as may be conferred by the act of the national assembly

APPEAL WITH LEAVE S. 233(3)

Any other instance not included in s. 233(2)

Appeal by an interested party who was not an original party to the proceeding at the court of appeal s. 233(5)

CONSTITUTION

The supreme court shall constitute of at least 5 justices

But 7 justices (full court) when:

Appeal involves interpretation or application of the constitution

Appeal involves question bordering on chapter IV of the constitution

It is exercising its original jurisdiction, s. 234, 1999 constitution.

Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria have a mandatory retirement age of 70 

VIOLATION OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT LAWS IN NIGERIA

It is heartening, however, that the anti-graft agency, the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), is perfecting arrangements to prosecute about 156 companies found   to have violated the procurement and due process laws.The ICPC Chairman, Ekpo Nta, disclosed the plans in Abuja recently through the scribe of the commission, Mr.Elvis Oglafa, during a public presentation of the final monitoring and inspection reports for Federal Government projects, covering the years 2009 -2011. 
He confirmed that there had been flagrant abuse of Due Process and Public Procurement laws.Under the Public Procurement Act 2007, Due Process is supposed to be followed in the award of contracts to ensure that government gets Value for Money (VfM) in its procurement activities.

It is sad and disconcerting that the extant laws on procurement and due process are being subverted at will by companies. The ICPC will need to diligently prosecute the offending firms. 
Laws are relevant only when they are enforced and obeyed. It must be stated that under the Public Procurement Act, bidders for public contracts are bound to follow Due Process except where a waiver is first obtained under the Act Now, companies have been reported to be conniving with some unscrupulous public officers to corner most of the contracts on offer without Due Process. The allegation that some of the companies use fake tax certificates is, in itself, criminal in nature. If proved to be true, it should attract the maximum punishment prescribed by law.
Nigeria’s continuous high ranking on the corruption index has much to do with abuse of procurement regulations. This includes the offering, giving, receiving and soliciting of anything of value to influence the action of a public official in the procurement process or in contract execution.
If the crusade against corruption is to be effective, the provisions of the Procurement Act must be strictly enforced. For instance, it is necessary to ensure that there is no conflict of interest such as in situations where a person has a direct or indirect interest in, or relationship with a bidder for a contract. Or, where a person for his personal benefit, discloses to unauthorised persons, confidential information belonging to the procurement agency, or a bidder. These two scenarios have become commonplace in procurement units of some Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) at all tiers of government. The result is that corruption has become entrenched in government institutions, while the aims of ensuring due process, transparency, accountability, fairness, economy and consistency are defeated.
Government should strengthen the relevant anti-graft laws. All over the world, governments use public procurement laws to address a number of issues, including budget implementation and service delivery. We believe that it is for this reason that the Federal Government established the National Council on Public Procurement (NCPP) and the Bureau of Public Procurement(BPP). However, it appears that the two agencies have been unable to ensure that bidders for public contracts do not subvert due process. The government needs to do more to ensure proper monitoring and oversight of public procurement activities. It has become necessary to harmonize existing policies and practices by regulating, standardizing and developing legal framework for procurement. The firms that were found to have violated procurement laws might have cashed in on lax enforcement of extant regulations.
Henceforth, we advise that procurement plans should be closely coordinated with the budget departments of each procuring entity to ensure that funds for procurement are provided for in the budget. Also,it has become necessary to indicate the appropriate procurement methods for each project to avoid “contract splitting”.
Overall, the government must continuously update  procurement laws and ensure that they are obeyed to the letter in the best interest of the country.

culled the sun

EXPLOSION AT RIVER'S STATE JUDGE'S OFFICE, CAR PARK

The office and car park of Justice C. N. Wali in Ahoada, the headquarters of Ahoada East Local Government Area of Rivers State, was hit by explosion yesterday. The guard on duty was missing.
Wali, on Monday, at the Rivers State High Court, Ahoada, restrained Evans Bipi, who represents Ogu/Bolo constituency, from parading himself as the Speaker of the Rivers House of Assembly.
The dynamites were thrown into the premises of the high court, Ahoada at 3 am yesterday, according to a source.

Justice Wali also restrained Bipi from presiding either at plenary or committee of the House as speaker and acting in any manner whatsoever as the speaker.

The presiding judge is safe in an undisclosed location in Port Harcourt. He was said to have been in shock over the development.

Police spokesman Ahmad Mohammad could not be reached for comments.

LEAKED: THE REASON WHY DELE ADESINA INSISTED ON BEING THE NEXT NBA PRESIDENT.

It is Egbe Amofin’s turn to produce the next NBA President. Prominent members of Egbe have indicated interest to run the association’s affairs. The candidates are Funke Adekoya (SAN), Dele Adesina (SAN), Chief Niyi Akintola (SAN), Augustin Alegeh (SAN) and the incumbent First Vice-President of the NBA, Osas J.  Erhabor.
In 2008, when it was the turn of Egbe to produce a president for the NBA, two aspirants Mr. Oluwarotimi Akeredolu (SAN) and Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) showed interest. Three meetings were reportedly held at the instance of Chief Olanipekun at his office at No. 94 Norman Williams, South West Ikoyi, Lagos and both aspirants attended this meetings with delegates drawn from their supporters.
At each meeting, the house recognised that both Adesina and Akeredolu were eminently qualified to contest the office and that both of them could be Presidents of the NBA but at the same time rather  one after the other.

Consequently, pressure was mounted on Mr. Adesina to allow Mr. Akeredolu to run and Adesina would wait till this year. At a meeting held on April 19, 2008, and hosted by Chief Olanipekun (SAN) at his country home in Ikere Ekiti, Oba Abolade of Oke-Ila, a respected traditional ruler and a lawyer was in attendance at this meeting.
He appealed to Mr. Adesina to wait for the next time around, insisting that it is unreasonable and unnecessary for the Egbe to dissipate resources and energy when we can understandably agree that one person could go then and the other later.
Chief Bandele Aiku and Olanipekun co-presided over the meeting and at the end of the day, Mr. Adesina stepped down from the race in due deference to the request of the elders and the generality of the people at the meeting, although contrary to the wishes and desire of majority of his supporter, particularly those from outside the Southwest.

It is believed that Adesina was promised adoption in the current dispensation, but other contestants in the forthcoming election have made it clear that adoption or not, they were prepared to run the race to an end.

The Egbe Amofin is the Yoruba Lawyers Forum.

CYBERCRIME "YAHOO YAHOO" AND THE RATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT IN NIGERIA

The unemployment rate can be defined as the number of people actively looking for a job divided by the labour force. Changes in unemployment depend mostly on inflows made up of non-employed people starting to look for jobs, of employed people who lose their jobs and look for new ones and of people who stop looking for employment.

Unemployment Rate in Nigeria increased to 23.90 percent in 2011 from 21.10 percent in 2010. Unemployment Rate in Nigeria is reported by the National Bureau of Statistics. From 2006 until 2011, Nigeria Unemployment Rate averaged 14.6 Percent reaching an all time high of 23.9 Percent in December of 2011 and a record low of 5.3 Percent in December of 2006. In Nigeria, the unemployment rate measures the number of people actively looking for a job as a percentage of the labour force.

Unemployment in Nigeria is one of the most critical problems the country is facing. The years of corruption, civil war, military rule, and mismanagement have hindered economic growth of the country. Nigeria is endowed with diverse and infinite resources, both human and material. However, years of negligence and adverse policies have led to the under-utilization of these resources. These resources have not been effectively utilized in order to yield maximum economic benefits. This is one of the primary causes of unemployment and poverty in Nigeria.

As per the report of the World Bank, the GDP at purchasing power parity of Nigeria was $170.7 billion during 2005. Unemployment in Nigeria is a major problem both economically and socially. Unemployment in Nigeria has resulted in more and more people who do not have purchasing power. Less consumption has led to lower production and economic growth has been hampered. Unemployment also has social consequences as it increases the rate of crime.

For instance cybercrime A.K.A Yahoo Yahoo a redefined form of the popular Nigeria 419 scams, this is a form of fraud that appears to be a field in which Nigerian entrepreneurs were pioneers, and remain prominent. The scammers view themself as a sort of folk hero or Robin Hood, getting money out of gullible westerners in repayment for colonial mistreatment and are frequently viewed as folk heroes

They use the Internet services or software with Internet access to defraud victims or to otherwise take advantage of them, for example by stealing personal information, which can even lead to identity theft. A very common form of Internet fraud is the distribution of rogue security software. Internet services can be used to present fraudulent solicitations to prospective victims, to conduct fraudulent transactions, or to transmit the proceeds of fraud to financial institutions or to others connected with the scheme.

Other Internet scams  can include lotteries, on-line dating services, inheritance notices, work permits/job offers, bank overpayments, or even make it appear that you are helping a friend in trouble.

In many cases, "yahoo yahoo boys" troll the Internet for victims, and spend weeks or months building a relationship. Once they have gained their victim's trust, the scammers create a false situation and ask for money. Scammers can be very clever and deceptive, creating sad and believable stories that will make you want to send them money.

All of these scams have one thing in common - they contain requests for money. Sometimes you are asked to pay money to obtain something of value for yourself (e.g. a prize, a romantic relationship, more money); or you are asked to pay money to help a friend in trouble. In every case, however, the ultimate indicator of a scam is that you are always asked to give money.

Yahoo Yahoo boys can be very creative and very determined.

Therefore to curb the menace of Yahoo Yahoo in Nigeria, the government need to work on reducing the alarming rate of unemployment in the country, as the official statistics illustrate that previously unemployment did not always decline with the economic growth. Other solutions such as the provision of right skills to the people to help them tackle the problems and lead a more prosperous life should also be given importance.

Recently the experts have suggested some techniques, which can play important role in curbing Unemployment in Nigeria. These include –

Sports schools, evening clubs that teach kids to play football, swim etc

Computer training schools and clubs that specializes in teaching programming softwares such as Java, Oracle, ASP, Cold fusion, JSP, digital photography, and video editing, etc.

Language schools teaching foreign languages like French, Spanish, and Chinese.Setting up of provisional work agencies, which provides temporary staff to small companies etc.

LAWYER OF THE WEEK: OLARENWAJU ONADEKO

Olanrewaju Adesola Onadeko Esq., is the new Director General of the Nigerian Law School. He was the former Deputy Director General of Lagos campus and the former secretary to the council of Legal Education and Director of Administration of the Nigerian Law School. He is the author of the book ”The Nigerian Criminal Trial Procedure” and a number of articles in journals. He was also the first Chairman of the Editorial Board of the Nigerian Law and Practice Journal from 1997 to 2001. From 1988 to 1994 he served as the Director of Public Prosecutions of The Republic if Gambia.

ECOWAS Court summons Fed. Govt, NJC

The Federal Government and the National Judicial Council (NJC) have been summoned by the Community Court of Justice of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS Court) over a suit initiated by a Nigerian, Jude Eluemuno Azekwoh, alleging, among others, unlawful denial of right to fair hearing.
The government and NJC are, by the summon, requested to enter appearance and respond to the suit initiated by Azekwoh who accused both defendants of unjustly denying him the opportunity of having his case property adjudicated upon by the Nigerian judicial system.

The plaintiff, who seeks among others, $10million compensation, argued that the their actions or inaction, the defendants violated his rights as guaranteed under sections 3, 7 and 13 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR).
Azekwoh had contested participated in the 2011 Delta North Senatorial election as a candidate of the Democratic People’s Party (DPP), in which Arthur Ifeanyi Okowa of the People’s Democratic Party ((PDP) was announced winner.
Dissatisfied with the election’s outcome, Azekwoh went before the Electoral Tribunal.The tribunal struck out his petition on the ground that application for the pre-trial session was not by way of motion. He proceeded to the Appeal Tribunal, Court of Appeal, Benin, Edo State where, he said, his appeal was unfairly dismissed.
He said his recourse to the ECOWAS Court was because of the alleged failure of the NJC, an agency of the Federal Government, with control over the nation’s judiciary, to act on the petitions written by his lawyer in the case, Dipo Okpeseyi (SAN) asking the NJC to look into the case.
Okpeseyi had, in one of the petitions, stated that Azekwoh’s “petition was sacrificed on the altar of technicalities” at both the tribunal and the appeal levels, thereby leaving unresolved, the questions he raised about the competence of the PDP candidate, who now occupies the disputed senatorial seat.
“The decision and approach of the panel of justices of the Court of Appeal, Benin in respect of this matter, violently violated our client’s right to fair hearing, compromised his appeal and has occasioned miscarriage of justice,” Okpeseyi said in one of the petitions, copies of which formed parts of the court documents.
Azekwoh argued that where his appeal against a decision of an electoral tribunal was “dismissed for no reason in law and in fact, without hearing,” his right to equality before the law, protection of the law, fair hearing and right to participate in government, guaranteed by the ACHPR, have been violated.
He is praying the court to declare:
•That his right to equality before the law and protection was violated was the Appeal Court in Benin allegedly refused to hear his appeal petition on no justifiable legal or factual ground.
•That the his rights, as a Nigerian and citizen of ECOWAS, to have his case heard at the appellate level of the country’s court and be accorded fair hearing were violated when the Court of Appeal, Benin refused to hear his appeal no: CA/B/EPT/230/2011.
•That the failure of the NJC to act of his petitions, has resulted in the continuing breach of his right to fair hearing and freedom to participate in the government contrary to Articles 7 and 13 of the ACHPR.

BOOK PRESENTATION FOR HON. JUSTICE RAHILA CUDJOE: THE FIRST FEMALE LAWYER FROM KADUNA STATE

The public presentation of a book, Reminiscences of A Lady Jurist: The Story of Hon. Justice Rahila Cudjoe OFR, will hold on Thursday Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Hall, Murtala Square, Kaduna at 11.00am.
The book is from the stable of Gems Communication Resources Limited.
The event, billed to attract dignitaries from all walks of life, would be chaired by the former President, Court of Appeal, Hon. Justice Umar Faruk Abdullahi, while Vice President Mohammed Namadi Sambo, will be the Special Guest of Honour.
A statement by Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer of Gem Communications Resources, Yemi Adebisi, said the Governor of Kaduna State, Alhaji Mukhtar Ramalan Yero, will be the Chief Host, Emir of Zazzau, Shehu Idris will be the Royal father of the Day, Alhaji Bashir Dalhatu (Walin Dutse) is Chief Presenter while Prof. Yemi Akinseye-George (SAN) is the reviewer.
The book written in honour of Hon. Justice Cudjoe, the Chief Judge of Kaduna State, chronicles her family background, her eventful career path, which started on a record-breaking note from when she was called to the Bar in 1973 as the first female lawyer from Kaduna State, to her 17 years as the Chief Judge of State.
It also captures some of her landmark judgments, spanning 30 years, from 1983 to this year, as well as chapters highlighting her views on certain issues and comments from about 90 eminent Nigerians and foreign personalities.