 You're welcome back, there's still the run-up. Recall that the Tribunal ruling on Friday had nullified the election of People's Democratic Party, PDPs at Demola at Delike, a mid-overvoting and additional votes for Adeboega or Yatola of the APC, putting Yatola ahead of Adeleke. With acquisitions and discrepancies in the 2022 Oshun State Governorship election, how can the judiciary contribute to the free, fair and credible election in this February and March? Because these are the two major elections and that's what we're discussing here. Remember that before, now we had talked about the fact that the UN chief team had advised the judiciary to be very up and doing and be transparent enough so that these cases will be seen to be given the right judgements. Well, Justice CEO of Huebu Human Rights Lawyer, Vice Presidential Candidate of NAC Party in 2019 presidential election is here and Barista Abumere Osara. Barista Abumere Osara is a legal practitioner and notary public. Welcome gentlemen to the program. Okay, let me start with you. Yeah, let me begin with Barista, with Justice of Huebu. You were in 2019 a candidate, right? And you saw the... Sorry? Hello Justice, can you hear me? Go ahead, I'm hearing you. Okay, okay. All right. You were a candidate in 2019 and there was an election, the outcome of the elections and all that. You saw the legal processes that happened in 2019. So let me just begin with you. What kind of things from the 2019 experience do you think the judiciary should never take into 2023 because of this advice and the fact that Nigerians want a free and fair election and after that all the drama that goes into the legal matters that come after the elections. What kind of things do you think the judiciary must never take from 2019 to 2023? Well, truly speaking, I have to say that there are two major issues. First of all, the issue of putter independence of the judiciary. What I mean by that is independent of the judiciary in the sense that there should not be any interference, any form of interference by the executive. Both at the national level, state level, and the local government level. And that is part of the problem we are having today. Why? Because I keep on saying this and I will still maintain my position. We are judges are being appointed by the powers of the state governor or the president. There will be likelihood of bias. Secondly, the issue of having people who are above the board incorruptible judges. Remember that the same judges you are talking about are also product of the society. But we must be very, very careful to make sure I could remember a novel I read when I was in secondary school, the incorruptible judge. I don't forget that. And throughout my years in practice till today, I've always remembered that novel we read in the school, the incorruptible judge. It takes a lot. It takes courage and boldness to be an incorruptible judge in Nigeria because of the interference of the executive. For me, the judiciary should correct itself in certain mistakes they've made, especially the adjudicators. Because any government or any country in the whole world, the executive might make mistakes or might fail. The legislature might make mistakes or might fail. But any country that the judiciary has failed, that country is leading to do. We must be very, very careful because remember this saying that the judiciary is the last hope of the common man. Let us not forget that. To draw a parallel between us and the United States. In the case of the United States, the president directly appoints Supreme Court justices directly. And actually, for certain reasons, maybe this person is a liberal or this person is on this side of the ideological divide, you know, the president of the U.S. directly appoints us against our system where it's got to be a recommendation of the National Judicial Council without prejudice to the point you made. I just want to draw this parallel. Now, if in the case of the U.S., for instance, we are the president directly appoints justices, we can still say to a reasonable degree that there is a certain significant level of independence in the U.S. But in our own case where it's upon the recommendation of the NJC and all that, and we are still having concerns about the incorruptibility and neutrality of our judges, what do you think the issue is here? Is it the society? Because like I said, in one case, we see the president directly appointing. In another case, we see the president appointing on the basis of the recommendation of the NJC. But yet we here are more concerned that the perception is that a lot needs to be done, you know, on the part of our judicial system to guarantee transparency and neutrality and so on and so forth. Is it for me? I look at it and I see it as a societal issue. And that was why I said, remember, that even the judges themselves are the opposite produce of the society. You can remember that. Then if you look at it holistically, you see there's something that baffles me in Nigeria. We always make reference to United States, UK, when things are like this. We don't make reference to them when we are supposed to attract the good things from those countries to put it to ourselves. Remember that every country with its own peculiarity cannot be comparing Nigeria with a place like United States or UK in terms of administration or in terms of government. Because these are people that are sane. These are people that know what they are doing. These are people that somebody wants to live above, these are people that somebody wants to make a name, these are people that somebody wants to, you know, the society or the world to know that they are actually doing something good. And not in our own life where people, the major problem we have here today is impunity. And you see, you talked about NJC. NJC, yes, is there. But remember that even if you look at it holistically, if you look at it holistically, NJC somehow is also being influenced by the course of the executive team. That is, if you look at it side by side with Nigerian system, the United States system and even the UK system, you begin to understand that we are doing things differently, entirely differently. Okay, we talked about the President of United States appointing Supreme Court judges. Can the President of United States pick up a phone and call the Supreme Court judge that he has an interest in a matter? It cannot happen because everybody's doing money talk. Even the phone calls you make, he's doing money talk. He cannot have him be here, a governor, even a chairman of a local domain can pick up a phone and call a judge. And it becomes another story, all of a sudden, look at some serious judgments we've had in recent times. Look at the case of female states, for example. So what are we saying? So what do you think in terms of character? I mean, definitely your point is solid. Everybody in the country is a product of the society. But then if you look at the judges we've had, or the justices we've had, people like Adito Kumbha Demola, Justice Oputa, Fatai Williams, and so on and so forth, that golden generation, where many of them even became international jurists, what was happening at that time. And mind you, Barista justices, you also remember that they functioned largely in the military era. In the military era, when there was no, I mean, no rule of law, no democracy, none of that. But some of them became internationally acclaimed jurists. So what have we missed? And what can be done, even though the elections are just 25 days away. But are there some things from your perspective that we can still do, you know, to try to begin to go back to that era of this eminent jurists? Yes, truly speaking. First of all, I look at this from the angle of character. Because today, for example, with our mission was, for example, magistrates and judges are nowadays appointed by, I'm from human states. A certain time in human states, magistrates in human states, we are appointed by just a text message from the CJ in collaboration with the governor. So you see, when they have messed up the system, that is just the truth. You talked about the era of Opputa. Opputa, JSC, or blessed memory. I used to call him the log enemy of Africa. I met him one on one when he was alive. I learned a lot of things from him. Today, who can we have an Opputa again in this country? And that era, these are people that lived above us. These are people that wanted to make name. These are people that are not, you know, interested in your billions and millions of Naira. But today is all about what are you going to gain? As I speak to you, my brother, most of our investigators today try to lobby to be appointed to go to Tebuna. Is it supposed to be so? It's no longer about making them for yourself and making them for the judiciary. It's about self-induced influence, what you think you can make up. And that's why I talked about Karata. Remember, I talked about the incorrigible judge. What are the kind of people we are bringing? Because when you talk about dedication, it's one of the most suspicious things you can talk about. Judges, the lives of people like the hands of these judges. They try murder cases, they try manslaughter and so many other cases. And even the issue of Tribuna, the whole nation, a whole state is relying on them. And again, let me also say this. You see, we should not stay away from the truth. That is what is, the court can make judgments or can deliver judgments based on public morality, public safety, and security. You don't make judgments, you cannot enforce them. You can make judgments that will be anti-people, that will cause a problem in this society. Then are you a problem-sover or a problem-creator? We must understand the truth. The time of them. We are not like this. What has gone wrong in this era? Before you become a judge or a magistrate, people must know your Karata. Let's go to Barrister Abu Merozara. The fact that the United Nations has said, let me not use the word warned, but they have said that 2023 the judges or whoever is in charge of the legal angle to whatever will happen in February and March should be careful and do the right thing. It means that the world is watching us. Obviously the world always watches us. We are the most populous black nation in the world. So the world watches us and whatever happens in Nigeria will trickle down to other African countries and by implication the entire globe. So a simple question is this thing that they are advocating, this thing that the United Nations is asking for, is it doable? If it is doable, what are the things that must be put in place before the elections and immediately after the elections? Go ahead. Thank you very much, a good friend. In case you are looking for the name. In my view, the United Nations personnel in Nigeria, to whom the statement is attributed to, they have not said anything really new. I recall at the inauguration of the election tribunal panel, the President of the Court of Appeal did give an admonition on the need for the selected judges to add through to their votes, be fair minded and not to be swayed by other considerations. We also have to remember that the judges swore on votes that would do good to all mana of men, irrespective of whose votes is gold. To one way, to one way vote and pray that the judges would act through to the vote of office and dispense justice according to the facts of the case before them and the law and not allow themselves to be swayed by other considerations, namely ethno-religious consideration or to fall under the undue pressure of politicians. You recall some time ago when the Chief Justice of Nigeria had to more or less, you know, he shall fail to the Nigerian public calling on politicians to stop putting pressure, undue pressure on the judiciary. The main problem we have are the politicians. The Partitioners amended Electoral Act 2022 and the Constitution and all other laws are very clear and simple. But the politicians will refuse the Electoral Act. They will refuse to do the right thing. There's no internal democracy among the parties. The political parties will come up with guidelines. The guidelines are there themselves formulated. The political class will not abide by it. When the recklessly breached provisions of the guidelines and the law, they now begin to put pressure on the judges. That is where you begin to hear of cases of some person personally judiciary being corrupted. So I think the right quarters to which a statement and a commission to be directed at are the politicians in political class. They are the ones who recklessly with impunity disobeying and flat, extra provisions of Electoral Act, the Constitution and all other laws. We're a little bit confused here, Barisa. We're a little bit confused. We're a little bit confused. It's like putting a law in the Constitution that if you thief, if you steal something, you go to prison and the courts will be the ones to send you to prison. And the thieves are stealing and then the families of the thieves or the thieves themselves are putting pressure on the legal or judiciary to make sure that they don't go to prison. And then you are saying that we should not direct the need to abide by the laws to the thieves instead of the institution that has been put in place to make sure these thieves get what they need to get for breaking the law. I don't know how I will take my complaint to the politicians who will always put pressure to make sure it favors them when I have a body that should make sure these politicians pay for the wrongs they do. There's a Electoral Act. It's not for the politicians to interpret. It's for the judiciary, for the legal luminaries like you guys to interpret and send them to jail if they have to go to jail. Why do we have to take it to the politicians again? Because it favors them. They will not do anything about it. So our question is why is it seeming like the judiciary is a bulldog without his teeth? What are the constraints that need to be removed for the judiciary to function the way it should function? That's our question simply. Well, you've raised a number of issues. Let me start with the last question. Like my later friend, Justice, said the first thing to do is to have a complete independence of the judiciary in terms of certain national autonomy. You recall a couple of years ago there was a strike action and backed up on by the judiciary office on the basis of a national autonomy of the judiciary. In fact, the chief judges of the various states on the federal high court and even the chief judges of Nigeria will have to go cap in hand again the executive to provide funds for the administration of a justice system needs much to be desired. It exposes them to a possibility or place in a position to be manipulated or controlled. Whereas if the judiciary is there to draw their funds directly from the consolidated revenue fund without reference from the executive, then their independence would be more or less guaranteed and enhanced. Secondly, the mode of appointment essence to the judiciary is still working in progress. You will find out by and large starting from the magistracy up to the highest level from time to time questions are asked as to the quality and the capacity of personnel appointed as that budget. It's still working progress and I know that the NJC they keep on reviewing the rules regarding the qualifications and the character content expected and required of persons aspiring to the position of judges. And then totally you have to bear in mind that the judiciary cannot divorce itself from the society that we live in. By and large you find that there has been a gradual descent into more or less that we use the word ignominy in all facets of Nigerian life. The executive, the legislature, even members of the society, morality is gradually waning. Impurity, lawlessness, might is right, a right and arrogant display of power. Ethnicity, religious bias is my brother, is my sister. All these factors they come to go play. Nigerian judges are human beings. They don't live in the moon. They live without hair. They pass through all the vagaries, all the is and norms and it's from and we take the society that you recruit the personnel. So it will be nearly impossible for you to express that judges behave like Jesus Christ. I will be super human, super human beings. They are not from the moon. Selected from about us. So by and large the negative aspect that you see manifest themselves in the judiciary is a reflection and manifestation of the type of society that we live in. Okay Justice, sorry Barista if I just quickly come in here and thanks for your perspectives. You made a very interesting point which has to do with the character and actually Barista Justice also said something similar. The character, integrity, competence of those who are of some of those who are appointed onto the bench. But there is also the submission by some observers that very competent persons, legal practitioners who have distinguished themselves when being offered the opportunity to become judges or justices, they don't want to accept it. They would rather prefer to continue their practice. They don't want to go onto the bench. Don't you think that if competent people, I mean your colleagues, you who practice in the legal profession, if you turn down opportunities to go and sit on the bench, we are not going to solve this problem? Yes, you are correct. Absolutely I agree with you. But unless you improve the positions of service of judges and they are sure of independence, freedom in the discharge of their individual function. More and more qualified persons will not continue to decline in the bench. Why would you want to leave your lucrative practice and not go to the judiciary? And life becomes difficult for you. Don't forget these are human beings. They have personal needs. They have children. Those who go to school, have you heard that children's who face? What happens to them after they are made? So that is why it is essential that the conditions of work of judges all over the country to be improved tremendously. When they are more or less isolated from the normal vagaries that afflicts other members of material society, then the temptation to be sought into, to pervert justice because of some peculiar consideration will be removed. You cannot expect to appoint a judge. And he does not have a house to stay. He does not have a car. I will take him to work. He has to worry about fueling his generator. He does not have access to proper law libraries. He has to rely on his personal own efforts. I must command some states in the aspect of welfare of judges, state like Lagos. What I would recommend is that the NJC working with the conjunction with the federal government should look into the question of the welfare of judges. Okay, Barista, let's just move very fast now because of time. Well, it appears that no matter how we do it, no matter where we go, there must always be someone who we are begging to pay the piper and he who pays the piper dictates the tune. Something needs to be done by the legal practitioners themselves to make sure these autonomy really comes because if you keep asking the state governments or the federal government to do something about the welfare, in fact they're listening right now, which means like people have said, poverty has been weaponized so that you get the people to do your bidding once you know that they are hungry enough. May that not be what is happening in the legal profession and the judiciary? But right now we are concerned about the elections. The forthcoming elections 24 days left now because today is the first. We have just four or 23 days to prepare for it and on the 25th we're having a presidential election. Now let me come to you Justice Uhuebo. If we take the Oshun scenario for instance, do we even have hope for the 2023 election as it is? Because we've seen the judgment in Oshun and some of us still do not understand what happened there. We would like to have your take on that. You mentioned earlier on what happened in Imo state till today. It's a legal abracadabra. I do not understand how it happened where someone from the third before position became the governor. We don't understand. So let's just take your, let's get your take on what happened in the judgment regarding the Oshun election where a Demola delegate was, was, okay, or yetula was pronounced as the winner. Give us your take on that briefly so that we can also take from Osara. You know why I'm laughing is because first of all as lawyers, I, I overheard when we were discussing with your colleague in the studio there. And for now we may not be able to discuss fully about it because the matter is still in court because I know this man has approached the court of appeal for, for that reason. And that's why in the wisdom of the judicial system we have three layers. The first one, the second one, and the third floor, which is after that you cannot appeal to God. But fully speaking, every Nigerian was surprised at judgment, just like what happened in Nigeria in Imo state. And that was why I made the comment. That was why I say this thing, that you don't truncate the hopes and the lives of the people. And secondly, remember, I say that most times, even when we read, we read the laws, even when law school and all the rights, especially in law of thought and all the rights, you see that judgments at times can be given for stability of the society, for stability of the society. So this has been what has happened in Osho. I am so, I am so optimistic that by the time they get to court of appeal, any abnormally would be corrected or might be corrected. But the truth is this, you see, when you leave some of these things, just like we have been saying to the hands of people that just try to be in the bench by all means. I'm sorry to say, but I have to say this. Today, I am also saying, like when my little friend said to politicians, I can't blame it on politicians because if you have this, if you have taken yourself out to become an educator, whether a magistrate, whether a judge or whatever, provided you are an educator, you must distinguish yourself. You have to live above board. You are not to seem to behave like others. You are not to seem to within like an ordinary Nigerian because you are not a separate person. The lives of many are in your hands. Whether the issue of finance or not becomes immaterial because for you, you know, when you know of your risk and you decided to take the risk, there's nobody in Nigeria today that does not know that the financial stability of initially is not that palatable. But once you have accepted to take it, you must. That's a volatile, not fit injury. And when you know of your risk and you decided to take the risk, you cannot rely on the fact that because that initially it's not you were taking care of. You now want to go there and make yourself of. No. And that is where the issue of credibility, integrity and your person begins to stand. I asked him, what is the difference between a judge and a lawyer? He answered me. He said that a judge is somebody who after long standing in the back is called to sit in the bench. I still remember what he told me today. He said after long standing in the back is called to sit in the bench. For you to be called to sit in the bench, which means there is something that will have been seen about you that you must distinguish you. What I'm trying to say now, if you look at what they are showing in the tribuna and all the like you said, if you read that judgment very well, you might discover or figure so many things. But it's not an issue we'll discuss here because this is not the best for us to discuss such matter. We're still watching and we're still waiting. I would still want to know what will happen. Yes, please. Just one more question for Barista Osara. It does appear as if the electoral process in Nigeria depends significantly on a judiciary. Some people have raised this issue and they have said that of course it is expected that if there's dispute or whatever in an electoral matter it naturally should go to court. But that in our own case it's like the courts have become like INEC. They have actually become an integral part of the electoral process itself. And that this is not healthy. Is there something that can be done to diminish? I know first of all that most of our politicians will not accept defeat. So willy-nilly they will always go to court. But other than that, is there something that can be done to actually make sure that the judiciary is not that much engaged or involved in an electoral process? Thank you very much. Thank you very much. You have to take into consideration the fact that when there's a conflict, there's an agreement in a constitutional way. That's why under the criminal session 6 of the court's judiciary, what we create is a dispute between individuals, between citizens and governments. However, and it's a fact of life that it is normal to have issues before to go to, is it judiciary? Is it judiciary? So I still make this appeal. The only way that we can reduce the intervention of the judiciary in the electoral process is if the political actors, if they learn to play by the rules, they learn to play by the rules. The provisions of the electoral act 2022, they are very clear, very simple. All the political parties, they have legal departments, they have legal advisors, they are all educated, they can read the constitution, they have guidelines and provisions. But it's just that the torso for power and control of power is such that politicians, they are ready to do anything to show us to grab power. So the deliberative flouts, their own rules, flouts provisions of the electoral act, and the only records is to go to court for resolution. And by and large, if you take a look at the performance of the judiciary from 1999 up to date, you can say fairly that the judiciary has discharged itself relatively well. This is in spite of the reservation that most of us have regarding the OSHO results, and including that of Akbabiu, the recent judgment of his Supreme Court in the Akbabiu senatorial ambition. Because most of us, we are still trying to understand Irashola because we saw Akbabiu contesting for presidential primary ticket of the APC. And we knew that the second DIG had already been selected as the senatorial candidate of the party in Akbabiu state. And then the judge of the Supreme Court says that the political party have, it's an eternal affair of the political party. And we are wondering, we are waiting to spread the details of that, but better that we see Irashola. And now I understand that Senate President Lawan is planning on the body to prove out. So the body is on the political approach. It should learn to play by the rule. I am not for restricting access to the court by any of anybody, whoever is aggrieved. Because in grievance, in terms of electoral practices or business relations or interpersonal affairs, the only place to go as prescribed under the equations of circumstances of our constitution is to go to the courts. How much we can take? Well, we talk legal matters, especially we that do not really understand the legal angle to everything would like to dig and keep digging and keep digging. But we do hope that this 2023 general elections will not bring as many cases as we've seen in the past. And even if they do, we do hope that the judgments will be speedy enough so that governance can start right away. We'd like to thank you gentlemen for coming on the show, hoping that we are going to connect with you again, even before the general elections or immediately after. Thank you so much for coming on the show. Thank you for having me. Thank you. It is my pleasure once more. Okay. Well, we'll take a short break now for the news. And when we come back from the news, we'll just take what the guests have said and some other issues that are bedeviling us, if I may use the word, in Nigeria right away. So don't go away. Stay with us.