 And we're back with the conversation this morning. We'll have a legal practitioner join us this morning in Lagos via Zoom, Aguio Day, Stephen to be precise. In no time we're having joined the conversation, but just a bit to the background of what we're about to talk about. It's that the Nigerian government has accused a major opposition leader of treason. Now weeks after the candidate of the ruling party won a hotly contested presidential election. The government spoke best in line. Mohammed gave a government's position during an engagement with journalists in Washington, D.C. That's in the United States. According to the Minister of Information and Court Relye Mohammed accused the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Albi, of inciting people to violence over the outcome of the presidential election, saying it's reasonable. Now, during the respective interactions with international media organization, the minister said that it was wrong for Albi on the one breath to seek redressing court, and the other hand of the outcome of the polls actually, and the other hand also to incite people to violence. Albi and his vice, Dati Ahmed, cannot be threatening Nigerians. Dati Eve of the president, Eleg Bola, Ahmad Tunibu of the All Progressive Congress is sworn in on May 29. It will be the end of democracy in Nigeria. You know, the conversation is endless. The thoughts are still there, but this is the point where we have our guests join us. Let's make sense of all of this back and forth. The fact that they're also wreaks the standard chance of being, you know, they probably might be arrested. It seemed like they are enemy of the state. Stephen Agiodi, thank you once again for joining us. So quickly, I'd like to ask you what exactly is a treason according to the Constitution and to all the laws in our polity? What exactly is a treason? Treason means a series of acts where you, by force, want to overthrow the state government. So it's very simple. That means by some act or some definite deed, we are trying to overthrow the government of the country. That's what it is. In many times. So but do you think that, you know, the actions or the accusation of the federal government in response to, I mean, if you look at that juxtaposing that with your definition of a treason according to the laws of the land, do you think that it's a treason? No. What Alaji Dattin Mohamed has said is wrong and it is condemnable. If you contest an election and you are in court over it, you should not be declaring the end of democracy. That is wrong. But at the same time, I don't think it rises to the level of treason. I think actually he responds before anyone to actually even be talking about treason at this time. It may be wrong for him to say that, but one must place it in the context of what is going on in our polity right now. Someone has won their court. What I would have thought is that the spokesman for the winner at this time should indeed be coming up rather than exacerbating situations. One can see that when we use something, at least they say that you haven't heard or you cry. Naturally, they lost an election, they will cry. But one should not extend that crime and then turn it into another thing and say it is a treason. One can condemn what they have said and say it is wrong. That's on one hand, but to extend it to treason, no. I think it's still between the bounds of prespit even though it is wrong and condemnable. That's my own view. So then looking at that, if you say that that's condemnable just again, the thought when this is not that I'm holding brief for the liberal presidential candidate, but we're just looking at the issue when we juxtapose it with what the law and the Constitution says you have someone who's trying to overthrow government. For you to say that the president election should not be sworn in because the election was not free, fair and credible, does that really align with the definition of treason when you see you're trying to overthrow government? Is there any way in the statement that was made that sounds like there's a plan to overthrow the government, whether by that particular statement or the actions again, you're a man of the law and so I'd like you to bring us up to speed critically. Like I said, what he has said, if you have to take the text of what is said carefully, if you take everything he has said carefully, it does not amount to treason. He's still within the bounds of free speech. He should take every single word of what he said that democracy will end. That is his opinion that democracy will end. He didn't say there should be a coup. He didn't go there. He just said you'll be doing something illegal and unconstitutional. That is his opinion. He will do his wrong. He will say that if someone is contesting for that high level of office, he assumes the status of his statement. So he should watch what he says. And I would agree completely that he should watch what he says. But is what he has said out really outside the bounds of free speech? Has it gone to the extent of what has he done? What unconstitutional act has he done? He has said something that he shouldn't have said. But it's still broadly within the range of free speech. It may be irresponsible to expect his statement to be talking like this. But that does not mean he's treason. And I think that those who are talking treason should be well guided. Because before you know it, you are going into the realm of authoritarianism, where you are... It's like someone is... Don't cry. No, no, no. You don't do that. You yourself are going beyond the bounds of democracy when you do that. There should be a certain latitude for speech in a democracy. Someone on speech. That is my point. So but then again, with what the government has said, there's also been a response from the side of the Labour Party saying that they have never in any way incited anyone or tried to overthrow the constitutional government. But then again, do you see this government moving ahead to swing into action in that light, declaring them an enemy of a state, making arrests? And what have you... If they do that, it would be a very bad moment. And it would be taking us back rather than forward. What one will expect of the government now and people of goodwill is to say to the Labour Party vice president that he should turn parties down for now. He's a statesman at this point. He should turn parties down and face the court action which they have instituted and let that play its course. He's in court already. He may win. He may lose. We don't know yet. We should face the court action. He can even express opinions about the court where he's so long as he doesn't enter into the range of prejudging the court action. We should allow a lot of latitude for principality. He can talk. But as a statesman, should he be talking about the end of democracy now? But to speak of arrests, really, you are entering, in my view, into the range of fascism. You are entering into the range of fascism, into the range of authoritarianism. You almost allow democracy to have amplitude and plenitude. You must allow it to stay large. You must give every room for people to speak, to savor the want and all that. These people are aggrieved. They lost an election. You might not speak, but the vice president of the vice presidential candidate of the Labour Party is a statesman and he should not heat up the polity. This is what men of good ways should tell them. I mean, there's also a statement from a very noble Nigerian, Wale Shoinka, who's in his response to all of the back and forth that's going on with the Labour Party and what have you. He's described them. He said that the obedient fascist. People believe that Wale Shoinka calling the obedient fascist is part of the plan. This is politically motivated. There's an agenda to demarket the presidential candidate of the Labour Party by the ruling government. Do you agree with this? No, because we can barely hear you. If you can project a bit, we can barely hear you. We're struggling to hear you at this point in time. Now, this is better. Okay. I say I am an admirer of Wale Shoinka. I don't think he's part of any government agenda. I think that he has a, well, I don't see anything wrong in him saying that Mr. Datty's statement bothers on fascism because when you are saying that because whilst you are caught because you have not had your way, therefore democracy is ending, you are having a tunnel vision view of politics. I think the Labour Party people should realise that in politics you can win or lose. It's like football. You can either win or lose. But I don't think we should understand what Wale Shoinka is saying. Wale Shoinka is probably saying that he should be careful what he says, that his statements are fascist. While at the same time I find fault with the Leonard Professor because the Leonard Professor has not made any comments about some of the things that happened in the grant that he says he was not around during the election, but he has not made any statement about the things that happened during the election, particularly in legal stage where people are saying that it was about to drive Europe. The kind of dirty ethnic politics that was played, one would have expected by now that Professor Wale Shoinka would make a comment on that. Not only because the kind of violence and ethnicity that was exhibited nationwide, I know he made a general statement of that, but he needs to condemn those ones specifically too, as he says that what Allaji Dati has said is fascist. But what Wale Shoinka has said should not be a licence for anyone to now say that he wants to ground a charge of treason on that. I'm sure Wale Shoinka himself who has faced this kind of matters before will not intend that. There was no way in the interview that Shoinka has granted where he said that Allaji Dati should be arrested or Ubi should be arrested. He didn't say that. I think he even had some complementary things to say about the obedient movement, about the emergence of Ubi as a credible candidate. I think he had some not, if you listen to him carefully, say that what Allaji Dati has said amounts to treason. He didn't say that and I don't think anyone should stretch it to that and think that is part of any agenda. Personally, I don't think it's part of any agenda. No, but I mean it's not that he was said that he said that, but you know the description that he is giving over time, he said that you know it's a sort of very nice fascism or fascist description that he's given and he's greeted a lot of condemnation from several Nigerians. But again, I like us to understand this because what you have the Labour Party doing is what if it was like every other politician does every other time, we will not accept, we will not concede defeat, we're going to challenge the process, we don't think he was elected, he shouldn't be sworn in. These are the statements because also vividly, we remember the time where President Bahá'u'lláh and the Bahá'u'lláh himself had rejected results from 2003 elections, he rejected results from 2007, rejected results from 2011, how come he wasn't tagged as you know all of the rejection of results saying I don't accept it, all of that, how come he wasn't, that particular act was not described as you know a treason because if someone says you have committed a treason, it's huge, you have been declared an enemy of state and it's not something that the international community or you know the home community as well would want to deal with. So again, what sort of conversation is this and should the government not also be held accountable for making such statements, how do we classify it, is this hate speech, is this propaganda, where exactly does this lie? No, if you listen carefully to Waleishu Inka's interviews, he did say that he felt that all the spokesmen for all the parties, all the spokesmen for all the parties should be sent to Ukraine for the time they should be sent to Ukraine, he said it as a joke, that they should be sent to Ukraine because they were hitting up the polity, he said he also felt that the spokesman of the winner of the election should go somewhere because you see they are the ones hitting up the polity, if you notice President Buhari has not spoken, if you notice to the major candidate, the presidential candidate of the APC who is the declared winner has not spoken himself. What you are hearing about treason and all that are from ministers maybe, from party, aparatics and all that, what you are not hearing from the president of the country, you are not hearing from the responsible minister for national security of defense. So I just see you have a group of people hitting up the policy and I think Waleishu incorrectly said in his interviews that we should take care to deport these people to Ukraine, it used to be Afghanistan but okay now it's Ukraine, maybe they should go and experience what war means so that they can know how to be circumspect about making statements that lead to disorder. So but you know in all of this what big lessons do you think that we can take home again after the elections 2023, there's still an aftermath and that's what we're talking about, different parties are aggrieved to have approached the court and then this cycle continues over and over again, what lessons can we learn, what exactly can we do differently in another election cycle? Well I take it one by one, for the Labour Party they came third, they are a new political force in Nigeria, they achieved a lot, they won where they were not expected to win and I think they should take away some level of satisfaction from their performance, we shouldn't wash away the BB with that water, I know maybe they're expected to win but I think they have done well, I think they have done well, if you look back in our history too, you'll see Chief Aulao contested many times and he never won, Buhari too contested many times and he never won, maybe it is immaturity that is playing through at this point, maybe the candidates of the more experienced will temper it down, if you don't win this time you can win another time, that's democracy, it's like a football game, sometimes you lose when you should win, sometimes you win when you should lose, this is democracy, I think they should go to a court if they want, that's their right, but whatever plays out there, I think they should accept it and build a stronger movement, that's the point, as for the APC, they are the declared winners, I think in victory one should be gallant, they have won an election, they are there, they used to say that you shouldn't throw stones at every passing dog, people will make comment and all that, but then it's not for them to throw stones, I think rather at this point being the prospective leaders of the country, they should show more maturity, well as for the PDP, they have not featured in these controversies, so let's leave them alone, but as for the people of Nigeria, my message is democracy is important and the defense of democracy is important, the difference of free speech is important, whenever free speech like this is being challenged and you hear things like oh we are going to, people banding things like cruising about and all that, you need people to come out and say no this is wrong, don't go that far, particularly as there are no acts to support it, mere statements do not amount to cruising and even if you look at the statement you won't say anything, so I expect Nigerians to come out and say no, don't go that way, because sometimes if you don't talk you will find the situation where actually things may begin to happen that perhaps the authorities might feel if people are not talking this is what they want, so people need to talk and say no, that's not through the political confusion, we can question ourselves and move on, politics is a game, that's how I see it, free speech is very important, what you have said may be wrong but you are entitled to say wrong things when you are exercising your right of free speech, so the other part of the question is what exactly do you think that we need to do in the next election cycle, I mean we are looking at all stakeholders right now, thank you for drawing my attention to this, INEC and INEC again, INEC was a major disappointment in this election, they made promises that they couldn't give up to, they said that the IRA would be instant, it wasn't instant and all that, INEC needs to go back to the drawing board, but their performance in this election cycle was shambolic, if we are to be honest and the leaders, the leaders, the current leaders should acknowledge that as a matter of urgency, when Yadua came to power even during one election he acknowledged there were problems with the process that brought him there and he set up a committee, this is the way of good leadership, there have been, there were problems with this election, we shouldn't sweep it under the carpet, under the guys that our party won, no, no, no, no, no, they should go back to the drawing board, INEC should go back to the drawing board and look at what went wrong and correct it, the federal government itself should acknowledge that there were problems with these elections and try to find a solution, I know we are huddling down to censors now to another program but you see, you don't keep huddling from one problem to the other without solving one, I think that the, what happened in this election should be the subject of some seminars and discussions within governments to improve on, obviously the template that INEC set up for this election didn't work out as planned, that is clear, so they should think of reworking it and improving their performance for future elections, that is my opinion, they should think of reworking their performance for future elections, this election has not lived up to it, their performance in this election has not lived up to be believed, the truth be told and governments should acknowledge it, there's no shame in acknowledging the truth. Alright then Steven Aguio Day, we have to let it go at this point in time, thank you so much for being part of the show, it's my pleasure. Alright then we have been speaking with a legal practitioner right here in Lagos, he joined us via Zoom, looking at what a treasonable offence is or if you know the actions of the Labour Party authorences has been made not to say that you know statements have not been made but is that tantamount to a treason, at what point do you say that an individual or group of persons have committed you know a treasonable offence, that's the size of it this morning, we take a breather when we return we'll be looking at a second conversation, the federal government that the government itself swing into action already as they have decided to say hey we are taking 800 million narrow loan just to cushion the effects of the subsidy removal you know after six months in 2023, stay with us, we'll be right back.