We acknowledge the new helmsman at the Justice Ministry, a deserving member of the National Executive Committee of NBA, as a Bar man. We want to thank him for the visit to the NBA Secretariat. We believe the job of the Attorney General of the Federation is very easy for anyone who decides to allow the rule of law to be the basis of his actions.

We fervently hope that the FAG will avoid the mistakes of some of his predecessors. We look forward to an improved relationship between the Attorney and the Bar leadership. There is a lot to be done to repair the incalculable damage to our reputation through the connivance of our members in politics. The time left is short. Attorney Adoke, you can always count on the Bar for frank advice.

Now to my speech:

To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven;  A time to be born, and a time to die; A time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; A time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; A time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; A time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; A time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; A time of war, and a time of peace; A time to enter and a time to exit.

This often use quote  must be our consoling words to ourselves as members of the Legal Profession, nay, Nigerians, as we bid farewell from the Bench to a quintessential jurist and a truly learned law Lord, Hon. Justice George Adesola Oguntade, CON. So ends a three-decade meritorious judicial career which inauspiciously commenced in September 1980 with his appointment to the High Court Bench of Lagos State.  How time flies.  Before that appointment, His Lordship had studied law at the famous Holborn College of Law in London between 1961 and 1964 in which year he obtained his LL.B (Honours) degree, after which he worked for a brief period with The Greater London Council.  He had also attended the Nigerian Law School in 1965 leading to his call to Nigerian Bar in January 1966.  Then followed a period of private legal practice from 1966 to August 1980.

I must say that it was after his elevation to the Court of Appeal Bench in September 1987 that his star shone brightly in the constellation with which our court is adorned; partly owing to the exposition provided by the Law Reports for his very brilliant, lucid and well-thought-out judgments in every branch of the law; adjectival or substantive.  A bold and courageous judex, Justice Oguntade never feared to dissent.  His dissenting judgments (and they are many) were just as formidable as his leading judgments were strikingly redoubtable – both exhibiting exceptional legal knowledge and erudition, rendered in the Denning-type easy-to-read and easy-to-understand flawless prose.  We definitely will miss him on the Bench.

According to that great Greek Philosopher, Socrates, four qualities belong to a good judge:

- To hear courteously

- To answer wisely

- To consider soberly, and

- To decide impartially

Without any equivocation or fear of contradiction, do I say with supreme confidence that His Lordship Oguntade JSC (as he then was) possesses these qualities.  These admirable qualities manifested quite conspicuously in all the five Judicial Divisions of the Court of Appeal (Enugu, Ibadan, Jos, Lagos and Abuja) where he served. Little wonder then that on 19^th May, 2004, Justice Oguntade was elevated to the Supreme Court to where he was accompanied by his legendary judicial idiosyncrasy to which his dissenting judgments in  INAKOJU Vs.  ADELEKE (Governor Ladoja’s impeachment case), BUHARI Vs.  YAR A’DUA and ATIKU ABUBAKAR Vs.  YAR A’DUA (to mention a few) bear eloquent testimony of his brilliant exposition of scholarship and sound intellectual fecundity.  The sad aspect of these decisions however is that both INEC and our politicians, for whom these decisions ought to be normative guide in civilized and legal conduct of political affairs have sadly remained incorrigible and impervious to reason and political decorum. The INEC is still “holier than the Pope” wasting public money for spaces in the print media to rationalise why the ruling party must win, rather than ruminating on how to conduct credible elections. INEC will rather prefer to engage the services of the best lawyers for the defence of the fraud and in the process cry more than the bereaved.  The politicians on their part still believe that elections must be a “do or die” affair and that no law or guideline or any court should prevent that from being so.

Sham and fraudulent “elections” have been conducted by INEC and voided by the courts in Edo, Kogi,Gongola, Ekiti, Ondo etc. yet no single INEC member had been prosecuted or even as much as administratively reprimanded for the monumental fraud.  They fail to see anything wrong in delivering sensitive Registration of Voters’ material and actual electoral materials illegally to party leaders and “garrison commanders” before the election date.  In spite of the electoral atrocities committed by INEC under his charge, Professor Maurice Iwu has failed to resign.  Instead, some clownish characters, beneficiaries of the INEC fraud, are even touting the extension of his term.  Unfortunately, people tend to associate the poverty of integrity in INEC with the mode of appointing its Chairman.  They however forget that Professor Nwosu conducted the best election on June 12 1993, notwithstanding that he was appointed by a military President.

 The NBA has been watching, with keen interest, the spirited efforts of hirelings and major beneficiaries of the worst electoral heist in the history of the country, conducted by Iwu, to stampede the rest of us into accepting Iwu as part of the political reality of our time, even if his activities have had debilitating impact on the people of this country. We equally note with consternation the ease with which rented crowds were received with undisguised expectation by some      legislators from the National   Assembly.   

While we acknowledge the right of this special breed of individuals, who seem impervious to the sentiments expressed by majority of Nigerians who desire change, to demonstrate. What is deplorable is the unmistakable impression created in the minds of reasonable citizens that certain elements within INEC are responsible for this confusion for the simple reason that they want to maintain   the    status          quo.

The NBA wishes to reiterate its position that Maurice Iwu and other commissioners must be removed for any electoral reforms to have the desired impact. We are not unaware of the constitutional provision in regard to tenure of office of these people. We are also not unmindful of the real reason behind this current agitation. Iwu and his fellow travelers want a second term to perfect their iniquitous deeds. They conduct themselves as if all they have done to make this country lie prostrate are not important. We join other well-meaning Nigerians in condemning the activities of the suborned agitators. We enjoin the Acting President to shun all workers of iniquities and take steps that will etch his name in the minds of the people permanently. Let Iwu and his colleagues leave us in peace after the expiration of their tenure. This is the only path of honour if they understand what it means to be honourable.

The joy of His Lordship, and the Supreme Court in all these, is that he, or it, or both cannot be counted among those who are placed at a vantage position to talk to power but choose to take refuge in suspicious quietude when silence at this stage is plain cowardice or an indication of shameful compromise.  They cannot be labeled cowards.  Without any iota of doubt, Hon. Justice Oguntade has paid his dues.  His contribution to legal development and political evolution in Nigeria constitute an imperishable landmark legacy from which generations yet unborn will benefit.

The exit of Justice Oguntade from the Supreme Court Bench and the vacuum so created cannot but bring again to the front burner the recurrent issue of the methodology for appointment of judicial officers for our courts particularly the appellate courts.  The Bar remains of the unflinching opinion that “the Bench must be stronger than the Bar”, with the logical corollary that only the Best from the Bar or Bench must be appointed to the Bench or Higher Benches as the case may be.

The acceptance of this innocuous universal truism is incongruous with the extant policy of limitation of appointment to the higher Bench to only personnel from the immediately lower Bench.  In other words the search for the best personnel for appointment to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court should not be limited to the judicial personnel of the High Courts and the Court of Appeal respectively.  It must be broad-based enough to include the Bench generally, the Universities, the inner and outer Bar.  The Bench and indeed the country, stand to reap tremendous benefit from such an exercise.

My Lords, distinguished ladies and gentlemen, in canvassing this position, we do not pretend to be proposing a new policy.  Precedent abounds in the appointment of Dr. T. O. Elias straight from the Bar to the position of Chief Justice of Nigeria and in the appointment of Dr. Augustine Nnamani (of blessed memory) straight from the Bar to the Supreme Court. So also were their lordships Dan Ibekwe and Mamman Nasir.  Conversely, we have had Justices moving from the Supreme Court to the court of Appeal or even to the High court.   Hon. Justices  Mamman Nasir, Buba Ardo and Dan Ibekwe being notable examples.   The civil service system of promotion to the next level is, we submit, totally incompatible with the judiciary’s system of merit-based elevation.

In his book “Thoughts on Nigerian Constitution” published in 1966, at pages 76 – 78 thereof, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, SAN. GCFR opined inter-alia thus:

“If we had our way, we would insist that no one without a good knowledge of Mathematics, or Logic and Methodology, and Psychology, in addition to his professional qualifications, should be elevated to the Bench.  The rigorous mental drill which these disciplines enforce; the tidiness of mind and precision in thought and presentation which the study of Mathematics, Logic and Methodology provide; and the breadth of outlook and a deep comprehension of ‘the complex of human passion’ which psychology imparts – all these, among other things, are a sine qua non of any healthy trial or adjudication of dispute.  The court, as an organ of the State, is sui generis.  It is the citizen’s bulwark of last resort against the tyranny and unconstitutionality of the executive and Legislature, and against illegitimate invasion of, or arbitrary threat to, his rights, liberty, property, and life, from any quarter whatsoever.  Those who are posted to protect this bulwark against violation must possess the finest intellectual and moral equipment…”

“For many obvious reasons, Nigeria cannot and must not, in future, brook mediocrity in any sphere of her public life, more especially so when such mediocrity tries to show its face in that sphere where, if admitted, it will be entitled by constitution to wear the ermined robe and the silk gown of judicial finality…”

“It cannot be disputed that the average standard of academic accomplishments in the judiciary should be as high as, if not higher than, that prevailing at the Bar or, indeed, in other sectors of our national life. Furthermore, the Bench, because of the unique role it is expected to play, should be so adorned by its occupants that it becomes invested with such halo as can spontaneously command general respect, and at the same time exert a most powerful attraction on the best among the lawyers…”

“In addition to academic qualification, a person should have long and intensive practice at the Bar before being appointed as a judge. Such a practice will strengthen and enhance his academic qualification and moral qualities. He will be immensely enriched in experience, thereby. What is more , his success at the Bar will fortify his spirit of independence and self –reliance.”

“In any case, the independence and impartiality of the judiciary cannot be secured by making the Bench accessible to those who have not done so well in the academic race and/or find it difficult to make a living at the Bar…”

Also sharing this view, Guy Aldous while congratulating Lord Denning on his appointment to the Bench at a very young age said:

“It can only be for the benefit of the law generally that the greatest lawyers be appointed to the Bench.”

All these are to show that our agitation for a very strong Bench-Stronger than the Bar, enjoys neither uniqueness nor novelty.  So also is our clamour for the application of the same principle of selection for our appellate courts.  Our position in this particular regard finds very solid support in many other countries where meritocracy is a directive principle of judicial policy.  It is also the practice in England, as can be gleaned from Lord Dennings book “The Due Process of Law”.  At pages 19 – 20 the legendary jurist wrote:

“Now I remember this case for a particular reason.  It was argued for three days on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, 11, 12 and 13 July 1962.  It was the ‘night of the long knives’.  The Prime Minister, Mr. Harold Macmillan, dispensed with most of his ministers, at a minute’s notice; they include the Lord Chancellor, Lord Kilmuir.  That left him very sore.  Now one of the duties of the Master of the Rolls is that he has to swear in any new Lord Chancellor.  One day I was warned that I would have to swear in a new Lord Chancellor.  I was not told who he was.  But during that morning the Attorney-General, Sir Reginald Manninngham-Buller (who was arguing the case himself), asked to be excused for an hour or two.  We guessed the reason.  He was to be the new Lord Chancellor.  So on one day he was arguing before us as Attorney-General.  The next day he was Lord Chancellor above us. We decided in his favour – but on the merit of his argument – not because he had become Lord Chancellor.  Things like that make no impact on us. 

Should a thing like that make any impact on our own judges in Nigeria too?  I urge the NJC to answer the question in the negative and give this issue a deserved second thought.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we also hasten to comment on another issue which currently agitates the minds of practitioners. Our jurisprudence has been undoubtedly enriched by the age-long doctrine of stare decisis . The establishment of courts is always considered on the basis of hierarchy within the court system. Our law developed through the adherence to this principle. It allows the law to be ascertainable. It affords both lawyers in practice and the academia to have a robust platform for cross-fertilisation of ideas. Astute litigants too are able to follow court decisions with appreciable ease. Consequently, our courts have always frowned at any attitude of importunity bordering on disrespect for which our appellate courts have established precedents. A court below is expected to be bound by the decision of a higher court. Even courts of coordinate jurisdiction are enjoined to be persuasively swayed by decisions already reached by other courts in matters similar to the ones under consideration.

A situation which leaves lawyers uncertain as regards the position of law is deplorable. The Bar has noticed with increasing discomfiture the conflicting decisions emanating from our appellate courts. The Court of Appeal has found itself in an embarrassing quagmire arising from the disparate pronouncements on matters which are, as lawyers will say, “on all fours” with earlier decisions reached by the same court. The Supreme Court appears not be immune from this current crisis. Legal practitioners are deeply frustrated by this development. The Bar states that the situation is unacceptable. The Office of the CJN should look into this as a matter of utmost urgency.

On an occasion like this ladies and gentlemen, we must remind ourselves of the state of the nation. We have been forced to watch the unfolding drama in the country with consternation. We are living witnesses to the tragic-comic histrionics playing out in the presidency. Since the President was ostensibly evacuated to Saudi Arabia last year up till the point of his purported return to the country in the wee hours of the night sometime this year, major players in the corridors of power have turned the rest of us to pawns in their undisguised struggle for power.  So ludicrous has the whole drama turned out to be that even fringe appointees sought to define the limits of presidential powers exercisable by the Acting President after the equally controversial resolution of the National Assembly.

The latest in the absurd theatrical performance is the reported visits of some clerics to President Yar Adua . Traditional rulers and leaders of NGOs will soon follow suit. This is distractive and the media should not encourage these funny elements to drag us backwards. Who cares about the private visit of opportunistic individuals who have no constitutional roles to play to another individual who is recuperating and is temporarily out of office? What purpose is this news meant to serve? A simple picture of an ailing president will resolve the riddle. Let no one bother us with stories of the tremendous improvement of Yar Adua except his personal physicians and those constitutionally empowered to do so.   

There appears to be some stability restored to the polity since the assumption of full presidential powers by the Acting President, especially with the dissolution of the cabinet peopled by political appointees who appropriated the position of the sovereign and committed treasonable acts through gross violation of our Constitution. It would amount to an exhibition of naivety at its worst to believe that the appointment of a new cabinet, which still has as its major constituents, active players in the not-too-distant inglorious past, will commence the process which will bring our country out of doldrums. The time left for the life of this administration is far too short to justify any expectation of quality performance. We must, nevertheless, demand of the new men and women of transient power to always act in the best interest of the mass of the people. They must be conscious of the verdict of history.

The issue of insecurity has reached a point when even those in government should feel sufficiently threatened. The fact that our people get killed, on a daily basis, in their homes, on the streets and even in areas which used to be immune from such attacks, should nudge us all out of our self-imposed state of benumbing complacency. Alhaji Abubakar Rimi, the former civilian governor of old Kano state, is the latest prominent victim. The ease with which hoodlums perpetrate their heinous acts calls for deep reflection on the quality of existence in the polity. It is also an eloquent testimony on the level of preparedness of the security apparatus in the country. The knowledge that once crimes of such magnitude are committed the perpetrators will never be found encourages felons.

We have spoken extensively on ethno-religious crises in the country. Nigeria continues to wax strong in acts of iniquity against the weak and the defenceless. Women and children are the immediate victims of the orgy of violence liberally and freely employed as a way of expression of discontent. From Boko Haram to the recurrent Jos crises, our sensibilities are being constantly assailed by characters whose claim to sharing ancestral commonalty with us is suspect. Denizens of the forest stroll into the country to hack down women and children to settle scores as hired hands or rob hard working Nigerians of their valuables. Our security operatives have proved inept or unwilling to tackle the social challenges posed by the activities of these elements. All we get as assurances are the worn out clichés that the “perpetrators of the dastardly act will be brought to book”. Perhaps, it is we who have failed to understand the import of the message. Maybe what they really mean is that they must record such acts in their book and nothing more.

Political assassination is now part of the culture of intolerance among members of the political class. Opponents are routinely killed to pave way for the ascendance of bestial characters who parade themselves as leaders of the country. The electorate is held in indescribable contempt by these people who supposedly derive their powers from the people. The role of the electorate seems to have been abolished effectively by the fact that their votes no longer count. Politicians owe their allegiance to god-fathers and not the people. The monolithic economy of the country, a situation which ensures that everything and everybody depend on federal allocation for survival exposes the vulnerability of the people themselves. The economy is grossly underdeveloped to the extent that the claim of the people to being tax payers, except for the insignificant number of government workers, is unjustifiable by the economic reality. Since the structure of the economy is basically consumptive, and all aspirations are hinged on the price of oil fixed by the international cartel, politicians feel they owe no one any explanation for their inexplicable acts of avarice.

We cannot fail to touch on the issue of corruption perennially until the malady is drastically reduced or totally stamped out. We note with great disappointment that corruption, which pretended to be on retreat some time ago is now back with full force. Government officials conduct themselves with such utter contempt for the people of this country in a manner that should have aroused the populace to react. There have been some ineffectual symbolic gestures on the part of the current people in the anti-corruption agencies. Nothing significant has been achieved. 

It must be surprising to many that Justice Oguntade, in spite of his tight schedule as exemplified in the numerous judgments written by him still finds time for religious activities to an extent of being appointed Chancellor, Church of Nigeria, Anglican Communion between 1992 and 1999 and also Chancellor, Diocese of Lagos, Anglican Communion from 1992 to date.  His day must consist of more than 24 hours. However, as a true “Omo Eko”, (“Lagos boy”) no one is surprised that my lord finds enough time to recreate and socialize as attested to by his membership of several social clubs. This we however do not commend to our judges. Membership  of one social club should be just enough.

My lord, Justice Oguntade, you have paid your dues.  You have rendered qualitative service to your father land.  You have earned you place in the hall of fame of the legal profession.  You are a pride to the legal profession.  You are a blessing to the judiciary.  You are worthy of being counted among the legends of the Bench.  Now you can justifiably and proudly depart from the Bench, saying as did Apostle Paul that:

“…and the time of my departure is at hand.  I have fought a good fight.  I have finished my course.  I have kept the faith.  Henceforth, there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at the day.”

 Learned  Justices, members of the inner and outer Bar, ladies and gentlemen, let me at this juncture join you all to bid farewell from the Bench to a consummate advocate, quintessential judge, erudite scholar, inimitable jurist, amiable gentleman, exquisite socialite and a man of God.

May the Almighty direct your future course.

Ladies and gentlemen, I thank you for your patience.

OLUWAROTIMI O. AKEREDOLU, ESQ, SAN

PRESIDENT, NBA