— Says Magu Trial Was Not Laced With Fair Hearing
— Calls For Par-Time Legislative Arms, Resource Control And
Reduction of Items on Exclusive List; As Part of Restructuring
Measures
— Says Sunday Igboho Not Similar To Nnamdi Kanu, Shekau
Others
![image](/2020/10/lawreport.jpg")
The Chairperson of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against
Corruption [PACAC] and widely acclaimed legal scholar, Prof Itse
Sagay, has called on the Presidency and the National Assembly to
see to the actualization of individual and communal protection
against terrorism, banditry and kidnapping via the arming of
private citizens, as well as, holding a strategic session with a
view of reducing crime and criminality in the country.
![image](/2021/01/payne-alex.jpg")
“I have made this suggestion before,” the Professor of Law told
VINCENT
KALU of Sun[1]. “We
should all be armed. Communities should be armed. Individuals
should be armed so that anybody coming to attack you will know that
he too has no chance of surviving.”
The acclaimed legal scholar made his position know via an
interview wherein he considered the worsening security situation in
the country. Mr Sagay noted that the nation as presently
constituted requires [what he referred to as] ‘a balance of terror’
in other that the country scales through this state of quagmire
that it presently exists in.
“… Although it [the insecurity situation] is more in the North,
the South is not safe. In the Southwest now, you can’t travel by
road because people will jump out of the forest and stop and then
abduct you. I have never seen a thing like this; really the Federal
Government ought not just to declare a state of emergency. It
should have a major strategy session on this. I have made this
suggestion before: we should all be armed so that anybody coming to
attack you will know that he too has no chance of surviving.
Communities should be armed; individuals should be armed. That is a
balance of terror…the federal government should think of loosening
the rules governing arms-bearing and allow persons and communities
that are under attack to have arms to defend themselves. Like in
America, everybody has arms; if you are going to raid somebody’s
house, you know that it is a big risk….”
He further questioned why the youths of the country would prefer
to cry out against the supposed invasion of their lands and homes
by criminal elements disguised as fulani herders rather than seek
arms and uniformly fight against such invasion. He noted that the
likes of Sunday Igboho as an ‘ethnic warlord’ in the south-west
seem to correct the vaccum that somewhat exist in the country and
his activities are quite distinguishable from other ‘ethnic
warlords’ like Nnamdi Kanu, Shekau amongst others. He however noted
that if the present security situation is not properly tackled,
there exists the possibility of an imminent breakup of the
country.
“…So there is no peace; the whole country is boiling. The
security agencies – the army, the police, the DSS, the Civil
Defence Corps, if they need more recruitment into the forces, let
it be done. But this thing has to be stamped out. Otherwise,
Nigeria will be destroyed. I see its imminent break-up, especially
by the time you have people roaming all over the places. Look at
what is happening now: those who supply foods and meat from the
North are saying they are not coming to the South because something
happened to some of their people. They are not looking at this
thing properly. The South didn’t plan anything against anybody
except actions individuals might have been taken against those who
were terrorizing them. But for such a situation to arise shows that
the level of insecurity in the country is so bad that we are
unconsciously creating a breach between the North and the
South…”
On the notoriety of Sheikh Ahmed Gumi’s headship and supposed
negotiation with some bandits, the Senior Advocate of Nigeria urged
the Federal Government and all other relevant security stakeholders
to extract necessary information from the Sheikh, especially with
regards to his [the Sheikh’s] relationship with the bandits. He
noted that the supposed mouthpiece with the Sheikh presents himself
as on behalf of the bandits serves as a contradiction in any sane
society, as it compels the belief that illegality can in fact be
legitimate in Nigeria. Further noting that the supposed comparison
of the Herders and bandits to the Niger Delta amnesty is in fact a
false equivalence, on the grounds that the militants were
expressing their political and economic protest against injustice
in their land, and not particularly involved in the killing and
maiming of various persons for pure criminal gain as evident in the
activities of the bandits.
“It is really a contradiction. Gumi should be made to tell the
security organisations where these people are so that operatives
can organise themselves and wipe them out wherever they are. He
should be made to tell them. To create a situation in which the
impression is given that bandits and kidnappers are legitimate
operators with whom we should be negotiating destroys society. What
this thing says is that there is no boundary to misconduct: it
means that any misconduct you can carry out becomes legitimized.
That is the impression…the Niger Delta militants were not killing
people. Yes, they did some kidnapping. But they didn’t go to school
to kidnap schoolchildren. They targeted oil companies and those
expatriates working for oil companies. It is not as if I support
it, but it is not the same thing. Those people were engaged in
political and economic protest. They were not just engaged in pure
criminality to make gain out of the evil…”
Similarly, Professor Sagay opined that the directive given by
the Ondo State Governor, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu, SAN, was valid
especially when considered in light of the purpose of the law
seeking to preserve the forest reserve. He noted that contrary to
the needless controversies generated by the directive, there exists
nothing like unchanneled freedom of movement, noting that one’s
freedom stops where the right of another begins.
“There are so many freedoms and many legal entitlements. Your
freedom of association or freedom of movement is subject to other
rules too. Like this question of forest reservations, the law
allows you to have reservations. The whole idea is to preserve
certain species from being destroyed. Government can make a law
that nobody should live in such area so that they would not begin
to cut down such trees or kill the animals. There is nothing like
unchanneled freedom of movement. You can’t say that because you
have freedom of movement, you just pack all your things into my
sitting room and say: ‘I have come; I have freedom of movement
under the Nigeria Constitution.’ What type of freedom is that? Your
freedom ends where my right begins. So the freedom of movement ends
where such laws that control reservations begin. So there is no
such unchanneled freedom, otherwise, there will be chaos.”
Also, Mr Sagay noted that there exists [to his mind] no
political gain with regards to the insecurity currently ravaging
the country, especially by those seeking to gain political power in
2023. He also noted that the harm is done to everyone, as terrorism
and criminality has no ethnic discrimination, as everyone is
affected in one measure or the other. Accordingly, there exist the
need for a united front by each and everyone to stamp out the
menace.
Also sharing his opinion on the fight against corruption,
Professor Itse Sagay, noted that the administrative probe of Mr.
Magu was not laced with the requisite fair hearing expected,
holding that it was a one-sided affair especially where the
perception seemed to be that the tribunal had already convicted
Magu before even the trial began. He however admitted to not having
seen the report of the proceedings and as such would not come to
any conclusion on the issue. With regards, Magu’s travails, the
learned Senior Advocate noted that, ‘…I will say there are two:
one, independent-mindedness, not wanting to be controlled or his
discretion and authority taken over in the way he pursues war
against corruption. Secondly, everybody has a candidate for that
his position and they were just waiting for him to do four years
before pushing their candidates forward. To that extent, there was
general agreement among some powerful people that Magu should go
because they have their candidates. That is the thing about
Nigeria; it is a very strange country. You don’t have to be a bad a
person; if you have been there for sometimes, there are people who
are warming up to put somebody there, regardless of your excellence
or non-excellence.’
Speaking o the perceived nepotism and the call for
restructuring, Professor Sagay noted that competence should always
be the watch ward, rather than ethnic sentiments, noting however
that there ought to be more diffusion in the appointment of
security personnels, howbeit, the manner of appointment, to his
mind, is not the cause of the security problem in the country. He
called for a more federal state in the governance of the country
and breakdown of power from the central to the subordinate units of
the country. He considered that resource control should be the duty
of the generating state, whilst royalties and taxes be paid to the
central government, as well as the need to reduce the items on the
exclusive list of the federal government and grant same to the
state governments, including the need for a per time legislative
arm at both the federal and state level.
— Says Magu Trial Was Not Laced With Fair Hearing
— Calls For Par-Time Legislative Arms, Resource Control And
Reduction of Items on Exclusive List; As Part of Restructuring
Measures
— Says Sunday Igboho Not Similar To Nnamdi Kanu, Shekau
Others
The Chairperson of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against
Corruption [PACAC] and widely acclaimed legal scholar, Prof Itse
Sagay, has called on the Presidency and the National Assembly to
see to the actualization of individual and communal protection
against terrorism, banditry and kidnapping via the arming of
private citizens, as well as, holding a strategic session with a
view of reducing crime and criminality in the country.
“I have made this suggestion before,” the Professor of Law told
VINCENT
KALU of Sun[1]. “We
should all be armed. Communities should be armed. Individuals
should be armed so that anybody coming to attack you will know that
he too has no chance of surviving.”
The acclaimed legal scholar made his position know via an
interview wherein he considered the worsening security situation in
the country. Mr Sagay noted that the nation as presently
constituted requires [what he referred to as] ‘a balance of terror’
in other that the country scales through this state of quagmire
that it presently exists in.
“… Although it [the insecurity situation] is more in the North,
the South is not safe. In the Southwest now, you can’t travel by
road because people will jump out of the forest and stop and then
abduct you. I have never seen a thing like this; really the Federal
Government ought not just to declare a state of emergency. It
should have a major strategy session on this. I have made this
suggestion before: we should all be armed so that anybody coming to
attack you will know that he too has no chance of surviving.
Communities should be armed; individuals should be armed. That is a
balance of terror…the federal government should think of loosening
the rules governing arms-bearing and allow persons and communities
that are under attack to have arms to defend themselves. Like in
America, everybody has arms; if you are going to raid somebody’s
house, you know that it is a big risk….”
He further questioned why the youths of the country would prefer
to cry out against the supposed invasion of their lands and homes
by criminal elements disguised as fulani herders rather than seek
arms and uniformly fight against such invasion. He noted that the
likes of Sunday Igboho as an ‘ethnic warlord’ in the south-west
seem to correct the vaccum that somewhat exist in the country and
his activities are quite distinguishable from other ‘ethnic
warlords’ like Nnamdi Kanu, Shekau amongst others. He however noted
that if the present security situation is not properly tackled,
there exists the possibility of an imminent breakup of the
country.
“…So there is no peace; the whole country is boiling. The
security agencies – the army, the police, the DSS, the Civil
Defence Corps, if they need more recruitment into the forces, let
it be done. But this thing has to be stamped out. Otherwise,
Nigeria will be destroyed. I see its imminent break-up, especially
by the time you have people roaming all over the places. Look at
what is happening now: those who supply foods and meat from the
North are saying they are not coming to the South because something
happened to some of their people. They are not looking at this
thing properly. The South didn’t plan anything against anybody
except actions individuals might have been taken against those who
were terrorizing them. But for such a situation to arise shows that
the level of insecurity in the country is so bad that we are
unconsciously creating a breach between the North and the
South…”
On the notoriety of Sheikh Ahmed Gumi’s headship and supposed
negotiation with some bandits, the Senior Advocate of Nigeria urged
the Federal Government and all other relevant security stakeholders
to extract necessary information from the Sheikh, especially with
regards to his [the Sheikh’s] relationship with the bandits. He
noted that the supposed mouthpiece with the Sheikh presents himself
as on behalf of the bandits serves as a contradiction in any sane
society, as it compels the belief that illegality can in fact be
legitimate in Nigeria. Further noting that the supposed comparison
of the Herders and bandits to the Niger Delta amnesty is in fact a
false equivalence, on the grounds that the militants were
expressing their political and economic protest against injustice
in their land, and not particularly involved in the killing and
maiming of various persons for pure criminal gain as evident in the
activities of the bandits.
“It is really a contradiction. Gumi should be made to tell the
security organisations where these people are so that operatives
can organise themselves and wipe them out wherever they are. He
should be made to tell them. To create a situation in which the
impression is given that bandits and kidnappers are legitimate
operators with whom we should be negotiating destroys society. What
this thing says is that there is no boundary to misconduct: it
means that any misconduct you can carry out becomes legitimized.
That is the impression…the Niger Delta militants were not killing
people. Yes, they did some kidnapping. But they didn’t go to school
to kidnap schoolchildren. They targeted oil companies and those
expatriates working for oil companies. It is not as if I support
it, but it is not the same thing. Those people were engaged in
political and economic protest. They were not just engaged in pure
criminality to make gain out of the evil…”
Similarly, Professor Sagay opined that the directive given by
the Ondo State Governor, Mr. Rotimi Akeredolu, SAN, was valid
especially when considered in light of the purpose of the law
seeking to preserve the forest reserve. He noted that contrary to
the needless controversies generated by the directive, there exists
nothing like unchanneled freedom of movement, noting that one’s
freedom stops where the right of another begins.
“There are so many freedoms and many legal entitlements. Your
freedom of association or freedom of movement is subject to other
rules too. Like this question of forest reservations, the law
allows you to have reservations. The whole idea is to preserve
certain species from being destroyed. Government can make a law
that nobody should live in such area so that they would not begin
to cut down such trees or kill the animals. There is nothing like
unchanneled freedom of movement. You can’t say that because you
have freedom of movement, you just pack all your things into my
sitting room and say: ‘I have come; I have freedom of movement
under the Nigeria Constitution.’ What type of freedom is that? Your
freedom ends where my right begins. So the freedom of movement ends
where such laws that control reservations begin. So there is no
such unchanneled freedom, otherwise, there will be chaos.”
Also, Mr Sagay noted that there exists [to his mind] no
political gain with regards to the insecurity currently ravaging
the country, especially by those seeking to gain political power in
2023. He also noted that the harm is done to everyone, as terrorism
and criminality has no ethnic discrimination, as everyone is
affected in one measure or the other. Accordingly, there exist the
need for a united front by each and everyone to stamp out the
menace.
Also sharing his opinion on the fight against corruption,
Professor Itse Sagay, noted that the administrative probe of Mr.
Magu was not laced with the requisite fair hearing expected,
holding that it was a one-sided affair especially where the
perception seemed to be that the tribunal had already convicted
Magu before even the trial began. He however admitted to not having
seen the report of the proceedings and as such would not come to
any conclusion on the issue. With regards, Magu’s travails, the
learned Senior Advocate noted that, ‘…I will say there are two:
one, independent-mindedness, not wanting to be controlled or his
discretion and authority taken over in the way he pursues war
against corruption. Secondly, everybody has a candidate for that
his position and they were just waiting for him to do four years
before pushing their candidates forward. To that extent, there was
general agreement among some powerful people that Magu should go
because they have their candidates. That is the thing about
Nigeria; it is a very strange country. You don’t have to be a bad a
person; if you have been there for sometimes, there are people who
are warming up to put somebody there, regardless of your excellence
or non-excellence.’
Speaking o the perceived nepotism and the call for
restructuring, Professor Sagay noted that competence should always
be the watch ward, rather than ethnic sentiments, noting however
that there ought to be more diffusion in the appointment of
security personnels, howbeit, the manner of appointment, to his
mind, is not the cause of the security problem in the country. He
called for a more federal state in the governance of the country
and breakdown of power from the central to the subordinate units of
the country. He considered that resource control should be the duty
of the generating state, whilst royalties and taxes be paid to the
central government, as well as the need to reduce the items on the
exclusive list of the federal government and grant same to the
state governments, including the need for a per time legislative
arm at both the federal and state level.