Haste to handover Bakassi was not only a blunder but also indecent – Akinjide

Chief Richard Akinjide

Following the step taken by the National Assembly to void the transfer of Bakassi to Cameroun on the grounds of procedural error, former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Chief Richard Osuolale Akinjide (SAN), was engaged by IDOWU ADELUSI in a 30-minute interview on the development, last Friday in Ibadan. Chief Akinjide, the leader of the legal team that represented Nigeria at the International Court of Justice at the Hague, over the Bakassi case, said that as far as the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is concerned, you cannot transfer Bakassi to Cameroun without amending the constitution.

What do you think is wrong with the transfer of Bakassi to Cameroun?
So many things are wrong. It is legally wrong, both in municipal law and international law. If you take a copy of our constitution, you will see that all the local governments are scheduled. The Cross River State local governments are also scheduled, and Bakassi is a local government. That was done in the constitution among others for the following reasons. For gubernatorial elections. Just as you need a state for geographical spread in presidential election, you need the local governments for geographical spread in other to win in the gubernatorial election. So,the Bakassi Local Government Area has a crucial role to play in both the gubernatorial and presidential elections.

Secondly, the local governments are used for revenue allocation. We have three tiers of government, the central, state and the local governments. And all these three tiers share the revenue. And also when you want to determine the population of the country, the local governments are also a unit. These are the reasons why the local governments are scheduled in the constitution and made part of the constitution. Therefore, no federal or state government can tamper with the local government because it’s part and parcel of the constitution for very good reasons.

When the immediate past administration under Olusegun Obasanjo purported to transfer Bakassi to Cameroun, it was a monumental blunder.You can’t do that without first of all amending the constitution. Now, they said there was a judgement of the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Yes, there was a judgment of the ICJ, but the judgement cannot ipso facto override the constitution of Nigeria. Even, if you want to accept that judgment or you want to implement it, you can only do so by amending the constitution. It was wrong for the Obasanjo administration to have gone ahead to transfer Bakassi to Cameroun without first of all solving the legal problems involved.

Therefore, the transfer in law is null and void and of no effect. Look at Section 12 of the constitution, you cannot implement all these things without the involvement of the legislature particularly, the Senate. I don’t know why such a monumental blunders were done. As far as the law is concerned, Bakassi has not been transferred, Bakassi is part of Nigeria, and it would be very very right for both the Cross River State government and the federal government to be dealing with Bakassi as part of Nigeria and not to recognise what the previous administration did.

Are you saying that the step being taking by the National Assembly is right?
Yes, very right. It is stated that there was a judgement of ICJ, nobody doubting it. But the judgement of ICJ does not become effective automatically. Certain things have to be done. I remember the United States when she was dragged before the ICJ by Nicaragua twenty five years ago. Nicaragua won but the judgement has not been implemented till today.

There was a maritime problem between Norway and the United Kingdom, and also another case between France and the United Kingdom. These judgements, till now were never implemented. So, why was the indecent haste in implementing the Bakassi judgement? I just don’t know. I maintain that if the federal government decided to accept the judgement, the implementation must be done in accordance with the provisions of our constitution.

And what is important, the President of Nigeria swore to oath of allegiance and also the oath of office. One of the provisions in those oaths and the schedule of the constitution is that he (President) had sworn to uphold the constitution, by transferring Bakassi Local Government Area in the way it was done, the president did not uphold the constitution. And therefore, he committed an impeachable offence.

Is Bakassi really part of Nigeria?
Yes, both in law and in facts, Bakassi is part of Nigeria. The boundary between Cameroun and Nigeria is the river known as Rio derale, and its recognised throughout the history. But in 1913, there was Anglo-German treaty which was signed between Britain and Germany at that time, purported to transfer Bakassi from Nigeria to Cameroun. But that was unlawful for the reason that as at that time, Nigeria was a British protectorate, and there was a fundamental difference both in municipal and international laws between a protectorate and a colony. In the case of a protectorate, the territory belongs to the people of that territory. The radical title is vested in them, not in the protecting power which was Britain at that time. In the case of Colony like Lagos, the radical title of Lagos was in the Britain. There is a fundamental doctrine in the international law and in municipal law, that you cannot give out what you don’t have.

Britain was to protect Bakassi as a property of Nigeria and not to transfer it. Lagos could be transferred because as a colony, its radical title was in Britain. Therefore, Britain signing the Anglo-German treaty in 1913 did not transfer Bakassi to Cameroun

Why then did Nigeria lose the case at ICJ?
France was against Nigeria, and at that time, the president of ICJ was a French. Also, Britain was against Nigeria because Britain knew that if Nigeria won, the illegal transfer of Bakassi in 1913 through the Anglo-German treaty would expose Britain for breach of trust. Therefore, you have two powerful members of the ICJ opposing Nigeria. All the laws and the facts (both in international and municipal laws) were in favour of Nigeria, and we canvassed that. We have some of the best brains in international and municipal laws, and they were assembled at the ICJ for the case. But they still ruled against us.

As you know, there is no appeal to anywhere. We did not go to court, it was Cameroun that sued Nigeria to court. Some people were saying wrongly that we should have withdrawn from the case. We could not withdraw because Nigeria was sued to court. If we are sued to court, they just give judgement in default of appearance.

Is the National Assembly taking the right step by reversing the transfer?
There is nothing to reverse because the transfer was never effective. You cannot transfer your local government, your territory, and your national to a foreign country.

How about the ceremony of transfer at that time? What becomes of it?
They were just enjoying themselves. It is null and void. You cannot do that unless all the steps required by the constitution are followed. And if the National Assembly has not done it in accordance with our constitution, nobody else can do it. I don’t believe that the federal government was not properly advised, its just that era of lawlessness, era of not taking the constitution and rule of law serious. I am very sure, the present government would not behave like that.

What do you envisage to be the reactions of the international community if the National Assembly should reverse the transfer?
What is crucial is Nigeria’s national interest and not the interest of the International Community. Look at what America is doing in Iraq. Overwhelming international opinion is against what America is doing over there, but the US takes into account America’s national interest. So, what is more important to us is our national interest, not the international opinion.

In your opinion why did Obasanjo has to rush in implementing the judgement?
That question has to be directed to Obasanjo himself. This is one of the several blunders the man committed. And that is why I said in an interview sometime ago that his government is the worst we ever had in the history of this country. As somebody who was involved in his impeachment. I was a member of the impeachment committee set up by the National Assembly to look into the avalanche of allegations against Obasanjo.

When I look at the indictments, and all the things he did and those he failed to do, I know that surely there must be something wrong with him. I was the chairman of the subcommittee that wrote the report of the findings.

The PDP convention is coming up soon. What kind of person would you recommend for the post of national chairman and other offices?
I am a very loyal party man. I will support whatever my party support. Somebody who is not a dictator, somebody who will not treat the party as his private estate but as a commonwealth belonging to all of us.

Why are you so critical of Obasanjo administration now. Or, why do you have to wait until he has left office to point out defects in the administration?
Dont forget that you cant attack your government at the time, more so that the South-West was holding the slot. We no longer hold it now, and it’s better we do the post-mortem. I have been praised for what I said. Many people had said exactly something.

But those who held brief for Obasanjo said you were criticising him because your daughter was not retained in the government, and also because your son did not win the senatorial election. Those charges are not true. My daughter is my daughter, and I am myself. My son is my son and I am myself. The critics are assuming that we have same opinion.

The opinion of my daughter may be different from mine, and mine maybe different from my son’s opinion. Those who know me knows that I have not said anything new. The difference is that I am now saying them publicly more than I have been saying privately. I am a very fearless person. I am a typical Ibadan man. Ibadans are warriors, and you know that throughout history, we were never conquered. We respect human beings. We fear God, we don’t fear human beings. So, I have been consistent.

Amaechi puts Rivers legislature to work

Rivers State Governor,
Hon Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi

In the people’s view, the Rivers State governor, Honourable Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, has not been moving fast enough , especially investigating how the State’s money was managed when the former governor, Celestine Omehia was in power. In this piece, BOLAJI OGUNDELE writes on steps being taken by the governor to ascertain the correct position of the State’s finance.

When the Rivers State Governor, Hon Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, sat with the stakeholders of the state recently, one message he passed on was that he was not ready to be on collision course with some elements in the state’s politics, especially those suspected to be behind his ordeal in the controversial primaries of the PDP.

To ensure that the message was clear enough, he implored people at the forum to emulate his principle of forgiving those who might have offended them, as he has forgiven those who wronged him over the last election.

He anchored the progress of the State on the ability of all to forgive one another and allow the past to go.

This genuine appeal for forgiveness and forgetting the past by the governor has, however, started receiving blessings from diverse interests, especially because of his disposition towards probing finance of the State. This first assignment has drawn support for his administration At least now that there are state agencies that could enforce this kind of order.

But almost one month into the Amaechi administration, nothing has been heard of any probe of anybody, the only message, in stead was the call for all to forgive and ‘forget the past’.

The situation, as it stands, has already engendered stout demand of the probe of the last two administrations, which many people believe massively looted the state. One of such voices was that of the former foe of Amaechi, Prince Tonye Princewill, the Action Congress (AC) governorship candidate in the last election, who had hitherto led a vibrant opposition against the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

Princewill, whose decision to throw his weight behind the governor had initially sparked off a controversy, has come out to tell the world that he was supporting the new governor, not because he wanted a political appointment, but because he saw the hands of God in the victory of Amaechi. To that end, he directed his lawyers to withdraw his petition against PDP so as to allow Amaechi the time to focus and set the state again on the right track.

The prince, however, did not just blindly follow the new governor. For instance,he said that though he has been impressed by the first few stepstaken by the governor. He said that he would remain vigilant and contributory as the Governor’s failure would be the failure of a generation and “ours to bear”.

So, when the governor seemed to be footdragging on the probe, the AC and some other interest groups in the state sounded a note of warning.

Princewill categorically objected to what he described as the “village meeting treatment” of what many have come to consider as a monumental decapitation of Rivers State funds. He, in a press statement circulated by his media consultant, Chief Eze Chukwuemeka Eze, said he may not object to any of the governor’s decisions on state matter, but would certainly not condone treating serious state issue like financial mismanagement as a ‘family issue’, saying if the Governor failed to move swiftly and tell everybody that it is no longer business as usual, he would be sending out a bad signal

Princewill stated further,“In consideration of the fact that as a major stakeholder and one of the principal partners of the new administration in Rivers state under the captainship of Hon Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, it becomes imperative at this juncture to urge Governor Amaechi to see the need of asking Sir Celestine Omehia to render account of how the 150 billion Naira which accrued to the State was utilised during his administration that lasted five months.

“This act, if implemented, will give our people the needed leverage and confidence to push the state forward, an opportunity which the past administration squandered on a platter of gold.

“This does not in any way amount to witch-hunting which the governor wants to avoid, but to redress the unfortunate misapplication of our state fund these past five months.

“As much as we praise the governor for this statesman approach to governance, we will like to point out to him that as a group that carries the burden and misery of the common people of Rivers State that his relationship with the immediate past governor should not in any way impede him from using his office to recover the looting that took place within the five months . The matter of statecraftship and serious issues like state fund should not in any way be reduced to village meeting or family affair between him and the former governor who is his cousin”.

Indeed, Hon. Amaechi since he assumed power, has not stated how he plans to bring back the huge amount of money allegedly spirited away. It has been gathered that when the governor came into office on October 26, the record showed that there was a little above N100 million in the coffers of the government, whereas the State received as much as N113 billion within the five months. Another source claimed however, that the governor at a function declared that he met N18 billion out of N36 billion that had accrued to the State.

In a swift response, Omehia, recently, came out with a defence that most of the allegations about the actual amount that accrued to the state in the period he was governor was less than N100 billion and that when he was leaving, he left well above N28 billion. He then wondered where the peddlers of the stories of inaccurate figures got their information from.

He said, “The issue of an empty treasury has been addressed by my predecessor, who on his own said he inherited huge sums of money. The allegation of N150 billion is neither here nor there because for the four of five months we were in office, we never got up to N100 billion, let alone N150 billion. Within the period we were in power, we had started the Olu Obasajo Bye-pass, we had started the market, we had paid up to 60-70 percent of these projects and many more. The security, which we battled was one area we had to do a lot. We took over the position and the funding of a steady system in Rivers State and as I speak with you now, we are still expecting over 70 Armoured Personnel Carriers (AMC) from Israel, which the Rivers State government had paid for.

Other watchers and analysts, who have been paying attention to the issue as they unravel , seem to be giving the issue another interpretation. In their view, the governor was not expected to take every advice because they could mislead him. These people argued that since Amaechi and Omehia are first cousins, the probe could endanger peace of the State.

. These people however, absolved the governor of any alleged lackadaisical approach or pussyfooting as far as the probe issue is concerned.

In fact, they said Amaechi was very serious about his professed zero tolerance for corruption and business as usual. According to them, the key to his game plan of working without his hands being traced to any of the art-tricks was secretly and perfectly hidden in his first State broadcast. Then, he had promised many things, among which is absolute separation of powers of the three arms of government.

It would be recalled that Amaechi himself came from the House, where he presided as the speaker for eight years and during which he learned how powerfully and effectively the legislature can be used by an executive that does not want to be seen as biting too much. Acceding so much power to the other arms of the government has been described as a masterstroke in Amaechi’s game plan.

Of course, he is not just blindly shedding powers to the other arms, especially the legislature. He had done so because he was sure of the balance of the House.

He was fortunate enough to still get a clear number of young men, who consider themselves as his loyalists, in the House . The other ones, especially the green horns, have not displayed disloyalty so far. So he has the State Assembly, which he has given a free hand.

In the last four weeks of Amaechi administration, the State Assembly has suddenly found its lost voice. The assembly has been making statements on serious state matters. It has in the last two weeks summoned people who worked in past administrations, but whose decisions and actions have serious financial and technical implications on the State. For instance, the Assembly has set up an ad-hoc committee to look into how the Odili administration handled the Malaysian scholarship programme.

The Commissioner for Education under whom the scheme operated, Dr Ngozi Odu, has been summoned to give account on how the scheme was put together and how they arrived at choosing the schools, which were alleged not to be accredited in the programmes to enjoy the scheme.

Just on Tuesday, the Assembly constituted another ad-hoc committee to investigate the activities of Barlad Nigeria Limited (BNL), a tax consultant contracted by the Odili administration since September 2005. According to the motion, which brought the matter of the company before the Assembly, raised by a member, Honourable Henry Ogiri, who is also a chattered accountant,Barlad had been engaged by the state government as Technical Adviser on Internally Generated Revenue “specifically to increase the internally generated revenue of the state from one billion naira monthly to N2.5 billion and to train staff of the state Board of Internal Revenue (BIR) to become more professional with a high level of integrity to maintain the envisaged revenue figures.”

Although Ogiri’s argument is that the idea of using tax consultants in tax administration is a violation of the constitution, hence the State Boards of Internal Revenue was established as the tax authority of a state and had basically sought that the Assembly should withdraw services of the private firm so that the Board of Internal Revenue can do the work for the state.It is believed that the investigation of the company, which claimed to have “fast-tracked audit reports and collected over eight billion naira in tax audit payments in two years” would only blow open the neatly concealed shady deals, which would merely add to the records of indictment of some past public officers. It should be pointed out, however, that the target in hiring the tax consultant was to increase internally generated revenue from N1 billion a month to N2.5 billion.

Putting the issue of the Assembly and its recent activities in perspective, some analysts have come to conclude that the governor, though seen as the one operating, is moving at a fast rate and not doing badly so far. He can get things done through the House and he is not even mentioned in it,This they say seems to be more acceptable to the Nigerian Constitution, which does not give room for a one-man show, the kind of politics known with the Obasanjo era both at the state and federal level.

However, the watchers say events are just unfolding and that the little yet seen in the Amaechi administration, barring any later time change in character, has indicated that he might have a real plan to turn the state around and that all he needs for now is support and some more time to concentrate on his job as governor.