SV: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Today's Quote

​Laws are not sacrosanct. When laws are tested and found not to be for the peace and progress of the society they are resisted (disobeyed) and changed - Chidi Anthony Opara.

​Laws are never enacted to be tested but to be applied. It is during application that it can be adjudged as either good or bad. If a law is found not to serve the purpose for which it was enacted, it is repealed. However, all laws must be obeyed until they are repealed or changed. A law is like a dry fish which you cannot bend at will and if you try, you will break it into pieces. Breaking the law to suit your personal interest is an invitation to anarchy. Whatever opinion you may have about the CCT, it is the only initial instance to try public officials that have contravened CCB Act. The CJN cannot chose which Court should try him for the crime he admitted to have committed even though he attributed the crime to his temporary affliction with Alzheimer. If your stand is that the law can be disobeyed before it is changed, then it must be sensible for the President who enjoys constitutional immunity to disobey the law and not the Chief Justice that lacks protection from prosecution while in office unless he is a BÓLÈKÁJÀ Chief Justice.

​Anyway, the drafters of the legislation under reference did not envisage the emergence of highly nepotistic President who would remove highly placed officials from other ethnic groups on mere allegations to pave way for people from his ethnic group, while ignoring allegations against people from his ethnic group - Chidi Anthony Opara.

​Section 231 (4) of the constitution that empowers the President to suspend the CJN if the occasion arises is now said by Chidi Anthony Opara to have been applied by the President in a nepotistic manner against a CJN who belongs to an ethnic group different from the President. ​I don't know which ethnic group Chief Justice Onnogen belongs in the South-South and what language he speaks. However, in his affidavit dated 14 December 2016, he admitted to ownership of a Union Bank account No. 0021464934 in Abuja with a balance of 9million, 536 thousand and 407 naira as at 14 November 2014. In Calabar branch of Union Bank he had account number 0012783291 containing a balance of 11 million, 456 thousand, and 311 naira as at 14 November 2014. He stated the sources of the funds in the accounts as salaries, estacodes and allowances. All along Chief Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen concealed from the CCB in his declaration that he had several accounts in Standard Chartered Bank (SCB) namely, a domiciliary account No. 50010626686 in euro, a domiciliary account No. 5001062679 in pound sterling and a domiciliary account No.0001062650 in US dollars. Besides, he had an e-saver savings account in naira and a naira account which are all maintained with SCB (Nig.) Ltd., in Abuja. A scrutiny of Chief Justice Onnoghen's domiciliary dollar account No.0001062650 at the SCB revealed the following : On five different occasions on 8 March 2011 Onnoghen deposited in person $10,000 on each occasion ($50,000 total); two separate cash deposits of $5,000 each (total $10,000) followed by four different cash deposits of $10,000 each (total $40,000) on 7 June 2011; another set of five separate cash deposits of $10,000 each (total $50,000) on 27 June 2011; and on 28 June 2011 at different occasions, four deposits of $10,000 each (total $40,000) was made into the account. Please note that 2011 was an election year with subsequent election petitions. Chief Justice Onnoghen said he forgot to declare his robust euro, dollar, pounds sterling and naira accounts at the SCB which was the cause of CCB arraigning him before the CCT. The foreign currencies as well as naira accounts do not speak any of the ethnic languages in Nigeria. Moreover, Chief Justice Onnoghen did not amass the aforementioned currencies for his ethnic group and in reality his ethnic group was not aware that he has ammassed such a huge cash wealth. Are you, Chidi Anthony Opara telling readers that President Buhari should not have suspended Chief Justice Onnoghen in accordance with Section 231(4) of the Constitution because the latter is from another tribe in Nigeria and when his tribe has never sent him to acquire unexplained wealth and declare false assets?

​Rule 1(3) of the Code of Conduct for Nigerian Judicial Officers states : A Judicial Officer should respect and comply with the laws of the land and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary. Chief Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen has acted in disregard of Rule1 (3) of the Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers perhaps in adherence to your idea that a law that does not serve ones interest, especially the pecuniary one, should be disobeyed. His disregard for CCB Act and its consequence has nothing to do with his ethnic origin. Onnoghen rides Mercedes but he is not of the same tribe as the makers of Mercedes Benz Cars. We, Nigerians should stop deploying ethnicity to excuse and justify wrongdoings. 

​S. Kadiri

---

Från: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com <usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com> för Chidi Anthony Opara, FIIM <chidi.opara@gmail.com>
Skickat: den 31 januari 2019 10:01
Till: USA Africa Dialogue Series
Ämne: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Today's Quote

 

"The case of the CJN is totally different.  Only the NJC which he chairs can discipline him, and if he refuses to call an NJC meeting whereat he sets up a panel to investigate - after hopefully stepping aside for the duration - the nation is stuck.   But enter Section 231(4) of the Nigerian Constitution, which empowers the President, who, if he determines that the CJN "for any reason" - presumably moral reasons - cannot discharge his duties, he can be suspended".

Laws are not sacrosanct. When laws are tested and found not to be for the peace and progress of the society, they are resisted(disobeyed)and changed.

During the time of slave trade, buying and selling of blacks was lawful, so also the discrimination against blacks in the apartheid era South Africa, but these were bad laws, which were resisted(disobeyed)and changed.

Anyway, the drafters of the legislation under reference did not envisage the emergence of a highly nepotistic President who would remove highly placed officials from other ethnic groups on mere allegations to pave way for people from his ethnic group, while ignoring allegations against people from his ethnic group.

CAO.

--
Listserv moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin
To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
To subscribe to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue+subscribe@googlegroups.com 
Current archives at http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
Early archives at http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.