You can’t fight a legal battle against illegality

Hundreds of civil society organizations in Nigeria have protested against what they described as a deliberate attempt by the federal government to disrespect the Nigerian Constitution and destroy the principles of federalism by using anti-corruption agencies illegally constituted.

The CSOs, numbering around 200, said the federal government’s attempt to derail the hearing of the case filed by 19 state governments, challenging the constitutionality of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and two others, was an indication that the government was aware of the illegality of anti-corruption agencies and was trying to put pressure on the Supreme Court.

In a statement on Sunday, signed by Comrade Ifeanyi Odili, Chairman of the Campaign for Democracy, and Dr Dapo Oluwole of the Transparency and Accountability Network, TAN, the activists criticized the Federal Government’s alleged pressure on the Supreme Court for her to dismiss a valid case. They indicated that they fully supported the fight against corruption, but would not support the shenanigans of agencies working against the success of anti-corruption efforts.

For them, the objections raised by the Attorney General of the Federation in his application had no bearing on the present case because they did not address the issue at stake: constitutionality.

They called on the judiciary to ignore harassment and intimidation by the central executive, saying a situation where successive administrations perceived the EFCC, in particular, as a tool of intimidation must end in the future. interest of true federalism.

According to them, this is the reason why corruption has continued to worsen instead of decreasing.
The statement reads: “As a group of civil society organizations across Nigeria, we have deemed it appropriate to also intervene in the ongoing debate and litigation regarding the constitutionality or otherwise of the establishment of the EFCC, NFIU, ICPC, etc.

“When it comes to constitutional matters, all issues of concern must be properly and thoroughly investigated and resolved by the judiciary, without the federal government attempting to exert its influence. In a federation like ours, the federal government is not superior to the federating units and cannot always take their breath away, especially in matters of competing jurisdiction.

“This does not mean that we oppose the creation of anti-corruption agencies. Nigeria needs effective anti-corruption agencies to curb the dangerous trends of the corruption epidemic in Nigeria’s public and private spaces. Corruption is holding this country back. It is killing us and we must put an end to it or, at least, control it.

“However, you cannot fight a legal battle against an illegal organization.

To do so is to subvert the very principle of justice. Suppose it is discovered that the establishment of our anti-corruption agencies took place outside the constitutional processes stipulated by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended. In this case, it is urgent that this aberration be treated and cured before continuing. Otherwise, all the actions of anti-corruption agencies would end up becoming obsolete in the long run.

This will benefit the federal government, which can now operationalize anti-corruption agencies without any restrictions or hindrances. This is why it becomes so strange that the federal government is opposing a measure from which it should take full advantage.

We see a deliberate intention by the federal government to impose a fait accompli on the justice system in this matter, and this is not only unacceptable, but will be resisted by all legal means, including public actions by CSOs. What exactly is the federal government afraid of? Why would you oppose the answers demanded on constitutional questions?

All the federal government needs to do is organize its best lawyers to bring this matter through the courts to its logical conclusion, without this overly agitated attempt to defeat or derail it.

The federal government’s preliminary objection is unnecessary, unwarranted and basically gratuitous. A student who has obtained good results should never be afraid of their paper to take the re-examination exam. The judiciary has resolved many constitutional questions, and this will continue to happen.

Why should anyone object to this one? It is corruption to say that a competent court should not decide constitutional questions surrounding anti-corruption agencies. It is ridiculous to claim that the highest court in the land does not have jurisdiction over a constitutional question. Which court can then hear it?

States, organizations or even individuals, as bona fide citizens of this country, have the right to question the legality or constitutionality, as the case may be, of any governmental activity or agency, and they have the right to be heard. Stifling this right through legal fraud, as the federal government is currently attempting to do, is reprehensible.

As civil society organizations, we wish to finally resolve all constitutional issues regarding the establishment and operation of all government agencies, including anti-corruption commissions.

This must be allowed to take its course without complications.