NIGERIA AND ITS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM- DELE FAROTIMI;

A REVIEW BY ABDULKAREEM MUSA (AK MUSA)

Mary Akanbi

9th December, 2024

THE BOOK: NIGERIA AND ITS CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM 

This book was motivated by the series of event that transpired in the process of the determination, resolution or execution of judgments in the case of Major Muritala Gbadamasi (Rtd) & 4 Ors vs HRH Oba Tijani Adetunji Akinloye & 2 Ors. The book is deeply personal and no one can pretend that it isn’t. It is in my view a score-settler, a revenge package for the injustice Dele Farotimi felt over the Gbadamasi-Eletu Case and the frustration and helplessness that must have been foisted on him and his clients.  The book contains a damning indictment of several persons, Judges like Hon. Justice Rhodes Vivour, Hon. Justice Walter Onnoghen, Hon. Justice Kayode Ariwoola. Hon. Justice Atilade etc and atop of them in order of the grievance they seemed to cause Mr. Farotimi is Hon. Justice Oyekan Abdullahi. Lawyers were indicted alike, Afe Babalola, SAN, Lawal Pedro, SAN, S. B. Joseph, SAN, Oludaramola, SAN, Olu Faro Esq etc were indicted for playing one role or the other in compromising justice. Civil servants, politicians and other stakeholder were also not left out in this detailed narration.

The narrative structure of this book is not just law, crime, and action-packed sequences. It is a beautiful blend of plot twists that explore themes of cultural heritage, love, a bit of comedy, friendship, and the uncertainties of youthful life. For instance he spoke about how he grew up in Inalende in Ibadan, Nigeria with his maternal grandmother in the house of his maternal grandfather who had a very large family. He explains that his grandmother, as the eldest wife, took on the role of resolving disputes among the younger wives and others, that it was by sitting at her feet that he instilled the qualities of justice and the essential characteristics of a good judge. He talked about his aspiration to become a practicing advocate after being called to the bar in 1999. He recounts turning down offers from corporate firms that promised N30,000 and magistracy positions offering N60,000, opting instead for a firm that paid only N5,000, where he felt he could learn the type of legal practice he desired. He also shares personal stories, including how his girlfriend left him due to his hopeless demeanor at the time, as well as the story of how he met his wife. He narrated his decision to resign from his first job after the office typist spitefully altered a grammatical expression in his draft. Despite his instructions to revert the change, she refused, and when his seniors intervened, he felt the typist had not been adequately reprimanded. I believe he told all these stories to show his foundational experiences and the influences that shape his perspective on various issues.

FAROTIMI’S ALLEGATIONS

Farotimi alleged that Afe Babalola, SAN, engaged in corrupt practices to obtain a fraudulent judgment from the Supreme Court and together with his colleagues in chambers, Olu Daramola, SAN, and Olu Faro, he compromised the Supreme Court. He asserted that the law firm of S. B. Joseph, SAN, manipulated the original judgments of the Supreme Court. Furthermore, he claimed that Lawal Pedro, SAN, acted contrary to the interests of Lagos State while serving as Solicitor General, prioritizing the interests of the Eletu family for his personal gain. 

Farotimi accused Justice Atilade of unlawfully issuing warrants and maintaining communications with litigants involved in cases before her. He also asserted that Justice Oyekan-Abdullahi unjustly dismissed his libel suit against Afe Babalola, SAN. Additionally, he claimed that General Abacha had relocated the Nigerian Law School from Lagos to Abuja solely to accommodate his daughter, Gumsu, who was unable to attend law school in Lagos for unspecified reasons. 

Farotimi further contended that Justice Rhodes Vivour laid the groundwork for fraud in the Gbadamasi-Eletu case by including an unnecessarily ambiguous term in the Supreme Court’s judgment. He referenced comments made by Hon. Justice Amina Augie regarding Afe Babalola’s professional conduct or misconduct in one Bayelsa case, but he suggested further that Justice Amina’s remarks at the time was either uninformed or hypocritical, because it should have been known ever since that Afe Babalola had been in the act of corrupting the judiciary.

He alleged that Afe Babalola and the Eletu family had agreed on a payment of $20 million or $10 million. However, Babalola became disappointed when the fraudulent Supreme Court judgment he procured for that course did not yield the anticipated returns due to Lawal Pedro’s interference. That though Lawal Pedro and Afe later reached a mutual settlement involving some benefits.

The allegations were supported by detailed accounts of facts that are circumstantially and tangentially interconnected, making them difficult to dismiss without substantial counter-evidence.

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE GBADAMASI-ELETU CASE AS IT RELATES TO THIS BOOK.

The case centers on a land dispute between the Eletu Family and the Ojomu Family. Dele Farotimi represented the Ojomu Family, while Afe Babalola represented the Eletu Family. There appeared to be an acknowledgment that the Ojomu Family had owned the land in question for an extensive historical period. This land, approximately 254 or 255 hectares, is located in Osapa Village within the Eti-Osa Local Government Area of Lagos State. 

The Eletu Family contended that their father, Gbadamasi Bandele Eletu, purchased the plot from the Ojomu Family in 1977, claiming that the land was no longer under the ownership of the Ojomu Family. Following a series of litigations, the Supreme Court eventually determined that the Eletu Family was entitled to 10 hectares of land. The ruling, delivered by Justice Kumai Bayang Aka’ah, affirmed that the Appellants (the Eletus) in Appeal No: SC/145/2005 were entitled to 10 hectares of reclaimed land in Osapa Village. This decision was based on a settlement agreement reached between the Appellants and the Lagos State Government, which reduced the Appellants’ entitlement from 18.05 hectares to 10 hectares, clarifying that only 18 hectares of the 255 hectares had been sold to the Eletus, who relinquished 8 hectares to the Lagos State Government.

However, the judgment included a clause, inserted by Justice Rhodes Vivour, which complicated enforcement by stating that the Eletus held an “unextinguished equitable interest in 254 hectares.” Subsequently, Afe Babalola sought a review of the judgment from the Supreme Court. (It is important to note that a review of a Supreme Court judgment is typically permissible only for clerical errors, accidental slips, or to clarify the meaning of a judgment in order to make it enforceable; seeking a review for any other reason is generally considered inappropriate within the context of the Nigerian Supreme Court. In fact, it is almost like a sacrilege).

In this instance, the Supreme Court issued a judgment that altered the previously granted 10 hectares to 254 hectares in favor of the Eletu Family. This revisit to the Supreme Court became the foundation of Farotimi’s grievances, leading him to assert that “Afe Babalola, SAN, Olu Daramola, SAN, Olu Faro, Esq. and the entire Afe Babalola’s office compromised the Supreme Court and the remaining semblance of intergrity it might have had. When they went back to the Supreme Court and got the court to swim in the sewer of corruption and shameless self-abnegation”.

CONCLUSSION

This book presents no surprises for those of us familiar with litigation; however, it represents a bold attempt at naming some of the perpetrators of the injustices that Nigerians endure. From personal experience, it is easy to believe Farotimi, as he skillfully told this story with compelling circumstantial evidence. He affords readers the opportunity to connect the dots and conclude that he has ample reason to support the claims he made. Farotimi’s outcry is a crucial wake-up call for all of us; lawyers, judges, and leaders across all sectors to step up in commitment to justice. It is essential that we not only name those responsible for wrongdoing but also hold ourselves to the same standards we expect from others.

Regarding the issues of defamation and the charge against Farotimi, he will be fine. The Judiciary is under a test right now. All parties will have the opportunity to present their side of the story, and posterity will render its judgment after Nigerian Judiciary renders its own.