Sunday, October 30, 2016

How Rickey Tarfa Charged Client N100 Million to Bribe Judge


Culled from; Law Jurists


Controversial lawyer, Mr. Rickey Tarfa (SAN), has landed in a fresh scandal following his demand and receipt of a N100 million from a client to bribe a judge handling the client’s case. 

Exclusive documents in possession of SaharaReporters, show that the client, Mr. Nsima Ekere, had an interest in a civil/political suit Ime Ekanem Vs PDP (Peoples Democratic Party), Udom Emmanuel; as well as another suit FCT/HC/CV/7652014, which Mr. Tarfa’s firm was prosecuting before Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court.

 
Mr. Tarfa’s firm demanded, as legal fee, the sum of N5 million, which was paid in two equal installments of N2.5million. The first installment was paid in cash to the cashier at Mr. Tarfa’s firm, while the other was paid into Rickey Tarfa and Company’s account domiciled in Zenith Bank.


After the mention and hearing of the suit, Tarfa, documents showed, approached the Ekanem with a request of N100 million.

The client asked if the requested sum was part of the legal fee, but Mr. Tarfa responded in the negative, explaining that it was required to ensure that all the client’s prayers brought before the court were granted.

Tarfa was said to have assured that his effort would be successful, promising a refund of the bribe it failed.

With an agreement secured, Mr. Tarfa instructed Mr. Segun Jolawo and Mrs. Regina Okotie-Eboh, lawyers participating in the case, to provide a distinct account for the lodgment of the N100 million. The account provided bears the name Afuwa Integrated Services and is domiciled with Zenith Bank (1013902385).

Curiously though, Mr. Tarfa abandoned the suit leading to the court striking it out. Worse still, he failed to make a refund of the received sum, as promised, if the court declined the client’s prayers. Attempts to get him to comply were futile, with Tarfa claiming that the money was used to bribe Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court.

On account of this, Mr. Ekere instructed his lawyers, Leo Ekpeyong & Co., to demand a refund from Mr. Tarfa. In a letter of demand to Mr. Tarfa’s firm, dated October 19, 2015 and signed by Leo Ekpeyong, Principal Partner, Mr. Tarfa was given seven days to make a refund.

“At this juncture, we hereby demand within seven days the refund of our client’s N100million as same was not given for the purpose of bribing any judge. Our client is a practising born-again Christian, whose belief system is certainly repugnant to such satanic and ungodly practices of bribery and corruption,” wrote the Mr. Ekere’s lawyers.

The legal firm also asked Mr. Tarfa if it was his practice to bribe judges to win cases and if he actually bribed Justice Halilu.

“Maybe the National Judicial Council, the Privileges Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, the Nigeria Police, the Directorate of State Security and indeed, the whole world will hear how our learned silk has indeed been practising law vis-à-vis his relationship with his clients, just in seven days. I repeat, in seven days,” threatened Ekere’s lawyers.

Mr. Tarfa would later comply with the demand, but not fully. This nudged Mr. Ekere’s solicitors towards the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). In a letter to the acting EFCC Chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, Mr. Ekere’s solicitors said Tarfa refunded the sum of N70 million, an uncomplicated indication that he actually received N100 million from their client.

Titled “The Unholy Exchange Between Justice Yusuf Halilu and Rickey Tarfa (SAN) and dated 18 July, 2016, the letter said Mr. Tarfa has refused to pay the balance of N30 million to Ekere and requested the EFCC to investigate the relationship between Mr. Tarfa and Justice Halilu as well as the bank account that served as conduit for the bribe. Mr. Tarfa knows a thing or two about bribing judges. Earlier this year, the lawyer was arraigned before a Lagos State High Court by the EFCC for paying money into the bank accounts of two Federal High Court judges. EFCC’s witness in the trial, Tosin Owobo, told the court that the anti-graft commission wrote letters to Zenith Bank and Fidelity Bank in the course of its investigation to request information on Tarfa and Awa Ajia Nigeria Limited’s account. Replies from the two banks showed that the signatory to the company’s account was Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa.

Also found in the transaction history was Justice Mohammed Nasir Yunusa of the Federal High Court. Owobo provided detailed information of transactions emanating from Mr. Tarfa to the two judges from the statement of account received.  Further hearing on the case will commence on 13 and 14 October.

Exclusive List of Judges and Their Crimes - DSS Sting Operation

The judges named in a confidential list sent to President Muhammadu Buhari include: 


SUPREME COURT

1. Justices Nwali Sylvester Ngwuta
2. Justice John Inyang Okoro 

COURT OF APPEAL
1. Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, President Court of Appeal
2. Justice Muhammad Ladan Tsamiya
3. Justice Uwani Abba-Aji

FEDERAL HIGH COURT
1. Justice Ibrahim Auta, the Chief Judge
2. Justice Adeniyi Ademola 
3. Justice Mohammed Yunusa 
4. Justice Kabir Auta 
5. Justice Munir Ladan 
6. Justice Bashir Sukola 
7. Justice Mu'azu Pindiga
8. Justice Abdul Kafarati 
9. Justice Nnamdi Dimgba 
10.Justice Anwuli Chikere 
11. Justice I. A. Umezulike( Rtd.)
12. Justice Ibrahim Buba
13. Justice Ajumogobia 
14 .Justice Abdul Kafarati (Chief Judge Designate)

The memo accused Justice Chikere of receiving cash for a pre-election matter that came before her. Justice Chikere is married to Kenneth Anayo Chikere, a chieftain the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Rivers State and a former member of the House of Representatives. According to the source of the memo, Mr. Chikere acted as go-between to funnel significant amounts of cash to his wife who then proceeded to give favorable judgments to those who offered the cash


The memo alleged that Justice Kabiru Auta collected bribes from a businessman named “Alhaji Kabiru SKY.” The bribe scandal led the National Judicial Council (NJC) to suspend the judge, but the council later recalled the judge, claiming there was not sufficient evidence that he auctioned verdicts from the bench.


JUSTICE ABDUL KAFARATI has a litany of corruption allegations against him, even though he is due to become the new Chief Judge of the Federal High Court. Officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) allegedly found more than N2 billion in the judge’s bank account. The judge reportedly claimed he had earned the funds from his farming business in Yobe State. Recently, Justice Kafarati granted a N26 billion verdict in favor of Capital Oil CEO, Ifeanyi Uba, against the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON). Mr. Uba was the biggest debtor to AMCON. The memo stated that Justice Kafarati has a favorite lawyer, Prince Ajibola Oluyede, who funnels bribes to him to grant illegal orders and pay-to-play judgments.


JUSTICE YUNUSA also faces several allegations of corruption. The memo cited evidence that he took N5 million bribe from a senior lawyer, Rickey Tarfa. Justice Yunusa is also accused of disregarding case precedents set by the Supreme Court of Nigeria.


JUSTICE PINDIGA of the Gombe State High Court was thrust into national prominence on account of his involvement in the Rivers State election petition fraud. He reportedly received N100 million from Governor Nyeson Wike of Rivers State to influence a tribunal ruling in the governor’s favor. The judge was subsequently removed as the head of the tribunal, but he reportedly bought several cars and built houses from the proceeds of his alleged corruption.


JUSTICES MUNIR LADAN AND BASHIR SUOKLA of the Kaduna High Court were recommended for arrest and prosecution based on several petitions alleging that they receive bribes in exchange for verdicts. Some lawyers reportedly characterized the two judges as “cash-and-carry” judges. 


Some of the most extensive allegations in the memo pertain to Justice Adeniyi Ademola. In one instance, the judge allegedly accepted a $200k bribe to discharge a garnishee order against the Delta State House of Assembly. He was also accused of using his position as a judge to get his wife appointed to the position of Head of Service in Lagos State because of shady dealings with Bola Tinubu, national leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC). In 2010, the Cross Rivers State command of the DSS determined that Justice Ademola had accepted a bribe from some members of the “Peace Corps of Nigeria” and oil bunkerers under prosecution.



JUSTICE ADEMOLA was arrested last weekend and allegedly found to be in possession of $550k, part of which he reportedly claimed belonged to Justice Auta, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court. Justice Ademola was also allegedly found with two unlicensed Pump Action Rifles in his Abuja home.


The judge has asserted that his ordeal was because he once tried current Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN), for professional misconduct when he was a judge in Kaduna. He has accused Mr. Malami of being behind his harassment, adding that the raid on his residence was a part of a retaliation plot by the AGF. The judge did not, however, deny the fact that he was found with huge cash at home.

JUSTICE IBRAHIM AUTA of the Federal High Court faces several allegations of misconduct, according to the memo obtained by SaharaReporters. The accusations against him include accepting bribes in order to assign "lucrative" cases to certain corruption judges who give him kickbacks. Numerous real estate assets have been traced to him. In addition, law enforcement agents allege that he once accepted N500,000 from Mr. Rickey Tarfa. 

JUSTICE TSAMIYA of the Court of Appeal is accused of demanding N200 million from an interested party in a case before his court. He was arrested last week after the NJC determined that he was guilty of demanding for bribes. 

JUSTICE ZAINAB BULKACHUWA, president of the Court of Appeal, is named in the memo where she is described as incurably corrupt and stupendously wealthy. Even though agents found that Justice Bulkachuwa abstained from taking bribes in the Rivers State election case, she is accused of engaging in bribery and taking kickbacks from judges to which she assigned "lucrative" cases. 

JUSTICE ABBA AJI reportedly received N8 million from Mr. Tarfa. SaharaReporters learned that she was dropped from the list of judges recommended for elevation to the Supreme Court on account of her implication in the Tarfa bribe scandal.

In addition, Justice Bulkachuwa is alleged to have taken bribes from former Governor Godswill Akpabio of Akwa Ibom and Governor Patrick Okowa of Delta State in order to facilitate favorable judgment in election petitions.

The two justices of the SupREME COURT, NGWUTA AND OKORO, allegedly received significant bribes from Governor Nyesom Wike of Rivers State. Security agents allege that Mr. Wike gave the two judges N5 billion to ensure that other Supreme Court justices ruled in the governor's favor in a final election petition at the Supreme Court.

SaharaReporters had earlier reported that Justice Mary Odili of the Supreme Court played a role in the Wike case. Justice Odili reportedly wept in front of her colleagues, claiming that her husband, former Governor Peter Odili of Rivers State, would die prematurely if Mr. Wike's election was not upheld. Justice Odili reportedly coordinated the bribe scheme with Justice Ngwuta, who allegedly took delivery of some of the bribe in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Justice Walter Onnoghen, the nominee for the post of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, is alleged to have taken part in the Wike bribe scandal. However, security agents decided not to go after him, telling President Buhari that the backlash would be intense if Justicd Onnoghen, a southerner, were bypassed for CJN in favor of a northerner. 



Justices Ngwuta and Okoro were also named in the case of Akwa Ibom where the governor is alleged to have disbursed a huge amount of money to bribe Supreme Court justices to secure a favorable ruling. A senior lawyer, Damian Dodo (SAN) reportedly facilitated the deal using a female in his chambers whose name was given as "Kauma". The Akwa Ibom governor paid the highest bribe to the Supreme Court justices.

Both justices were among judges arrested last week in late night raids carried out by the DSS. Security agents claimed that Justices Ngwuta and Okoro were found with stashes of foreign currency at their homes. Both justices have since been released.

Culled from: Law Jurists

Thursday, October 27, 2016

I refuse to be shamed for having a female body

When Egyptian teenager Ghadeer Ahmed sent her boyfriend a video of her dancing - without her hijab, and in a short dress - she never imagined he would post it online. But years later he did. Here she tells the story of her decision to re-post the video herself, and to tell the world she saw no reason to be ashamed.
In 2009, when I was 18 years old, I was at a friend's house having fun and dancing with other girls. In Egypt, girls don't have anywhere to dance in public, so we dance together behind closed doors.
I asked one of my friends to record a video of me dancing on my mobile phone. There was nothing pornographic about this video, but I was wearing a short dress that revealed my body. A few days later, I sent it to my boyfriend.
 Ghadeer Ahmed

In Europe or the US this would not be a big deal. But I come from an ordinary Muslim family in the Nile delta and, like most Egyptian girls, I had been raised to believe that no man has the right to see my body except my husband. At that time I was still wearing the hijab, the very emblem of female modesty, whenever I left the house. I knew that it was risky to send that kind of video to a man who was not my husband or even my fiance. But I sent it anyway. A while later I did something even riskier and sent him some private photos.
By 2012 we had broken up. That's when the threats started. He said he would put the video and photos online if I didn't get back together with him. He knew that I was starting to build a public profile as a political activist and women's rights campaigner, and he thought he could use these images to destroy my career as well as my reputation.
Ghadeer at a demonstration


I was really frightened. I even thought my life might be in danger. In our society, the reputation of the whole family rests on the conduct of its daughters, sisters, and wives. Our bodies are not our own: they belong to the male members of the family, and are the vessels in which the family's honour is carried. I was scared that the video would bring shame on my parents, that our friends and neighbours would condemn my father for failing to raise me as a "good girl". I begged my ex-boyfriend not to publish the photos or the video.
About a year later, in early 2013, I was talking with friends and mentioned that I loved dancing. I'll never forget the reply from one of the men in the group. "I know," he said. "I've seen you dancing on YouTube."

#ShameoOnline


This is one of a series of stories looking at a new and disturbing phenomenon - the use of private or sexually explicit images to threaten, blackmail and shame young people, mainly girls and women, in some of the world's most conservative societies. You can explore all the stories and contribute to the conversation here.

My ex had not only uploaded the dancing video - he had also made a video montage out of the private photographs and uploaded that as well. I managed to get YouTube to take down the video showing these photos, but the dancing video was still online.
Secretly, I contacted a friend who is a lawyer and asked if there was anything in Egyptian law that would allow me to press charges. He encouraged me to file a complaint for defamation. The next day I reported my ex-boyfriend to the police.
My family still knew nothing of this, and I was hoping to keep it that way. But a few months later, when I was on my way from Cairo back to my parents' home town, I received a phone call from my mum. Worried by the involvement of the law, my ex-boyfriend had gone to my father and told him everything. He had even shown my dad the private photos to prove that he had seen my body, and then offered to "restore" the family's honour by marrying me - on the condition, of course, that I drop the charges. I can definitely say that this was the worst marriage proposal I have ever received.

The absurdity of this offer - a legal settlement wrapped up as a marriage proposal - lays bare the assumptions that restrict the sexual freedom of women in Egypt and across the Arab world. Family honour is inextricably linked to female sexual purity. If that purity is compromised in any way, honour can only be restored through marriage - or, in extreme cases, through murder. Some countries apply the same logic even in cases of rape. Jordan, for example, still has a law, Article 308, which exempts rapists from prosecution or punishment if they agree to marry their victims.
When I got home, my mother was distraught. "You have shamed us," she said. I left and got on the bus back to Cairo, where I had been living for a while. I was convinced that I had lost my family. But after a few kilometres, I told the bus driver to stop and let me off. I went home again to my parents and asked them to help me put it right. "I can't fix this without your support," I told them.

My father was furious with me for sending the video to a stranger. I tried to argue that the fault lay not with me, but with the man who had violated my privacy. He looked totally unconvinced. But despite the immense social pressures that they were under, my parents supported me in my fight for the right to privacy, and in 2014 my ex-boyfriend was convicted for defamation and sentenced in absentia to one year in jail.
The legal situation was muddied by counter charges that, in an attempt to derail the case, he had filed against me in a separate dispute over money.
In the end, exhausted by the whole procedure, I decided to withdraw my complaint. His conviction was annulled and he was never arrested or jailed. But the fact that a judge had examined the case and found him guilty was enough for me. The blackmailing was over. I thought I could forget about the video and get on with my life. I was wrong.


Ghadeer Ahmed on Facebook
Image copyright Facebook
Back in 2012, exactly one year after the Egyptian uprising and the protests in Tahrir square, I had founded a group called Girls' Revolution. It began as a hashtag on Twitter, and then grew into a movement of young women campaigning for change. We felt we had no real rights in Egypt, that we were merely tolerated as guests in our own country. Around the same time I decided to take off the hijab and started to become more outspoken - on Facebook, in TV debates and elsewhere - about the situation of women in Egypt.
This drew hostility from some men, who began to insult me on social media. In October 2014, one of these trolls posted a link to the dancing video, with a comment saying, "This is Ghadeer Ahmed, who wants to corrupt our Egyptian girls, and here is the video that shows that she herself is a slut."
For me, that was breaking point. I was exploding with rage. I thought, "No. I refuse to be blackmailed, I refuse to be threatened, I refuse to be shamed for having a female body. I will never again feel guilty about my own body, or frightened of what I do with it."

So I took the dancing video and posted it on my own Facebook page for the whole world to see. The post I wrote to accompany it said: "Yesterday a group of men tried to shame me by sharing a private video of me dancing with friends. I am writing this to announce that, yes, it was me in the video, and no, I am not ashamed of my body. To whoever is trying to stigmatise me, as a feminist I've got over the social misconceptions about women's bodies that still dominate Eastern societies. I don't feel ashamed because I was dancing happily, just as I did publicly at my sister's wedding, where I also wore a very short and revealing dress. Now, I want to ask you guys: what is it that really annoys you? Me being a slut, or me being a slut without sleeping with you? My body is not a source of shame. I have nothing to regret about this video."
Immediately, the post went viral in Egypt. A lot of people said how brave I was, and agreed with my argument that a woman must have rights over her own body, as well as the right not to be exposed online. I received calls from my close friends offering their support. Finally, after five years, I felt that I had put an end to all the fear. I closed the door on it all.
Two years on, I have no regrets about posting that video. Every now and then a girl has to break the mould that girls are put in. A girl has to stand up and say "Yes, I've been blackmailed with private images, yes, I sent them of my own free will, but still no-one has the right to use them to shame or humiliate me."

Rainbow flag picture

I am sharing my story now to encourage the thousands of girls all over the world who are still being threatened and blackmailed with digital images on social media. Here is what I want to say to you: You are not alone. I went through what you are struggling for. I felt lonely, I felt helpless, I felt weak and ashamed. There were times when I collapsed during this whole exhausting experience. I do not have the right to tell you to fight as I did, but I am urging you to ask for help from someone you trust. Once we ask for help, we feel less alone, less endangered. Together, we can change the culture that makes us frightened and ashamed. Together, we can survive. Together, as sisters, we can turn the world into a safer place for women.
Source: BBC

Sex, honour, shame and blackmail in an online world

Source: BBC
A BBC investigation has found that thousands of young women in conservative societies across North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia are being shamed or blackmailed with private and sometimes sexually explicit images.
Daniel Silas Adamson looks at how smartphones and social media are colliding head-on with traditional notions of honour and shame.
In 2009 an 18-year-old Egyptian girl, Ghadeer Ahmed, sent a video clip to her boyfriend's phone. The clip showed Ghadeer dancing at the house of a female friend. There was nothing pornographic about it, but she was wearing a revealing dress and dancing without any inhibition.
Three years later, in an act of revenge after their relationship had ended, the boyfriend posted the video to YouTube. Ghadeer panicked. She knew that the whole situation - the dance, the dress, the boyfriend - would be utterly unacceptable to her parents, to their neighbours, and to a society in which women were required to cover their bodies and behave with modesty.
But in the years since she had sent the video, Ghadeer had also taken part in the Egyptian revolution, taken off her hijab, and started to speak out about the rights of women. Outraged that a man had attempted to publicly shame her, she took legal action. Although she succeeded in having him convicted for defamation, the video remained on YouTube - and Ghadeer found herself attacked on social media by men who sought to discredit her by posting links to it.
In the West a naked picture might only humiliate a girl - but in our society it might lead to her death Inam al-Asha, Jordanian psychologist and women's rights activist
In 2014, sick of the abuse and tired of worrying about who might see the film, Ghadeer made a brave decision: she posted the video on her own Facebook page. In an accompanying comment, she argued that it was time to stop using women's bodies to shame and silence them. Watch the video, she said. I'm a good dancer. I have no reason to feel ashamed.
Ghadeer is more outspoken than most Arab women, but her situation is not unusual. A BBC investigation has found that thousands of young people - mainly girls and women - are being threatened, blackmailed, or shamed with digital images from the innocently flirtatious to the sexually explicit. Obtained by men - sometimes with consent, sometimes through sexual assault - these images are being used to extort money, to coerce women into sending more explicit images, or to force them to submit to sexual abuse.
Revenge porn is a problem in every country on Earth, but the potency of sexual images as weapons of intimidation stems from their capacity to inflict shame on women - and in some societies, shame is a much more serious matter.
"In the West, it's a different culture," says Inam al-Asha, a psychologist and women's rights activist in Amman, Jordan. "A naked picture might only humiliate a girl. But in our society, a naked picture might lead to her death. And even if her life isn't finished physically, it is finished socially and professionally. People stop associating with her and she ends up ostracised and isolated."

#ShameOnline

Shame season logo
This is one of a series of stories looking at a new and disturbing phenomenon - the use of private or sexually explicit images to threaten, blackmail and shame young people, mainly girls and women, in some of the world's most conservative societies.

Most cases of this form of abuse go unreported because the same forces that make women vulnerable also ensure they remain silent. But lawyers, police, and activists in a dozen countries have told the BBC that the arrival of smartphones and social media has sparked a hidden epidemic of online blackmail and shaming.
Zahra Sharabati, a Jordanian lawyer, told the BBC that in the last two or three years she has handled at least 50 cases involving the use of digital images or social media to threaten or shame women. "But in the whole of Jordan," she says, "I think the number is far higher - not fewer than 1,000 cases involving social media. More than one girl, I think, was killed as a result of this issue."
My guesstimate is going to be that we are seeing thousands of such cases [in India] on a daily basis Pavan Duggal, Indian lawyer
Louay Zreiqat, a police officer in the West Bank, says that last year the Palestinian police cybercrime unit handled 502 online crimes, many of which involved private pictures of women. His compatriot Kamal Mahmoud, who runs an anti-extortion website, says he receives more than 1,000 requests for help every year from women across the Arab world.
"Sometimes the photos are not sexual… a photo of a girl not wearing a hijab could be scandalous. A man could use this photo to pressure the girl to send more photos," he says. "The Gulf countries are facing blackmail on a huge scale, especially girls in Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain. Some girls tell us, 'If these photos are made public, I will be in real danger.'"
In Saudi Arabia, the problem is so serious that the religious police have set up a special unit to pursue blackmailers and to help women who are being threatened. In 2014 the then head of the religious police, Dr Abdul Latif al-Sheikh, told a Saudi newspaper, "We receive hundreds of calls every day from women who are being blackmailed."
Further east, Pavan Duggal, a lawyer with India's Supreme Court, talks of a "torrent" of cases involving digital images of women. "My guesstimate is going to be that we are seeing thousands of such cases [in India] on a daily basis," he says.
And in Pakistan, Nighat Dad, head of an NGO dedicated to making the online world safer for women, says "two or three girls or women every day" - about 900 per year - contact her organisation because they are being threatened.
"When women are in a relationship they share their pictures or videos," she says. "And if the relationship ends, not on a good note, the other party misuses the data and blackmails them - not only to remain in the relationship but to do all sorts of other weird stuff."
Smartphones
But it goes beyond blackmail. Nighat Dad is also starting to see a disturbing link between smartphones and sexual violence.
"It started from intimate pictures, but now it has a very grave connection with rape itself," she says. Before these technologies, when perpetrators used to do rape they had no idea how to silence the woman… But now technology brings another aspect to the whole rape culture, and it's to silence women by making a video and then to threaten that if they speak out, this video will be shared online."
The more devastating the consequences of public exposure, the more power the perpetrator has over the victim.
One young woman from rural Tunisia told the BBC her story from a women's prison on the country's north coast. It began when she was sexually assaulted and photographed naked by a friend of her father. The images left her at the mercy of her abuser, who subjected her to months of sexual violence, while also blackmailing her for money. It was not until the man threatened to rape her younger sister that Amal reached her limit. She invited him to her house and murdered him with a meat cleaver. She is now serving a 25-year prison sentence.
Women being shown an image on a smartphone
Another young woman, the 16-year-old victim of a gang rape in Morocco, set herself on fire in July this year, after her rapists threatened to share images of the attack online. The eight accused were trying to intimidate the girl's family into dropping the charges against them but instead drove her to suicide, as she suffered third-degree burns and died in hospital.
It is in India and Pakistan, however, that the use of mobile phones to record sexual assault appears to be most widespread.
In August 2016, the Times of India found that hundreds - perhaps thousands - of video clips of rape were being sold in shops across the northern state of Uttar Pradesh every day. One shopkeeper in Agra told the newspaper: "Porn is passé. These real-life crimes are the rage." Another, according to the same report, was overheard telling customers that they might even know the girl in the "latest, hottest" video.
In one example investigated by the BBC, a 40-year-old health worker took her own life after a video of her being raped by a gang was circulated in her village via the messaging service WhatsApp. The woman appealed to village elders for help but, according to a colleague, received no support from a society which saw her as not only sullied by the attack, but even to blame for it.
But the power of these images in conservative societies can cut both ways.
Some women have understood that if they can be used as weapons to shame women, then they may also be used as weapons to attack or challenge patriarchal cultures.
When Ghadeer Ahmed posted the dancing video on Facebook she was not just undermining attempts to humiliate her, but rejecting the very idea that the video was a source of shame.

I refuse to be shamed for having a female body

Ghadeer Ahmed
"Yesterday a group of men tried to shame me by sharing a private video of me dancing with friends. I am writing this to announce that, yes, it was me in the video, and no, I am not ashamed of my body."
Read Ghadeer's story in full

In 2011, another young woman from North Africa, Amina Sboui, went even further: she posted a topless photo of herself on Facebook. Across her naked torso she had written, "My body belongs to me - it is not the source of anyone's honour." The image ignited a firestorm of controversy in Tunisia.
More recently Qandeel Baloch, who came from a village in Pakistan's Punjab region, used social media to gain celebrity by posting provocative selfies online. Known as the Kim Kardashian of Pakistan, she challenged Pakistani social norms by embracing the sexualised culture of the internet - until she was strangled by her brother in July this year for bringing shame on the family.
The power of smartphones and social media appears not to have been lost on the authorities in Saudi Arabia, who, as well as aggressively pursuing men who misuse images of women, run campaigns to educate girls about the dangers of sharing photos online. On one level this is an important measure to protect Saudi women, but the urgency of the response may also reflect a recognition that technology has the power to change patterns of behaviour and ways of thinking - and that it is already opening up a new front in the battle over what women can and cannot do with their bodies.
This is the first in a series of BBC reports looking at how new technology has collided with age-old notions about honour and shame across North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia.

Wednesday, October 26, 2016

How The Nigerian National Judicial Council Shields Corrupt Judges

BY SAHARA REPORTERS, NEW YORK OCT 11, 2016

Law enforcement officers involved in investigating corrupt Nigerian judges arrested over the weekend have told Saharareporters how the main national body saddled with punishing judges have made it impossible to prosecute the judges even after they found guilty by the same body, the National Judicial Council.

They revealed that in the cases of judges arrested over the weekend by the Department of State Security they had written to the Chief Justice of Nigeria,  Justice Mahmud Mohammed a month earlier regarding the criminal conduct of some of the judges but the CJN who is the presiding chairman at the NJC refused to let the judges be interrogated. They said before the invitation by the DSS; the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission had also tried to interrogate judges with whom they found substantial sums of bribe money but the NJC had insisted that the sanctions by the body were sufficient. In most cases, corrupt judges are given compulsory retirement and left to enjoy their loot.

The NJC is made up a committee headed by the CJN as chairman while the second most senior judge at the Supreme Court, in this case, Walter Onnoghen is deputy chair, others includes the President of the Court of Appeal, five chief judges of state high courts chosen by the CJN, five legal practitioners and the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court.

The current composition of the NJC also presents a problem, according to an EFCC official some members of the NJC are themselves corrupt and have been shown to be heavily involved in corruption. They pointed to immediate past chairman of the Nigeria Bar Association, Austin Alegeh who has petitions pending at the EFCC accusing him of embezzlement of NBA funds.

Also, another former President of the NBA, Joseph Daudu who chairs the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee has a case against him at EFCC over embezzlement of settlement fees paid to Nigeria by Halliburton.

Ricky Tarfa, a senior lawyer, involved a maze of corrupt activities involving several judges is also a member of Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee, a body saddled with choosing senior lawyers known as “Senior Advocate of Nigeria.” Mr. Tarfa he has retained his position despite being charged with bribery and corruption.

More troubling for law enforcement agents is the attitude of the outgoing CJN who they accused of shielding a judge of the Court of Appeal, Justice Uwani Abba-Aji, who reportedly received N8 million from Mr. Tarfa. Despite her indictment, the CJN has recommended her for elevation to the Supreme Court.

A former CJN, Justice Katsina-Alu had also prevented Justice Umaru Eri of the National Judicial Institute in 2011 from honoring an invitation by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission over allegations that N6 billion went missing at his agency. Eri remained as the chairman of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee until his retirement.

One of the cases involving now-retired Justice Gladys Olotu of the Federal High Court in the Abuja Division in 2014 was also cited as the reason the NJC has become a useless body; the judge was found by the EFCC to possess over N2 billion in her bank accounts. As soon as the EFCC summoned her to appear she rushed to the court of Justice Adeniyi Ademola to obtain an order to stop the EFCC from acting on her case. She was later “compulsorily retired” by the NJC. Meanwhile, Justice Ademola was one of the judges arrested over the weekend with $500,000 found in his bedroom.

Soon after seven judges including two Supreme Court justices were arrested in overnight raids carried out by the DSS, the CJN met with President Muhammadu Buhari to ask for their release.

Sources at the Presidency said while President Buhari assured him that the raids were not targeted at the judiciary but corrupt judges the CJN showed the president of some persons close to him who had funneled monies to judges to influence them in recent election cases.

The President then reluctantly asked the DSS to release all the arrested judges on Sunday pending their arraignment in court.

The NJC is expected to meet today to discuss the recent clampdown on corrupt judges. The DSS has reportedly sent a detailed report of its investigations against the arrested judges and eight others under investigation to the NJC to aid their deliberations and decisions, however, a source knowledgeable about today's meeting said the NJC was to fight back strongly against the DSS not to ratify its actions

Corruption in the Nigerian Judiciary

PRESS STATEMENT
by
Professor Ben Nwabueze

The attitude on the part of the Supreme Court, as the apex Court, that it is not subject to the law, is fraught with grave danger for our constitutional democracy. This is because, whilst the law of the Constitution, is the primary instrument of the Rule of Law, and the statute law the next leading instrument for it, court decisions form its foundation. And when the foundation is faulty, the entire edifice becomes shaky. The point needs amplification..
 In our constitutional system, the courts are the only authoritative decider and interpreter of what the law is for purposes of the Rule of Law. And once a court has spoken, then, its decision establishes, with binding force, the law on the point in issue, unless and until it is reversed or overruled by due process of law. Neither the President nor anyone else has the power or the right to substitute and apply their own view of the law in preference to that of the court in a matter affecting the lives, affairs and actions of other people. To admit any such power or right in anyone, the President included, would only lead to anarchy, to the substitution of the rule of the jungle for the Rule of Law.
 The binding force of decisions or orders of the court as the authoritative decider or arbiter of what the law is under the concept of the Rule of Law applies notwithstanding that a court decision or order is perverse or blatantly erroneous on the merits; not only that, they also apply despite the fact that the court lacks jurisdiction to give the decision or make the order in question either because its jurisdiction is ousted by statute or for some other reason. In a system of government under law, as ours is supposed to be, no one, the President again included, is entitled to disregard a decision or order of a court of law, because, in his opinion, the court lacks jurisdiction to give it.
 In the recent case of Att-Gen of Anambra State v. Att-Gen of the
Federation & Ors [2005] 9 NWLR (Pt 929 – 931) 574 at page 606, the Supreme Court, speaking through Katsina-Alu JSC, (as he then was), affirmed the binding force of the court’s decision or order as the authoritative statement of what the law is that governs or rules the lives and affairs of people in society. Said the Court:
“The law in this regard is clear……..An order or judgment of court, no matter the fundamental vice that afflicts it, remains legally binding and valid until set aside by due process of law” (emphasis supplied).
But this obliges the courts to ensure that their decisions and orders are in accordance with the law, and not given in disregard of it; the court should not over-step the limits of its jurisdiction or power in a show of reckless activism, as was done by Hon. Justice Okon Abang of the FHC Abuja in his decision sacking Dr Okezie Ikpeazu as Governor of Abia State, declaring Dr Ogah as Governor in his place and ordering INEC to issue a Certificate of Return to Dr Ogah as well as ordering that he be sworn-in forthwith, and as was done by the Supreme Court itself in Jev’s Case (2015) 15 NWLR (Pt 1483) 484 when it ordered a person who took no part at all in a general election for the election of members of the House of Representatives, and for whom no votes were cast, to be sworn-in as a member of the House and also ordered INEC to issue him a Certificate of Return – all in disregard of the law as embodied in the Constitution and the Electoral Act 2010.
 It is apparently the pre-eminent role assigned to the judiciary in the concept of the Rule of Law that has created in the Supreme Court, as the apex court, the arrogant attitude that it is the law itself, and not a subject of the law. As earlier stated, the attitude is fraught with grave danger for our constitutional democracy, and the Court needs to be shaken out of it by means radical enough to transform the Court’s attitude about its role in our constitutional system, and the way it goes about in applying its role.
The arrogance of power on the part of the Supreme Court must be curbed. This requires to be done in a manner that accords with the guarantee against “inhuman or degrading treatment” and respect for the dignity of the human person in section 34(1) of our Constitution; the protection of the right to private and family life in section 37; the guarantee of personal liberty in section 35 relating especially to the processes of arrest, detention and search.
Whilst judges are not granted immunity from criminal process, the vital and sacrosanct role of the judiciary in governance entitles them to great respect over and above that accorded to the ordinary citizens. To disgrace a judge, as by a degrading treatment, is not just the disgraceful treatment of an individual; it brings the entire judiciary, as the third organ of government, the Third Estate of the Realm, into disrepute and undermines its credibility in the eyes of the public. It diminishes our country, and all of us. The matter therefore counsels and demands cautious handling.
We are in a constitutional democracy, not a military dictatorship, and the law must be respected and obeyed in the way the affairs of the country are handled, including the handling of the fight against corruption which we all wholeheartedly support.

Professor Ben Nwabueze

10 October, 2016
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...