Some military officers convicted and
under various categories of punishment by various courts-martial have
appealed to the Presidential Investigation Panel to Review Compliance of
the Armed Forces with Human Rights Obligations and Rules of Engagement
to hear their complaints against the Nigerian Army...
Among the soldiers is a former Commander
of the Multi-National Joint Task Force, Enitan Ransome-Kuti, who was
demoted from the rank of Brigadier General to Colonel.
Others include Lt. Col. A. O. Ojo, who
was dismissed by the Nigerian Army for alleged negligence of military
duties; and 54 soldiers, who claimed to have been illegally tried and
convicted by the court-martial for demanding weapons for
counter-insurgency operations in the North-East geopolitical zone.
The rest are Lance Corporals Bankole
Taiwo, Ayodele Olawale and Isiah Olofu as well as Private Adebayo
Gbenga, who are collectively seeking the review of their convictions.
The Justice Biobele Georgewill-led
seven-man panel had, at its inaugural sitting on Monday, expressed
doubts on its jurisdiction to entertain the complaints of the soldiers
bordering on decisions of a military tribunal with pending appeals
against the said decisions at the Court of Appeal.
But with the soldiers’ lawyer, Mr. Femi
Falana (SAN), insisting that the panel had jurisdiction to hear the
complaints, the panel, on Monday, directed parties to the complaints to
file written addresses on the issue.
Arguing on behalf of his clients on
Tuesday, Falana conceded that his clients had pending appeals before the
Court of Appeal challenging their convictions and the sentences passed
on them by the courts martial.
He maintained, however, that the pending
appeals had not robbed the panel of the jurisdiction to hear his
clients’ petitions which he said were only urging the panel to recommend
to President Muhammadu Buhari to grant them pardon.
He said his clients were not requesting
the panel to sit as an appeal court on the decision of the
courts-martial but was only seeking to explore the platform provided by
the panel to secure presidential pardon.
He added that Section 198 of the Armed
Forces as well as Section 175 of the constitution empower the President
to grant pardon to any convicted person in Nigeria without condition and
regardless of whether or not the convicts had pending appeals.
Falana added, “We concede the fact that
all the petitioners have pending appeals challenging their convictions
and sentence passed on them by some courts-martial. That appeal was
brought pursuant to Section 240 of the constitution.
“No where is it stated in the terms of reference of the panel that it shall not look at cases in court.
“What we have before this honourable
panel is a prayer that this panel should recommend to the President to
grant pardon to the petitioners.
“In the cases pending before the Court
of Appeal, their prayer is for the conviction to be set aside but, here,
we are asking for pardon.”
He maintained that the basis for his
clients’ request for pardon was not related to the matter before the
Court of Appeal but was based on facts that came up after they (the
clients) had been tried and convicted.
He said the request for pardon followed
the emergence of facts about how funds earmarked for purchase of arms to
prosecute the counter-insurgency war in the North-East were diverted.
“After the trial, facts emerged that huge funds earmarked for the purchase of weapons were diverted.
“The matter before you is not before the
Court of Appeal. This matter goes to the root of violation of human
rights in the military,” he stated.
But the Nigerian Army’s lawyer, Mr.
Biola Oyebanji, who also appeared alongside Brig.Gen. D. O.
Idada-Ikponmen (retd.), urged the panel to refuse to hear the soldiers’
complaints.
Oyebanji argued that the “limited” scope of the panel’s terms of reference did not give room for entertaining such complaints.
He added that the quest for pardon by
the complainants was an afterthought as such was not prayed for in the
soldiers’ petitions submitted to the panel.
The counsel said, “The prayer in the
memoranda does not have anything on pardon. To draw in pardon by
inference is a belated attempt by the petitioners. It is an
afterthought.
“They do not need the setting up of this panel to exercise their right.
“Having conceded that they have
exploited other means to entertain their case, it has become duplicitous
to burden this panel with the same application.”
When confronted with a prayer in one of
the petitions requesting the panel to recommend to the President about
the complainants’ pardon, Oyebanji agreed that the issue was not an
afterthought.
In his reply on points of law, Falana
said the complaints by his clients before the panel was for
“reinforcement” of his clients’ pleas to the President for pardon.
The Justice Georgewill-led panel fixed ruling for Wednesday.
The panel said, with agreement of
parties, that other petitions by Falana, including the one that had to
do with the alleged violation of human rights by the military justice
system, would be heard in Maiduguri, Borno State, where the panel’s
North-East sitting is to take place.
No comments: