It is not a cat-in-bag fact anymore that trials of political individuals in the country are seen as slowed and, more often than not, justice is stalled by what many call ‘higher’ powers, in order to deaden the attention of the public on the particular cases. But the government wants to end this, and is taking steps.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, presently have several pending, if not stalled, cases in various courts in the country against some former and current political office holders, including governors, many years after the cases were first instituted.
At the latest count, no fewer than 20 of such cases are pending in the courts. Some of the cases involving former governors include Jolly Nyame (Taraba) filed in 2007; Danjuma Goje (Gombe) filed in 2011; Timipreye Sylva (Bayelsa) 2015; Murtala Nyako (Adamawa) 2015; Sule Lamido (Jigawa) 2015; Adebayo Alao-Akala (Oyo) 2011; Gbenga Daniel (Ogun) 2011; Aliyu Akwe Doma (Nasarawa) 2011; Attahiru Bafawara (Sokoto) 2009; and Ikedi Ohakim (Imo) 2015.
NJC’s Intervention and COTRIMCO
Concerned about the situation, the National Judicial Council, NJC, had, in November last year, set up an intervention panel known as Corruption Financial Crimes Cases Trials Monitoring Committee, COTRIMCO, to monitor and assess alleged corruption cases piling up in the courts in a bid to fast-track the trial of such cases. Remarkably, the Committee, working in concert with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, ICPC, had within a short time received 2,306 on-going corruption cases which it subsequently assigned to its four sub-committees for special attention.
The sub-committees, constituted at the meeting of the anti-graft panel, under the leadership of the Chairman, retired Justice Suleiman Galadima, are Practice Directions, Training, Feedback and Engagement, and Awareness. For ease of monitoring and evaluation of the said cases, the committee had divided the country into three zones, namely: Zone A, Abuja FCT; Zone B, Northern Zone; and Zone C, Southern Zone. At the last count, Zone A in Abuja has 554 pending cases, Zone B has 347 cases, with Zone C having 1, 405 cases.
The Committee also directed its Secretary, Gambo Saleh, who is also the Council’s secretary, to write Chief Judges of State divisions who were yet to submit the list of the alleged corruption cases to the committee to do so without delay.
The Provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, ACJA, 2015
The stated purpose of the Act is “to ensure that the system of administration of criminal justice in Nigeria promotes efficient management of criminal justice institutions, speedy dispensation of justice, protection of the society from crime and protection of the rights and interests of the suspect, the defendant, and the victim”.
Apart from that:
“The courts, law enforcement agencies and other authorities or persons involved in criminal justice administration shall ensure compliance with the provisions of this Act for the realisation of its purposes”.
Speedy trial
But it is with respect to ensuring speedy dispensation of justice that the introduction of the ACJA is considered particularly relevant in Nigeria’s criminal justice system. This is because it is expected to address the matter of delayed trials through the following provisions:
Stay of Proceedings [16]
The new position of the law in this regard is that application for stay of proceedings shall no longer be heard in respect of a criminal matter before the court. This unprecedented provision puts a gag on the delays occasioned to the trial process by interlocutory applications to stay proceedings pending appeal on preliminary matters even when the substantive issues are yet to be tried on their merits.
Day-to-day trial [17]
Upon arraignment, the trial of the defendant shall proceed from day-to-day until the conclusion of the trial. Where day-to-day trial is impracticable, the Act provides that parties shall be entitled to only five adjournments each. The interval between each adjournment, according to the Act, shall not exceed two weeks each. Where the trial is still not concluded, the interval for adjournments will be reduced to seven days each.
Assignment of information and issuance of notice of trial [18]
By virtue of this section, information filed are to be assigned to courts by the Chief Judge within 15 days and the Judge, in turn, is to issue notice of trial within 10 working days of the assignment of the information to his court.
Objection to the validity of charge [19]
Any objection to the validity of the charge or information raised by the defendant shall only be considered along with the substantive issues and a ruling thereon made at the time of delivery of judgement.
This Act has been very appreciated and applauded even though there is yet to be reasonable result that can attest to the efficiency of the act.
