On October 30, 2021, security operatives made up of soldiers and police officers had stormed the Abuja residence of the Supreme Court justice over an allegation that illegal activities were going on there.
The special investigator of the Nigerian Bar Association probing the invasion of a Supreme Court judge, Justice Mary Peter-Odili’s home by security agents, Monday Ubani, has submitted the report of his findings to the National Executive Committee of the association.
Ubani was appointed as Special Investigator on November 5, 2021 by the NBA to unravel the circumstances that led to invasion of the residence of Peter-Odili, a Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.
In the report, the investigator noted that it was understood that some “persons in the Federal Ministry of Justice have an inkling of the illegal activities of Mr. Ajodo and his collaborators and perhaps they have one way or the other consented or collaborated with him in some of his illegal activities.”
The NBA investigator further revealed that “some persons in the Federal Ministry of Justice may have benefited directly or indirectly from the illegal activities of this syndicate that hangs around the Ministry while using its name to create an official toga in their nefarious activities. The Federal Ministry of Justice officials cannot completely deny that they do not know some members of the syndicate.”
Ubani was mandated amongst other things, to co-opt other members of the NBA to take steps necessary to ensure that the direct and indirect perpetrators of the actions were exposed and brought to book.
The lawyer was also asked to interface as the representative of the association with all relevant persons connected with this incident including Peter-Odili, the Magistrate who issued the search warrant and the Chief Judge of the FCT High Court who exercises supervisory jurisdiction over Magistrates in the FCT Abuja; the Attorney General of the Federation in whose office the officials who carried out the invasion are purportedly domiciled; as well as the Inspector General of Police whose officers attempted to execute the purported search warrant.[story_link align="left"]102340[/story_link]
On October 30, 2021, security operatives made up of soldiers and police officers had stormed the Abuja residence of the Supreme Court justice over an allegation that illegal activities were going on there.
According to Ubani in his report, the search warrant granted to one Lawrence Ajodo, who identified himself as a Chief Superintendent of Police had been revoked by Chief Magistrate Emmanuel Iyanna.
The lawyer said the search warrant was obtained after one Aliyu Ibrahim, a whistleblower, deposed to an affidavit on October 13, stating that he “observed some illegal activities” within the area.
While Odili’s address is 7, Imo river street, Maitama, the address on the warrant is 9, Imo Street, Maitama.
Ubani said the judicial officer revoked the search warrant on the grounds that the court was misled and exonerated him of any serious misconduct as he took extra measures on documentations.
“The Chief Magistrate, Mr. Emmanuel Iyanna was confronted with these inconsistencies. His response was that after CSP Ajodo left his office with the signed Search Warrant, he took a closer look at the copies of the application CSP Ajodo presented before him and noticed that the words "Street" and "Close" were used interchangeably in the Application, Affidavit and the Search Warrant itself,” the report read.
“According to him, knowing the importance of specificity and exactitude of address in the issuance and execution of a search warrant, he instructed the Registrar of the Court to immediately call CSP Lawrence Ajodo, draw his attention to the above and ask him to come back to his office to clarify the use of "Street" and "Close". However CSP Ajodo who promised to come back for him to correct the slip relating to the issue of address never did. Having waited till 5.30pm that day without seeing him, Chief Magistrate Iyanna said he revoked the Search Warrant. He further stated that he communicated this Revocation Order to CSP Ajodo that same day through his Registrar, even though the mode of communication by the Registrar was not made clear in his response.
“The Chief Magistrate was asked if the revocation order was made before the invasion or after. His Honour stated that it was before the invasion, and that the invasion was done on a revoked search warrant that was illegally obtained by CSP Ajodo. What was the quality and sufficiency of evidence placed before him that warranted the Chief Magistrate to exercise his discretion in signing the Search Warrant?[story_link align="left"]101091[/story_link]
“The Chief Magistrate in addressing this issue argued that he was solely guided by the provisions of Sections 143 and 144 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 which empowers him, upon being satisfied by information on oath before him, to issue a search warrant authorising law officers to search a building, ship, carriage, receptacle, motor vehicle, aircraft or place. When asked whether he was really satisfied before signing the search warrant, and based upon the affidavit evidence that contained irregularities and inconsistencies, he stated that he was initially satisfied, since CSP Ajodo identified himself as an officer of the Nigerian Police Force attached to the Joint Panel Recovery under the Federal Ministry of Justice.
“For purposes of identification and verification, the said CSP presented to him his identification card duly signed by the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation. The signed copy was attached to his application. Moreover, according to him, there were two affidavits sworn before the High Court of FCT, Abuja by the whistle-blower and the Senior Police officer allegedly attached to the Federal Ministry of Justice.
“When asked why he did not seek to know the name of the occupant of the said address, he answered that he actually demanded for the name of the occupants of the address, but that CSP Lawrence Ajodo and the whistle-blower orally swore before him and in the presence of his Registrar that the premises sought to be searched was an uncompleted building used by unknown persons suspected to be carrying out some illegal activities. Most importantly, he said, he quickly revoked the said Search Warrant when it became apparent to him that the search warrant with a vague address should not be allowed to be executed on any address. The revocation was done on the same day.
“According to the Chief Magistrate, he was later justified by that singular move he made that same Friday as he later learnt that the said CSP Lawrence Ajodo and his co-conspirators sought to execute the "lifeless" Search Warrant on No. 7 Imo River Street, Maitama, Abuja as distinct from No. 9 Imo Street and/or No. 9 Imo Close, Maitama, Abuja, being the address contained in the application letter and search warrant. He was of the strong view that he had no reason to believe that CSP Ajodo and the whistle-blower could lie under oath in respect of the actual address and their real motive for the search warrant.
“He was of the view that the issuance of search warrant in respect of No. 9 Imo Close, Maitama, Abuja as opposed to No. 9 Imo Street, Maitama, Abuja which appeared on the application letter was not due to negligence but purely accidental slip which the law allows him to correct upon its discovery, and which he attempted to correct by inviting CSP Lawrence Ajodo to rectify the error. Finally, he stated that he was misled on oath as to the true intention of CSP Lawrence Ajodo concerning the real address they intended to execute the search warrant for the alleged illegal activities.
“What may exculpate the Chief Magistrate, His Honour Emmanuel Iyanna despite his observed negligence and manifest errors in the processes, is the fact that the Search Warrant that contained the address of No. 9 Imo Close, Maitama, Abuja was sought to be executed on No. 7 Imo River, Maitama, Abuja. There is perhaps no way the learned Chief Magistrate could have deciphered the alleged criminal intent of the deponent, same having been concealed from him. When the Chief Magistrate's eyes were opened to the nefarious intent of the invaders, they refused to honour his invitation to clarify the issue of conflicting addresses. They proceeded to carry out their intended action even when the search warrant had been revoked. The revocation on record was done the same day, signifying promptness in addressing the grave error His Honour committed in signing a search warrant with vague details.
On Ajodo, the report said, “Mr. Lawrence Ajodo, in a widely televised interview, stated that though he has been working for the Ministry (Federal Ministry of Justice) over undisclosed cases, the invasion of Hon. Justice Odili's home was not directed by Mr. Abubakar Malami SAN or any of his subordinates. It is also noteworthy that when the news broke concerning the illegal invasion, EFCC was the first security agency that was ‘implicated’ before the Agency quickly debunked the allegation. Till date, we have not been able to establish any official connection between EFCC and Mr. Lawrence Ajodo.
“Instructively, Mr. Ajodo said: I am not a policeman and I have never been in the Nigerian police. I have an ID card of Assets Recovery and a name of CSP Ajodo F. Lawrence, Position O/C Investigation with police logo, police colour, coat of arms on the ID card. The meaning of CSP on the ID card is Chief Superintendent of Police. I decided to make people believe that I am a policeman.”
“It is suggested that a man who claimed that he was a police officer designated as Chief Superintendent of Police only to recant later is an unreliable witness. Whatever he says should be taken with a pinch of salt. Having arrived at this conclusion, it will be untenable to use his tainted and mostly oral evidence to implicate anyone without any corresponding documentary evidence.
“I am therefore of the strong view that his allegation that he was an employee of the Federal Ministry of Justice or that he even remotely had their backing for this ill-fated invasion is not established by any shred of evidence. Rather, what can be deciphered, though with caution, is that some persons in the Federal Ministry of Justice have an inkling of the illegal activities of Mr. Ajodo and his collaborators and perhaps they have one way or the other consented or collaborated with him in some of his illegal activities.
“One may also conclude that perhaps some persons in the Federal Ministry of Justice may have benefited directly or indirectly from the illegal activities of this syndicate that hangs around the Ministry while using its name to create an official toga in their nefarious activities. The Federal Ministry of Justice officials cannot completely deny that they do not know some members of the syndicate. However, the absence of any official communication or connection is strong enough in my candid view to exonerate the Federal Ministry of Justice and her workers in the present circumstances. I have vigorously sought for that official connection between Mr. Ajodo and the Federal Ministry of Justice. I am afraid that I WAS UNABLE TO SEE ANY.
“Arising from the foregoing, the following are my recommendations: Substantive and procedural laws with elaborate processes and procedures for the issuance of search warrants, arrest warrants, detention orders, extension of detention orders among others should be enacted for the States and the Federal Government by the Legislature.
“The independence of the Judiciary should not be a matter for negotiation. It is either we have independent judiciary or we choose not to have it. The advantages of an independent judiciary cannot be over-emphasised. The independence of the Judiciary should not only be on paper but should be practicalised. The administrative, operational and financial autonomy of the Judiciary should be total and exhaustive. The Federal and State governments should not be allowed to pay lip service to the independence of the Judiciary.
“Government Agencies or Security Agencies that tolerate or harbour criminal gangs, touts or law-breakers in and around their offices should be made to answer to their illegal activities by being summoned by the various committees that superintend over them in the Legislature. Ensuring obedience to Court Orders and respect for the rule of law should remain the eternal pursuit of NBA and other professional bodies until these become abiding principles by every government in Nigeria.
“The Special Investigator will hold watching brief on behalf of NBA over the invasion matter which has commenced at the Federal High Court, Abuja. The next adjourned date is 8th April, 2022.”