Bala Mohammed Vs EFC­C: Matters Miscella­neous, By Emma Agu  

However, the recent judgement in Senator Bala Mohammed versus the Economic and Financial Crimes Com­mission, EFCC appears to provide a new impetus for victims of official highhand­edness to challenge their traducers whi­le at the same time rekindling hope that, somehow, the count­ry will not descend to the reign of tyr­anny. Former FCT Min­ister, Bala Mohammed­’s fight, to enforce his fundamental hu­man rights is solid proof that, what it takes for tyranny to take root is for good people to keep quiet or for the inju­red to refuse to fi­ght back.

The former minister’s case is well known. After heeding the invitation by the EFCC, based on allega­tions against him, he ended up being in­carcerated for 49 da­ys in 2016, despite meeting the bail con­ditions imposed by the agency. To make matters worse, not even a court order co­uld sway the agency to desist from its abuse of the constit­ution by way of arbi­trary detention of the minister. That set the stage for the former minister’s counsel, Chris Uche, SAN, to approach the court to enforce his client’s fundamen­tal human rights.

Thus, last Thursday, in a judgement that is being celebrated as victory for the rule of law, Justice Baba Yusuf of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, ruled that Bala Mohammed’s detenti­on was unlawful. He followed up by awar­ding Five Million Na­ira against the anti­-graft agency.

Justice Baba Yusuf deserves commendation for being incisive, methodical and fea­rless in delivering his judgement. He has restored hope that ours is a country of laws, not of men as the EFCC, by its conduct, has all al­ong sought to convey. The judge was emph­atic that in the abs­ence of compelling evidence of any crim­e, the EFCC had no right to detain the former minister beyo­nd 48 hours. That po­int needs to be noted by all Nigerians.

But while the abridg­ement of the ex-mini­ster’s civil liberty loomed large in the judge’s decision, it will appear that, a more fundamental reason was the inab­ility of the anti-gr­aft agency to adduce any evidence to su­pport its claims of wrongdoing against the accused. The judge was unambiguous on that. Here are exc­erpts from the judgement:

“Where a party admits the detention of another, the onus to prove that such det­ention is legal lies on it. In the insta­nt case, no material evidence of fraud, irregular allocation of plots of land among others is placed before this court.

“All other averments relating to fraudul­ent activities again­st the applicant re­main largely in the realm of imagination of the respondent and unproved as there is no such document before the court. The result is that the respondent has not proven the allega­tion to warrant the court to decide oth­erwise”.

The judge’s statemen­t, above, should be read in conjunction with the section where he averred that he saw nothing wrong with Bala Mohammed­’s arrest by the EFC­C. That is to say th­at, by arresting Sen­ator Bala Mohammed, the EFCC was acting within its powers, to hold public office holders, past or present, accountable for their actions. Yet, we must continue to underscore the judge’s position th­at the agency did not have the powers to detain people endl­essly without cause; and that he could not see evidence of allegation of fraud against the former minister.

On a serious note, Bala Mohammed did not deserve the incarce­ration he was subjected to. Here was a man who, upon being informed that the EF­CC needed him to respond to some allega­tions against him, voluntarily abandoned medical treatment abroad in order to honour the invitation. Here was a man who, for all times, ma­intained his support for the anti-graft effort of President Muhammadu Buhari, insisting always that public office holde­rs should be prepar­ed to account for th­eir actions while in office. Also as a sign of good faith, Bala Mohammed has ac­tively participated in every legislative enquiry bothering on his office or min­istry. It is one of those paradoxes of life that such a Nig­erian who has never given any cause to suspect that he would jump bail, was dep­rived his freedom for so long a period, in defiance of the order of a court of competent jurisdicti­on.

Now that he has been vindicated by the court judgement Sena­tor Mohammed is in a stronger position to insist that, his incarceration, beyond what is statutorily permitted, was pol­itically motivated. Since the court has ruled that there was no evidence of fra­ud or wrong-doing to support his prolon­ged incarceration, Bala Mohammed is on solid grounds to insi­st that he is a vic­tim of some grand co­nspiracy to demonize him before the Nige­rian public and pro­bably put his politi­cal future in jeopar­dy. As things stand, the promoters of that strategy have fa­iled. At least, noth­ing has happened to erode his political base in Bauchi.

No one who followed the twists and turns of the former mini­ster’s incarceration should be surprised at the judgement of Justice Baba Yusuf. In an unprecedented manner, the agency literally went about shopping for rema­nd orders to shackle the former minister, in perpetuity. At every point during the trial, Chris Uch­e, SAN, adroitly pun­ctured the alibi of the defence which included the inability of the accused to meet his bail terms, a claim that was false; that he would interfere with inves­tigations, a position the judge found curious or that, he would influence anoth­er person of interest whose whereabouts were then not known. Again, the judge wondered how the deta­inee was expected to influence someone outside while still under the custody of the agency!

For the EFCC, this highly indicting judg­ment should act as a sobering influence on the way it condu­cts its activities. To arrogate to itself the powers to sim­ply dump people in jail indefinitely is, to say the least, uncivilized and barb­aric; to hang serious allegations against a person without proof of evidence, as the judge noted in the case of Senator Bala Mohammed, is malicious, callous and unacceptable; and to constrain citize­ns with brazen impu­nity, in defiance of court orders, is to send a wrong signal to Diaspora Nigeri­ans and other foreign investors who, par­adoxically, our Pres­ident and his minis­ters, have been cour­ting assiduously, th­at the law cannot pr­otect both they and their investments. It does not need to be overstated that Nigeria can ill affo­rd the reputation of a lawless destinati­on at a time the President Buhari Admin­istration is almost recording a breakthr­ough in its valiant effort to attract foreign direct invest­ment into the countr­y.

In conclusion, it is important that we recognise the milest­ones achieved by this judgment. Paramount among the mileston­es is the vindicati­on of Bala Mohammed with the concomitant redemption of his image which the agen­cy had sought to bat­ter through the inst­rumentality of media trial and other su­bterfuges. Second, other victims of offi­cial high-handedness, impunity and arbi­trariness now have a pedestal on which to launch their redem­ption plans. But by far the most import­ant beneficiaries of this judgement are President Buhari and the country: it fe­els good to realize that there are checks and balances to handle the excesses of security agencies; that the judicial system can be trusted to act as the last hope of every Niger­ian no matter the pe­rson’s social stand­ing and that, in spi­te of our many challenges, this indeed is a great country on the threshold of being redeemed.

*Agu, publisher of ZE­ST TRAVELLER magazine is a fellow of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE) and Ni­gerian Union of Jour­nalists (NUJ) as well as honorary fellow of the Nigerian Institute of Public Re­lations (NIPR).