 |
| Richarmond O. Natha-Alade |
Sowore
should thank his stars
Sowore is my friend, I do not hate him, but
the truth be told, ‘if he is charged of anything less than treason, he should
thank his stars from saving him from the cold hands of death which is the
punishment for treason under the law, perhaps treasonable felony is lesser with
life imprisonment as punishment. And if God would help him, Terrorism by words
and conducts attracts only 20 years imprisonment of the first category and 10
years imprisonment by the second category. See section 2 and 3 of the Terrorism
(Prohibition) Act.
Apart from the likelihood of been charged
under any of the above laws, he would be prone to be charged in respect of
other offences related and/or ancillary to treason or terrorism such as making
inciting statements and conducts likely to breach public peace among others.
Femi Falana,
SAN scenario and Omoyele Sowore Scenario
By the about five minutes Video, Femi Falana narrated his ordeal
in the hands of ex-President Babangida, what they did at that time and how they went about
same , which cumulatively lead to their arrest and detention for two months before finally
being charged to court for treason. By the video, Femi Falana, SAN laid to bare the illogicality in his/their arrest and how same was tabled in court and argued out.
Femi Falana is highly respected and believable, but he refused to tell the world which other words spoken or conducts put up by the them other than “Ibrahim Babangida must Go!’, I did hope that in driving home his point, the learned silk should have at least tell the world if he, late Gani Fawehinmi SAN or others made any vulgar or reckless statement other than 'IBB must go'. No, He did not. He only emphasized on the word treason and revolution, the meaning which he partially gave and nothing more.
Femi Falana is highly respected and believable, but he refused to tell the world which other words spoken or conducts put up by the them other than “Ibrahim Babangida must Go!’, I did hope that in driving home his point, the learned silk should have at least tell the world if he, late Gani Fawehinmi SAN or others made any vulgar or reckless statement other than 'IBB must go'. No, He did not. He only emphasized on the word treason and revolution, the meaning which he partially gave and nothing more.
In Sowore situation, he was profiled by security authorities and
the whole world saying: ‘he would burn himself alive to cause Somalia
and Tunisia situation. By August 5 there would no longer be DSS, there would no
longer be Federal Government, there won’t be Nigeria, there would be
revolution...’ Bla bla, reference is hereby made to the Director of
State Security Services release after Sowore’s arrest.
Sowore never stopped from his utterances above to overthrow
Nigeria Government, he had earlier put himself forth in a photograph with the
embattled Biafra agitator , who is currently perceived as an enemy of Nigeria and who is also facing treason charge; Nnamdi Kanu, later jumped bail and now a refugee in several countries of the world; by
intelligence report, The Director of SSS said “there is proof that Sowore was
contacting and working with some persons outside Nigeria to cause disaffection,
chaos and anarchy in the country…”
in other words, any other persons seen as Nigerian enemy in place of
sponsor or accomplice, whom Sowore may be contacting and working with may be
unknown and/or undisclosed to the public. This is purely under the purview of
SSS with the discretionary power to disclose details or not for security
reasons. The question is, is Falana, SAN or any of us privy to such facts which
the DSS may have information on?
By the last two paragraphs above, can you say or infer that what Falana,
SAN said about himself, late Gani Fawehimi and others on the protest of
operation ‘IBB must go’ (only) and what Omoyele Sowore did by conducts and utterances
prior his arrest and conclude that same are similar or the same? The answer is
capital NO!
If you listen to Femi Falana, SAN narration and read section 37(1) & (2) and 41 of the Criminal Code Act and the provisions of Terrorism (Prohibition) Act,
I am sure by the time you are done reading, the learned Silk stand would not
hold water. to you His compared narration is not in any way the same or cloned with an iota of similarity.
For avoidance of doubt, I provide the provisions of the section
37(1), (2) and Section 41 of the Criminal Code Act as follows:
37.
Treason
(1) Any
person who levies war against the State, in order to intimidate or overawe the
President or the Governor of a State, is guilty of treason, and is liable to
the punishment of death.
(2) Any person conspiring with any person, either within or without Nigeria, to levy war against the State with intent to cause that levying of war as would be treason if committed by a citizen of Nigeria, is guilty of treason and is liable to punishment by death
(2) Any person conspiring with any person, either within or without Nigeria, to levy war against the State with intent to cause that levying of war as would be treason if committed by a citizen of Nigeria, is guilty of treason and is liable to punishment by death
41.
Treasonable felonies
Any person who forms an intention
to effect any of the following purposes, that is to say-
(a) to remove during his term of office otherwise
than by constitutional means the President as Head of State of the Federation
and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces thereof; or
(b) to likewise remove during his
term of office the Governor of a State; or
(c) to levy
war against Nigeria in order by force or constraint to compel the President to
change his measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon,
or in order to intimidate or overawe any House of the National Assembly or any
other legislature or legislative authority; or
(d) to
instigate any foreigner to make any armed invasion of Nigeria or any of the territories
thereof, and manifests such intention by an overt act, is guilty of a felony
and is liable to imprisonment for life.
It is worthy of note that the conducts of Omoyele Sowore on all fore,
particularly by his manifest utterances is meant to levy war on Federal Government of
Nigeria and overthrow same not using constitutional means, hence amounts to an act of treason punishable by death. Or at least, his manifested intention to change the system of government via unlawful means, makes him liable to
life imprisonment.
You would recall that nobody came for Nnamdi Kanu until he started
to say 'he is consulting with foreign forces to make bombs and that he would
burn down Nigeria, because Nigeria is a zoo...' Nnamdi Kanu never even used the
word ‘revolution’, yet liable for treasonable charge.
In the circumstance, no country in the world would fold its harms and wait for any individual or group to manifest his threat against the
interest of the larger populace of the citizenry.
As a Nigerian citizen, If you want to protest, lawful protest is
constitutionally guaranteed, the qualification is that it must be peaceful. That
is why Section 40 of the Constitution
sub-headed same ‘Right to Peaceful Protest
and Lawful Assembly’. In other words, if you aim or manifest any intention to topple a
democratically elected government, its treason and the punishment would be
determined by the extent of your conduct, utterances and manifestation of your
intention(s). Kindly be guided that under the law, no right is absolute. all rights are qualified with strong worded derogations balancing other individual and societal rights.
Semantically, ‘REVOLUTION’ has two or more meanings; one is violent
in nature, the other is systematical. Whichever one Sowore meant would be
interpreted by his conduct and utterances at the court of law.
You don't have to use the word revolution to be charged for treason
and you can use same word revolution and you are not committing any offence; at
least Nnamdi Kanu never used the word revolution, yet he was sighted. Your utterances
and conducts is all that would speaks and give out your intention.
Falana Self
Interest is paramount to him this time
We would believe, the opinion of Femi Falana, SAN is tainted with
self interest of the fact that Sowore is his client. The leaned Silk wordings in the video are hereunder quoted as
follows;
"…While
in custody, Sowore said he won't write any statement until he talks to his
lawyer, and they asked, who is your lawyer and he answered, Femi Falana. In all
fairness to the DSS they gave Sowore phone to call me while in custody and I
spoke with him and I told him, the Government would not be so stupid to charge
you with treason..."
As Sowore’s Lawyer, it is natural that Falana, SAN by his self interest would allure
to any instance to free his client, even if such situations does not relate. Unfortunately,
the court looks and decides all facts based on their peculiarity. And let it be
told that the national interest is paramount and mightier than any individual
interest. Be it that of Sowore or the learned Silk, Falana.
I would advise that Falana, SAN should seek political solution for his client’s
conduct rather than threatening the institution and calling Federal Government
stupid, otherwise, I don’t see Sowore surviving the tsunami of time to come.
Sovereignty belongs to the people. We voted our leaders into government to act in our best interest and protect us from threat of dangers and war. If you call them stupid because of one man, you are insulting all Nigerians who submitted their powers to them.
Sovereignty belongs to the people. We voted our leaders into government to act in our best interest and protect us from threat of dangers and war. If you call them stupid because of one man, you are insulting all Nigerians who submitted their powers to them.
Ask Somalia, Syria and Tunisia etc to know how sweet war is. May
we never witness war!
Richarmond O.
Natha-Alade is a legal
Practitioner and Principal Partner at
Sun Natha-Alade &
Partners (SNATHAP)
lordricharmond@gmail.com
www.snathap.com
You may also love this:
CLICK HOME BELOW (in blue/red colour)TO GO TO BLOG MAIN PAGEYou may also love this:
REVOLUTION: Sowore was not properly advised, He may be sentenced to death - Richarmond O. Natha-Alade
We give all for Benefits...
I am on all fours with the conclusions reached here.
ReplyDeleteAnd to add, that irrespective of titles, practice culture is gradually shifting to the media and public courts in a bid to predetermine the outcome of a matter. This is wrong practice even for development of the Law and jurisprudence. Cases are first won in the Chambers (prepared) not in the public arena and presented before an arbiter; a judge who will consider the facts, precedents, the laws, equity and justice.
Let us be professional once again.
I concur
Well written brother. We wish to bounce back. God bless the legal profession
Delete