Reporting by The Punch indicates that human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) has criticized the Nigerian judiciary for using ‘legal technicalities’ to release individuals accused of stealing billions intended for arms procurement. Falana argued that while soldiers are being sent to the frontlines with inadequate equipment, those responsible for diverting the funds are enjoying freedom and ‘obstructing justice’ through prolonged bail and stay-of-proceedings.
The senior advocate called for a dedicated ‘Anti-Corruption Court’ to fast-track cases involving national security funds. He emphasized that the current judicial system is too slow and susceptible to influence from wealthy defendants. Falana’s critique comes amid fresh reports of military casualties in the North-East, which he links directly to the ‘financial sabotage’ of the defense budget.
Supporting reports from Premium Times and Channels TV validate Falana’s stance. Premium Times noted that ‘Falana’s call for special courts is gaining traction among activists,’ while Channels TV quoted him directly: ‘Technicalities should not be a shield for those who leave our soldiers vulnerable.’
Echotitbits take: Falana is highlighting the ‘disconnect’ between the courtrooms and the trenches. The Nigerian judiciary is often criticized for being ‘pro-defendant’ in high-profile corruption cases. Watch for whether the National Judicial Council (NJC) issues a new directive on ‘priority corruption cases’ to counter this narrative.
Source: The Punch – https://punchng.com/treasury-looters-dont-deserve-bail-says-falana/ January 5, 2026
Prof Pat Utomi, Femi Falana (SAN) and Oby Ezekwesili are advocating constitutional changes to mandate automatic loss of seat for elected officials who defect from their parties, except in narrow cases. They say frequent defections betray voters and weaken democracy.
Human Rights Lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Femi Falana has condemned a section of the 30year old Company and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) recently signed into law by President Muhammadu Buhari, stipulating the power of a supervising Minister to remove the Board of Trustees of Churches without recourse to the court.
The erudite lawyer joined other prominent Nigerians who have criticised the section that sought to regulate Churches and Non Government Organizations (NGOs) in his contribution, as reported by thenigerialawyer.com, to discussions facilitated by a group known as Friends of TheNews, which held on WhatsApp messaging platform.
Echotitbits gathered from the report that Falana noted that although, the law isn’t completely new, the addition thereof is nonetheless a violation of the fundamental human rights to freedom of association enshrined in the Nigerian constitution.
File photo: Human Rights Lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN).
“I have read the law. It was badly drafted. A government that set out to facilitate the ease of doing business could not have come up with a 604-page business law (CAMA 2020).”
“But it is not a completely new law. Registered NGOs were regulated in the past in line with the practice in all democratic societies. The only addition which is objectionable is the power conferred on the commission to take over and manage NGOs on allegations of misconduct. It is illegal because it is a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of association guaranteed by section 40 of the Constitution”, Falana emphasised.
On Sunday, August 16, 2020, presiding Bishop of the Living Faith Church Worldwide, David Oyedepo vehemently rejected the section of the CAMA law pertaining to taking over administration of Churches.
File photo: Founder and Presiding Bishop of Living Faith Church Worldwide (a.k.a, Winners Chapel), David Oyedepo.
Oyedepo, during his sermon and before his hundreds of congregation questioned the rationale behind the inclusion of religious centres and charity organisations into the Company and Allied Matters Acts (CAMA) that states that:
“The commission may by order, suspend the trustees of an association or a religious body and appoint an interim manager or managers to coordinate its affairs where it reasonably believes that there has been any misconduct or mismanagement, or where the affairs of the association are being run fraudulently or where it is necessary or desirable for the purpose of public interest.”
The very vocal cleric stated that the decision, which others described as an attempt to gag the church, was “borne out of jealousy of the church’s growth”.
Oyedepo went on to argue that: “The church works on the pattern delivered by God not the pattern of man. The government has no power to appoint people over churches. This is a secular nation. The church is the greatest asset of God in this country. Please be warned. Judgment is coming. The Lord says I have been still but now I will arise.
“Anybody that is in this deal is taking poison. This will never work. I am waiting for a day when anybody will appoint a trustee over this Church… You can’t gag anybody. We own this country together. It is only in Africa that people who are over 80 years still run around to become president. I know that it is the prosperity of the church that is making them jealous. But I am going to live to see an army of many winners soar greater. In this church shall emerge one of the largest concentrations of giants on earth”, Oyedepo said.
Also interesting in the submissions of people who participated in the discussions facilitated by Friends of TheNews group.
According to thenigerialaw.com, a veteran journalist and former Associate Editor at The Guardian, Lade Bonuola, who was part of the discourse “forwarded a contribution from another platform to enrich the thread”.
The thread reported to have been forwarded by Lade Bonuola below:
“If you guys know the amount of things hidden in that 604 pages of the new Companies Act, you’ll start weeping. The Corporate Affairs Commisson has just been made a monster. You see that NIPOST regulation fixing N20m as licensing fee? That is small stuff compared to what CAC will do.
The sector that will be worst hit are the churches, mosques, charity organisations, schools, NGOs etc. The CAC can now arbitrarily remove and replace the “owners” or leaders of these organisations. Also, CAC can convert/take over the monies in their bank accounts.
Every sector will be hit. In the old Act, small fees were clearly prescribed for certain things.E.g, the Act may say if you fail to do XYZ, you’ll pay N50 for each day of default.The new Act has removed all those meagre fees & gives CAC power to make regulations prescribing fees.
Online vendors who operate under a business name other than their government names, are now risking conviction in court if they don’t register their business names with CAC.
The most damning revelation from my review so far is that, a private organisation has been written into the new Companies Act and has been emboldened through the back door to:
1. generate revenue; and
2. regulate an aspect of law practice, accountancy etc.
The private org is Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners of Nigeria (BRIPAN). S. 705(C) of the new CAMA requires that to qualify as insolvency practitioner,you must be a lawyer/accountant AND a member of BRIPAN. On BRIPAN website, membership fee ranges from N90k – N250k.
BRIPAN is not a chartered institute (like ICAN, ICSAN, CIPM) or a statutory body. It is a private association formed by private citizens. Remember how Lagosians fought against Alpha Beta being written into the Lagos Land Use Charge Law (albeit unsuccessfuly)?
In similar fashion, some people have successfully slipped in BRIPAN (a private organisation) into an Act of the National Assembly and the President has signed it into law. How did our law makers not see this while deliberations on the bill were ongoing?
Another curious provision in the new CAMA is S. 851 which empowers CAC to now act as a ‘court’ or tribunal of some sort. So if CAC imposes fees on your small business, before you can go to court to challenge those fees, you must first appear before CAC panel & make your case.
The panel is made up of guess who? Registrar General of CAC, 5 officers of CAC & someone from the Ministry of Trade & Investment, which is the Ministry overseeing the CAC. In effect, the CAC is now a Prosecutor & Judge in its own case. Goodluck if you have a case against CAC.
One of the narratives touted by the govt regarding this new law is that, it’ll aid ease of doing business. While I agree that on face value,some sections of the law will aid this,I am simply drawing our attention to other sections which will become a clog & make things difficult.
Another narrative is that, with this new law, you wont need a lawyer to either incorporate a business or carry out many post incorporation activities as you can do them yourself. Truth is, many lawyers will grapple with this new law. If this is so, what are your chances as a layman?”, the thread, according to thenigerialawyer.com read.
The attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami has been demanded to produce in court for trial, soldiers indicted for the brutal murder of three policemen over suspected kidnap kingpin Bala Hamisu.
The demand was made in a personal statement by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and human rights lawyer, Femi Falana on Sunday.
The human right czar noted that the military’s court-martial lacks the competence to try the soldiers for terrorism offences committed against police personnel or other members of the public.
He argued that the terrorism offence allegedly carried out by the soldiers is not provided for in the Armed Forces Act.
Falana explained that: “With respect, the offence of terrorism allegedly committed by the indicted soldiers are not provided for in the Armed Forces Act.
“To that extent, a general court-martial or special court-martial lacks the jurisdictional competence to try the offence of terrorism committed against police personnel and other members of the public by soldiers who are subject to service law.
“For the avoidance of doubt, Section 32 of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2011 as amended by the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013 provides that “The Federal High Court located in any part of Nigeria, regardless of the location where the offence is committed, shall have jurisdiction to (a) try offences under this Act or any other related enactment; (b) hear and determine proceedings arising under this Act,” he stated.
SEE FULL STATEMENT HERE
A COURT-MARTIAL LACKS THE COMPETENCE TO TRY OFFENCES OF TERRORISM
The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami SAN was reported to have said that the soldiers indicted in the brutal murder of 3 policemen who arrested a suspected kidnap kingpin, Bala Hamisu (alias Wadume) could be tried by a court-martial. According to the Minister, “They are military personnel. First, they are to go through the in-house processes. There are two options – either to charge them before the court-martial which is a special court established by law for the trial of soldiers or in the alternative for the military after consummation of the in-house processes should consider handing them over for trial.”
With respect, the offence of terrorism allegedly committed by the indicted soldiers are not provided for in the Armed Forces Act. To that extent, a general court-martial or special court-martial lacks the jurisdictional competence to try the offence of terrorism committed against police personnel and other members of the public by soldiers who are subject to service law. For the avoidance of doubt, Section 32 of the Terrorism Prevention Act 2011 as amended by the Terrorism Prevention Amendment Act 2013 provides that “The Federal High Court located in any part of Nigeria, regardless of the location where the offence is committed, shall have jurisdiction to (a) try offences under this Act or any other related enactment; (b) hear and determine proceedings arising under this Act”.
Hence, the indicted soldiers were properly charged with terrorism along with other suspects in the only competent court in the land. However, since the military authorities did not release the suspects to the Police for the purpose of arraigning them in court the learned trial judge, the Honourable Justice Binta Nyako rightly ordered the Chief of Army Staff to produce them to answer to the heinous charge of terrorism and allied offences. Even though the Attorney- General withdrew the charges against the indicted soldiers the order that they be produced in court for arraignment has not been vacated or quashed either by the trial court or the Court of Appeal. Therefore, the Attorney-General is duty-bound by to ensure full and unconditional compliance with the valid and subsisting order of the federal high court in accordance with section 287 (3) of the Constitution.
Femi Falana SAN
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
