Ladoja: Justice on a slow lane

Oyo A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things could destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgement of its value; that people who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of life come to believe that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching; that people come to believe the law – in the larger sense – cannot fulfill its primary function to protect them and their families in their homes, at their work and on the public streets. —Warren E. Burger, a former Chief Justice of the USA, in an address to the American Bar Association in 1970.

SENATOR Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja is a former governor of Oyo State. He now holds the tittle of Osi Olubadan of Ibadanland. That makes him a high ranking member of the Olubadan-in-Council. He was elected governor in 2003, but forced to take an unpleasant break for 11 months. He had the unique opportunity of coming back and the rare privilege of completing his tenure on May 29, 2007. The case against him had a grand kick-off in November 2008. It was highly celebrated. Trust the press, it elaborately feasted on it. It was a case like no other. A brief re-cap: Ladoja was first arraigned on a 10-count charge of money laundering with one of his aides, Waheed Akanbi, six other defendants were charged along before Justice Ramat Mohammed. All pleaded not guilty and granted bail. The case re-surfaced four years later. They were re-arraigned before the three-man panel of Justice Chima Nweze. By this time, four of the eight defendants were “lost”. They were turned prosecution witnesses. That was the first amendment and second charge.

The second amendment followed the full steps of its predecessor. It reduced the defendants to only two by removing another company from the list. Of course, they too graduated to prosecution witnesses. Then came the third amendment in 2016. It was a watershed, the prosecution wanted Ladoja’s bail quashed. But the judge thought differently. He allowed Ladoja to continue his bail as granted by Jus

tice Mohammed.

In his wisdom, there was no evidence that the accused (Ladoja) breached the bail granted him on September 5, 2008: “It is not out of place for this court to revalidate the order of A.R. Mohammed.” He adjourned the case to February 14, 15 and 16, 2017 for commencement of trial. He ruled that the court could not deny the accused bail on account of exercising their constitutional rights of appeal allegedly resulting in the delay of the case. Something fundamental took place at this juncture. To forestall further delay, all parties involved agreed to close their submissions on or before September 30, 2018. That was the last day the Justice Mohammed could sit in that court. He was moved to the Appeal Court as a judge on October 1, 2018.

ALSO READ: Osun governorship election tribunal reconstituted

It is curious to note that delay in the trial persisted despite the passing of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, by the National Assembly. ACJA came into being “to ensure that the system of administration of criminal justice in Nigeria promotes 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.” Ladoja put this at the back of his mind. He kept faith with the agreement. He made a “no-case submission” before closing his argument. He was expectant that the judge would rule on this submission on September 27, 2018. But that was not to be. Instead, the prosecution came up with a bang. They brought an amendment for the fourth time. It was a rude shock. It took the case many steps backwards. The amendment was a direct response to the “no-case submission” in a wrong way, exposing the prosecution’s inadequacies. Instead of addressing the issues raised in the submission, the complainants (prosecution) brought up new complaints never mentioned in the past 10 years. Justice Idris was therefore forced to postpone the case indefinitely. He made it known he could only continue the case if his September 29 fiat was extended. Sources said Ladoja has gone to ask for extension for Idris to conclude the case. This has been a classical case of justice delayed is justice denied. How long can you hang somebody on a case, particularly criminal case? In this our odd clime, a suspect is a subject of ridicule no matter his innocence. He is called a sort of names, he is denied some privileges.

He cannot move freely in the society. He cannot go about doing his legitimate business without fear. His family members also suffer ridicule and embarrassment. People forget he is a suspect and not a convict. That he is still perceived innocent unless otherwise pronounced by a competent court of law. All adjournments and amendments in this suit have been at the instance of the Federal Government (prosecution.) Not a single one came from the defendants. It is still shopping for evidence 10 years after. It is disheartening and saddening that three years after ACJA, the issue of delayed trials continues to haunt and hunt our judicial system. When will these funny court dramas end?

All through these amendments, the prosecution always brought in fresh and/or additional charges. Perhaps, the purpose was to give a dog a bad name in order to hang it. One may ask who are the beneficiaries of these delays? Why are the beneficiaries being denied? Who is actually delaying trial/justice in this instance? The answers are on our finger tips! And we keep those fragile fingers crossed; at lease for now.