Harvard Law School trained Lawyer and former Nigerian Government Attorney in the United States of America, Emeka Ugwuonye wrote: DUMB, DUMB, DUMB: NO, NO, NO! ABUSIVE USE OF WARRANT. I questioned the professionalismof the SSS (State Security Service) leadership yesterday. Today, I believe the conduct of the SSS has become a matter of lack of professionalism. The following statement from its spokesperson, stating its understanding of the meaning and purpose of warrant of arrest implicates the SSS. (The SSS is Nigerias security services charged with domestic intelligence). According to the report, She explained that the SSS got an arrest warrant demanded by Mr. El-Rufai, but could not find him to personally serve him the document. “We extended a friendly invitation to him [El Rufai],” the SSS spokesperson said. “He was invited honourably to come and make some explanations about the comments attributed to him. “He said he wanted an arrest warrant. We have now obtained that from a competent court and we are wondering why he is running. “We want to serve it on him. Or is there any Nigerian that is above the law? “The president has said his ambition is not worth any Nigerian’s blood. So why will anyone else be making provocative statements?” The above statement is their basis for warrant of arrest? It is a mockery of the judicial system and the judge that issued the warrant, and I hope that judge is reading the statement of the SSS spokesperson. For your information, a warrant is issues when a judicial officer is satisfied that a crime has been committed by a suspect. The application for the warrant shall contain an affidavit from the law enforcement officer. (There is a reason an affidavit is required - it is meant to commit the officer to truth and to punish him for perjury if he lies in the affidavit). That affidavit would state the crime the officer believes has been committed, the basis for the suspicion that the crime has been committed, and any evidence in support of that suspicion. The judicial officer (judge) would review this application for warrant. If he believes that the act in question constitutes a crime under the specific law, if true, then he would issue the warrant and state the necessary conditions and terms for the execution of the warrant. From the above, you can see the absurdity of the SSS thinking. IF El Rufai committed a crime, you get a warrant to arrest him for the crime. You dont get a warrant to arrest a man for refusing to honor your friendly invitation. That is not a crime. It is so unfortunate that these people could feed such absurdity to Nigerians. For goodness sake, what is the connection between what the President said and the arrest warrant for a suspect? That statement alone implicates the SSS in a political persecution of El Rufai. Why are these people so dumb, they dont even know how to conceal their motives? We are interested in knowing the offense the man is suspected of committing. That is what they are not telling us. Rather, they are telling us that he refused to honor an invitation, which is not a crime. They are interested in telling us that they could obtain a warrant as a challenge. In fact, from the statement of this lady, it is clear that the SSS lied in the affidavit with which they obtained this warrant. So they committed perjury. And if they did not lie, then the judge erred in law. He ought not to issue a warrant of arrest just because a person refused to honor an invitation. It is unfortunate.
Posted on: Sat, 25 Jan 2014 23:30:43 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015