The Sun News On-line

Mr. Oluwafemi Felix Onibalusi, a legal practitioner, is one Nigerian who is proud of the ongoing revolution in the judiciary, especially as it relates to judgements on fraudulent election cases.

In this interview with Daily Sun, Onibalusi commended the judges of the various election petition tribunals, the Appeal court and the Supreme Court for their boldness in giving justice to the aggrieved and thus restoring public trust and confidence in the judicial system.

He also commended President Umaru Yar’Adua for his promptness in effecting court rulings, noting that the independence of the Nigerian judiciary was an imperative for the growth and sustenance of democracy.

Onibalusi stated that in as much as it was easy to nullify elections on grounds of exclusion of candidates, as currently witnessed in some states, it might, however, be an heculian task proving cases of election rigging because of the solid evidences required to prove such cases.

Background
My name is Oluwafemi Felix Onibalusi. I was born in 1961 in Ogbagi Akoko in Ondo State. I read law at the University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University) and the Nigerian Law School, where I graduated with a bachelor of law 1983 and was called to the Nigerian Bar in 1984.
I worked briefly with Olawoyin & Olawoyin, a firm of legal practitioners headed by Professor Olawoyin, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN). In 1987, I became a principal partner, in Adebola, Onibalusi & Co. (Legal Practitioners & Consultants), based in Lagos.

I became a partner in this firm of barristers and solicitors when the firm was registered in September 1987. The firm has on its employ five lawyers (including the principal partner). They are dynamic and engage in the practice of commercial and general civil law, dispute resolution and arbitration. They have professional experience of between two to 23 years of active practice and offer reliable, cost effective legal counsel and consultancy to its numerous clients.

As the principal partner, my duties are: to manage the business and operations of the firm; assign duties to the lawyers in the chambers and supervise the process of carrying out such duties; vetting of all legal processes or documents prepared by the lawyers in chambers; preparation of legal documentations and deeds; act as leading counsel in litigations particularly when the issues are contentious; advisory services on alternative dispute resolution and arbitration; and companies incorporation and secretarial services.
I have handled litigation and legal works for many companies and NGOs.

My litigation experience is not limited to Lagos as I am engaged in law suits in Port Harcourt, Benin, Abeokuta, Ibadan and Ado Ekiti.
Approach to legal practice
My approach to legal practice involves meeting targets and solving knotty legal issues through review of the relevant statutes and case law.

Judiciary and democracy
My opinion about the tribunal is that they have performed well. They have lived above board and they have shown that the judiciary is the last hope of the common man in this country. When you look at the judgments delivered so far, you can say they are almost unassailable particularly when it has to do with the unlawful exclusion of some candidates by INEC.

I believe that most of the appeals that have gone to the appeal courts, will be affirmed by the appeal court particularly those ones setting aside the election of some governors. One of such examples is the one given by the Court of Appeal on the Kogi State governor, Ibrahim Idris.

When you see the reaction of Nigerians to these judgments it is that of excitements. I know it can be sustained. It gives Nigerians hope that the future is bright. You will notice that since the coming into power of President Umaru Yar’Adua, he has said if the judiciary gives a ruling he would obey as no one is above the law. You will see that the appeal court judgment, which affirmed the tribunal ruling that the governor of Kogi should vacate office was implemented.

When you have a judiciary that people believe in, democracy thrives better. I know some people avoid going to courts because of what they feel as the exorbitant cost of hiring lawyers. But the first thing is if you believe that you have a good case and you are sure of getting justice, you will always find a lawyer who believes in your case and he will be motivated.

It is not in all cases that lawyers charge exorbitant fees. That is why I say the present trend in the Nigerian judiciary is good for democracy and the economy. When democracy is sound, the economy will grow. When you have an executive that is ready to obey court orders you are bringing stability to the polity. You are also bringing law and order. These are vital ingredients for democracy to flourish. It will stop election rigging and people will think twice before doing so many things.

Building evidence in cases of rigging
Proving a case of rigging is tough. It is difficult to provide evidence of rigging because it might involve bringing in so many people to come and tender evidence and say ‘this is what we saw as rigging’ and then when you look at the time frame required to prove a case it might be an Herculean task for the aggrieved.

Although in law, it is not always ideal that when a group of people give evidence it falls in order. What I think the court should do is, maybe, to enter into the arena and look at things by sampling the evidences of so many people. Like if you are calling evidence from one local government, you can have credible evidence from two to three persons to say that yes, this election was rigged and they could prove that maybe the returning officers were not given the relevant forms to fill or sign and return.

If they can prove that those forms were not properly signed by the agents that should sign them and if that could be corroborated by the evidence of some other persons who were actually at the pooling stations, maybe the agents of those parties, I believe that the tribunal would have enough evidence to arrive at their judgments, particularly when such parties can show that these are evidences exists and are different from what the INEC officials presented.

Of course, there is the need for people to start showing evidence of video recordings in such cases too. Recordings of malpractices in polling stations and in communities and prove that this is indeed what happened during the elections is good. If you can show such evidences it will go a long way in assisting the tribunals.

In Ondo State, where I come from, I am informed and from the evidences we have received so far, we are aware that there were malpractices in the state. A lot of people can attest to the fact that the elections were massively rigged and video recordings have been presented on how some people assisted in effecting the malpractices and the aggrieved are building their petitions on these video coverage.

If they concentrate on the forms that were returned, were these forms signed by the parties that are supposed to sign them? If not, do you have other forms that were purportedly signed by some people who are not suppose to sign them? All these are things that the tribunal should look out for and use.

If I were part of the tribunal, I will strongly rely on the evidence of the video coverage in addition to those of individuals because like I said earlier, when it comes to proving rigging, it is always an herculian task.

Immunity for public officials
My view is that we cannot give everybody the opportunity to sue public officials. I believe that immunity is a clause that should be looked into and separate criminal cases from civil cases for public officials enjoying immunity.

For example, the immunity clause was inserted to protect the governors and allow them to work so we don’t have cases from just anyone. What I feel is that in order to balance that with the tendency of our governors to steal our money, we should have a system where we can say, there should be no immunity, especially in cases like criminal matters as corruption and violence.