‘A judge who gives stringent bail condition is indirectly refusing bail’

Going by the definition from the Black’s Law Dictionary, Bail is a process ‘to procure the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgment of the court’.

Bail therefore, is a privilege granted to a suspect at the discretion of a court. The court exercises its discretion to give the temporary freedom pending the conclusion of the suspect’s trial. But if the bail must be given at all, it must also be achievable, meaning that the suspect should be able to meet the bail conditions the court imposes on him or her.

Where the bail conditions become stringent, unattainable and out of the reach of the suspect, they will overreach themselves and defeat the intendment of the law.

This is the reason why many people are raising serious concerns over the present practice of the courts in which they dish out stringent and unattainable bail conditions to accused persons forcing them to remain in custody to attend to their trials.

The question stakeholders in the judicial circle are asking is whether this sudden practice is meant to serve the interest of the law or certain unknown interests.

To a Lagos-based lawyer and human rights activist, Ikechukwu Ikeji, this development is not healthy for Nigeria’s legal system and must stop. In this interview he granted to YETUNDE AYOBAMI OJO, he takes a swipe on the practice and calls on the National Judicial Council (NJC), to intervene and save the judiciary from further embarrassment from this practice.

How do you describe ‘stringent’ bail conditions being given to accused persons by courts? In your thinking, do these courts actually intend to grant the bails if they cannot be met?
A judge who gives stringent bail conditions is simply indirectly refusing the bail. This is not healthy for our legal system. There are offences that are bailable, simplicita without the judge’s discretion. There are other offences that require the judges’ discretion to grant bail even though the defendant is entitled to bail, while some other very serious offences like murder and armed robbery are not bailable, except in extremely special circumstances.

The law does not make specific provisions as to what bail conditions should be like. There are three different circumstances considered in the grant of bail. Firstly, in simple misdemeanor offences, the defendants are entitled to bail outside of the discretion of the court. In simple felony offences, the defendants are entitled to bail subject to the conditions set by the court. Thirdly, in serious offences like murder and armed robbery, the defendant is not entitled to bail except on serious circumstances.

The recent show being displayed by some of our judges who hide under the guise of granting bail to deny a defendant bail when the defendant is ordinarily entitled to bail, spells ill for our judicial system. Bail, by its definition, is simply a process designed to ensure the attendance of the defendant to court to answer charges against him or her. It is not meant to be punitive or to punish him or her.

A good example is the ongoing trial of Olisah Metuh, the PDP Publicity Secretary, who can safely be regarded as the voice of the opposition in Nigeria and whose trial must be viewed as political requiring extreme care and transparency.

What we have seen however is a clear indication that the Federal Government is out to punish and humiliate Metuh even when he is yet to be convicted. The judges who granted him bail on the two cases he is defending have shown that they are either scared of the executive arm of the government or scared to stand for justice and fairness for fear of being tagged corrupt or supporting corruption.

This position is supported by the fact that the judge in one of the cases involving allegation of illegally receiving N400 million, granted Olisah Metuh bail in the sum of the same N400 million and property in an exclusive area of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. In the second case where Olisah Metuh was accused of tearing his own statement to EFCC, a clearly simple offence, the judge surprisingly granted him bail in the sum of N300 million for himself and a surety in the sum of N300 million making a total of N600million. This is clearly an indication that the judges just did not want to grant him bail but had no option because the offence is bailable. So, to carry out their intention, they simply gave impossible conditions.

The recent show being displayed by some of our judges who hide under the guise of granting bail to deny a defendant bail when the defendant is ordinarily entitled to bail, spells ill for our judicial system. Bail, by its definition, is simply a process designed to ensure the attendance of the defendant to court to answer charges against him or her. It is not meant to be punitive or to punish him or her.

This situation has lend credence and given vent to the general belief that the Federal Government is working assiduously at strangulating the opposition. This view is without prejudice to the fight against corruption because if you are serious about fighting corruption, giving a Defendant bail does not in any way derogate from the effectiveness of the fight.

We can easily deduce that people like Olisah Metuh and Dasuki have already been convicted even before their trial commenced. It will be a surprise if the courts do not convict them, not necessarily that they committed the offences but that there is a determination to pronounce them guilty irrespective of the true situation.
Is it what the law says?

The law does not make specific provisions as to what bail conditions should be like. There are three different circumstances considered in the grant of bail. Firstly, in simple misdemeanor offences, the defendants are entitled to bail outside of the discretion of the court. In simple felony offences, the defendants are entitled to bail subject to the conditions set by the court. Thirdly, in serious offences like murder and armed robbery, the defendant is not entitled to bail except on serious circumstances.

However, given the nature of the offences, you can safely make some assumptions as to what kind of conditions should be given. The offences that people like Olisah Metuh and Dasuki are being accused of, are corruption cases whose terms of imprisonment range between three and seven years. They are entitled to bail, the terms of which are left to the discretion of the judge. However, the discretion must be exercised judicially and judiciously. In my humble view, some of the bail conditions being given presently are not judicious in any manner.

From the ongoing, do you think any one can stand as surety to an alleged suspect facing corruption case? Where it happens, don’t you think EFCC can turn its searchlight to begin investigation of the person?

This is a real possibility as Sureties who stand in huge sums may be subjected to investigations. The result is that people will become unwilling to come forward to stand as sureties for some accused persons out of fear of victimization or investigation. This is especially so in this era when there appears to be a selective fight against corruption.

What is your perspective on the state of the Nigerian courts and the conditions judges operate?
Our courts are still operating in the analogue era as judges still write in long hand and they do not have enough and quality staff to assist them in research and documentation. Judges operate in such conditions that make them somewhat subservient to the executive arm of government. The Governors and the President bear a lot of influence on our judges and this does not augur well for justice dispensation.

Again, a situation where the independence of courts is tampered with by the unguarded statements of government officials regarding the conduct of our judges does not help for the administration of justice. Our judges operate under very difficult circumstances. They are unfairly accused of corruption while those who are engaged in actual corruption operate under the cover of powerful individuals. We also see situations where wives of politicians who are judges are appointed into electoral tribunals. This is not right.

Furthermore, judges’ emoluments need to be revisited nationwide. Some states like Lagos are paying the judges good salaries but other states pay pittance to their judges. Most courtrooms lack the basic amenities like electricity and air-conditioners. Judges and lawyers sit in extremely difficult situations in the courtrooms