The Storm Of Injustice In The Facebook Court: A Case Study Of The COZA Saga By Ebi Robert

There is a New Court in town. It is known as the FACEBOOK COURT. It is fast becoming a Superior Court to the Supreme Court of Nigeria under the Nigerian Legal system; it is what I call an Imaginary Court in our ugly reality.

This Court is characterized with features such as the fact that it entertains no plea, mention, pre-trial, trial, and any form of examination, typical of a criminal procedure. It has a semi-original and original jurisdiction. It also entertains appeals without any Notice of Appeal.

It’s procedure are basically jungle-based, with everyone as a Judge in his or her own case. To become a Judge in this Court, all you need is a post-birth-days experience as opposed to a post-call-years experience. That is, so far you can access the cyberspace and make use of the keypads, you are good to go.

This is the Court that dominates every social media platform. The name ”FACEBOOK COURT” is coined to cover every cyberspace where this atmosphere exist.

There is no justice in this Court. Although the controversial concept, ”Justice” has been considered relative, nothing close to it can be found in this Court, because we have on the bench Jurists who wear the gown of emotions.

I hold no breath to say that it is an arena of jungle justice. Jungle justice is not only interpreted to mean when a thief is mobbed and burnt to death. It connotes every act wherein a suspect is labelled guilty even before he or she is docked and by a stretch, when penalties are meted to a suspect without due process. It offends the olden Dicey’s Rule of Law.

Though observers may have reasons why they make such labelling, fact is that the language of the law no matter how archaic it may look, must be respected and adopted.

The recent case of the COZA Lead-Pastor, Biodun Fatoyinbo, demonstrates the functionality of this emerging Court. The Jurists in their strange robes never cared to know what the supposed ugly, beastly and guilty
male has to say. ”Rape is a sin and a crime; he must be nailed,” is the echo some protesters who flooded the modern streets of God-knows-where voiced.

I threw up some rhetorics which many mistook for side-taking, but in all sincerity, those rhetorics were aimed at raising one legal maxim which I shall state later in this piece.

Some of the bench-men who evaluated my opinion with little or no digestion of my analysis spat words which in brief could be summarized as: ”EBI, WE ARE DISAPPOINTED IN YOU”.

Well, you cannot please everyone, can you? So I had no reason to cough or make a sentence. I asked myself, brother, you really do have such number of friends on your friend list? Where have they been all this while? But you never can tell, they see almost everything you voice out or scribble, just that they have had no cause to lament and tell you their disappointment. Some wait for tales of disappointments anyway. Everyone is a hero after all, and so if it is A RAPE CASE, everyone is an activist.

For those who are feminist, this is surely a sound topic on which a combat with the male folks shall begin; for those who think Christianity is the reason why they cannot impregnate their wives, this is another way to make anti-christian updates; for those who have been victims before, it is another opportunity to tell their stories. They are all right in the own narratives.

But to say something worth the mention, it is a season of disappointments and I am also disappointed at a few.

I am disappointed not at all Jurists of this Court because not all of them know how the Regular Court of the land operates. Worse of it all is that many of them do not even know the first word in the fons et erigo of all laws of the land. So why blame them? Some do not even know what the grundnorm looks like not to talk of its many provisions.

I am instead disappointed at those lawyers who call themselves Human Rights Activists, but definitely do not know who they are.

You see, not all rights are human rights and not all human rights are fundamental. If you are conversant with the chapters of the Constitution, you will understand that one chapter is dedicated to these fundamental rights. Do not ask me which chapter it is.

The first right enshrined within the provisions of the Chapter is THE RIGHT TO LIFE. This right seems to look like the most important right because out of it, flows other rights. But as important as this right is, it is not absolute or anything close to it. You can see the Constitution for a guide.

There is one right which is absolute and cannot be traded for any reason whatsoever and that is THE RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING. This is the right that is forbidden in the FACEBOOK COURT.

No one cares what you have to say — in so far as you are perceived guilty, you are not entitled to that right. It is even worse when the evidence against you have been corroborated with other stories that attract many likes, retweets, and amazing emojis.

Well, everyone does believe somethings at some point. Even learned Attorneys do. It is on believing and forming an opinion over facts that a stance is taken. But you see, even such advocates do try as much as possible to persuade a Judge, take a bow and thank the Jurist for a well considered ruling or judgement even if it goes against his or her opinion. That is what legal sportsmanship entails. That’s an obiter anyways.

So if a Human Right Activist who is a Lawyer agrees that where the right of another ends, that of another begins, it is out of place to say: GRANT HIM OR HER FAIR HEARING?

And if the Court is not as active as you suppose, is that enough to violate the right of a criminal in the verge of finding justice?

It is not easy to be a Human Right Activist. I say this with all boldness. I have seen many of such activists who protect only the rights they like. Little do many know that even a condemned man still has his right to dignity of human person intact.

To those who are ignoramus, dump to the zigzag dance of the Law, all rights are extinguished the moment the gavel bangs on you.

Take notice that if I am to believe anyone in this rape incident, I definitely will believe Busola Dakolo, the wife of Timi Dakolo. Yes, I will believe her. If I am to choose who to defend, I will defend her against the COZA pastor. Why? Because my instincts suggest to me that she is not lying. But what some amazing fellows do not appreciate is that my opinion or that of any other busy-body is not enough to violate the right of the COZA pastor.

You see, my position is just like that of the state. The state is the prosecutor, however, that same state will assign a State Counsel to defend an arm robber if he has no legal representation in Court, especially in case of capital offenses. Do people consider to ask themselves why that? It is as simple as the primary white colour: AUDI ALTAREM PATEM.

In conclusion, I must say this, the FACEBOOK COURT has come to stay. It is a Court of jungle justice, but I am more worried that even lawyers who are Human Rights Activist are Jurists in this Imaginary but Real Court of our cyberspace.