hardbody:


These steps that appear boring now are the same blocks upon which the judges will build their defence and then you will all come here, speaking from a point of ignorance to castigate the trial judges as being inept and the ones creating stumbling blocks and throwing spanners on the path of justice.

Have you really wondered why no convictions have been recorded by the EFCC? It is because they approach these things in a knee jerk manner and then get stuck in the middle. Can't we try and get it right for once?

Pierocash:
Rubbish post!they wrote several letters to NJC whc they refuse to honour.
On d issue of disciplinary measures.is this Illegal luminary telling us that Judges can't be arrested because they are Judges.Is as gud as saying Medical Doctors can't be arrested because NMA are the ones to discipline erring doctors.Military personels are been arrested by police and DSS and arraigned before a magistrate nt to talk of a bloody corrupt civilian.
NJC can only discipline on matters that are plainly on ethics of d profession and Dss can arrest and interogate a judge on matters partaining to crime.

Firefire:



See reasoning?

989900:


People largely speak from the angle that suits their interests. #factoflife

DSS already indicated this borders on national security -- Baba Afe is entitled to his opinion though.

Pierocash:
Rubbish post!they wrote several letters to NJC whc they refuse to honour.
On d issue of disciplinary measures.is this Illegal luminary telling us that Judges can't be arrested because they are Judges.Is as gud as saying Medical Doctors can't be arrested because NMA are the ones to discipline erring doctors.Military personels are been arrested by police and DSS and arraigned before a magistrate nt to talk of a bloody corrupt civilian.
NJC can only discipline on matters that are plainly on ethics of d profession and Dss can arrest and interogate a judge on matters partaining to crime.

jeffizy:
The justification or otherwise of this particular case is becoming boring.
Let's move from horse trading to trials. If found guilty, convict them and we move to the next one.

JumiR:
Legal luminary Chief Afe Babalola (SAN) has said it was wrong for the Department of State Services(DSS) to take over Police duties, while decrying the method the security agency used in arresting judges over alleged corruption. Speaking during the foundation-laying ceremony of the new Ekiti State High Court at the Judiciary Headquarters, Fajuyi, Ado Ekiti, the state capital, Babalola said: “I am very sad about the attack on judges when they are not common criminals, they have not run outside the country. The following day, you released them on bail, why did you harass their families?

“It is a trite law that process of the court can’t be served after 7pm. Even if the DSS had the arrest warrant, they should not have gone on midnight raid of the houses of the judges. “The NJC has the power to promote, appoint and discipline judges, this was done to ensure independence of that arm. So, I expect them to have approached the NJC. How can you a[b]rrest a sitting Supreme Court judges and took him to magistrate court for trial?[/b] That could only be done after they have been removed. If these people have facts that they are corrupt, they should approach the Judicial Council. How can you arrest a sitting judge and hand him over to a magistrate to try him? Anywhere in the world, you don’t try a sitting judge; you first remove him from office before taking him to court. If you catch a masquerade, you first take the regalia off him.”

http://dawntodusknews.com/afe-babalola-speaks-arrest-judges/

Jirate:


But why is it difficult for you to understand what the SAN is saying, Follow Due Process. Simple, Any other way will meet a dead End.
To use your Example, if a Police man shoot a Judge dead, his colleagues will arrest him, Dismiss Him from the service First, before taking him to Court for Trails.

pedel:
So if a Supreme Court judge commits felony he can't be charged to court?

Let's say a Supreme Court judge shot his gate man dead in the middle of the night and the neighbours call the police, does it mean the judge can't be arrested and charge for murder?

This country is definitely screwd.

jeffizy:
The justification or otherwise of this particular case is becoming boring.
Let's move from horse trading to trials. If found guilty, convict them and we move to the next one.

Firefire:

Have you heard the story from the angle of NJC?
Nigerians and one-sided judgement.

pedel:
So if a Supreme Court judge commits felony he can't be charged to court?

Let's say a Supreme Court judge shot his gate man dead in the middle of the night and the neighbours call the police, does it mean the judge can't be arrested and charge for murder?

This country is definitely screwd.

Firefire:
Sometimes we need to be objective when speaking from the angle that suits our interest.

Let not forget that power can be abused, including the aspect of precedent and posterity.

Thank you.

anonimi:



Enabling Act of 1933

The Enabling Act (German: Ermächtigungsgesetz) was a 1933 Weimar Constitution amendment that gave the German Cabinet – in effect, Chancellor Adolf Hitler – the power to enact laws without the involvement of the Reichstag. It passed in both the Reichstag and Reichsrat on 24 March 1933, and was signed by President Paul von Hindenburg later that day. The act stated that it was to last four years unless renewed by the Reichstag, which occurred twice. The Enabling Act gave Hitler plenary powers. It followed on the heels of the Reichstag Fire Decree, which abolished most civil liberties and transferred state powers to the Reich government. The combined effect of the two laws was to transform Hitler's government into a de facto legal dictatorship.

The formal name of the Enabling Act was Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich ("Law to Remedy the Distress of People and Reich". It was enacted by the Reichstag (meeting at the Kroll Opera House), where non-Nazi members were surrounded and threatened by members of SA and SS. The Communists had already been repressed and were not able to vote, and some Social Democrats were kept away as well. In the end, nearly all of those present voted for the act, except for the Social Democrats, who voted against it.

More from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

Jirate:


But why is it difficult for you to understand what the SAN is saying, Follow Due Process. Simple, Any other way will meet a dead End.
To use your Example, if a Police man shoot a Judge dead, his colleagues will arrest him, Dismiss Him from the service First, before taking him to Court for Trails.

pedel:
So if a Supreme Court judge commits felony he can't be charged to court?

Let's say a Supreme Court judge shot his gate man dead in the middle of the night and the neighbours call the police, does it mean the judge can't be arrested and charge for murder?

This country is definitely screwd.

pedel:
So if a Supreme Court judge commits felony he can't be charged to court?

Let's say a Supreme Court judge shot his gate man dead in the middle of the night and the neighbours call the police, does it mean the judge can't be arrested and charge for murder?

This country is definitely screwd.

sincerlyyo:


what happens to innocent until found guilty? I think it's wrong to dismiss before trial. You have already found him guilty by that dismissal.

sucess001:

yes i agree its screwed cos of comments like yours.
this guy has made a valid point and u cant open ur head enuf to process it...
and why is there no case against the judges?
so all the arrest was just to harrass them...no evidence to make a case against them...
i wish the FG luck in getting any case won before other judges

989900:
He must have bribed a judge, maybe. This is a man I know personally, and have so much respect for.

neocortex:


It is not a matter of what you feel, it is the "due process" that matters.
A sitting judge or police should be suspended/dismissed before trial, if the case
favours the accused then he/she can be reinstated.

Innocent until proven guilty applies to how the court views the suspect not the
process leading to the arraignment which depends on a lot of factors.

pedel:



I hate injustice and corruption.

jumobi1:
Why can't a sitting Judge be arrested if there's probable cause? I'll agree with referring the matter to the NJC if the infraction was within the scope of the Justices' duties but taking bribe isn't. Replace the Justices with an Acting Justice and try them. The judiciary arm can't always police themselves. What recourse exists if the whole judiciary is corrupt? I'm with the DSS on this one.

TheRealestGuy:
[s]A thoroughly learned fellow speaks and instead of you to learn you still look for a way to cast aspersions at him? To drag him down to your mud slinging?

Gosh! Can zombies ever learn?!!![/s]

hardbody:


These steps that appear boring now are the same blocks upon which the judges will build their defence and then you will all come here, speaking from a point of ignorance to castigate the trial judges as being inept and the ones creating stumbling blocks and throwing spanners on the path of justice.

Have you really wondered why no convictions have been recorded by the EFCC? It is because they approach these things in a knee jerk manner and then get stuck in the middle. Can't we try and get it right for once?