Reyginus:
Lolol. A court order for what? After arresting you the police get an arrest warrant. After sending you in Jail the system get a judgement. The section I just read quoted by Falana clearly indicates that the court order precede the Freezing. But you can still show me it says otherwise. Go ahead.

Reyginus:
Lol. So if a bank sponsored your election you lose your immunity? Wow. Tell me, was his account frozen after he said Zenith bank funded his election or before it?

Bodmas94:
Bros, please next time when you are reading an article, especially one of this magnitude, do not skim through. It is only ridiculous and risible that you have failed to comprehend such a plain article as this. For your clarification, Mr Falana in this article that, "the senior lawyers who have questioned the freezing of Mr Fayose's account on the ground that the EFCC did not obtain a court order have not read section 28 of the EFCC Act which provides that 'where a person is arrested for an offence under this Act, the Commission shall IMMEDIATELY trace and attach all assets and properties of the person acquired as a result of such economic or financial crime AND SHALL THEREAFTER CAUSE TO BE OBTAINED AN INTERIM ATTACHMENT ORDER FROM THE COURT'". Are we clear now?

richidinho:
I appreciate the anti-corruption war, but I wish our media could also carry headlines of economic progress instead of incessant arrests by DSS/EFCC. We are so fixated on the anticorruption war that we are not noticing the steep decline in our economy. In one day, Aliko Dangote lost $3.7 billion according to Bloomberg. The only business booming in Nigeria today is the business of arresting and detaining. I would not mind if we are arresting economic decline! President Obasanjo fought corruption, but he also grew the economy. And he did this with oil at $15 per barrel (today it is $48). Low oil price is no excuse.

menxer:


You are begging the question.

What is the premise for EFCC freezing the account in the first place?

Which one came first, the alleged crime or Fayose's admittance of Zenith bank funding his campaign?

Sequential logical reasoning can be an issue especially when one has to do it in reverse order.

Ayanko:
You've forgotten that the statement can not disappear.

Reyginus:
Just a little correction, bro. The EFCC froze the Account of Adamawa State Government and not Nyako's. The two are entirely different. Nyako's account was not touched. It's good we don't misinform people.

You see, in this fight against corruption, if our method fall short of due process it becomes corrupting. The EFCC should have gotten a court order permitting the act. Any contrary act, like we have now, is both corrupt and corrupting.

A governor can be investigated, that's true. Where Falana fails is to tell us if it's right to freeze the account of a sitting governor without recourse of a court of law. We shouldn't corrupt the system in the name of fighting corruption. Let's follow due process.

Reyginus:
Lolol. A court order for what? After arresting you the police get an arrest warrant. After sending you in Jail the system get a judgement. The section I just read quoted by Falana clearly indicates that the court order precede the Freezing. But you can still show me it says otherwise. Go ahead.

joedera:


SO ARE YOU SAYING YOU DID NOT READ THIS PART OF THE ARTICLE?

"since there is no immunity for impunity as far as electoral malfeasance is concerned, the investigation by the EFCC is in order. The senior lawyers who have questioned the freezing of Mr. Fayose’s account on the ground that the EFCC did not obtain a court order have not read section 28 of the EFCC Act which provides that “where a person is arrested for an offence under this Act, the Commission shall immediately trace and attach all the assets and properties of the person acquired as a result of such economic or financial crime and shall thereafter cause to be obtained an interim attachment order from the Court”. The law permits the EFCC to freeze an account or attach a property of a criminal suspect and proceed thereafter to obtain an ex parte order from the appropriate court."

ikwubaba:


I think you are deliberately refusing to get the explanation and refusing to follow the logic. So first for EFCC to freeze an account, it first investigate it by calling for information of such account from the bank. The owner of the account is alerted immediately. And zap!!! he withdraws everything. If there was need to trap the money which may be a proceed of crime, that is defeated. Similar to arresting you. The police does that and get court to remand you. Police does not see a criminal and first approach the court before arresting abi? They approach the court to keep you in remand after arresting you. Na same thing...trap the cash first and get court order to continue to keep it.

If you like continue to stubbornly refuse to understand.

Reyginus:
Lol. First I have to say, garnishing our words with molecules of insult doesn't add value or substance to them or us. This spice spoils the entire meal.

What premise are you talking about? That, in your words 'he has no immunity once he committed the offense'? Offense? Lol. How can something that is yet to proved to be an offense an offense?

In case you forgot your argument let me help you. Here is it:

'Fayose said "Zenith bank funded his campaign," which I will assume goes to form the bulk of funds frozen; meaning he had no immunity when
he committed the offence and can't be immune
from its consequences'

How am I the one now begging the question? Why should even answer my own question of which came first when you already posited:

'no immunity when he committed the offence and can't be immune from its consequences'. A statement he made after the frozen and a statement EFCC didn't even use as blueprint?

So tell me now, how can somebody be punished for committing an offense when the punishment is to show that he committed an offense? How do you think around this and your words now?

ikwubaba:


Immunity or no immunity for a case is not judgment. What you are accused of is what determines whether you can invoke immunity or not. In this case, Fayose is being accused of electoral crime i.e. the money in question was used to perpetrate a crime for electoral purpose. Since the crime bothers on whether he is legally entitled to being a governor or not, he cannot invoke immunity on that account. It helps to stem people doing everything to assume a position and claim immunity.

Just for emphasis, if a governor or president is being accused for perpetrating a crime for an election for which he is currently a beneficiary, the case can be entertained since it may invalidate his current position.

As for account freezing, the argument is that it is part of investigation for which immunity does not apply. Reason is because, it will defeat the very purpose of the investigation itself.

For our information, the law is an ass. Don't ever depend on it to protect for your evil doings and impunity. There are a lot of openings to catch you. The framers of any constitution cannot envisage everything. there are usually more holes than you can imagine.

Reyginus:
The law is an Ass? Wow! Should we ditch the law then?

ikwubaba:


It means the law, as created by legislators or as administered by the justice system, cannot be relied upon to be sensible or fair on it's own.

It depends on what you want to make of it. Reason why landmark supreme court judgments and interpretations are used to augment.

Until today, I did not know that an EFCC art provides for certain level of investigation and actions on executives despite immunity. I'm sure even Fayose's legal advisers were oblivious of this too.

But we should celebrate that the law provides for this. Else we produce a monster one day.

eph12:
I didn't have to read everything to pick out some key points:
1. A governor can be investigated.
2. For him/her to be prosecuted his/her election has to be annulled(by the relevant authorities). Only after this can the prosecution hold.
Falana here is basing his argument on the possibility of the annulment of that election that brought Fayose to power as a result of the overwhelming evidences of electoral malpractice.

TheGoodJoe:


Your point is wrong. If a Sitting Governor like Wike can be dragged to the Tribunal and court due to determining if he legitimately got Won the election.

Fayose can be dragged to court hence this money was used to manipulate elections.

Reyginus:
I'd also have to advice you. This is very important. In articles where the newspaper or media outlet reports news, direct speeches, that is, statements expressed by a person is written in quotes and statements carrying the insinuations and inference drawn by the outfit is not in quotes.

The defense you presented above is not Falana's words but the inference drawn by the media outfit carrying the news. We've got brains for a purpose not exclusive to aesthetic value. You see, Bodmas, stating the above as statements made by Falana is not just only unintelligent but also mischievous. I take it back because I know you know this thing. But why? Okay. Show me Falana's Exact quote of condemnation and not his quotation of the law.

Reyginus:
I'd also have to advice you. This is very important. In articles where the newspaper or media outlet reports news, direct speeches, that is, statements expressed by a person is written in quotes and statements carrying the insinuations and inference drawn by the outfit is not in quotes.

The defense you presented above is not Falana's words but the inference drawn by the media outfit carrying the news. We've got brains for a purpose not exclusive to aesthetic value. You see, Bodmas, stating the above as statements made by Falana is not just only unintelligent but also mischievous. I take it back because I know you know this thing. But why? Okay. Show me Falana's Exact quote of condemnation and not his quotation of the law.

joedera:


SO ARE YOU SAYING YOU DID NOT READ THIS PART OF THE ARTICLE?

"since there is no immunity for impunity as far as electoral malfeasance is concerned, the investigation by the EFCC is in order. The senior lawyers who have questioned the freezing of Mr. Fayose’s account on the ground that the EFCC did not obtain a court order have not read section 28 of the EFCC Act which provides that “where a person is arrested for an offence under this Act, the Commission shall immediately trace and attach all the assets and properties of the person acquired as a result of such economic or financial crime and shall thereafter cause to be obtained an interim attachment order from the Court”. The law permits the EFCC to freeze an account or attach a property of a criminal suspect and proceed thereafter to obtain an ex parte order from the appropriate court."

Reyginus:
Lol. First I have to say, garnishing our words with molecules of insult doesn't add value or substance to them or us. This spice spoils the entire meal.

What premise are you talking about? That, in your words 'he has no immunity once he committed the offense'? Offense? Lol. How can something that is yet to proved to be an offense an offense?

In case you forgot your argument let me help you. Here is it:

'Fayose said "Zenith bank funded his campaign," which I will assume goes to form the bulk of funds frozen; meaning he had no immunity when
he committed the offence and can't be immune
from its consequences'

How am I the one now begging the question? Why should even answer my own question of which came first when you already posited:

'no immunity when he committed the offence and can't be immune from its consequences'. A statement he made after the frozen and a statement EFCC didn't even use as blueprint?

So tell me now, how can somebody be punished for committing an offense when the punishment is to show that he committed an offense? How do you think around this and your words now?

Bodmas94:
Thanks for the unsavoury comments about my intelligent. It is no surprise. They only make us a better 'bubu'. But as regards the other aspect of your comment, you seem or appear, either unwittingly or mischievously, to deny the fact that the article was written in its entirety by Falana. From the context of the article, it is painfully clear that that article was Falana's. It is an address to the Nigerian public which was circulated by the media. You seem also not to be aware that Femi Falana is a regular columnist on several media outlets, Sahar reporters being one. So how could have they added or removed some parts of the article. And as regards the 'condemnation' theory of yours. I don't really get that part. But for the record, all the legal phenomenon did was just to make Nigerians (I mean the laymen amongst us) know the true position and to bring people who might have been misled by people who are preoccupied with blatantly distorting facts and giving traction and credibilty to outright and brazen falsehood. BE WISE! LOVE A LAWYER! God bless!

menxer:


Hhhhhhmmmm
The "insult" was inadvertent.

I guess if no "offense" was committed EFCC wouldn't be investigating Fayose, prompting an ex parte order which culminated in the frozen account which is evidence of the alleged offense committed, till proven otherwise in the course of the investigations.

Thanks for the mental exercise.

Reyginus:
Just a little correction, bro. The EFCC froze the Account of Adamawa State Government and not Nyako's. The two are entirely different. Nyako's account was not touched. It's good we don't misinform people.

You see, in this fight against corruption, if our method fall short of due process it becomes corrupting. The EFCC should have gotten a court order permitting the act. Any contrary act, like we have now, is both corrupt and corrupting.

A governor can be investigated, that's true. Where Falana fails is to tell us if it's right to freeze the account of a sitting governor without recourse of a court of law. We shouldn't corrupt the system in the name of fighting corruption. Let's follow due process.

udoh2k:


Falana quoted that: “That a person protected under section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, going by its provisions, can be investigated by the POLICE for an alleged crime or offence".

I am wondering if efcc and police are same thing in the law.

We know falana is speaking from the position of d FG as prosecuting counsel not as a defence council. that is law for u.

eph12:

No you're wrong. Unless it's election related you can't prosecute.