MUSIC HOUSE DEMOLITION: THE HEIGHT OF INSENSITIVITY

The bar should begin to put prospective members into a serious screening process. Common sense, although not common, should be made common in the legal realm. We must commit every resources at our disposal into achieving this objective, even if it requires the introduction of courses such as "the use of common sense" or even "the use of discretion" into the curriculum... We must, as a matter of priority, begin to reemphasize the need for the study of philosophy and logic as a foundation study in our schools.


As if the unforgivable demolition of that music house (in spite of a court "process" ) was not enough, I read with disgust another statement credited to the counsel to Oyo State Government pointing to the pictures of the demolition as (probable) photoshop documents. The statement according to him: "I have not seen any demolition exercise carried out anywhere, and with this, photos on display could be photoshop, we have to be empirical about whether there is demolition or not.”- Vanguard newspaper (20th August, 2018)
He also said that the affected parties weren't served with a court injunction.

Starting with the issue of photoshop, that Counsel (with due respect to him) may either be ignorant or playing on our collective intelligence. How do you say that you cannot authoritatively confirm a demolition that was (as at yesterday) the subject of even the most credible of our newspapers?

How do you say that you are a counsel, and you failed in your duties to confirm an issue which has a direct bearing on the case you're defending?

That said, the second issue is a matter of discretion and logic. Even learned individuals or legal luminaries would agree that not all processes or matters are viewed holistically without regard to discretion or logic. Some court processes or procedures requires just logic. It doesn't have to be spelt out!

It is only logical to say that parties involved in a case in the Court should stay or obey the status quo, whether or not it is spelt out, especially as it pertains to a Court injunction or restraining order, even in the absence of an 'express' order from the court. A party must not be quick to 'preempt' the court of law. That's disrespect, that is contempt!

The implication is that the status of the issue in contention has to be duly maintained. Maybe a status quo ante bellum, so as to give credence to the issue.

Fundamental questions thus arise;
Why was the case in Court in the first place?
The answer is simple, that the Court should restrain the State Government from taking the said action.
And now that the State Government has taken the action, what is left for the Court to determine?
Then, where is the place of logic?
I mean, this is abuse of State Powers which in itself is punishable under the law.

Lastly, the demolition of that music house is another draconian action of this government aimed at suppresing the freedom of the press.

It would be recalled that it took the intervention of Amnesty International to secure the release of the editor-in-chief of the weekly source magazine, after spending two years in incarceration

This was followed by the detention of a premium times reporter.

I will leave the rest to the hands of legal professionals but those who are concerned should know for sure that the world is watching!

Ifeoluwa Orimoloye
loveorims@yahoo.com