More time or not, U DASUKI n SARAKI r DEAD MEAT

Second guy above me has a valid question, me too want to know.

Matron Metuh you must crazy....

And some people will be shouting witch-hunting up and down, Oya defend yourself now, u dey run

Nurse metuh is a shameless man. You will surely rot in jail. Ndi ara

dalambusu:
Keep on buying time till 2019 by then PDP take over and then case closed!!!

it will take forever for pdp to take post

odikimi:

without any intention to spite u, u r more of your description on Metuh.
Section 36 of the constitution that deals with the fundamental human rights of an accused person avail him with right to extension of time to prepare well and get facilities to defend himself. If this right is denied, an accused can appeal against it by showing miscarriage of justice occasioned by it's denial. Metuh's lawyer knows this that is why the change of counsel midway to delay it, looking for excuse or ground of appeal.
Sorry if u feel insulted but I am telling u from the Bar, just allow Metuh to exercise his right as enshrined in our constitution. That is the beauty of democracy.

I cant in anyway feel insulted or spite even in the face of provocations . we are here to learn and share information.

You will agree with me that same constitution equally frown at frequents adjournments of cases especially use of delay tactics to buy time from the defendants especially when it involves criminal trails.

Metuh had come up with the first delay tactics of accusing the judge of being his class mate, now he is coming up with time for his lawyers to get acquainted with the proceedings.

so if by tomorrow, The same lawyers come up with some flimsy excuses of not going further with the case, he will plead for more time again foe the new lawyers and by so doing, the matter before the court is dragged for years.

Cant he borrow a leaf from orubebe who requested for speedy trials and equally wanted his trial to commence earnestly .

what then is the stands of section 306 and even the position of ICJA as well

if they have a good case , the idea of dragging court cases should be avoided and they should enter for the trial .
I thought metuh has been advocating that he should be charged to court and he is ready to open his defense .

We are watching

Hmmm!

experimentist:
Please why are you guys calling Metuh a 'nurse?' I don't know

just like "wailers" started, in metuhs case, an APC stalwart said during an interview on PDP after elections, he said, " PDP is sick,but no doctor to treat it, only Nurse Metuh is attending to him. That stuck, so metuh nurse tag stuck with him.

odikimi:

without any intention to spite u, u r more of your description on Metuh.
Section 36 of the constitution that deals with the fundamental human rights of an accused person avail him with right to extension of time to prepare well and get facilities to defend himself. If this right is denied, an accused can appeal against it by showing miscarriage of justice occasioned by it's denial. Metuh's lawyer knows this that is why the change of counsel midway to delay it, looking for excuse or ground of appeal.
Sorry if u feel insulted but I am telling u from the Bar, just allow Metuh to exercise his right as enshrined in our constitution. That is the beauty of democracy.

Our justice system is crap this extension of time is not given to poor people they strong arm them and put them in jail before they can say jack Robinson but here's a confirmed thief and they are giving him extension

Maghan37:
I think is counsel needs time for spiritual matters.

......

uchedydy:


just like "wailers" started, in metuhs case, an APC stalwart said during an interview on PDP after elections, he said, " PDP is sick,but no doctor to treat it, only Nurse Metuh is attending to him. That stuck, so metuh nurse tag stuck with him.

oh... I remember that interview lol let him go and nurse kuje prison inmates..

damton:
If there is anything I don't like about our judiciary, it is the slow pace of criminal justice dispensation .


Because how do you explain how people with heavy criminal allegations have been able to play around cases by employing some dodgy tactics through their defense team in securing freedom for their client who ought to be in incarceration for a very longtime.


Anyway, Justice should be allowed to prevail in the end.

You see what is happening now, if Metuh is still in detention and not granted bail, they would say PMB is dictatorial, instructing court not to grant them bail. Metuh is using all forms of delaying tactics to watery the case against him.

odikimi:

without any intention to spite u, u r more of your description on Metuh.
Section 36 of the constitution that deals with the fundamental human rights of an accused person avail him with right to extension of time to prepare well and get facilities to defend himself. If this right is denied, an accused can appeal against it by showing miscarriage of justice occasioned by it's denial. Metuh's lawyer knows this that is why the change of counsel midway to delay it, looking for excuse or ground of appeal.
Sorry if u feel insulted but I am telling u from the Bar, just allow Metuh to exercise his right as enshrined in our constitution. That is the beauty of democracy.

Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 Clause 396


(2) After the plea of the defendant to the information or a charge has been read, it shall no longer be open to that defendant to raise any objection to the validity of the charge or information.

(3) Upon arraignment the trial of the defendant shall proceed from day-to-day until the conclusion of the trial.

(4) Where day-to-day trial is impracticable after arraignment, no party shall be entitled to more than five adjournments from arraignment to final judgment: provided always that the interval between eachadjournment shall not exceed fourteen days.

(5) Where it is impracticable to conclude a criminal proceeding after the parties have exhausted their five adjournments each, the interval between one adjournment to another shall not exceed seven days inclusive of weekends

(6) In all circumstances, the court may award reasonable costs in order to discourage frivolous adjournments.

senatorbayor:


I cant in anyway feel insulted or spite even in the face of provocations . we are here to learn and share information.

You will agree with me that same constitution equally frown at frequents adjournments of cases especially use of delay tactics to buy time from the defendants especially when it involves criminal trails.

Metuh had come up with the first delay tactics of accusing the judge of being his class mate, now he is coming up with time for his lawyers to get acquainted with the proceedings.

so if by tomorrow, The same lawyers come up with some flimsy excuses of not going further with the case, he will plead for more time again foe the new lawyers and by so doing, the matter before the court is dragged for years.

Cant he borrow a leaf from orubebe who requested for speedy trials and equally wanted his trial to commence earnestly .

what then is the stands of section 306 and even the position of ICJA as well

if they have a good case , the idea of dragging court cases should be avoided and they should enter for the trial .
I thought metuh has been advocating that he should be charged to court and he is ready to open his defense .

We are watching

I cherished yo answer, because it is matured in nature.
the constitution in no way bars the defendant from having time to defend himself, what the constitution envisaged was timely disposition of trial.
The ACJA u r referring to is subject to the entire chapter of the constitution.
The legality of that provision has been challenged and the case is coming up on the 13th of this month.
The constitution gives right of choice of counsel to an accused person and the accused have right to substitute counsel. When he is substituted, the counsel have right to be fully abreast of the brief n proceedings and familyilure to allow that right amount to denial of fair hearing.
Lawyers always look for the loopholes of the law to delay trial which is bad, but on this the lawyer to Metuh is right.

baslone:


Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015 Clause 396


(2) After the plea of the defendant to the information or a charge has been read, it shall no longer be open to that defendant to raise any objection to the validity of the charge or information.

(3) Upon arraignment the trial of the defendant shall proceed from day-to-day until the conclusion of the trial.

(4) Where day-to-day trial is impracticable after arraignment, no party shall be entitled to more than five adjournments from arraignment to final judgment: provided always that the interval between eachadjournment shall not exceed fourteen days.

(5) Where it is impracticable to conclude a criminal proceeding after the parties have exhausted their five adjournments each, the interval between one adjournment to another shall not exceed seven days inclusive of weekends

(6) In all circumstances, the court may award reasonable costs in order to discourage frivolous adjournments.

As far as I am concern, most provisions of this Act is illegal by reason of their contravention of section 36 of the constitution. The legality of the provisions of this act is coming up this week.
see below
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2016/04/court-hears-suit-against-new-criminal-law-april-13/,
http://www.punchng.com/breaking-tompolo-sues-fg-over-n45-9bn-fraud-charges.
read this two link and u will see my position of the law.
I am speaking from the Bar

odikimi:

I cherished yo answer, because it is matured in nature.
the constitution in no way bars the defendant from having time to defend himself, what the constitution envisaged was timely disposition of trial.
The ACJA u r referring to is subject to the entire chapter of the constitution.
The legality of that provision has been challenged and the case is coming up on the 13th of this month.
The constitution gives right of choice of counsel to an accused person and the accused have right to substitute counsel. When he is substituted, the counsel have right to be fully abreast of the brief n proceedings and familyilure to allow that right amount to denial of fair hearing.
Lawyers always look for the loopholes of the law to delay trial which is bad, but on this the lawyer to Metuh is right.

Thanks for your compliment

The case of the legality of the ICJA comming up does not invalidate the provisions as enshrine until the supreme courts gives verdict.

Quite frankly, I agree that accused have rights to have legal representations but should not used such rights as a clog in the wheel of justice to be dispense on his case.

What will be your position if same tactics of change of legal representation at the slight of commencement of trials is adopted again by Metuh.

We must help to kick against this adjournments that tends to delay trials and move for speedy trials .

senatorbayor:




Thanks for your compliment

The case of the legality of the ICJA comming up does not invalidate the provisions as enshrine until the supreme courts gives verdict.

Quite frankly, I agree that accused have rights to have legal representations but should not used such rights as a clog in the wheel of justice to be dispense on his case.

What will be your position if same tactics of change of legal representation at the slight of commencement of trials is adopted again by Metuh.

We must help to kick against this adjournments that tends to delay trials and move for speedy trials .

It is better to stay on the side of caution that to rush because u want to prosecute or persecute someone.
Like I said, their are plethora of supreme court ratio on the right of the accused to be represented if he so wish, this is a criminal matter and the position of the law is sacrosanct.
Metuh is looking for way to be denied his right of fair hearing.
For your information, he has gotten 1 already. He challenged the Presiding judge on fair hearing, but the judge out of judicial reality refused to hand off.
In law, once the bias is alleged on the side of the judge, u hand of because it will amount to lack of fair hearing.
see section 36 (6) (c), 1999 constitution (as amended), see also SUPREME COURT on Audu v, FRN, Jang v.INEC, UNIUYO v. Nse, Oykhire v. The State, etcetera.
When u read these cases, u will see what Metuh's lawyer is plotting. He is wishing the denial of fair hearing on his counsel.

odikimi:

without any intention to spite u, u r more of your description on Metuh.
Section 36 of the constitution that deals with the fundamental human rights of an accused person avail him with right to extension of time to prepare well and get facilities to defend himself. If this right is denied, an accused can appeal against it by showing miscarriage of justice occasioned by it's denial. Metuh's lawyer knows this that is why the change of counsel midway to delay it, looking for excuse or ground of appeal.
Sorry if u feel insulted but I am telling u from the Bar, just allow Metuh to exercise his right as enshrined in our constitution. That is the beauty of democracy.

His lawyer shld b gvn 2 days 2 study & prepare his defence.

billyG:
His lawyer shld b gvn 2 days 2 study & prepare his defence.

He will tell u that he has cases or his diary is filled up.

Like my experience in court today, I was asked to take day after I moved for adjournment and I chose one month time to reply to the Applicant's originating process because my diary was filled up and their is nothing the judge can do because contrary to that will amount to denial of right of audience and fair hearing.

Lawyers know what is called delay tactics, especially when u r SAN. Remember how Orubebe's lawyer shouted at the CCT panel. Senior lawyers always have their way to delay trials and am learning fast from them

ZuzuMan:
......

I beg make una tell metuh make him daruko d angel name wey him know including angel fatai so that after him finish 4rm prison he go do thanks giving 4 church.

odikimi:

He will tell u that he has cases or his diary is filled up.

no court shld wait 4 a lawyer,if he is not ready he shld hands off,he must provide proof he has case on d day fix d judgement.

odikimi:

Like my experience in court today, I was asked to take day after I moved for adjournment and I chose one month time to reply to the Applicant's originating process because my diary was filled up and their is nothing the judge can do because contrary to that will amount to denial of right of audience and fair hearing.

did u shew him yur diary?

billyG:
did u shew him yur diary?

the judge need not to see it except he suspects that u r lying

odikimi:

As far as I am concern, most provisions of this Act is illegal by reason of their contravention of section 36 of the constitution. The legality of the provisions of this act is coming up this week.
see below
http://www.vanguardngr.com/2016/04/court-hears-suit-against-new-criminal-law-april-13/,
http://www.punchng.com/breaking-tompolo-sues-fg-over-n45-9bn-fraud-charges.
read this two link and u will see my position of the law.
I am speaking from the Bar

The first link (Dr. A.C.B. Agbazuere) you posted is actually challenging clause 165

The second one link (Tompolo) is challenging sections 221 and 306.

What I posted was Clause 396.

Between those clauses are still Valid till they are amended and what guarantees they will win the cases?

C'mon Brov!!!

baslone:




The first link (Dr. A.C.B. Agbazuere) you posted is actually challenging clause 165

The second one link (Tompolo) is challenging sections 221 and 306.

What I posted was Clause 396.

Between those clauses are still Valid till they are amended and what guarantees they will win the cases?

C'mon Brov!!!

what does section 396 says?

baslone:




The first link (Dr. A.C.B. Agbazuere) you posted is actually challenging clause 165

The second one link (Tompolo) is challenging sections 221 and 306.

What I posted was Clause 396.

Between those clauses are still Valid till they are amended and what guarantees they will win the cases?

C'mon Brov!!!

what does section 396 says?
I am talking about right of fair hearing here. when u r facing a trial every day and u asked for stay of proceedings or stand down or adjournment which is more that 5times as indicated and yo right of time to prepare is denied because of s. 396, what do u call that.
just read Oyakhire v. the State and see what amounts to denial of fair hearing.
If section 396 is not being challenged, it then means I will challenge it at the federal high court. denial of time is against section 36. (6) (b) 1999 constitution and anything contrary to that provision of adequate time is null and void by reason of its inconsistency.

dalambusu:
Keep on buying time till 2019 by then PDP take over and then case closed!!!

Keep on dreaming Mr dreamer.

odikimi:

It is better to stay on the side of caution that to rush because u want to prosecute or persecute someone.
Like I said, their are plethora of supreme court ratio on the right of the accused to be represented if he so wish, this is a criminal matter and the position of the law is sacrosanct.
Metuh is looking for way to be denied his right of fair hearing.
For your information, he has gotten 1 already. He challenged the Presiding judge on fair hearing, but the judge out of judicial reality refused to hand off.
In law, once the bias is alleged on the side of the judge, u hand of because it will amount to lack of fair hearing.
see section 36 (6) (c), 1999 constitution (as amended), see also SUPREME COURT on Audu v, FRN, Jang v.INEC, UNIUYO v. Nse, Oykhire v. The State, etcetera.
When u read these cases, u will see what Metuh's lawyer is plotting. He is wishing the denial of fair hearing on his counsel.

I don't have issue with defendant seeking for fair hearings.
But the act of raising unnecessary delay tactics and accusations to either buy time or kill the case is unacceptable.

Note that the chief judge ruled metuh case out when he said the presiding judge is his classmates.

If we allow every defendant to accuse a judge of bais, who will hear their case then.

It's evident that metuh does not want the trial to commence just as Saraki did in hisown case before the CCT chairman ruled him out citing section 306 and the provisions of the ICJA.
I also look forward to the NJC working assiduously on this frivolous adjournments that are applied by the suspect to delay trial or buy time

senatorbayor:




I don't have issue with defendant seeking for fair hearings.
But the act of raising unnecessary delay tactics and accusations to either buy time or kill the case is unacceptable.

Note that the chief judge ruled metuh case out when he said the presiding judge is his classmates.

If we allow every defendant to accuse a judge of bais, who will hear their case then.

It's evident that metuh does not want the trial to commence just as Saraki did in hisown case before the CCT chairman ruled him out citing section 306 and the provisions of the ICJA.
I also look forward to the NJC working assiduously on this frivolous adjournments that are applied by the suspect to delay trial or buy time

Metuh allegation against justice Okon Abangwere not just classmates, he has appeal against that, let's see what the SupremeCourt will say, because I don't believe in Court of Appeal judges, they are hungry judges.
I lost my trust the moment they dismiss Wike's appeal for non use of card reader but upheld Ambode with out use of card leaders