The Advocate
By Onikepo Braithwaite
Introduction
Even though I’m a Lawyer of approximately 35 years standing, I still get confused about the law here. Nigeria is a country of contradictions, double standards, and two-facedness, where the law is applied inconsistently. The disregard for the rule of law is blatant, whether by Government, its agencies, the people or even Judicial Officers and Counsel, who are officers in the temple of justice and expected to have higher standards. Almost on a daily basis, Nigerians wake up to hear reports about incidents that confirm these state of affairs. Even the Banks/Commercial ventures, aren’t left out. Yet, Nigeria is seeking FDI (Foreign Direct Investment).
Under this kind of uncertain and inconsistent system, only “dubious or opportunistic type” foreign investors, whose motives are just as questionable as that of their local collaborators, will be interested in coming to Nigeria. For instance, while it is impossible to condemn all Chinese interventions in Nigeria as many of them are legitimate, still the Chinese have become known for their illegal mining activities not only in Nigeria and Ghana, but other African countries, ruining the environment in the process. If the Nigerian system wasn’t as broken as it is, the Mexican Drug Cartel wouldn’t have found it easy to build a factory in the forest of Ogun State, manufacturing methamphetamines. Thank God for the NDLEA, under the leadership of Brigadier General Buba Marwa (Rtd), who got them arrested. Not just foreign opportunists, but foreign hardened criminals want to turn Nigeria into a haven for their illicit activities, because corruption here makes it easy for them, and so do the gaps in our system.
Knowing that some Counsel and Judges go as far as conniving against ongoing commercial concerns to force them into Receivership, even when they may not have breached the terms of their agreements, or take businesses from performers to give to non-performers who have breached the terms of their own agreements, or Judges like Lifu J. and Dashen J. blatantly abuse court process, is a cause for serious concern.
Oil Industry
1) Kepco; Eurafric v Petralon 54
In August 2025, I examined the case of Kepco Energy Resources Nigeria Ltd, in which Kunle Ogunba, SAN, purportedly appointed Receiver/Manager by a consortium of Banks, sought to force Kepco into receivership on a debt that is due in 2034.
Again, in April, 2026, I discussed the case of Eurafric Energy Ltd v Petralon 54 Limited & Ors where the Federal High Court (FHC), Lagos per Awogboro J. in a controversial judgement purported to take a marginal oil field from Petralon 54 that found oil, has been exporting and paying royalties to the Federal Government, to return it to Eurafric Energy Ltd who had been adjudged to have failed DPR’s performance evaluation for not bringing the oilfield to production in about 17 years. The fact that the trial Judge was happy to hear a case where a necessary party, DPR (now NUPRC), the Regulator, wasn’t joined as a party, to arrive at a judgement that appeared to go against the weight of evidence adduced and therefore, failed to meet the standards of a good judgement, giving rise to numerous fertile grounds of appeal, is a cause for great concern on how Judges decide cases.
2) GHL v First Bank
On Friday, the Supreme Court gave judgement in the GHL v First Bank (FBN) case. In that case, we saw FBN and its Counsel weaponise the abuse of court process against GHL, by going to the FHC Port Harcourt to arrest oil cargo belonging to GHL for well over a year, despite a subsisting judgement by the FHC Lagos. FHC Port Harcourt had dismissed FBN’s application, but the Court of Appeal set aside the judgement, which the Supreme Court subsequently reversed.
One of the Counsel to GHL commented that this act of FBN had resulted in a loss of revenue of about $70 million, as the price of oil reached an all-time high during the period the cargo remained seized, and has now dropped significantly. The act of FBN appears to be tantamount to economic sabotage.
While there’s nothing wrong with legitimate, lawful debt recovery and receivership that follows due process, it seems that there are a bunch of notorious Senior Lawyers who specialise in the receivership/abuse of court process style. Yet, they go unpunished for their activities. Officers in the temple of justice, who specialise in meting out injustice!
Arrest of Uche Nnaji
The arrest of former Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology, Mr Uche Nnaji, for allegedly using forged credentials to secure his job. It is interesting to note that, the SSS (DSS) didn’t smell a rat when they did their due diligence on Mr Nnaji, and gave him a clean bill of health to be confirmed as a Minister by the Senate. It is also interesting that, despite the fact that the University of Nigeria, Nsukka where he claimed to have graduated from, and the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) under which he claimed to have done the mandatory one year post-graduation service, both distanced themselves from the certificates Mr Nnaji had presented, stating that they didn’t issue them, he resigned his Ministerial position under a cloud, he wasn’t arrested then. Now that Mr Nnaji has ported to PDP as their Enugu State Gubernatorial candidate, running against the incumbent who defected to APC sometime ago, the authorities have suddenly realised that Mr Nnaji has a case to answer!
Sections 147(5) & 66(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)(the Constitution), which were already part of the Constitution when Mr Nnaji was appointed by President Bola Tinubu in 2023, provide clearly that a Ministerial nominee must meet the qualifications for running for member of the House of Representatives, one of the disqualifications being the presentation of a forged certificate. Did the DSS do a sloppy job, in their investigation? Or was it that, as a member of APC, Mr Nnaji’s alleged offence wasn’t activated until his defection to PDP? If the second scenario is the case, then we see the double standards.
Furthermore, despite the fact that apart from Section 66(1)(j) of the Constitution (National Assembly), presentation of forged certificates is also a ground for disqualification for election to other political offices – see Sections 107(1)(j)(State House of Assembly), 137(1)(j) (President and Vice President) & 182(1)(j) (Governor and Deputy Governor) of the Constitution, Section 138(1) of the Electoral Act 2026 (EA) has indirectly rendered the constitutional provisions redundant for politicians, because the presentation of forged certificates is no longer a ground for election petition, and only those who have partaken in the direct primaries with a candidate can raise this issue as a pre-election matter at the Federal High Court (see Section 29(5) of the EA). This shows inconsistency, hypocrisy and two-facedness in the application of the law guiding forged certificates for elective office holders, particularly APC members and everyone else!
Forgery is a serious criminal offence, that can attract up to 14 years imprisonment upon conviction – see Section 362-368 of the Penal Code; Dalyop v State (2025) LPELR-80375(SC) per Jamilu Yammama Tukur, JSC on the definition of forgery. It is therefore, rather bizarre, that the EA more or less, allows those vying for political office to get away with the presentation of forged documentation.
On the other hand, it could be argued that nothing actually prevents a law enforcement agency such as the Police or ICPC, from immediately charging a person to court for alleged presentation of forged certificates, as their intervention isn’t an election petition, but institution of legal proceeding against someone who stands accused of committing the criminal offence of forgery. It then becomes ‘one kind’, when the security agencies are selective in who or how or when they prosecute.
Local and Foreign Expulsion/Deportation
Last Thursday, I watched a videoclip on Arise TV where some people in Imo State (Imolites) were protesting that Fulanis should leave their area, accusing them of being responsible for the kidnapping there. The fact that there are grave security concerns there and most other places in the country is undeniable, but, it is unreasonable to issue a blanket expulsion on a single ethnicity because of the allegation of criminality against some.
The Fulanis are not the only ones responsible for kidnapping; it is now a come-one-come-all commercial affair. The people who kidnapped the Adelabus are Yorubas. In the past, kidnapping was rife amongst the Niger Delta militants. Boko Haram was initially a group that originated from the Northeast, and is probably now a mixed bag probably of so-called Muslims. Arrest the criminals and prosecute them, instead of generalising. How do these Imolites purporting to expel Fulanis, or the Yorubas that said the Igbos should leave Lagos, or the Northern Youth who purported to expel the Igbos from the North, giving them a deadline in 2016 (Kaduna Declaration), differ from South Africans who most of the world is condemning, for demanding that other black Africans leave their country?
In the Preamble, the Constitution mentions that its essence is to consolidate the unity of Nigerians. Sections 14(3), 15(2) & (3) thereof provide for Federal Character and National Integration, while Section 42 prohibits discrimination on the basis of ethnicity. Sections 41(1) & 43 of the Constitution guarantee the right to freedom of movement of every citizen to all parts of Nigeria, to settle down where they choose to within the country, and to acquire immovable property there. See Abu v State (2024) LPELR-62381 (SC) per Helen Moronkeji Ogunwumiju, JSC on freedom of movement. Are all these constitutional provisions, simply for decoration?
It is clear that such expulsion demands, are unconstitutional. Yet, people still make them, cause disaffection, hatred and heat up the polity. Inciting disaffection, promoting hostility and feelings of ill-will between different groups of people such as ethnicities, promoting hatred and contempt are seditious offences under the Criminal Code (Section 50-51) and Penal Code (Section 416-417). Yet, even though most times those responsible for spewing such hatred are known, they usually do not face any legal consequences for their actions.
Mass State-Sponsored Weddings in the North
This may be a sensitive topic for some, but the truth, which they say is sometimes bitter, must be told. Almost every time we switch on the television these days, we hear disgruntled Northern politicians say that the North is unhappy with President Tinubu, and won’t vote for him in 2027. They are quick to see the logs in the eyes of others, while ignoring the ‘iroko’ trees in theirs! They do not discuss the role they play, in not making the lives of their common man better.
While Sections 14(2)(b), 16 & 18 of the Constitution set out objectives for Government, for the maximum security, happiness, economic well-being and welfare of Nigerians, some Northern States are busy using funds that can be channelled into small scale businesses and more useful endeavours to empower the people to be able to provide for themselves, to conduct mass weddings for people. While those Governments who conduct these weddings may be well-meaning, the initiative appears to have become counter-productive. It seems to further entrench, the cycle of poverty and criminality. Thousands of people who cannot afford to live well or get married, are married off. They start to have children, who they cannot cater for financially. Little boys are thrown into the now corrupted Almajiri system, grow up on the streets and graduate into criminality – no education, nothing. Girls are married off early, and the unfortunate cycle continues.
If a culture ceases to be beneficial, or becomes obsolete, it must be discarded. Once upon a time, in parts of the South South, having twins was considered to be an abomination, and the babies were killed. Scottish Missionary, Mary Slessor arrived in Calabar around 1876 and started advocating against twin infanticide. In 1906, twin infanticide was criminalised, throughout the South Nigeria Protectorate by the British.
My point? If culturally, State sponsored marriage for the less privileged was a good social venture in the past, but today, it is a contributor to the cycle of poverty and insecurity, why not put a pause on it for now?
The N1.5 billion budgeted by the Kano State Government for the 2026 marriage event, may be able to purchase about 1,500 brand new AK 47 rifles, and up to double that number for good second hand AK 47s to equip their State Police. A sufficiently well finished classroom for 40 students, complete with furniture shouldn’t cost more than N10 million. With N1.5 billion. approximately 150 furnished classrooms can be built. The North has the highest number of out-of-school children in Nigeria.
While educational objectives for the benefit of all are provided for in the Constitution, marrying people off with Government funds is not! Yet, the Northern State Governments seem to be more interested in the latter, almost as if they are legitimising the cycle of poverty and crime. Education and adult literacy programmes would enlighten the people, particularly about the benefits of family planning, and put them in a better position. Who knows this better than the Northern elite and political office holders, who mostly send their children abroad to be educated, while the children of the masses are out-of-school Almajiris. Double standards! One for themselves and families, and another for the common man.
Conclusion
These contradictions, where the law is vigorously applied against some, but appears dormant for others, and where constitutional rights to movement and dignity are openly flouted without consequence, erode public trust in our institutions. From certificate forgery and oil asset receivership battles, to ethnic expulsion campaigns and misplaced State spending priorities, the pattern is unmistakable.
Until we insist on consistent, impartial enforcement of the law (whether against certificate forgery or incitement to ethnic hatred), regardless of political affiliation, ethnicity or status, the rule of law will remain more aspirational than a reality in Nigeria. The time for selective justice, double standards and institutional hypocrisy must come to an end, if we are to build a nation that truly commands the confidence of its citizens and attracts serious investors.