LAWYERS REACT, DIFFER ON THE PROPOSED NEW CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES

But his Ikorodu Branch counterpart, Mr. Bayo Akinlade, disagreed with Oloke, by welcoming the proposed rules.

“My argument is simple, first of all, default fees are so that litigants and Lawyers will be up and doing. After being served with a court process, some litigants will sit on it, rather than give it to their Lawyers, and sometimes, Lawyers too, after collecting a brief, delay in taking action, while the other party who filed the suit, is already in court going on with the case. And when the other party is about getting judgement, the Defendant’s Lawyer will suddenly show up, and start argument about the right to fair hearing.

“So, the court is saying that, the habit of sitting on court processes must stop. So, instead of a default fee of N200 per day, the court is saying it is now N 1,000 per day. That is on the one hand.

“On the other hand, some Lawyers give a lot of excuses. On the day of trial, they will not show up in court, and it is a mechanism to frustrate cases. But, the Lawyers that are complaining, I ask the question: These measures, are they not for you if you are for the Complainant or the Plaintiff? And if you are for the Defendant, who is up against a Complainant who just wants to hold somebody’s business with an injunction, are the measures not for you?

“So, what we are telling Lawyers is: if you are not ready to go to court, don’t go to court. Get all your facts and your witnesses ready, before rushing to court to sue somebody. That is the point that the Judiciary is making, because there are over 3,000 cases each year, and there are only about 56 judges, out of which only 40 are active. Only half of that 40 are hard-working. And you have a situation where a Judge has over 600 cases in her docket; are they not human beings?

“So, we are telling Lawyers that, the cost of litigation will be high, so, don’t just go to court anyhow. Settle your disputes amicably, if you can.

“So, I am not in support of the protest against the new provisions. I’ m a Chairman of a Branch, and I have been involved in reforms in the Judiciary. So, if I talk, I talk out of knowledge, and I am not biased. Because if I can fight the Judiciary on the corruption of their members, I am not one to easily support the new rules made by the court, if they are against the poor.”

For the immediate past 2nd Vice President of the NBA, Monday Ubani, while not condemning the amendment, he said it must done in a balanced view.

“My position on the proposed rules is that, nature will always strive for improvement. We have rules that has been existence since 2012, and we have discovered that even though the intention or the objectives is to ensure speedy dispensation of justice, we still have issues that are a clog in the new rules. Some of them require fine-tuning that will ensure that we get at that central objective which is speedy dispensation, because we know what delayed justice has cost us a nation in the committee of nations. So, there’s always room for improvement.

“So, I’m grateful, but I am very averse to some of the new rules specific provisions, which may likely trigger some levels of offences that are not intended by the amendment. The amendment process was not to trigger any offences, but when in the process of trying to do that you now singled out one of the stakeholders in the administration of justice, to now impose some of penalties that are considered draconian and selective, then it will not augur well for the smooth dispensation of the rules. Take for instance the issue of penalty that a Lawyer will be asked to pay a fine of N100,000 if he asks for adjournment, and all that without taking cognisance of the reason for request for the adjournment. I’m not ignorant of the fact that, some Lawyers purposely take up a case in order to delay, and they play all manner of funny games which all aim at delaying justice. The Judges have always had the discretionary powers to discipline erring Lawyers, or even impose some levels of penalties and all that. It’s already there in the rules. But, you must not in any way, make a blanket rules that anytimea Lawyer asks for an adjournment, you then impose penalty of N100,000. To me, that is selective and draconian, and it will actually distract from the central objective of the amendment.

“If the amendment is targeted at Lawyers, for the purpose of saying that Lawyers are actually causing delay in the administration of justice, I don’t think that it’s a fair view. It’s not a correct fair view, of what is causing delay. There are many issues that we need to address, with issue of policing. When you file a case, the issue of e-filing, it takes many days for you to file through that e-filing. You can’t even get a number instantly, you have to wait and go back and even give money. And if you do not have money to give to them, that means your file will not be attended to. That issue, has not been addressed. We have not addressed the issue of service of process; we have not addressed the issue of providing proof of service whenever you serve. So, there are many issues, which act as a clog in the wheel, even when a matter has not got to the court. I’m talking about from the filing of the process now, to assignment of cases, there are so many other clogs in the wheel, that any serious minded system has to deal with, in order to clear. But they have not dealt with all those processes, they are now singling out the proceedings itself. Yes, there are issues with the proceedings, but you must start from the foundation. Because if the foundation is destroyed, there is nothing the righteous can do.

“So, let’s take holistic look at our administration of justice system, and know whether we are doing it right, and where we have some defects, what should we do to correct those defects. And, I think that starting from the filing of the process to the assignment, and even to the proceedings, we have to take a holistic look, and then make sure that it’s a balanced view,a balanced objective, so that you don’t single out only one stakeholder to impose some punishments. Also on the issue filing out of time, instead of the N200 you pay per day, you are now to pay N1,000, that is punitive. All this will discourage people from approaching the throne of justice, making it impossible for those who have no money to come to court, in order to ventilate their grievances. And when this happens, they resort to self-help and other actions that are inimical to the health of the nation. So, I think that we must try to be a bit balanced in the amendment. I am not condemning the amendment, it is needed, there is always room for improvement. We cannot in any way, say that the one we have is solving the problems, there are still issues in it that need amendment.”

On his part, Ahmed Adetola-Kazeem, Executive Director of Prisoners’s Rights Advocacy Initiative said, rules evolves and once there’s a need to improve on the existing statute of body of laws, just like the rules of court, it is necessary that there is improvement on it.

“I think there should more engagement, so that we can have rules that will be acceptable to all. Everybody cannot be able to accept the contents of the rules, but it should be done in a way that, at least, most people will be very comfortable with it.