Chief Mike Kaase Aondokaa was the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice during President Umaru Musa Yar?adua?s administration, from 2007 to 2010.

The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) is a chieftain of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in Benue State. In this interview with BEN UKEJI, Aondoakaa bares his mind on contemporary issues in Nigeria?s legal jurisprudence, state creation, state police and the turbulent political developments in his home, Benue.

You once held public office as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice. You are not occupying one now. How are you coping with life in private legal practice?

When I was in public service, I took it as service to the country. And in private practice now, I am also rendering services to the country. First, as a private practitioner, I have engaged in cases that have developed the country?s legal jurisprudence. Then, also in the private sector, I have set up companies that added value to agriculture. So, I?m still doing that.

From 1999 to date, the National Assembly has embarked on one form of amendment of the Constitution or another. It is becoming like a jamboree. Does Nigeria really need a new Constitution?

Well, it is unfortunate. No country amends its Constitution in the manner it is being done in Nigeria by our National Assembly.

Certainly, it has become a ritual, as you rightly said. Normally, constitution amendments are done when the Constitution is tested. Some, over the period of 40 to 50 years, before the amendments are done, when there is a real danger of injustice. So, in Nigeria, every small thing that happens, that is adverse to a particular group, and when the group has access to the National Assembly, the first thing that comes is a constitutional amendment.

The Constitution has to be tested and interpreted by the Supreme Court before we can even think of an amendment. Look at the amendment they made in the case of election petitions. It is becoming a time bomb. Generally, Nigerians will be better off if they are allowed free access to the court.

So, it defeats the essence of the fair hearing envisaged under Section 36 of the Constitution. Because the court is supposed to be open, and ought not to have many restrictions on access to the court. And that is it.

Now, the amendment has become counterproductive. People use that to deny people access to the court. It is not very good.

Even if it comes to the issue of the Electoral Act, it becomes clear that, in every election, there is an Electoral Act. It ought not to be so. Now, the last amendment of the Electoral Act has brought gross injustice, and it?s in conflict with other existing laws, especially the Law of Evidence. The Evidence Act. The law as it relates to subpoena evidence. I think we need to do something about it.

Subpoena evidence cannot be concluded at the time of filing a petition, especially with the evidence in the custody of the adversary. How will you be filing a petition against INEC? And the evidence that is in their custody, how will INEC give you to go and file a petition against them? The Electoral Act is supposed to give a distinction in such a way that such evidence should be allowed to be tendered after the petition has been filed.

So, a lot of people suffered injustice.

Subpoena evidence was not allowed because it was not tendered before the filing of the petition. It?s not supposed to be like that.

So, I think the new Electoral Act should take care of that. It was not a constitutional amendment, but the new Electoral Act should try to reform that aspect. That reconciliation of the Evidence Act. The quest for the creation of a new Constitution is led by eminent Nigerians such as Chief Emeka Anyaoku.

It?s difficult when you have a contrary opinion. Are you saying those calling for a new Constitution are playing to the gallery?

That is their own opinion. I don?t know. That is their desire.

Somebody?s desire does not in any way mean it will meet the constitutional requirements. I may desire that my hometown, Lessel, be created a state: Lessel State. That?s my desire.

It doesn?t mean, as former Attorney General, I desire to have Lessel State, that it?s automatic. Such states must meet the requirement to be accepted by the National Assembly to be created as a state. That is, meeting the 2/3 concurrent of the 36 states as needed by the Constitution for such a state to be created. And even at that, it still requires the assent of the President.

But, generally speaking, if not for the intervention of President Bola Tinubu, the states were having a difficult time paying salaries. So, what is the essence of creating new states now? What we have gained from the removal of the subsidy should be used for the development of the country, not for paying off huge overhead of such new states. When you create more states, you have more governments, more Houses of Assembly, more vehicles, and all those kinds of things.

More judges in those new states. So, the essence is to remove the subsidy and allow development, not for the creation of states.

Even the ones that are in existence, where is the development? A few are doing some developments, like Lagos, Borno, and Nasarawa states are carrying out development. Many are not.

Many are not doing anything. The preoccupation of the National Assembly should be to create laws that will strengthen our security. Bring the Nigerian Security and Civil Defense into the Constitution as part of security. Just like the Nigerian Police. There should also be a Civil Defence and give them the responsibility of protecting properties. Both public and private properties.

That will enhance and complement the police in policing.

Are you aspiring to contest governorship in Benue 2027 now that preparation for the 2027 election is on, is your ambition of ruling the state still alive?

Well, I am a lawyer. INEC has not lifted the ban on political campaigns. When the time comes, you will know.

But, let me speak on another important issue. Hence, you insisted on having this interview with me.

The issue of state police

The time has come for the creation of the state police. The issue of state police should be placed on the concurrent list.

Any legislation for state police should be done by the National Assembly. Not the states. With specific features, the acquisition of arms for state police should be exclusively vested in the federal government. We cannot have all 36 states going out of the country to buy arms for their own state police. Then, the issue of recruitment and training should also be vested in the federal government. This should also be done by the federal government to ensure that the standard of recruitment is the same as that of the federal police.

But, the payment of bills and other logistics should be handled by the states. It?s almost like community policing.

Even now, the states have the right to take advantage of community policing. The state police should be charged with a specific responsibility; Terrorism/armed robbery, kidnapping, murder, rape, and other violent crimes. The issue of politics and political gatherings should be completely out. Politics should be out.

They should not be involved in politics. It should only be made for crime ? organized crimes ? or the prevention of crime. Because every state has a peculiar need.

The state police should be deployed for pure non-political crime. For instance, we have a farmer-herder crisis in Benue State

Yes, the state police should be deployed to curtail that. They have no power of arrest for political action and political offenses. We can start with that. As time goes on and the opportunity comes, the federal government will continue to devote more power through additional legislation. It?s something we need to start now.

The state police must not have the power to attend political gatherings. These are the kind of things we can do.

And, of course, the state police act will contain personal liability on officers, if they violate the provisions of the act or carry out arbitrary arrests of persons or become involved in politics. Personal liability to the officers and the commanders. And even to the state. In that case, the governors can only use them for various riots, not political arrests. Civil unrest restricts them to civil unrest and communal conflicts.

Once the government utilizes it, the state commander or the state police will file a report to the Commissioner of Police in the state within 24 hours.

There should also be permission for the intervention of federal police as listed in the state police act. Once they are convinced that the situation is beyond the state, the federal police will not need permission to intervene.

Once you design the law in that way, nobody can abuse it.

Are you worried that members of the coalition ADC want to unseat your party, the All Progressives Congress?

Well, we in the APC are aware of ADC. Their activities, as a group, will further push us to deliver more dividends of democracy to the people. You will notice that prices of foodstuffs have started dropping down drastically.

If you go to town now, foodstuff prices have dropped. More money has been released to states for infrastructure. The federal government is directly involved in infrastructure development. You can see the new look of the federal capital territory, done by the president through FCT Minister Nyesom Wike. President Tinubu, I can describe him as the best salesman for the country.

His travels have boosted the inflow of revenue. Our foreign reserves have risen from a single digit to a double digit of 44 billion dollars in August. That is remarkable.

It places our banking system in a very comfortable manner. We can trade effectively and engage in international trade.

In other words, you are not afraid of the coalition?

Nobody is afraid of the coalition. You see, I granted an interview. And I said the President is the most attacked President by the opposition. But he has guaranteed freedom for the opposition. And I warned of what is happening in Benue State, where individuals, who I am sure did not consult Governor Alia, will go and say, ?No Alia No Benue;? how do you talk about that? Somebody who won an election with overwhelming popularity by persuasion never in the history of Benue State. Nobody was hurt. Nobody was killed.

The election was one of the freest elections. Governor Alia got an overwhelming vote that has never happened in Benue State. Then, suddenly, you are campaigning, No Alia, No Benue!

That means you are telling the people that the man has lost the whole of that popularity. That is the implication of such slogans, No Alia, No Benue. It means he has lost his popularity.

Because there is no need. What he is doing should be evidence for the people of Benue State to re-elect him, if he so desires to contest. Anybody who yells ?No Alia, No Benue? is doing a disservice to the governor. Because he never shouted ?No Alia, No Benue.? What he did when he was elected was ?Yes Father.? Not ?No Alia No Benue?.

It is a disturbing issue. The best thing to happen in a democracy is for people to be allowed to contest freely without intimidation. It makes the government sit up and do more. Not intimidation and all those things. (Daily Sun)

Update news