The fury in the land following the presidential pardon granted to 175 persons by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu last week has continued to simmer. On Thursday, the Federal Government stated that the list was still at the review stage.

A statement by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi SAN read:

“The Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice wishes to clarify that no inmate approved for clemency under the recent exercise of the President’s power of prerogative of mercy has been released from custody.

“The process remains at the final administrative stage, which includes a standard review to ensure that all names and recommendations fully comply with established legal and procedural requirements before any instrument of release is issued.

“It is important to note that the last stage of the exercise, after approval by the Council of State, is the issuance of the instrument for the implementation of the decision concerning each beneficiary. This stage affords an opportunity for a final look at the list for remedial purposes, if any, before the instrument is forwarded to the Controller-General of Corrections for necessary action.

“This verification process is part of the standard protocol and reflects the government’s commitment to transparency and due diligence”

Since the list was released, Nigerians, shocked by the category of convicts who were let off the hook, have been expressing dismay, disappointment and disillusion over the action.

Many have yet to come to terms with the standard of measurement used by the amnesty committee appointed by the president in recommending freedom for drug offenders said to be in their numbers, and criminals who ought to be permanently put away from the society.

A few of those pardoned were Maryam Sanda who was convicted for killing her husband, Bilyaminu Bello in 2017. Also pardoned was Kelvin Prosper Oniarah, linked with high profile kidnappings, including that of Barrister Mike Ozekhome (SAN), on Auchi–Benin road on August 24, 2013; a Judge of the Edo State judiciary; a top officer of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS); Dr. Chudi Nwike, a former Deputy Governor of Anambra State, among others.

The presidential pardon which the Presidency described as a mark of “compassion, justice, and national healing,” was recommended by the Presidential Advisory Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy, headed by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN).

However, civil society groups and other concerned citizens have been responding differently with sting rebuke, describing the move as both “a national disgrace” and “an open invitation to anarchy,” while accusing the Presidency of stamping its imprimatur on corruption.

Some Nigerians spoken to were emphatic that freeing criminals, kidnappers and murders remains the height of injustice to the society.

Lawyers affirm that it is well within President Tinubu’s constitutional rights to grant pardon to whom he pleases. But at the same time, they are united in condemning the inclusion of some undeserving beneficiaries, warning that the move had telling impacts on justice administration in the country.

The lawyers were vehement that something definitely went wrong in the way felons were freed, while those who had no one to speak for them were left out to languish in various correctional centres.

The lawyers held that Tinubu was obviously wrongly advised and demanded a probe into the show of shame clothed as prerogative of mercy.

It’s within president’s right to grant mercy, but…

Lawyers told Nigerians that it lies within the powers of President Tinubu to pardon whosoever he judges qualified for amnesty.

Speaking to our correspondent, constitutional lawyer, Fred Nzeako, noted that “the law establishing the prerogative of mercy provides that the president has the right to issue pardon to anyone that is convicted.”

Nzeako added that “the same right is also extended to state governors – the governors for state offences and the president for federal offences.

“But unfortunately, there is no qualification for the types of offences that can be pardoned. It is so general that any offence whatsoever under the sun can be pardoned under the prerogative of mercy. And so, as a matter of fact, even someone who has been convicted by the Supreme Court can be pardoned by the president or the governor. And that is the position of the law.”

Reacting to the development, journalist-turned-legal practitioner, Abdulah Wahab Olawale, emphasized that the president has constitutional rights in the selection of individuals to be granted clemency.

Olawale cited Chapter 6, Section 175 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which empowers the president to grant pardons, reprieves, or commute sentences after receiving recommendations from the Advisory Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy.

“The reason people are angry is not because the president acted unlawfully, but because of the category of offenders who benefited from the pardon.

“Many of those released were serving time for grievous crimes. While the law allows the president to exercise this power, it must be done judiciously and responsibly,” he said.

Quoting Section 175, of the Constitution, in part, rights lawyer, Ayo Ademiluyi said: “The President may grant any person concerned with or convicted of any offence created by Act of the National Assembly, pardon either free or subject to lawful conditions,” after consultation with the Council of State.

President’s action insensitive

Although the president has the right to pardon, Nigerians are vexed that he went down too low in freeing criminals who once committed heinous acts, regretting that what the president did was offensive in every sense of the word.

“In any thing that concerns the government, one expects that the president or the governor who holds an exalted position must conduct himself in a manner that will not undermine the interest of the state or the interest of the people, or undermine the maintenance of law and order,” Nzeako averred.

A former chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja Branch, Dave Ajetomobi, expressed dissatisfaction over the presidential pardon, describing the process as flawed and in need of investigation.

“The president relied on a committee to advise on who should be pardoned, believing the members were people of integrity. But with the current list, the public is beginning to question that belief,” Ajetomobi said.

“From what I witnessed, some prison officials allegedly demand bribes from undeserving inmates to get their names listed for release during visits. This kind of manipulation could have happened with the pardon process too,” he said.

Speaking in the same vein, human rights lawyer and activist, Chijioke Ifenkwe condemned the presidential pardons, calling the move a damaging blow to Nigeria’s justice system and anti-drug efforts. Ifenkwe criticized what he described as public indifference, stating: “In my opinion, people are not angry enough. They are just making comments as a defeated people.”

He wondered why pardons were granted to individuals convicted of serious drug-related crimes at a time the country is currently grappling with a deepening drug abuse crisis.

Also condemning the president’s action, Olawale stressed that while presidential clemency is not a new practice in Nigeria, the opaque nature of the selection process and the inclusion of individuals convicted of high-profile crimes raise questions about justice and equity.

Another legal practitioner and rights activist, Maduka Onwukeme, described the pardons as an embarrassment to the nation, particularly in the light of the inclusion of convicted drug traffickers.

“Nigeria is currently battling a pandemic of drug addiction. Our global reputation is already stained by drug trafficking cases involving Nigerians abroad. Granting pardons to convicted drug dealers at such a time sends the wrong message,” Onwukeme submitted.

About Maryam Sanda, Abba Kyari, NDLEA, others

Already, the presidential pardon has also opened a debate as to whether an agency like the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), which had laboured to extract conviction, had been justified.

Former Ikeja NBA chair, Ajetomobi, speaking against the backdrop of the public outrage, warned that such decisions risked undermining the justice system and the efforts of law enforcement agencies.

On the continued detention of embattled former police officer, Abba Kyari, Ajetomobi clarified that the concept of presidential pardon applies only to convicted individuals.

“Kyari is still standing trial. We should set sentiments aside and allow the legal process to run its course. The police haven’t collapsed since he left service,” he stated.

Rights lawyer and activist, Ifenkwe argued that the pardon undermines the efforts of law enforcement agencies such as NDLEA.

“This sends a clear message to the NDLEA. While the society is obviously battling a drug problem, the leaders in power do not seem to think so. They are sympathetic to offenders,” Ifenkwe said.

He also questioned the fairness of pardoning Maryam Sanda, while her accomplices continue to serve life sentences.

On the embattled Kyari who remains in detention over allegations of drug trafficking, Ifenkwe maintained that justice must be impartial.

“Releasing Abba Kyari should not even be on the table. He committed a crime and should face the consequences. Nothing makes him special,” he argued. “He abused his powers as a police officer in a country where policing crime is almost a luxury. It’s okay for him to face the music so others can learn.”

Olawale argued that what had happened would, going forward, undermine the work of agencies like the NDLEA.

“Granting pardon to convicted drug barons, while the NDLEA is risking lives to combat drug trafficking, sends the wrong message to the public.

“Pardons should be reserved for those convicted of misdemeanours, the elderly, or those who have shown clear signs of rehabilitation,” he stated

He acknowledged that Maryam Sanda’s case might have been influenced by humanitarian grounds, possibly due to her role as a mother. However, he insisted that all pardons must be grounded in law, not politics.

As for Kyari, Olawale maintained that his exclusion from the list of pardoned individuals was justified. “Kyari is facing serious allegations, some of which have international implications. His case is far from concluded, and he does not qualify for clemency under the current circumstances,” he explained.

On his part, Onwukeme lamented that Sanda’s pardon was not only unjust but deeply unfair.

“A commutation of her death sentence to life imprisonment might have been considered reasonable, but a complete pardon is unacceptable.

“Meanwhile, individuals like Sunday Jackson, who acted in self-defence, remain on death row,” he lamented.

The activist warned that the pardons could demoralize key security agencies like the NDLEA and the police, who risk their lives to bring criminals to justice, only to see them released without due accountability.

The President of Middle Belt Forum (MBF), Dr. Bitrus Pogu, contended that the president’s action would be frustrating to NDLEA officials and its leadership, adding that for whatever reason, it was discouraging.

However, he agreed that Abba Kyari’s case was something different. “Why would the president pardon such a character?” he queried.

He expressed dismay that Sanda was pardoned, urging that “if she is to be pardoned, her accomplices should also enjoy a similar pardon.”

Speaking on Sanda, former scribe of Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) Anthony Sani said: “The whole provision for the prerogative of mercy is expected to be used with discretion in the hope that such exercise would serve the better part of society, and not be seen as discriminatory.”

On Kyari, his take is that the “exercise of prerogative of mercy is not expected to be discriminatory. It is such discrimination which has drawn the angst of some people against the pardon for some people. The pardon might have not offended the law, but some of them have not met the requirement of moral rectitude.”

On his part, the President General of Mzough U Tiv (MUT) Worldwide Chief Iorbee Ihagh, noted that “the NDLEA is supposed to be discouraged, but because it is a government agency, its officials wouldn’t want to show anger at the President.

He however, questioned: “If people with serious offences are being released, why is Abba Kyari, Nnamdi Kanu and some people still in custody? Why were they not released?”

Overall, Nzeako’s take on the pardon is that it will naturally demoralize effort at conviction.

“It will demoralize the men who are putting their lives on the line to ensure that the society is safe for all. If someone is on the line to being executed and all of a sudden, you return them to the society, you are undermining the moral fabrics of the society.”

Critics knock Amnesty Committee

Critics have also condemned the work done by the prerogative of mercy committee. While defending the president from direct blame, Ajetomobi flayed the committee for the imbroglio.

“Contacts were likely made with someone influential, either inside or outside the committee. That’s the typical ‘Naija way.’

“I believe the president may not be happy with the backlash this has caused. Hopefully, he won’t repeat this mistake,” he added.

Sani in his submission said that the committee did a “half-baked job,” stressing that giving the prerogative of mercy to murderers and kidnappers who killed their victims could inflame the tempers of families of the victims.”

Sani gave reasons why people were angered by the presidential pardon.

“Many people are not satisfied with some of the pardons granted by President Bola Tinubu not because the pardons were illegal, but because the Presidential Committee on the Prerogative of Mercy did not do its home work of making mercy smarter by being discrete. For example, extending the prerogative of mercy to murderers and kidnappers who killed their victims can inflame the worst instinct of victims’ families.”

Calls for investigation

In the light of the foregoing, there have been strident calls for investigations into the debacle that passed as presidential pardon.

One of the folks seeking inquiry into the issues is Pogu, who said it was “unfortunate that these things are surfacing. Maybe the judicial officers who must have worked on those cases before recommending to Mr. President to act have some questions to answer.

“Investigative journalists should be able to find out what happened behind the scene in selecting those that should be pardoned; this should help us to make rational judgment. Under normal circumstances, we say it is not fair.”

Ajetomobi too emphasized that the handling of the assignment has brought shame, just as it had cast serious doubt on the credibility of the process, while accusing the actors of favouritism.

“This entire episode reeks of favouritism and backdoor dealings. The members of that committee must be held accountable for this odious show,” he maintained.

MBF, CNG, ACF, MUT flay action

Meanwhile various ethnic groups have lent their voices in condemning the Tinubu pardon.

Among the groups are the Middle Belt Forum (MBF), Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG), Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) and the Mzough U Tiv (MUT) Worldwide.

The President of MBF, Dr. Bitrus Pogu, reasoned that the president was not properly advised before he took the action.

“For whatever reason, Mr. President has done it, he will have to live with his conscience on why he did what he did, and whether or not he was properly briefed before he did what he did is another thing because governance is a complex thing.” The MBF president further pointed out that the president should have asked the judiciary to pick people who for some minor reasons had been in jail, to receive presidential pardon.

“Such would get the sympathy of Nigerians, but for people who pushed hard drugs, their pardon will not enjoy the sympathy of Nigerians.”

Sani also joined his voice in decrying President Tinubu’s action, describing pardoning particularly drug offenders as dangerous

“Drug trafficking is dangerous because the dangerous drugs destroy the society not only by killing, but because they affect people mentally and render them useless to themselves and the society.”

‘Action, assault on judiciary’

In like manner, the Coordinator, Coalition of Northern Groups, Comrade Jaliu Aliu Charanchi, said the presidential pardon is a direct assault on the integrity of the nation’s judicial system.

According to him, “it’s disheartening that a president who ought to uphold and preserve the rule of law is instead, eroding its very foundation.

“Such action sends the wrong signal, emboldens criminals and promotes lawlessness in the nation. The decision was not only regrettable but must be condemned in its entirety.”

‘With Kanu left out, action politically-motivated’

Chief Iorbee Ihagh also expressed displeasure at the presidential pardon, describing it as politically-motivated.

“The pardon is politically motivated and Nigerians are not happy about it. People are angry and certainly I’m angry because the right thing was not done.

“We have a problem in this country; if everything is politics, politics, we would not go anywhere. I don’t know why in such a pardon, somebody like Mazi Nnamdi Kanu was not touched. Why are you holding Kanu up till today? What has he done? If you want to try him, why not go ahead and try him and if you really want to jail him, jail him. But it is taking too many years. So, I want the Igbos to sit up and demand Kanu’s release.

“I was not happy with the amnesty because a lot of people that shouldn’t have been out of jail were given amnesty; but it’s because what they are doing is politics. Not everything should be politicized.”

Ihagh advised the President to do the correct thing, adding that in doing so all Nigerians would be happy.

“I advise President Tinubu to face the insecurity in the country, especially in the Middle Belt and address it.

“The people are being killed on a daily basis and the primary responsibility of the government is to protect lives and properties.

“Look at me, as the President General of Mzough U Tiv in the Middle Belt, my people are being killed on a daily basis. My wife died and I couldn’t bury her where I buried my dad, my mum and my elder brothers because of herdsmen. This is what he is supposed to be facing: not giving pardon to those that have committed crimes and leaving those that have not committed any offences.”

Equally, Olawale admitted that the fact that certain persons were excluded from the pardon list made the action appear politically-motivated. He called for transparency in the application of the prerogative of mercy.

For Nzeako, the reason why some people believe that some of the beneficiaries of the prerogative of mercy don’t deserve such pardon is because the government had not told Nigerians the criteria it used in arriving at such grant and the standard of the criterion it used to determine who was qualified for such grant of pardon.

“What that tells us is that there are many persons who are in correctional centres across the country who were not pardoned. So, one now is not wrong to ask: what were the criteria used in arriving at such a pardon? What standard of measurement was applied to determine whether it was going to be Mr. A or Ms. B over every other person who is currently languishing in the correctional centres? I think this does not help the country.”

Why Nigerians ought to be worried

Considering the sensitivity of the matter, Nzeako warned that what had gone down was very worrisome.

“When presidential pardon is deployed for political purposes, it will undermine the whole essence of the law. If it is deployed without due consideration and sensitivity to the law, it will go contrary to the expectations of the society. That, then, will be a misapplication of the principle of prerogative of mercy and application of the rule of law.

“The prerogative of mercy is there to ensure that in case there is miscarriage of justice it is corrected.”

He expressed sadness that “if an individual is obviously and manifestly convicted for a crime that they commit, and they are granted amnesty and pardon, that sends a very wrong signal to the society.

“In a way, this will begin to send the message that once you commit any crime you can go free as long as you are connected to the political class. In that case, such deployment of the prerogative of mercy will now stand on its head as very badly abused. And based on that, society will not get better.”

How recent pardon will shape society

Nzeako was clear in his submission that if any amnesty granted does not further the cause of justice, it is bad in itself.

“Any pardon given to a convict does not further the cause of justice, it is an abuse of the prerogative of mercy; because there is a reason why someone is in prison while others are not.

“There is a reason why there are laws to punish crimes. There is a reason citizens are encouraged to be obedient and civil in their approach to their daily living with others.”

He was unapologetic that the president’s action undermines the good of the society. “In that case, the one handing out the prerogative of mercy is breaking down the essential fabrics of the society. An abuse of the prerogative of mercy is an outright breakdown of the fabric of morality in any society where such abuse happens. That is why it is not easily dispensed. It is not easily convoked. And that is why it does not lie in the office of every person but those of the president or governor.

“It is expected that in handing out the prerogative of mercy, it must be done discretionally, bearing in mind the maintenance of sanity in the society.”

As promised by the Attorney-General of the Federation, the nation awaits, with bated breath, the conclusion of ongoing review of the process to see who and who will make the final amnesty list. (Saturday Sun)