By Sonny Aragba-Akpore

On Monday September 16,2024,ByteDance and it’s short video platform,Tik Tok appeared at a crowded court in Washington DC,the United States of America (USA) before a panel of three judges to appeal against a law that is likely to ban the company from doing business in the USA by January 2025 if it does not divest its operations.
Although,this legal tussle is ongoing,Nigerian content creators appear to be the first victims of this long drawn battle between Tik Tok and the American government.
While the content creators wonder what becomes of their trade,Facebook and Instagram are making things more difficult for them.
Tik Tok ,Facebook and Instagram may have strong reasons for their actions but not as much as we know.
Meta Group,owners of Facebook,Instagram and WhatsApp last week deleted over 1,600 users in Nigeria for alleged scamming activities.
The deleted 1,600 Facebook groups are allegedly linked to Yahoo Boys.

This purge, which happened on October 17,2024 , follows the one in July 2024 that saw 7,200 Facebook assets removed. The company also announced that the recent removal of 63,000 Instagram accounts in Nigeria were tied to financial sextortion scams.

On Thursday ,October 17,2024 Meta revealed that these groups attempted to organise, recruit, and train new scammers. It said, “Yahoo Boys are banned under Meta’s Dangerous Organizations and Individuals policy — one of our strictest policies — which means we remove Yahoo Boys’ accounts engaged in this criminal activity whenever we become aware of them.”

“While we’ve been removing violating Yahoo Boys accounts for years, we’re putting new processes in place which will allow us to identify and remove these accounts more quickly.”

In addition to targeting scammers, Meta introduced new safety features aimed at protecting users, particularly teens, from sextortion scams. These measures include blocking suspicious accounts from following teens and making it harder for scammers to view follower lists, which are often used to blackmail victims.

The TikTok face off with the U.S. government in federal court specifically argued a law that could ban the platform in a few short months saying it is unconstitutional .

But the American Justice Department said it is needed to eliminate a national security risk posed by the popular social media company.

In the more than two-hour appearance before a panel of three judges at a federal appeals court in Washington, attorneys for the two sides – and content creators – were pressed on their best arguments for and against the law that forces TikTok and its China-based parent company ByteDance to break ties by mid-January or lose one of their biggest markets in the world.
Andrew Pincus, a veteran attorney representing the two companies, argued in court that the law unfairly targets the company and runs foul of the First Amendment because TikTok Inc. – the U.S. arm of TikTok – is an American entity. After his remarks, another attorney representing content creators who are also challenging the law argued it violates the rights of U.S. speakers and is akin to prohibiting Americans from publishing on foreign-owned media outlets, such as Politico, Al Jazeera or Spotify.
Despite the spirited arguments put forward by Tik Tok is already licking its wounds and in what seems a transferred aggression visited its spleen by deleting over two million accounts of Nigerians mid last week.
This is the second time in the last one year that it will visit its anger on Nigerians.
By last quarter of 2023, no fewer than 1.7 million accounts were deleted.
Figures published in ByteDance’s advertising resources indicate that TikTok had 23.84 million users aged 18 and above in Nigeria in early 2024 according to DataReportal.

ByteDance allows marketers to target TikTok ads to users aged 13 and above via its advertising tools, but these tools only show audience data for users aged 18 and above .

ByteDance’s figures indicate that TikTok ads reached 20.8 percent of all adults aged 18 and above in Nigeria at the start of 2024.

TikTok’s ad reach in Nigeria was equivalent to 23.1 percent of the local internet user base at the beginning of the year, regardless of age according to DataReportal.

In early 2024, 40.9 percent of TikTok’s ad audience in Nigeria was female, while 59.1 percent was male.ByteDance’s advertising resources only publish audience gender data for “female” and “male” users.

DataReportal explains that, ad audiences often only account for a subset of a platform’s total users, and given that TikTok’s ad tools only publish data for users aged 18 and above, it’s important to remember that trends in TikTok’s ad reach figures may not necessarily match changes in the platform’s overall user base. In reality TikTok’s ad reach in Nigeria was equivalent to 23.1 percent of the local internet user base at the beginning of the year, regardless of age.

The battle in the American courts is especially calculated to upturn a Presidential Executive Order which specifically directs Tik Tok to divest its operations by breaking away from the Chinese appendages.

The measure, signed by President Joe Biden in April, 2024 was the culmination of years-long saga in Washington over the short-form video-sharing app, which the government sees as a national security threat due to its connections to China.

The U.S. has said it’s concerned about TikTok collecting vast swaths of user data, including sensitive information on viewing habits, that could fall into the hands of the Chinese government through coercion.

Officials have also warned the proprietary algorithm that fuels what users see on the app is vulnerable to alleged manipulation by Chinese authorities, who can use it to shape content on the platform in a way that’s difficult to detect.

So what is the offence of Nigerian content creators in all of these?

During the second quarter of 2024, approximately 21.6 million TikTok accounts owned by Nigerians were removed from the platform due to suspicion of being operated by users under the age of 13.
“During the last measured period, around 171 million fake accounts were removed from fake accounts removed from TikTok” as alleged by the company saying that the deleted accounts allegedly consistently violated Community Guidelines and so stood banned from TikTok.

“If your account has been banned, you’ll receive a banner notification when you next open the app, informing you of this account change” Tik Tok stated.

Some of the accounts were deleted because they were said to be inactive and were not used to access TikTok for at least 180 days.

“Whether an account is inactive is not publicly visible and duplication of user name is inadmissible.”

“In most instances, we cannot reassign a username. We suggest using a variation of your desired username by adding numbers or underscores, or using an abbreviation.

If you believe that a username infringes your intellectual property rights, view our Intellectual Property Policy.”

TikTok’s Community Guidelines Enforcement Report provides insight into how the platform maintains safety and integrity. With over 40,000 trust and safety professionals working alongside cutting-edge technology, TikTok enforces strict guidelines and policies to ensure a positive experience for all users.
With a global proactive detection rate of 98.2%, TikTok is more efficient than ever at preventing harmful content from reaching its audience.

The platform’s ongoing investment in cutting-edge moderation technology is coupled with its commitment to transparency, ensuring a secure space for its diverse Nigerian and global users.

TikTok’s report is part of its broader mission to inspire creativity and foster a joyful, safe environment for all users.

These actions reflect TikTok’s focus on ensuring user safety by addressing harmful content swiftly. The platform continues to invest in advanced technologies to detect and remove inappropriate material.

Globally, TikTok removed over 178 million videos in June 2024, with 144 million of these removed through automated systems.

These improvements have helped reduce the exposure of moderators to harmful content, as well as the speed of detection.

“In its Q2 2024 Community Guidelines Enforcement Report, Tik Tok emphasized its commitment to maintaining a safe and positive environment for Nigerian users.

This report provides transparency into the platform’s content moderation efforts, highlighting the videos and accounts removed for violating community guidelines” according to agency reports.
The 2.1 million videos deleted from Nigeria are less than 1% of all content uploaded in the country.
The social media platform attributed this action to violations of its Community Guidelines.

It noted Nigeria’s presence among the top 50 countries for such policy breaches during Q4 of 2023.
Globally, 176.5 million videos were removed during this period, with the top 50 offending markets responsible for about 90% of these removals.

According to the report, the deleted videos violate TikTok’s restrictions pertaining to safety, and civility. Additionally, they violate mental and behavioral health, privacy and security, integrity, and authenticity restrictions, among others.

TikTok claimed that within the period under examination, it had deleted 169 million accounts that had been found to be fraudulent or spam.

Agency reports quoted TikTok Ada’s saying “From October through to the end of 2023, we removed more than 169 million fake accounts globally. Also, we have removed about 1.2 million bot comments on content tagged with hashtags related to the Israel-Hamas war.”

“However, we remain vigilant in our efforts to detect external threats and safeguard the platform from fake accounts and engagement.

“These threats persistently probe and attack our systems, leading to occasional fluctuations in the reported metrics within these areas.”

Since its launch, TikTok has become one of the world’s most popular social media platforms, using recommendation algorithms to connect content creators with new audiences.

In April 2020, TikTok surpassed two billion mobile downloads worldwide.
Cloud flare ranked TikTok the most popular website of 2021, surpassing Google.The popularity of TikTok has allowed viral trends in food and music to take off and increase the platform’s cultural impact worldwide.

TikTok has come under scrutiny due to data privacy violations, mental health concerns, misinformation, offensive content, and its role during the Israel–Hamas war.

Countries have fined, banned, or attempted to restrict TikTok to protect children or out of national security concerns over possible user data collection by the Chinese government through ByteDance.

TikTok, started as Douyin in China and Hong Kong as a short-form video hosting service owned by Chinese internet company ByteDance. It hosts user-submitted videos, which can range in duration from three seconds to 60 minutes.It can be accessed with a smart phone app.

ByteDance planned on Douyin expanding overseas. The founder of ByteDance, Zhang Yiming, stated that “China is home to only one-fifth of Internet users globally. If we don’t expand on a global scale, we are bound to lose to peers eyeing the four-fifths. So, going global is a must.”

ByteDance created TikTok as a global version of Douyin. TikTok was launched in the international market in September 2017.On November 9,2017, ByteDance spent nearly $1 billion to purchase Musical.ly, a startup headquartered in Shanghai with an overseas office in Santa Monica, California.Musical.ly was a social media video platform that allowed users to create short lip-sync and comedy videos, initially released in August 2014.

TikTok merged with Musical.ly on August 2,2018 with existing accounts and data consolidated into one app, keeping the title TikTok.

On January 23,2018, the TikTok app ranked first among free application downloads on app stores in Thailand and other countries.TikTok has been downloaded more than 130 million times in the United States and has reached two billion downloads worldwide,according to data from mobile research firm Sensor Tower (those numbers exclude Android users in China).

In the United States, celebrities, including Jimmy Fallon and Tony Hawk, began using the app in 2018.Other celebrities, including Jennifer Lopez, Jessica Alba, Will Smith, and Justin Bieber joined TikTok as well as many others.In January 2019, TikTok allowed creators to embed merchandise sale links into their videos.

On September 3,2019, TikTok and the U.S. National Football League (NFL) announced a multi-year partnership.The agreement occurred just two days before the NFL’s 100th season kick-off at Soldier Field, where TikTok hosted activities for fans in honor of the deal.

The partnership entails the launch of an official NFL TikTok account, which is to bring about new marketing opportunities such as sponsored videos and hashtag challenges.

In July 2020, TikTok, excluding Douyin, reported close to 800 million monthly active users worldwide after less than four years of existence.

In May 2021, TikTok appointed Shou Zi Chew as their new CEO who assumed the position from interim CEO Vanessa Pappas, following the resignation of Kevin A. Mayer on August 27, 2020.In September 2021, TikTok reported that it had reached one billion users.
In 2021, TikTok earned $4 billion in advertising revenue.

In October 2022, TikTok was reported to be planning an expansion into the e-commerce market in the US, following the launch of TikTok Shop in the United Kingdom. The company posted job listings for staff for a series of order fulfillment centers in the US and is reportedly planning to start the new live shopping business before the end of the year.

Douyin was launched by ByteDance in September 2016, originally under the name A.me, before rebranding to Douyin in December 2016.

Douyin was developed in 200 days and within a year had 100 million users, with more than one billion videos viewed every day.

While TikTok and Douyin share a similar user interface, the platforms operate separately.

Douyin includes an in-video search feature that can search by people’s faces for more videos of them, along with other features such as buying, booking hotels, and making geo-tagged reviews.

BY. DELE AILEMEN

Having been involved for most of my life in working class and progressive activism, and journalism nationally and globally, I must admit my hopefulness at the inspirational nomination of Hon. Mohammed Maigari Dingyadi for the Labour and Employment portfolio. These are simultaneously defining and trying times for President Bola Tinubu administration. Undeniably, the helms of the labour and employment is an existential artery for oxygenerating our national socio-economic health. The choice of President Tinubu for the phenomenal task of the ministry is vitally consequential.

After months of speculations and serial rumour, President Tinubu announced changes and rejuvenation in the federal executive council. In swift action, he named seven ministerial nominees supplanting five others. As expected, the ministerial-shake up has elicited energetic comments in the media and other platforms.

While some have vilified and minimized the efforts of Tinubu saying that the changes were not far reaching, others believe that the administration deserves commendation for the courage to effect potentially profound reforms.

Amid the cacophony of talks about the cabinet changes, there are indisputable silver linings of positivity; for the first time, since the birth of the fourth republic in 1999, Tinubu attached portfolios to the list of ministerial nominees for the Senate screening. With this audacious decision, the President has responded to the yearning of Nigerians who have clamoured for such feature in the nomination process in a way that enables the Senate to engage in direct interrogation and thoughtful scrutiny of every nominee.

To every discerning, and informed mind interested in national growth and development, the labour and employment portfolio is very paramount. In developed climes, necessary, and imperative details are devoted to who manages this strategic ministry in every administration. From empirical studies, countries like the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia conscious of the importance of labour and employment to growth and development ensure that whoever heads the sector must possess criterion fitting for necessary collaboration, and realistic synergies between the government, organised labour, and private sector.

For every Nigerian that has followed the distinguished public service career of Alhaji Mohammed Maigari Dingyadi, his choice as a ministerial-nominee by Tinubu is well-deserved. Also, his expected deployment to labour and employment is akin to putting a round peg in round hole. Indeed, it is apposite to commend Tinubu for the nomination which depicts his commitment, and determination towards having all-round, all-inclusive, robust, and results-yielding labour-government relations as necessary impetus for national development.

In his over four decades post-graduation career as a dedicated civil servant; consummate administrator; resourceful security expert; responsive lawmaker; altruistic politician; and serial philanthropist, Dingyadi has carved enviable niches for himself. Deploying boundless energies, bountiful courage, consistent candour, and ceaseless competencies in the discharge of every duty, assignment and responsibility, Dingyadi has recorded unblemished records of excellence, and achievements in his numerous services to the country, state, community, and humanity.

That Tinubu has found him worthy to oversee the labour and employment portfolio speaks volumes about his high-rating, and affirmation of his achievements as the police affairs minister, between August 2019 and May 2023 in the Buhari administration. That he is the sole nominee; from the last government to deserve a positive look-in confirms, in many ways the acknowledgement of his performances in the last administration, and recognition of his consistency, character, capabilities, and competencies.

From available records, Dingyadi is arguably, the best police affairs minister since 1999. Under his leadership, the Nigerian Police Force, and other agencies such as the Police Academy, Wudil; Police Training Colleges; and Nigerian Police Trust Fund witnessed improved operations, and service deliveries. Numerous initiatives were emplaced towards capacity building, ethical standardization, and operational sustainability of agencies under the ministry.

Under his supervision, the police affairs ministry posted many laudable achievements including:- presidential assent to the elevation of the Police Academy, Wudil to a full-fledged degree awarding institution; presidential assent to the establishment of the federal government Public-Private Security Fund; review, and upgrade of training curriculum for police institutions to align with contemporary policing realities; full implementation of the Integrated Payroll and Personnel Information System (IPPIS) at all agencies; establishment of the Interpol Cybercrime Reportorial Platform; commissioned the NPF Crime and Incident Database Centre; establishment of the NPF Cybercrime Control Centre; deployment of ICT-based apparatus at strategic commands and units in fighting crime; improved operational apparatus of the Interpol Cybercrime Unit; and launch of “NPF Rescue Me” application.

Dingyadi also ensured that officers, personnel, and staff of the ministry, and agencies benefited from various operational, empowerment, and welfare initiatives towards encouraging commitment, and service deliveries at all levels. These included:- construction, renovation and rehabilitation of police stations and barracks at FCT, Lagos, Gombe, Kebbi, Abia, Plateau, Edo, Ogun, Borno, Sokoto, Niger, Bayelsa, and other states; construction and rehabilitation of hospitals and health centres; provision of operational vehicles, arms and ammunition, and others; provision of intelligence equipment at Abuja Force Headquarters, and Headquarters Annex in Lagos; provision of medical equipment, kits, and other consumables; recruitment of about 100,000 constables through open, transparent, and credible processes; recruitment of young WASC holders into the Nigerian Police Academy, Wudil for Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) training; and many others.

Given his broad-based experiences, and multi-disciplinary competencies which has attracted national and global recognition over the years, Dingyadi is best-suited to be the labour and employment minister. As a top civil servant in Sokoto state where he rose to the position of Secretary to State Government; having functioned as Permanent Secretary in the Career, Special Services, and other strategic ministries, he had excellent working relationship with civil servants such that at no time did workers embarked on any strike action. As a federal lawmaker, he played useful roles in every legislative intervention with the organised labour. At the ministry of police affairs, labour unions, and workers had productive synergies with him. One is confident that leveraging on his manifested love for humanity, and the general well-being of people, Dingyadi would help advance smooth, better, and fruitful government-labour relations towards immense benefits to the Nigerian worker, and the nation.

* DELE AILEMEN, Co-Convener, 2002 Los Angeles (California)People’s Convention; and Chairman, defunct Bendel State Council of Nigeria Union of Journalists writes from Benin.

By Achi. William-Wobodo

Being a judge, is a tough personal call to make. It is a highly demanding and ethical job to do, which makes a judge vulnerable and prone to bullying. A judge is trained to rise up in defence of the defenseless, yet he cannot defend himself. The rot in our society has made the job even more hazardous.

For every judgement that does not go in the way of public opinion and expectation, the judge is blamed and accused of corruption. This is unpatriotic. Judges are not employed to pander to public opinion. I am not in anyway suggesting that there are no corrupt judges in the system, but I honestly believe that the incorrupt ones are much more than the corrupt ones.

As we know it, Nigeria operates an adversarial legal system, which means that the parties are responsible for providing evidence upon which the court predicates its judgement. This is different from the inquisitorial system where the Court gets involved in the investigation of the facts of a case. Our legal system forbids a judge from applying extraneous facts in the determination of a case, except those brought before it by the parties in accordance with the law of evidence. In others words, even if a judge witnesses an event, he cannot apply his eye-witness account/evidence in his determination of the case. At best, he may recuse himself from such a case.

In the last few months, on account of THE POLITICAL CRISIS IN RIVERS STATE, Judges of the Federal High Court, especially, have come under serious public attacks and aspirations from some misinformed members of the public and MISCHIEVOUS LAWYERS, some of whom are either ignorant of courtroom practices and procedures or are indulging in clout chasing ventures. It is even more reprehensible and shameful when lawyers, who ought to have known better, are the ones indulging in such unethical and unprofessional conducts. These lawyers know that JUDGES HAVE NO RIGHT OF PUBLIC REPLY, yet they chose to castigate and cast aspersions on them; Most times, based on unsubstantiated allegations.

It is AN ACT OF COWARDICE TO CONTINUOUSLY ATTACK A DEFENSELESS PERSON.

LET ME EVEN CONSIDER TWO SCENARIOS FROM RIVERS STATE AS EXAMPLES.

In the wake of the crisis now rocking the Rivers State Government, between the Executive arm (the Governor) and Legislature arm; over the “alleged division” in the Rivers House of Assembly (RSHA) at the time. The Speaker of the RSHA (Rt. Hon. Martins Amaehwule) and the RSHA itself approached the Federal High Court for the determination of several questions, including: whether or not the “ALLEGED CRISIS/DIVISION IN RSHA” had crystallized to the point that the National Assembly (NASS) can takeover the functions of the RSHA pursuant to SECTION 11(4) of the 1999 Constitution, whether there was division in the RSHA, who was the authentic Speaker of the RSHA, etc.

Based upon which Rt.Hon. Amaehwule and the RSHA asked for declarations that Rt.Amehwule is the authentic Speaker of RSHA, that the crisis in RSHA did not warrant the NASS to takeover the functions of the RSHA, that the RSHA is entitled and empowered to make Appropriation Laws for Rivers State, including 2024 Appropriation Law, etc. Most of the Defendants in the case put up nominal appearance and defence in the matter, EXCEPT FOR the Governor of Rivers State and Rt. Hon. Edison Ehie (factional speaker at the time) who put up contest in the case.

Before or on the day fixed for the hearing of the case, Mr. Governor through his Counsel withdrew his Counter Affidavit/Defence (for reasons best known to the Governor and of course he is entitled to) and his Defence to the case was accordingly struck out. In same vein, Rt. Hon. Edison Ehie not only withdrew his own Counter Affidavit/Defence to the case, he presented a letter indicating his resignation as a Member of the RSHA. In other words, he also affirmed to the Court that he has lost his right, if any, to the claim of Speakership of the RSHA.

Invariably, there was NO CONTENDING DEFENCE to the case of Rt. Hon. Amaehwule and the RSHA. Justice Omotosho reviewed the evidence before him, which were DEEMED UNCHALLENGED and then reached conclusions and entered judgement for Rt.Hon. Amaehwule and RSHA to the effect that THERE WAS (IS) NO DIVISION in the RSHA, that Rt.Hon Amaehwule is the AUTHENTIC SPEAKER of the RSHA, that the RSHA led by Rt.Hon. Amaehwule is the rightful RSHA to make Appropriation Laws for Rivers State, that the Governor should present the 2024 Appropriation Bill before the appropriate RSHA.

It is important to mention that one of the issues raised by the Governor in his withdrawn Defence/Preliminary Objection was the fact that no Pre-Action Notice was served on the NASS before the action was commenced. Yes, the issue was jurisdictional in nature, but it a PROCEDURAL JURISDICTION ISSUE, not a substantive jurisdiction issue. The law is settled that a procedural jurisdiction question touching on non-service of pre-action notice can only be raised by the person directly affected, in that case NASS. The reason is because, the party concerned has an option to waive the right and proceed to defend the case against him without objection. The NASS took part in defense of the case.

In any case, the Governor withdrew his objection.

I have asked all those who fault the decision of Hon. Justice Omotosho in the media to point a finger to a fault, either in procedure or decision, in the judgement and I am yet to see o finger. Assuming anyone still had doubts about that judgement, the Court of Appeal had cleared the doubt.

The Governor who submitted to judgement by withdrawing his defence refused to obey the same judgement.

Not surprisingly, the Governor who in law is DEEMED TO HAVE CONSENTED TO THE CASE of Rt. Hon Martins Amaehwule before the Federal High Court, went to the Court of Appeal to challenge a JUDGEMENT OF FHC DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ENTERED BY “HIS CONSENT”, WITHOUT THE LEAVE OF COURT to so do, contrary to SECTION 241(2)(c) of the 1999 CONSTITUTION and decided cases: See: ABDULKARIM VS. INCAR (NIG) LTD, (1992) LPELR-26(SC) (Pg.23-24, para D-A). The Governor also challenged the procedural jurisdiction of the Federal High Court predicated on non-service of pre-action notice on the NASS, a personal right of the NASS which was waived by the NASS by participating in the case without objection.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal for lacking in merit, and the Court is blamed; it is corrupt.

ANOTHER CASE: All People’s Party (APP) filed an action before the Federal High Court seeking a declaration that Rt. Hon. Amaehwule and 26 others have lost their seat. The APP commenced the action through an ORIGINATING SUMMONS, which is a procedure used for determination of non-contentious and non-hostile facts. Perhaps, the APP and its lawyers had expected an easy sail from Rt.Hon. Amaehwule and members of the RSHA. They are used to defection cases where the Defendants would say, “yes we defected because our party has dispute or division”: and then the court is called upon to interpret the admitted facts vis-a-vis the law.

They had expected Rt. Hon. Amaehwule and co to say we defected. Unfortunately, they met an unanticipated shocker, a brick wall; Rt.Hon. Amaehwule and co stated that they did not defect. A case which APP and it’s lawyers had thought would be heard based on non-contentious facts, had automatically become contentious and hostile by that singular denial.

The APP and it’s lawyers had three (3) options open to them by that material denial: (1) withdraw the case and file a fresh suit via Writ of Summons, (2) apply to the Court to order the parties to file pleadings, which would allow them to call oral evidence to prove the allegation of defection or (3) continue the case in its form with ruptured foundation and foreseeable pitfalls. They opted for number (3) and proceeded with their Originating Summons, then filed FURTHER AFFIDAVIT to which they ATTACHED A FLASH DRIVE that “allegedly” contained video clip of a certain defection.

The questions and challenges then arose: how and where does the court watch or see the content of the flash drive? ls it while in his chambers writing the judgement? If there is anything that needs clarification from the flash, who does he turn to in his chambers? Would he call the APP or its lawyers for explanation?

On realizing the procedural error, the APP still had an option of applying to that Court to convert the case by filing pleadings and to call oral evidence in order to resolve the allegation of defection, they did not. Rather, they pushed on with yet another and graver procedural error. The APP decided to play the video in the flash drive in open court, WITHOUT ANY WITNESS TO DEMONSTRATE THE VIDEO, TO IDENTIFY THOSE IN THE VIDEO OR WHERE THE “MOVIE” WAS SHOT, OR TO IDENTIFY THE MAKER OF THE MOVIE (VIDEO) (the CONTENT CREATOR). They pushed the procedural comedy and errors to a finish and left.

The the Judge was expected to perform a miracle, regularize the errors and grant them judgement.

Anyways, based on settled position of the law as decided by the apex Court, the Federal High Court Judge had no difficulties trashing and discarding the flash and its content as a piece of document dumped on the court. With that trashy piece of evidence made worthless by the inadvertence of counsel off the way, the Court was left with reviewing any other means of proof of membership of the said RSHA members, which should include, either APC membership register, PDP membership register, letter of resignation, etc. Unfortunately, these evidence were not before the Federal High Court. The Court therefore had no difficulty in reaching a finding that the APP did not prove defection.

As we now know, a judge, based on our adversarial legal system, cannot apply his residual knowledge of or any extraneous facts, not duly presented before him in accordance with the Law of Evidence, in the determination of any case before him. So, it remains immaterial if the judge’s wife was a camera person who made the “alleged” video or that the judge himself was in the chambers of RSHA on such a day or that he read or saw on news media any of the facts in contention. The law is that such facts MUST NOT ONLY BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE COURT, BUT ALSO IN LINE WITH THE EVIDENCE ACT, otherwise the judge cannot rely on them.

Sadly, we do not see the public blame lawyers, who either by inadvertence, overconfidence, indiscretion, desire for speedy trial, etc, destroy a hitherto actionable and legitimate cause of action and eventually their clients’ case. All we see are aspersions on Judges.

If non-lawyers feign ignorance of the workings of the Court, it may be justified and pardonable; but should same go for lawyers, who should haven better. Every lawyer knows when he has made a mistake in the prosecution of case, he is human who is prone to errors. If he is not courageous enough to own his mistakes, he should at least be honourable enough to keep quiet and not pass his blame by alleging corruption against the Judge.

It is a moral issue for both the lawyers and the litigants who cast aspersions on the courts. For instance, In 2023, the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division and the Supreme Court of Nigeria affirmed the Governor of Rivers State as the duly elected governor of Rivers States, the Governor organized thanksgivings, where he eulogized the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court Justices as men of honour and integrity. Those who lost took it in good faith and obeyed the orders of Courts.

At that time, no one heard the Governor make any insinuations of corruption against these courts. Few months afterwards, the Governor was ordered to present Rivers State Appropriation Bill to the RSHA recognized by the same Court that had recognized the Governor few months earlier, and what we now hear from SAME Governor who eulogized SAME Courts are insinuations of corruption against the courts. It seems hypocritical to me.

Litigants and lawyers must stop this act of casting aspersions on judges simply because the judges are not allowed by the ethics of their job to react. Should any one have proof of corruption against a judge, let him seek redress lawfully rather the public opprobrium. And for lawyers, whom I believe to be legal scholars in the college of continuing legal education, if anyone strongly feels that a decision of a court is wrong in law, and he cannot resort to appeal because he is not counsel in the matter, then such a lawyer can do a legal essay to query/critic decision based on acceptable legal review mechanisms, not by deploying blackmail and defamation.

Judges are human, they also have feelings and emotions which are bruised by these aspersions.

Please, SAY NO TO SOCIAL MEDIA BLACKMAIL, BULLYING, IRRITATION, ASPERSIONS on judges doing their legitimate jobs according to the dictates of their conscience. If they err or are corrupt, seek legitimate redress.

Achi. William-Wobodo
Lawyer writing from Port Harcourt