The Law envisages an
ideal world, and as long as ours is imperfect, the Law will keep making a fool
of itself. A few recent experiences drove this point home, and I have captured
them under different story lines. Here goes:
I
was in court the other day during the final ruling in an action for Nuisance. The defendant’s generator was robbing the plaintiff of his nightly sleep. The
judgment favoured the plaintiff and the defendant was ordered to pay a few
hundreds of thousands in compensation. A no-brainer; it happens every day. But
think again! Place the litigants in a dinghy, overcrowded section of Lagos
where the electricity transformers have all crumbled from over-use, potable
water lies in subterranean idleness waiting for elusive electricity to draw it up, and ventilation is nil, as even air cannot move freely amidst the
logjam of buildings and humans. In a
place like this, a generator becomes a basic tool for self-preservation. Anything
less compromises the right to life. It is our world, our country, but the poor
defendant pays. Maybe that is the hidden meaning of separation of powers. Yes, separated from the governed
in favour of the governors. Now, you
will agree that the judge erred. Not just because he placed liability unjustly,
but also because he did not lay a proper sequence. The proper test should
be: Has
the plaintiff been able to establish specifically that it was the exact sound
of the defendant’s generator that denied him sleep at the precise hour of the
night in question? Has he eliminated the possibility that in a street
continuously buzzing with generators, it could be any of those (beyond that of
his immediate neighbour) that remotely or directly resulted in his forced insomnia?
Evidently, the judge looked at proximity. Yes, he may be right. But it then
means that our neighbours will keep paying for the sins of our far-away leaders. Long arms of the law;
my foot. As the court pleases!
2.
EMPLOYMENT,
PRIVACY & FACEBOOK
Regularly, I read of how some bosses in Europe and
America get into trouble for requesting the passwords to employees’ social
accounts. In many of these countries,
there are strong arguments that use of the Internet is a fundamental right. How
do you reconcile this then with the overbearing practice of most organizations:
forbidding Facebook at work. These days, they do not merely disable the
service (they have since been defeated by Smart phones and tablets) they
publish Employment Guidelines warning of immediate sack of “anybody found on
Facebook during work hours”. The question is; when you do ‘catch’ a defaulter,
how do you prove the frequency of his visits, and how has this frequency
affected his productivity? So, bosses merely set themselves up for wrongful
termination lawsuits. Knowing this, they merely fume and rave, while the
defaulting staff continues putting up smileys, and work piles up. But there’s a
solution bosses can try! And it’s simple: First, create a profile of a very
beautiful girl whose personal information conspicuously announces “an
unexplainable weakness for lawyers”. Secure in the feeling that you can’t sack
him, it won’t be too hard obtaining the Profile name of defaulting staff. The
next steps are easy: Miss Charming adds Staff as friend. No man ever turns down
a girl’s friend request. Of course as the boss you don’t have that much time to
waste, and so should recruit any available awaiting-Jamb-result niece of yours
for the task. The chats begin. ‘Hi lawyer; spare a moment for your admirer?’
Unsuspecting, he gleefully tumbles headlong. More shoddy jobs, more missed
deadlines. But thanks to the massive
memory of the Facebook chat history, within a week you will have enough evidence
to nail him. Not to worry, illegally obtained evidence is acceptable in our
courts. And most importantly, the sacked
dude retains his ‘right to browse’…only this time, for job openings.
3.
DEATH
FOR THE CORRUPT
Everyday, the self-righteous chants
ring: “the only way out of corruption in
Nigeria is to make it a capital offence!.” I agree. But I notice that the
proponents say it with their eyes on the public sector alone. Yes,
they are the sole custodians of our wealth and should exercise a higher level
of restraint! Really? But most critical wealth infrastructures are in the
private sector. For instance, if the banks decide to wrongly channel our
deposits for just 24 hours, it’s a state of emergency! So the penalty should extend to both sectors:
public and private. Now, instead of the glorious image of a bloated
agbada-decked senator being riddled with the executioner’s bullets, more gory
visions play out before my eyes: the University lecturer who hands out false
grades, the hireling that ‘pushes files’ at the Government Ministry, the
contractor with a hefty brown envelope, the hapless banker ‘borrowing’
depositors’ funds for the weekend, the peddler of fake drugs with the
Regulator’s mark of approval, etc. lining up tearfully to face the
executioner’s axe. Yea, you asked for ‘capital’ offence, and its literally
handed down. Corruption is capital-based. Oh, are we having a rethink! And come to think of it, who will effect the
arrests of these offenders? The police? (LOL!). See why the subject is not even
worth debating? On to the next one, please.
4.
SENDING
YOUR HUSBAND TO PRISON
The wedding day is a cocktail of sweet smiles
and kisses. How does life manage to get sour afterwards? The nags, the whines,
the sulks, the fights. But the line must
be drawn. Do not strike the woman! Yes, any man that beats a woman is a beast.
Anger and provocation are no defence! We
all agree. But these words do not stop the scourge. Every now and again, a
woman rushes out to the media and bares all. The rest gasp in shock and
outrage, meanwhile, gritting their teeth over their own private experiences and
uploading more fairy-tale photos of marriage on Facebook. That is until some dude goes overboard and the
woman loses limb or life. The Law is
reluctantly brought in then, but usually, it’s already late. The remedy? A dedicated care-line for victims of spousal
abuse. Once he deals you the lightest of slaps, call in the police quick! Also,
a Law should be passed covering ‘the least touching in anger” as battery; and a
minimum of 15 years behind bars for the brute. But therein lies the snag.
Without a divorce, what is the legal status of a woman who sends her husband to
jail, in our country? Oh sure, the
courts can order support for the wife and kids, but that is if the gentleman
has an estate in the first place? If he doesn’t, how much more can you punish
him for abdicating responsibility? He is already in jail! And we the outraged
onlookers, how willing are we to pay a special kind of tax: Support for
Battered Wives (SBW). More so, if the woman decides to divorce him, does our culture
readily send out our brothers and our sons to marry a woman reputed to have locked up her husband? This is a question even the Law cannot
answer.
I rest my thesis.
Also published in THISDAY Newspapers, Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Also published in THISDAY Newspapers, Tuesday, July 10, 2012
Hahahahahaha. I truly enjoyed this. From the perspective of your junior colleague at the bar, I see the issues here. Pretty serious issues but you've made them hilarious. New here but now following
ReplyDeleteThanks Cherry. U are most welcome to the Unstarched Collar
Delete