In July 2005, Bayo Ojo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), quietly left his position as the president of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Victoria Island, Lagos. Shortly thereafter, on a Monday in Abuja, he assumed the role of Attorney-General for President Olusegun Obasanjo, marking his fourth appointment to the position in five years.
Within three months of becoming Attorney-General of the Federation, Ojo filed a five-count charge against Alhaji Mujahid Asari Dokubo, who at the time was the self-proclaimed leader of the Niger Delta Peoples’ Volunteer Force (NDPVF) and a prominent member of the Pro-National Conference Organisation (PRONACO). The charges included two counts of treasonable felony, two counts of operating an unlawful society, and one count of publishing statements likely to incite fear and alarm.
Asari was already in detention when these charges were filed, and he was widely known as a key figure in the Niger Delta militia movement, which had caused significant damage to the country’s reputation and revenue.
The charges stemmed from a meeting of the Pan-Niger Delta Action Conference/Council held in Benin City, Edo State, on August 28, 2005. This meeting involved various advocacy groups from the Niger Delta region and resulted in a communique criticizing government officials for misappropriating oil revenue, leading to widespread poverty. The communique also labeled President Obasanjo as “dictatorial,” a statement considered unacceptable at the time.
Around two weeks after the conference, Asari granted an interview to the Independent Newspaper, during which he expressed his desire for Nigeria to dissolve and disintegrate, voicing strong opposition to the government. Based on these actions, Bayo Ojo accused Asari, along with others, of plotting to remove President Obasanjo through unconstitutional means, threatening violence against the government, and waging war against the country.
Asari pleaded not guilty when arraigned, seeking bail, which was denied by the Federal High Court citing national security concerns. The Court of Appeal later upheld this decision. The Supreme Court, led by Aloysius Katsina Alu, unanimously affirmed the denial of bail on June 8, 2006. The court’s reasoning, as articulated by Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, emphasized that national security takes precedence over individual rights, even if it meant suspending those rights. This judgment, however, lacked a clear rational basis for limiting constitutional freedoms, given the facts of the case.
This case illustrates the flexibility of Nigerian law, where legality often conforms to the preferences of those in power. This situational ethics approach has allowed various forms of misconduct, including abuse of power, corruption, judicial impropriety, extrajudicial killings, and election manipulation, to thrive unchecked.
Fast forward a decade later to 2016, President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration confronted the same judiciary it had once favored in the Asari Dokubo case, invoking the doctrine of national security. President Buhari referenced Justice Tanko Muhammad’s words from that case to justify his actions against the judiciary, receiving applause from the Nigerian Bar Association at their 2018 conference.
Now, in 2023, the political landscape has shifted, and Asari Dokubo, along with his Niger Delta Militants and SEA supporters, has become an influential force in Abuja. The law enforcement agencies, once his persecutors, now appear to look the other way as he flexes his influence. The Supreme Court, located near his activities, remains powerless. This illustrates the ever-changing nature of the rule of law and its susceptibility to political influence.