By Olajide Abiodun (Notary Public)

President Bola Tinubu’s nomination of Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, as Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation has stirred up concerns among legal experts and political observers in Nigeria. This is due to Mr. Fagbemi being lead counsel for President Tinubu’s party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), in ongoing election petition cases filed by Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, candidate for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and Mr. Peter Obi, candidate for the Labour Party (LP).

The candidates are challenging President Tinubu’s declaration as winner of February 25th presidential elections by Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on grounds that irregularities occurred during voting.

The five justices of the Court of Appeal who make up the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal have reserved their judgment regarding these petitions after hearing submissions from all parties on August 1st, 2023. They will deliver their decision within a maximum period of one hundred eighty days from filing date; which falls before September 18th, 2023.

Before then however, Mr. Fagbemi must be confirmed by Senate as Minister if he is to assume his new role alongside serving as Lead Counsel representing President Tinubu and APC in this suit – a situation posing serious ethical dilemmas for him given his professional duty to represent clients to best ability while adhering to law & ethics versus constitutional obligation towards public interest – calling into question whether such dual roles create conflict or bias/ partiality? How might this affect his credibility/integrity?

Legal practitioners/civil society groups/opposition parties/concerned citizens argue that representation may be incompatible with appointment/nomination citing various constitutional provisions including Section 147(1)-(5) outlining qualifications necessary when appointing ministers; Sections148(1)-(2)&150(1)-(2) highlighting functions/responsibilities assigned Vice-President or any Minister responsible for governmental business &powers vested with Attorney-General Federation respectively; Section174(1)-powers given AGF relating to civil proceedings against Government Federation property/rights defence/intervention etc.; Section6(1),(4)&(12)-judicial power vestments/independence/impartiality/conflict resolution through written laws prescribed under criminal offence charges; Rules14-17 discussing lawyer conduct codes/guidelines governing witness advocacy/substantially related matters/public officer employment acceptance/litigation communication restrictions based on client representation.

It can therefore be deduced that should Mr. Fagbemi continue with dual roles without withdrawal from either position or revocation/rejection/redesignation thereof could result in ethical problems arising i.e., biased/partial behaviour/abusing power/professional integrity compromise/violating constitution/laws/public welfare erosion eroding confidence/trust in judiciary/executive governance bodies leading ultimately towards controversies/litigations stemming therefrom.

Hence it would appear advisable that either role(s) ought not coexist simultaneously so justice may be seen to have been done in the Sans controversy.

By Olajide Abiodun (Notary Public)
20/8/2023