Estimated reading time: 8 minutes
By David Timilehin
At the heart of the coastal part of Ondo State where I come from, there is usually a metaphorical expression used to underscore the danger of extending an invitation to trouble unsolicitedly. The expression which has almost metamorphosed into an everyday cliche used to warn vagabonds is about a personified āĆØsĆØā (trouble) lying gently in his abode while a mischievous provocateur goes to beam a searchlight on him.
In the same vein, Chinua Achebe in his āArrow of Godā published in 1964 exposed us to the danger of being intoxicated by one’s previous wins and refusal to bow out of the stage when the ovation is still loud. I now quote from pages 26-27 of the book mutatis mutandis: āOnce there was a great wrestler whose back has never known the ground. He wrestled from village to village until he had thrown every man in the world. Then he decided that he must go and wrestle in the land of the spirits, and become champion there as well. He went, and beat every spirit that came forward. Some had seven heads, some ten, but he beat them all. His companion who sang his praise on the flute begged him to come away, but he would not, his blood roused, his ear nailed up. Rather than heed the call to go home, he gave a challenge to the spirits to bring out their best and strongest wrestler. So they sent him his personal god, a little wiry spirit who seized him with one hand and smashed him on the stony earth.ā
A major takeaway from the above didactic folktale in Chinua Achebeās book is that in this life, one must not be mesmerized by past triumphs to the extent of not knowing when to sheathe one’s sword. Another important as well as instructive takeaway therein is that it is not everyone that can be fought: You engage in fisticuffs with some personalities and your back will be smashed to the ground, breaking your spine forever.
It seems the now embattled lawyer and self-acclaimed whistleblower, Dele Farotimi, is not privy to this folktale of Chinua Achebe and has not copulated with the wisdom inherent in it. If not, why is ĆØsĆØ lying gently in his habitat and Dele Farotimi searching it with his dying hurricane lamp? Maybe I should provide a succinct background to the brouhaha so as to refresh the memories of my readers and put the matter in its proper perspective.
A few weeks ago, social media was awash with vitriols and vituperations following the arrest of a popular lawyer, Dele Farotimi, who without restraint thrust mountainous allegations on a revered legal giant, Aare Afe Babalola, causing the 95-year-old learned silk to be staggering in circles from the distress of the energy-sapping weights. Renegade Farotimi did not just stop at that. Just the way unfettered lunatic runs amok into the market square, victimizing innocent traders for no just cause, Farotimi looked pointedly at the Supreme Court bench and spat on the faces of the justices sitting thereon. This he did through the instrumentality of his controversial book entitled āNigeria and its Criminal Justice Systemā.
Indeed, whom the gods want to destroy they first make mad ā thanks to the Greek Euripides tragedy for the popularisation of this cliche. Also, the Yorubas in their wisdom said: āAjĆ” tĆ³ wį»lĆ© tį» įŗ¹kĆ¹n gbį»Ģdį»Ģ į¹£etĆ”n lĆ”ti fįŗ¹Ģjįŗ¹Ģ wįŗ¹Ģā (Meaning āThe dog which defiantly dashes into the leopardās den must be ready to get drenched in blood). With the combined effect of the above aphorisms, I begin to wonder what could be the motivation for the public crying wolf on Dele Farotimiās matter. How do you smear the reputation ā which undoubtedly was built with sweat and blood over the yearsā of a man like that and you expect him not to fight back? Not even when the man is inching closer to his grave than ever before! Do these people know what it takes to build such a towering career like Afe Babalolaās?
Assuredly, Dele Farotimi would have a rough ride in this bumpy terrain he has taken. His case is that of a person between the devil and the deep blue sea. The fact that he was charged under the criminal jurisprudence of defamation will leave a lasting impression that freedom (in this case freedom of speech) is not, has never been, and was never intended to be absolute. To allow that would be anathema to modern civilisation. Moreso, every action has consequences. And whatever a man of free volition does with his free will, he must be prepared to withstand the furnace of its consequences. While Dele Farotimi may be carrying the day in the court of public opinion, it is a different ball game in the court of law. Those who win in the court of public opinion are more often than not losers in the court of law who only find a euphoric respite in the court of public opinion.
ALSO READ
The court of law does not operate by conjectures, assumptions, suspicions, and generalizations, but on facts. And not just facts but relevant facts. Presumably to the chagrin of my readers, the court is not even targeting the truth of the matter but the facts thereof. So it is safe to say that the truth at times may not even qualify as facts; likewise, the facts may sometimes not be true. Howbeit, where the truth coincides with the facts, it is good for both.
What makes this case even more labyrinthine is that Aare Afe Babalola is not the only one indicted, our apex court is equally on trial. This, ipso facto, impugns the integrity of our judiciary and cast mud on the resplendent face of our court system. So the justice here is not only for Aare Afe Babalola but also for the Nigerian judiciary.
How will Dele Farotimi prove that Afe Babalola actually corrupted the judiciary as averred in his book? By oral testimonies of witnesses? Highly unlikely. By direct evidence? I doubt its possibility. By documentary evidence? Highly improbable. Or is he going to rely on hearsay evidence from one unnamed lawyer released by WikiLeaks last week in the absence of the so-called lawyer showing up to testify as to its veracity? In the light of the foregoing, the only defense that could exculpate Farotimi [Justification] would most likely hit the rocks.
In retrospect, the available facts negate the inference that Aare Afe Babalola must have been greasing the palm of the judges because he has been winning all his cases. There were high-profile cases in which influential government officials were involved and the 95-year-old man lost. A Facebook friend of mine, Karounwi Adini, aptly captured three such instances in one of his posts:
āTerhemen Tarzoor was the PDP Gubernatorial Candidate for Benue in 2015, and contested against Samuel Ortom of APC. Afe Babalola’s chambers represented him at the Appeal and Supreme Court and lost against Samuel Ortom and the APC.
āAfe Babalola’s chamber represented Chief Segun Oni of PDP against Kayode Fayemi and the then AC/ACN over the 2007 gubernatorial election in Ekiti. In 2010, the Appeal Court sitting in Ilorin declared Kayode Fayemi the winner of the 2007 election in Ekiti, the Fayemi appellant team was led by Mallam Yusuf Ali SAN.
āIn 2006/2007, during the Obasanjo vs Atiku fight, Obasanjo had declared Atiku’s seat vacant (for decamping to the then AC), the case dragged from Appeal to Supreme Court. Afe Babalola argued on the side of FG and Attorney-General, Wole Olanipekun, argued on the side of Alhaji Atiku Abubakar.
āIn February 2007, the Appeal Court declared Atiku’s sack as VP unconstitutional and in April 2007, the Supreme Court again dismissed Afe Babalola’s appeal and affirmed that Atiku Abubakar was the rightful VP.
āIf Afe Babalola was OBJ’s lawyer, in a case where OBJ was personally interested in removing the other party at the Supreme Court and OBJ was the President, why couldn’t Afe Babalola’s so-called influence over Supreme Court judges help him win the case?
āDoes it not occur to you that Afe Babalola is a great lawyer not because he never loses cases, but because he wins far more cases than he loses because he knows his onions and prepares well,ā Karounwi Adini submitted.
I am very much abreast of the debate on whether Aare Afe Babalola was right to have deployed the criminal justice system in his pursuit of justice. If I am asked to contribute my view, my answer would be in the affirmative. Why? In the foreword to his book, Dele Farotimi alleged that Aare Afe Babalola once libeled him and he sued him but the nonagenarian leveraged his influence on the judiciary to deny him justice. So the point is that even if the learned silk had sought redress through civil means and got judgment in his favour, Dele Farotimi would still have alleged that the scale of justice was skewed against him, courtesy of Aare Afe Babalolaās so-called influence.
Ultimately, Dele Farotimi should be ready to dance to his music. If he comes out of this fiery furnace unscathed, lucky for him. And if he is consumed by the conflagration, so be it. After all, the Yorubas usually say: āA kĆ¬Ć tāįŗ¹sįŗ¹Ģ bāodĆ² kĆ” tĆŗn mĆ”a kĆgbe Ć²tĆŗtĆ¹,ā meaning āOne cannot voluntarily step into the stream and still complain of cold.ā Thus, Dele Farotimi has stepped into this stream, and as such, he must not be heard complaining of cold.
Timilehin David Abiodun is a penultimate Law student at Adekunle Ajasin University, Akungba-Akoko, Ondo State. He is an avid reader, a dispassionate writer, political analyst and a publicĀ commentator.
Discover more from News Round The Clock
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
