Reporting News and opinions
But wars are not graded like Olympic gymnastics. There are no medals for technical execution if the end result leaves your opponent intact, emboldened, or—worse—adapted.
There is a particular cruelty in a medical report. Unlike a political speech, a budget forecast, or an election manifesto all genres of creative literature to which democratic publics have made a resigned peace a medical report carries with it the residual authority of science. When a doctor speaks, we are conditioned, in some prelinguistic way, to believe them. Which is precisely why what has happened to American presidential medicine under Donald Trump is so arresting. The clinic has been converted into a theatre, the stethoscope swapped for a megaphone, and the diagnosis subordinated entirely to the demands of the narrative.
The Case of Lakanmi & Kikelomo Ola v. Attorney-General (West) & Others The post discusses a landmark Nigerian legal case, "Lakanmi & Kikelomo Ola v. Attorney-General (West) & Others," which highlights the tension between the judiciary and the military government in Nigeria. Background: Following the military coup of January 15, 1966, Nigeria was ruled by the Federal Military Government (FMG) which issued decrees and edicts without a proper court process. Lakanmi and others were seized of their assets under the Western State Assets Forfeiture Edict, which established a tribunal to investigate individuals and seize their assets. Judgment: The courts, remarkably, agreed with Lakanmi and others, and their challenge succeeded. The Supreme Court ruled in their favor again, laying down some of the most important constitutional principles in Nigerian legal history. Constitutional Principles Established: 1. Military Government Is Revolutionary, Not Sovereign: The Supreme Court made a distinction that the military did not govern by inherent sovereign authority. It came to power through revolution, an extra-legal, factual event, and therefore its authority was necessarily limited by the nature of its origin. The post emphasizes the courage and intellectual rigor of the judiciary in delivering a judgment that challenged the military government's authority. It also highlights the government's retroactive legislative action, which nullified the court's judgment and effectively told the judiciary that it would not be needed.
Nigerian public life has a tradition of justifying questionable legal actions with the doctrine of necessity, a principle originating from the UK's unwritten constitution. This doctrine allows for actions deemed unlawful under normal circumstances if they are necessary to prevent greater harm, such as escaping a burning building. However, Nigeria, with its codified Constitution of 1999, presents a stark contrast. The constitution, seen as the supreme law, renders any act inconsistent with it void. The article questions how the doctrine of necessity can coexist within a constitutional democracy like Nigeria, highlighting the tension between the flexible nature of UK law and the rigid framework of Nigeria's constitution.
Nigeria's culture of impunity, where laws are treated as optional and accountability is viewed as unnecessary, is a significant obstacle to its development. Despite a conviction by the Supreme Court in 1997 for a serious criminal offence, Bello Magaji was never imprisoned. He was instead pardoned by President Goodluck Jonathan and later appointed as Dean of the Faculty of Law at the American University of Nigeria. This case highlights the arbitrary nature of the legal system in Nigeria, where convictions are often disregarded and individuals with criminal records can rise to high positions.
