-
Popular LAGOS Lawyer, WAHAB SHITTU (SAN)
Mr Wahab Kunle Shittu (SAN) is a popular Lagos Lawyer. He is the Principal Partner at WK Shittu & Co. in Ikeja, Lagos He is also a Senior Lecturer in UNILAG where he has been a teacher since 2005, till date. He teaches in the Department of Jurisprudence & International Law, Faculty of Law, University of Lagos. He is a brilliant mind, who has 33 years experience handling complex Civil Matters and Criminal Prosecutions, at all levels, up to the Supreme Court. He has also handled a lot of significant cases that have shaped the legal landscape. He is passionate about the fight for Justice, safeguarding Human Rights and eradicating corruption.
He flaunts an intimidating profile, having emerged as the best student at various levels of his academic pursuits. For instance, he was the Best graduating student Ansar-ru-deen College, Offa with Grade 1 distinction, Best A’level Student, Kwara State Polytechnic, Ilorin with distinction in 4 subjects; Best Student Law of Contract Faculty of Law, University of Lagos 1983; Best Student Banking and Insurance Law, University of Lagos 1986; Best Student Public International Law, University of Lagos 1986; Recipient of Provost/Dean’s Prize of the most outstanding student of the set 1986; Recipient of Bola Ajibola’s Prize, Faculty of Law, University of Lagos 1986; Best graduating LL.M Student with distinction Faculty of Law, University of Lagos 1985; Best postgraduate student in the Masters of Public and International Affairs with distinction, University of Lagos 2010; and NBA Ikorodu Branch Award in appreciation of Lecture delivered at Annual Law Week on February 5, 2013.
He has also served in various capacities in public life. He has been retained as Private Counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), since inception of the Commission till date, and has represented the State and Federal Government on a wide array of matters. Wahab Shittu has also been retained as external counsel for other institutions like the ICPC, ICAN, Nigerian Stock Exchange, the National Assembly, among many others, to prosecute high level cases involving both high profile government officials and captains of industry in Nigeria. He is also a member of the Presidential Advisory and National Prosecution team inaugurated by the then Acting President, Yemi Osinbajo SAN, GCON; Consultant to the Prosecution Team of the Lagos State Government in the case of Lagos Coordinator, Centre for Human Rights, University of Lagos since 2015 and Executive Secretary, National Association for Law and Religion Studies (NALARS); retained Private Prosecutor to the Federal Government of Nigeria since February, 2017.
Since he established his law firm W.K Shittu & Co, over two decades ago, he has been handling complex Criminal and Civil cases and real estate transactions.
He is also one of the lawyers who have handled cases at the election petition tribunal for his clients and he won these cases.
Recently, City People asked him how sees the recent Appeal Court judgement that confirmed President Bola Tinubu as winner of this years Presidential elections.
“I am impressed by the judgement”, he replied. Because it has shown clearly that our Jurisprudence is not one from the market place. That our Jurisprudence is not one anchored on beer parlour gossips. That our jurispendence does not depend on social media propaganda or rumblings in beer parlour arena.”
“That judgement for me has clearly shown Transparency, in terms of letting the entire world, local and international know how Jurisprudence operates in Nigeria. That aspect is lost on some people. But it is something very significant. It shows us how the Judiaciary works. Like I have said the Judiciary does not work on the variables that I have mentioned. The Judiciary works on the basis of facts, facts, facts., facts, ably presented. The Judiciary works on the basis of Evidence, Evidence, ably and correctly presented. The Judiciary works on the basis of findings, findings, arising from facts and evidence presented. Judiciary works on the basis of settled legal principles, and precedents. The Judiciary works on conclusions arising from those settled legal principles.”
“What people don’t know in election petition matters, is that it is not just for you to have the right, you must be ready to enforce that right within the time frame, stipulated by constitutional and electoral provisions. If you are complaining about irregularities in any election, you must present your petition within 21 days of the declaration of the result. So no matter how credible your complaints are, if you fail to present your petition within 21 days, you are shut out, not by anybody, but by yourself.”
“So, there are specific rules guiding the way you draft your pleadings. I am speaking from authority. I did 5 Election petitions, in this dispensation, in Lagos, involving Lagos senatorial elections, Yaba, about 5 of them and I won all.”
“And I know that for those who lost, some of their petitions failed because of their failure to adhere to substantive and procedural requirements. So, if you listen to what the Court of Appeal delivered, I don’t think anyone can fault, it because they took every point, one by one. There are grounds for which you can challenge any election. They are stated in Section 134. It is either you say somebody, at the time of the elections was not qualified to contest the elections. That bothers on Qualification. Will anybody say that Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu is not qualified? Somebody who was in Mobil, who rose to become an Auditor in Mobil, somebody who was Governor, who was Senator. Will you say that kind of person is not educationally qualified? No, except you want to play politics. Now, will you also say he did not win majority of lawful votes during that elections? This is somebody who has been preparing ahead of others, who started the race earlier, who has built structures across states, who was instrumental to the enthronment of the former President, somebody whose name has become a household name throughout the country, will you say he was an unknown quantity.”
“If you say the election was rigged, will you say it was marked by corrupt practices, by who? If you are casting a stone, who will cast the first stone? Will you be able to justify all the votes that happened in some sections of the country? I don’t want to mention names. Like Prof. Wole Soyinka said, he is a man of high pedigree. Tinubu won the elections. And the Court of Appeal has said so. It has pronounced it. He won the election.”
“Overall in terms of spread, in terms of presence, in terms of quality of preparations and everything, he is miles ahead. With Tinubu, you can see a team. When you are examining the candidacy of Tinubu, you are not just looking at Tinubu alone, you can see a lot of people around him, quality-driven people behind him. I don’t think you can say that about all other aspirants. You can mention some of them as having high profile names, but who are the names behind them? With the candidacy of Tinubu, you can talk of the Tinubu team, can you say that of the others? I leave you to answer that question. So, I think he won the elections.”
“But the fact that those people have also challenged the elections is also good for our Democracy, in the sense that it will deepen our Jurisprudence. Now, that they have further opportunity of going to the Supreme Court. This cases will litter the pages of our Law reports and Law students can still benefit, law lecturers can still benefit, legal practitioners can still benefit, judges can still benefit, our Jurisprudence can still benefit, international and domestic observers can also take benefit. Without the matter being litigated at the Court of Appeal, would you believe that we have such high quality judges at the Court of Appeal.”
“Look at how those 5 judges delivered their judgement. I felt very proud. As a member of the inner bar, I am very very proud of the Court of Appeal judges that delivered that judgements. I am also very proud that they made it public, for all to see.”
“And they addressed every issue one by one, point by point.”
When you want to attack any judgement, what you should look for is the justification for that judgement, the legal reasoning. When they arrive at a conclusion, what you should be looking at is what informs that conclusion?
What is the legal reasoning? What is the thinking of thinking? What is the jurispudence behind the conclusion they have reached. That is what you should look at. There are certain fundamental things that I know as a legal practitioner of 35 years standing and as someone who is also vast in International Law and also as a member of the inner bar. If you talk of the allegation that Tinubu was involved in criminal activities outside our shores, there is no way you can establish the holden of a court in another jurisdiction in Nigeria, without first of all, registering that judgement. That judgement they are talking about was not registered. That is the 1st thing. 2ndly, there is a distinction between Criminal Forfeiture and Civil Forfeiture. Civil Forfeiture is an action in rem, the target is not the defendant, it is not the person, the target is what they think is unlawful activity. That is when they either attach the property or they attach the funds in the account, (proceeding in rem). It doesn’t amount to an indictment. That is the law, nationally & internationally.”
“Civil Forfeiture which is an action in rem is quite different from Civil Forfeiture which is an action inpersona, where you formally arraign somebody, you Charge him, you read a Charge to the person, he is brought to trial. So, our law was not infracted, neither was Tinubu convicted as a person. He wasn’t brought to any trial. I am particularly happy about that Before then, that stigma was there.”
“What the Appeal Court judgement did was to wash Tinubu clean of any criminal infractions, like Pontius Pi late.”
“And you saw what the Court of Appeal alluded to, the way they drafted their pleadings.”
“Some of the witnesses were lined up.”
“When you want to prove that an election it is invalid, you have to prove it, through the polling booth. None of the party agents who superintended over the elections in the polling booths and who saw what happened were brought to testify, so, if the party agents didn’t testify, any other person testifying is hear say. That is elementary law.”
“And so if you look at the reasoning behind the conclusions taken by the justices of the Court of Appeal you hardly can fault it.”
