Human rights lawyer and and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Femi Falana, has challenged the controversial Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mr. Nyesom Wike, to take him before the Legal Practitioners’ Disciplinary Committee.
The challenge comes in response to Wike’s criticism of Falana’s legal interpretation of the Supreme Court’s verdict on the political face-off in Rivers State.
In a statement titled “I Did Not Lie Against the Supreme Court of Nigeria,” issued on Sunday, Falana reiterated his stance, accusing Wike of attempting to manipulate public opinion and pit the apex court against him.
The legal guru refuted Wike’s claims as spurious and tendentious in every material particular.
Recall that the former governor of Rivers State berated Falana during a press briefing in Abuja, arguing that the senior lawyer misrepresented the Supreme Court’s ruling on Channels TV.
Wike said: “If someone of Femi Falana’s calibre can go on national television and lie, it’s very serious. Lies can cause a lot of crises.”
But in response, Falana explained: “Mr. Wike subjected me to another scurrilous attack in a press conference, where he alleged that I lied about the defection status of certain legislators during my appearance on Channels TV.”
He added that the issue of the lawmakers’ defection was still pending before the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt when the Supreme Court delivered its ruling.
Falana clarified: “I did not lie against the Supreme Court in respect of the judgment in question. All I said was that the matter of the defection of the 27 legislators was raised suo motu and determined by the eminent Justices of the apex court.”
Speaking further, Falana noted that there were video tapes and a sworn affidavit in which the lawmakers confirmed their defection from the Peoples Democratic Party to the All Progressives Congress.
He stressed that his right to criticise court judgments is protected by both the Nigerian Constitution and international human rights law.
“My fundamental right to criticise the decisions of courts is guaranteed by Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,” he said.
The Senior Advocate of Nigeria accused Wike of hypocrisy, pointing out that the minister has a history of attacking judges when rulings do not align with his political views.
Falana added: “Unlike Mr. Wike, who calls judges names whenever they disagree with his politics of opportunism, I have always criticised the judgments of domestic and regional courts with utmost decorum and in good faith.”
He referenced a popular statement by the late Justice Oputa in the Adegoke Motors Limited v. Dr. Babatunde Adesanya case: “We are final not because we are infallible; rather, we are infallible because we are final,” highlighting the judiciary’s openness to criticism.
Falana also quoted former Chief Justice of Nigeria, Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad, who once said: “You have the responsibility of drawing our attention to where things are going wrong or on the verge of going wrong.”
Falana challenged Wike to take legal action if he believed Falana had breached professional conduct.
“Since he has become the unsolicited defender of the judiciary, I challenge him to report me to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee for professional misconduct,” Falana said.
Also speaking on the issue of legislative defection, Falana warned that the Supreme Court’s recent stance—requiring proof of defection through a party’s membership register—could embolden “unpatriotic politicians to justify political prostitution in Nigeria.”
He urged the court to adhere to its earlier rulings, such as in Attorney-General of the Federation v. Abubakar and Abegunde v. Ondo State House of Assembly, where it ruled that legislators who defect automatically lose their seats.
Falana concluded that Wike’s attempts to discredit him had failed.
“It is indubitably clear that the allegation leveled against me by Mr. Wike is spurious… He has failed in his desperate bid to incite the Justices of the Supreme Court against me without any basis whatsoever.”
Post Views: 172
