“Costly Oaths” By Adesina Ogunlana

Occasionally I come across an advert stating that “talk is cheap.” I doubt whether talk is ever cheap, or at least that cheap, if you know what I mean.
Talk may be cheap, but I can tell you that swearing to an oath, is more likely to be expensive than cheap.

Even the very sound of the word “Oath” suggests that it carries some weight and you know weight matters can cost dearly indeed.
If one goes to an African shrine of whichever deity or is it principality, it may not be too smart to believe in the slogan – “Talk is Cheap.” For dire consequences for swearing falsely or avowing carelessly or recklessly in such shrines, it is believed, come swiftly and surely.

The matter is not that grave with swearing in the shrines of Gods originally located or identified in off-shore jurisdictions. Such shrines or worship centres are called cathedrals, temples, synagogues, mosques, praying grounds, holy ghost camps etc.

Take Islam for example. A supposedly devout Muslim can blithely swear by the name of Allah that he would not dip his hands into the cookie jar, but will calmly proceed to swallow it completely. Should an innocent remind him of his Oath, he would shrug his shoulders and wink at the innocent’s fears to declare: “No shaking, Allah is not a wicked God!”

Don’t let us even talk of Christianity. If a “brother in the Lord” or a “sister in the spirit” loudly and clearly declares his innocence on an allegation of a crime and goes on to invite the “God that answereth by fire” to deal with him if his declaration was false, when indeed it was assuredly false, he would do so because he reclines in the easy chair of a certain confidence that for quite some time now, at least since the demise of the Apostles, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob has ceased to deal with malefactors, including bare-faced liars like him, grimly and quickly.

At any rate he knows that a heavy dose of tithes and fulsome, if expeditious “cries” for mercy tends to sway Jehovah, sorry, “Daddy” to indulgent forgiveness.

But there is a place in the geographical expression known, called and addressed as Nigeria, where swearing to an Oath now, is a matter where the ordinary Nigerian may have to tread with caution.

That place, ladies and gentlemen, is the Lagos State Judiciary. You see I stumbled across an undated and unsigned public memo last Thursday (14 January 2010) proclaiming that those wishing to swear in any of the ‘shrines’ of the Lagos Judiciary (Registry) would pay N250.00 per oath; as from the 16th January 2010, and for certification of documents, it would henceforth cost N200.00 per page.

Before now, swearing to Oath cost only N50.00 and certification N100.00.
Clearly, a jump of N50.00 to N250.00 for swearing to an oath would in the light of the dilapidated state of our national economy, encourage prudence and sober reflection on the part of the average Nigerian.
You know N250.00 is more than a tidbit of cash; if one is not in the league of EFCC attracting bankers.

With 250.00 you can buy:
(a) two or three litres of black market petrol
(b) a fat bottle of lager and some smoke
(c) a recharge card (starcomms)
(d) five pieces of Gala
(e) a stick of chunky suya
(f) two (pirated) CDs
(g) five bottles of coke
(h) five BRT tickets
(i) five apples
(j) a big tube of toothpaste
(k) a wrap of hot amala with one or two pieces of meat in a ‘bukateria’

Now for any of these things and many more, citizen Olu, Obi or Audu would have to surrender his N250.00 for deposing to an Oath.
But who is the “Management” that says oath swearing now is N250.00 and no longer N50.00?
I am not conversant with that nomenclature in the Lagos State Judiciary. Is somebody afraid to identify with a decision that smells and looks “anti-people?”
And it has happened before. In 2001 when Justice Sotuminu was Chief Judge and Mrs. Toyin Taiwo, now Hon. Justice Toyin Taiwo, was the Chief Registrar of the Lagos State High Court, a ‘public memo’ came out. Its message was the sale of The Squib, this same Squib had been banned in the Lagos State courts. The said memo was unsigned and undated and did not refer to any law.
I swear that this new memo is inspired by proddings from Alausa.
If I am wrong let this happen to me; let that happen to me. Talk is cheap, since I am not swearing to an affidavit on this matter.
But seriously speaking, isn’t N250.00 for an oath not a hurdle to easy access to the courts?


*Inspirational message from the Squib editor at http://www.winnersdonotquit.blogspot.com

HOME TRUTHS FOR NEW WIGS IV

A good advocate must be well spoken. And it is not just a matter of compliance with rules of syntax and grammar of the English language. In fact that is a basic, that should be taken for granted.
Suppose you come into a court-room and should look round the bar, how would tell the new wig from the veterian?
Is it by their wigs and gowns?
Certainly not, for not all old wigs don old, case-worn wears to court.
Is it by their faces?
This cannot be another good yard-stick, for there are Methuselahs just called to the bar while there are many young bucks and does for that matter who have seen years in the bar!
I can tell you a seasoned advocate by the twirl of his tongue - that is how he chooses his words and how he delivers them.
For starters, the good advocate never ever bellows or shouts. It is only yokels who mistake clarity for high decibel.
When they say your words should come out loud and clear in the court room, it is not an invitation to re-enact the environment of the Towers of Babel.
Even the need for emphasis does not compel raising up a din. The presiding judge or judges and the witness are not Helen Keller clones. In fact they hear you only too well.
The other thing you will easily notice in the language style of seasoned advocates is that it is invariably polite and polished.
The good advocate’s speech oozes with courtesies and even where colourful, does not do away with tact and is always calculated to win not only the head of the judex, but also his heart.
Only a few new wigs can put up a creditably high performance in court. The words are basic, stark, bereft of the arresting grace, tending to sting the ears of the judge with its ordinariness, even coarseness.
Where the seasoned advocate would to an enquiry from the court yield “yes milord” or “yes sir,” the new wig may not deem it any better to answer “yes” and in some cases, present the Yankee variant of “Yeah” or even worse “Yep!”
Of course you’ll never, under any circumstances find the seasoned counsel saying to the honorable judge: “you said this, or “I did not hear you...”
The way of the seasoned counsel is to intone mellifluously- “your lordship did say"…… "and I respectfully beg the pardon of the honourable court..."
And so easily do new wigs lose their cool and balance often in reaction to provocative antics and assays of apposing counsel or the bothersome thrusts of quirky judges or magistrates.
But not so quickly the veterans. These know that the colour of grace is best revealed under fire and so like legal ducks bob coolly on even as insults, tirades and such hostile liquids slush all over them.
The veteran’s contant purpose is never to lose the judge, for that worthy and nobody else is the instrument than can procure for his client, justice and its attendant benefits and redemption.
As they well know, indulging or giving in to anger or its not too distant a kinsman in court is one sure way of kicking off the much needed instrument. So when next you see a counsel remaining as cool as a dog’s nose inspite of all tribulations from the bench, do not judge him as a weakling who is allowing his back unnecessary whacks and wallops.
Just do like-wise. And it helps to remember that what is called and known as a court of law is not a jungle, a market place or a motor-park.
A court-room is a temple. A temple of justice. And in temples, the best of behaviour is expected, particularly of the ministers.
Never forget this.