ISSUES IN THE PRESIDENTIAL PARDONS
The process of granting pardons should be thorough
Following public outrage, the Attorney General and Justice Minister, Lateef Fagbemi said last week that the list of beneficiaries of President Bola Tinubu’s prerogative of mercy was still under review, raising further questions about the process that led to the initial decision by the Council of State. “It is important to note that the last stage of the exercise, after approval by the Council of State, is the issuance of the instrument for the implementation of the decision concerning each beneficiary,” said Fagbemi. “This stage affords an opportunity for a final look at the list for remedial purposes, if any, before the instrument is forwarded to the Controller-General of Corrections for necessary action.”
In the earlier statement announcing the presidential clemency for 175 persons serving various jail terms, what was cited were reports of repentance and good conduct while in prison, and there was no proviso for any review. It was only after the decision drew negative reactions that Fagbemi issued his ‘clarification’. That convicted drug dealers were pardoned without the input of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) is beyond the pale. Convicted illegal miners were also pardoned at a period when illegal mining has become a serious national security challenge. And then, remorseless death-row convicts with powerful social connections were also pardoned along with those who were jailed for abusing public trust.
To be clear, the president has unfettered power to grant pardon to anyone subject only to the provisions of the constitution. All that he is required to do is consultation with the Council of State. But exercising such powers also requires a measure of circumspection, especially when the president is not subject to any legislative oversight or inputs from the public on whom he may pardon. It is purely his prerogative. Therefore, even though President Tinubu is at liberty to pick and choose the beneficiaries of his pardon, many have questioned the rationale behind the inclusion of murderers, kidnappers, illegal miners and those serving terms for drug conviction.
Although Fagbemi now claims that the process remains at the final administrative stage, “which includes a standard review to ensure that all names and recommendations comply with established legal and procedural requirements before any release instruments are issued”, this amounts to no more than an afterthought. The question that arises is, will the Council of State now meet again to approve the ‘reviewed list’ when that process is completed? Besides, will people whose names were on the list earlier released by the presidency be ‘unpardoned’?
What makes the issue more serious is that this administration has a penchant for announcing decisions without thinking them through, only to change course after public reaction. Nowhere is that more apparent than in the education sector. But this issue of pardon has also exposed the absence of due process in presidential decision making. Meanwhile, we believe, as most people have argued, that Fagbemi does not have the power under the constitution to review the decision taken by the president in consultation with the Council of State.
Ordinarily a presidential pardon eliminates all legal consequences of a conviction for all crimes, no matter how heinous. Once pardoned, the individual is no longer regarded as a criminal with all collateral repercussions and consequences of the conviction erased. What this suggests is that the process through which such a pardon is granted should be rigorous. It is therefore evident that the presidential pardon granted by Tinubu which is now being ‘reviewed’ by his Attorney General was reckless. That the report emanated from the office of the same Attorney General who is now ‘reviewing’ the list he compiled for the Council of State makes the whole controversy even more egregious.
