For many years, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) office was embroiled in disputes that frequently eclipsed its constitutional significance. Whether the position should be kept apart from the Minister of Justice was a topic of intense debate. The public’s trust in the office progressively declined, and critics bemoaned what they saw as rising politicization.
On the other hand, something extraordinary seems to be occurring now. The honor and dignity of that position are being reinstated in a low-key, unnoticed manner. Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi (SAN) deserves much of the credit for this, since his leadership as the Federation’s Attorney General and Minister of Justice has been characterized by professionalism, moderation, and a deep regard for the organization he oversees.
In light of this, it is important to remember that Fagbemi’s tenure has been marked by relative calm, not inactivity. On the contrary. The legal struggle for local government autonomy may have been his most significant intervention.
For many years, state governments controlled and interfered with local governments to varied degrees, and local governments were essentially at their mercy.
The Federal Government made the politically dangerous choice to challenge the practice by going to the Supreme Court while Fagbemi was in charge.
The ensuing ruling, which upheld local governments’ financial independence, might ultimately be regarded as one of the Fourth Republic’s most significant constitutional rulings.
The case marked a daring endeavor to bolster constitutional governance and expand grassroots democracy, regardless of practical challenges.
The AGF has contributed in a fair manner.The law has been heard. The Supreme Court has made its decision in a straightforward manner. Politics and government now bear more of the burden than the courtroom.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu now has the responsibility of exhibiting the political will necessary to guarantee that local governments receive their allocations straight from the Federation Account and to ensure compliance with the ruling.
In the end, history might evaluate the case based on how faithfully the ruling is carried out rather than the skill of the legal arguments that led to success.
After all, the desire of governments to abide by court rulings is what gives them their real worth, not the persuasiveness of their statements.
The growing focus on prosecuting terrorists has been equally important. For years, Nigerians called for convictions as well as arrests. After all, the capture of suspects is hardly the real litmus test for criminal justice. It is obtaining convictions by means of due process.
Counterterrorism is not limited to the battlefield, as seen by the successful prosecution of those guilty for the tragic Owo Catholic Church massacre. It concludes in the courtroom.
Convictions are the final means of consolidating security successes. Under Fagbemi, the Ministry of Justice has been instrumental in this regard.
The debate surrounding the prosecution of juveniles detained in relation to the EndBadGovernance demonstrations provided another illustration of cautious leadership. The arraignment of obviously undernourished toddlers on treason charges was met with public indignation.
Instead of delving deeper, the AGF stepped in, ordered the case file, and then ordered the charges to be dropped. It served as a reminder that prosecutorial authority is not just a tool for punishment. They are tools of justice as well. During a period of intense emotion, the AGF opted for moderation over retaliation and empathy over inflexibility.
What has not occurred is perhaps just as significant. Fagbemi has mainly let the courts and the law speak, in contrast to earlier times when Attorneys-General were often at the center of institutional conflicts and public issues.
He has behaved in a way that is appropriate for the country’s chief law officer in terms of professionalism, dignity, and moderation.
His clear resolve to keep his office and himself free from the temptations of partisan politics has, in fact, been one of the most remarkable aspects of his administration.
He hasn’t tried to use the position as a stage for political grandstanding or sought political relevance.
The difference is important.
Because the AGF office is too significant to be reduced to a mere political office.
In fact, the question of whether the AGF’s position should be kept apart from the Minister of Justice’s was hotly contested for years by legal experts and public affairs pundits.
The argument was primarily motivated by worries that the combination of the two offices frequently led to conflicts between partisan political objectives and professional legal obligations.
Calls for such constitutional surgery were only exacerbated by subsequent disputes between some of the office’s holders.
Strangely, under Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi’s leadership, the ferocity of the argument has much decreased.
This may be due to the fact that the public’s trust has been progressively rebuilt thanks to the actions of a classic gentleman who has handled the position with dignity, professionalism, and prudence.
His tenure serves as a reminder that institutional failures are not necessarily the result of poor design.
They occasionally fail due to the personalities of individuals who are in charge of them.
In certain cases, what seems to call for a constitutional amendment just needs the correct occupier.
That may be one of the subtle but important lessons of the current stewardship.
No AGF can meet the needs of all.
No public official should also be shielded from criticism.
However, criticism shouldn’t stand in the way of acknowledgment when it is warranted.
The most significant accomplishment of the current AGF may not be found in a single instance.
It involves reestablishing the honor and dignity of a position whose legitimacy had previously been questioned.
Noise in politics is rewarded. Results in history are rewarded.
Furthermore, there are enough signs to indicate that Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi is making an effort that is becoming more and more uncommon in Nigerian public life, even though it may still be too early to make a firm judgment on his tenure.
He prioritizes the institution over the individual.
Move past the spectacle.
Politics is subordinate to the law.
That alone merits attention.
Because modest improvements might occasionally end up being the most lasting legacy of all in a nation that is frequently distracted by commotion.
And maybe that’s why the AGF’s Office was quietly restored.
