BLord: Lawyer Queries Bail Terms, Suggests ‘City Boy’ Bias
Public interest lawyer Vincent Nnebedum has waded into BLord, Linus Williams and VDM, Martins Vincent Ortse’s feud, and the debate over differential treatment in Nigeria’s criminal justice system, questioning why the defendant, BLord facing bailable charges was not released on self-recognizance after arraignment.
“Considering that the alleged offences are bailable in nature, and his personality which could have given him edge to be granted bail on self recognizance, don’t you think he would have been allowed to go home after arraignment if he was a city boy?” Nnebedum wrote in a widely circulated update on his official Facebook handle.
His comment coincide with a familiar grievance: that bail outcomes often track social capital as much as legal principle. Under Nigerian law, offences that are ordinarily bailable should attract liberal conditions, and courts may release a defendant on self-recognizance where the person is deemed trustworthy and unlikely to abscond, interfere with investigations, or threaten witnesses.
The lawyer alleged bias and stated that the judicial process was likely harsh on the defendant because of his non-involvement with the pro-Tinubu campaign group tagged “City Boys”.
Nnebedum’s position has resonated with critics of the Nigerian judicial system who accuse the justice system of selective justice, clamouring for a system where the bail principles uniformly apply, regardless of background, to avoid the appearance of two-tiered justice.
It is true that bail is discretionary but judicial discretion should be exercised both judicially and judiciously