A former Oyo State Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mutalubi Adebayo, has condemned the intervention of the Governor of Osun State, Ademola Adeleke in the death sentence of a young man, Segun Olowookere, in the state.
Henzodaily reports that Justice Oyejide Falola of an Osun State High Court in Okuku had convicted and sentenced Olowookere and one Sunday Morakinyo of armed robbery and sentenced them to death by hanging.
The two convicts, armed with firearms, were reported to have forcefully entered the residence of a police officer, Balogun Tope, attached to the Divisional Police Headquarters in Okuku, in April 2010, stealing his belongings.
Adeleke, in a statement, had directed an investigation and the initiation of a pardon process for the convict after Olowookere parents, in a viral podcast, claimed their son was sentenced to death for stealing a fowl.
However, speaking via a statement made available to journalists in Osogbo on Wednesday, Adebayo cautioned against unconstitutional investigations.
He warned against actions that could endanger judges and expose them to threats from criminals, potentially leading to loss of life.
The senior lawyer urged governments and the public to avoid being misled by bloggers and social media commentators spreading half-truths and falsehoods to vilify and harass the judiciary.
His statement read, “The claim that the prisoner was convicted and sentenced to death for stealing a fowl is an outright falsehood and cheap blackmail, aimed at securing his release through underhanded means.
“The convict was a member of a notorious gang of armed robbers that terrorised residents of Odo-Otin Local Government Area in Osun State before his arrest. He was fairly tried, convicted, and sentenced to death by hanging by the Osun State High Court. There has been no appeal against the judgment in over 14 years.”
Adebayo clarified that while governors and the president have the constitutional right to grant pardons, it is unconstitutional for the executive to investigate judicial decisions, including the reasoning or propriety of such judgments.
“The executive arm lacks such powers. Investigating judges for their decisions constitutes a usurpation of the judiciary’s constitutional role. Judges being harassed online for performing their lawful duties is deeply traumatic, especially when such attacks are rooted in falsehoods and rumours,” he added