Malami: Buhari Didn’t Breach S’Court Order By Banning Old Banknotes

Abubakar Malami, the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, refuted claims that President Muhammadu Buhari violated the Supreme Court’s decision in the currency exchange lawsuit brought by several governors yesterday. Malami claimed that Buhari did nothing to violate the Supreme Court’s ruling in the matter brought by several governors about the naira swap deadline when he talked to reporters at the State House in Abuja.

He claimed there were other solutions open in terms of the rule of law.

In a national broadcast on February 16, 2023, Buhari ordered the CBN to reissue the old N200 denomination of the naira, prolonging the notes’ usable life by another 60 days to April 10, 2023.

Following the President’s broadcast and his directive’s omission of the N1000 and N500 notes, there has been debate among the public, particularly among attorneys, regarding whether or not the administration violated the Supreme Court’s order. Malami responded by stating that the administration was not in violation of the ruling of the supreme court because the case was still pending and the government had legal options.

The easiest way to respond to your inquiry is to discuss what defines a rule of law in the Nigerian context. You have a number of options when a court issues an order, but let me first make a point before I discuss the possibilities the government has at its disposal. The fact is that we are not in violation of any court orders, including those related to the redesign of the naira. We are not violating. I don’t think I’m a banker, but you didn’t go find out which bank you went to submit the N1000 or N500 bills that were turned down. Thus, there is no violation.

Yet even if we are in violation, you are correct in knowing that this matter is still pending. When an order is made, you have a number of options within the framework of the rule of law, and it is being fought before the Supreme Court. One, you have the right to request for setting it aside if the facts and evidence support your case. The law and legal jurisprudence are clear that you cannot be regarded to have been acting in violation when you submitted your motion for setting aside if you are contesting and trying to set aside an existing court order.

You also have the option to appeal if the court is not an apex court, and you may do so by requesting a stay of execution. The main point of what I’m trying to say is that, if the case is still pending and within the parameters of the rule of law, the government is taking the necessary steps to ensure that its rights in relation to the redesign of the naira are upheld. Hence, we are not in violation.

However, certain governors, including as Nasir el-Rufai of Kaduna State and Abdullahi Ganduje of Kano State, openly mocked the naira policy by urging their constituents to disregard the validity of the previous N500 and N1000 notes, which were set to expire. The two governors were among those who petitioned the Supreme Court to block the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) deadline of February 10 from ending the acceptance of the N500 and N1000 notes as lawful cash.

When questioned about claims made in some quarters that the governors’ statements amounted to treason, the AGF responded that an investigation could not be ruled out and that the pertinent security agencies would decide whether further action would be required. Malami emphasized the significance of the redesign policy, which he claimed would allow citizens to take collective ownership of the electoral system instead of letting a few wealthy individuals take control. Malami also added that the policy was created to allow for freedom of choice and to fight corruption. On the advantages of electoral reforms, the AGF claimed that only the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari has demonstrated the political will necessary to improve democratic practice through governmental, political, and administrative interventions. He explained the motive behind the recent naira redesign policy was to ensure that Nigerians effectively take ownership of their election processes by way of ensuring that no foreign funds were allowed to influence the people’s decision in terms of ownership and by way of limiting the contributions by Nigerians in political parties.

The AGF claimed that the redesign of the naira offers several benefits related to the fight against corruption in terms of design visibility and openness, but that the policy was not to enable money to play a significant role in impacting Nigerians’ freedom of judgment. “Advantages linked with subsistence and permitting the freedom of Nigerians to prevail, freedom devoid of monetary inducement and intervention is equally part of it,” he said.

In light of the fact that a significant percentage of these factors are the subject of litigation before the Supreme Court, let’s turn to the question of the open revolt. But more importantly, as you are well aware, you also brought up the subject of treason or a specific order connected to it. These problems are typically problems that include forces. Therefore, you cannot completely rule out the possibility of an investigation. However, it is the security agencies’ responsibility to conduct an investigation and take any necessary action based on their assessment of the statements’ implications and weight. In my opinion, they are already taking this action, which will help them decide whether further action is necessary.

investigations into what additional steps should be done if it is determined that they are necessary in light of the statements made, and activities linked with those investigations. That is therefore all I have to say about the uprising. He asserted that the concept of prosecution should be understood and that it is the demonization of corruption that is currently being presented to and used by the government.

I believed it would be advantageous and visible, which would help 200 million Nigerians build their infrastructure and advance their lives. that matters to the demand of a person who may have gained N200 billion through deception, fraud, or illegal means, and who now sets aside N100 billion because he has a louder voice insisting that we must uphold the law.