We all went hard on the Federal Government and the Department of State Security over the weekend about the issue of the illegal arrest of Justices across 6 cities in Nigeria.

The FG called it a ‘surgical’ sting operation intended to cleanse the judiciary of corruption.

One of the rational arguments put forward against the clamp-down centered around the fact that due process was not followed. First, because the National Judicial Council is the body constitutionally empowered to investigate allegations brought against members of the Nigerian Bench and not the State Security Service as was the case here.

Yesterday, Mustapha Ramalan, who tweets @mustafaramalan, has put up a few pictorial evidences showing that the National Judicial Council (NJC) might have been trying to cover up for the judges which could have informed the DSS action.

Mustapha Ramalan is the former National Co-ordinator of the pro-Buhari group, I Stand With Buhari, who resigned from his position just weeks after being appointed in March this year on account of his lack of confidence in the direction of the group.

He expressed his distaste for the NJC’s rush to dismiss the DSS action and convening of an emergency meeting despite having knowledge of the backstory that wasn’t previously available to the public.

He went on to post photos of correspondence that had been exchanged between the DSS and the NJC about the matter for several months before the sting operation that was carried out Saturday night.

Here are his tweets:

When we are naive, we criticize without being objective. We now see proof that DSS invited the judges but were rebuffed by NJC ? 1/ pic.twitter.com/FNr8yYS0hi

— M. Ramalan (@mustafaramalan) October 13, 2016

NJC refused all entries & advised DSS to obtain an "order of court". DSS complied with NJC & obtained arrest warrants from a COURT. ? 2/ pic.twitter.com/OcovPRWjou

— M. Ramalan (@mustafaramalan) October 13, 2016

These correspondences as far back as August 2016, clearly showed that DSS observed highest levels of due process in judges arrest. 3/ pic.twitter.com/hY976HmIto

— M. Ramalan (@mustafaramalan) October 13, 2016

Before arrests, Justice Pindiga was invited by DSS in mid September. He never honored such an invitation & NJC never cared! Due process? 4/ pic.twitter.com/hOmKfCwM0e

— M. Ramalan (@mustafaramalan) October 13, 2016

DSS has NO constitutional powers to investigate judges? NJC certainly disagrees bcos they invited DSS to obtain a COURT order ? 5/ pic.twitter.com/OAZNHuCTSL

— M. Ramalan (@mustafaramalan) October 13, 2016

It's disappointing to know that CJN Mohammed chaired an NJC that shields corrupt judges from prosecution. We are in trouble! ? 6/ pic.twitter.com/xOQrCLdfET

— M. Ramalan (@mustafaramalan) October 13, 2016

These tweets and the correspondence they reveal certainly do not totally vindicate the DSS and the Presidency but they do show that some measure of respect for the Rule of Law and the notion of Separation of Powers were exhibited by the Presidency in this case.

There is still no constitutional justification to be shown for why the SSS, and agency clearly created to prevent the disruption of internal security in Nigeria will take on the responsibility of clamping down on allegedly corrupt individuals. There are enough of such anti-graft agencies that could have lawfully done what the DSS did including the EFCC, ICPC and even the Nigerian Police.

There is also the pending question as to the authority of the SSS to arrest the the Justices that were put in custody as this only shows Search warrants and not warrants of arrest.

We will merely be deceiving one another if we want to completely justify the federal government’s actions here. Many laws were broken in the process and the closest justification will be to say that the government took the most radically precise approach to dealing with a situation that a lot of red-taping would have hindered. But that is exactly our fear. If in a democracy, we cannot rest assured that due process will prevail under all circumstances and that the authorities will not take the anything-that-works-irrespective-of-what-the-law-says approach every time a situation like this arises.

The whole point of a democracy is lost when a dictatorial approach is taken to solve tricky situations. Or is it then correct to say that Nigeria is not quite ready for a democracy giving the allowance that bureaucracy, one of the natural consequences of democracy, gives for corruption to reign?