By Eric Ikhilae, Abuja

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Sebastine Hon, has argued the responsibility of implementing the constitutional provisions on financial independence of the Judiciary rests solely with the Federal Government.

Hon contended the ongoing indefinite strike by members of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) could have been averted had those concerned properly interpreted the Constitution.

The constitutional lawyer argued these positions in a letter written to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice; the Minister of Labour and Employment; the President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the President of JUSUN.

In the letter titled: “The JUSUN strike action and the correct position of the Constitution on financial independence for the Judiciary in Nigeria,” Hon argued all courts of superior records, named in Section 6 of the Constitution, are creation of the federation.

Such courts are: the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, Federal High Court, National Industrial Court, High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), High Court of a State, Sharia Court of Appeal, FCT, Sharia Court of Appeal of a State, Customary Court of Appeal of FCT and Customary Court of Appeal of a State.

Read Also; SW Speakers insist on state police, financial autonomy for legislature, judiciary

Hon, who engaged in an elaborate analysis of various constitutional provisions, insisted the Constitution “has made far-reaching provisions guaranteeing, in express and unequivocal terms financial independence for both superior and inferior courts in Nigeria.”

He argued that the Federal High Court or High Court of a State are all creation of the federation and therefore should derive funds from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF).

“Section 318(1) defines Federation as the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Clearly, therefore, the framers of the constitution wanted those courts that are wrongly labeled State courts to be courts of the Federal Republic of Nigeria- meaning they are Federal courts, which are, however, established for each state, just for geographical and other administrative reasons.

“Since these are also ‘Federal’ courts established to function within states of the Federation, therefore, they are supposed to also be part of the expenditure content of Mr President’s annual budgetary estimates submitted to the National Assembly”, Hon said.

He added that “under the present constitutional scheme of things, the state governments are only to take care of the budgetary needs of magistrate and other courts lower to the superior courts on the judicial ladder of the state.”

Hon faulted President Muhammadu Buhari’s issuance of Executive Order 10, which he noted prescribed other budgetary methods for states not contemplated by the constitution.

He argued the “Executive Order 10 is also in conflict with the express provisions of Sections 6(1), (3)(5) read together with sections 81(3) and 84(1)(4)(7) of the Constitution. It indeed runs counter to the very section 121(3) as amended, since, as against the wrong notion held by Mr President, neither the original text of that subsection nor its amended version has anything to do with superior courts of records, even though located in the various states and acting as state courts.”

Hon noted that under “the Presidential cum Federal Constitution of Nigeria, the states are semi-autonomous, hence the President has no power, direct or implied, to force down orders on the governors or to attempt,as was done in Executive Order 10 to run the states from Abuja or to create some bodies that will run those states (as in the case of the Presidential Implementation Committee created in the said Executive Order 10

“The presidential Order 10 signed by Buhari on May 20, 2020 is unconstitutional, null and void and of no effect, it being in conflict with the express provisions of the 1999 Constitution,” he said.

Hon urged the National Judicial Council (NJC) to urgently assume responsibility for collecting, collating and fine-tuning budgetary estimates in respect of superior courts of record from the various Heads of the courts for onward delivery to the Budget Office of the Federation to be included in the annual budget of the federation.

He equally asked the NJC to disburse funds meant for the superior courts of record directly to them once the funds are made available to it.