The recall of judges under suspicion is tantamount to NJC birthing a judicial concert for corruption
The June 1 decision, by the National Judicial Council (NJC), to recall judges under suspicion, takes the judiciary to uncharted waters: the ogre of the Bench spotting morally challenged judges, presiding over summary trials.
That could well be a prelude to the judiciary, under a gale of alleged corruption, finally nailing itself on the cross. That, to be sure, would be fair comeuppance for legal professionals, wilfully sticking their fingers in a naked flame. But the general society would be the ultimate victim — for the death of, nay even casting a pall on, the integrity of the judiciary, always signals the birth of anarchy.
Rising from its 82nd meeting, which held from May 31 to June 1, the NJC, chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, recalled the following judges: Justice John Inyang Okoro (Supreme Court), Justice Uwani Abba Aji (Court of Appeal), Justice Hydiazira A. Nganjiwa and Justice Adeniyi Ademola (both of the Federal High Court) and Justice Agbadu James Fishim (National Industrial Court).
Justice Ademola has been discharged and acquitted at the high court, though the prosecution is launching an appeal. But most of the other judges are yet to be formally arraigned.
That is six months after a much publicised “sting” operation, which exposed some judges harbouring, at home, a great haul of cash. Such huge cash, which normally should be in bank vaults, arouses easy suspicion as possible proceeds of corruption.
There is something, however, to be said for the NJC recall logic. Judges, as other citizens, are entitled to justice. So, any foot-dragging over charging them to court, after a highly brushing publicity that suggests they could be common rogues, must be condemned.
Besides, with every passing day, the people make up their minds — not based on any forensic rigour, but on the titillating rumour in the streets. No class of citizens should be victims of such abuse of public opinion — not the least judges, whose spotless integrity is their only capital.
Ironically, however, the imperative for spotless integrity, nay moral impregnability, is the same reason the NJC action was rash, reckless, unwise and suicidal; and it is well and truly shocking that in a moment of hubris, the CJN could sit over the virtual slaughtering of the judiciary’s integrity.
That the judges were recalled to curb the mountain of cases, which had gathered in their absence, is simply cheap, pathetic and self-serving. Equally ludicrous is the NJC playing the Pontius Pilate of putting some judges on a so-called “watch list”.
That might, indeed, be the standard judicial practice of fairness and due process. But in the travesty of the moment, recalling indicted judges, to go on pontificating over other accused persons, while putting others on a “watch list”, is scandalously hollow and empty.
Are litigants then to sneer, on sighting a presiding judge, under dark suspicion, by the same system that hoisted him or her above fellow citizens, and snap: “Your Lordship, the rogue”?
That is the spectre the CJN and his NJC conclave have unleashed on the judiciary. It would appear the judicial institutional version of self-ruin.
Yes, the argument for inalienable rights of judges is tenable. But what if that leads to institutional ruin? Would there not be a judiciary first before judges and lawyers can practice their trade? Caesar once said of his wife: she must not only be above reproach, she must be seen to be so. He who comes to equity, goes that popular legal cliche, must come with clean hands.
The NJC would appear to obtuse towards these two dicta, particularly when the integrity of the judicial process is the question. Whoever is comfortable with a stained judge sitting over his or her case? Even if such a judge were earnest, would (s)he not be vulnerable to blackmail by bad-tempered litigants?
Then, there is this little question of bad faith, which sticks out in the case of Justice Ademola. Yes, a court of first instance discharged and acquitted him. But the judiciary, of all institutions, knows that is only the first of a three-pronged process, if the case drags on to the Supreme Court. Besides, the prosecution had just scaled all the technical processes to appeal, its right under the law.
So, why the rush to reinstate Justice Ademola who, the instance he was acquitted, started pushing the NJC for a reinstatement? Is that move made to wilfully truncate the process, thus illicitly tilting the scale for Ademola, simply because he is a member of the judiciary? Besides, how comfortable would Justice Ademola himself be — sitting on the high throne of justice in a court, crouching in the dock in another?
That the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) could be part of this conspiracy against judicial integrity is a double shame. That professional body of lawyers had in a statement marking this year’s Democracy Day, pushed for the judges’ reinstatement. Like the NJC, the NBA is proudly urinating in the pool from which it draws its sustenance. It should not complain later, when it starts having professional diarrhea.
This outrage is a shame on the CJN, shame on the NJC, shame on the NBA — all for a wilful commission of putative professional suicide. Worse: by doing so, they give the impression of a brazen judicial concert for corruption. Nothing more could be more injurious to their professional essence.
The Buhari Presidency should do everything within the law to stall this descent into judicial disgrace, perfidy and anarchy. Besides, every Nigerian of goodwill should stop, in their misguided track, this deluded ensemble.
This moral baggage, if not lifted fast, would crush the judiciary and ruin polite society.