Legal historians always reminisce about the golden era of the Judiciary, when the likes of Justices Louis Mbanefo, Atanda Fatai-Williams, Udo Udoma, Taslim Elias, George Sowemimo, Muhammed Bello, Andrew Obaseki, Anthony Aniagolu, Kayode Eso and other giants bestrode the Supreme Court. Will the standards they set ever be met? Legal experts hope so. One jurist who epitomised that era was the late Justice Chukwunweike Idigbe, whose jurisprudence was all about justice over technicalities. A symposium was organised by the law firm he founded, Punuka Attorneys & Solicitors, as part of events to mark his centenary, report Deputy News Editor JOSEPH JIBUEZE and ERIC IKHILAE.
With legal fireworks set to begin at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) and at various tribunals, there are high expectations from the Judiciary.
But, will justice be done and seen to be done in the cases? Will there be a focus on substance over form?
Or will there be a reliance on technicalities as has been seen in some judgments that left many scratching their heads?
Perceptions about the Judiciary border on uncertainty and unpredictability, and there appears to be some level of mistrust. But that was not always the case.
A time was when the Judiciary could be relied on to deliver justice according to law, with emphasis on substance rather than technicality.
Justice was also seen to be done. That period is now referred to as the golden era of the Nigerian Judiciary. Can the standards set by those law lords be met? Experts believe it is possible.
One of the Justices of that era, who epitomised the gold standard of the Bench, is the late Chukwunweike Idigbe.
His intellect and sense of justice as seen in his judgments remain references and subjects of enquiry today.
The man Idigbe
The late Justice Atanda Fatai-Williams once described his contemporary thus: “Justice Idigbe was the very embodiment of the law, whether it was common law, customary law, statute law, or the Constitution. He seemed to have it in his very bones…He was so well versed in his knowledge of the law that he would reach the right result almost by instinct.”
The late Idigbe practised law all over West Africa from his base in Warri between 1947 and 1961.
He served as a judge in the then Eastern Region of Nigeria High Court and as Chief Justice of the Midwest Region of Nigeria.
Justice Idigbe, born August 12, 1923, in Kaduna, would have clocked 100 years this year.
He studied law at King’s College, University of Cambridge, graduating in 1946 and winning the Forster-Campbell Prize in Criminal Law.
The first lawyer in the Asaba Division and the then Benin Province, he settled in Warri in 1947, where he established PUNUKA Chambers.
In 1961, he was appointed a judge of the Eastern Nigeria High Court, and in 1964, he was elevated to the position of Justice of the Supreme Court.
From 1964 to 1967, he served concurrently as the Chief Justice of the newly created Mid-Western region before he ceased to be a Nigerian judge as a result of the Civil War.
During his tenure on the Bench, he delivered the lead judgments in several landmark cases amongst which are: Bucknor-Maclean & Anor vs Inlaks Limited, Shitta-Bey vs Federal Public Service Commission, Arase vs Arase, Balogun vs National Bank, Usoro vs Shell Petroleum Development Co., Atiti Gold vs Beatrice Osaseren, Mutual Aids Society vs Akerele, amongst others.
Justice Idigbe passed away on July 31, 1983, just a few days short of his 60th birthday and anticipated appointment as the Chief Justice of Nigeria.
As part of a series of events to mark his centenary, Punuka Attorneys & Solicitors organised a symposium in his honour during the 15th edition of its annual lecture. It featured discussions on his landmark judgments.
Among the dignitaries were former Head of State General Yakubu Gowon, who was the special guest of honour; Minister of State for Budget and National Planning Prince Clem Agba and former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Mohammed Belgore.
The symposium speakers included Minister of Works and Housing Babatunde Fashola (SAN), who chaired the event, and former Director-General of the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS), Prof Epiphany Azinge (SAN).
Others were professor of commercial law at the University of Lagos (UNILAG) Abiola Sanni (SAN); international law expert Prof Obiora Okafor; and professor of law at Veritas University, Josephine Agbonika.
Vice Chairman of the Body of Benchers, Asiwaju Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN) chaired it.
The keynote speaker was the Senator-elect for Akwa Ibom South and legal author/researcher, Dr Ekong Sampson.
A peep into Idigbe’s jurisprudence
Dr. Samson highlighted key judgments that underscored Justice Idigbe’s intellect and focus on justice over technicalities.
According to him, Justice Idigbe’s judgments showed his preparedness to move the law and society forward, and he was never deterred by lack of, or scant, precedent.
Even where there was precedent, Justice ldigbe would carefully scrutinise it, as if with binoculars.
“In his search for justice, he, like the famous Lord Denning, would not be unduly manacled by precedent or technicalities,” Samson said.
At the Supreme Court, Justice Idigbe wrote some of the most difficult, yet unassailable decisions, as he resolutely trod the path of substantial justice.
In Maclean vs Inlaks (1980), he led the full panel of the Supreme Court to overrule its line of authorities which appeared, at the time, untouchable.
In some of his verdicts, such as in Shitta-Bey vs Federal Public Service Commission (1981), and Balogun vs National Bank (1978), Justice Idigbe made clear departures from ostensibly sacrosanct premises of the common law.
“The triumph of substantial justice over undue technicalities is an ideal that will strengthen public confidence in the judiciary,” Samson said.
He added: “In realising this objective, even our Supreme Court should not shy away from revisiting its earlier premises on which it erected a decision, if the circumstances call for that, in the interest of justice…
“Though precedent is an indispensable foundation on which to decide what is the law, there may be times when a departure from precedent is in the interest of justice and the proper development of the law.”
He referred to the case of The State v. Musa (1967), in which Justice Idigbe, usually amiable but stern, betrayed discernible compassion.
In the case, the deceased Musa, a Nigerian married to an American lady, Claudette Barrington, went out one evening in a Peugeot car belonging to the wife.
He returned home at about 1.45 am the next day and met her waiting, displeased that he stayed out for so long. They exchanged unpleasant words.
Later that morning, the wife took the key to the car and made to drive it away.
Her husband followed her as she was entering the car. However, she quickly got into the car and shut the door.
As she tried to reverse onto the highway, her husband threw across the path of the car a block in an effort to halt the movement of the car.
The car went over the block after smashing it into pieces and kept moving.
As the car slowly surged forward, her husband who was waiting on the side of the street, mounted the bonnet of the car, in yet another effort to prevent his wife from driving away.
She drove on and after a distance of about 100 yards, the husband fell from the bonnet onto the road. He died shortly after that from injuries he sustained in the head and other parts of the body.
Claudette was charged with the manslaughter of her husband and reckless driving.
Deciding the case, Justice Idigbe noted: “It was foolish and reckless of the deceased to mount the bonnet of a moving vehicle whatever his motive may have been.
“If it was intended to prevent the accused from further driving the car that morning it was indeed a misguided and stupid action.”
Regarding the wife, he added: “But accused herself told the court she knew it was a dangerous act on the part of anyone to mount the bonnet of a moving vehicle and for the driver of such vehicle to continue the journey in those circumstances. She, however, drove on, not making any attempt to bring the car to a halt.”
After considering the evidence, His Lordship found the accused guilty of reckless driving.
After allocutus (plea for mercy), Justice Idigbe held: “This is indeed a very pathetic case. There was a domestic disagreement such as it is not unknown between husbands and wives; the accused walked out on the deceased possibly in an effort to avoid an explosive situation.
“The deceased followed, possibly intending to prevent the accused from going out that early hour of the morning; in doing this, deceased became rash in his action and courted death.
“Aggrieved about the situation, accused, heedless of the consequences of the action of the deceased, also pursued a dangerous course of action…
“After taking into consideration the facts of the case, I propose to be extremely lenient. Accused is cautioned and discharged.”
Samson said Justice Idigbe was a liberal-minded crusader who, in Ukaegbu v. Attorney-General of Imo State (1983), led a full panel of the Supreme Court to declare that a private individual or agency had the right to establish a university, a secondary or post-primary institution.
A yearning for the good old days
Ekong believes members of the Bench can emulate the likes of Justice Idigbe by focusing on justice rather than technicality.
He said: “Needless emphasising that, a truly autonomous, independent Judiciary deserves support and encouragement to perform optimally and help strengthen our institutions. Certainly, Nigeria needs a courageous, integrity-driven Judiciary.
“Despite the worrisome outlook in some cases, the Nigerian Judiciary is well positioned in terms of content. There may well be other Idigbes in our midst waiting to happen.
“One way we can draw them out is by enriching the Bench with more presence from the accomplished Bar or even from the academia.
“That way, we can have more Elias, Nnamanis, Tobis, Udomas, Esos, Oputas and other icons who lit up the Nigerian Judiciary.”
Speaking with reporters, the lawyer and Senator-elect added: “We need a courageous judiciary, one that responds progressively to the needs of society. That is why Justice Idigbe is highly respected.
“He was a pathfinder. He wrote some of the most remarkable judgments of the Supreme Court in his time. And those judgments are cited today.
“Our judiciary is trying, but my case has been that we need truly autonomous, courageous, independent judiciary. It’s very key. We need a Judiciary that responds to the dynamics of the times, that interprets the law based on justice.
“The basic motivation should be the search for justice, especially over undue technicalities.
“We need to develop our society beyond the application of technicalities, which sometimes become impediments to justice. We need to have such fundamentals of legal reasoning that embrace conceptions about justice.
“It’s good that we gathered to honour Justice Chike Idigbe, and indeed, reflectively, we also honour other giants who did well on the Bench.
“We need to dig more into the backgrounds that made these judges stand out. Justice Idigbe lives on. Great thinkers don’t die. He lives on through his judgments and strength of his reasoning.”
‘Judges can learn from him’
Senior Partner at Punuka Attorneys & Solicitors, Chief Anthony Idigbe (SAN), noted that the principles his father established in his judgments remain relevant and can guide judges and justices in their decisions.
He told reporters: “The principles he established, his jurisprudence, seem to be still very relevant today, to guide our judges on how they can deal with current problems.
“From the analyses, it seems he had a focus on substantive justice and he established in a couple of cases that form should never override substance. That principle remains relevant.
“The jurisprudence of Justice Idigbe is that form should never override substance. And in looking at any issues contemporarily, those principles should guide the action of our judges today.”
Idigbe also noted that there is something to learn about precedents from his father.
He said: “Another thing that stood out for me is determining when the court should overrule itself or depart established judicial precedent. We seem to have that challenge today.
“Some argue that there is no more adherence to judicial precedent and that that is dangerous for the system and that what makes it strong judges follow previous decisions and that is what makes law a science.
“But there have been cases where the court departs from precedent. Knowing when to depart from precedent becomes quite significant to prevent abuse.
“And it looks as if there is a lot of guidance from some of his previous cases, such as the case of Bucknor-Maclean & Anor vs Inlaks Limited in which he gave some guidance as to when and how you should depart from precedent.”
Idigbe agreed that the Judiciary should be concerned about how it is perceived, even if its business is not about being popular.
“Perceptions may vary from time to time. As such, the Judiciary should be working hard to ensure that the perception of the courts is strong. But, I also need to sound a note of caution.
“If you suck the court into a popularity contest, it can be dangerous, because they can move toward popularism. The court doesn’t have to be a popular institution because that’s not their role.
“However, every court has to be sensitive to perception issues. It has to invest in human, material, administrative and other resources to ensure they can continuously deliver justice.”
Managing Partner of Punuka Attorneys, Mrs Elizabeth Idigbe, stressed the need to have those who really wish to be on the Bench appointed as judges, rather than merely offering people jobs.
She said: “We need people who are interested in being good judges, not people who are judges because they were made judges.
“Justice Idigbe believed in values of integrity, objectivity and fairness. These are lacking.
“Judges who want to be good judges go out of their way to really read and upgrade themselves in different spheres of the law. It is quite important. You cannot decide what you don’t know.
“Judges can get experts to talk to them about specific areas, so they can become experts in those fields as well.
“So, we need judges who want to learn, be good judges, and be objective. Integrity is key.”
Fashola: his judgements continue to speak
Fashola said Justice Idigbe’s judgments “will continue to communicate with us”, adding that the late jurist and his likes “were giants in every respect”.
He said while the Judiciary must continue to improve, judges are sometimes misunderstood.
Fashola explained: “When judgments are given, they are first the sum total of the assistance that the court receives from lawyers.
“Let us as lawyers look at ourselves: how much preparation do we put into our cases in aid of the judges?
“You may have witnessed an event, but when it gets to court, the judges and lawyers who were not there, have rules by which they operate –what evidence is admissible and not admissible.
“If you don’t bring the evidence of what happened when you were there in the format that the law prescribes that it should be presented, the case is dead on arrival.”
Idigbe bestrode profession like a colossus, says Agba
Prince Agba said Justice Idigbe is remembered not only as a jurist par excellence but as an advocate for equity, justice and the fair application of the rule of law.
He said in his goodwill message: “The late jurist was indeed never bothered about the most beautiful things of this world, but how to make a positive impact in the lives of the Nigerian people using the instrumentality of law as a tool for social change.
“He believed and rightly so that law not only laid down the norms which were acceptable to a given society, it also laid down the norms, which the society should adopt in the interest of its own welfare.
“He was renowned for his landmark judgments, which continue to benefit Nigeria’s jurisprudence to this day.
“I, therefore, take this opportunity to commend the organizers of this event.”
Prince Agba said the Muhammadu Buhari administration believes that law can be used as an instrument to promote economic and social development.
“Economic development involves much more than a country’s adopting the appropriate growth-enhancing policies but the right application of the rule of law since it is a prerequisite to draw foreign investments and boost economic growth,” he said.
Gowon hails Idigbe’s commitment to justice
Gen. Gowon said from what he learnt of Justice Idigbe, the late jurist’s “unwavering commitment to upholding justice and the rule of law is a testament to his unflinching character and his belief in our nation evinced through his life and office”.
Emphasising the critical role of the Bench, he added: “It is no secret that the judiciary plays a vital role in nation-building and in keeping us united as a nation. The Judiciary, in essence, is the guardian of the constitution and the rule of law.
“The Judiciary provides a check on the powers of the executive and legislative branches and ensures that the rights and freedoms of the citizens are protected through the instrumentality of the court.
“As a former military leader (Head of State), I have seen and known firsthand the importance of the judiciary in maintaining stability and order in our society.
“The Judiciary serves as the bedrock of our democracy, and it is only through a strong, independent and impartial judiciary that we can ensure the protection of our democracy and the advancement of our nation.
“The Judiciary has over time maintained its enviable status as the beacon of hope for our democracy, serving as the balance between every class and truly the hope of the common man.
“In the words of Nelson Mandela, ‘A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones.’
“This quote highlights the importance of fairness and justice in any society. Justice Idigbe has demonstrated that he embodies these ideals and he worked tirelessly to ensure that every citizen of this great nation is treated fairly and justly.”
He lived a life of integrity, says Awomolo
Chief Awomolo described Justice Idigbe as a man with divine touch.
He said: “The memories bequeathed to the generations of Idigbes in my humble view are transferred to two things, things that are invaluable, things so dearly cherished and for which the scriptures confirm as divinely given.
“The first one is the ‘words spoken by the mouth, written down’ in the judgments and rulings of the great jurist.
“The words are life, light and products of several years of investment in learning the law, experience in judging his fellow human, believing that Judges perform divine functions even though they are a mere mortal.
“The ‘words’ we are celebrating were clearly given to him as representative of God on earth, these words resonate even several years after he had joined his creator.
“The power of words is such that no man can cover, it is like the power of the sun.
“Words contained in the decisions of Honourable Justice Chike Idigbe have the power of creation, elevation, encouragement, admonition, teaching and guidance to greater humanity. They were words succinctly used in the direction of truth and justice.”
Chief Awomolo said he had the privilege of appearing in the Supreme Court when Justice Idigbe was there.
“I have also read the book: The Path of Justice Chukwunweike Chike Idigbe by Ekong Sampson.
“I came to realise that as one experiences change and breakthroughs, integrity, honesty and trust are the highest vibrating energies to guide one forward as everything else will fall away.
“Reading through some of his decisions, he came across as one who deliberately lived a life of absolute integrity, honesty, humility and kindness and today his children and grandchildren celebrate and think of him as their role model.
“It is important to remind ourselves of eminent Justices who served in the Supreme Court of Nigeria at the same time as the sage.
“They were celebrated jurists like Hon. Justices Sodeinde Sowemino, Kayode Eso, Anthony Aniagolu, Atanda Fatai-Williams, Mohammed Bello, Ayo Irikefe Justices of the Supreme Court, were in the Apex Court.
“It is significant to know that all his colleagues acknowledged his deep knowledge of the law, his integrity and honesty,” the SAN said.
