By Adebisi Onanuga

 

One Day Governor of Lagos State 2021, Miss Ajala Gloria Eniola paid a visit to the Chief Judge of Lagos State, Justice Kazeem Alogba at Ikeja High Court premises.

Her visit to the State Judiciary, was historic being the first time that the Judicial arm of the State would be hosting the State’s One Day Governor since the initiative was instituted ove 20 years ago.

During the visit, Eniola interacted with members of the top echelon of the State Judiciary.

Miss Eniola, who became one day governor following her  winning  of the Spelling Bee Competition, commended the Judiciary for ensuring timely delivery of justice in spite of the effects of last EndSARS protest on the Judiciary’s operations.

Miss Ajala in her interaction with the State Chief Judge, Justice Kazeem ,  commended the  state Judiciary for its efforts in ensuring  fair dispensation of justice for all regardless of status, religion or creed.

The one day governor who was accompanied by other runners-up in the competition during the visit, charged the Judiciary to uphold its integrity in the dispensation of justice.

“Let integrity continue to be your watchword as you go about attending to numerous cases in the state”, she pleaded.

Earlier, Justice  Alogba welcomed the governor to the Judiciary while also applauding the originator of the One Day Governor, describing it as a very laudable initiative that had stood the test of time.

Alogba applauded Ajala for demonstrating rare eloquence and determination among her peers and for standing out in the midst of others.

Read Also: Sanwo-Olu harps on advocacy to halt SGBV in society

 

He, however, implored her and other winners of the Spelling Bee competition not to be complacent with the recognition accorded them by the state government but rather remain steadfast and aim for greater accomplishments.

The visitation to key government officials, according to the Director-General, Mrs. Abiola Seriki-Ayeni, was informed by the need to motivate winners of the Spelling Bee and also encourage other students in public schools to aspire to excel in their academic pursuits.

She said: “Office recognises the hard work that these pupils from public schools put in their academic, hence the need to reward them adequately.”

Seriki-Ayeni disclosed that apart from the privileges of meeting top government officials across the state, the Spelling Bee winner will equally be sent on a trip to Finland alongside other Runners Up as part of the reward for their hard work and dedication to their studies.

Members of the cabinet of the one day governor, who is a student of Lafiaji Senior High School, Lagos Island were; Miss Grace Ikhariale of TinCan Island Senior High School, Tolu; Oluwatosin Akinbodewa of Iworo Ajido Senior Secondary School, Badagry; Miss Eunice Adedotun of Agbede Senior School, Ikorodu and Master Ekene Ezeunala of Meiran Community High School.

It would be recalled that the former First Lady of Lagos State and the founder of New Era foundation, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, who is currently representing Lagos Senatorial District in the National Assembly, initiated the Spelling Bee Competition during the tenure of Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu as the then Governor of the State.

Nigeria’s first female Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Chief Olufolake Solanke, marked her 89th birthday on March 25. Just days earlier, she clocked 40 years as member of prestigious Inner Bar. Remarkably, it is the 59th year since the former Buckinghamshire Mathematics and Latin teacher was called to the English Bar, writes ROBERT EGBE.

 

Chief ‘Folake Solanke SAN clocked 89 on March 29, to a flurry of well-wishes from the country’s legal community. But it was not just her enviable age that elicited the honour and felicitations.

In 2007, Chief Solanke published her autobiography, ‘Reaching for the Stars.’ In it, she described herself as a “Lady of many firsts”. The author could not have chosen a better description.

Last month, apart from her birthday, Solanke also attained a remarkable 40 years as a SAN – a member of the Nigerian legal profession’s Inner Bar. Even more astonishing is that this is the 59th year since she was called to the English Bar.

Early life

Solanke was born on March 29, 1932 in Abeokuta, to the family of the late Jacob Odulate (founder of Alabukun Medicine). She attended Ago Oko Primary School, Abeokuta from 1937-1939, Emo Girls School, Abeokuta from 1940-1944 and Methodist Girls High School, Yaba Lagos, from 1945-1949, where she consistently took the first prize in English and Mathematics.

She soon left for England and in 1951, she entered the King’s College in the University of Durham, now the University of Newcastle in England where she obtained her BA (2nd Division) in Latin and Mathematics in 1954. In 1955, Solanke received a Diploma Certificate in Education. She taught Latin and Mathematics at Pipers Corner School, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire between 1957 and 1958, and in 1960,

Law story

Solanke gained admission into Gray’s Inn, London to read for a degree in law. She was called to the English Bar in 1962. On her return to Nigeria in 1962, she joined the chambers of M.A. Odesanya, who later became Honourable Justice Odesanya, in Lagos from August 1962 – May 1963 from which she moved to the chambers of Chief FRA Williams in Ibadan as Junior counsel in 1963.

She married the late Emeritus Professor Toriola Solanke, and they are blessed with three children: Dr (Mrs) Oluyemi Koya who is both a Medical Doctor and a Lawyer, Engr. B.A Solanke and Miss Busola Solanke, a Mathematician.

In 1972, Chief Solanke was appointed as the first Commissioner of the then Western State of Nigeria; as well as Chairman, Western Nigeria Television Broadcasting Corporation (WNTBC).

Among her numerous awards is the National Honour of the Commander of the Order of the Niger.

On March 5, 1981, Chief Solanke got the rare privilege of being the first female lawyer to be conferred with the highly coveted and prestigious rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria.

In 2012, Solanke received the International Bar Association’s Outstanding International Woman Lawyer Award at the Association’s 5th World Women Lawyers’ Conference held in London, in recognition of her professional excellence and immense contribution to the advancement of women within the legal profession. Also in 2012, Solanke released her second book, A Compendium of Selected Lectures and Papers, Volume 1.

She is the first African to be named 42nd President of Zonta International, an international service organisation that focuses primarily on advancing women’s status.

 

Memorable quotes

“Lawyers are paid by their clients, so, lawyers in pupillage should be paid. New lawyers incur expenses during pupillage, to wit: for rent, food, transportation, books, apparel, etc.

In defence of lawyers in pupillage, I declare that lawyers are not slaves. Only slaves work for no pay because a slave is the legal property of the slaver. A lawyer is certainly not the property of a learned senior or any other person.”

Solanke defending the rights of lawyers in pupillage at the 35th anniversary of the call to Bar of Mr. Dele Adesina (SAN) in February 2018.

“Good governance embraces the participation of capable men and women who work for the good of the people.”

Solanke urging the government to encourage gender equality in governance in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on January 31, 2020 at the inaugural book launch in Lagos in honour of Justice Chinwe Iyizoba.

“Speak up against those who cannot speak for themselves. Let’s speak in the language of the youths. Visit schools, visit hospitals. What assistance do we offer those who cannot help themselves? We should assist rape victims. We should be the voice of the society.”

Solanke charging the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA)-Women Forum to speak out against societal ills at the International Women’s Day Conference organised by the NBA-Women Forum, last month.

“I make bold to say that offenders are impostors, not lawyers, I can declare whether or not on oath, that I am not corrupt. The country needs an instantaneous paradigm swift shift from gross iniquity with impunity being perpetrated on the nation by fraudsters.”

Solanke calling for a review of the Rules of Professional conduct to tackle corruption in the Bar and Bench, when she chaired the Colloquium organised by Kenna Partners in 2018 to mark its 25th anniversary.

 “Something must be done so that they weed the political parties to a minimum. In the United States of America, there are two political parties but in Nigeria, 91 political parties; out of the 91, 80 of them want to be President. So, something is wrong with our Electoral Act; we must go and look at Section 222 and do something about it.”

Solanke canvassing a review of the Electoral Act at the Colloquium to mark Kenna Partners’ 25th anniversary

“Currently, there is unanimity on the poor standard of professional practice, particularly of some new wigs. Recently, I discovered one of the reasons for the poor quality of some graduates in our beloved country. This is it – Educational authorities now descend to the low, sub-standard of the indolent students in the universities and the Law School, by fixing the pass marks in examination below 50 per cent. Last century, I taught Latin and Mathematics in England and Nigeria, and I am resolute in my conviction that any percentage below 50 per cent is a failure. I understand that the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) itself scores 120 out of 400. That is 30 per cent! “Infandum” (Unspeakable). Woe upon woe, our institutions in their discretion, erroneously accept 40 per cent, 45 per cent and 48 per cent as pass marks. No wonder, employers now say that some Nigerian graduates are unemployable. I appeal to the Federal Minister and State Commissioners of Education, Nigerian University Commission, JAMB, Dean of Faculties of Law, Vice Chancellors, Principal of Schools and Colleges, parents, grandparents, the Media organizations, NGOs, the great and the good here present, and the public to protest vociferously that the policy of a pass mark below 50 per cent must end NOW in order to the end the unacceptable deterioration of educational standard.”

Solanke demanding a paradigm shift to save education in Nigeria at the Kenna Partners’ event.

A time was when the Nigerian judiciary was highly revered. Judgments were obeyed; judges were feared. It was unthinkable to associate them with corruption. But, over the years, standards have fallen. Judges now stand trial for corruption; many are denied justice on technicalities. Will the judiciary ever return to the golden era? These and more were discussed at a roundtable by the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC). Deputy News Editor JOSEPH JIBUEZE reports.

 

At 80, an eminent professor of law, Prof Itse Sagay (SAN), has seen the best and worst of the Nigerian judiciary.

He witnessed the “golden era” when the judiciary was truly the last hope of the common man.

It was an era the likes of Kayode Eso, Chukwudifu Oputa, Mohammed Bello, Augustine Nnamani and Chukwunweike Idigbe, among other great names, bestrode the Supreme Court.

Such jurists were known as the knights of judicial activism because they did justice despite operating in sometimes unfavourable circumstances. They even dared the military.

A strident critic of what the judiciary has become, Sagay longs for a return to the time when the Bench did justice to “all manner of people” without fear.

“I  have lived long enough to have seen what it used to be as compared to what it now is,” he said.

Sagay spoke at a Roundtable on jurisprudence and philosophy of judgments in the Nigerian legal system, organised by the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), which he chairs.

Speakers at the event said restoring the standards would require getting the appointment processes right.

 

Reminiscences

Nothing would give Sagay as much satisfaction as seeing the judiciary return to those lofty standards.

Calling out the institution as he often does, he said, does not mean he is hostile towards it. He only wants the best for it.

“The perception that I am unduly critical of judges and the judiciary is wrong. Let me declare this: “I regard the judiciary with great respect and awe.

“I am deeply upset when it falls below the high standard set for it and behaves like the typical Nigerian institution.

“You can say I love the judiciary to a fault. They must be perfect and remain the repository of honour, integrity and high moral authority. That is what makes the judiciary the supreme institution in the land.

“Therefore, my so-called hostility towards the judiciary constitutes a very unfair assumption.  Criticising and making suggestions for a change or improvement in the philosophy of judgments is positive for everybody. It is merely a struggle to propel the judiciary towards glory, even perfection,” he said.

Sagay desires a judiciary that does justice and relies less on technicalities, and that is morally upright.

He said: “I remember a time when the judiciary of this country could not be associated with corruption. Nobody, no matter how bold and demon-possessed, would dare go to a judge’s chambers to offer him money, particularly at the very high level. A judge loses his high moral authority if he is in any way associated with corruption.

“Judges of the golden era created such a high standard that nobody looked at America or Britain for judicial leadership because we had the best judicial leaders in the world.

“We must devise a system for the appointment of judges which promotes confidence in their quality. We must institute a system for the promotion of judges which rewards productive justice rather than continuing with the present system, which is a combination of routine, in other words, turn by turn.

“Judges with whom we’ve spoken said their main problem was that their promotion is based on quantity rather than quality. I think that’s a major mistake in the system.”

 

‘Avoid technical justice’

Sagay also wants members of the Bench to dwell less on technicalities in dismissing good cases.

The SAN said: “Every judgment must pass one test, which is: has justice been done? If you have read a very highly learned judgment, which at the end of the day punishes the innocent and elevates the guilty, you have not done justice.

“Judges of the golden age created a high standard. If a case arose for which there was no remedy, they would provide the remedy.  Where there was no law to protect the innocent, they would make a ruling that would bring the law into existence.

“Our judges can enjoy immortality by going back to the golden age of the judiciary. We brought nothing into this world and we’re going back with nothing.

“The only thing you can leave behind is your name, integrity and fame for what you have done when you had the power to do so. Let us go back to that golden era.

“Let there be justice in every judgment. Let there not be a repeat of the Zamfara and Bayelsa cases where victory was given to people who lost elections miserably and people are imposed as rulers.”

On how to get judicial appointments right, Sagay said the process must be open to scrutiny.

He said: “It is clear that countries like Nigeria need a more complex system of appointment in which several institutions are involved to check one another.

“To avoid the practice of gross lobbying and nepotism that presently undermine the appointment of judges, there is a need to seek the opinions of the local Bar and colleagues regarding the fitness of prospective appointees for office before forwarding their names to the National Judicial Council (NJC).”

 

Wanted: fearless, corrupt-free judiciary

The lead speaker, Yemi Candide-Johnson (SAN), believes judges must be held accountable for the public trust they hold.

The judiciary, he noted, is the guardian-protector of the constitution and the fundamental rights of the people and holds a balance between arms of government as well as individuals with competing rights and interest.

Therefore, judges must be true to their judicial oath and act impartially, honestly and efficiently.

Candide-Johnson said only an efficient and independent judiciary could command public confidence in the administration of justice and promote/protect the rule of law and human rights.

To achieve that, he suggested that every aspect of the judicial appointment process should be such as would command public respect and confidence that the best persons in terms of skill, learning, integrity and courage are recruited.

He proposed a model that does not exclude anyone who has the requisite qualifications and qualities needed and desires to be considered for appointment to the judicial office.

The new order, he said, must put in place a mechanism for assessment of the suitability of candidates, including, but not limited to, careful screening, interview and assessment of the evidence presented by the candidate.

He recalled that in 2018, a former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mariam Aloma Mukhtar, decried the corruptive prevalence of lobbying and favouritism in judicial appointments at the cost of merit.

Candide-Johnson said: “The current opaque system of judicial appointments defeats legitimate public interest in the quality of judges.”

To guarantee that the most capable justices are selected, the SAN said a successful candidate should demonstrate independence and impartiality; possess an outstanding knowledge of the law; and have excellent oral and written communication skills and analytical competency.

On the independence of candidates, he said: “To evaluate their background, all candidates should be made to furnish a sworn statement containing a comprehensive list of clients, contractors, former work and professional colleagues, as well as business and professional entities in which they have a stake or have been involved with, in the past.

“At the public interview, such background and its potential impact in the post a person is applying to should be assessed thoroughly.”

The candidate, he added, must be known for reputable conduct and a spotless record of integrity.

Also, the candidate must show a commitment to the judiciary as a public institution; demonstrate a commitment to the protection of human rights, democratic values and transparency, and must understand the social and legal consequences of one’s decisions.

 

‘Make NJC more independent’

Candide-Johnson believes the NJC should be much more autonomous and independent.

He said: “The current council is dominated by a single powerful judge. For legitimacy in the public mind, the majority of members should be appointed by persons with ties to the democratic process, rather than unelected special interests.

“Independence would suggest that the ultimate appointing authority would not be allowed to select any member of the council.

“Judicial independence requires that the selection of its members be spread out among several groups so that no one political party or interest group can influence the selection process.

“The council should reflect the diversity of the community as well as the diversity of its segments.

“Legitimacy will be enhanced if both lawyer-members and laypersons can participate in selection as well as regulation and discipline of judges.”

 

Blame NBA also, says Falana

Activist-lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) blamed the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) for not doing enough to bring sanity to the profession.

To him, a disciplined Bar makes a disciplined Bench.

He said: “If the judiciary is bad, then the lawyers who go to the Bench are bad or worse.

“Petitions are taken seriously by the NJC. That is not so with the NBA. Any lawyer in Nigeria can do what he or she likes and gets away with it.

“So, unless we are prepared to reform the NBA, in terms of disciplining of our members, we’re not going to get it right. These are the products that go to the Bench. You can’t blame the judges alone.”

He said while the NBA is busy organising annual conferences and bar dinners, it must not jettison its role of disciplining erring lawyers.

A member of the Justice Reform Project (JRP), Dr Babatunde Ajibade (SAN), who moderated the virtual event, believes emphasis must be placed on merit in judicial appointments.

“That golden era arose because the judges were appointed through a painstaking process that ensured that it was only the best of the best that got onto our Bench. The judiciary is probably the most important arm of the government. The challenge is a grave one.

“We must put in place a system where merit and identifiable criteria play the predominant role in judicial appointments. The justice sector must carry out significant introspection,” he said.

‘Judges can learn on the job’

For the Court of Appeal President, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, some of the criticisms are off the mark.

She said while only the best should be appointed to the Bench, those appointed do not necessarily need to know everything.

She rejected critical comments by the NBA President, Olumide Akpata, who lamented that some of the 18 judges currently being recruited could not answer basic legal questions.

Justice Dongban-Mensem said: “Somebody said there is room for learning and the President of the NBA took offence that somebody said that people will learn on the job. Who doesn’t learn on the job?

“Prof Sagay, did you know everything you should do when you were appointed as chairman of PACAC? Has he not learnt some things? Has he not started looking at some other things differently? I mean, we all learn.

“In the Court of Appeal, we sit in panels and we help each other. Somebody may know more about something. Some of the judges of the Court of Appeal may not have had the privilege of sitting on maritime cases.

“Will you deny them the opportunity of being appointed on the Court of Appeal Bench because they do not know the meaning of maritime law? Don’t they know other things? Will they not learn from others? These are some of the things that inform our decisions.

“So, people should be a little bit kind with the judiciary when they go out and try to criticise and throw everything away. I can assure you that there are men and women of integrity in the judiciary.”

‘Politics part of appointment process’

The Court of Appeal President thinks political influence in the appointment process does not mean the best cannot emerge.

“The interests are varied. We are different parts of the nation. You cannot keep politics out of the appointment into the judiciary.

“They (judges) are representing their people. So, you can stop politicians from advocating for (sic) people from their regions to be represented in judicial appointments.

“But I can assure you, that is not what guides…. We look at all of these things and take the best.

“If our bests have not been good enough, there is room for improvement. We are still learning. We have not closed the bus.”

As the controversy generated by the latest nomination of some judges by the National Judicial Council (NJC) for appointment as justices of the Court of Appeal rages, law experts are of the view that a review of existing judges’ appointment process is necessary to ensure that the best always makes it to the Bench from the Bar. ERIC IKHILAE reports.

 

 

It is gradually becoming a tradition. The frequency with which the announcement of judicial officers’ appointment generates controversy is becoming habitual in recent time.

Last year, when the National Judicial Council (NJC) made public a list of nominees for appointment as judges, hell was literally let loose. Petitions flew from right and left, with many querying the rationale for the choices made.

A group, the Open Bar Initiative (OBI), in its petition, urged President Muhammadu Buhari not to approve the list of 33 candidates recommended to him by the NJC on April 26, for appointment to the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

OBI claimed that no fewer than 17 of the lawyers recommended for appointment were unqualified. It added that the NJC’s recommendation was flawed and should not be allowed to stand because “the selection process violated the NJC’s laid-down rules and procedures and was fraught with judicial insider dealing, which risks turning the judiciary into an instrument for advancing narrow personal interests and patronage.

“Out of the 33 candidates recommended, at least 17 were unqualified, according to the NJC’s own rules and standards. On the basis of our own checks, nearly all of the unqualified nominees got on the list for appointment on the basis of their relationships or affinity by blood or marriage with serving or retired senior judicial figures.

“At least one candidate did not apply for the job and did not participate in the interview or selection process but was smuggled into the list for appointment after the shortlisting had been done. The suggestion that judicial service in Nigeria is an inheritance transmitted from parents to children is not supported by the constitution or any other instrument under Nigerian laws. This is manifestly an abuse of the high constitutional responsibility invested in those who must nominate judges for your appointment.

“Additionally, these appointments could violate the requirement of federal character. For example, Ebonyi State, which has no indigene on the FCT High Court, has also been denied any nominee in this current round of nominations but several states, which already had judges on the FCT High Court got two nominees, including Adamawa, Benue, Delta, Jigawa, Kano, and Kebbi states.”

In resolving the controversy generated, President Muhammadu Buhari, in July 2020, accepted only 11 out of the 33 recommended for the High Court of the FCT by the NJC,  who were eventually appointed.

The current controversy

As if no lesson was learnt, the recommendation by the NJC for the appointment of justices for the Court of Appeal has ignited another round of controversy. Immediately a list of nominees became public earlier this year, groups and individuals began raising varied issues.

The President of Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olumide Akpata, reportedly lamented, while speaking at an NBA meeting in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, the shoddy nature of the screening exercise done at the NJC.

Akpata later faulted that account of events, claiming to have been misrepresented by a member of the NBA National Executive Council (NEC), who was credited with the report.

A group, the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum (SMBLF), is concerned that the majority of the nominees are Muslims from the North, which does not in any way reflect the fact that Nigeria is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural.

SMBLF noted that 13 of the 20 nominated judges are from the North, including three Sharia judges, and wondered whether there is no Christian judge at all from the North and the Middle Belt, who could be considered for elevation to the appellate court.

Another group, the Global Integrity Crusade Network (GCIN) raised a petition, which it addressed to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), demanding, among others, the cancellation of the appointment process. A third group, the Alaigbo Development Foundation (ADF), led by Prof Uzodinma Nwala, argued that the choice of nominees for the Court of Appeal this time was meant to deny the Southeast its quota in the Court of Appeal based on the principles of Federal Character as enshrined in the constitution.

ADF argued that: “It is very unjust and unfair for only one justice to be appointed from the Southeast out of 20 justices that are being appointed from the six geo-political zones, whereas the other zones were allocated as follows: North-West (8), North-East (3), North-Central (2) South-West (4), South-South (2)”.

The Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) also questioned the composition of the list of nominees, accusing the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) of being insensitive to the reality of religious diversity in the country, alleging a gradual process at Islamising the nation’s judiciary.

Court of Appeal’s President defends process

Bothered by the barrages of criticism, which threatened the integrity of the entire process and, by extension, the judiciary, the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem, addressed the issue, faulting claims that the process of appointing justices for her court was being manipulated to favour certain individuals.

In a statement, Justice Dongban-Mensem insisted that those behind the false claim were interested in destabilising and scandalising the judiciary. She urged Nigerians to disregard such a false claim.

Justice Dongban-Mensem, who is from Plateau State, said: “A total of 80 nominees were shortlisted and recommended for the appointment of 20 justices to fill the existing vacancies. I state on my honour that any of the 80 nominees could be appointed.

“It is unfortunate that some people have elected to go to the press without hard facts which are readily available to those who seek to know. I hereby state that the current recommendation pending determination by the National Judicial Council (NJC) was done without any preference for tribe, creed or association.

“If there were sufficient vacancies to be filled, all the nominees would have been recommended. I hereby totally disassociate myself from those who are insinuating that I had a list of preferred candidates based on tribe or religion. This is clearly the handiwork of detractors who want to destabilise and scandalise the Judiciary,” she said.

Although the NBA President has denied what he was reported to have witnessed during the screening exercise, and that the NJC, last week, forwarded its list to President Buhari, the agitation over the quality and choice of those nominated this time has persisted, with critics unwilling to back down.

Before now

Unfortunately, doubt about the level of objectivity and altruistic inclination of those saddled with the process of judicial officers’ appointment is on the increase today. This development may have been fuelled by the perception by some that the Buhari-led administration sometimes promotes primordial considerations in public appointment, which has, by its decisions, elevated nepotistic, ethnic and religious tendencies above the constitutionally enshrined Federal Character principles, and at the expense of competence.

Before now, the concern was about the quality of persons so appointed, not ethnic, political and other mundane considerations. People were concerned about the increasing influence of politicians and like minds in the process of judges’ appointment, insisting on the need for a process that ensures that the best makes it to the Bench from the Bar.

Mandatory tests for applicants for judicial office

This position gave rise to the suggestion that consideration should be extended to those outside the Bench when appointments for the appellate courts’ benches are being considered.

Vice President Yemi Osinbajo (SAN) stressed this point while contributing to a webinar put together by a law firm, with the theme: “Developing an Institutional Concept of Justice in Nigeria.”

Osinbajo argued in favour of the need to reform the process of appointing judges in the country to ensure that the best and most suited are appointed.  He said: “We must take a second look at the appointment of judges. The merit-based system is necessary. We need to do mandatory tests for them. We need to look at how our judges are selected.

“It is not enough to rise through the ranks in the judiciary with judges going to the Supreme Court from the Appeal Court. We must be able to bring in practising lawyers and the academic to become judges. We owe it to ourselves to change the rules. Change is necessary and reform of our Judiciary process should be urgent.”

Another Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Wole Olanipekun, who also participated in the event, echoed a similar position when he expressed discomfort about the current practice whereby judges of the appellate court were being appointed based on promotion.

Olanipekun said: “I  reckon that judges can be appointed from the academia and the Bar and not just based on promotion from one court to another.”

CJN prefers status quo

Before he was compelled to step down, the then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, had commenced a process to appoint established lawyers as justices for the appellate courts. The impression then was that he planned to experiment with the Supreme Court.

That plan died immediately the incumbent CJN, Justice Ibrahim Muhammad, took office. Justice Muhammad has not always been diplomatic about his aversion to such a plan. To him, appointing judicial officers for the appellate court from the Bar would work a disservice to those who chose to commence their career from the lower benches.

The CJN spoke his mind on this issue at the annual conference of the Justices of the Court of Appeal, where he said although there was pressure and calls for a review of the current appointment process that gives priority to career judges and justices, he was not ready to yield ground on the matter.

Justice Muhammad told the gathering: “I wouldn’t want to say much on the process of selecting Justices from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court. But one thing on which I am positively assuring you, although there is a lot of pressure, is that we will retain the old regime.

“Those of us who passed through the Court of Appeal spent a number of years in the Court of Appeal, and we had a lot of experience and created a lot of relationships in the Court of Appeal. We will feel slighted if we are made to take anybody straight from outside.

“I don’t know. There are a lot of calls, a lot of insistence that we should take a look at the process we currently use in appointment to the Supreme Court and that we should not concentrate on the Court of Appeal alone. I say no.

“But, maybe it is because I am biased because I am a son of the Court of Appeal and I know the number of years that I spent in the Court of Appeal. And I know the experiences I gathered in the Court of Appeal. I know the number of Justices that I met and made friends within the Court of Appeal, and we still telephone each other till today,” he said.

The CJN said he was not, by his position, denigrating practising lawyers, but that it would be an act of injustice against career judges and justices who have committed years to the Bench and have no other options, like practising lawyers have.

“This is somebody who has followed through the line. For example, myself. I started as a Magistrate Grade II. Going up the ladder, I wouldn’t want the authority to forget those of us who have been around.

“You grew up from the magistracy, rising through the ranks, and then they say we are not taking candidates for the Supreme Court from the Court of Appeal; we are taking from among the practising lawyers.

“We are not denigrating the practising lawyers. That is why I said let’s call a spade a spade. A practising lawyer may have a lot of openings. Tell me: what are your openings? What is the way forward for you? Please, let’s put our heads together. Don’t entertain that kind of thing.

“As far as I am concerned, the Supreme Court is the last stage. Any one of us who grew up with the system and has continued to grow, why stagnate him? We know that it is not every one of us that will get to the Supreme Court. That is destiny.

“If somebody is brought from outside, it will take time to train such a person to fit in. I am with the old regime that we should train those who are already on the line. If you want to be a judge, you should join at the High Court; most of them do not want to join at the High Court. That is the best place for you to start.

“I don’t think it will be the right thing to appoint somebody straight to the Court of Appeal, because you have to train and teach him/her,” he said.

Agbakoba: Make appointment process fully transparent

Despite the disagreement about the process of appointment, stakeholders are, however, united that a well-constituted Bench, made of quality and independent minds, not besotted to extraneous forces and interests, would work to ensure, not only a better Judiciary but a better nation.

A former President of the NBA, Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) has suggested that a way to ensure the appointment of quality judges was the adoption of the recommendation of a committee led by former CJN, Justice Dahiru Musdapher.

Agbakoba was recently quoted to have said: “In order to remove these challenges, simply make the appointment process fully transparent as recommended by the high-level committee set up by Chief Justice Dahiru Musdapher.

“The committee comprehensively reviewed the justice sector and recommended a root and branch transformation of the judicial process. I was very honoured and privileged to be part of that committee.

“Unfortunately, on the voluntary retirement of Mr Justice Dahiru Musdapher, who became one of the great reformers, everything came to a screeching halt. My suggestion is that the Dahiru Musdapher recommendations be implemented immediately,” Agbakoba said.

Ozekhome: subject applicants to rigorous, thorough scrutiny

Another lawyer, Mike Ozekhome (SAN) warned that a faulty process of judges’ appointment was not beneficial to the Judiciary and the country, noting that a shoddy screening of applicants for any position in the Judiciary would lead to shoddy results.

Ozekhome added: “Shoddy results lead to a shoddy Bench. A shoddy Bench leads to a shoddy justice delivery system. A shoddy justice delivery system leads to miscarriage of justice. Miscarriage of justice leads to injustice. Injustice leads to anger. Anger leads to violence. Violence leads to destruction. Destruction leads to insecurity. With insecurity, our dear nation is imperilled. It’s a never-ending cycle of misfortune that can be avoided by doing the right thing.”

He said a functional system that subjects applicants to rigorous and thorough scrutiny was necessary to ensure the emergence of a virile, independent and courageous Judiciary, peopled by men and women of courage, integrity, honour and dignity.

Akinwunmi: NJC must set clearly defined criteria

On his part, Babs Akinwunmi, an Abuja- based lawyer stressed that appointing competent judicial officers was important for the safeguard of the principle of rule of law and the dispensation of justice.

Akinwunmi argued that the process of appointing judicial officials should always serve as a veritable platform to identify persons who possess the highest standard of intellectual abilities, moral qualities and practical skills.

“These are all the qualities required in a judicial officer. Thus, this process should be well guided and seen by all to be transparent, in order to sustain public confidence in the judiciary. Therefore, they should set clearly defined criteria and process that is known to all and sundry, probably etched in a document that is accessible to all. The process must be seen to be transparent by stakeholders. This will imbue confidence in people and would not attract any uproar,” Akinwunmi said.

Falola: NBA should screen applicants for judicial office

Another lawyer, Tunde Falola urged the President (who is the appointing authority in the case of justices for the appellate courts and other federal courts, and who acts on NJC’s recommendations) to ensure fair and equal representation, in terms of the geographical diversity of the country and strict adherence to the Federal Charter Principles as enshrined in the Constitution.

Falola argued for the NBA to be given constitutional responsibility to screen applicants seeking appointment as judicial officers, adding that since part of the constitutional requirements to be appointed a Justice of the Court of Appeal include being a legal practitioner of not less than 12 years post-call, the NBA should be allowed to recommend and screen its members, who aspire to be so appointed.

“This will promote transparency, competence and ensure that members, who have integrity crisis do not get to the Bench. Doing this will also have positive impacts on the administration of Justice in Nigeria. Since the Appeal Court plays a pivotal role in the efficient administration of Justice in Nigeria, an intending applicant to this court must be a legal practitioner, who is worthy in character and in like manner. His/her appointment must be devoid of any extraneous, parochial or political considerations,” Falola said.

By Adebisi Onanuga

 

 

An Ikeja Special Offence Court has acquitted a 36-year-old former staff of an old generation Bank, Oluwaseye Adu, of theft of $200,000.

Adu’s acquittal followed his refund of $200,000 to the complainant, Insurance Brokers of Nigeria (IBN) and the withdrawal of the bank in the matter.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC)  had arraigned the defendant on a one count charge of stealing before Justice Oluwatoyin Taiwo.

According to EFCC counsel, Mr U.U. Buhari, Adu committed the offence in 2014 in Lagos State.

Buhari said the defendant dishonestly converted the sum of $200,000 belonging to Insurance Brokers of Nigeria (IBN) to his use.

Read Also: 80 in court for violating sanitation law in Ondo

 

He alleged that the defendant used his position as a bank’s relationship officer to the complainant, IBN, to steal the money.

The offence contravenes Section 287 of the Criminal Law of Lagos, 2015. The defendant, however, pleaded not guilty to the offence.

Adu  had pleaded not guilty to the charge when he was first arraigned in March 2020 .

On the advice of his counsel, the defendant changed his not guilty plea and also went into settlement arrangement with the bank which led to him paying back the stolen money.

Ruling on the matter at resumed proceeding, Justice Taiwo discharged and acquitted the defendant of the offence.

“Having conform to the terms of settlement and have the sum of $200,000 refunded in full, I hereby discharge and acquit the accused person.”