The Nation Newspaper

Tag: CJN

  • The imperative of appointing and swearing-in a substantive CJN

    The imperative of appointing and swearing-in a substantive CJN

    One-time Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President WOLE OLANIPEKUN is of the view that President Muhammadu Buhari ought to have forwarded Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen’s name to the National Assembly for confirmation as the substantive Chief Justice of the Federation (CJN). The Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) says the Constitution has no provision for acting CJN.

    There is no gainsaying or debating the fact that Nigeria operates a constitutional democracy, which also recognises, in the main, three arms of government, that is, the executive, legislature and judiciary. The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) (the Constitution) is pre-eminently not just the organic law, but also the grundnorm. In the celebrated case of Dapianlong v. Dariye (2007) 8 NWLR (Pt. 1036) 332 at 411, the Supreme Court succinctly and brilliantly summed-up what a constitution represents in the following hallowed words: “It is settled law that the Constitution of any country is what is usually called the organic law or grundnorm of the people. It contains all the laws from which the institutions of state derive their creation, legitimacy and very being.”

    In effect, our democracy and all institutions of state, including the citizenry, thrive and co-exist by constitutional imperatives. We have to abide not just by its wordings and letters, but also by its tenor and intent.

    Judicial powers of the federation are vested in the courts created by Section 6(5) of the Constitution, otherwise styled ‘the superior courts of record’; and the Supreme Court stands at the apogee of the hierarchy. The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) is not just the head of the Supreme Court, but also doubles as the leader of the judicial arm of the Government of Nigeria, including both the inferior tribunals and the superior courts. The Constitution, in its wisdom, makes clear and very unambiguous provisions for the appointment of the Chief Justice of Nigeria under Section 231. Relevant for the purpose of this discourse are sub-sections (1) and (4) of Section 231, which read thus respectively:

    • “(1) The appointment of a person to the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council subject to confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.
    • (4) If the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria is vacant or if the person holding the office is for any reason unable to perform the functions of the office, then until a person has been appointed to and has assumed the functions of that office, or until the person holding the office has resumed those functions, the President shall appoint the most senior Justice of the Supreme Court to perform those functions.”

    From the simple coinage of Section 231(1), the appointment of a Chief Justice of Nigeria is constitutionally done by the three arms of government, to wit; the President makes the appointment on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC), subject to confirmation by the Senate. Simple logic dictates and demands that the NJC kick-starts the process, and would forward its recommendation to the President, who in turn will send or forward the recommended name to the Senate for confirmation or otherwise. It is common knowledge that in exercise of its constitutional functions and duties, the NJC had, after its meeting of October 11, 2016 resolved to recommend the name of Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen to Mr. President for appointment as the Chief Justice of Nigeria. To my mind, immediately after this recommendation, NJC had completed its constitutionally vested duty, thus, becoming funtus officio. It can no longer revisit, review or re-examine the recommendation it has made. Section 158(1) of the Constitution guarantees not just the independence of the NJC, but also the sanctity of the decision it has arrived at. The NJC has no constitutional latitude to approbate and reprobate on the subject.  Starting from that point, particularly, on receipt of the recommendation of the NJC by Mr. President, the ball shifted to the President’s court; but has to be passed to the Senate simply in accordance with the wordings and dictate of the Constitution. The law has well crystallised in the proposition that where the wordings of a statute, particularly the Constitution, are clear, they merely call for application, and not interpretation. (See C.C.C.T.C.S. Ltd. v. Ekpo (2008) 6 NWLR (Pt.1083) 362 at 392 and Dapianlong v. Dariye (supra).

    With very much respect, it is submitted that in the face of a definitive recommendation by the NJC to Mr. President for the appointment of a particular Justice as the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mr. President cannot fall back on the provision of Section 231(4) to appoint that same Justice as the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria. With every sense of responsibility, Section 231(4) will come into play if, for example, after the receipt of the NJC’s recommendation, the President has forwarded the name of the Hon. Justice Onnoghen to the Senate, and as at November 10, 2016, when the last holder of the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria retired, the Senate had not reverted to the President, confirming the appointment or deciding otherwise. Then, there would have been an interregnum. With the situation of things whereby the NJC has made recommendation to Mr. President under Section 231(1), the said sub-section and sub-section (4) have become mutually exclusive. In its clear wordings, the Constitution does not expect that an interim appointment should be made in the circumstances. By its tenor and spirit, the Constitution does not contemplate it. It might be apt to pose some rhetorical questions, derived from similar circumstances in the Constitution at this stage, in order to drive home my point. Can a Chief Justice of Nigeria refuse to swear in a President-elect on any ground at all, particularly on the ground that his election is being challenged at an election court or Tribunal, despite the clear mandate given to the Chief Justice of Nigeria under and by virtue of Section 140(2) of the Constitution to swear him in, without allowing the CJN to express or harbour any reservation? The answer is clearly in the negative. Further, can the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria refuse to consider for confirmation or otherwise, ministerial nominees forwarded to it by Mr. President on any excuse at all, including the fact that it does not like the process through which the said ministerial nominees evolved, despite the clear provision of Section 147(2) of the Constitution? The answer is also nay. Again, can Mr. President refuse to recognise any presiding officer, be it Senate President or Speaker of the House of Representatives, elected or selected by any of the two chambers, on any conceivable ground at all? I submit that the answer is no. The question then arises, why the judiciary? Or, why leave or put the judiciary in an avoidable conundrum? The issue or discourse is not about the person of the nominee of the NJC; far from it. It is also not about his ethnic extraction or religious inclination or catechism. It also has nothing to do with whether he is from any particular section of the country, whether North or South. These are extraneous issues which becloud reasoning.

    Furthermore, I am not joining issues with those who contend, rightly in my view, that under and by virtue of Section 231(3) of the Constitution, an appointment to the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria can be made from either the Bench of the Supreme Court itself, or from any appropriate segment of the legal profession, provided the appointee has qualified as  a legal practitioner for a period of not less than fifteen years. We have passed that stage in this circumstance, whereby the NJC has made a recommendation and forwarded same to Mr. President under and by virtue of Section 231(1).

  • 17 Justices ‘okay for Supreme Court’

    17 Justices ‘okay for Supreme Court’

    •‘More courts, more congestion’

    The Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria Walter Samuel Onnoghen said yesterday the 17 justices of the Supreme Court were adequate for the country.
    Onnoghen said the appointment of more judges and justices as well as creation of more judicial divisions were not solutions to judicial delay and congestion of cases.
    He spoke yesterday at the inauguration of the re-modelled and upgraded Court of Appeal, Lagos Complex, in company of Lagos State Deputy Governor Dr. Idiat Oluranti-Adebule, who represented Governor Akinwunmi Ambode.
    Onnoghen, responding to a call by Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) Vice President Monday Ubani for three more divisions of the Appeal Court for speedy justice delivery, noted that it will create more problems.
    He said: “We always think we can solve congestion in our courts by appointing more judges and justices and creating more divisions, because the idea is that the more they are, the lesser the job or workload.
    “But this has not been proved right. It has rather been proved wrong, because the more divisions you create, the more cases get filed. The solution doesn’t lie in multiplying number of divisions and judges. The more judges and justices you appoint, the more cases that get filed, which points to the fact that we have really not hit the nail on the head.
    “The solution lies in making every appeal to the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court by leave. It lies in controlling the jurisdiction of the court in the quantity, number of cases that get to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.
    “If we have 21 or so provisions for vacancies to the Supreme Court, we believe if we appoint that number, it will be the solution? No.”
    Onnoghen observed that the United States and India with far more people than Nigeria had fewer Supreme Court justices.
    “Apart from the physical constraints the Supreme Court has in terms of space, there is another idea we should look at. Which of the countries in the world can you point to with that kind of number of justices on its Supreme Court bench? There is none. Even in America as large as it is, it has nine. Go to India, none.
    “So, the number 17 is adequate for our size, if we can only solve the problem of congestion by controlling volume of traffic that gets to the Supreme Court.
    “We say appeals should get to the Supreme Court as of right. Good. On matters of questions of law; yes. If it is on point of law, the point of law must be novel enough to attract attention of the Supreme Court. Otherwise, we are just playing about.”
    Ambode, who hailed the upgrade, pledged the state’s support for the judiciary.
    Appeal Court President Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa led a host of dignitaries, including Supreme Court Justices Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, Sidi Bage, justices of the Sokoto, Port Harcourt, Calabar, Makurdi, Abuja, Jos and Yola Divisions of the Appeal Court.

  • CJN, Ribadu to lawyers: fight corruption

    The Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter S. N. Onnoghen, has  called for a collaborative effort in the fight against corruption.

    According to him, the fight should not be left to the government alone.

    He said organisations, institutions and professional bodies must act rather than remain silent about corruption.

    Justice Onnoghen spoke at the ninth  J-K Gadzama LLP Annual Public Lecture in Abuja  with the theme:  Corruption and the nation’s economy; lawyers as change agents.

    The Acting CJN, represented by Justice Musa Dettijo Mohammed,  praised Chief J-K Gadzama (SAN)  for  the lecture series, which has been on for almost a decade.

    He decried the devastating effect of corruption on the economy, saying: “If we do not arrest and eliminate this monster, it would consume our nation and we will not have any nation to bequeathe to our children and future generation.“

    He urged the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) as well as other relevant legal education and regulatory bodies “to educate our lawyers on their very important role as change agents”.

    The guest lecturer, pioneer Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC),  Mallam Nuhu Ribadu,  examined the concept  of corruption and the imperatives of fighting it.

    “I want to urge our legal practitioners to always put our legal code of ethics as your guiding light, set morality as your canvas and carry in your heart the public interest, to avoid harming yourself along with the larger society, as Lord Brougham cited above described.

    “We must take an active step in self-cleansing. We as lawyers should shun the attitude of playing the ostrich for self preservation. The NBA must be in the forefront of the current effort to cure the justice sector of the evil of corruption and in this there should be no sacred cows.

    “The talent commonly displayed by lawyers and their training place the lawyer at a comparative advantage for leadership roles, especially at important junctures of history.

    “A number of lawyers have played that role to the admiration of the world. Let’s look at our Mandela, lets look at Ghandi, lets look at Obama, as lawyers they altered the course of history. We all have similar traits in us. Lawyers are trained to be change agents, and we the Nigerian lawyers should not be any different,” Ribadu said.

    The paper was discussed by  the former Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice in Cross River State, Mrs. Nella Andem- Rabana (SAN),  Chairman of Civil Society Network Against Corruption, Mr. Olanrewaju Suraju and  Mrs Ozioma Izuora.

    Plateau State Governor,  Simon Bako Lalong sent his good will massage through Justice Chris Selong. Others, who gave goodwill massages at the event, included the Chief Judge of Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, Chief Judge FCT High Court, Justice I. U. Bello, President, National Industrial Court, Justice Babatunde Adejumo, D-G Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS) Prof.Deji Adekunle and President, Law Media Justice and Society Initiative, Mr Charle  Odenigbo.

  • CJN: why we asked judges under probe to step down

    CJN: why we asked judges under probe to step down

    Attorney-Gen. ‘insists on trial’

    Amina Augie, Ejembi Eko join Supreme Court

    Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Mahmud Mohammed yesterday explained why the National Judicial Council (NJC) directed judges under probe for criminal allegations to stop sitting pending when their innocence is established.

    The CJN, who is the Chairman of the NJC, explained that the council’s decision was informed by the insistence of the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN), on prosecuting the judges arrested by the Department of State Services (DSS).

    He said the Judiciary, being a responsible arm of the government, chose not to interfere with the AGF’s exercise of his statutory powers to prosecute.

    Justice Mohammed, who will retire on Thursday, spoke in Abuja yesterday while swearing in Amina Augie and Ejembi Eko as Justices of the Supreme Court.

    He said the Judiciary was mindful of the powers ascribed to each organ of the state under a constitutional democracy. He said the Judiciary was resolute in upholding its independence by adjudicating with utmost fairness and justice as prescribed by the Constitution and the law.

    Said the CJ: “A common thread that runs through all Judiciaries is that judicial officers are traditionally accorded the highest dignity and respect by all. This is because justice is rooted in confidence and where confidence in our judges is undermined and independence eroded, it is the nation that ultimately suffers most while true democracy is fatally undermined.

    “Certainly, the decision of the National Judicial Council at its last meeting reflects our desire to preserve this independence. Hence, we proclaimed to the world that any judicial officer that is standing trial will cease to perform judicial functions.

    “The council took this stand following communications it received from the Hon. Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice that he was embarking on the prosecution of the affected judicial officers for the offences disclosed against them from the evidence on the ground.

    “We must not forget that we operate a constitutional democracy, which clearly prescribes the powers accorded to each organ of the state.

    “I therefore wish to state without fear of contradiction that the third arm of government will remain resolute in its commitment and resolve to uphold its independence and to adjudicate with utmost fairness and justice as prescribed in our Constitution and law.”

    Justice Mohammed, who noted that Justice Augie and Justice Eko were joining the Supreme Court bench “at a time when there are a lot of challenges”, said he trusted their capacity to cope.

    The CJN urged the new Justices to, more than ever before, “firm, honest and steadfast in the discharge of your duties, while striving to emulate the greats of this court by enthroning the rule of law and respect for our courts.

    “I charge you to continue to be diligent in the discharge of your duties. You must remain blind to personality and status and remain the hope of all men, whether common or uncommon.

    “Hence, the integrity and impartiality of our court must not be in question or compromised. I am confident that, with the institutions and initiatives that we have put in place, the Nigerian Judiciary will evolve to meet the high standards demanded by our citizens,” the CJN said.

  • Seven accused judges are entitled to fair hearing – CJN

    Seven accused judges are entitled to fair hearing – CJN

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Mahmud Mohammed, has said that the seven judges, like all other persons, are entitled to a fair hearing as stipulated in Section 36 of the constitution.

    The CJN was quoted as stating this in a letter which was sent to Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) in a statement issued on Tuesday in Abuja by Mr Timothy Adewale, SERAP Senior Staff Attorney.

    The letter, dated Oct. 26, 2016, was signed by H. S. Sa’eed, Senior Special Assistant to the CJN.

    Mohammed’s remark was in response to SERAP’s request that he as Chairman of the NJC, should take over the cases of the seven judges from the Department of State Service (DSS).

    The CJN stated that there were clear constitutional provisions relating to the power of any individual, institution or arms of government which must be adhered to.

    He said that the NJC could neither handover corrupt judges to law enforcement agencies for prosecution nor recover proceeds of corruption.

    He also explained that the NJC could merely make actionable recommendations upon its findings as it had always done.

    Mohammed said that in the exercise of its constitutional mandate, the NJC had enacted the Judicial Discipline Regulations, 2014.

    This, he said, was to ensure that petitions are received, investigated and addressed as appropriate.

    According to SERAP’s report, 64 judicial officers have been disciplined in the last five years.

    The CJN maintained that “the seven Judges, like all other persons, are entitled to a fair hearing as stipulated in Section 36 of the constitution.

    “As such, it will be presumptive and indeed pre-emptive to sanction the said judges without exhausting the proper procedure for their removal,” Mohammed stated.

    He expressed delight with SERAP’s dedication to justice, fairness and justness, stressing that it was the collective responsibility of all to tackle any perceived challenge facing the Nigerian judiciary.

    The CJN also stated that with the support of well-meaning Nigerians and SERAP, a transparent, fair and equitable justice system would be attained.

    Mohammed urged SERAP to continue to strive to support and entrench good governance in the country. (NAN)

  • Letter to CJN

    Whatever happens or goes wrong in the judicial system, lawyers (particularly some senior lawyers) are involved. There are some who have the capacity to influence and intimidate the courts and they do it with relish…sometimes (and when it matters) some members of the Bar representing NBA on the NJC hardly stand up for the truth, not to talk of speaking the truth.
    – Justice Ayo Isa Salami, ex-President of the Court of Appeal.

    My Lord, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Mahmoud Mohammed, it is with heavy heart that I start with the above quote from the parting shot of Justice Ayo Salami to the judiciary three years ago after a two-year battle to retain his seat as President of the Court of Appeal (PCA). As you are aware, Justice Salami was suspended from office by the National Judicial Council (NJC) on August 18, 2011 not for professional misconduct or corruption but for refusing to apologise to then CJN and NJC chairman Aloysius Katsina-Alu.  Though you were not then a member of NJC, which you now head, you were privy to all that happened as a Justice of the Supreme Court (JSC). My Lord, I will not bore you with details of that matter, but recent happenings in the judiciary make it imperative for me to refer to it. And I will be drawing heavily from some of Justice Salami’s remarks at the valedictory session held for him on October 31, 2013 in Abuja because he spoke a lot about NJC.

    By virtue of his position, PCA, as he then was, Justice Salami was an automatic member of NJC, but his membership amounted to nothing when he had issues with his chairman, former CJN Katsina-Alu. His fellow members disowned him in the face of glaring evidence that he did no wrong because they did not want to incur the wrath of Justice Katsina-Alu.

    Justice Salami exposed the inner workings of the NJC at his valedictory session. From what he said, it is not the august body that we all think it is. It seems that rather than stand up for what is right and just, the NJC will do anything to protect its own, especially those in the good books of its chairman. The NJC was not set up to be the tool of the CJN and his acolytes. It was established to ensure that the justice system works smoothly, with judges seen to be alive to their sacred responsibilities. Should such people become objects of scorn and ridicule? The answer is no.

    Unfortunately, this is what is happening today. Two Justices of the Supreme Court – Inyang Okoro and Sylvester Ngwuta –  the suspended Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, Ilorin Division, Mohammed Ladan Tsamiya, Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Enugu State Chief Judge Justice I.A. Umezulike, Justice Kabiru Auta of the Kano State High Court, Justice Muazu Pindiga, Gombe State High Court, Justice Bashir Sukola and Justice Ladan Manir, both of the Kaduna State High Court are today fighting a battle of their lives following allegations that they desecrated their offices. They are being investigated by the Department of State Service (DSS). Six others – all of the Federal High Court – Justices Mohammed Nasir Yunusa, Hyeladzira Ajiya Nganjiwa, Musa Haruna Kurya, Agbadu James Fishim, Uwani Abba Aji and Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia are being probed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).  These are men and women who sit in judgement over others being accused of some of the offences they try people for.

    My Lord, Justices Okoro, Ngwuta and Ademola have written to you, stating their innocence. Without their stating so, our law presumes them innocent until otherwise proven. Their letters have become subjects of public debate, with many wondering if they were actually written by those judges. Indeed if such letters should come to these judges in the course of a case what weight will they attach to them in evidence? Can they convict any felon on the strength of such letters? My Lord, their lordships, in their own words and in their own hands, admitted that there were attempts to induce  them to pervert justice and they kept quiet until they ran into trouble!

    The issue now is : should they continue to sit while allegations of corruption are hanging over their heads like the sword of Damocles? My Lord, to you, this is a dilemma, but to the public, it is not. The judges put themselves in the position they are in today. A smart and incorruptible judge, if it is true, would have reported to the police immediately he was approached to subvert justice. His complaint would have stood him in good stead in the day of trouble. Without a police report, I am sorry to say, Justices Okoro’s and Ngwuta’s claims that some ministers sought their help in some election petition cases sound like fairy tales. But, My Lord, they claimed to have reported the matter to you. Is that so? What did you do? Did you refer the matter to the police? The world is waiting to know the steps your lordship took.

    To keep silent in the face of at tempts to bribe a judge is to encourage corruption. If a Justice of the Supreme Court does not know this, then who will? The man on the street? My Lord, you have about two weeks left counting from today to bow out of service. With November 10, your retirement date fast approaching, you have but a little time to decide how you wish to be remembered after your exit. One major decision you have to take between now and then is what to do with the embattled judges. The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), which always side the NJC, has called for their suspension. Whatever anybody, especially some so-called senior lawyers, may say, the Bar cannot be faulted on this score. It cannot be proper for the judges to continue to sit not even while being investigated, not to talk of when their trial eventually starts.

    My Lord, you have kicked against the Bar’s demand, saying it is against the law establishing the NJC. That law, until amended, only gives NJC the power to discipline judges and recommend appropriate actions against them. It does not confer NJC with the power to conduct the sort of investigation being carried out against the judges by DSS and EFCC. My Lord, I am at a loss over your objection to the suspension of these judges. To me, suspending them will not be breaching the NJC law.

    It is misplaced fear to say that their lordships’ suspension will negate the law and also affect their integrity. To restore hope in the judiciary, their lordships must step aside to face trial. If they do not, you will be shirking your responsibility as NJC chairman. This is no time for esprit de corps. To save your own name, you must let the law take its course.

    Justice Salami may be right after all when he said : ‘’The problem with the Nigerian judiciary is that some dishonourable people not fit to be judges get into the stream and then make it to the highest level of the judicial career…’’ Will the outcome of the judges’ trial prove Justice Salami wrong? Time will tell.

  • CJN: DSS sting operation assault on judiciary

    CJN: DSS sting operation assault on judiciary

    CHIEF Justice of Nigeria Mahmud Mohammed spoke yesterday of his disappointment at “rising antagonism over the recent arrest of our judicial officers and other issues pertaining there to.”

    Justice Mohammed who will be retiring in about three weeks from now deplored the recent sting operations carried out by the Department of State Security (DSS) on some judges, including two justices of the Supreme Court, as an assault on the independence of the Judiciary.

    But he explained that the judicial arm is not in any way at war with the executive and legislative arms, saying it is a misunderstanding between the National Judicial Council (NJC) and the DSS.

    “It must be reiterated that the current misunderstanding is only between the National Judicial Council (NJC), which was established by the Constitution and the Directorate of the State Security (DSS), in the Presidency,” he said in a statement issued by his Senior Special Assistant to the CJN, H. S. Sa’eed.

    It was an update on the CJN’s position on the arrest and interrogation of Justices Sylvester Ngwuta and Iyang Okoro both of the Supreme Court and Justices  Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court ,Abuja; Kabir Auta of the Kano High Court; Muazu Pindiga of Gombe High Court; Mohammed Tsamiya of the Court of Appeal in Ilorin; and I. A. Umezulike of the Enugu State High Court.

    The statement: “Under the powers provided by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) and as the Head of the Third Arm of Government, the, the Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman National Judicial Council, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, GCON is calling on all Nigerians to continue to have faith and full confidence in the Nigerian Judiciary.

    “The Chief Justice of Nigeria (Hon. CJN) is indeed deeply concerned by the rising antagonism over the recent arrest of our Judicial Officers and other issues pertaining thereto. “Furthermore, it must be reiterated that the current misunderstanding is only between the National Judicial Council (NJC), which was established by the Constitution and the Directorate of the State Security (DSS), in the Presidency.

    “Hence, we must emphasise that the Judiciary continues to maintain cordial relations with the other arms of government, that is, the Executive and the National Assembly.

    “The CJN reiterates that the Nigerian Judiciary, as an Arm of the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, is not a party in this matter, nor is the Nigerian Judiciary on trial. “On the call by President of the Nigerian Bar, A. B. Mahmoud, SAN, to suspend Judicial Officers whose residences were invaded and who were subsequently arrested and detained by the DSS, we believe that the call was unnecessary and hasty as the said Judicial Officers are still being investigated by the DSS.

    “Furthermore, the DSS is yet to forward any complaint or any official communication regarding the seven Judicial Officers to the National Judicial Council.

    “Indeed, some of the affected Judicial Officers have already been investigated by the NJC, which found some culpable and recommended their removal from office by dismissal or retirement to the President and respective Governors as provided under the Constitution.

    “While some are still being investigated by the NJC, in respect of others, no complaint against them has been received by the NJC whose powers to suspend must be exercised in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution establishing it.

    “The National Judicial Council is currently investigating the various complaints made against a number of Judicial Officers. As soon as such investigations are completed, appropriate recommendations will be made to the President or Governors, as the case may be, who will have the final say on the fate of the affected Judicial Officers who could then be charged for the offences disclosed from the facts against them and be prosecuted if necessary.

    “The Chief Justice of Nigeria also wishes to state in clear terms that the ‘sting’ operations carried out by the DSS on 07 and 08 October 2016 was certainly an assault on the independence of the Nigerian Judiciary.”

  • CJN, NBA president and embattled jurists

    CJN, NBA president and embattled jurists

    NO scandal has so thoroughly shocked and bewildered Nigeria in recent years as the case of the seven judges against whom the secret service has launched extensive probes and a ‘sting’ operation. The interrogations of the jurists, sometimes downgraded to interactions, have continued. So, too, have the embarrassments. With each passing day, more revelations are emerging of poor judgements (not of court judgements, as may be imagined) by Supreme Court justices who ought to personify and exude juristic expertise and integrity, of overzealousness by state agents whose macabre delight in people’s misfortune often propel them to excesses and the creation of gaping loopholes, and a presidency quite unable to appreciate the enormity of the tragedy inflicted on the polity and the opportunities the scandal presents for deft and nuanced handling of national affairs.

    The ‘sting’ operation is a tragedy for the Supreme Court in particular, and a depressing affair for the National Judicial Council (NJC). The Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Mahmud Mohammed, has tried to keep a regal detachment, and has struggled to walk a tightrope between the pressure to cleanse the judiciary, which he says he believes in, and the almost certain invasion and erosion of the independence of the judiciary which the executive arm appears to be fomenting. Last week’s NJC statement indicates that the secret service did not avail anyone but itself of the details of the investigations undertaken against the judges. The statement stopped short of insinuating that the government seemed inspired by perverse, ulterior motives. But eventually, the CJN will have to recognise that he had been outfoxed and must assent to the recusal of the accused judges, as the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) president Abubakar Mahmud, suggested on Thursday. Mr Mahmud had at first been unadvisedly combative until he realised that the lower rungs of the NBA were up in arms against the status quo dominated by those they describe as irresponsible seniors who had embraced and profited from judicial corruption.

    If President Muhammadu Buhari understood the implications of the judicial tragedy his country faced, the depth of systemic corruption in Nigeria and the ramifications of the whole saga, and had he also been capable of the altruism he often immodestly appropriated for himself and displayed a grasp for the tempered and foresighted bureaucratic expertise a complex democracy needs, he would have handled the problem differently and perhaps with more aplomb. But the president lives in a dualistic world of right and wrong, with nothing in-between, and of law and order interpreted simplistically and offensively. With the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Department of State Service (DSS) training their guns on the judiciary, it is a question of time before they erode the independence of the third arm.

    The NJC has tried to fight back, but its punches have been ineffectual primarily because of lack of public support. In published statements and advertorials, they have presented their own side of the story, and have done it admirably well and somewhat persuasively. As a matter of fact it is evident they came to their conclusions on the affected judges based on the facts before them. But there seems to be a chasm between what the public and the DSS guess or know and what the NJC acknowledges. The CJN has groaned under the pressures, and appears minded to dig in the more. He should resist the temptation to remain inflexible, as galling as the events and campaigns of the past few days might be. The judges themselves, particularly Justices John Inyang Okoro and Sylvester Ngwuta, have given their own sides of the story, sides that have tried to drag in as many people as possible into the scandal, and revealed unpalatable truths about the precipitous decline in the dignity, integrity and competence of the Supreme Court.

    The story is still developing and it must, therefore, not be suggested that the ‘sting’ operation was unimpeachable, or that the justices are guilty of corruption. The public must wait for the DSS to reveal all it has, including tracing the sources of the money recovered from the judges. It must be established whether the money is proceeds from corrupted judgements, and if so, which: Rivers or Kogi, or elsewhere? The two justices have blamed politicians and other people for their woes, including making serious allegations against serving ministers. Their accounts have so far not been corroborated. In fact, the words they penned do not seem the logic and erudition of senior judges, and have remained unpersuasive and rather desperate and impolitic. The jurists should have maintained a dignified silence. But by revealing how they met with politicians and how politicians visited them, even if true, showed how low the Supreme Court has sunk. It is unimaginable that such cavalier, deliberate meetings could have taken place a few decades ago when the Supreme Court seemed to be at its apogee.

    The terrible mess is still being unearthed. It will get messier, and more people will be implicated. The full unpalatable truths about the perversion of justice in Nigeria, the appallingly low calibre of some of the judges, and the excesses of a government inebriated by its unchallengeable power, may yet come to light as the standoff continues. The genie is, however, already out of the bottle, and the country must brace itself up for more sordid details. Meanwhile, the CJN should put a lid on the scandal by ordering the loquacious justices to keep quiet. They have not inspired anyone by their drivelling. As the NBA president also suggested, the judges should recuse themselves and submit to the legal process. That recusal cannot be at the instance of the judicial organ, as the NJC sensibly pointed out a few days ago citing relevant provisions of the constitution and its own rules; it should be at the instance of the embattled justices, as the NBA president has suggested. An impasse will not help anyone, let alone the NJC and the CJN who have been unfairly perceived as tolerant of judicial corruption. As long as the stalemate continues, the secret service will intensify its media trial, the jurists will blunder the more, and the public will happily but uncarefully align with the DSS, EFCC and the government.

    But what should be uppermost in the mind of every patriot is how to remould a country that has broken down in virtually all areas. The task cannot be accomplished overnight, nor easily, and certainly not by the Buhari presidency whose strange and often dogmatic way of presiding over the affairs of the country continues to rile the judicious. That task, indeed, will be accomplished by a leader who has a brilliant and comprehensive grasp of the dynamics and complex interplay of forces destabilising the country — a leader who has an overarching view of where and how the country missed it, and how lost grounds can be reclaimed, a leader who, despite his private misgivings and loathing and prejudices, can see far into the future: a future of strong institutions unfettered by the control of strongmen, populists and propagandists.

  • ‘Seniority not criterion for CJN’s appointment’

    The only constitutional qualification for holding the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) is 15 years post-call practice at the Bar, an Awka, Anambra State-based lawyer, Chuks Nsobundu, has said.

    The adoption of factors, such as seniority at the Supreme Court, tradition and ethnic balancing by the National Judicial Council (NJC), in appointing the CJN, according to him, did not make such factors constitutional.

    Nsobundu said this while reacting to an Abuja-based lawyer’s views on the propriety of appointing the most-senior Justice of the Supreme Court (Justice W. N. Onnoghen) as the next CJN on the retirement of Justice Mahmoud Mohammed on November 10.

    He said: “The Supreme Court of Nigeria and the office of the Chief Justice and Justices of the Supreme Court are created by Section 230 (1), (2) (a) and (b) of the 1999 Constitution.”

    The appointment of CJN, he added, is strictly governed by Section 231(1) of the Constitution, which requires the President to do so on the recommendation of the NJC subject to confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.

    “On the constitutional qualification to hold the office of CJN, Section 231 (3) of the 1999 Constitution provides: ‘A person shall not be qualified to hold the office of Chief Justice of Nigeria or of a Justice of the Supreme Court, unless he is qualified to practice as a legal practitioner in Nigeria and has been so qualified for a period of not less than fifteen years.’

    “Therefore, the only constitutional qualification for holding the office of the Chief Justice of Nigeria is 15 years post call at the Bar.

    “The makers of the Constitution have never made seniority or tradition one of the qualifications for appointment of the Chief Justice and this has been the position for many years,” Nsobundu said.

    He explained that seniority could easily enthrone mediocrity which breeds corruption and ineptitude.

    Nsobundu added: “In fact any practicing lawyer with over fifteen years post-call experience is constitutionally qualified to be appointed the Chief Justice of Nigeria.

    “I am aware of one precedent. Dr. T. O. Elias was only a Senior Lecturer and not even a Prefessor of Law at the University of Lagos (UNILAG) when he was appointed the Chief Justice of Nigeria and he remained one of the best Chief Justices of Nigeria.”

    He argued that it was only in the appointment of an acting CJN that seniority is provided for in Section 231 (4) of the Constitution, adding that by elementary rule of interpretation of statutes, Section 231 (4) does not govern the appointment of a substantive CJN.

  • ARREST OF JUSTICES: Minister behind my travail -Justice Ademola

    •AGF: No vengeance, allow the law to take its course

    One of the Federal High Court judges under probe by the Department of State Security Services (DSS), Justice Adeniyi Ademola has accused Attorney-General of the Federation/ Justice Minister Abubakar Malami (SAN) of being behind his travails.

    Ademola, who narrated how 45 DSS operatives invaded his residence penultimate  Friday and ‘abducted’ him, claimed he once ordered the detention of Malami for alleged professional misconduct. He branded his arrest by the DSS as a ‘vendetta and revenge’ by Malami.

    He further alleged that he was forced at gunpoint to sign the inventory of items DSS claimed to have  recovered from his residence.

    Ademola, who opened up in a report to the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, said 45 DSS operatives invaded his home at midnight on October 7, to conduct a search. He said he was picked up by the DSS without any warrant of arrest.

    But the AGF last night said he will “not join issues with Justice Ademola in order not to jeopardize ongoing investigation.”

    “The judge should allow the law to take its course instead of clinging to the last straw to defend the allegations against him,” he said through a spokesman.

    Justice Ademola in an October 11, 2016 letter to the CJN expressed regrets that he was ‘abducted’ on October 7 by DSS operatives.

    His words:  “On the 07/10/2016, I was in my house at No. 30 Ogbemudia Crescent, Apo Legislative Quarters, Abuja. On or about 12:00am (midnight) of the said Friday, I was awakened by loud sound of banging, breaking and hitting on my front door.

    “This gave me a lot of fear as I thought whoever was banging and hitting at my door were armed robbers or thieves especially because this was at an ungodly hour of the night.

    “Therefore I remained in my room upstairs and carefully listened to all the noise that came from downstairs. At this point, these persons had already started breaking into my house through the front door.

    “After some minutes, I heard the door fall to the ground and about 15 minutes also, some persons began to hit my living room door. This movement continued for about at least an hour, then I heard footsteps on my staircase and these unknown persons finally reached my bedroom door.

    “They asked me to open the door and I responded, asking them ‘who are you?’ They answered, we are officers of the Department of State Security Services (DSS) and we are here with a Search Warrant to search your house. I told them to allow me to call my counsel. At this point, they had already begun kicking at my door and after about three kicks, I got up and opened my bedroom door and let them in.

    “To my surprise, I saw about 45 masked officers of the DSS all heavily armed pointing their guns at me.

    “They flashed a document purported to be a search warrant and ordered me to sign on a document claiming that they had already conducted a search downstairs. They also added that I was totally under their control today as I have always made order against them (the DSS).

    “I complied and upon getting downstairs, I noticed that they had already scattered everything in the room on that floor. In the middle of the search, my counsel came and they continued with the search.

    “After the search they informed me that before they got to my bedroom, they found some money in my guest rooms downstairs. I moved back to my living room space, while they were searching, where I sat down waiting for them to finish.

    “When they finished, they came back to me with their guns still pointing at me, instructed me to take them back to my bedroom.

    “Upon arrival in the said room, they began their search again thoroughly in and out of my personal belongings i.e, bags, boxes and collected personal family documents and draft judgements.

    “All this activity lasted for about six hours and when they finally finished with their guns still pointed at me, they handed a document to me purported to be an inventory of the items found upon their search and threatened me to sign it as being true.

    “They threatened me if I did not sign it, they would not leave me alone and whatever they did to me at that point would be recorded that I will not be alive to tell the story of what transpired between me and them that night.

    “For fear and interest of my life, and unknown persons with mask on their faces, I collected the written items and signed the document.

    “I was whisked away at about 6 am to the office of the DSS ‘without any warrant of arrest or reason for my arrest.”

    He said he was informed 24 hours later that he was arrested based on “a petition by Hon. Jenkins Davies dated 4th of April, 2016 to the  National Judicial Council; granting bail to Col. Sambo Dasuki; and  unconstitutional release of Nnamdi Kanu.

    “After stating the grounds for the invasion as stated above they requested for explanation of the money found in my apartment, as well as two licensed firearms also found in my apartment….but they were unable to tell me the exact amount recovered.”

    On Malami, he said: “What is more intriguing in this whole episode, is that I see it as a vendetta/revenge from the Hon. Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami (SAN) whilst I was in Kano between 2004 and 2008. As a Federal High Court Judge, he was involved in a professional misconduct necessitating his arrest and detention by my order. However, with the intervention of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Kano branch, the allegation of misconduct was later withdrawn by me.

    “Consequently, the National Judicial Council ( NJC) referred Abubakar Malami (SAN) to the NBA Disciplinary Committee for disciplinary action. It was as a result of this he was denied the rank of SAN by the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee for a period of four years until when he produced a fake letter of apology, purportedly addressed to me.

    “It was then he was conferred with the rank. Since the above incident, Abubakar Malami (SAN) has threatened to revenge, and swore to do anything to bring me down.”

    The Federal High Court Judge appealed to the CJN to grant him leave to enable him pursue justice over alleged  infringement of his fundamental human right by the DSS.

    “My Lord, with this infringement of my fundamental right, I seek for the leave to commence an action against the Department of Security Service to enforce my right that was breached.”

    Ademola attached photocopies of the orders he gave against the DSS in respect of Dasuki’s case and the damage allegedly done to his property by the security officers.

    Reacting to the allegations, the Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Salihu Isah, the AGF said: “The Minister of Justice will not join issues with Justice Ademola in order not to jeopardize ongoing investigation.

    “The judge should allow the law to take its course instead of clinging to the last straw to defend the allegations against him.  At the end of the day, justice shall prevail. He should let the ongoing process take its full judicial course.

    “Having sworn to an oath to do good to all, the AGF has no cause to embark on vengeance or intimidation of any judge or any Nigerian.”