The Nation Newspaper

Tag: CJN

  • Imo’s new court complex thrills CJN, judges

    If what it takes the judiciary to rise up to the onerous task of dispensing justice and other everyday tasks of this distinguished arm of government is a conducive environment, then the judiciary has been adequately equipped to excel in Imo State.

    With an ultramodern court complex furnished with state-of-the-art equipment both in the offices and courtrooms, the business of the judiciary has been given a new lease of life by the outgoing state governor, Rochas Okorocha, who conceived and built the Justice Oputa Court complex in memory of one of Nigeria’s finest jurists, Hon Justice Chukwudifu Oputa.

    The edifice built in a sprawling area of Owerri, according to the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mohammed Tanko, represented at the commissioning by Hon Justice Amina Augie, is the best in the country.

    Before now the State High Court and other lower courts were housed in a colonial apartment that added to make the business of the judiciary more cumbersome and frustrating.

    Speaking during the commissioning handing over of the complex, which was attended by eminent jurists and state Chief Judges, the CJN, charged Judges in the country to write Judgements because of the monetary benefits but for posterity.

    Tanko who was represented by a Judge of the Supreme Court, Hon. Justice Amina Augie,  said, “We thank God for the vision given to His Excellency, Governor Rochas Okorocha that came to fruition in the realisation of this wonderful court complex. I doubt if there is any state in this country that has a High Court Complex as magnificent as this one. For this, we thank God for His Excellency, the governor of Imo State, we thank God for the Judges of Imo State and we thank God for the people of Imo State who are going to benefit from this complex after the commissioning.

    “The complex is so comfortable that it will enable judges to relax and do their jobs well and give justice without fear, favour or ill will. At the same time, when you walk in and see the name of the complex, Hon. Justice Oputa Complex, he is one of the greatest Jurists this country ever had. Till today, if I am writing any judgement, I still rely on him because he was a great jurist. He was able to capture the law, he was able to explain it and was able to put it into clear words.

    “Justice Oputa was an example of what a Judge should be. He never knew that one day a complex like this will be named after him. This is a message to all living judges that we must all have posterity in mind. It tells us that whatever we are writing, we should remember that one day, hundred years’ time one of your grand-children will be reading whatever rubbish you have written or reading something sublime you have written and they will proudly say, my grandfather or mother has done well by the kind of judgement he or she has written.”

    He continued that,  “posterity beckons on us not to write bad judgements today because somebody paid us money, tomorrow that person is gone, your reputation down the drain, your children will never want to accept that they were your children. When they are confronted with your name, they will deny it because the association comes with something shameful. Is this what we want as Judges? Or do we want, when long we are gone, our works will teach, motivate and inspire people even those who don’t know the law.”

    Earlier in his speech, Governor Rochas Okorocha, stated that he would be remembered for all the works he has done as the governor of the state after he must left as governor, saying, “I stand here today to present to you this wonderful edifice which is tripartite in arrangement. The first building standing by the left is called the Justice Building and the one in the middle is Building of Equity and the last one is Building of Fairness.”

    In his words, “when I came in as the governor, I was not lucky like those packaged by the elites of Imo State. I hadn’t any support of the big masquerade politician in the State. I came in as the governor of Imo State through the window of the masses and not through the door of the elites. I didn’t have the co-operation of who is who because I bend protocols for the good of the masses. I have never broken any protocol or law, I only bend it a bit and make sure it doesn’t break, and at the stage of breaking, I strengthen it to the destination I am going to.”

    He continued, “One thing you cannot take away from me is that I came here with a passion and vision to make Imo better. But if I have followed your way, this structure standing here wouldn’t have been standing because there were many governors and leaders before me. If I had followed your style and system, the International Cargo airport which is the biggest in this country won’t be standing tall at the airport and so many other projects of note. Only few days ago, we collected the licence of four new Universities, all established in Imo State but yet you don’t understand.

    “Today, we have the best police headquarters in Nigeria after the one in Abuja and we have the best prison headquarters in Imo State all built by this government and our Justice Oputa Court Complex stands tall in Nigeria today. Let my work speak for me even after I leave office. This is the only message I have for my political opponents and definitely my work will speak for me.”

    The governor said, “By 29th May, I will no longer be governor and never in the history of mankind will I be your governor again. But one thing I am sure is that I have done and what I will be remembered for. I have opened up Owerri, I have given Owerri a new life and today our city is functioning, our roads are expanded, real estate is growing in geometrical progression. I have turned land to a capital as wealth set aside for production of further wealth. “Imo people will remember as the person who expanded and developed Imo, Imo people will remember me for the free education.”

    The Chief Judge of Imo State, Justice Pascal Nnadi in his speech said, “The event of today, which is the official and ceremonial commissioning of the new Justice Chukwudifu Akunne Oputa High Court Complex marks a major milestone in the annals of the history of the Judiciary of Imo State Nigeria. This edifice and world class Master Architecture was solely conceived, designed and erected by the Rescue Mission Administration of His Excellency, Owelle Anayo Rochas Okorocha, the governor of Imo State of Nigeria.”

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • ONNOGHEN RESIGNS AHEAD OF IMMINENT SACK

    THE suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, resigned from office on Thursday.

    His resignation came less than 48 hours after the National Judicial Council (NJC) recommended his compulsory retirement.

    His resignation, it was learnt, was aimed at pre-empting the action that President Muhammadu Buhari would take on the report of the NJC.

    It was gathered that at the time the embattled CJN tendered his resignation, President Buhari was still seeking legal advice on whether to retire him or subject him to full trial on the allegations levelled against him.

    Onnoghen, however, decided to beat the President to it in order that he might remain on the honours roll of past Chief Justices of Nigeria and also enjoy the full benefits accruing to the office.

    Explaining why Onnoghen resigned his appointment in a telephone conversation with one of our correspondents yesterday, counsel to the suspended CJN, Adegboyega Awomolo, SAN, said he acted in the interest of the judiciary.

    Awomolo, who confirmed that Onnoghen resigned on Thursday, said: “I have just spoken with him. He confirmed to me that he resigned yesterday. He said he resigned in the interest of the Judiciary.”

    Awomolo is the lead defence lawyer in Onnoghen’s trial before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) on charges of non-declaration of asset.

    Another Senior Advocate in Onnoghen’s defence team, who sought anonymity, also confirmed that the suspended CJN put in his resignation letter on Thursday, saying that he addressed it to the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. Another top source in the Supreme Court said the suspended CJN resigned on Thursday evening following a fait accompli decision taken by the NJC.

    The source said: “The CJN was shocked at the decision of the NJC, so he offered to resign instead of being thrown out through compulsory retirement.

    “I think he chose resignation because it is a better option than a compulsory retirement, which implies some indictment. “The truth is that if a public or a judicial officer is compulsorily retired, he is not entitled to some benefits.

    “Technically, compulsory retirement has some stigma attached to it while resignation would allow the CJN to get full complement of his entitlements, including a N2.5 billion package.

    “One of the official perks enjoyed by past Chief Justices of Nigeria is a retirement home worth about N2 billion, provided by the NJC.”

    Another source, who confirmed the resignation of the CJN said: “I believe Onnoghen opted for resignation because President Buhari can either accept or reject his retirement.

    “And do not forget that if the President accepts Onnoghen’s compulsory retirement, he has to subject it to a two-thirds consent of the Senate in line with Section 292 of the 1999 Constitution.

    “The alternative is to allow the process to drag in the Senate and the fate of Onnoghen will hang in the balance. “Definitely, the Buhari administration will not send its decision to the 8th Senate; it will only leave it for the 9th Senate to decide in June.”

    But a judicial officer who is conversant with the case said: “Onnoghen’s resignation is an afterthought, because he was given the same window when a delegation of the NBA met with Vice President Yemi Osinbajo on his fate.

    “It was decided at the meeting that some senior members of the bar should sell the resignation idea to him. Unfortunately, some lawyers persuaded him not to resign without knowing that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has more dossiers on him.

    “Going by precedent, NJC decision has more pre-eminence before President Buhari than an emergency resignation.

    “Now, the President has two letters on his table including the one from the NJC and the other, which is a subterfuge ploy, from Onnoghen.”

    BMO, CHRICED call for Onnoghen’s dismissal

    But the Buhari Media Organisation (BMO) and the Resource Centre for Human Rights and Civic Education (CHRICED) yesterday demanded tough sanctions against the embattled former CJN.

    In a statement signed by Niyi Akinsiju and Cassidy Madueke, its Coordinator and Secretary respectively, the BMO said the failure of Justice Onnoghen to declare his assets and thus breaching the Code of Conduct expected from judicial officers, among several other malfeasances and breach of the Money Laundering Act, are too grave to be treated with kids gloves.

    It noted that the offences that are being prosecuted and that have been petitioned against Justice Onnoghen have tainted the sanctity of the judiciary and are not matters to be played with or treated with levity.

    “Justice Walter Onnoghen is alleged to have outrightly failed to declare some of his assets. In fact, he declared only salary accounts but failed to declare accounts where he had funds that were far above his legitimate earnings as a public officer.

    “There is also no evidence that he ever declared his assets since his appointment as a judicial officer from 1989 up until 2016. This is an outright THE NATION ISATURDAY I APRIL 6 I 20192 •Continued on breach of the Code of Conduct for Public Officers under the 1999 Constitution, and is the least expected from a man who sat at the pinnacle of Nigeria’s judiciary, and should ordinarily be the one to mete out punishments to others who commit such breaches.

    “The ‘Chief Justice of Nigeria’ is also alleged to have had money that he could not reasonably explain the source, but which were lodged in various accounts operated by him. He had over $1.7 million in his dollar accounts, which he conspicuously never declared.”

    According to the group, the alleged receipt by the Justice Onnoghen of pecuniary gifts from various lawyers who had cases in his court breached the Rules of Judicial Conduct which outrightly prohibits judges from receiving pecuniary gifts from lawyers who had cases before them.

    “Justice Onnoghen received several gifts, ranging from a luxury car worth N7 million to a deposit of $30,000 from lawyers who had cases before him,” they said.

    They criticised Justice Onnoghen for maintaining suspicious relationships with lawyers who had serious cases in his court, noting that such conducts created perceptions of bias which is against the Rules of Judicial Conduct.

    The group noted that Justice Onnoghen failed to maintain the minimum standard of decorum expected from judicial officers, saying “the many infractions of Justice Walter Onnoghen are so grave, they have fouled the temple of Justice.

    “It is even most unfortunate that this man was sitting in the highest judicial office of the land. He has embarrassed the legal profession and brought shame and disdain to the judiciary.

    “We must not treat this matter with kid gloves. We expect the toughest sanctions to be meted out to him. What Justice Onnoghen has done does not deserve mercy but serious punitive and corrective sanctions that must send a clear message to other members of the Bench, while assuring Nigerians that the judiciary still remains the last hope for the common and even uncommon man.”

    CHRICED, on its part, recommended summary dismissal of Onnoghen to send a clear message that the law is no respecter of anyone.

    The body faulted the NJC for recommending compulsory retirement for Onnoghen, saying it was strange that the Council would propose a soft landing for the suspended CJN even after it had established that funds running into millions in foreign currencies were traced to his bank accounts.

    REad also: Onnoghen: The man, the judge, the end

    It said potential investors and partners of Nigeria are closely watching to see if the judiciary would rise up to the occasion by using the Onnoghen case as a litmus test to demonstrate readiness to address the rot in the system.

    It demanded summary dismissal of Onnoghen to send a clear message to the public that the action taken against Onnoghen by the Federal Government was meant to clean the Augean stable in the judicial arm of government.

    CHRICED made its position known in a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Dr. Ibrahim M. Zikirullahi.

    The statement said: “The Resource Centre for Human Rights & Civic Education (CHRICED) is seriously concerned about reports making indicating that the National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended that President Muhammadu Buhari should compulsorily retire suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen, with full benefits and privileges.

    ‘For us, it is curious that the NJC is making this kind of recommendation, despite establishing a clear case of judicial misconduct and unbridled corruption against the suspended CJN.

    ‘As the organisation which spearheaded the efforts of credible civil society organisations (CSOs) to investigate and report Onnoghen’s asset declaration infractions to the NJC, CHRICED finds it strange that the Council is proposing a soft landing for the suspended CJN even after it has established that funds running into millions in foreign currencies were traced to the bank accounts of Onnoghen, which he could not convincingly explain how he came about such huge amounts that were far above his legitimate income as a judicial officer.

    “In the course of the hearing at the NJC, it was also established through extensive documentary evidence, and by the admission of the suspended CJN himself, that he breached the Code of Conduct for public officers by his failure to declare his assets as required by law.

    “With these facts in mind, it is our considered position that the NJC is working towards rewarding the breaking of laws, financial impunity and judicial corruption by making this kind of recommendation.

    “The proposed steps give the impression that the judiciary as an institution is not prepared to clean up its act in the face of the deep rooted problem of corruption.

    “CHRICED therefore calls on the President not to accept the NJC recommendation, which would further embolden misconduct in the judiciary.

    “Given the weight of the infraction committed, and as admitted by the CJN, the kind of punishment which would serve as deterrent to other judicial officers is nothing less than summary dismissal of Onnoghen. This would send a clear message to the public that the action taken against Onnoghen by the Federal Government is to clean the Augean stable in the judicial arm.

    “For the umpteenth time, CHRICED deems it necessary to remind the NJC and all other institutions connected with this case that the whole world, including potential investors and partners of Nigeria, are closely watching to see if the judiciary would rise up to the occasion by using the Onnoghen case as a litmus test to demonstrate readiness to address the rot in the system.

    “If the soft landing being recommended is allowed to stand, then the impression would have been further created that the rule of law, justice and accountability have no place in Nigeria’s judicial system.

    “Such precedence would also damage public confidence in the anti-corruption drive, especially as it would fuel the narrative of a separate kind of justice for the rich and powerful, while there is another kind of justice for the poor and less-connected citizens.

    “Finally, CHRICED hopes that in taking a final decision on this case, the President would be guided by clear provision of the 1999 Constitution as amended, which unambiguously mandates in Section 15(5) that: ‘The State shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power’.

    “Only a faithful application of the laws of the land would guarantee a just and fair closure of the Onnoghen matter.”

  • NJC advises Buhari to okay Tanko Muhammad for CJN

    WITH the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC), the coast seems clear for Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad to mount the saddle as CJN.

    President Muhammadu Buhari is likely to accept the NJC’s recommendation that Justice Muhammad should be CJN, The Nation learnt yesterday.

    But Buhari is said to be weighing whether or not to accept the NJC’s recommendations on the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria ( CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    Buhari, who had a meeting with Vice President Yemi Osinbajo on the issue before flying out to Jordan yesterday, is also said to be seeking legal opinions on the NJC’s decisions.

    The NJC absolved Justice Muhammad of any blame in deferring to the President to be sworn in as the Acting CJN.

    He accepted the appointment, having been presented with an ex parte order of the CCT, which led to Justice Onnoghen’s suspension.

    The Nation learnt that after receiving the NJC’s recommendations, the President elected to seek legal advice on them.

    REad also: NJC advises Buhari to retire Onnoghen over $1.7m cash

    A top government official, who pleaded not to be named because he was not permitted to talk on the matter, said the President was considering:

    • whether or not NJC’s conclusions on findings on Onnoghen did not amount to indictment;
    • if he should accept NJC’s soft-landing decision to retire Justice Onnoghen with full benefits;
    • Onnoghen’s retirement without benefits; and
    • whether the law should run its full course, including the conclusion of Onnoghen’s trial by the Code of Conduct Tribunal and a fresh trial by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Buhari is also believed to be thinking of asking NJC to recommend deterrence for Onnoghen or seeking further consultations with the council.

    The President is also said to be planning to seek advice on whether the input of the Senate necessary in retiring Onnoghen?

    The source said: “Since he received the NJC’s recommendations, the President has been thinking of how to manage the situation without rubbishing the anti-corruption agenda of his administration. He has the right to accept or reject the council’s recommendations on Onnoghen.

    “The President is already seeking legal opinion on legal issues  surrounding the NJC’s decisions. He does not want to set a bad precedent in tackling this Onnoghengate”.

    The source confirmed that the President met with Vice President Yemi Osinbajo. He believed Onnoghen’s case and other matters were discussed.

    Responding to a question, the source said: “What NJC decided was a kind of soft-landing for Onnoghen with moral and legal implications.

    “Apart from stepping down, there are concerns about what Onnoghen is really offering as deterrent. Some are saying why can’t the law run its full course?

    “Others are pressurising the government to take advantage of the window created by the NJC to rebuild the ties between the Executive and the Judiciary as a result of Onnoghen’s travails.”

    It was unclear whether or not the President would need the consent of the Senate to retire Onnoghen.

    “This is part of the legal opinion being sought by the President,” a presidency source said, pleading not to be named.

    Section 231 of the 1999 Constitution says: “(1)The appointment of a person to the office of  Chef 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.

    “(2) The appointment of a person to the office of a Justice of the Supreme Court shall be made by the President on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council subject to confirmation of such appointment by the Senate.

    “(3) 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 practise as a legal practitioner in Nigeria and has been so qualified for a period of not less than fifteen years.

    “(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 point the most senior Justice of the Supreme Court to perform those functions.

    “(5) Except on the recommendation of the National Judicial  Council, appointment, pursuant to the provisions of subsection (4) of section shall cease to have effect after the expiration of three months from the date of such appointment, and the President shall not reappoint a person whose appointment has lapsed.”

    Part 1 of the Third Schedule to 1999 Constitution says: “The National Judicial Council  shall have power  to:

    • (b) recommend to the President the removal from office of the judicial officers specified in sub-paragraph (a) of this paragraph, and to exercise disciplinary control over such office’s;
    • (c) recommend to the Governors from among the list of persons submitted to it by the State Judicial Service  Commissions persons for appointments to the offices of the Chief Judges of the States and Judges of the High courts of the states, the Grand Kadis and Kadis of the sharia Courts of Appeal of the States and Presidents and Judges of the Customary Courts of Appeal of the States;
    • (d) recommend to the governors the removal from office of the judicial officers specified in sub-paragraph (c) of this paragraph, and to exercise disciplinary control over such officers;
    • (e) collect, control and disburse all moneys, capital and recurrent, for the judiciary;
    • (f) advise the President and governors or any matter pertaining to the judiciary as may be referred to the Council by the President or the covernors;
    • (g) appoint, dismiss and exercise disciplinary control over member and staff of the Council;
    • (h) control and disburse all monies, capital and recurrent. for the services of the Council; and
    • (i) deal with all other matters relating to broad issues of policy and administration.

    Meanwhile, the NJC has recommended the confirmation of Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad as the substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria.

    Another source said: “The council actually did not find him culpable of infractions. He actually did not even want to be inaugurated as the Acting CJN until there was evidence of an ex-parte order from the CCT on Justice Onnoghen’s suspension.

    “As the next in-command, the NJC said he should take over from the CJN.”

    When contacted, a source in NJC said: “In line with Section 26 of the Judicial Discipline Regulations of 2017, the council has reached out to all those affected by its decisions.

    Section 26 says: “The decision taken in regulation 25 of these Regulations shall be notified to the following persons: (a)The subject of the decision; (b)The Complainant and (c) The relevant Head of Court

    “Upon a request made to the Council, the decision may be notified to any other person. The grant or refusal of such request is in the absolute discretion of the Council.”

  • Judiciary’s role in anti-graft war, by SERAP

    The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) has launched the Nigeria Anti-Corruption Performance Assessment Survey, with some recommendations on how the Judiciary can tackle corruption, reports JOSEPH JIBUEZE.

    The Judiciary has a critical role to play in tackling corruption, but how can it do so when the institution is perceived to be corrupt?

    The Chief Justice of Nigeria and the National Judicial Council (NJC) must proactively promote transparency and accountability in the judiciary, according to a civil society group, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).

    The group said the judiciary should identify and review all outstanding cases of judicial corruption and refer such cases to appropriate anti-corruption agencies.

    The Judiciary must also apply the Code of Conduct for judicial officers in a consistent and transparent manner, with full respect for the fundamental guarantees of fair trial and due process, SERAP said.

    The group wants the CJN and the NJC to grant suspected corrupt judges the right to have disciplinary decisions reviewed by a higher judicial tribunal.

    These were some of the recommendations in the Nigeria Anti-Corruption Performance Assessment Survey conducted by SERAP.

    The latest survey is published as part of the organisation’s implementation of the Anti-Corruption in Nigeria (ACORN) project funded by UK aid from the British people.

    SERAP said the views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect the UK government’s official policies.

    The group urged the Judiciary to improve the process of judges’ appointment, and to promote their continuing education and training.

    It wants their professional integrity protected and disciplinary proceedings enforced in a fair and consistent manner.

    SERAP believes the Judiciary should publish annual reports of all its activities, including expenditure, and provide the public with reliable information about its governance and organisation, including the number of judges found to be corrupt.

    “Ensure that the Chief Justice of Nigeria and all other judges make periodic asset disclosures; promote proactive disclosures of conflicts of interest by judges as soon as they become apparent,” the group urged the Judiciary.

    Besides, it said victims of judicial corruption should be encouraged to speak out so that they can enjoy access to effective remedies.

    Key findings

    The national survey carried out last November and December covered the police, judiciary, power, education and health sectors.

    The Survey targeted a total of 2,655 respondents selected from seven states spread across the six geo-political zones of Nigeria and the capital city of Abuja. The sample was proportionate to population size across these zones.

    SERAP said data for the survey was collected through a survey among ordinary citizens picked through simple random sampling of Nigerians above 18 years; in-depth interviews with key governance experts including representatives of national anti-corruption bodies, trade unions, the business community, media, lawyers, academia, people living with disability and university student leaders; and a review of the legal and institutional frameworks guiding anti-corruption efforts in Nigeria to assess their effectiveness

    The survey finds a lack of political goodwill to consistently enforce the different anti-corruption laws; inadequate funding for the various anti-corruption agencies; and weak public support and/or ownership of the anti-corruption initiatives.

    Other key findings are the poor clarity of roles between various anti-corruption agencies, as well as public perceptions of politicisation of corruption arrests and prosecutions.

    The report finds that several Nigerians still pay a bribe to access police, judiciary, power, education and health services, with 70 per cent of Nigerians describing the level of corruption as high, the state of affairs remaining the same in the last five years.

    According to the survey, there is a 63 per cent probability that an average Nigerian would be asked to pay a bribe each time he/she interacted with the police.

    The likelihood of bribery in the power sector stood at 49 per cent, according to the report.

    The chances of encountering bribery at the judiciary, education and health services stand at 27 per cent, 25 per cent and 20 percent.

    On prevalence of bribery, the police were the most adversely ranked on the indicator.

    For every 100 police interactions reported by the respondents, there was a bribe paid in 54 interactions.

    The prevalence levels stood at 37 per cent in the power sector, 18 per cent in education, 17.7 per cent in the judiciary and 14 per cent in the health sector.

    On perceived impact, 51 per cent of the individuals that paid bribes to the police and 35 per cent to the power sector believed this was the only way to access the services sought from the institutions.

    The ranking of the education sector and the judiciary was less adverse with 16 per cent perceiving bribery as the main avenue of accessing services in the institutions, and health services recording 13 per cent.

    On share of national bribe, the police and judiciary had the largest proportion of total bribes paid at 33 per cent and 31 per cent.

    Bribes paid for education, power and health services accounted for 19 per cent, 10.9 per cent and five percent of all bribes reported.

    On average size of bribe, the survey finds that the average amount of bribe paid by the respondents was highest among those who paid to the judiciary at about N108,000 (US$ 298).

    N12, 253 and N11, 566 were reportedly paid to the police and education sectors, and N6,462 and N5,143 paid for health and power services.

    Reforming the police

    SERAP said the Buhari administration and the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Mohammed Adamu can leave a positive legacy by improving police accountability and proactively working towards ending all forms of corruption within the rank and file.

    It called on the IGP to streamline and prioritise internal control mechanisms by establishing an Ethics and Inteegrity Unit at each police station.

    The unit, the group said, should include a human rights officer, an anti-corruption officer, and an officer responsible for service delivery complaints.

    SERAP said these personnel should be assigned the exclusive duties to:

    • Receive and investigate complaints of bribery and corruption against police officers filed by members of the public.
    • Liaise with community leaders and civil society organisations in regard to incidents of police bribery and corruption within the community.
    • Report incidents of police extortion and bribery to the divisional police officer, and appropriate internal and external oversight bodies.
    • Protect members of the public who file complaints against police bribery and corruption from harassment, violence, or any other form of reprisal.”

    Role of international organisations

    SERAP urged th einternational community to issue public and private statements denouncing corrupt practices in Nigeria.

    It said they should help shine a light on bribery, extortion, and embezzlement in the public sectors, particularly in the police, the judiciary and the ministries of power, education and health.

    “The United Nations, the African Union and members of the international community should support Nigerians in the fight against corruption in the country,” SERAP said.

    They should also call on the authorities to investigate all outstanding allegations of corruption involving these sectors promptly, thoroughly and effectively and to hold anyone found to be involved to account, SERAP recommended.

    The international community, it added, should impose condition funding to the Nigerian government, including financial and technical assistance.

    It said foreign aid should be based on measurable progress in holding public officers implicated in corruption in the police, judiciary, and ministries of power, education and health accountable.

    SERAP said the international community should target funding and technical assistance for the Nigerian government to initiatives that directly improve financial transparency and address accountability.

    It added that all officers in the police, the judiciary and the ministries of power, education and health who participate in international missions or training courses should be required to publicly declare the total value of all personal assets.

    “Impose visa bans on senior public officers in the police, the judiciary, and ministries of power, education and health credibly implicated in corruption,” SERAP added.

    Other suggestions

    The survey recommends the establishment of an independent commission of inquiry to conduct a transparent, comprehensive, and impartial investigation into systemic corruption in the police, the judiciary as well as the ministries of power, education and health.

    There is also need to amend the Code of Conduct Bureau and Tribunal Act to ensure public access to asset declarations made by public officials, SERAP said.

    It called for urgent passage of the Proceeds of Crime Bill, the Whistleblowers Bill, and the Witness Protection Bill among other relevant pieces of legislation.

    SERAP wants the establishment of civil society desks by the Economics and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to facilitate and improve access to corruption complaints in key public service sectors.

    The group advocated the identification and review of all outstanding cases of judicial corruption, and referral of such cases to appropriate anti-corruption agencies.

    To ensure transparency, SERAP called for quarterly publication of budget execution reports that detail monthly state government income from federal allocations and other sources, and state government expenditure in all key sectors.

    Besides, there is the need to establish mechanisms to support and promote strong public participation in anti-corruption initiatives through the provision of a platform for public awareness on corruption and by making the citizens’ voice more central in any intervention.

    Falana hails SERAP

    Activist-lawyer Mr Femi Falana (SAN) said unlike many elitist organisations which have a penchant for dismissing the Federal Government’s anti-corruption policy, SERAP has adopted certain measures to hold public officers accountable in a country where impunity has been institutionalised.

    In a goodwill message at the survey’s launch, he said: “Apart from exposing corrupt practices of public officers by writing petitions to the anti-graft agencies, SERAP engages in campaigns and embarks in public interest litigation with a view to promoting public accountability and transparency in the management of public resources.

    “In particular, SERAP has used the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act to obtain information from Ministries, Departments and Agencies of the federal government on the funds earmarked for the provision of water, electricity, roads hospitals etc for the Nigerian people.

    “In fact, SERAP has secured mandatory orders from the Federal High Court to compel recalcitrant public officers to render the account of their stewardship.”

    Falana said by hearing directly from the masses, SERAP has finally resolved to collaborate with the Nigerian people in the struggle to end grand corruption in the country.

    “It is hoped that SERAP will ensure that all victims of grand corruption are actively involved in the struggle for the actualisation of the socioeconomic rights enshrined in chapter 2 of the Constitution.

    “Without compelling the federal, state and local governments to channel public resources towards the development of the country, the looting of the public treasury will continue unabated,” Falana said.

    Among those at the launch were France Ambassador represented by Mr. Blanc Barllulemy, Prof Akin Oyebode, who chaired the event, Bureau for Public Procurement (BPP) Director-General represented by Mrs. Amaka Obinna, and Nigerian Bureau of Statistics Statistician-General represented by Mrs Lola Talabi-Oni.

    The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor was represented by Dr. O. E. Olowofeso, Mr. Chadiugha Emeka and Mr M. M. Nagogo; Edo State Attorney-General was represented by Mr George Ntor, while the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) chairman was represented by Mr Olusoji Ola.

    The IGP was represented by an Assistant Commissioner of Police Saadat Ismail; the Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) chairman was represented by Mr. Japhet Udeani , while the UNODC Nigeria was represented by Ms Princess Chifiero and Mr. Adebusuyi Adeniran.

    EFCC Acting Chairman was represented by Mr Ayo Oyewole; Amnesty International, Nigeria Executive Director was represented by Mrs Ikubaje Esther, the Minister of State for Petroleum Resources was represented by Mr Salisu Muktar, among several others.

  • CCT Chair truly answerable only to Presidency, says NBA

    …..Pleads with FG to stop Onnoghen’s CCT trial

    The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) said on Tuesday that it agreed with the argument by the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal ( CCT ), Danladi Uma that he and his tribunal were not answerable to the Judiciary, but the Presidency.

    NBA, in a statement issued on Tuesday by its President, Paul Usoro (SAN), said Umar was correct in that argument, but contended that the fact that the CCT was under the control of the Executive informs the urgent need to discontinue charge of breach of code of conduct pending against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Walter Onnoghen before the CCT.

    It said: “the Chairman of the CCT, Hon. Danladi Umar, in his response to a petition that was written against him and which was forwarded to him by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) states emphatically that he and his tribunal are answerable and report only to the Presidency, by law and practice. He is absolutely correct.

    “An insistence, in the circumstance, on the CJN, the head of an independent arm of the FGN, standing trial before a tribunal that is under the Presidency and is answerable only to the Presidency, mocks the concept of and completely erodes the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional separation that should exist between the three arms of the FGN.

    “It is precisely for this reason that our Constitution created the NJC and we are pleased that the FGN has warmed up to the utilization of that due process, as illustrated by the submission of the EFCC petition to the council.”

    NBA’s new intervention in the case is coming a day before the resumption of proceedings in the case before the CCT.

    The Chairman of the CCT, Danladi Umar had, at the last proceedings on February 4 this year, insisted that Onnoghen must appear before the tribunal in person before any further businesses could be conducted in the charge pending against him (Onnoghen).

    Umar gave the directive shortly before agreeing to the request by parties for adjournment to February 13.

    He said: “Under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), a defendant, who is served with a charge and represented by lawyers, must take his plea before raising any objection.

    “The defendant has continued to stay away from this tribunal. I am going to grant this adjournment at the instance of the prosecution and defence, but must state that the defendant must attend court at the next adjourned date so that all the issues would be resolved in his presence.”

    Read Also: Onnoghen to CCT chair: you’re a biased, tainted arbiter

    Also on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal in Abuja failed to hear the three appeals filed suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    The appellate court had in late January adjourned on February 12, 2019 for the hearing of the appeals

    But, when lawyers to parties got to court on Tuesday, the court could not form quorum (of three Justices) for the purpose of hearing the appeals.

    Parties were told to await information, on a later date, on when the hearing is to be rescheduled.

    The appeals are against the decisions of the Code of Conduct to assume jurisdiction over the charge pending against Onnoghen and the ex-parte injunction granted by the CCT, and on which President Muhammadu Buhari acted to suspend Onnoghen.

    The statement by the NBA reads: “Ahead of the adjourned proceedings in the above-named matter before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (“CCT”), scheduled for tomorrow, February 13, 2019, the Nigerian Bar Association again urges the Executive arm of the Federal Government of Nigeria (“FGN”) to discontinue this Charge against the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honorable Mr. Justice Walter S N Onnoghen, GCON (“CJN”) for the following reasons, amongst others:

    “First, as widely reported, one of the two petitions against the CJN that is currently before the National Judicial Council (“NJC” or “Council”) is an exact replica of the petition that motivated the CCT Charge.

    “The second petition was reportedly presented by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), an FGN agency. We commend the FGN for adhering to due process by submitting the EFCC petition to the NJC for consideration.

    “In like manner and in adherence to the law and due process, we urge the FGN to discontinue the CCT Charge and allow the NJC consider the initial petition which, as widely reported, has already been responded to by the CJN.

    “Second, the Chairman of the CCT, Hon. Danladi Umar, in his response to a petition that was written against him and which was forwarded to him by the Federal Judicial Service Commission, states emphatically that he and his tribunal are answerable and report only to the Presidency, by law and practice. He is absolutely correct.

    “An insistence, in the circumstance, on the CJN, the head of an independent arm of the FGN, standing trial before a tribunal that is under the Presidency and is answerable only to the Presidency, mocks the concept of and completely erodes the independence of the judiciary and the constitutional separation that should exist between the three arms of the FGN.

    “It is precisely for this reason that our Constitution created the NJC and we are pleased that the FGN has warmed up to the utilization of that due process, as illustrated by the submission of the EFCC petition to the Council.

    “Third, and complementary to the two points afore-stated is the fact that the spectacle of having our CJN, while still holding that title, in the dock before the CCT or any other court, truly diminishes all of us, not least the Executive arm of the FGN.

    “The NJC process allows an initial determination to be made on the petitions against the CJN and if His Lordship is found liable or wanting howsoever, appropriate sanctions would be imposed by the NJC including recommendation for his dismissal or retirement.

    “In that event, he would no longer hold the office or title of CJN and could be prosecuted for any criminal infraction before the CCT or any other Court.

    “An insistence on the CCT prosecution paints a picture of persecution of the CJN by the Executive and such a spectacle in no way ennobles the FGN Executive arm and/or its officials. Such a scenario should be avoided by all means.

    “Given these non-exhaustive considerations and facts, we press on the Executive arm of the FGN to please discontinue the Charge against the CJN when the matter comes up before the CCT tomorrow, Wednesday, 13 February 2019.

    “We respectfully urge full compliance with due process by FGN in this matter by allowing the NJC process to take its course in respect of the two petitions against the CJN – a step that has already, commendably, been embraced by FGN in respect of the EFCC petition.”

  • Muhammad to chair maiden workshop for Supreme Court Justices

    The Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad will on Monday and Tuesday chair the maiden workshop for Justices of the Supreme Court and judges of other courts on issues relating to “secured transactions in movable assets.”

    The workshop, being the first of its kind, is being jointly organised by the National Judicial Council (NJI), the National Collateral Registry (NCR) and the Juris Law Office (JLO)

    The head of JLO, Professor Niyi Ayoola-Daniels, explained that the workshop is intended to bring the Justices and judges up to date on the salient provisions of the Secured Transactions in Movable Assets Act, 2017 (The Act) and Part III of the Central Bank of Nigeria Regulation on Registration of Security Interests in Movable Property by Banks and Other Financial Institution Regulation No. 1 of 2015 (The Regulation).

    Ayoola -Daneil said the workshop is part of efforts by the government to ensure that the nation’s Judiciary is abreast of the provisions of the law to allow for its effective application.

    He said the Act alone and the Regulation will not guarantee “best practices” and ”Rule of Law” in secured transactions in movable assets in Nigeria without effective application by a well knowledgeable and sound Judiciary on the subject matter”

    Read Also: CJN Suspension: Buhari acted constitutionally – Wamakko

    He said the workshop, with the theme: “Leveraging on movable asset for credit delivery In Nigeria: Legal and regulatory framework,” is slated for Abuja between February 11 and 12, 2019.

    Ayoola-Daniels said the workshop aims “to acquaint Justices and judges with appropriate legal and regulatory framework of the secured transactions in Movable Assets Act and its contribution to the national economy.

    He said the Acting CJN will also deliver the keynote address, while the Governor, Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Godwin Emefiele is scheduled to give the opening remarks.

    Ayoola-Daniels added: “Also expected to participate at the workshop are Supreme Court Justices, Court of Appeal Justices, Chief Judge and Judges of the Federal High Court as well as Judges of the High Courts from many states across the country.

    “The Honourable Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, key government officials, captains of industry, and officials of the World Bank/ International Finance Corporation (IFC).

    “The Central Bank of Nigeria, in collaboration with the International Finance Corporation (IFC), established the National Collateral Registry (NCR) in 2016 in line with the Bank’s mandate on sustainable economic inclusive growth and financial inclusion. The NCR is a financial infrastructure that seeks to deepen credit delivery to Micro Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) through enhanced acceptability of movable assets such as equipment, machinery, vehicles, crops, livestock, account receivables, inventories, and jewelleries,” he said.

     

     

  • Nigerians back Buhari on suspension of CJN

    President Muhammadu Buhari’s suspension of Chief Justice of Nigeria ( CJN ) Justice Walter Onnoghen over alleged failure to fully declare his assets to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) is in order, a poll has revealed.

    66 per cent of Nigerians who participated in the poll on the website of The Nation Newspaper backed the action.

    Only 31 per cent of respondents faulted the suspension.

    Read Also: CJN at CCT: proceedings suspended abruptly

    Buhari suspended Justice Onnoghen as CJN on January 25 over allegations of non-declaration of assets.

    The President immediately swore in Justice Tanko Muhammad to replace Onnoghen in an acting capacity.

    A total of 5,689 Nigerians voted in the poll carried out from January 27 to February 8, 2019.

    3,863 of them are in support while only 1,820 opposed it. 186 voters abstained from a yes or no response, declaring there were unsure of the legality or otherwise of the action.

  • BREAKING: CCT Chair insists on Onnoghen’s appearance

    The Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Danladi Umar has directed the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen to appear before the tribunal in person before any further businesses could be conducted in the case pending against him.

    Umar gave the directive at the resumption of proceedings in the case on Monday, shortly before agreeing to the request by parties for adjournment to February 13.

    Read Also: BREAKING: CJN at CCT: proceedings suspended abruptly

    He said: “Under the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), a defendant, who is served with a charge and represented by lawyers, must take his plea before raising any objection.

    “The defendant has continued to stay away from this tribunal. I am going to grant this adjournment at the instance of the prosecution and defence, but must state that the defendant must attend court at the next adjourned date so that all the issues would be resolved in his presence.”

    Details later.

  • BREAKING: CJN at CCT: proceedings suspended abruptly

    Awomolo, CCT Chair engages in hot exchanges

    Proceedings at the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), in the case against the suspended Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen has been brought to an abrupt end to allow temper to seamer in view of the hot exchanges between tribunal Chairman, Danladi Umar and lead counsel for the defence, Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN).

    Trouble started when the tribunal Charman insisted that proceedings must continue despite agreement, by lawyer to the prosecution, Aluyu Umar (SAN) and Awomolo, that the case be adjourned to a later date in view of some recent developments in the case.

    Rather than rule on the joint position presented by lawyers to the parties, the tribunal Chairman insisted on proceeding to hearing pending applications.

    While Awomolo stood up to appeal to tribunal Chairman to consider the position presented by lawyers to the prosecution and defence, for an adjournment, Umar ordered Awomolo to sit down.

    Read Also: CCT serves Onnoghen trial notice

    He accused the defence lawyer of encouraging delay and waste of time, observation Awomolo objected to and told the tribunal Chairman that it was wrong today such things about him.

    While Awomolo spoke, complaining about the way the tribunal Chairman described him, Umar said he was not bothered, but was only interested in continuing with the case.

    At that point, the prosecution lawyer sought for a short stand down, which was granted.

  • NJC’s role critical to removal of CJN

    SIR: Vociferous proponents of the recent suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria (the “CJN”), Justice Walter Onnoghen by the President have continued to insist that the decision is as simple as it sounds – a mere suspension. However, in legal circles, the dominant argument is that the suspension of the CJN was in fact a removal for all intents and purposes. The suspension of the CJN is a colossal issue which must be properly addressed in the light of the law. While it is immediately clear that the Senate has a role to play in the removal of the CJN (see section 292(1)(a) of the 1999 Constitution), what is perhaps shrouded to many is whether the National Judicial Council (the “NJC”) also has a role to play in the removal. Many are uninformed and, in their ignorance, continue to hold ridiculous positions on the issue.

    The NJC is a body created by the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution to play certain roles in the appointment, discipline and removal of judicial officers. Whilst it may appear that these clearly defined roles are merely incipient in nature, it is clear that they form part and parcel of any process culminating in the appointment, discipline and or removal of judicial officers. Paragraph 21(a)(b) of the Constitution saddles the NJC with the responsibility of disciplining certain judicial officers (including the CJN) internally and recommending their removal to the president. While section 292 may not have expressly mentioned the NJC, it does not connote that the NJC has no role at all to play in the removal of the CJN.

    One principle that must be applied towards the interpretation of the constitution and or any statute is that no single provision should be read in isolation. Once this principle is well understood and applied, it would always yield positive results. If one would consider the provisions of the entire constitution, the inevitable conclusion would be that the NJC has definitely has a role to play in the removal of the CJN. In circumstances similar to the removal of the CJN, the Supreme Court condemned the procedure adopted in an attempt to remove the erstwhile Chief Judge of Kwara State. In Elelu-Habeeb v. A.G. Federation (2012) 13 NWLR 423, the Supreme Court in a landmark decision held as follows:

    “It is not difficult to see that for the effective exercise of the powers of removal of a Chief Judge of a State by the Governor and House Assembly, the first port of call by the governor on his journey to remove a Chief Judge of the State shall be the National Judicial Council…I hold the view that in the resolution of the issue at hand, the entire provisions of the 1999 Constitution in Sections 153(1)(i)(2), 271(1), 292(1)(a)(ii) and paragraph 21 of Part 1 of the Third Schedule to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 dealing with the appointments removal and exercise of disciplinary control over Judicial Officers, must be read) interpreted and applied together in resolving the issue of whether or not the Governor of a State and the House of Assembly of a State can remove a Chief Judge of a State in Nigeria without any input of the National Judicial Council. This is because the combined effect of these provisions of the Constitution has revealed very clear intention of the framers of the Constitution to give the National Judicial Council a vital role to play in the appointment and removal of Judicial Officers by the Governors and Houses of Assembly of the State…The Governor of Kwara State and the House of Assembly of the State cannot remove the Chief Judge of Kwara State from Office without the participation of the National Judicial Council in the exercise.”

    It is worthy to note that the drafters of the constitution obviously intended that the independence of the judiciary should be held sacrosanct when, in their wisdom, they established the NJC to discipline judicial officers internally as a condition precedent to the final discipline of judicial officers by any other arm of government or authority. The law is therefore clear on the issue. The CJN unlike ministers is not an appointee of the president. The president cannot therefore fire the CJN unilaterally. The judiciary (through the NJC) and the Senate must be involved in the process. That is the position of the law.

     

    • Temitope Badejo, Esq. Lagos.