Tag: John Tsoho

  • Judiciary is on trial, says FHC Chief Judge

    Judiciary is on trial, says FHC Chief Judge

    The judiciary is on trial due to delays, systemic inefficiency and corruption, Federal High Court Chief Judge, John Tsoho, said yesterday.

    He said inefficiency allows unethical practices to thrive, but that the issues are being addressed.

    The CJ, who lamented that judges are overworked, stated that there is a need to adopt measures that would decongest the dockets.

    He recommended the introduction of specialised tribunals to deal with certain disputes to limit what comes to the court for adjudication.

    Also, Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Mazi Afam Osigwe (SAN) stressed the need to limit the appeals that reach the Supreme Court.

    He believes landlord-tenant issues and minor theft cases should be decided at either the High Court or Court of Appeal to allow the Supreme Court to operate as a policy court.

    Justice Tsoho and Osigwe spoke during a session at the NBA Annual General Conference in Enugu State, with the theme: “Stand out, stand tall!”

    The CJ, represented by Justice Mabel T. Segun-Bello of the Enugu Division, believes the tribunal model for the adjudication of specific matters will lighten judges’ workload.

    He said: “I am not saying that tribunals should take the work of judges.

    “But what I am saying is that the tribunal model, which is a specialised or quasi-judicial forum for resolving specific types of disputes, should be considered.

    “Most judges are overburdened, so they are quick to adjourn cases on the slightest mistake by counsel.

    “A judge’s work starts when he is done sitting in court hearing cases – from signing orders to writing rulings and judgments.

    “These specialised tribunals can take specialised cases with informal procedures other than the traditional courts.

    Read Also: Is the Judiciary faring better under Kekere-Ekun?

    “These can include immigration tribunals, intellectual property tribunals, environmental tribunals, etc. We have similar models around the world.”

    Justice Tsoho described inefficiency as the “greatest sponsor of corruption”.

    “If a system is not working efficiently, you have provided a feeding field for corruption to thrive,” he said.

    He recalled that a corrupt affidavit system in a court in Abuja, where even business centres were issuing affidavits, was solved through “a digital infrastructure.”

    “If the structure is not in place, such as a photocopier not working, users will look for easy alternatives.

    “Justice is on trial for multiple reasons such as delays, systemic inefficiency, corruption, bureaucratic bottlenecks and inconsistent judgments,” Justice Tsoho said.

    On what needs to change, he said the digitalisation of the judiciary is both urgent and essential.

    He regretted that some of the key players are not embracing digital tools and technology.

    “How many lawyers use AI assistance? AI cannot take our jobs because our jobs are rooted in human nuances, but a lawyer who is not AI-compliant will lose his job to a lawyer who is,” Tsoho said.

    The CJ added: “Reform is not an option. It is imperative. Let us move from tradition to transformation.

    “Justice must be seen to be swift, just and serve.”

    NBA President advocates limits to appeals

    Osigwe stressed the need to reduce the number of matters that go on appeal to the Supreme Court.

    “The Supreme Court should be a policy court. Cases on tenancy, stealing of chicken – these should not get there,” he said.

    He said the NBA will set up a support fund for lawyers to offer free legal services in all branches.

    Osigwe lamented that the pro-bono system is now being abused by lawyers who merely use it to fulfil the requirement for conferment of the rank of Senior Advocate.

    He said such lawyers abandon the cases once they attain the rank.

    The NBA President added: “There is now a black market in the Correctional centres where prison officers sell these cases to lawyers.

    “We have proposed setting up a pro-bono fund, and we will do that immediately after the conference.

    “All branches will be directed to set up a pro-bono desk that will be manned by young lawyers or volunteer senior lawyers.

    “The Committee will be chaired by Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN).”

    He believes Custodial Centres are congested partly because some judges impose too stringent bail conditions that are difficult to meet, even for offences that may seem minor.

    “Insisting that a surety must show evidence of land ownership in FCT, and titles to be verified – that’s nonsense.

    “Sometimes they keep suspects locked up after they have perfected their bail conditions.

    “Why can’t the identity of a surety be verified through BVN or NIN?

    “In some court divisions, the court registrars have become monsters.

    “You must give them N1million before they go on the verification exercise after someone has been granted bail.

    “Why should the court subject itself to these officials or the prosecutor?

    “Until judicial officers stop becoming tools in the hands of complainants or prosecutorial agencies to simply secure a remand, the Custodial Centres will be overstretched.

    “But we must dedicate ourselves to helping those in society who are not able to help themselves,” Osigwe said, promising that the NBA will do more.

  • FG charges Ekweremadu, other with non-declaration of assets

    *Courts fix October 22, Nov 19 for arraignment

    *Okay substituted service of charges on them

    The Federal Government has filed two charges against the Deputy Senate President, Ike Ekweremadu and Senator Albert Bassey Akpan (Akwa Ibom North-East) for allegedly failing to declare some of their assets.

    The charges marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/62/2018 (for Ekweremadu) and FHC/ABJ/CR/88/2018 (for Akpan) were filed before the Federal High Court, Abuja on behalf of the Federal Government by the Special Presidential Investigation Panel (SPIP).

    The charge against Ekweremadu has been assigned to Justice Binta Nyako, while the one against Akpan is assigned to Justice John Tsoho.
    Both judges, on Wednesday, granted leave to the prosecution to serve the charges and other accompanying court documents on the defendants through the Clerk of the National Assembly.

    The order for substituted service was granted by both judges after listening to prosecution lawyer, Celsus Ukpong, who complained of difficulty in effecting personal service on the defendants.

    Justice Nyako adjourned to October 22 for arraignment, while Justice Tsoho adjourned to November 19 for arraignment.

    The two count-charge against Ekweremadu reads:

    ” That you, Ike Ekweremadu ‘M’ ‘on or about 28th day of March, 2018 being a public officer with the National Assembly Abuja within the jurisdisction of this honourable court, committed an offence to wit: refuse to declare your assets without reasonable excuse and upon the notice to declare your assets in the manner prescribed by the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property contrary and punishable under Section 3 (3)(1)a of the Recovery of Public Property (Special Provisions) Act 2004.

    “That you, Ike Ekweremadu ‘M’ on or about 28th day of March, 2018 being a public officer with the National Assembly Abuja within the jurisdiction of this court, committed an offence to wit: neglect to declare your assets without. reasonable excuse and upon the notice to declare your assets in the manner prescribed by the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property contrary and punishable under Section 3(3)(1)3 of the Recovery of Public Property (Special Provisions) Act 2004.”

    The charge against Akpan reads:

    “That you, Senator Albert Bassey Akpan ‘M’ on or about 12th day of April, 2018 being public officers with the National Assembly within the jurisdiction of this honourable court ,committed an offence to wit; refusal to declare your assets without reasonable excuse and upon notice to declare your assets before the Special Presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property, Abuja contrary to and punishable under Section 3 (3) (1) (a) of the Recovery of Public Property (Special Provision) Act 2004.

    “That you, Senator Albert Bassey Akpan ‘M’ on or about 12th day of April, 2018 being public officers with the National Assembly within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, committed an offence to wit: neglect to declare your assets without reasonable excuse and upon notice to declare your assets before the Special presidential Investigation Panel for the Recovery of Public Property, Abuja contrary to and punishable under Section 3(3)(1)(a) of the Recovery of Public Property (Special Provision) Act 2004.”

  • Melaye’s trial: Court faults IGP for ignoring Senate’s invitation

    *Says Idris’ excuse not tenable

     

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has faulted the excuse given by the Inspector General of Police (IGP), Ibrahim Idris for refusing to honour Senate’s invitation over the trial of Senator Dino Melaye.

    Justice John Tsoho, in a judgment on Tuesday, said not only was the IGP’s excuse untenable, the two suits he filed in relation to the Senate’s invitation, amounted to an abuse of court processes.

    The IGP has filed both suits earlier this year to challenge the propriety of the Senate’s insistence that he must honour its invitation in person, and the Senate’s subsequent declaration that he was not fit to occupy public office.

    The Senate had, by a letter dated April 25, 2018, invited the IGP in relation to the alleged inhuman treatment of Melaye, and the incessant killings in many parts of the country, including Benue, Plateau and Kwara states.

    The IGP,who was expected to appear before the Senate the following day, sent the Deputy Inspector General of Police (Operations) and Commissioner of Police, Kogi State to represent him.

    The Senate refused to grant audience to both men sent by the IGP and insisted that he must appear in person.

    The legislators rescheduled the meeting for May 2 and again directed that the IGP must honour its invitation in person.

    Rather than honour the legislators’ invitation, the IGP filed the first suit on April 30, 2018, through his lawyer, Alex Izinyon (SAN), contending among others, that he was not required, under any known law,to honour every invitation in person.

    The IGP argued that by the Constitution and Police Act, it was within his powers to delegate responsibilities, including directing some of his subordinates to represent him where ever he was invited, more so that his choice of the DIG (Operations) and CP, Kogi State was on the basis that they were conversant with the issues for which he was invited.

    In his judgment on Tuesday, Justice Tsoho upheld the argument by the defendants – the Senate and its President – to the effect that the IGP’s suits were intended at hindering the Senate from performing its constitutional and legitimate responsibilities.

    The judge’s judgment was on one of both suits. He declined to determine the second suit on the grounds that having rendered his opinion on one, he would prefer that another judge hear and determine the second one.

    He returned the filed to the court’s Chief Judge for reassignment to a new judge.

    The judge was of the view that although the IGP could be excused for being unable to honour the first invitation because he accompanied President Muhammadu Buhari on an official trip, there was no justification for his refusal to honour the second invitation.

    Justice Tsoho noted that the IGP, having had knowledge of the Senate’s invitation, his excuse that he could not attend the second invitation because he was on an official trip to Birnin Gwari with the General Officer Commanding was “not tenable”.

    The judge added: “I do not see any harm that would have been caused if the plaintiff honoured the defendants’ invitation.

    “I uphold the defendants’ argument that the plaintiff’s suit is intended to prevent the exercise of the Senate’s legitimate and constitutional responsibility and that it constitutes an abuse of court process.”

    He said the IGP’s contention that it would be subjudice to discuss issues relating to the pending cases against Melaye was not a sufficient reason for him to ignore the invitation by the legislators.

    The judge said the IGP should have honoured the invitation and impress it on the Senate to refrain from deliberating on the matter that was subjudice.

    Justice Tsoho noted that although, from the headings of the two letters of invitation by the Senate, it was clear that the issues to be deliberated upon had to do with a case pending in court, the plaintiff ought to have appeared for the legislative hearing to notify the Senate of the development.

    He said : “In this present case, the plaintiff ought to have appeared before the Senate and sought the Senate to ensure that the nothing is done to change the character of the matter in court.

    “The plaintiff having failed to do so but chose to run to court to file this suit, the suit amounts to an abuse of court process and it is accordingly struck out.”

    The judge proceeded to dismiss the suit.

    The second suit, which the judge returned to the Chief Judge relates to May 9, 2018 declaration by the Senate that the IGP was “an enemy of democracy and unfit to hold any public office within and outside Nigeria,” following his failure to honour the invitations.

    Read Also: Shehu Sani, Akpabio, Yari, Uduaghan returned unopposed

    The Senate and the House of Representatives, at a subsequent joint session, passed another resolution reaffirming the Senate’s “vote of no confidence” on the IGP.

    In the suit, the IGP argued that the conduct of both the Senate and its President, Saraki, in the proceedings leading to his being declared unfit to hold public office and an enemy of democracy, was borne out of hatred and “undisguised contempt” they allegedly had for him.

    He described the Senate’s May 9, 2018 resolution as an unwarranted “penal sanction” and “a legislative judgment” borne out of the alleged hatred and contempt the Senate and Saraki had for him.

    The IGP contended that the conduct of the Senate and its President, Saraki, during the “votes and proceedings” leading to the May 9, 2018 resolution “is palpable of bias, deep rooted prejudice, visible hatred, and undisguised contempt of me.”

  • Court okays IGP’s suit against Saraki, Senate

    Accuses Saraki, others of harbouring hatred,contempt against him

     

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has given nod to plan by Inspector General of Police (IGP), Ibrahim Idris to sue for among others, an order quashing the May 9, 2015 resolution of the Senate, describing him “an enemy of democracy and unfit to hold any public office within and outside Nigeria.”

    In an ex-parte ruling, Justice John Tsoho also granted leave to the IGP to file an originating summons for judicial review of the said resolution made on May 9 this year by the Senate, for the purpose of quashing it.

    The judge ordered that processes in the suit, including the ruling be served on the respondents – the Senate and its President, Bukola Saraki – through the Clerk of the National Assembly.

    He said the service of the processes through the Clerk of the Senate shall be deemed proper and valid service.

    Justice Tsoho gave the ruling after IGP’s lawyer, Alex Izinyon (SN) moved the application and prayed the court to grant it.

    The proceedings of Thursday is separate from a pending suit equally file by the IGP, challenging the legitimacy of the Senate’s insistence that he must appear before the legislative house in person in relation to the Senate’s purported probe of the trial of its member, Dino Melaye on criminal charges.

    The IGP, in an affidavit supporting his ex-parte application that was moved on Thursday, described the May 9 resolution of the Senate as “legislative judgment.”

    He argued that the conduct of the respondents, in the proceedings leading to resolution, was borne out of the “hatred and undisguised contempt” they allegedly harbour against him.

    The IGP said the conduct of the Senate and its President, Saraki, during  the “votes and proceedings” leading to the May 9, 2018 resolution “is palpable of bias, deep rooted prejudice, visible hatred, and undisguised contempt of me”.

    He added: “That I was informed by my lead counsel, Dr. Alex A. Izinyon, SAN, in his office at No. 1 Kinshasa Street, Wuse Zone 6, Abuja on May 20, 2018 about 5:30pm of the following facts which I verily believe to be true:

    “That the respondents lack the competence and/or jurisdiction to impose penal sanction on me under section 88 and 89 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).

    Read Also: Police insist on Saraki’s link with Offa robbery suspects

    “That the respondents act ultra vires its powers under the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by imposing on me penal sanction unknown to law contained in the said gazette dated 9th May, 2018.

    “That the conduct of the respondents throughout the votes and proceedings that led to the said resolution contained in the gazette dated May 9, 2018 is palpable of bias, deep rooted prejudiced, visible hatred and undisguised contempt for me.

    “That the said votes and proceedings leading to the resolution contained in the said gazette wherein sanction was imposed on me is a legislative judgment.

    “That this court has the supervisory power to quash the said resolution contained in the gazette dated May 9, 2018.”

    The IGP, in the originating summons, is praying the court for “order of certiorari” quashing “the entire votes and proceedings”. leading to the “resolution contained in the gazette dated May 9, 2018.”

    He also prayed for the same order “quashing same the report of the Ad hoc Committee investigating the various allegations levelled against the applicant (Idris) that led to the said resolution contained in the gazette dated May 9, 2018.”

    The IGP equally wants the court to make “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the respondents (Saraki and the Senate)” whether by itself, or through its servants or agents “from acting on the said resolution contained in the gazette dated May 9, 2018 or causing same to be acted upon by any person or authority or government agency, or carrying out similar or like resolution against the applicant.”

    He also seeks among others, “A declaration that the respondents (Saraki and the Senate) acted ultra vires its powers under section 88 and 89 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) in the votes and proceedings leading to the resolution contained in the gazette dated 9th May, 2018 imposing a penal sanction on the applicant…

    “A declaration that the respondents acted ultra vires its powers under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) in initiating the votes and proceedings leading to the resolution contained in the gazette dated May 9, 2018, declaring the Applicant as enemy of democracy and unf1t to hold any public office within and outside Nigeria.”

    Hearing in the case has been fixed for June 27.

  • Court voids House of Reps’ suspension of Jibrin

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has declared unlawful the 2016 decision by the House Representatives to suspend one its members, Abdulmumin Jibrin for 180 days.

    Justice John Tsoho, in a judgment on Thursday, held that the House of Reps, in suspending Jibrin beyond the 14 days allowed under its Rules, violated the House’s Rules and Jibrin’s constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of expression and fair hearing.

    The judgment was on a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/CS/595/2016 filed on October 14, 2016 shortly after his suspension in September.

    Read Also: Money laundering: Court dismisses Belgore’s application

    The judge described as laughable the decision by the House of Reps to suspend a member on the grounds that he reported cases of corrupt practices against its leadership to anti-corruption agencies.

    He said, in a democracy, the lawful option opened to the House”s leadership, against who such allegations were made, was to go before the agencies to clear their names rather than resorting to undemocratic tactics.

  • Court dismisses suit seeking to sack Bello

     

    A Federal High Court in Abuja on Tuesday dismissed a suit seeking to sack the Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello.

    The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/488/2017 was filed by three individuals, who described themselves as electorate in the state. They are Michael Elokun, Ibrahim Sule and Mrs Hawa Audi.

    In a judgment on Tuesday, Justice John Tsoho upheld the objection raised against the suit by Bello (who was sued as the 1st defendant), to the effect that the plaintiffs had no locus standi to institute the suit.

    The judge added that the plaintiffs could not challenge the right of 2nd defendant (All Progressives Congress) to substitute/nominate the 1st defendant as its flagbearer in place of a dead gubernatorial candidate in the 2015 Kogi governorship election.

    Read Also: Kogi killings: Bello to set up judicial panel of inquiry

    He said such decision was the sole prerogative of the 2nd defendant and as such could not form a basis for any legal dispute between the plaintiffs and defendants.

    The judge noted that the plaintiffs were neither members of the APC nor aspirants in the primary election that produced Bello as the APC’s flagbearer in the governorship election. He agreed with the 1st defendant that the plaintiffs were not the only electorate in Kogi state.

    Justice Tsoho held that the subject matter of the suit was not within the jurisdiction of the court as it was not a pre-election matter.

    The judge further held that the court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters outside the purview of Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended). He said the subject matter and reliefs sought by the plaintiffs were predicated on issues on which only an Election Tribunal could exercise jurisdiction pursuant to Section 285(2) of the Constitution.

    Justice Tsoho said the suit, as presently constituted, did not disclose any reasonable cause of action. He added that the suit was bound to fail, because it was filed almost two years after Bello was sworn in as a democratically elected governor of Kogi state.

    Other defendants in the suit were the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Independent National Electoral  Commission (INEC), and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).

     

  • Dokpesi ’s alleged N2.1bn fraud trial adjourned until Feb. 6

    Dokpesi ’s alleged N2.1bn fraud trial adjourned until Feb. 6

    The Federal High Court, Abuja, has adjourned until Feb. 6, the trial of erstwhile Chairman of DAAR Communications Plc, Raymond Dokpesi, over alleged N2.1bn fraud.

    Justice John Tsoho, fixed the date after the 11th prosecution witness, Mr Gabriel Agorye, testified on Friday.

    Agorye, led in evidence by Mr Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), the prosecuting counsel, said that he withdrew N40 million for Dokpesi from his First Bank account.

    Agorye also told the court that he was Dokpesi’s personal assistant and ran errands for him.

    The witness also said that some monies were paid into his personal account which he withdrew and gave to his boss.

    Under cross examination by Mr Kanu Agabi (SAN), the witness told the court that he did not know the source of the monies that he withdrew for Dokpesi’s from his account.

    He added that he did not know if the money was proceeds of an illegitimate transaction.

    “I cannot say that the source of the money was illegitimate, and I do not know the uses to which the monies were put to,” the witness said.

    Justice Tsoho discharged the witness and adjourned the matter until Feb. 6 and 7 for continuation of trial.

    Dokpesi is being tried by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commissions ( EFCC ) over alleged N2.1 billion fraud.

    NAN

  • Absence of interpreter stalls arraignment of alleged kidnappers

    Absence of interpreter stalls arraignment of alleged kidnappers

    The absence of an interpreter at the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, stalled the arraignment of five men accused of abducting some pupils.

    The kidnappers allegedly kidnapped pupils and members of staff of Nigeria/Tulip International College, Isheri, Ogun,  on Jan. 13.

    When the matter was called, the defendants, Bekewei Agbojule, Egbasimokumo Ayeomi, Godspower Olopele, Toki Okuba and Super-Allen Baye, said that they only understood Pidgin English very well.

    The judge, Justice John Tsoho, adjourned the matter until June 21 to enable the court to provide an interpreter.

    “It is regretted that the court could not locate an interpreter to translate proceedings to Pidgin English which the defendants understand.

    “Therefore, the court will adjourn the matter until tomorrow to look for a competent and unbiased interpreter,” Tsoho said.

    The Federal Government is arraigning the defendants on a five-count charge bordering on involvement in the acts of hostage taking, receiving of ransom and acts of terrorism.

    The crime carries life sentence under the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013.

    In the five-count charge, the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation alleged that the defendants conspired among themselves and with others at large and demanded N800 million as ransom after abducting and detaining their victims.

    They were said to have later reduced the amount to N50 million which they allegedly received before releasing the victims.

    The prosecution, led by Mr Aminu Alilu, also alleged in counts four and five of the charge that the defendants along with others at large, on Dec. 16, 2016 in Lagos, seized six other people at gunpoint.

    They allegedly demanded a ransom of two million naira from the family members of the victims and received the money before releasing them.

    The prosecution alleged that the offence of conspiracy to commit hostage taking was an act of terrorism contrary to Section 17 of the Terrorism Prevention (Amendment) Act, 2013.

  • Court discharges Boko Haram suspect

    Court discharges Boko Haram suspect

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday discharged a Boko Haram suspect, Usman Abubakar, who was arraigned alongside six others for terrorism.

    Abubakar, the 6th defendant, was allegedly involved in the abduction of seven foreigners from a construction site in Bauchi, who were taken to Sambisa Forest, in Borno, where they were murdered in February 2013.

    He was charged alongside Mohammed Usman (a.k.a Khalid Al-Barnawi), Mohammed Bashir Saleh, Umar Mohammed Bello (a.k.a Abu Azzan), Mohammed Salisu (a.k.a Datti), Yakubu Nuhu (a.k.a Bello Maishayi) and a lady, Halima Haliru.

    They were arraigned on an 11-count charge, bordering on abduction and murder of their victims.

    At the resumed trial, the prosecuting counsel, Mr Shuaibu Labaran, informed the court of the development, which was filed on June 5, saying that the prosecution has nothing against the 6th defendant.

    Labaran said that among other features in the amended information is the “striking out’’ of Usman Abubakar as a defendant, in line with the information filed on Feb. 23, 2017.

    The prosecution added two other defendants- Mohammed Sani and Abubakar Habib.

    They are to be arraigned, bringing the number of defendants to eight.

    Labaran prayed the court for an adjournment to enable him produce the two new defendants for arraignment.

    The discharged defendant’s counsel, Mr K. Abdulkarim urged the court to speed up his discharge processes.

    The judge, Justice John Tsoho, in a short ruling, struck out the name of the 6th defendant, who has spent four years in custody.

    Tsoho adjourned the matter until June 19 for the two defendants to take their plea.

  • Counsel’s ill health stalls Fani-Kayode’s trial

    Counsel’s ill health stalls Fani-Kayode’s trial

    A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday adjourned the trial of former Minister of Aviation, Femi Fani-Kayode  till July 7, due to his counsel’s ill health.