The first woman Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Aloma Mariam Mukhtar is one year old in office today. In this report, Eric Ikhilae examines her efforts at restoring public confidence in the judiciary.
The judiciary, many believe, sunk to its lowest following the face-off between former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Aloysius Katsina-Alu and suspended President of the Court of Appeal (PCA) Justice Ayo Isa Salami. At the root of the altercation were perceived corruption and unethical conduct in the judiciary.
This explains the scepticism that greeted the assumption of office of Justice Dahiru Musdapher, who succeeded Justice Katsina-Alu as the CJN.
To an extent, Justice Musdapher, in his short tenure, tried to cleanse the judiciary through some policies, the most prominent being the reform measures he suggested in his recommendations to the National Assembly on the aspects of the Constitution that should be reviewed to aid efficiency in justice delivery.
Many were, however, unhappy when his tenure ended before the legislature could act on his recommendations. Most people had nursed the fear of a possible return to the era of a directionless, indolent and corruption-infested judiciary; knowing that continuity in public policies’ implementation is alien to public administration in the country.
This has, however, not been the case since Justice Musdapher’s successor Justice Mariam Aloma Mukhtar mounted the saddle.
Before assuming office, she acknowledged the rot in the system. When, she appeared before the senate for screening on July 11 last year, Justice Mukhtar admitted that the temple of justice had been desecrated by some elements. She was responding to questions from the senators on the state of the judiciary. She vowed to reverse the trend.
“As at now, it is very bad and I am saddened by it. I will try. I don’t want to sound like a broken record. I will try to make sure that the confidence reposed in the Judiciary, as it was before, is returned. I will try to ensure that the bad eggs that are there are flushed out,” she said. Justice Mukhtar assured that “there will be a cleansing by the National Judicial Council (NJC) based on petitions. It is sad that the ordinary man on the street thinks and feels that he cannot get justice. This is because of the situation we find ourselves. I will ensure that this perception changes.” While she was making pledges before the Legislature, those who knew her, were quick to describe her as “a no-nonsense woman, who is firm and lives by her words.”
A year into her tenure (having assumed office on July 16, 2012) things seem to be looking up in the judiciary. Justice Mukhtar appears to be matching her words with actions. Discipline seems to be finding its way back to the system.
This no doubt could be attributed to her three-pronged approach to sanitising the judiciary, which seems to be gaining ground. The first is her resolve to ensure prompt treatment, by the National Judicial Council (NJC), of petitions against judicial officers.
The second is the yearly NJC’s Nigeria’s Judicial Performance Evaluation Report (NJPER) while the third is the newly introduced practice direction for all courts. The practice direction is specifically intended to fast-track trials of offences involving terrorism, rape, kidnapping, corruption, money laundering, human trafficking and related cases.
What was almost becoming a taboo in the judiciary happened in quick succession on her assumption of office. Petitions against judges wer,e before now, left to rot with the NJC.
Justice Mukhtar said on May 13, this year in Lagos, at a two-day workshop organised by the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Action Group, with the theme: “The rule of law- the bedrock for sustainable democracy,” that she inherited 139 petitions.
Within few weeks they were treated and 106 were considered vexatious or baseless, with only 33 considered worthy of attention.
She added that 198 fresh petitions have been filed since she got into office. They have equally been treated, with 150 found to be frivolous, 15 are awaiting responses from judges while 21 were slated for consideration.
On November 5, 2012, Justice Mukhtar decided to defer the swearing-in of Justice Ifeoma Jombo-Ofor elevated with other 11 justices to the Court of Appeal, on the ground that a petition was pending against her, with allegations that Justice Jombo-Ofor had laid claim to two states of origin in her career.
Despite the public outcry that greeted her decision, Justice Mukhtar insisted on due process of law, pointing to the provision of Paragraph 2 of Part II of the Federal Character Commission (Establishment) Act Subsidiary Legislation, which states that “a married woman shall continue to lay claim to her state of origin for the purpose of implementation of the Federal Character Formulae at the national level.”
The NJC, under her leadership, eventually ensured that Justice Jombo-Ofor got sworn-in as a Court of Appeal Justice on the slot of Anambra State rather than her husband’s state – Abia.
The NJC, under her, took a bold step when on February 28, this year, it recommended the compulsory retirement of Justice Charles Archibong of the Federal High Court and Justice Thomas .D. Naron of the High Court of Justice, Plateau State.
The council also set up a ‘fact-finding’ committee to investigate the allegations against Justice Abubakar Talba of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in respect of the Police Pension case involving John Yakubu Yusuf.
On April 26, this year, upon receiving the report of the fact-finding committee, the NJC suspended Justice Talba from office for 12 months without pay, sequel to the council’s findings that he did not exercise his discretion judicially and judiciously with regard to the sentences he passed on Yusuf, who was convicted for stealing N1.3 billion meant for the payment of pension and gratuities of retired policemen.
Also, the NJC, after treating petitions against Justice Okechukwu Okeke of the Federal High Court, Lagos, issued a serious warning, before he retired from service on May 18, 2013.
Many petitions are still being considered, among which is that involving the former Chief Judge of the FCT, Justice Lawal Gummi.
The cleaning effort is not limited to judicial officers.
With the hindsight of experience, Justice Mukhtar knows the havoc some of the supporting staff are capable of causing in the justice delivery system.
This, she noted, at a workshop held on June 17 in Abuja by the National Judicial Institute (NJI) for librarians working in the judiciary.
At the event, the CJN expressed her determination to extend the ongoing sanitisation in the judiciary to support staff.
“Let me quickly add that the fight against corruption in the judiciary is not only targeted at judicial officers, but also against any member of staff of the judiciary who finds luxury or convenience in engaging in corrupt practices or in any other unwholesome conduct.
“It is a notorious fact that this category of workers has in the past caused leakages of judgments written by judges, which were yet to be delivered. Litigants’ applications are at times not filed in their case files thereby denying the judges from acting on them.
“Some of them midwife between the litigants and the judges in the sale of judgment, or provide information to litigants on how some judges can be approached to compromise his or her judgment. All these they do for fee at the expense of judiciary integrity and image,” the CJN said.
True to her words, a few days later, the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) announced the dismissal of five support staff of Supreme Court workers and one from the Court of Appeal of Abuja division. They were found to have leaked the judgment in the case of Senator Alphonsus Igbeke vs Lady Margery Okadigbo before it was delivered on May 31, 2013.
The FJSC did not stop at that, it also requested the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) to further investigate and possibly prosecute Igbeke and one Collins Okechukwu for allegedly aiding and abetting the leakage.
There have been many cases of leaked judgments in the apex court and even in the lower courts before now, but the dismissal was the first time such incidence would be investigated with the culprits apprehended and punished.
This development, no doubt, will serve as a deterrence to this category of workers.
To combat indolence among judges, the CJN has also devised a means of monitoring their performance. This, she said, was in conformity with the civil service rule, in which any worker who is rated poor or unproductive on performance evaluation could be asked to give way for good hands to take his or her place.
She said the need to monitor judges’ performance stemmed from complaints, by stakeholders, particularly the NBA about the attitudes of judges to work in recent time.
“Many will leave their work and travel for days abroad. This is why I insisted they must obtain approval before traveling abroad. Until this directive, I never thought things were all that bad, because some of the judges will be seeking for permission to travel abroad while the courts are in session, despite the six weeks holiday they are entitled to in a year.
“These are part of the reasons the NJC undertakes performance evaluation from time to time, both at the trial and appellate courts, to determine productivity of the judges and their courts in the states and the Federal Capital Territory.”
The CJN spoke on May 17 , while receiving analysed copies of NJC’s “Nigeria’s Judicial Performance Report (2008-2011)” submitted by the Nigerian Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (NIALS).
She said the report would aid planning and easy decision making by the NJC.
The CJN said it was absurd to observe that some judges couldn’t even deliver up to two judgments in a quarter.
‘’We are now thinking of looking at the performance evaluation of the judges for the purpose of discipline. If a judge cannot deliver three to four judgments in a year, there is no use keeping him on the bench other than to be shown his or her way out’’.
Under this scheme, the NJC sends out its monitoring team to all the superior courts – Court of Appeal, Federal and state High Courts, National Industrial Court, Customary and the Sharia Courts of Appeal – which engages in periodic collation of data on the numbers of cases – civil, criminal and motions – assigned to each court. The team also gathers data on the number of these cases disposed off and those pending at the end of each quarter.
The same NJC’s committee on performance evaluation maintains a data bank which also contain information on the performance of individual judicial officer.
The report generated by the monitoring team shows, among others, the manner in which the cases were disposed off; whether they were cases decided on the merit or they were struck out as non-contested cases. Judges are rated based on the cases disposed on merit.
By this arrangement, judges would be more apt to effectively and expeditiously prosecute cases in their courts in order to register a minimum of four judgment in a year.
Another means devised by the CJN, directed against undue delay in justice administration, is the introduction of new practice direction for courts.
Already, the CJN is working with Chief Judges of states’ High Courts, the Abuja High Court, the Federal High Court and presiding Justices of the various divisions of the Court of Appeal, to put in place an efficient system that will eliminate delays in criminal trials.
The intention is to produce a model practice direction for all courts to fast-track trials of offences involving terrorism, rape, kidnapping, corruption, money laundering, human trafficking and related matters.
In what may yet turn out to be her biggest achievement, Justice Mukhtar also hopes to extended the practice direction to the Supreme Court.
This is to ensure that while the Judiciary awaits the Legislature to effect the necessary constitutional amendment, it should, in the mean time, put in place administrative measures to achieve the much needed judicial reform for quick dispensation of justice.
Observers are of the view that much as the CJN should be commended for her efforts at ensuring a corruption free and efficient judicial system was in place, she must understand the need carry all stakeholders along.
This, they said, requires that she takes steps to ensure that other stakeholders buy into her objectives and plans, with a view to ensuring that the changes being introduced become a culture when she vacates office.
“We should not see all this as her own alone. Everyone, who desires a judicial system that we will all be proud of; a system that will dispense justice without being influenced; a system that will always be unbiased, we must all buy into this woman’s reform ideas, a lawyer, Christopher Nnamdi said.
Others also suggested that the reform efforts should include capacity building for judicial officers and their support staff; deployment of modern work tools, particularly information and communication technology (ICT); review of the appointment process for judges to allow more openness and public participation.
There is also the argument that an enhanced funding for the sector would also be of immense benefit.
The ultimate wish of all however, is the realisation of a judicial system that serves to dispense justice no matter whose interest is at stake; a system that is blind to external manipulations and serves the good of all irrespective of who is on the saddle.
