The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Judiciary

  • Akwa Ibom: Judiciary on trial?

    Akwa Ibom: Judiciary on trial?

    Nigerians are waiting, with baited breath, to see whether the democracy which they fought and toiled for, will be deepened or truncated after 16 years of experiment. The only institution which shoulders this wondrous task is the judiciary.

    Why do I say so? The Judiciary, being one of the legs of the government institutional tripod, is saddled with the responsibility of interpreting the laws to regulate the operations of other institutions of government. And that responsibility is on trial in the on-going election litigations across the country, and is threatening our long march to have an electoral system that guarantees the freedom to choose those who should run our daily lives.

    So, the disparate, confusing and shocking judgements in the various election tribunals are not giving us, the citizens, who fought hard to enthrone a credible and civilized electoral system, any cause to cheer. We are daily witnessing or hearing judgements that are twisted and leaving the people confused. Pray, can anybody make any meaning as to the import of a judgement involving the Akwa Ibom elections? An election, adjudged by both local and international observers to be fraudulent; lacking in every known measurement for credible poll; cancelled in 18 out of 31 local government areas of the state; and which forensic report on the ballot papers saw mostly ‘ghost’ thumbprints, was  not good enough for cancellation? And did meet substantial non compliance, as stipulated in the electoral laws?

    This is the dilemma in which the Election Tribunals, and indeed the Judiciary has thrown the citizens into. Apart from the Rivers state elections which have a clear-cut pronouncement, the one in Akwa Ibom state saw both parties in the dispute in jubilation and mourning moods at the same time. But, a more cursory look at the Akwa Ibom elections tribunal verdict revealed a pattern that would hurt our electoral system and erode the gains which, Prof Athahiru Jega, erstwhile INEC chairman and his team worked so hard to enthrone.

    It was the hope of every Nigerian that election tribunals would, in helping to deepen our democracy, promote those things or give judgements based on merits or demerits of cases before it rather than dwelling on technicalities. If I were a Tribunal judge, and as once expounded by the Chief Judge of the federation, I would have concerned myself more on whether the processes and guidelines of elections were followed rather than duel on whether dates were signed in the right columns. I would look at the video and oral evidences, exhibits, qualities and relevance of witnesses rather than looked for regularities in an election marred by irregularities. My court would be more concerned with whether the elections fulfil the basic ingredient of processes like accreditation, voting, collation and whether they met the requirements of the electoral law.

    These were the points in which the written addresses of the lawyer to the Petitioner to the Akwa Ibom state Governorship election tribunal, Wole Olanipekun dwelt on, as captured on pages 8 – 14 of the address. But, the argument by the Tribunal for not calling for a total rerun of the election in Akwa Ibom state was more on the admissibility or otherwise of the card reader in determining whether the elections were flawed or not. Interestingly, the argument was not whether the use of card reader served a useful purpose in determining the identity of the voter or not, or the fact the it an instrument designed by INEC to help in checking over voting, or the fact that INEC, as an institution has the right to set its internal rules to effectively do its job, or even the fact that, prior to the 2015 general elections, some misguided fellows had gone to the court to stop the use of card reader without success. The Tribunal, in a rather bizarre judgement merely saw the card reader as a device not captured by the provisions of the constitution. The question one would ask is: Is the colouring of the finger to avoid over voting, anywhere in the constitution? Or, is the use of election observers enshrined in the constitution?

    I think that, the preponderance of opinion favoured the use of card readers to check the unfortunate but criminal issue of over voting and ballot stuffing. It was also meant to authenticate the voting population and give the electoral system a high level of credibility. But, our Tribunals, except Justice Ambrosa’s verdict in the Rivers state elections, have resorted to castigate this highly recommended device, citing its non inclusion in the Electoral Act. But, one is wont to ask: if the card reader is a device designed by the electoral body to achieve a near electoral correctness, why should anybody have anything against? The answer is obvious. Those who kicked against it are not doing so out of altruistic reasons, they want to subvert the electoral system and get to power through the backdoor.

    Sadly and ironically, those who attacked the card reader device were not limited to the politicians or the partisan colouration it took, alone. Listening to some INEC staff, at the Akwa Ibom elections tribunal, come up to denounce the card reader, was to say the least debilitating. In this land of the absurd, how can a staff of an organisation come up to vilify a very critical policy of that organisation and still walked back to his job? In sane climes, the likes of Austin Okojie, the Resident Electoral Commissioner in Akwa Ibom state and some staff of the legal department of the state who tried hard to water down the use of this device during the trials would have earned themselves an instant sack and other punitive measures taken against them. It was convenient for them to deny knowledge of the directive by Secretary of INEC, Mrs  Augusta Ogakwu on the use of card reader and the Incidence Form, because they found a lacuna in the way the country’s legal system and tried to pander to whims of those they served (obviously not the Nigerian people).

    The kernel of this conversation is that if we have had a pro-active Elections Tribunal across the states and worthy rulings given, the electoral system and, indeed, the Nigerian people would have been the ultimate beneficiaries. How? A credible electoral process would ensure that credible Nigerians are allowed within the political space. Again, the cruel act of impunity and flawed elections would have been eliminated, and issues-oriented politics enthroned in our politics. Nigerians, the butt of electoral malfeasance would have been saved the trauma of watching their only claim to electoral participation, which is voting for candidates of their choice, being eroded by the political vampires. And, ultimately, a credible electoral system and the resolution of conflict resulting thereof, through a believable justice system would have brought about a Nigeria where ideas and selflessness would turn the wheels of our polity.

    Unfortunately, there is no cheery news from tribunals who are wrapping up their sittings across literal states. Nigerians are concerned that the efforts of Jega’s team in putting together a framework that could address the inadequacies in our electoral systems would be eroded by the activities of the tribunals and bring back the infamous ‘carry go’ electoral conduct. Apart from complacency which would be the ultimate result, and understandably so, I want somebody to convince me that Nigerians in subsequent elections would want to waste their time and go through the rigours of identification through card readers, knowing that , in event of litigation, it won’t amount to anything.

    Welcome back to impunity and self help in our electoral system. My consolation is that a window has opened through appeals at the appellate courts. I hope this opportunity would be used by our learned judges to right the wrongs, wrought on Nigerians at the tribunals. The judges at the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, I am sure would use the opportunity to give judgements that will deepen our democracy.

    In achieving this, the learned judges should treat every case on its merit and not decided on technicalities. Answers should be sought for questions such like: did the elections conform with the processes? Did the votes of the electorates count during the exercise? Were there incidences of over voting and ballot snatching? Were there situations of intimidation, killings and unruly conduct during the voting exercise? What were the views of those who were accredited to monitor the elections both locally and internationally? Were the results signed by party agents pasted in every ward or local government headquarters as demanded by the Electoral Act? If not, why not? Among many other questions which should probe the credibility or otherwise of the process.

    In fact, I expect our revered judges at the Appellate courts to scrutinise the testimonies of witnesses through their statements and contrast same with oral testimonies. Unfortunately they were not at the tribunals to see how their tutored testimonies and body language could have played a major role in determining the truthfulness or otherwise of testimonies. I totally disagree that the law is an ass because the truth has no edges. It is only falsehood that struggles to hide its inadequacies to take the toga of truth.

    The Judiciary, in conclusion, is therefore on trial. We are at a threshold of either deepening our democracy or truncating it. We would deepen it by giving judgements in the pending appeals that will mitigate the anger of voiceless majority who are made to believe that the judiciary is their last hope to right wrongs done on them. The judgement should rely primarily on the merits of the cases before them and not on technicalities. On the flipsides, any judgement at the Appellate courts on the elections that goes contrary to the expectation of the people would just be the tonic that will create complacency, rules of the thump and electoral lethargy on the people.

     

    • Uwem-Obong Ankak, a journalist and Public Analyst lives in Lagos

     

  • Abe: I have confidence in Judiciary

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) senatorial candidate for Rivers Southeast in the March 28 National Assembly election, Magnus Ngei Abe, has said he never described the Judiciary as 419.

    The senator said he had confidence in the Judiciary, adding that he would continue to hold judicial officers in high esteem.

    Abe was reacting at the weekend to a statement credited to him that he impugned on the integrity of the Judiciary when he addressed his supporters at his Bera hometown in Gokana Local Government Area.

    The senator said he was misinterpreted in his remarks, following the judgment by the National Assembly Election Petitions Tribunal sitting in Abuja, which struck out his petition against Olaka Nwogu of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    He noted that it was the condition the tribunal gave him to provide witnesses from every unit in his senatorial district within five days that he described as 419, and not the Judiciary.

    Abe said there was no election in Rivers State, particularly in his Gokana Local Government Area, in the March 28 and April 11 elections.

    The senator hinted that he would appeal the judgment.

    Abe said: “…Everybody in Nigeria knows that there was no election in Rivers State. The outcome of our case at the tribunal was not satisfactory. So, we have decided, in keeping with the decision of the APC in Rivers State, that we must seek justice for you and for all of us.

    “We have decided that we must proceed to the Court of Appeal to appeal against the decision of the lower court. A lot of comments have been made about the decision of the court. Most regrettably, one of the comments that people keep referring to is to say that Senator Abe said it was judicial 419. In making reference to that comment, everybody else forgot everything else that I said in that comment.”

  • PDP leaders : Buhari, Judiciary, INEC behind our electoral woes

    PDP leaders : Buhari, Judiciary, INEC behind our electoral woes

    President Muhammadu Buhari, the judiciary, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Department of State Services (DSS) yesterday came under fresh attack from the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) over the party’s recent electoral reverses in Rivers and Akwa Ibom States.

    The PDP  accused  the Buhari administration of  politicising  and compromising critical institutions, including the judiciary, DSS and INEC,  for the purpose of  subverting democracy in the country.

    The party’s national caucus, rising from an emergency meeting in Abuja on Thursday, where it reviewed  the judgements of the Akwa Ibom   and Rivers State Election Petition Tribunals, said the behaviour of the President and the ruling All Progressives  Congress (APC) constitutes  a huge threat to the nation’s democracy and danger  to its peace, unity and progress.

    It did not spare the National Assembly which it claimed was being  intimidated  by the executive arm of government.

    In a communique issued at the end of the meeting, the PDP  National Secretary, Prof.  Wale Oladipo, said the APC-led government has eroded  the  ‘gains’  recorded by the PDP in its 16 years in the saddle.

    It vowed to  “vigorously resist”  the  “undemocratic tendencies” it attributed to the President.

    It said: “The undue interferences by the executive arm of government in the activities of the judiciary, legislature and INEC, using the Directorate of States Services (DSS), is clearly unacceptable to the PDP as well as the Nigerian people and the party resolved to vigorously resist such.

    “The PDP finds it offensive and provocative the judiciary’s handling of cases involving it in election tribunals in some states, particularly Akwa Ibom, Rivers, Imo, Taraba, Ogun, Plateau and Lagos.

    “The conclusive evidence of external influence on the Rivers State governorship election tribunal is the fact that it was able to deliver its judgment within 24 hours in a case that had nearly 100 witnesses, 1,000 pieces of documentary evidences and nine counsel’s final written addresses; each not less than 40 pages.

    “The decision, in view of the rather interesting history of the case, indicates that the judiciary, like the PDP and the Nigerian electorate, are victims of the APC-led Federal Government.

    “The tainted judgments of these tribunals, which are evidently products of arm-twisting from the nation’s security operatives under the direct command of an APC member, remains unacceptable to us”.

    The PDP also alleged clandestine moves by the APC to use various agencies of government to manipulate the upcoming governorship elections in Kogi and Bayelsa states, vowing to deploy every means within the law to resist the moves.

    The APC, it claimed, is  steering the country towards dictatorship and asked the judiciary to restore its image by taking immediate measures to protect itself from political interferences.

    Besides, it  said  the Court of Appeal  must  remedy the “embarrassing rulings”  by some election petition tribunals, particularly  those of Rivers and  Akwa Ibom states.

    The PDP similarly called on President Buhari to stand up for justice and equity, and halt the undemocratic attitudes of agents of government in the interest of peace and stability.

    It hailed its senators for walking out of the Red Chambers on Thursday  ahead of the confirmation of former governor of Rivers State, Mr. Rotimi Amaechi, as a ministerial nominee, saying: “We salute the courage and unity of purpose of our senators, especially as demonstrated in the Senate chambers on Thursday in their collective stand against impunity and corruption, in line with the wishes and aspirations of the Nigerian people.

    “The PDP states that what the APC senators did at the ministerial screening  was a death knell on their party’s pretentious war against corruption.”

    It wondered why “former APC governors are being rewarded with ministerial appointments” while those of PDP  “are being hounded and harassed in the selective war against corruption.”

    A week ago, the Rivers State Election Petitions tribunal  voided the emergence of PDP’s  Nyesom Wike as winner of the April governorship election on account of the petition filed by the APC candidate, Mr.Dakuku Peterside.

    The tribunal said the election was characterised by fraud citing the over one million votes recorded for Wike  even when the records showed that under 300000 people were accredited to vote in the election.

    Wike denounced the verdict and vowed to take his case to the Court of Appeal and if necessary the Supreme Court.

    A few days earlier,the Akwa Ibom Election Tribunal  had cancelled the results of the governosrship election in 18 local government area of the state .

    It said fresh poll should be  conducted in the affected areas.

  • Abia APGA’s onslaught against judiciary

    The judiciary is sacred. It is to democracy what the vestry is to the holy temple.  It is the sanctuary of democracy, the fulcrum of life of any civilized society.  I think that somebody, and this is not sarcastic, must volunteer to teach this freshman course to the leaders of the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA) party in Abia State.  We may have been committing a very fatal error to presume that they know or that they should have known. Ignorance could be a valid claim to innocence in these matters.  We forget that, as Amos Alcott noted, to be ignorant of one’s ignorance is the malady of the ignorant.

    Every civilized society and every civilized person or group respect the sanctity of the judiciary. The judiciary as one of the three arms of government is so crucial and critical to the social contract that its independence cannot be negotiated.  The ability to interpret the law and dispense justice accordingly remains the responsibility of the judiciary and that is why it is the last bastion of hope of the common man.  The judiciary exists not only to check the excesses of the executive arm and the legislature but to check and control the society. It exists to control and direct the activities of man and, in that spirit, we avoid acting in contempt of the court.

    It is from this premise that every well-meaning Nigerian must decry the campaign of calumny mounted by APGA against the chairman and members of the Abia State Election Petition Tribunal.  Since the judgment of the tribunal in the petitions of the National and House of Assembly elections and the verdict of the Owerri Appeal Court where APGA went to seek for extension of time to present more witnesses, the party literarily went gaga against the honourable jurists of the Abia tribunal. In a well-orchestrated campaign, both in the print, electronics and on other channels, the party has accused the jurists of having been bribed and compromised to divert justice in favour of the PDP.

    The height of this campaign of character assassination was the call by APGA for the jailing of the judges of the Abia Election Tribunal. It has been a sheer irony for a party which had earlier expressed an unflinching faith in the judiciary as a citadel of justice to turn around and launch such disparaging campaign not just against the jurists but against the institution of the judiciary, simply because their canvassed wheel of justice (which they have been waiting for) doesn’t seem to be swinging   in their favour.

    Let’s sample the aspersions of Abia APGA against the tribunal.  In a full page advertorial published on page 41 of The Nation of Friday, October 16, and personally signed by Reverend Ehiemere as the chairman of APGA, he declared as follows: “Huge sums of money in form of gratification have exchanged hands between the PDP leadership in the state and cronies of the justices. Consequently, some of the judges have been responding in line with the dictate of the lucre as evidenced in the current dismissing of all petitions filed by our party against the PDP candidates. The bribe funds, we understood, were delivered to the judges outside the country and through proxies in order to leave no traces”.

    In another full-page advertorial titled: Abia Election Petition Tribunals; The Height of Travesty of Justice, published on page 47 of The Nation of the same date, the party wrote: “There should be no space for corrupt judges in the present Nigeria. It is not enough to just retire them, they must be tried and if found guilty, jailed or even shot to death as the people of Ghana are asking their president to do”.

    On Sunday, October 18, in another full-page advertorial published on page 10 of The Nation APGA fired again: “In the last few weeks, suspicious but serious moves involving the officials of the Abia State Government have been made across the borders of Nigeria to seek a possible and highly secretive way of compromising the judges either in cash or through the purchase of very expensive property.”

    The party continued again on Wednesday October 21, on page 39 and 40 to denigrate and malign the character and integrity of the tribunal. Their language is uncouth, derogatory and abusive and only projects a picture of a desperate people. Considering that there is still a window for APGA to seek further redress in the Appeal Court,  if it thinks that its petition has not be judiciously addressed, one could only conclude that their action in the last couple of days is intentional   to ridicule the hallowed institution of the Nigerian judiciary. If the party is convinced that it still has some claim to make, the right action should have been to proceed to the higher court which has the jurisdiction to vacate the judgment of the lower court rather than resort to uncivil and barbaric actions of name-calling and mudslinging.

    It is clear that the whole aim in the scenario is to tarnish the coveted image and reputation of the honourable jurists and cast aspersion on the credibility of the Nigerian judiciary. This, precisely, amounts to taking election gangsterism too far. And this does not portray us positively before the civilized global community. The party would also add salt to injury by calling out paid touts and street urchins to attempt to orchestrate an unrest purporting it to be a reaction to the judgment of the tribunal, the aim being to create an atmosphere of pandemonium and thereby portray the state to be in crisis over the rulings that was indisputably fair to all concerned.  Politics should not be this dirty and filthy and politicians should play it with some conscience.

    There is need for members of the Nigerian judiciary both the bar and the bench to rise up in condemnation of the attack that has been unleashed on members of the Abia tribunal and the denigration that has come to the way of the judiciary, no thanks to  the Abia  branch of APGA. There is a sense in which this smear campaign has a spiral link to how every other tribunal should or should not be treated. And this statement must be made unequivocally as a lesson to the Abia APGA. The court is a hallowed entity that should not be treated with disdain or held in such contemptuous manner that cast a bad image on our total outlook as a country. Somebody must call the party to order and reverse this flagrant descent to indecency.

    The people of Abia respect the rule of law and the impartiality of the judiciary and do believe that the judgments so far delivered by the tribunal are fair to all concerned.  Abians see the attack on the tribunal as transcending the borders of decency and sanity.  Nigerians owe a duty to uphold the sanctity of the judiciary.

     

    • Adindu is the Chief Press Secretary to Abia governor
  • APC warns Fayose to stop attacking judiciary, judges

    APC warns Fayose to stop attacking judiciary, judges

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) in Ekiti State has warned Governor Ayo Fayose to stop what it called “sustained and relentless attacks on judges and the judiciary” because he had benefited from them in the past.

    Following the ruling in the Akwa Ibom and Rivers governorship election petitions, Fayose was reported to have alleged that the tribunal judges “succumbed to federal might in nullifying the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) victories in favour of the APC.’’

    In a statement yesterday by its Publicity Secretary, Taiwo Olatunbosun, the APC denounced Fayose for accusing somebody else of using federal might for electoral gains.

    “We never knew that Fayose would be the one accusing anyone of using federal might for electoral advantage.

    “Did Fayose take his conscience into consideration when Army officers and men were used by former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration to intimidate opponents in the June 21, 2014, governorship election?

  • Tasks before the judiciary, by lawyers

    The four branches of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) in Lagos have set a 17-point agenda for the state judiciary, stating the challenges confronting the justice system and proffering solutions.

    Speaking at the Bar and Bench Forum as part of activities to mark the new legal year, NBA Ikeja branch chairman Mr. Yinka Farounbi, said a discussion of the challenges is fuelled by the desire to get things right.

    Mr Farounbi, who spoke on behalf of Badagry, Ikorodu, Lagos and Ikeja branches, listed the issues lawyers face to include lack of notification when courts would not sit, delay in delivering judgments, difficulty in obtaining copies of judgments, stringent bail conditions which defeat the purpose of bail and late sitting of courts.

    On the appointment of judges, he said: “Information to the Bar comes very late, leaving the Bar with no time to scrutinise the list.” According to him, the Bar should be notified on time.

    “The Bar proposes that the Lagos judiciary website be upgraded to include a link that will host judgments of the various High Courts as well as seminar papers and notable speeches,” he added.

    The association further requested for a periodical review of High Court Rules, the commissioning of the Badagry High Court and the relocation of the Ojo Magistrates’Court from Apapa to Ojo because of the chaotic traffic situation in the area.

    The NBA canvassed continuous training and legal education for judicial officers as well as courteous treatment of NBA members by judges and magistrates, while bemoaning the dilapidated state of some courtrooms.

    “More Judicial Divisions are needed in the state,” Mr Farounbi said, adding that the welfare packages for Magistrates needed to be enhanced.

    The NBA lamented the difficulty experienced by lawyers and litigants in the course of executing judgments, “particularly from the angle of procurement of police assistance.”

    “We urge the authority of the Judiciary to liaise with the Commissioner of Police with the view of having, at least, a Police Post within the High Court premises both in Lagos and Ikeja,” the NBA chief said, adding, “The Bar decries the attitude of Court Sheriffs who continue to extort lawyers and litigants before effecting service of court processes.”

    “The Bar urges the Chief Judge to immediately license courier companies and law firms to undertake service of processes as prescribed in Order 7 of our Rules.”

    Other items highlighted by the Bar include reform of the Probate Registry, review of the E-Filing System, implementation of the NBA seal project and review of Order 2 Rule 3 of the Magistrates’ Court Civil Procedure Rules which makes a summons void if not served within three months.

    The Bar and Bench Forum is organised every year as part of the new legal year activities of the Lagos State Judiciary. This year’s event had in attendance Judges and Magistrates of the Lagos State Judiciary, including the Chief Judge of the state, Justice Olufunmilayo Atilade, as well as lawyers, including Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN).

     

  • CJN, NBA President disagree on corruption in Judiciary

    THERE was a disagreement yesterday between Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Mahmud Mohammed and Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President Augustine Alegeh(SAN), on who is responsible for corruption in the Judiciary.

    The CJN described the allegation that judges were taking bribes as “an unfortunate and unguarded comments”. But, Alegeh alleged that judges delivered judgments for a fee.

    The duo spoke in Abuja yesterday at the special session of the Supreme Court to mark the commencement of the 2015-2016 Legal Year and the swearing-in of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs).

    The CJN said the allegation by prominent lawyers that some judges were corrupt was unfortunate.

    He said: “I regard as unfortunate the unguarded comments of some prominent members of the Bar that the Judiciary is corrupt. Such comments, coming from members of the Bar, mean that they know the identity of the corrupt judges and as such they should fish them out to be dealt with by the National Judicial Council (NJC).”

    The CJN noted that the Bench was a product of the Bar and that unless they ensured that only fit and proper persons remained in the Bar, it would be impossible to expect a different Bench.

    Justice Mohammed urged the new SANs to display utmost integrity and humility in helping the court to dispense justice.

    He said: “I advise you to display undoubted integrity and humility in the performance of your professional calling. I, therefore, call upon you to act commendably, remembering that your privilege is one of high regard and leadership.”

    On the call for the abolition of the SAN  rank, the CJN described the conferment of the rank as a privilege, conferred in accordance with Section 5 (1) of the Legal Practitioners’ Act by the Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee and a statutorily recognised privilege.

    The CJN urged the new members of the inner Bar to properly groom their juniors in chambers.

    He said the quality of lawyers and judges was dependent on the calibre of young  lawyers.

    Alegeh expressed worry that certain judicial officers still engaged in rendering judgments for a fee.

    He said: “Instances abound where judicial officers have resorted to standing the law on its head and making pronouncements which are at variance with the provisions of the law.

    “A few others have formed the bad habit of ignoring judicial precedents, even when such authorities are brought to their attention by counsel. This trend is quite injurious and erodes the confidence reposed in the Judiciary by the society.

    “The appointment of judicial officers, a process which was hitherto shrouded in secrecy, has been made more transparent under the present leadership of the Bench.”

    The NBA president, who commented on the refusal of Senate President Bukola Saraki  to appear before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), said: “The current face-off between the Code of Conduct Tribunal and the Federal High Court is an unnecessary distraction at this time. The constitutional hierarchy of our courts is well settled and we urge all to respect it. Let wise counsel prevail.”

    Speaking for the new SANs, Edward Kunav Shiekaa, said the new members of the Inner Bar valued their elevation.

    He pledged that the new SANs would not toy with the privilege.

    “It is our responsibility to provide good and quality leadership at the Bar, particularly to the young lawyers,” Shiekaa said.

     

  • Union demands probe of governors over judiciary’s autonomy

    Union demands probe of governors over judiciary’s autonomy

    The Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) has called on President Muhammadu Buhari to probe governors who are against financial autonomy for the judiciary.

    Rising from its National Executive Council (NEC) meeting  in Abuja, JUSUN said the governor’s action amounted to floating the constitution and court order.

    According to a communique signed by the President, Comrade Marwan Mustapha Adamu and General Secretary, Isaiah Adetola, corruption can be reduced if judiciary is granted financial autonomy.

    The union said it had raised a committee on the matter.

  • These times require a new judiciary

    SIR: The judicial system in Nigeria needs a closer look.  We inherited a judicial system that stands out as one of the best in the world.  Both the British Bench and Bar are classic institutions that have stood and will probably stand for centuries.  Among many judicial pontiffs of past and present generations, Lord Denning remains an oracle to our legal practitioners of both sides of the judicial system.  Lord Denning must be quoted from time to time as an authority.

    The English judiciary in my layman’s view, does justice quickly, efficiently, with no favour or malice.  Its operators do not bend the rule nor are they overshadowed or overwhelmed by the importance or size or the ego of contestants before them.  Before the English judiciary the Prime Minister who is the highest political office holder in the land is equal to the street-sweeper.  English judges do not slap the back of the palm of a crook by imposing a ridiculously low punishment (fine or jail term) on guilty renegades of society.  There, the law is the law.  That was why two former Nigerian governors were convicted.  The hearings, submissions, postponements, amendments and all that humbug were concluded within reasonable time.

    Here, in Nigeria, the major issue is usually abandoned for years, while technicalities and irrelevances are rigorously pursued. In the end, big time crooks buy big senior advocates to manipulate a judicial process that is so clear and unambiguous to laymen.

    The pension scandal in Abuja was a dramatic and record setting case in recent years.  Public servants who allegedly stole billions of naira of senior citizens’ terminal benefits were let go with fines less than one tenth of their loots.  If these were not a travesty of justice, I don’t know what it is.  Recently a newspaper carried the story of some kidnappers who were paid three million naira as ransom and the lower Bench was alleged to have granted the kidnappers bail on one million naira each while adjourning the case till later in the month.  Now, what enemy of the society can be worse than kidnappers that you have to allow them to continue their operations freely when indeed they may not report back to the court?  What kind of judicial system is that?

    More recently the judicial authorities were shopping for judges (about 100 of them) that were completely reliable and transparent to handle election petitions cases arising from our perennial clumsy national elections.  To me the implication here is that it is presumed some judicial officers fall short of requirements for such high office.  This is dandifying indeed.

    Some alleged looters of the national treasury have been in and out of court for almost a decade and will probably fizzle out “for lack of diligent prosecution.”   Is this not a conspiracy of law enforcement agents and judicial officers against our country?  The judge is presumed to decide cases based on facts presented to court.  Today, the weight of evidence may take a second place, while the personality involved and the mood of the society take the front burner.  And this is not right.  Some years back, some flamboyant bank chiefs, male and female, were able to avoid jail house by employing all kinds subterfuge to go free – and free they went.  These are bad commentaries on our judicial system.  There is a need to fast-track proceedings without undermining due process and fair hearing.

    True we have had some judges who claimed that their hands were tied in some high profile political cases, but we also have been fortunate to have brilliant and fearless judges who judgment and pronouncement can stand the test of all time.  Can one say this about some of our new generation judicial officers who are cowed down by some shouting and bully-bully senior lawyers whose only claim is the age of their silk?

    The present situation in Nigeria demands that if there is structural impediment that would not make justice move quickly, these negative forces should attract the attention of Nigeria’s Attorney General and the National Assembly.  These impediments should be removed.  Many Nigerians are grumbling privately, they are either unwilling or unable to talk straight.  This nation must be saved at all cost and judiciary officers are being urged to be stalwarts in the fight.

     

    • Deji Fasuan, MON, JP,

    Ado-Ekiti.

     

  • Reforming the judiciary

    What the Muhammadu Buhari-led administration is confronted with a Herculean task is no longer news. What is news is that Buhari, the self-proclaimed crusader, has pledged to tackle, head on, the quantum beast of corruption that runs free in the country. Already, there are indications that the president is sincere and determined to take a swing at the beast. However, if he must succeed, the judiciary should be a good starting point.

    The judiciary is not a branch of the executive or the legislature; it is a distinct arm of government with, perhaps, the greatest responsibility in the coming months and years, if the ongoing fight against corruption must be won. We must not underestimate the importance of the judiciary in ridding the country of its dirty image. This is why the present administration can contribute to seeing that a truly independent judiciary is realised in the country and avoid the mistakes of past administrations.

    It is sad to note that the noble profession has not been immune to the scourge of corruption and our lawyers and judges have been complicit. But with the coming of Yemi Osinbajo, a professor, former Attorney-General of Lagos State and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, as the Vice-president, there seems to be a ray of hope. The time could not be better for a real overhauling of the justice system to ensure that it is equipped to carry out its duties as freely, fairly and promptly as the present situation of the country demands. Surely, the country needs to make up for lost time in the prolonged fight against corruption which has been ongoing with multiple anti-corruption agencies, schemes and master plans that come to nought before the muddied waters of the judiciary.

    Over the years, judges and lawyers have been in cahoot with corrupt government officials and private individuals with deep pockets and their complicity has defaced the justice system. However, recent happenings in the judiciary seem to show a changing course within the judiciary. First, was the appointment of Justice Aloma Mukhtar as the Chief Justice of Nigeria in July 2012. Her tenure witnessed a toughening of the judiciary, with many disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, high and low, taking a new and determined shape. Under her leadership, the judiciary was determined to launder the image of the justice system, but this image laundry has yet to resonate in the lower ranks of high court judges and unfortunately, the bar itself.

    The case of a former state governor who was fraudulently absolved of all the cases of embezzlement, money laundering and other acts of financial impropriety brought against him in Nigeria before he was finally tried and jailed in Britain is still very fresh in living memory. Mention must also be made of the celebrated “Police Pension Funds. Scam’ involving N32.8 billion purportedly diverted by some top civil servants. One of them who was involved in defrauding the Pension Fund of N27.2 billion and pocketing N2 billion of the amount, was handed a jail term of two years with an option of N750,000 fine!  This was clearly a signpost of the endemic corruption and rot in the country’s judiciary.

    If the judiciary must live up to its responsibility of dispensing justice without fear or favour, then the status of courts and judges needs to be upgraded in terms of physical security around the courtrooms. Not once have we had news of thugs-for-hire overrunning court premises even while court sessions are ongoing. Bayelsa, Ekiti and Rivers are some of such states where the sanctity of the courtroom has been so derided by mischievous people who probably had a stake in whatever proceedings were being conducted at the courtrooms. The gripping thing is the ease and frequency of such happenings, an episode of which has also been recorded at the Apo High Court premises in Abuja in the past. The courts are manned by little-trained security personnel and the security measures in most courts leaves judges, litigants and lawyers as sitting ducks for intending troublemakers.

    The problems go beyond infrastructure and security. The judicial workers are mostly underpaid and lack basic training in most cases. In the mix of corrupt judges, lack of infrastructure, disenchanted judicial workers, political meddling and low standard of ethics at the bar, justice is continually held to ransom. In some of the impeachment dramas that played out of some states, for instance, judges played a shameful role at times as political stooges rather than the custodians of the law that they are. Similarly, lawyers engage in practices that abuse the law in order to satisfy the demands of clients that have no regard for the law. It has been said that the many strikes by judicial workers, although sometimes occasioned by legitimate grievances of the workers, are in a few cases, carefully orchestrated by deep pockets with vested interests in ongoing proceedings who want them stalled until any outcomes are inconsequential.

    The level of outside influence on the justice system is frightening in an otherwise independent judiciary. The search for solutions has led to the birth of views that attack the centrality of judicial power in the country. Many have criticised the power of the National Judicial Council on state judicial affairs and have gone as far as advocating the decentralisation of the judiciary with states having their own Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal not tied to the centre. This is the practice in the United States. The states already have considerable power over the state judiciary but the influence of the centre cannot be ignored. Other solutions have involved better pay for judges, better infrastructure and financial autonomy for the judiciary.

    While all of the suggested measures may be good steps towards achieving the goals of an impermeable judiciary, the essential work of cleaning up the justice system lies in a re-orientation of all members of the judiciary and consequently, all who turn to justice to right wrongs. We all have to put the courts in the exalted position where they ought to be, which may have to start with physical reinforcement in the case of Nigeria. All who turn to the courts have to feel the reverence for the courts that they feel for the government house and the legislature. Even more so. The Nigerian Bar Association also needs to ensure that ethics are taken very seriously to boost public confidence in the process of justice as a whole. Most importantly, all semblances of camaraderie between politicians and judges ought to cease, to dispel even the faintest hint of political influence on judicial outcomes. In the appointment of the Chief Judges of states, the most senior judges at any time can easily ease into the role or a form of secret ballot by all sitting judges should suffice. This will need constitutional changes, but these are the things the present administration should push for.

    It is not enough to go after offenders and obtain convictions. The focus should be on finding a system that works in favour of transparency and minimal influence. Under any system, wrongdoers will find a way to do wrong but the opportunities for going against carefully conceived practice should be scarce as a deterrent to the morally challenged. This fight is not a Buhari fight as we must now know, the judiciary should lead the charge and the effects will easily spread to other arms and to the populace. In changing the direction of the country as it is now, every institution, agency and arm has roles to play and the judiciary should be readied to handle the windfall of prosecutions that will inevitably emanate from the current shakedown by the government.

    ‘In changing the direction of the country as it is now, every institution, agency and arm has roles to play and the judiciary should be readied to handle the windfall of prosecutions that will inevitably emanate from the current shakedown by the government’