The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Justice Ademola

  • NJC recommends compulsory retirement of Justice Ademola, Tokode

    NJC recommends compulsory retirement of Justice Ademola, Tokode

    THE National Judicial Council (NJC) yesterday announced the compulsory retirement of two judges of the Federal High Court – Justices Ademola F. A. Ademola and O. O. Tokode.

    Justice Ademola last sat at the court’s Abuja Division and Justice Tokode was with the Benin division of the court before their compulsory retirement.

    The NJC took the decision at its 84th meeting held on December 6, 2017, during which it also issued strong warning to four judges and dismissed petitions against some judges.

    The decision by the NJC was contained in a statement issued late yesterday by its Director of Information, Soji Oye.

    The NJC’s decision is coming a day after Justice Ademola submitted a letter of voluntary retirement to the NJC through the office of the Acting Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Adamu Kafarati.

    Part of the statement issued yesterday by Oye reads: “Hon. Mr. Justice A. F. A. Ademola, who had forwarded his notice of retirement on 10th October, 2017 to the council against 9th April, 2018, when he will attain the mandatory retirement age of 65 years, was recommended for compulsory retirement from office to President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, pursuant to the findings by the council on the allegation contained in the petition written against His Lordship by a group of 8 persons under the name of Committee of Anambra State PDP House of Representatives members-elect…

    “The public is hereby informed to disregard news circulating on some news media that Hon. Mr. Justice Ademola has voluntarily retired. The purported voluntary retirement is clearly an afterthought as council had taken action before his decision to forward any voluntary retirement letter.”

    As it relates to Justice Tokode, the statement said: “Justice O. O. Tokode of the same Federal High Court was also recommended to President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, for compulsory retirement from office with immediate effect sequel to the findings of council on the allegation contained in petitions forwarded by Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and Miss Abimbola Awogboro.

    “The petitioners accused the Hon. Judge of misleading the Federal Judicial Service Commission and the National Judicial Council, by submitting six judgments he claimed to have personally conducted while practising as a lawyer; a pre-requisite for his application for appointment as a judicial officer, and was so appointed.

    “The Investigation Committee of Council, however, found that the Hon. Judge personally conducted only one of the six cases submitted. Therefore, council decided to recommend his compulsory retirement and the refund of all salaries and allowances he earned since his purported appointment to the position of a judge to the coffers of the judiciary.”

    The NJC stated that, in the interim and in exercise of its power under paragraph 21 sub-paragraph (d) of the Third Schedule of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, as amended, it suspended Justices Ademola and Tokode from office with immediate effect.

    It added: “The council also issued serious warning to Hon. Mr. Justice A. N. Ubaka of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria for failure to deliver ruling in suit No. NICN/BEN/51/2014 within the time specified by law.

    “The Council did not accept the reasons given for failure to deliver the ruling within time.

    “The Hon. Judge has also been placed on watch-list of the Council for the next one year.

    “Council also gave a warning letter to Hon. Mr. Justice Zainab Aliyu Sadat of the High Court of Niger State and placed her on the watch-list for three years for claiming that the defendant in suit No: NHSC/MN/46/2016 failed to make available authority cited by them after submission of the argument to her.

    “Council at the meeting also decided to dismiss the petition written by Senator Alimodu Sheriff alleging Hon. Mr. Justice A. Liman of the Federal High Court of corruption for his failure to honour the invitation of the Investigation committee on the three occasions that he sat to investigate the matter.

    “Council exonerated Hon. Mr. Justice Simon Akpah Amogeda of the Federal High Court from corruption allegation by Ernest J. Henry, who could not substantiate his allegation.

    “The Council decided to write the petitioner a warning letter for maligning the name of the Hon. Judge.

    “In addition, Council exonerated Hon. Mr. Justice F. I. Kola-Olalere of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria from any misconduct in the petition written against him by Samuel Atotuomah. Hon. Mr. Justice B. B. Kanyip of the same court was also exonerated of allegation of corruption written against him by Adebayo Jegede, Esq, who did not attend the Investigation Committee Panel to defend his allegation.”

  • NJC appeals judgment restraining investigation of Justice Ademola

    NJC appeals judgment restraining investigation of Justice Ademola

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) on Monday asked the Court of Appeal in Abuja to void a judgment delivered by Justice John Tsoho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, restraining the Council from proceeding with the investigation of Justice Adeniyi of the same court, over alleged misconduct.

    Justice Tsoho had on July 7 barred the NJC from inviting Justice Ademola for investigation over a petition filed against him by one Jenkins Duvie Giane Gwede in 2016, but was later withdrawn by the petitioner.

    The judge, who held that Justice Ademola should not be made to prove his innocence over a petition that was voluntarily withdrawn by the petitioner, said NJC’s insistence that Justice Ademola must appear before it was contrary to the provision of Section 36 (5 and 6) of the Constitution and unlawful.

    In a notice of appeal filed before the Court of Appeal, Abuja, on August 14, for itself and three members of the panel investigating the petition against Justice Ademola – Justice Umar Abdullahi (retd), Justice Babatunde Adejumo and Mrs. Rakiya Ibrahim – the NJC raised 10 grounds of appeal and urged the court to set aside the judgment.

    The Council said Justice Tsoho erred in law by assuming jurisdiction in the case where the National Industrial Court of Nigeria has exclusive jurisdiction.

    It noted that Justice Ademola being a serving judge was under its supervision and regulation.

    NJC argued that it was performing its supervisory and regulatory roles by seeking to investigate Justice Ademola on issues relating to performance of his official duties.

     

  • Judge declines Lamido’s bid to return case to Justice Ademola

    Judge declines Lamido’s bid to return case to Justice Ademola

    A judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Justice Babatunde Quadri, on Friday dismissed an application filed by a former Governor of Jigawa State, Sule Lamido, seeking the return of his case to Justice Adeniyi Ademola.

    Justice Quadri held that it would serve the interest of justice and public better not to return the case to Justice Ademola.

    The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, had re-assigned the case to Justice Quadri when Justice Ademola and seven other judges were suspended for alleged corruption.

    But after the suspended judges were recalled by the National Judicial Council (NJC), Lamido’s lead counsel, Joe Agi (SAN), requested the Chief Judge to return the case to Justice Ademola.

    However, the Chief Judge has insisted that Justice Quadri should continue to handle the case.

  • NJC lied on Justice Ademola’s acquittal – AGF

    NJC lied on Justice Ademola’s acquittal – AGF

    The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) on Monday faulted claim by the National Judicial Council (NJC) that there was no pending appeal against the acquittal of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court.

    NJC’s Director, Information, Soji Oye, in a statement on Saturday faulted claim by the Special Assistant to the President on Prosecution, Okoi Obono-Obla, that the Federal Government has appealed the acquittal of Justice Ademola.

    Oye said investigation by NJC’s officials revealed that there was no valid appeal filed against the April 5 ruling by Justice Jude Okeke of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) acquitting Justice Ademola, his wife and a lawyer, Joe Agi (SAN).

    But, in a statement on Monday, Obono-Obla said Oye’s statement contained false assertions and deliberate misrepresentation of law and facts.

    He said one of the assertions was Oye’s claim “that the Office of Attorney General of the Federation had on two occasions – April 18, 2017 and April 21, 2017 – shunned invitations by the Federal Capital Territory High Court for settlement of records of appeal which if it had done would have elevated the notices of appeal to proper appeal.’’

    Obono-Obla said contrary to Oye’s claim, the FCT High Court Registry, by a notice dated June 6, 2017 and signed by one Paul A. Edili (Head of Appeal) invited both parties to the appeal to attend court on June 14, 2017 for the purpose reconciliation of records of appeal.

    He said: “I challenged Soji Oye to furnish us with proof of service of this notice which the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation shunned.

    “It is obvious that Soji Oye in his haste to defend the indefensible muddled up the law concerning the role of an appellant and the registry of the court where an appeal is emanating from. In the interest of the discerning public and the need to the record straight, I wish to state as follows:

    “By Order 8 of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2016, the registrar of the court below has a duty to compile and transmit the record of appeal to the Appeal Court. This he has 60 days to do; commencing from the day the notice of appeal is filed. And it is immaterial that parties do not attend court for purpose of settlement of the said record.

    “It is only where the registrar fails or neglects to transmit the record of appeal in accordance with Order 8, Rules 1-3, that the appellant may intervene upon the expiration of the initial 60 days, to compile and transmit the record of appeal. And the appellant has additional 30 days to do so. See Order 8, Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016.

    “In the instant case, I am unaware of any notice for settlement of record of appeal served on the office of the AGF apart from that issued on the 6th day of June, 2017 against the 14th day of June 2017, just after the filing of additional notice of appeal. And even that was issued at the instance of the office of the AGF.

    “But assuming there was any notice for settlement of record of appeal, the failure of the appellant to attend court for settlement of the said record would not prevent the registrar of the lower court from performing his duty in line with Order 8, Rule 2 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016.

    “If the notice of appeal was filed on the 7th day of April, 2017, the registrar of the lower court had 60 good days (under the Rules) expiring on 7th June, 2017 to settle and transmit the record of appeal.”

  • Justice Ademola resumes duties

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja resumed duties yesterday in line with a National Judicial Council (NJC) directive that six suspended judges should resume duties.

    The judges were suspended last year following their investigation by the Department of State Services (DSS) on allegations of corruption.

    They are Justices Ademola (of the Federal High Court), John Okoro (of the Supreme Court), Hydiazira A. Nganjiwa (Federal High Court), Musa H. Kurya (Federal High Court) and  Agbadu James Fishim (National Industrial Court of Nigeria).

    Justice Ademola sat at exactly 9.30am.

    One of the early callers in Justice Ademola’s court was Joe Agi (SAN), whose case was taken first.

    Agi stood trial with Justice Ademola in the alleged corruption case brought against them, including the judge’s wife, before a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    The court freed the defendants on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove its case.

    The prosecution has since appealed the judgment.

  • Justice Ademola resumes sitting in Abuja

    Justice Ademola resumes sitting in Abuja

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola, who was recalled by the National Judicial Council (NJC) last week, resumed sitting at Federal High Court, Abuja, on Wednesday.

    He commenced sitting at 9:30 a.m. and seven cases were listed for Wednesday’s court session.

    Justice Ademola was among the six judges recalled by the NJC after their suspension for alleged corruption last year.

    Other recalled judges are – Justice John Inyang Okoro (Supreme Court), Justice Uwani Abba Aji (Court of Appeal), Justice Hydiazira A. Nganjiwa  (Federal High Court), Justice Musa H. Kurya (Federal High Court) and Justice Agbadu James Fishim  (National Industrial Court of Nigeria).

    One of the early callers in Justice Ademola’s court was Joe Agi (SAN), whose case was taken first.

    Agi was arraigned alongside Justice Ademola and his wife for alleged corruption by the Department of State Service (DSS).

    The Senior Advocate of Nigeria was arraigned for giving N30million gratification to the judge and other corruption related charges.

    The judge that handled the case, Justice Jude Okeke freed the defendants because the prosecution failed to prove its case against them.

  • Justice Ngwuta failed to declare plots of land, cars – FG

    Justice Ngwuta failed to declare plots of land, cars – FG

    The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) has accused Justice Sylvester Ngwuta of the Supreme Court of possessing 28 plots of land which he allegedly refused to declare to the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) between June 2, 2011 and July 19, 2016.

    The office alleged that Justice Ngwuta, within the same period engaged in the purchase and sale of rice, palm oil and other related products, while being a justice of the Supreme Court.

    He is also own five cars which he allegedly kept away from the CCB.

    These allegations are contained in a 10-count charge the office of the AGF filed against the Justice of the Supreme Court before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

    Justice Ngwuta will be be arraigned on April 20.

    A similar charge of two counts has also been filed before the CCT against Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court.

    Justice Ademola was accused of trading in foreign exchange among other charges.

     

  • Beyond Justice Ademola’s legal victory

    Beyond Justice Ademola’s legal victory

    DESPITE the hope the Muhammadu Buhari presidency gives of a successful anti-corruption crusade, nothing indicates that when trained historians write the history of this period, the president will receive kind treatment. The presidency does not work seamlessly at the moment, and possibly cannot in the near future. Whether President Buhari’s supporters like it or not, many of his crusades may yet peter out. The latest symptom of this dysfunction is the exculpation of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja. He had been charged with corruptly enriching himself, and prosecuted by the Attorney General of the Federation’s office following the ‘sting operation’ carried out by the Department of State Service (DSS) last October. The government says it will appeal the judgement. This column has no intention of commenting on the judgement, whether it has merit or lacks merit.

    What is more relevant is the aftermath. When the DSS raided the residences of seven judges, among which was Justice Ademola’s, last year, and celebrated the feat, thus triggering a media trial, a few judicial officers warned that the public would be disappointed when the judges are discharged one after the other because of the ineptitude of the investigations. This outcome, they said, would be because the DSS did not observe all the care necessary to get a conviction. The DSS seemed satisfied to get a media trial. Even the EFCC managed to let the public know that it was appalled by the manner the DSS carried out the raids, warning that the Service was neither trained for that kind of job nor careful enough to secure evidence in such a way as to get a conviction. Responding, the DSS sneered at the EFCC, wondering whether any other agency other than the secretive DSS could have carried out a ‘sting operation’ it described as highly successful.

    It is indeed remarkable that the government could not get a conviction in any of the 18 counts for which Justice Ademola was charged. It is significant; and the Attorney General’s office should have known whether the government stood a chance or not before heading to court. No one is sure the government will fare any better in the Appeal Court, regardless of what Nigerians excited by the news of the raids last year feel.

    A second observation involves the former National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki (retd.), who has been arraigned in court again before Justice Ahmed Mohammed of the Federal High Court in Abuja for virtually the same offences as the ones for which he was being tried earlier. Justice Mohammed has affirmed the bail earlier granted the former NSA. Indeed, three Nigerian courts and ECOWAS Court had since 2015 admitted the ex-NSA to bail. The Buhari presidency simply ignored the courts, preferring instead to swamp the media with stories of corruption involving the retired colonel. Nigerians have duly obliged the presidency by condemning the accused and asking for his head, limbs and torso.

    In both the Justice Ademola case and the former NSA trial, the Buhari presidency has not shown cohesion and the methodicalness associated with positive change. This is the danger, not whether both men are suspected to be guilty of the charges filed against them. The presidency has no concrete and substantial idea of what to do with the constitution and the laws of the land. It has little control over assertive and self-willed agencies of government, many of which are headed by powerful individuals who show contempt for the constitution. Many powerful individuals in the Buhari presidency are in fact working at cross-purposes, sometimes even undermining one another, as the EFCC and DSS have shown time and again.

    Nearly two years after President Buhari was sworn in, there is nothing to indicate the presidency will become harmonious and cohesive in its operations. With a slow, if not paralysed, presidential core, and agencies busy setting their own different programmes and goals, there will be more disobedience of court orders, more reverses in cases being prosecuted by the government, less economic pace and progress, and absolute lack of preparedness for a great and glorious future for a united country.

  • FG urges Appeal Court to reverse Justice Ademola’s acquittal

    FG urges Appeal Court to reverse Justice Ademola’s acquittal

    The Federal Government has asked the Court of Appeal in Abuja to reverse the April 5 ruling by Justice Jude Okeke of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) acquitting Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court and two others.

    Justice Okeke, in the ruling, upheld the no-case submission made by Justice Ademola, his wife, Olabowale and a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Joe Agi, who were charged with giving and receiving gratification, among others in an 18-count charge.

    The FG’s request is contained in three separate notices of appeal filed on Friday through the office of the Attorney General of the Federation, at the Court of Appeal, Abuja.

    It argued among others, that Justice Okeke erred in law in reaching his decision to discharge and acquit the three defendants.

    The appellant particularly wants the appeal court to issue an order allowing the appeal and overrule the decision of the lower court and remit the case back to High Court for re-assignment and defence.

    The FG contented that Justice Okeke erred in law when he proceeded to evaluate the evidence of the prosecution and ascribed probative value to it when he ought to, at the stage of ruling on the no-case submission, merely consider whether or not the prosecution has made out a prima facie case to warrant the defendants to enter defence.

    “What has to be considered in a no-case submission is not whether the evidence against the accused is sufficient to justify a conviction, but whether the prosecution has made out a prima facie case requiring, at least, some explanation from the defendants.

    “At that stage of the proceedings, the credibility of the witnesses is not in issue, nor does a consideration in that regard arise. The wrong exercise of discretion by the learned trial judge against the established procedure has grossly occasioned a miscarriage of justice on the appellant,” the government said.

     

  • FG appeals court’s ruling on Justice Ademola

    FG appeals court’s ruling on Justice Ademola

    The Federal Government on Thursday filed an appeal against the ruling of Justice Jude Okeke of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court which upheld the no case submission filed by Justice Adeniyi Ademola, Mrs. Olabowale Ademola and Mr. Joe Agi (SAN).

    The trio were arraigned for corruption by the federal government.

    Justice Okeke had on Wednesday upheld a no case submission filed by the defence in the case against the accused persons.

    The judge struck out the 18-count charge proffered against the defendants after holding that the prosecution failed to prove any of the allegations despite the provisions of sections 53 and 60 of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act (ICPC Act).

    A Presidential source, who does not want his name in print, said the federal government through the Ministry of Justice has also filed a fresh case in the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) against Justice Ademola and his wife for living above their means and failure to declare their assets.

    He said the government has been advised to appeal the case.

    “A very strange outcome indeed considering the underlying facts.  It is even more strange that the trial was not allowed to continue considering the applicable statutory provisions.

    “Section 53(1) of the ICPC Act raises a presumption that any gratification accepted or obtained by an accused person must have been corruptly accepted or obtained until the contrary is proved.  Section 60 of the Act does not apply to the case.

    “Of interest is the decision of the learned trial judge that the offence of giving and receiving gratification was not made out by the prosecution against the defendants in the face of the evidence held in court. Prosecution witnesses gave testimony of the payment of N30 million in three tranches by Mr. Joe Agi (SAN) into the account of Mrs. Olabowale Ademola, the wife of Justice Ademola.  Mr. Agi was a legal practitioner who actually had cases in the court of Justice Ademola,” the source stated.