The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Justice Ibrahim Auta

  • CCT trial: Justice Auta accedes to Saraki’s request

    CCT trial: Justice Auta accedes to Saraki’s request

    The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta has acceded to the request by Senate President, Bukola Saraki to direct one of the judges serving under him, Justice Abdul Kafarati to deliver judgment in his (Saraki’s) case.

    Saraki, who is standing trial for alleged false assets declaration before the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) had sued the Chairman of the CCT, Danladi Umar and others involved in his trial, before the Federal High Court.

    Saraki is, in the suit filed for him by his lawyer, Ajibola Oluyede, contending that his trial before the CCT, as currently constituted was a violation of his right and that there was no way he could get justice.

    It is also Saraki’s contention that, while the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) was currently investigating Umar for alleged bribery and at the same time prosecuting him (Saraki) before the tribunal he (Umar) heads, it was impossible for the CCT Chairman to do justice and act independently in his (Saraki’s) case.

    Having taken arguments from parties in the case, Justice Kafarati had scheduled judgment for March 22, but when parties arrived court, he changed his mind at the last minutes and informed parties that he was withdrawing from the case and returning the case file to Justice Auta for reassignment to another judge.

    Justice Kafarati hinged his decision on publications by some on-line media, which he (the judge) said had cast him in bad light and portrayed him as a compromised judge.

    He said no matter in whose favour his judgment went, the losing party will habour the impression that he was influenced.

    On March 23, Oluyede wrote Justice Auta, demanding that he prevailed on Justice Kafarati to deliver his withheld judgment, no matter who benefits.

    Oluyede said: “It is our argument in the suit that the Code of Conduct Tribunal cannot act independently the way it is currently constituted because we believe It’s Chairman, Danladi Umar, who is currently under investigation by the EFCC, cannot be independent in deciding a case being prosecuted before him by the EFCC.

    “We have also contended that the EFCC, by admitting that the investigation of the case against our client was done by a special task force, as against the requirement by the provision in Schedule 3 of the Constitution, has usurped the exclusive duties of the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB). It is on that basis we argued that our client cannot get justice under the current arrangement and asked the court to quash the charge,” Oluyede said.

    Part of the letter he wrote to Justice Auta reads: “Although one cannot but sympathise with the hard-working judges, who are victims of these vicious attacks, nevertheless, we find ourselves in disagreement with his (Justice Kafarati) that the interest of justice would be served by his withholding of his judgment and returning the matter to your Lordship for reassignment.

    “In our view, the abdication by Justice Kafarati not only fails to meet the end of justice, it also gives momentum to the growth of blackmail tactics and dishonourable conduct targeted at obstructing the administration of justice.

    “It would therefore set a bad precedent if your Lordship accedes to Justice Kafarati’s request to allow him to withhold his prepared judgment in this action because of fear of ephemera public opinion.

    “We write to seek your lordship’s most urgent intervention to prevail on honourable Justice Kafarati to have his judgment read, so that the very essence of such an important application under the fundamental rights (enforcement procedure) Rules 2009 may not be completely lost and the entire judicial process brought to avoidable ridicule.

    “It is immaterial in whose favour the judgment goes so long as we can, through this resistance, defeat the on-line media terrorism being unleashed against the judicial system.

    “If this precedent is set, there will be no end to this, as it would mean that all a litigant that wishes to frustrate the administration of justice for any reason, need to is to sponsor spurious allegations against the judge and that will terminate the proceedings and frustrate the timely delivery of justice,” it said.

    It was however learnt yesterday that Justice Auta has acceded to Saraki’s request and directed Justice Kafarati to proceed and deliver his judgement.

    The Nation learnt that Justice Auta’s decision was hinged on the fact that none of the parties in the suit complained about the conduct of Justice Kafarati and that the judge can not disqualify himself from further handling the case based on mere allegations made in the media.

    Lawyers representing parties in the suit confirmed this development to The Nation Tuesday. Investigation by The Nation also revealed that Justice Kafarati has rescheduled the judgment for this Friday.

     

  • The Nation vs Senate: CJ directs judge to deliver verdict

    Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, has issued a fiat directing Justice Mohammed Yunusa to deliver judgment in The Nation’s suit against the Senate.

    Justice Yunusa had adjourned the verdict before he was transferred to Enugu Division.

    Vintage Press Limited (publisher of The Nation), Editor Gbenga Omotoso and a correspondent, Imam Bello are the applicants.

    Through their lawyer Mr Wahab Shittu, they sued the Senate and National Assembly.

    A new judge, Justice Jude Dagat, took over the case, but the plaintiffs applied to the CJ for a fiat to enable Justice Yunusa return to Lagos to deliver the judgment rather than the case starting de novo (afresh).

    The applicants are praying for an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Senate from summoning them or compelling their appearance over a story.

    The Senate, last August 4, invited Omotoso and Bello over the story: Motion: 22 APC Northern senators ‘working against Buhari’, which was published last July 30.‎

    The Senate wrote again last August 11 threatening to invoke Section 89 (1) (D) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to compel the applicants to appear.

    But Justice Yunusa made an interim order of injunction restraining the respondents from issuing a warrant to compel the applicants’ attendance before a Senate committee set up to investigate the publication.

    ‎He barred the respondents, their members, committees or agents from summoning the applicants or their agents before any Senate committee.

    In the fiat issued on February 10 and signed by the CJ, he directed Justice Yunusa to return to Lagos to deliver the judgment.

    It reads: “In exercise of powers conferred on me by virtue of Section 19 (3) of the Federal High Court Act 1973 and all other powers enabling me in that regard, I, Ibrahim Ndahi Auta (OFR), Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, do hereby order that the judgments in the civil suits listed in the shedule of this order which were pending before Hon. Justice M. N. Yunusa formerly sitting in the Lagos Judicial Division, be delivered by Hon. Justice M. N. Yunusa sitting in the Lagos Judicial Division.”

    The four cases listed in the schedule are Alhaji Jibrin Okelewu vs IGP, Vintage Press Limited vs National Assembly, Songhai Energy vs Maersk and Valueline Securities vs Bishop David Oyedepo.

    In an application filed last December 1, the Senate prayed the court not to deliver the judgment but to extend the time within which it “may” file and serve its counter-affidavit.

    The Senate sought an order striking out the suit for want of jurisdiction and prayed the court to set aside the proceedings, its orders and decisions.

    In a supporting affidavit, Clerk of the Senate’s Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions Committee, Freedom Osolo, said the National Assembly’s inability to respond to the suit on time “is not deliberate but is due to the non-service of the aforesaid process of this court on the second respondent”.

    In its preliminary objection, the National Assembly sought an order striking out the suit for being “premature, pre-emptive and speculative”.

    It argued that the applicants were attempting to prevent the lawmakers from carrying out their constitutional duties by filing the suit.

    But, the applicants said the Senate’s motion was an abuse of court process because it had ample opportunity to defend the suit.

    Shittu averred that the court adjourned the case severally to enable the respondents file their defence, but they “deliberately failed and neglected” to do so.

    Besides, the applicants’ lawyer said the respondents were served with the processes, which were acknowledged with an official stamp, according to affidavits deposed to by the court’s sheriff.

    According to the proofs of service exhibited before the court, the suit was received by the Office of the President of the Senate last September 1.

    The National Assembly was earlier served last August 27 through the Office of the Deputy Clerk to the National Assembly.

    The applicants are claiming that the National Assembly was attempting to gag the press through intimidation and by demanding that they disclose the story’s source.

    But, in its counter-affidavit, the Senate said the letters to Omotoso and Bello were “mere invitation”.

    It said the National Assembly “is not a law enforcement agency that can impede or prohibit the rights of the applicants”.

    The case has been adjourned till May 5.

  • Biafra: Kanu, associates accuse second judge of bias

    Biafra: Kanu, associates accuse second judge of bias

    Pro-Biafra agitator, Nnamdi Kanu and two of his associates have accused a judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Justice James Tsoho, of bias.

    The three, who were arraigned before the judge on January 20 this year on charges of treasonable felony, have also applied for the transfer of the case to a new judge.

    These are contained in the notice of appeal and motion of stay of proceedings pending appeal filed by the three defendants Wednesday.

    This is the second time the three will be expressing doubt about the ability of their trial judge to endure justice and fairness in their trial.

    On December 23 last year, Kanu told Justice Ahmed Mohammed (also of the Federal High Court), before who they were to be arraigned, that he was not confident that the judge would ensure justice and would not be bias.

    Kanu, who said he got information that the judge cannot ensure justice in his trial, demanded that the case be transferred to another judge.

    Based on Kanu’s statement, Justice Mohammed withdrew from the case and returned the case file to the court’s Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, who later reassigned the case to Tsoho.

    Kanu and two others were arraigned before Justice Tsoho on six counts of treasonable felony, unlawful possession of firearms and other offences bordering on their agitation for secession ‎of the Republic of Biafra from Nigeria.

    On March 7, Justice Tsoho ruled on an oral application by the prosecution to allow the shielding of its witnesses from public glare in view of threat to their lives.

    The judge had, in an earlier ruling rejected the prosecution’s request to have its witnesses wear mask. But the judge varied that order on Monday and aggreed to the shielding of the prosecution’s witness, a decision the defendants represented by Chuks Muoma (SAN), expressed discomfort.

    Muoma, who reluctantly agreed to the court’s decision, insisted on a prior demonstration of the witness’ shielding procedure before it could be applied.

    Wednesday, the procedure was demonstrated behind the public, but the prosecution witness was not available, following which Muoma informed the court about the notice of appeal and motion for stay of proceedings he filed for the defendants.

    Prosecution lawyer, Muhammad Diri acknowledged being served with the two processes filed by the defendants and sought time to respond.

    In their notice of appeal, Kanu and others want the Court of Appeal to set aside Justice Tsoho’s  “ruling/order of th learned trial judge, dated March 7, 2015.

    “An order of this honourable court directing the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to transfer the trial hearing of the substantive charge No. FHC/ABJ/CR/383/15, currently pending before Justice J. Tsoho to another judge of the Federal High Court for trial.”

    Among their grounds of appeal include  that the judge erred in law “when having refused the application for the witnesses of the prosecution to testified behind screens, or masked” on February 19, 2016, “suddenly varied the said order in the ruling delivered on March 7, 2016, on a mere oral application by the respondent”.

    The defendants argued that the judge granted the prosecution’s oral application without jurisdiction, and thereby “occasioning a miscarriage of justice”.

    They stated that the particulars of the judge’s error include giving an order in violation of their right to fair hearing and therefore betrayed his alleged bias in the handling of the case.

    “There is manifest bias on the part of the learned trial judge in the conduct of this case, which is apparent in the unwholesome manner his order was reviewed to give undue advantage to the prosecution, in flagrant violation of the appellants’ right to fair trial, as constitutionally guaranteed under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended),” the defendants said.

    They raised similar issues in an affidavit filed in support of their application for stay of proceedings, which was deposed to by a lawyer in their defence team, Emmanuel Ayoola

    They stated in the affidavit that there was no formal written application by the learned Director of Public Prosecutions requesting variation of the order of court made on February 19, 2016.

    “That by granting the learned Director of Public Prosecution’s application, this honourable court sat on appeal over its own ruling/order, dated February 19, 2016.

    “That this honourable court has no jurisdiction to re-litigate on issue it had already decided.

    “That the court had manifested serious bias in the conduct of this trial, which is gravely impeding the defendants’ constitutional rights to fair hearing/trial.”

    Justice Tsoho has adjourned to April 4 for the hearing of the motion for stay of proceeding pending appeal.

  • Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia ‘transferred’ to Illorin 

    Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia ‘transferred’ to Illorin 

    A week after the National Judicial Council (NJC) barred her from elevation to the Court of Appeal, Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia of the Federal High Court, Lagos, has been transferred to Illorin Division in Kwara State.

    It was learnt that the Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, approved her transfer.

    It could not be confirmed when she will resume in her new division.

    Sources said Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia may return to deliver judgment in cases she has concluded, such as the one involving a former Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety (NIMASA) Director-General Temisan Omatseye who was charged with contracts splitting.

    Other cases before her, such as trial of a former Union Bank Managing Director ‎Bartholomew Ebong, may begin afresh.

    Deputy Chief Registrar, Lagos Division, Mr Bello Okandeji, said he was not aware that Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia has been transferred.

    “I’m hearing about it for the first time from you,” he said when our correspondent sought confirmation from him.

    A week ago, the NJC, in a statement by its Acting Director, Information, Soji Oye, placed Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia on its “watch list” for four years over misconduct.

    She is also not to be considered for any elevation to the Court of Appeal or included in any ad hoc judicial appointment till her retirement from the Bench.

    The penalties took immediate effect.

    The NJC’s decision, taken at its meeting on February 24 and 25, was based on its findings that the judge failed to deliver judgement in a pre-election case.

    It was alleged she delayed her verdict until the expiration of the tenure of the person whose qualification for election was being challenged.

    NJC statement reads: “The NJC, under the Chairmanship of Justice Mahmud Mohammed, at its meeting on February 24 and 25, 2016 decided to warn Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia and put her on the ‘watch-list’ of the council for the next four years.

    “The judge will also not be considered for any elevation to the Court of Appeal or any ad hoc judicial appointment till her retirement from the Bench.

    “The decision was sequel to the petition written against her by Victoria Ayeni, alleging misconduct and injustice on the part of Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia for failing to deliver judgment in Suit No FHC/AB/CS/31/2011, a pre-election matter between Victoria A. A. Ayeni and Olusola Sonuga and two Ors.

    “She was also alleged to have adjourned the pre-election matter severally until the termination of the life span of the Ogun State House of Assembly.

    The decision of the Council on Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia is with immediate effect.”

  • CJ reverses self in Oronsaye, Dokpesi’s trials

    CJ reverses self in Oronsaye, Dokpesi’s trials

    The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, has reversed his earlier decision to reassign the cases involving a former Head of the Service of the Federation, Steven Oronsaye and businessman, Raymond Dokpesi, to a new judge.

    Indication that Justice Auta has reversed his earlier decision emerged on Tuesday, when the new judge, to which the case was reassigned refused to take any step on the matter.

    Justice Auta had earlier this year reassigned the cases from Justice Gabriel Kolawole (before who Oronsaye and Dokpesi had been arraigned) to Justice James Tsoho, who was recently redeployed from the court’s Lagos division.

    Dokpesi and his company, Daar Investment and Holdings Limited were on February 17 re-arraigned before Justice Tsoho, who allowed them to remain on the bail earlier granted by Justice Kolawole.

    The parties were in court on Tuesday, hoping that Oronsaye and others persons involved in the case will be re-arraigned before the new judge.

    But when the case was called, Oronsaye and two other defendants – Osarenkhoe Afe and his company, Fredrick Hamilton Global Services Limited – were present in court.

    Oronsaye and Afe went straight into the dock when they were called by the court clerk.

    Prosecution lawyer, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), noted that other defendants in the case – Global Services Limited, Cluster Logistic Limited, Kangolo Dynamic Cleaning Limited and  Crew Investment and  Construction Company Limited – were not represented.

     

  • Synagogue: New judge to hear indicted engineers’ suit

    Synagogue: New judge to hear indicted engineers’ suit

    Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, has re-assigned a suit filed by two structural engineers indicted in the six-storey Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN) building collapse to Justice Ibrahim Buba.

    The engineers are praying the court to quash a District Coroner’s verdict which found them culpable after an inquest.

    Justice Buba had last year adjudicated a suit which sought to stop the inquest.

    A Lagos-based lawyer, Olukoya Ogungbeje, who filed the suit on the church’s behalf, had contended that the inquest had a pre-determined objective since it was constituted by the state government whose agents made indicting statements against Synagogue and its founder, T.B. Joshua, prior to the inquest.

    But Justice Buba, in a judgment delivered last November 17, held that the coroner was a fact-finding body rather than a court. According to him, it was in the public’s interest to know the circumstances surrounding the death of several worshippers in the mishap.

    After the coroner indicted the engineers, namely Oladele Ogundeji and Akinbela Fatiregun, the duo filed two suits against the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN), the state’s Attorney-General and the District Coroner, Mr. Oyetade Komolafe, a magistrate.

    The cases were filed during the court’s annual long vacation and were first heard by Justice Mohammed Idris who sat during the break period.

    Lagos State Government had filed a preliminary objection to the suit while it was still before Justice Idris.

    The engineers are challenging the July 8 coroner’s verdict on the death of 116 persons in the building collapse.

    Ogundeji and Fatiregun were accused of criminal negligence regarding the building’s construction. The coroner recommended them for criminal prosecution.

    Justice Idris had adjourned to Wednesday for further hearing, but the cases instead came up before Justice Buba.

     

  • Why Nigeria needs a national carrier, by Auta

    The establishment of a national carrier would assist to earn foreign exchange for the country as well as promote national pride, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Abuja, Justice Ibrahim Auta, has said.

    He said the setting up of a national carrier could not have come at a better time, when other countries in Africa have carriers that could compete with foreign airlines in African routes.

    He spoke at a forum for judges and stakeholders in the sector in Lagos.

    Auta urged the government to accelerate the process leading to the establishment of a national carrier, describing the industry as a gold mine that should be developed to enable it earn huge foreign exchange for the country.

    He said until the government repositions the sector by putting in place a national carrier, the huge capital flight would continue.

    He said the judiciary would continue to ensure interpretation of adequate laws to protect investors in the aviation sector, as no investor would come into the country without legal protection.

    The chief judge said: “The aviation industry in Nigeria is a gold mine. But, it has not been fully exploited, until the government develops it by setting up a national carrier.

    “The government must put its acts together to work towards setting up a national carrier, which is not just good for our national pride but, would earn huge foreign exchange for the country.

    “The aviation industry could contribute significantly to the economy if government develops the aviation sector.

    “No investor will come to Nigeria if there is no legal protection for either the lease and operations of their aircraft. That is why there should be adequate legal protection.”

  • Auta excited over court’s ‘milestones’

    The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta is excited with what he describes as the ‘great milistones’ recorded by the courts since its creation in 1973.

    Justice Auta spoke while unveiling a collection of photographs of the court’s judges, mounted on the foyer of the Federal High Court headquarters in Abuja. The collection includes those of serving, dead and retired judges. Besides, Justice Auta launched the court’s electronic cause lists installed on all the court’s five floors.

    The Chief Judge said the gallery and other beautiful decorations now adorning the court’s foyer, are in place preparatory to the grand celebration of the court’s 40th year anniversary scheduled for between December 9 and13 this year.

    Justice Auta particularly noted that the court, that began operation with just five judges sitting in a small apartment in Lagos Island, Lagos State, as grown both in the number of serving and retired judges, as well as in infrastructure development.

    “We have also made our mark in stabilizing the polity and given hope to the proverbial ordinary man,” he said.

    The judge explained that, while the photo gallery will tell visitors a brief history of the court, the electronic cause list will display the courts, number of cases for each day and the current cases being heard in each court at a particular time.

    The court was created as the Federal Revenue Court in 1973 by virtue of the Federal Revenue Act 13 of that year. It was renamed by virtue of Sections 228(1) and 230(2) of the 1979 Constitution.

  • Be hard on bank fraudsters, NDIC urges judges

    The Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) on Monday urged judges of the Federal High Court to be “hard on Bank fraudsters,” so as to restore depositors’ confidence.

    The Managing Director of the Corporation, Alhaji Umaru Ibrahim, made the call at a sensitisation seminar on “The Challenges to Deposit Insurance Law and Practice,’’ for judges.

    Ibrahim said the judges’ understanding was needed to abate the fraud in the banking system.

    He said that deliberate efforts should be geared towards quick dispensation of all pending liquidation-related cases.

    Ibrahim said the corporation was faced with difficulties in the execution of court judgments.

    He said the corporation had a vulnerable funding base, as well as difficulties in recovering debt owed to failed banks by debtors.

    According to Ibrahim, most of the problems stem from poor public awareness and inadequate legal framework.

    “The Nigerian judiciary, legal practitioners and other esteemed stakeholders have important roles to play in ensuring that the mandate of the Corporation is realised.

    “As our partners and stakeholders, I urge you to use your good offices and privileged positions to ensure that the corporation is empowered to safeguard the Nigeria banking system,” the News Agency of Nigeria quoted the NDIC boss as saying at the workshop.

    In his opening address, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, said the seminar was necessary to keep judges abreast with the operations of the NDIC, and the sustenance of the country’s economy.

    “Acquiring such technical capacity will certainly enable us to make efficient, effective and informed decisions based on law for the interest of the nation’s economy,’’ Auta said.