The Nation Newspaper

Tag: NJC

  • Constituents petition NJC, NBA, others over sacked Kwara PDP lawmaker

    Constituents petition NJC, NBA, others over sacked Kwara PDP lawmaker

    • Demand Appeal Court verdict’s probe

    Constituents of the sacked Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lawmaker representing Odo-Ogun in Oyun Local Government of Kwara State,  Otunba Taiye Afolabi, have petitioned the National Judicial Commission (NJC) on the Appeal Court verdict.

    The appellate court sitting in Ilorin on November 28, 2023 overturned the decision of the Election Petition Tribunal that affirmed the election of Otunba Afolabi.

    Others petitioned are Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Committee for Defence of Human Right (CDHR Nigeria) and Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP).

    Read Also; Dangote Cement hits N10tr market capitalisation 

    The constituents in the petition signed by Rauf Dele Yusuf demanded investigation into the Appeal Court judgment, which they described as controversial.

    The constituents claimed that the state House of Assembly Tribunal had before then ‘rightfully’ dismissed the petition against the PDP lawmaker filed by the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Yusuf Musa, challenging the election of Otunba Afolabi in the March 2023 House of Assembly election.

    They said the dismissal of the tribunal’s verdict in favour of the PDP lawmaker by the Appeal Court on the grounds of certificate forgery was against the rule of law.

  • NJC hails judge for delivering 28 verdicts in a quarter

    NJC hails judge for delivering 28 verdicts in a quarter

    The Judges’ Performance Evaluation Committee of the National Judicial Council (NJC), which assesses the performances of judicial officers of superior courts of record, has commended Justice Nelson Ogbuanya of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria.

     In a November 18 commendation letter addressed to him through the Office of the President of the Industrial Court and signed by the Secretary to the Committee for the Chairman, H. S Sa’eed, the committee said he performed excellently well by delivering 28 judgments during the quarter and urged His Lordship to keep the stride up.

     It reads: “At the 69th Meeting of the Judges’ Performance Evaluation Committee of the National Judicial Council held on 3 & 4 October 2023, the Return of Cases received for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th Quarters 2022, as well as the Return of Cases for the 1st Quarter, 2023 were assessed. 

     “The Committee noted with admiration that Your Lordship performed excellently well by delivering 28 judgments during the Quarter.

     “I am therefore directed to, through this letter, commend the effort of Your Lordship and to urge you to please keep it up. Please, accept the assurances of the warm regards of the Committee Chairman, HRH Hon, Justice S.Bage Muhammad 1.”

     In the assessments for contested cases, 0-3 is ranked as no performance; 4-5, marginal performance; 6-10, fair; 11-18, good; 19-23, very good; 24 and above, excellent.

     A judicial officer rated with non-performance or marginal performance in a quarter will be sent a letter (query) to explain the reason for his performance.

    Read Also: NJC rejects petition against Osun CJ Adepele-Ojo

     If such a judicial officer is graded with non-performance or marginal performance for three consecutive quarters, he will be invited to appear before the Committee to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him, as such non-performance is considered as misconduct, which can lead to removal from office.

     A judicial officer graded “very good” will be issued a letter of appreciation, while a judicial officer rated “excellent” will be issued a letter of commendation by the Committee.

     Judges’ performance rating also impacts the rating of the Head of the Court and the Court where the Judges are serving.

     The Committee was created in 2003 by the NJC to improve the judicial performance and ethical conduct of judicial officers across the country.

     The various mandates of the Committee include evaluating, assessing, monitoring and supervising the general conduct of judicial officers in the discharge of their judicial functions and administration of justice.

      One of the core objectives of the Performance Evaluation Committee is to provide adequate mechanisms to enhance the performance of judicial officers through continuous monitoring, evaluation accountability and learning to improve effective and efficient productivity by Judicial Officers in various courts in Nigeria, both trial and appellate courts.

    In discharging the mandate, it regularly carries out detailed examination, assessment and evaluation of the Quarterly Returns of Judicial Officers of the Superior Courts in the Country, based on their submitted Quarterly Returns of Cases conducted, and scrutinises the performance of Judges based on set indicators and parameters, and also regularly establishes statistical dashboards of Judges’ performance.

  • NJC rejects petition against Osun CJ Adepele-Ojo

    NJC rejects petition against Osun CJ Adepele-Ojo

    • Recommends judge’s sack
    • Reports Aribisala for disciplinary action

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has rejected the request by Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke to swear in an acting Chief Judge (CJ) for the state.

    It said it recognises Justice Oyebola Adepele-Ojo as the substantive Chief Judge of Osun State.

    The council was of the view that the Osun State House of Assembly lacked the power to suspend Justice Adepele-Ojo as the CJ.

    NJC’s Director of Information, Soji Oye, said in a statement late yesterday that the council reached the resolution at its 104th meeting held between December 6 and 7.

    “Council considered and declined the request of Governor Ademola Adeleke of Osun State requesting its permission to swear in the next most senior judge in the state in acting capacity, following allegations levelled against Hon. Justice Adepele-Ojo, Chief Judge, Osun State and the resolution of the House of Assembly to suspend him.

    “The Council affirmed that Hon. Justice  Adepele-Ojo is still the recognised Chief Judge of Osun State, and would not work on the resolution of a State House of Assembly, as it is the only body constitutionally empowered to investigate judicial officers and recommend same for any action to the governor.

    “Consequently, Osun State should revert to status quo,” Oye said.

    He added that the NJC also recommended to Governor Adeleke, the sack of one of the state’s judges, Justice S. O., Falola for misconduct.

    “The NIJ, under the chairmanship of Hon. Justice Olukayode Ariwoola, GCON, at its 104th meeting of December 6 & 7, 2023 has recommended the compulsory retirement of Hon. Justice S. O. Falola of Osun State High Court from the Bench.

    “The recommendation was made sequel to the findings of an Investigation Committee in a petition written against His Lordship by Mr Dapo Kolapo Olowo and Polaris Bank for granting a Garnishee Order Absolute against the Bank for the sum of N283,174,000.00 in a questionable and strange manner, and endorsement of the order, attaching the account of the Garnishee with another garnishee and not the account of the judgment debtor, who had the legal obligation to pay the supposed judgment sum.

    “They found that the subject judge misconducted himself by entertaining suit No: HIK/41/2018 when there was no evidence of a judgment of the Kwara State High Court before him, neither was there a certificate of registration of same in Osun State to confer jurisdiction on him.

     ”It further found the conduct of the subject Judge travelling to Lagos to visit the counsel for the bank in his chambers on the issue of Garnishee Proceedings, unbecoming of the standard expected of a judicial officer.

    “Consequently, council resolved to recommend him to Governor Adeleke of Osun State for compulsory retirement with immediate effect.

    “Meanwhile, in the exercise of its disciplinary powers under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, the National Judicial Council has suspended Hon. Justice S. O. Falola from office pending the approval of the recommendation of his compulsory retirement by the Osun State Governor.

    “Council also resolved to report A. A. Aribisala, SAN to Legal Practitioners’ Privileges Committee (LPPC) for investigation and disciplinary action, for the unpalatable and derogatory remarks he made against a Judicial Officer and by extension, the NJC in his petition to the Council.”

    “Council considered the reports of other investigation committees that had concluded their sittings, and dismissed the petitions written against Hon. Justice Ekaete F. F. Obot, Chief Judge, Akwa Ibom State, Hon Justice Benson C. Anya of High Court Abia State, Hon. Justice Z. B. Abubakar of Federal High Court, Hon Justice Opufaa Ben-Whyte and Augusta Uche K. Chuku of the High Court of Rivers State, for being unmeritorious, or withdrawal of petition by the petitioners.

    Read Also: NJC reinstates Justice Ojo as Osun CJ, kicks Adeleke’s petition out

    “However, Hon Justice A. I. Akobi of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory is to be issued a letter of guidance to take proper charge and control of his court.

    “The plenary also considered the Report of its three Preliminary Complaints Assessment Committees on 51 fresh petitions written against federal and state judicial officers and decided to constitute 11 panels to investigate petitions that had merits and dismissed the remaining petitions for being subjudice, having been withdrawn, and the subject judges having retired from service.

    “It also received notification of retirements of seven judicial officers and notification of deaths of six serving judicial officers of federal and state courts,” Oye said.

  • NJC reinstates Justice Ojo as Osun CJ, kicks Adeleke’s petition out

    NJC reinstates Justice Ojo as Osun CJ, kicks Adeleke’s petition out

    The National Judicial Council(NJC) has reinstated Justice Oyebola Ojo earlier suspended as Osun Chief Judge by Governor Ademola Adeleke. 

    The council, in its resolution after the 104th meeting held between December 6 and 7,  also recommended forceful retirement of Justice S. O Falola of Osun State High Court over misconduct. 

    Read Also: NJC clears 11 Justices for Supreme Court

    The Director of Information of the council, Barrister Soji Oye in a statement on the council’s website explained : “Council considered and declined the request of Governor Ademola Adeleke of Osun State requesting its permission to swear in the next Most Senior Judge in the State in acting capacity, following allegations levelled against Hon. Justice Adepele Ojo, Chief Judge, Osun State and the resolution of the State House of Assembly to suspend him. 

    “The Council affirmed that Hon. Justice Ojo is still the recognised Chief Judge of Osun State, and would not work on the resolution of a State House of Assembly, as it is the only body constitutionally empowered to investigate Judicial Officers and recommend same for any action to the Governor. Consequently, Osun State should revert to status quo.” 

  • NJC clears 11 Justices for Supreme Court

    NJC clears 11 Justices for Supreme Court

    • Six heads of courts, 26 others tipped for appointments

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended 11 Court of Appeal Justices for elevation to the Supreme Court.

    At its 104th meeting held yesterday, the Council considered the list of candidates presented by its interview committee.

    Director of Information, Soji Oye, said in a statement that they would be sworn in after the approval of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and confirmation by the Senate.

    It will be the first time the Supreme Court will have the full complement of 21 justices, according to Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Olukayode Ariwoola.

    He said during the new legal year ceremonies that he was determined to break the jinx as one of his legacies.

    The number of Supreme Court Justices dropped to 10 from 13 with the retirement of Amina Augie and Musa Dattijo Muhammad, and the death of Chima Nweze.

    The process of picking the Supreme Court justices dashed the hope of some senior lawyers in practice and in the academia being appointed to the apex court.

    The recommended justices are Jummai Hannatu Sankey (Plateau, Northcentral), Chidiebere Nwaoma Uwa (Abia, Southeast), Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme (Imo, Southeast), Haruna Simon Tsammani (Bauchi, Northeast) and Moore Aseimo A. Adumein (Bayelsa, Southsouth).

    Others are Obande Festus Ogbuinya (Ebonyi, Southeast), Stephen Jonah Adah (Kogi, Northcentral), Habeeb Adewale O. Abiru (Lagos, Southwest), Jamilu Yammama Tukur (Katsina, Northwest), Abubakar Sadiq Umar (Kebbi, Northwest) and Mohammed Baba Idris (Niger, Northcentral).

    Minor changes were made to the list first sent to the NJC by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC).

    The NJC replaced Justice Muhammad Lawal Shuaibu (Jigawa, Northwest), with Justice Tukur, who was not on the original list; while Justice Nwosu-Iheme, who was on the reserve list, replaced Justice Anthony Ogakwu (Enugu, Southeast).

    Tsammani was the presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division. 

    He headed the five-member panel that determined the presidential election petitions.

    Another notable name is Justice Idris, renowned as a brilliant and hardworking judge and son of a former CJN, Idris Kutigi.

    He was the judge who jailed former Abia State Governor Orji Ozor Kalu while sitting at the Federal High Court in Lagos.

    The Supreme Court later invalidated the fiat issued to Justice Idris by the Court of Appeal following his elevation, thereby freeing Kalu and his co-accused.

    Read Also: Sanwo-Olu swears in two new exco members

    Oye said the NJC also recommended Justice Ahmed Ramat Mohammed for elevation to the Court of Appeal.

    Mohammed was the trial judge in the fraud case involving former Governor of Benue State, Gabriel Suswam and his Finance Commissioner, Omadachi Oklobia at the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    The NJC recommended the appointment of other heads of courts, including new Chief Judges for Taraba and Kebbi states.

    Justice Joel Filibus Agya was listed for appointment as the Chief Judge of Taraba State and Justice Umar Abubakar as the Chief Judge of Kebbi State.

    The NJC recommended the appointment of Kadi Sadiq Usman Mukhtar as the Grand Kadi, Sharia Court of Appeal, Kebbi State; Justice A. O. Femi-Segun as the President, Customary Court of Appeal, Ogun State, and Justice Alfred Yakubu as President, Customary Court of Appeal, Taraba State.

    The NJC put forward Justice Tajudeen M. Abdulganiyu for appointment as the President of the Customary Court of Appeal, Oyo State; Amaebi Ibomo Orukari as a judge of the High Court of Bayelsa State, and Akinyemi Martins Ayodele as a judge of the High Court of Ogun State.

    Also recommended for appointment are Ama Edet Ekpo, Theresa Ansa Agom and Jalarth Ogar Agim (as judges of the High Court of Cross River State); Aminu Abdullahi Gusau, Usman Hassan Gummi and Hadi Sani (as Kadis, Sharia Court of Appeal, Zamfara State), and Abubakar Ahmad Tijjani and Aliyu Ibrahim Ebbema as Kadis, Sharia Court of Appeal, Nasarawa State.

    Others are Fatima Adamu, Hauwa Lawal Umar, Musa Ahmad, Musa Daihuru Mohammed, Farida Rabiu Danbappa, Halima Aliyu Nasir, Aisha Mahmoud, Adam Abdullahi and Hanif Sanusi Yusuf as judges of the High Court of Kano State.

    Opokuma David Lawrence was selected for appointment as a judge of the Customary Court of Bayelsa State

    As judges of the High Court of Nasarawa State, the NJC recommend Esther Mami Ejeh, Ibrahim Dauda Shekarau, Musa Muhammad Dallah and Makama Tanze Benjamin.

    It recommended Awoyomi Bolanle Adenike and Lawal Adeniyi Olusanya as judges of the Customary Court of Appeal, Ogun State.

    Oye said: “The various heads of court recommended would also be sworn in upon the approval of their appointment by their various state governors and subsequent confirmation of same by their respective state Houses of Assembly.”

  • A route not taken

    A route not taken

    • Qualified lawyers and academics as appellate court judges will enrich our jurisprudence 

    The list of 22 Justices of the Court of Appeal nominated by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) to the National Judicial Council (NJC) for appointment to the Supreme Court shows resistance to the suggestion to nominate academicians and legal practitioners for consideration. Currently, there are 10 justices of the court, well below the 21 provided for by section 230(2)(b) of the 1999 constitution, as amended.

     President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, represented by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, recently urged the NJC to consider qualified lawyers for appointment to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court benches.

    We support the president’s call to enrich the bench with intellectuals and legal practitioners who have distinguished themselves in the legal profession. Both the appeal court and Supreme Court would be the richer for it, if academicians in various fields of law and forensic advocates are nominated to the courts. If that is done, our legal jurisprudence and judgments would be enriched with intellectual and practice experiences, respectively. 

    Of course, such introduction should not be at the detriment of justices of the Court of Appeal and judges of the high court who rose through the bench.

    What is being proposed is a blend of theory and practice, to enrich our jurisprudence and judgments. Like every change, there are those who will resist the proposal, and insist on relying on the present template of using performance as judges and justices to select those to be elevated. Such criterion will automatically exclude non-judicial officers, since they have no such experience. To win such persons over, a robust dissection of the pros and cons of such introduction may help members of the NJC to allow the change. 

    Justice Taslim Elias was a good example of such historical transitions. Elias served as the first Nigeria Attorney-General and Minister of Justice from 1960-1966. With a doctorate degree he was appointed Professor and Dean of Faculty of Law, University of Lagos, in 1966. He subsequently served as the Chief Justice of Nigeria from 1972 to 1975, and later President of the International Criminal Court (ICC) from 1982 to 1985, where he became a judge since 1976. Highly regarded in the legal community, he was the longest serving judge of the ICC.  

    Read Also: Gov Adeleke flouts NJC, Industrial Court

    In other jurisdictions, like the United States, Justices of the Supreme Court are selected from universities, the bar, and public service. Such variety of experiences and legal background help the Supreme Court bring multidimensional savvy to the judgments of the courts. No doubt, the Supreme Court, while primarily an interpreter of law, is also a law maker in a constructive sense because the finality of its decision has profound impact on the society, and such responsibility is onerous and far- reaching.

    What is far more important is that only men and women of impeccable character are selected as judges and justices. Some of the current challenges faced by the judiciary arose because of the quality of persons elevated to the bench. Relying on base sentiments in the selection process has far-reaching consequences for the society. The process must also wean itself of  those with corrupt tendencies. 

    For, whenever the judiciary, which should be the bastion for all, is corrupt, the society decays and eventually collapses.

    President Tinubu, speaking through Mr. Fagbemi, correctly posited: “some of the challenges as identified by the National Judicial Council include; inefficiency and gaps within the process of appointment of judicial officers; lack of transparency and accountability in judicial process and administration of justice.” So, those to occupy the highest judicial position in our country must be the best our country can offer.

  • Tinubu, NJC and Supreme Court

    Tinubu, NJC and Supreme Court

    There is nothing more urgent now than the filling of the vacancies in the Supreme Court.  The retirement of Justice Musa Dattijo Muhammed on October 27 increased the vacancies in the highest court in the land to 11. With Muhammed’s exit, the court has only 10 Justices left, and this number is only enough to constitute two panels of five justices each to hear appeals that are not constitutionally-related.

    There will be a problem where the appeal is a constitutional matter because the panel must consist of seven justices. Where that is the case, the court will face the problem of having no Justices available to hear other appeals. Should appeals remain in the court’s docket because there are no enough hands to handle them? Should the number of Justices of the Supreme Court (JSC) be allowed to deplete that much before vacancies are filled? How did this happen?

       It is disturbing that the court has not had its full complement of  21 Justices, as stipulated in the Constitution, for years. It is unacceptable for the apex court to be starved of Justices at any point in time. The Supreme Court is not only a court of law, it also formulates policy. Under its functions, it shapes the nation’s socio-political development. The court’s October 26 verdict on the last presidential election dispute showed how important it is to the polity.

       As a matter of urgency, the vacancies in the court must be filled to enable it continue to function optimally. No less a person than the President weighed in to the matter on Monday at the opening of the All Nigeria Judges Conference of the Superior Courts in Abuja. President Bola Tinubu addressed a pertinent issue in his intervention. He suggested that practising lawyers too be considered for appointment into the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal. The President was not saying something new. There is a school of thought which believes that, that is the way to go.

        It happened in the past when Taslim Elias was appointed Chief Justuce of Nigeria (CJN) from outside the bench. The practice in recent times, however, is to appoint Justices from the Appeal Court to the Supreme Court. Despite calls on the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) and National Judicial Council (NJC) to cast their nets wide in the search for newJustices of both courts, they have stuck to the tradition of looking within for such appointees. Whereas the Constitution throws the job open to all qualified lawyers.

    Read Also: Afenifere disowns Adebanjo over Supreme Court judgment on Tinubu’s victory

       A person shall not be qualified to be CJN or a JSC, unless he is qualified to practise as a legal practitioner in Nigeria and has been so qualified for not less than 15 years, says Section 231 (3) of the Constitution. So, if the Constitution makes the job open, can NJC and FJSC limit their pick to only those from the appeal court?

       It is high time NJC and FJSC stopped this practice which appears to be a violation of the right of all practising lawyers qualified for the job. The bodies may cite fairness or otherwise to those career Justices, if they are bypassed in picking a new CJN, by bringing in someone from outside, so to say. But the Constitution allows that. Thus, NJC and FJSC cannot continue to follow convention in respect of this matter.

        It is a patent breach of the right of legal practitioners with 15 years post-qualification call interested in becoming JSC or even CJN, if they are not considered by NJC and FJSC, all because they are not ‘insiders’. The Supreme Court deserves the best brains and they can be either ‘insiders’ or ‘outsiders’ as envisaged by the Constitution. So, it is not a matter of convention, but of law. The Constitution should, therefore, prevail in filling the vacancies in the Supreme Court.

       As the Constitution states in Section 1 (1): “This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria”. What else is there to say than for NJC and FJSC to obey the Constitution. It is those they recommend that the President will send to the Senate for approval. The ball is in their court. I rest my case.

  • Ignore EFCC’s petition against judge, Okorocha urges NJC, Abuja CJ

    Imo State Governor Rochas Okorocha has urged Chairman of the National Judicial Council (NJC) and Chief Judge of the Federal High Court (FHC), Abuja, to discountenance the petition written by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Justice Taiwo Taiwo for lack of merit.

    In the said petition, EFCC alleged professional misconduct and abuse of judicial powers against the judge for granting an order enforcing Okorocha’s fundamental human rights.

    Okorocha’s letter, titled – Re: EFCC Reports Justice Taiwo to NJC over Restraining Order on Okorocha, Saraki” – noted that “contrary to the impression being created by the EFCC through its chairman, the order granted by Justice Taiwo was made pursuant to two fundamental human rights suits that I filed before the Court”.

    He added that the move against him by the EFCC “smacks of political vendetta and persecution”.

    The governor stated that the EFCC operatives ransacked his house in Jos, Plateau State, in May 2017, hoping to find something incriminating against him but found nothing.

    The commission also arrested almost all his principal staff “and in every case, insisting that they must make statements to indict me. When they refused, they were kept in custody for two days”.

    He said: “My political opponents accused me of nursing an ambition to contest for the Deputy Senate President. In their reasoning, they said the position will give me an edge to contest for President in 2023; so, everything must be done to get me out of the way.

    “Instead of the Ibrahim Magu-led EFCC to prove its case before the court, having submitted to its jurisdiction, it has resorted to cheap blackmail, needless name-calling and unwarranted arm-twisting, all in a bid to achieve their sinister motive of decimating me by all means…”

    Okorocha called on the NJC Chairman and the FHC Chief Judge to counsel EFCC to demonstrate confidence in the ability of its lawyers to defend it and that of the judiciary to dispense justice instead of making “hollow attempt at forum-shopping and name-calling.”

  • NJC, Kogi State and Court of Appeal judgements

    ON May 9, the Court of Appeal finally decided some of the cases filed before it by former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Walter Onnoghen. He was vindicated in three of the four interlocutory appeals he filed. Probably the most significant of the appeals was the one that concerned the ex parte order the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) surreptitiously and maliciously granted the government based on which the CJN was illegally suspended. In the opinion of the Court of Appeal, the mode of securing the ex parte order raised some questions. Justice, the court averred, must not be shrouded in secrecy.

    It is surprising then that the Court of Appeal merely dismissed the appeal, insisting that no reliefs could be granted because events had overtaken most of the reliefs the CJN sought. No weighty, censorious statements came from the court concerning the prosecution team which in clear view of the world perverted the course of justice, nor was anything said about a government that should know better but which chose to base its perpetration of injustice on what is now obviously a conspiracy to sack the CJN. Is this what justice is about in Nigeria? Is this not corruption on a scale that beggars belief and shames the entire country? If the Court of Appeal found the ex parte order flawed, after dithering for months over the case, should it not have ordered a redress? After all, “Ubis jus ubis remedium” (Where there is a wrong, there must be a remedy).

    When the former CJN was suspended and a new one appointed in clear breach of the law, this column raised the fear that both the courts and the National Judicial Council (NJC), were embarking on a journey whose end no one could foresee. NJC, the column noted particularly, had become compromised and a shadow of itself. As predicted, a few weeks later, the august judicial body was called upon to prove that its behaviour in the Justice Onnoghen matter was nothing but an aberration. The mimic Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, affecting to behave like the presidency, desired to sack the state’s chief judge, Justice Nasir Ajanah, for no reason.

    Mr Bello had taken umbrage at the Kogi State judiciary for failing to embrace the state’s civil service biometric exercise and pay-parade scheme. He then proceeded to seize the salaries of judicial workers against the provisions of the constitution and extant state laws regarding the funding of the third arm of government. Dissatisfied that the judicial workers embarked on a strike, and unable to successfully unseat Justice Ajanah whom he saw as the face of the judicial revolt, Mr Bello petitioned the NJC, alleging that the chief judge had been indicted in a state audit report. It turned out that the report had been doctored. Meanwhile, the NJC is reported to be in possession of the two reports, one real and the other forged. But instead of acting on the petition and proceeding to bring the forgers to justice, the NJC empanelled some justices to visit Kogi State. No one knew whether it was a fact-finding panel or a peacemaking panel.

    In any case, this column rebuked the NJC and asked them to deal with the petition and let justice be served rather than make peace. Instead the NJC, just as it buried its head in the sand over the Onnoghen matter, has also kept the Kogi governor’s spurious petition in abeyance. In fact, seeing that the NJC was supplicatory rather than defending constitutionality and the independence of the judiciary, and preferred to make plaintive remarks about rights and obligations rather than upholding the dignity of judicial workers, Mr Bello became remorselessly emboldened to harass the chief judge, walk him out of a state judicial function, refuse to pay the salaries of judicial workers, and continues to create a regime of fear and terror in Kogi. All because the courts are timid and the NJC is hemming and hawing.

    It started with Justice Onnoghen, when the courts supinely surrendered to the judicial corruption enacted by the presidency, and has persisted with the NJC remaining conspiratorially muffled. Now the train has lumbered into Kogi. Who and where is next in the inglorious and provocative march to distort and corrupt an already weakened judicial arm?

  • Court asks Buhari, NJC,others to justify Muhammad’s choice for CJN

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered President Muhammadu Buhari, the National Judicial Council (NJC), the Senate and others to justify why it should reject a suit seeking to stop them from appointing and confirming Justice Ibrahim Muhammad as the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN).

    Justice Inyang Ekwo gave the order while refusing an ex-parte motion for interim injunctions filed byt the Board of Incorporated Trustees of Malcolm Omirhobo Foundation.

    Justice Ekwo,in a ruling on Friday,an enrolled copy of which was sighted yesterday, declined to grant all the reliefs sought by the applicant.

    Instead, the judge ordered the defendants to, within seven days after being served, show cause why the applicants’ reliefs should not be granted.

    The judge said: “None of the prayers made on this motion ex-parte can be granted in the absence of the defendants.

    “The plaintiff is hereby ordered to put the ‘ defendants on notice.

    REad also: Appoint Muhammad as substantive CJN – Bauchi lawyers urge Buhari, NJC, FJSC,

    “The defendants are hereby granted seven days, upon being served, to appear and show cause why the application of the plaintiff ought not to be granted.

    “Case adjourned to 13th day of May, 2019  for the defendants to show cause.”

    The plaintiff/applicant had, in its motion ex-parte, prayed the court for “an order of interim injunction restraining the 5th defendant (Buhari) from appointing the 3rd defendant (Justice Muhammad) as the Chief Justice of the Federal Republic of Nigeria pending the determination of the motion on notice filed herein.

    “An order of interim injunction restraining the 7th defendant (the Senate President)  from confirming the appointment of the 3rd defendant as the Chief Justice of the Federal Republic of Nigeria pending the determination of the motion on notice.”

    Named as defendants in the suit, are NJC, Federal Judicial Service Commission of Nigeria (FJSCN), Justice Muhammad, Federal Republic of Nigeria, President, the Attorney General of the Federation and the Senate.

    In the substantive suit, the plaintiff is praying the court to restrain President Buhari from appointing the Justice Muhammad as the substantive CJN.

    The plaintiff argued that the Acting CJN conducted himself in a manner that reduced the confidence of the public in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary.

    It argued that President Buhari lacked the constitutional powers to unilaterally suspend and/or remove a CJN from office, as was done in the case of Onnoghen.

    The plaintiff is urging the court to declare that by combined interpretation of sections 1(1 )(2), 231(4), 292(1)(a)(i)(b), 153(1)(i), 158(1) and paragraph 21 (a)(b) of Part 1 of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, “it is unlawful and undemocratic for the 4th and 5th Defendants (Federal Government and President Buhari), to declare the office of the CJN vacant on January 25, 2019 and consequently appoint and swear in the 3rd Defendant as the acting CJN”.

    It is also pleading with the court to restrain the National Assembly from confirming Justice Muhammad’s appointment as the substantive CJN.

    He is praying the court to declare that Justice Muhammad, who is the most senior jurist at the Supreme Court, is unfit to replace the sacked CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen.

    The plaintiff is pleading with the court to declare that Justice Muhammad, having made himself available as a tool for the violation of the Constitution, especially with regards to the “illegal” removal of the former CJN, is therefore not a proper and fit person to be recommended for appointment to head the judiciary.

    It prayed for: “An order, compelling the 2nd Defendant (FJSC), to select and the 1st Defendant (NJC), to recommend the most qualified Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria that is fit and proper,  to the 5th Defendant, for appointment to office of the CJN, and for the confirmation of the 7th Defendant with a two third majority vote.”

    In a supporting affidavit, the plaintiff stated that unless restrained by the court, the Executive arm of the government would continue to violate the extant provisions of the Constitution and sanctity of the judiciary.