The Nation Newspaper

Tag: NJC

  • 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.”

  • PACAC Secretary: don’t blame NJC alone for corruption in judiciary

    PACAC Secretary: don’t blame NJC alone for corruption in judiciary

    •Banks, Customs should declare assets, says Owasanoye

    Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC) Executive Secretary Prof BolajiOwasanoye yesterday said the executive must complement the judiciary’s efforts to rid its ranks of corrupt elements.

    He disagreed with PACAC Chairman Prof Itse Sagay (SAN), who earlier said the judiciary was not on board in the anti-corruption fight.

    Sagay had faulted the National Judicial Council (NJC) for recalling some judges accused of corruption, including Justice AdeniyiAdemola, whose case is on appeal.

    Owasananoye believed the NJC’s statement blaming the Ministry of Justice for not being swift in prosecuting the judges had merit.

    Justifying its decision, the NJC said the Ministry of Justice officials failed to turn up to compile and transmit records of appeal in Ademola’s case until the 45 days allowed for the exercise expired on May 22.

    It claimed the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation only filed additional grounds of appeal last Tuesday, three days after the Council directed the judicial officers to resume duties.

    Owasanoye, in a telephone interview with our correspondent yesterday, said the Ministry of Justice could have done better in the judges’ prosecution.

    He said the onus was on Attorney-General of the Federation AbubakarMalami (SAN) to respond to NJC’s claims.

    Owasanoye said: “Prof Sagay’s comments needs to be taken in context of whatever conversation he was having with the journalists. My view is that it is not only the judiciary that is responsible for the present state of affairs with regards to our prosecutions.

    “The judiciary has taken certain steps. Unfortunately, the Ministry of Justice has not matched them. The statement issued by the judiciary vindicates my position.

    “Clearly, the judiciary has taken certain steps. It was up to the Federal Ministry of Justice to follow through, but those steps had not been taken, and so we have the situation that we have right now.

    “The judiciary has responded to say that the ball is in the court of the executive, especially the Ministry of Justice, to do what it said it was going to do.

    “I totally and absolutely agree with the position of the judiciary. The judiciary has not said they have been completely above board, but they’re saying they’ve made some effort. Can those efforts be complemented? I agree that those efforts need to be complemented.”

    Owasanoye, however, urged judges to show more firmness in the adjudication of corruption cases by not tolerating delays.

    “Once we see that, the stretch – the interminable delays to prosecution should significantly reduce. We want to judges who will no longer tolerate nonsense, such as requests for adjournments for unimaginable reasons.

    “Given the recent statement issued by the judiciary, the ball is in the court of the Ministry of Justice to respond.”

    Owasanoye said there was an existing law which requires banks and customs officials to declare their assets annually.

  • NJC faults Sagay on recall of suspended judges

    NJC faults Sagay on recall of suspended judges

    • Says no valid appeal against Justice Ademola’s acquittal
    • Claims judiciary supports govt’s anti-graft war

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) yesterday rejected the accusation made against it by the Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Professor Itse Sagay, that the judiciary was not in support of the current administration’s anti-corruption war.

    It insisted that its recent decision to recall the six judges suspended in the wake of their investigation for corruption allegation by the Department of State Services (DSS) was in order.

    The NJC said in a statement that the Judiciary was in full support of the administration’s efforts to curb corrupt practices in the country and would continue to do so within the ambit of the law.

    The council’s Director of Information, Soji Oye, who signed the statement also dismissed claim by the Special Assistant to the President on Prosecution, Okoi Obono-Obla, that the federal government has appealed the acquittal of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court.

    It said investigation by its officials revealed that there was no valid appeal filed yet 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).

    Justice Okeke had, in the ruling, upheld the no-case submission by Justice Ademola and his co-defendants, charged with corruption related offences.

    The NJC expressed regret that the Executive was not cooperating with the judiciary in cases of judges that have been recommended for either sack or compulsory retirement.

    The NJC said: “Contrary to the allegations by Professor Itse Sagay, (SAN), Chairman, PACAC, that Judiciary took a hasty decision to recall the Judges, and that it is not on board with anti-graft war of the federal government, the number of judicial officers that have been removed from office for misconduct particularly for corrupt practices since President Buhari administration came on board, that has been made public by NJC in October and November, 2016, speaks for itself in that vein.

    “Some of the judicial officers were removed from office by dismissal or compulsory retirement by the Ppresident or governors on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council.

    “While a number of the judicial officers were reprimanded by Council in the exercise of its Constitutional powers to exercise disciplinary control over judges of superior courts of record in the federation.”

    It claimed that some of the judicial officers it recommended for dismissal or compulsory retirement from office by the presidency or governors, have not to date been removed from office.

    It added:”But for suspension of the affected judicial officers from office by NJC, they would have to date been still performing their Judicial duties.

    “And these are officers that have been found culpable of gross misconduct by National Judicial Council after due process and diligent fact finding investigation by Council based on the Rule of Law enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, NJC Judicial Discipline Regulations and Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “The NJC will soon issue an advertorial on the foregoing and list out the number of judicial officers that have since April, 2000 when it held its inaugural meeting to date, been dismissed or compulsorily retired by the president or governors for gross misconduct or corrupt practices, on its recommendation; and also reprimanded by council by suspension or warning/caution.

    “Council is not oblivious of the fact that some major stakeholders in the Judiciary and justice delivery sector in conjunction with the Nigerian Bar Association, met with the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and anti-graft and security agencies before the judicial officers were recalled, to discuss the subject matter and in particular the fate of the judicial officers that have not been charged and arraigned.

    “When no progress was made, the NJC, which is the only constitutional institution empowered to exercise disciplinary control over judicial officers for misconduct, decided to recall the judicial officers.

    “It is to be stressed that our criminal justice is also predicated on accusatorial system and not inquisitorial.

    “Thus, every accused person is presumed to be innocent until his guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution.

    On Obono-Obla’s statement that the Attorney-General of the Federation filed a notice of appeal against the ruling of Justice Jude Okeke discharging and acquitting Justice Ademola and 2 ORS on 7th April, 2017,the council said  the registry of the High Court of the FCT, Abuja, informed the Department of Information of the NJC that the AGF office filed two Notices of Appeal in the Court; the first one on 7th April, 2017, against Justice  Ademola, his wife, and  Agi, while the second one was filed on 6th of June, 2017, two days after the press release was issued by the NJC, with additional grounds of appeal against only Ademola.

    “It is on record that when the parties were invited by High Court of the FCT for settlement of records to be transmitted to the Court of Appeal on 18th April, 2017, the Appellant failed to turn up,” the NJC said.

  • Self-crucifixion

    Self-crucifixion

    The recall of judges under suspicion is tantamount to NJC birthing a judicial concert for corruption

     The June 1 decision, by the National Judicial Council (NJC), to recall judges under suspicion, takes the judiciary to uncharted waters: the ogre of the Bench spotting morally challenged judges, presiding over summary trials.

    That could well be a prelude to the judiciary, under a gale of alleged corruption, finally nailing itself on the cross.  That, to be sure, would be fair comeuppance for legal professionals, wilfully sticking their fingers in a naked flame.  But the general society would be the ultimate victim — for the death of, nay even casting a pall on, the integrity of the judiciary, always signals the birth of anarchy.

    Rising from its 82nd meeting, which held from May 31 to June 1, the NJC, chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen, recalled the following judges: Justice John Inyang Okoro (Supreme Court), Justice Uwani Abba Aji (Court of Appeal), Justice Hydiazira A. Nganjiwa and Justice Adeniyi Ademola (both of the Federal High Court) and Justice Agbadu James Fishim (National Industrial Court).

    Justice Ademola has been discharged and acquitted at the high court, though the prosecution is launching an appeal. But most of the other judges are yet to be formally arraigned.

    That is six months after a much publicised “sting” operation, which exposed some judges harbouring, at home, a great haul of cash.  Such huge cash, which normally should be in bank vaults, arouses easy suspicion as possible proceeds of corruption.

    There is something, however, to be said for the NJC recall logic. Judges, as other citizens, are entitled to justice. So, any foot-dragging over charging them to court, after a highly brushing publicity that suggests they could be common rogues, must be condemned.

    Besides, with every passing day, the people make up their minds — not based on any forensic rigour, but on the titillating rumour in the streets. No class of citizens should be victims of such abuse of public opinion — not the least judges, whose spotless integrity is their only capital.

    Ironically, however, the imperative for spotless integrity, nay moral impregnability, is the same reason the NJC action was rash, reckless, unwise and suicidal; and it is well and truly shocking that in a moment of hubris, the CJN could sit over the virtual slaughtering of the judiciary’s integrity.

    That the judges were recalled to curb the mountain of cases, which had gathered in their absence, is simply cheap, pathetic and self-serving. Equally ludicrous is the NJC playing the Pontius Pilate of putting some judges on a so-called “watch list”.

    That might, indeed, be the standard judicial practice of fairness and due process. But in the travesty of the moment, recalling indicted judges, to go on pontificating over other accused persons, while putting others on a “watch list”, is scandalously hollow and empty.

    Are litigants then to sneer, on sighting a presiding judge, under dark suspicion, by the same system that hoisted him or her above fellow citizens, and snap: “Your Lordship, the rogue”?

    That is the spectre the CJN and his NJC conclave have unleashed on the judiciary. It would appear the judicial institutional version of self-ruin.

    Yes, the argument for inalienable rights of judges is tenable. But what if that leads to institutional ruin? Would there not be a judiciary first before judges and lawyers can practice their trade? Caesar once said of his wife: she must not only be above reproach, she must be seen to be so. He who comes to equity, goes that popular legal cliche, must come with clean hands.

    The NJC would appear to obtuse towards these two dicta, particularly when the integrity of the judicial process is the question. Whoever is comfortable with a stained judge sitting over his or her case? Even if such a judge were earnest, would  (s)he not be vulnerable to blackmail by bad-tempered litigants?

    Then, there is this little question of bad faith, which sticks out in the case of Justice Ademola. Yes, a court of first instance discharged and acquitted him. But the judiciary, of all institutions, knows that is only the first of a three-pronged process, if the case drags on to the Supreme Court. Besides, the prosecution had just scaled all the technical processes to appeal, its right under the law.

    So, why the rush to reinstate Justice Ademola who, the instance he was acquitted, started pushing the NJC for a reinstatement? Is that move made to wilfully truncate the process, thus illicitly tilting the scale for Ademola, simply because he is a member of the judiciary? Besides, how comfortable would Justice Ademola himself be  — sitting on the high throne of justice in a court, crouching in the dock in another?

    That the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) could be part of this conspiracy against judicial integrity is a double shame. That professional body of lawyers had in a statement marking this year’s Democracy Day, pushed for the judges’ reinstatement. Like the NJC, the NBA is proudly urinating in the pool from which it draws its sustenance. It should not complain later, when it starts having professional diarrhea.

    This outrage is a shame on the CJN, shame on the NJC, shame on the NBA — all for a wilful commission of putative professional suicide. Worse: by doing so, they give the impression of a brazen judicial concert for corruption.   Nothing more could be more injurious to their professional essence.

    The Buhari Presidency should do everything within the law to stall this descent into judicial disgrace, perfidy and anarchy. Besides, every Nigerian of goodwill should stop, in their misguided track, this deluded ensemble.

    This moral baggage, if not lifted fast, would crush the judiciary and ruin polite society.

  • NJC faults Sagay on recall of suspended judges

    NJC faults Sagay on recall of suspended judges

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) Saturday rejected the accusation made against it by the Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Professor Itse Sagay that the Judiciary was not in support of the current administration’s anti-corruption war.

    Insisted that its recent decision to recall the six judges suspended in the wake of  their investigation for corruption allegation by the Department of State Services (DSS),was in order.

    The NJC said in a statement that  the Judiciary was infull  support of the administration’s efforts to curb corrupt practices in the country and would  continue to do so within the ambit of the law.

    The council’s  Director of  Information, Soji Oye,who signed the statement also dismissed claim by the Special Assistant to the President on Prosecution, Okoi Obono-Obla that the Federal Government has appealed the acquittal of Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court.

    It said investigation by its officials revealed that there was no valid appeal filed yet 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).

    Justice Okeke had, in the ruling, upheld the no-case submission by Justice Ademola and his co-defendants, charged with corruption related offences. 

    The NJC expressed regret that the Executive was not cooperating with the Judiciary in cases of judges that have been recommended for either sack or compulsory retirement.

    The NJC said: ‘’contrary to the allegations by Professor Itse Sagay, (SAN), Chairman, PACAC, that Judiciary took a hasty decision to recall the Judges, and that it is not on board with anti-graft war of the Federal Government, the number of judicial officers that have been removed from office for misconduct particularly for corrupt practices since President Buhari administration came on board, that has been made public by NJC in October and November, 2016, speaks for itself in that vein.    

    “Some of the judicial officers were removed from office by dismissal or compulsory retirement by the President or Governors on the recommendation of the National Judicial Council.  

    “While a number of the judicial officers were reprimanded by Council in the exercise of its Constitutional powers to exercise disciplinary control over judges of superior courts of record in the Federation.’’  

    It claimed that  some of the judicial officers  it  recommended for dismissal or compulsory retirement from office by the presidency or Governors, have not to date been removed from office.  

    It added:”But for suspension of the affected judicial officers from office by NJC, they would have to date been still performing their Judicial duties. 

    “And these are officers that have been found culpable of gross misconduct by National Judicial Council after due process and diligent fact finding investigation by Council based on the Rule of Law enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, NJC Judicial Discipline Regulations and Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.  

    “The NJC will soon issue an advertorial on the foregoing and list out the number of judicial officers that have since April, 2000 when it held its inaugural meeting to date, been dismissed or compulsorily retired by the President or Governors for gross misconduct or corrupt practices, on its recommendation; and also reprimanded by council by suspension or warning/caution.

    “Council is not oblivious of the fact that some major stakeholders in the Judiciary and justice delivery sector in conjunction with the Nigerian Bar Association, met with the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation and anti-graft and security agencies before the judicial officers were recalled, to discuss the subject matter and in particular the fate of the judicial officers that have not been charged and arraigned.  

    “When no progress was made, the NJC, which is the only constitutional institution empowered to exercise disciplinary control over judicial officers for misconduct, decided to recall the judicial officers.

    “It is to be stressed that our criminal justice is also predicated on accusatorial system and not inquisitorial.  

    “Thus, every accused person is presumed to be innocent until his guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution.  

    On Obono-Obla’s statement  that the Attorney-General of the Federation filed a notice of appeal against the ruling of  Justice Jude Okeke discharging and acquitting Justice  Ademola and 2 ORS on 7th April, 2017,the council said  the registry of the High Court of the FCT, Abuja, informed the Department of Information of the NJC that the AGF office filed two Notices of Appeal in the Court; the first one on 7th April, 2017, against Justice  Ademola, his wife, and  Agi, while the
    second one was filed on 6th of June, 2017, two days after the press release was issued by the NJC, with additional grounds of appeal against only Ademola. 

    “It is on record that when the parties were invited by High Court of the FCT for settlement of records to be transmitted to the Court of Appeal on 18th April, 2017, the Appellant failed to turn up,’’ the NJC said.

  • Ondo CJ in court over age falsification

    Ondo CJ in court over age falsification

    The Ondo state High court sitting in Akure has commenced hearing in the suit seeking the removal from office the state acting chief judge, Justice Temitayo Osoba for alleged overstaying in office and age falsification.

    The plaintiff and legal practitioner, Mr Femi Emodamori had told the court presided over by Justice Aderemi Adegoroye that the National Judicial Council, (NJC) and the Ondo state house of assembly had not confirmed the appointment of the acting chief judge.

    Emodamori therefore prayed the court to declare the position of the CJ vacant since three months required by the 1999 constitution for the confirmation of justice Osoba’s appointment had elapsed.

    At the resumed hearing of the case, counsel to the Acting CJ and the state government, Batife Philip withdrew his appearance for  Genevieve Okoye from Dayo Akinlaja chambers but it was countered by the prosecuting counsel.

    The presiding judge, Justice Aderemi Adegoroye adjourned the case to June 16 and ordered the prosecuting counsel to file an application countering the change of the defence counsels.

  • NJC’s affront

    Citing government failure  to take some suspended judges to court for over eight months  while  a backlog of cases piled up in their various courts, “ the National Judicial Council (NJC) early this week directed  some judges undergoing investigation or facing trial in courts to return to their duty posts.

    Government officials have been fuming over the NJC decision. The Special Adviser to the President on Prosecutions, Okoi Obono-Obla, informed  Nigerians that  the NJC is aware that the government has appealed in the case of  Justice Ademola  and of “the intention of the EFCC to file criminal proceedings against the other judges” and that the NJC took the action despite knowing that there are pending  “complaints, petitions from members of the public against these judges” only  gives  “the impression  that they (NJC members) are trying to protect some of these judges”.

    On his part, chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption, PACAC, Professor Itse Sagay, SAN, says the NJC has not used its discretion judiciously adding  that “The image of the judiciary is going to be severely damaged” by the  body’s action. Sagay also wondered if NJC ever bothered to consult. “with the anti-corruption agencies and the DSS, that arrested them in the first place?”  For a body that appears to be ready to protect the interest of its members as Sagay has observed, I think such a question is unnecessary. NJC has only exploited the indolence that has been generally associated with President Buhari’s ‘go slow administration’ that spent six months even when he was not sick to constitute a cabinet. Waiting for over eight months to take the judges to court after a sting action that led to the discovery of huge sums of money in their houses is all in character with an APC government that spent up to two years unable to constitute the boards of agencies of government it needs to prosecute its party policies. And equally working to the advantage of NJC is the endless and embarrassing inter-agency in-fighting and rivalry.

    The NJC and senior lawyers are widely believed to be behind the corruption of the judges’ .The NJC is also believed to provide a safe haven for the judges. In fact the DSS sting operation that led to the discovery of huge sums of money in the judges’ houses allegedly followed the failure of the former   Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Mahmud Mohammed, to act after one month on a letter detailing instances of criminal conduct by the judges. As the presiding chairman of NJC, he was said to have, refused to allow investigators to interrogate the judges.  It was also alleged in some cases, the NJC slaps corrupt judges with compulsory retirement but allows them to enjoy their loot.

    Justice Mahmud Mohammed, initially resisted government pressure and defied public opinion by refusing to suspend the affected judges. And when he eventually reluctantly “asked the judges to temporarily step-down from the bench pending determination of corruption allegations against them”, it was due to the pressure from the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA whose senior members openly boasted government would not be able to successfully prosecute the judges before any judge in Nigeria.

    Of course government cannot also pretend not to know on whose side the loyalty of Justice Walter Onnoghen was as vice chairman of NJC under Justice Mahmud. And if government had any illusion, they don’t need to wait for long”. Speaking during a thanksgiving service held at Methodist Church Nigeria, Diocese, Zone 3, Abuja, after his emergence as the substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria, he had said “The Judiciary is under threat. Judges and judicial officers, including myself are being castigated without giving opportunity to be heard, but God knows our heart”. His Senior Special Assistant on Media, Awassam Bassey, went on to issue a statement on his behalf to lament about media trial of judges and warning ‘politicians to desist from using the mass media to smear the good image of the nation’s judiciary in general, and the hardworking and honest judicial officers in particular.’

    It is however not an accident that the picture painted by the CJN is markedly different for that of the Acting President. Speaking  as the special guest of honour during the opening session of a ‘Conference on Promoting International Co-operation in Combating Illicit Financial Flows and Enhancing Asset’ in Lagos on Monday, Professor Osinbajo, also a senior lawyer  faulted the allegation of media trial insisting it is ‘corruption fighting back by  the treasury looters’ in order to legitimise their acts of corruption. He did not think there was anywhere in the world where the discovery of large sums of money in an air-conditioned room would not have made news headlines.

    Earlier, on Thursday last week, the Acting President, while receiving protesting members of the organized labour, had  also revealed alleged plots by some elements to wage war against the anti-corruption campaign of Buhari-led government. Nigerians that voted APC to power want solution and not lamentation about sabotage by the legislature or the judiciary. If APC does not know how to use political power, it can consult ‘clueless’ ex-President Jonathan, who in power ignored public opinion and sacked Justice Isa Salami for ruling against his party and went on to illegally remove the CBN governor for raising an alarm about possible theft of $20b from NNPC. He got away with immoral and illegal acts with the support of some fair-weather senior members of the bar who are also today on ground to defend those who have not been able to explain how billions crawled into their bank accounts.

    The point is if Jonathan as reigning democratic sovereign could deploy absolute power of the presidency to defend fraud and immoral act, how come a government of Buhari and Osinbajo who cannot be said to be clueless cannot with massive public opinion support, deploy the absolute power of the democratic sovereign for good of society?

    And for the benefit of those who have become slave to the rule of law, democracy empowers the democratic sovereign to deploy absolute power to solve society problems. Let us remind ourselves that there is rule of law in Russia where the democratic sovereign has by sheer intimidation forced all those who bought government companies without fulfilling the conditions for their sales to cede same back to government. There is rule of law in China where it is almost impossible to steal government funds without facing the consequences and of course, rule of law thrives in USA where bungling Trump, the current democratic sovereign, has fallen back on the democratic sovereign’s absolute power to fulfil his electoral promises to his far right conservative supporters.

    Those who must come to equity –  as the lawyers say even without believing it – must come with clean hands. Except in Nigeria, it does not happen in any democracy anywhere in the world that a tainted legislature or a tainted judiciary will dare the democratic sovereign.

    Nigerians want the acting President who while describing himself as a pastor a few days ago reminded Nigerians that no amount of prayers will solve our problem without action. In the age of globalisation, the ‘Ogbologbo” lawyer ex-President Obasanjo craved for can be sourced from Britain. And if our judges have decided to cast their lot with the bar and their clients holding our nation hostage, he has the permission of Nigerians to adopt the 1974 Buhari’s trick – crate and ship by air, some of the unrepentant corrupt politicians to Britain for the Ibori treatment.

  • 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.

  • Alleged corruption: NJC directs Justices Ademola, Okoro, others to resume duties June 7

    Alleged corruption: NJC directs Justices Ademola, Okoro, others to resume duties June 7

    •Two placed on watch list
    •Senior lawyers hail their recall
    •Sagay: They can still be charged

    The storm seems to be over for five of the judges who were suspended last year on the strength of their being investigated for corruption by the Department of State Services (DSS).

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) lifted the suspension yesterday and asked them to resume work on Wednesday, June 7.

    Expected back at their desks on that day are: Justices John Okoro (Supreme Court), Adeniyi Ademola, Hydiazira A. Nganjiwa, Justice Musa H. Kurya ( all of the Federal High Court) and Agbadu James Fishim of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria.

    Senior lawyers yesterday hailed the recall of the judges.

    However, the NJC issued a warning to Justice M. N. Esowe of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Justice Adolphus Enebeli of the High Court of Justice, Rivers State, and Justice Bassey Etuk of the Akwa-Ibom State High Court in respect of allegations brought against them.

    Two of the three judges have been placed on a watch list by the council.

    The NJC at its 82nd meeting held last Wednesday and Thursday reviewed the case of eight judicial officers who were directed to recuse themselves from duties on the request of the Attorney-General of the Federation pending the outcome of investigations against them.

    The NJC Director of Information, Soji Oye, giving an insight into the decision of the NJC said: “After deliberation, council (NJC) noted that out of the judicial officers directed to recuse themselves from performing their official duties, only three have been charged to court.

    “They are:- Justice N. S. Ngwuta, CFR, of the Supreme Court of Nigeria; Justice A. F. A. Ademola of the Federal High Court; and Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia of the Federal High Court.

    “The trial of Justice A. F. A. Ademola has been concluded and he has been discharged and acquitted of the charges filed against him.

    “In view of the foregoing, Council decided that the various heads of court should direct the following judicial officers to resume their judicial duties with effect from Wednesday 7th June, 2017, as there are already backlog of cases in their various court for the past eight months.

    “They are Justice John Inyang Okoro of the Supreme Court; Justice Uwani Abba Aji of the Court of Appeal; Justice Hydiazira A. Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court; Justice A. F. A. Ademola of the Federal High Court who has been discharged and acquitted; Justice Musa H. Kurya of the Federal High Court; and Justice Agbadu James Fishim of National Industrial Court of Nigeria.

    “Council also at the meeting, decided to warn Justice M. N. Esowe of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Justice Adolphus Enebeli of the High Court of Justice, Rivers State and Justice Bassey Frank Etuk of the Akwa-Ibom State High Court for different offences and place two of them on the “watch list” of the council.

    “Council’s decision to give Justice Esowe a serious warning and put her on its “Watch List” for one year, was sequel to a petition written against her by Mr. Jimmy Dirisu Aliu, alleging injustice for failing to deliver ruling in Suit No. NICN/ABJ/394/2013, until Eight (8) months after the final address of counsel on Notice of Preliminary objection to his Suit.

    Council also decided to give Justice Adolphus Enebeli serious warning and place him on its “watch-list” for three years following its ‘findings’ that Justice Enebeli violated the Code of Conduct for judicial officers of the Federal Republic of Nigeria by granting ex-parte order in Suit No. PHC/983/2016, preventing the swearing-in of Victoria Wodo Nyeche as a member of the Rivers State House of Assembly, when the claim in the Suit did not border on qualification or pre-election matter.

    “The Judge was said to have granted the ex-parte order on 19th April, 2016, three days to the swearing-in ceremony and adjourned the case to 21st April, 2016 when the ceremony had been concluded.

    “ Justice Bassey Frank Etuk was warned following a petition written against him by Oro Youth Movement for failure to deliver judgment in Suit No. HOR/FHC/97/2014, a Fundamental Human Right case, after hearing it to conclusion and adjourned same for judgment to the 8th June, 2015.

    “The Judge then proceeded on national assignment as an election petition tribunal member and did not deliver the judgment even after his return in November, 2015, when he transferred the case file to the Chief Judge for it to start de-novo.

    The suit was filed by two officers of the movement to prevent the police from arresting them after they were reported for embezzling the sum of N20, 000.000.00 (Twenty Million Naira) from the account of the movement.

    “The decision of the council is with immediate effect.

    “Council also considered and dismissed petitions written against twelve other Judicial Officers.

    “Council dismissed the petitions because three (3) of the Petitioners withdrew their petitions against Justice T. U. Uzokwe, Chief Judge, Abia State, Justice Okoroafor of the Abia State High Court and Justice Judge Okeke of the FCT High Court of Justice.

    “One petition written against H. A. Nganjiwa of the Federal High Court was also dismissed for subjudice.

    “Other petitions written against Justices Adamu Abdu-Kafarati and O. E. Abang, both of the Federal High Court, Justices Mobolaji Ojo, and E. O. Osinuga, both of the Ogun State High Court, Justice B. A. Oke-Lawal of Lagos State High Court, Justice A. A. Aderemi of Oyo State, Ntong F. Ntong of Akwa-Ibom State High Court and the second petition written against Justice Bassey Frank Etuk of Akwa-Ibom State High Court of Justice were found unmeritorious.”

    The NJC meeting was presided over by its Chairman and Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen.

     

  • Senior lawyers hail NJC over recall of suspended judges

    Several Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) yesterday welcomed  news of the judges’ recall from suspension with Messers Sebastine Hon, Mike Ozekhome , Abdullahi Ahmed, and Ben Chukwuka  arguing  that, although it was wrong to suspend the judges in the first place, the NJC was in order to have reversed its decision since the Executive has failed to establish  allegations of corruption against the judges.

    They spoke in separate interviews with The Nation Sunday in Abuja.

    Ozekhome, Chukwuka and Ahmed were particularly unhappy that Justice Ademola was not allowed to resume work immediately he was acquitted by Justice Jude Okeke of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja.

    Hon said: “The decision of the National Judicial Council (NJC) to lift the suspension of the Justices and Judges accused of corruption is a most welcome development.

    “The NJC, even though is under the  Constitution, is not subject to  any body’s direction or control, decided to tacitly support the anti-corruption drive of the government, by suspending those judicial officers – even when they were not arraigned and convicted.

    “Since the Executive could not arraign them or secure conviction, the NJC just did the needful, as some of us urged them to do so.

    “No country treats its citizens the way those judicial officers were treated; and the NJC just woke up to its constitutional and moral responsibility by taking this bold step.

    “Speaking for myself, I will say kudos to the NJC. I will also conclude by urging the security agencies not to see this as an attempt by the Judiciary to splash odious mud on their face, but as the discharge of a constitutional and moral obligation by the NJC.”

    Ozekhome said that in the eye of the law, having been discharged, Justice Ademola remains on solid ground to resume his duties.

    “The fact that an appeal has been filed against his discharge and acquittal does not stand as a ground that he cannot resume his duties.

    “The reason is simple. In law, and appeal does not act as a stay of execution. I am not aware that, in the case of Justice Ademola, the federal government has been able to secure any stay of execution against him or file an application for stay.

    “If they have applied, one would say that pending the determination of the application for stay of execution the judge cannot act. But I am not aware that any was applied for or that any had been granted.

    “In the absence of that, we cannot say that Justice Ademola should be in hibernation at the whims and caprices of the state.

    “I learnt the federal government has again, gone on a forum shopping at the Code of Conduct Tribunal, with a case against this same judge. That is no longer prosecution. It is persecution. That offends the principle of double jeopardy.”

    Ahmed argued that “it was wrong in the first place to ask the judicial officers to stop sitting because they were being investigated.”

    He commended the NJC for finding the initiative to recall the suspended judges.

    Chukwuka said it was wrong for the other judges, against whom the DSS and Fed Govt failed to prefer charges, to be left perpetually in the cold.

    “The doctrine fair hearing should work to the benefit of every citizen. We commend the NJC for eventually finding its voice.

    If the Court of Appeal decides otherwise in the case of Justice Ademola, we will still call for his prosecution. But, as it stands now, and without any order staying his resumption, I think the pendulum of justice is in Justice Ademola’s favour.

    “We await the AGF and the prosecution, in Justice Ademola’s case to convince the appellate court otherwise. It is not for you to raise allegation. The law requires you to prove beyond reasonable doubt,” Chukwuka said.

    A former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) president Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) described the NJC decision as right.

    He, however, warned the council not to shield any corrupt judge.

    Olanipekun said: “The NJC decision is the right thing to do in the circumstances, particularly after placing the affected judges on suspension for seven to eight months without preferring charges against them.

    “We must avoid any situation whereby any Nigerian judge or citizen is first disgraced, ridiculed and embarrassed publicly for assumed or presumed criminal offences or misdemeanour, leading to his arrest and incarceration or detention.

    “Be that as it may , the NJC must not spare for a second any judge who has been found to have corrupted himself or engaged in any untoward act,” Olanipekun said.