The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Sebastine Hon

  • Hon appointed LPPC member

    Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen has appointed constitutional lawyer Sebastine Hon (SAN) as a member of the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC). This came as he marked his 51st birthday anniversary and 10 years as a Senior Advocate. Legal Editor JOHN AUSTIN UNACHUKWU reports.

    Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen has appointed Mr Sebastine Hon as a member of the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC).

    The Committee, established by Section 5(3) of the Legal Practitioners Act (LPA), is the body responsible for the screening of qualified legal practitioners for the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

    LPPC is also charged with making rules as to obligations and privileges to be conferred on SANs as well as restrictions and mode of appearance to ensure the dignity of the rank of SAN.

    It is chaired by the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) and comprises 15 other members.

    Chief Justice Onnoghen appointed Hon as LPPC member on January 9.

    This was as Gboko Town in Benue State came alive as family and friends gathered to honour Hon, author of the well cited book: S.T. Hon’s Law of Evidence.

    Dignitaries, including Benue State Governor Samuel Ortom, joined Hon in celebrating his 51st birthday.

    The celebrant also marked the 10th anniversary of his being conferred with the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

    The event, which had morning and afternoon sessions, was held at the Tiv Traditional Council Chambers and at the J.S. Tarka Stadium in Gboko.

    This is as Hon was named a member of the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC).

    Governor Ortom described Hon as a versatile, erudite and learned silk whose life has been eventful and full of achievements within and beyond the legal profession.

    “Your exemplary character, professional conduct and significant contributions to the Bar and the administration of justice in Nigeria cannot be overemphasised.

    “As an illustrious son of Benue State, I am proud to identify with your landmark achievements and appreciate you on this momentous occasion.

    “It is my earnest desire that you would continue to make useful contributions to the peace, unity and development of Benue State in particular and Nigeria in general.

    “As you celebrate these auspicious events, I join your numerous friends, colleagues and well-wishers to rejoice with you and your family and  to pray God Almighty to grant you good health, wisdom and strength to continue to serve God and humanity and be a model to the younger generations,” the governor said.

    Customary Court of Appeal President Justice Cosmas A. Idaye who spoke on behalf Benue judges congratulated S.T Hon for his “monumental achievements”.

    “He is an asset not only to Benue State Judiciary, but to humanity in general. He is industrious, humble, loves the poor and humanity in general.

    “He is a home grown product, all the schools he attended were here, he is an inspiration to the youth .

    “A great author, his books are cited in almost the entire superior courts of record in Nigeria including the Supreme Court.

    “Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo described him as a blessing to this generation because of his immeasurable contributions to the legal profession.

    “The Vice President said: ‘I am a Professor of the Law of Evidence, I used to think I was the wisest when it came to the Law of Evidence; but since I started reading S.T. Hon’s Book on Evidence, I realised he is wiser than me. I honestly commend him for the weighty contributions he has made to the development of law in Nigeria.’

    “Prof. Osinbajo is a genius because he taught us the law of evidence in the University of Lagos. So, for him to say this, then it means that the man we celebrating here today is also a genius,” Justice Idaye said.

    In her goodwill massage, the member representing Gboko East Constituency in the House of Representatives, Mrs Agaigbe Utsaha, also felicitated with Hon.

    “The birth of great men is heralded by great events and is usually for a mission. We at Gboko East Constituency and indeed the entire Benue State and Nigeria at large can attest to your doggedness, commitment to service and selflesness as reflected In your contribution to the peaceful co-existence and socio-economic development of our dear state and beyond.

    Gboko East State constituency is an acclaimed beneficiary of your uncommon service to humanity.

    “Our prayers are that the Almighty God, who has richly prospered you and ordered your every step these past years will continue to bless you with good health and fulfillment in the many more years of worthy service ahead of you,” Utsaha said.

    Chief E. K. Ashiekaa (SAN), who chaired the event, described Hon as “extra-ordinary person, an extra-ordinary son of Tiv land, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, an erudite author, a philanthropist and a very hard working person, a man who loves the Tiv and people who come near him”.

    He recalled how Hon encouraged him in his low moments as a lawyer, and spoke of the need for mentorship.

    “We are celebrating an icon in his own chosen career,” Ashiekaa said.

    Special Assistant to Governor Ortom on Community Relations, Hon. Silas Anjie, who chaired the event’s central planning committee, described Hon as humble, hardworking, God-fearing, dogged, diligent, generous and a gentleman.

    He said Hon had a humane disposition and uncommon ability to mix with the under privileged without discrimination.

    “You have contributed in no small measure to the legal profession and the development of the Federation of Nigeria at large,” Anjie stated

    Silas Anjie said Hon contributed to the development of not only the legal profession but the country.

    “These qualities which are the hallmark of greatness have endeared him to the people and earned him admiration, love and respect from people in and outside the state,” Anjie said.

    The 2018 set of the Nigerian Law School graduates who have just been called to the Nigerian Bar presented a big framed photograph to Hon in recognition of his contributions to the development of the State and the legal profession.

    The man Hon

     

    Hon was born on December 9, 1967 in Kano. An indigene of Gboko, Benue State, S.T. Hon attended St. Francis Primary School, Gboko, where he obtained the First School Leaving Certificate in 1980.

    He had a brief secondary education at Mbatiav Secondary School, Ikpenger but later, in 1981, attended Kings Comprehensive College, Mkar, Gboko, where he graduated in 1985.

    Hon also undertook studies at the School of Basis Studies, Makurdi between 1985 and 1987, where he obtained the Interim Joint Admission Board (IJMB) Certificate.

    In that same year 1987, he gained direct admission to study Law at the University of Jos; and he graduated therefrom in 1990.

    He was called to the Nigerian Bar in 1991, after successfully completing the mandatory one-year programme at the Nigerian Law School, Lagos.

    In 2008, Hon was elevated to the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria  (SAN). He was the only applicant elevated that year as an academic owing largely to his quite onerous task of combining research and book writing with legal practice.

    After undertaking mandatory study at the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Nigeria, Hon was inducted as a Fellow of that Institute, the highest any person can attain in arbitration.

    Court of Appeal President Justice Zainab Adamu Bulkachuwa appointed Hon as a member of the Court of Appeal Rules Advisory Committee.

    Hon is the author of many books. He is the co-author of: Management of Primary Schools at the Third Tier of Government in Nigeria: a legal manual (Based on Decree No. 3 of 1991; and published in 1992 during NYSC). He was the only NYSC member of set 1991 to publish a book.

    He is the author of Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence in Nigeria (Based on the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 and published in 2004).

    Hon is the author of Law of Evidence in Nigeria: Substantive and Procedural (Published in 2006), as well  as Civil Procedure In Nigeria [Federal High Court, State High Courts And FCT Abuja High Court] (Published in 2008).

    His other books are: S.T. Hon’s Law of Evidence in Nigeria, VOLS. I AND II (2012), S.T. Hon’s Constitutional and Migration Law in Nigeria (2016), Nigerian Legal Diction and Phraseology (Manuscript), Nigeria From Medieval Times To The Year 2000: Facts, Figures And Details (Manuscript).

     

     

     

     

  • Senior Advocate faults state’s funding of courts

    Senior Advocate faults state’s funding of courts

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Sebastine Hon has described as unconstitutional the involvement of State Governments in the funding of superior courts of record listed in Section 6(5) of the Constitution.

    Hon argued that the funding of such courts as State High Courts, Sharia Courts of Appeal and Customary Courts of Appeal by State Governments is not only wrong, it exposes the courts  to undue manipulation and control by state Governors, thereby compromising the rule of law and due process.

    In a statement, Hon relied on some constitutional provisions, which he cited, to support his position.

    He called for the abolition of the practice and urged the National Judicial Council (NJC) to assume the responsibility of budgeting for and funding these courts.

    Part of the statement reads: “By section 6(1) of the 1999 Constitution as amended, judicial powers of the Federation are to be exercised by ‘the courts to which this section relates, being courts established for the Federation.’

    “The phrase ‘to which this section relates’ becomes consummated when we look at subsection (5) of that same section – which has listed the mentioned ‘Federal’ courts, including the State High Courts, the Sharia Courts of Appeal and the Customary Courts of Appeal of the various states.

    “This then means that these courts are federal courts, established by the Constitution to operate at the State level.

    “To cement this fact, Section 84(1) and (4) of the same Constitution has placed payment of remuneration, salaries and allowances of all judicial officers manning superior courts of record in Nigeria, including the courts hereby discussed, on the doorsteps of the Federal Government.

    “If these courts were mere state courts, the states would have been saddled with the responsibility of paying the salaries and emoluments of the judicial officers manning them.

    “Also, Section 84(7) of the Constitution provides that ‘The recurrent expenditure of judicial offices in the Federation (in addition to salaries and allowances of the judicial officers mentioned in subsection (4) of this section) shall be a charge upon the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation.’

    “The phrase ‘recurrent expenditure’ here carries its ordinary, grammatical meaning – ‘that which happens again and again.’ This then means that all year-in, year-out expenditure of these courts are a direct responsibility of the Federal Government.

    “There cannot be any other reasonable interpretation of this subsection, which has decidedly used the words ‘of judicial offices’ (not ‘officers’).

    “Clearly, therefore, these Federal Courts operating as State Courts (‘judicial offices’) are to have their year-in, year-out expenditure drawn directly from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation.

    “A consideration of other portions of the Constitution will further show the unpretentious intensions of its framers that these Courts herein discussed are Federal Courts.

    “Paragraph 21(e) of Part I of the 3rd Schedule to the 1999 Constitution has vested powers in the National Judicial Council to ‘collect, control and disburse all moneys, capital and recurrent, for the Judiciary.’

    “The word ‘Judiciary’ here contemplates, in an inescapable fashion, the courts ‘established for the Federation’ in section 6(1) and (5) of the Constitution.

    “It will be absurd to posit that only the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the Federal High Court and the National Industrial Court are contemplated by paragraph 21(e) – since section 6(1) and (5) of the Constitution has listed all the superior courts of record, including the ones here discussed as belonging to one Federal family.

    “Compliment the above with paragraph 6 of Part II to the 3rd Schedule to the Constitution, which is silent on the disbursement of capital and recurrent expenditure by the various State Judicial Service Commissions.

    “Since, therefore, the courts here discussed are not state courts; State Governments have, with respect, no constitutional duty or power to provide for them in their annual budgets. I am again backed by section 81(1) of the Constitution, which mandates the President of Nigeria to lay before the National Assembly in each financial year estimates of the revenues and ‘expenditure of the Federation’ for the next following financial year.

    “The phrase ‘of the Federation’ here agrees with the phrase ‘courts established for the Federation’ in section 6(1) of the Constitution.

    “I decided to bring these salient constitutional truth up for various reasons, first of which is to persuade that this clearly unconstitutional practice of State Governments funding these courts should stop forthwith.

    “Secondly, by so funding the courts, the rule of law and constitutional due process is facing a regressive nosedive in the various States – owing to the ‘winner takes all’ attitude of most State Governors.

    “Thirdly, the said State Governments themselves, operating on very lean budgets, are not even properly funding the said courts, again compromising multidimensionally the rule of law in the states.

    “I, therefore, call on the NJC to collect and collate all capital and recurrent expenditures of these courts from their various heads, make a consolidated budget and present it to the Budget Office for inclusion in the yet to be submitted 2018 Federal budget,” Hon said.

  • South East: SAN commends Army’s pledge to probe allegation of ill-treatment

    South East: SAN commends Army’s pledge to probe allegation of ill-treatment

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Sebastine Hon has commended the decision by the military authorities to probe allegation of dehumanising treatment meted out to some captured pro-Biafra agitators by soldiers.

    Hon who codenamed the maltreament of agitators, said he was horrified when he said a video recording of what took place.

    He faulted the way the Federal Government was handling the Biafra issue and urged South East leaders to also do more in engaging the agitating youths.

    Hon said: “The video which has gone viral on the Internet, showing most dehumanising treatment of persons suspected to be Biafra apologists, is horrible and horrifying, to say the least.

    “It is unbelievable that the Nigerian Army, once respected globally, would condescend to the level of flogging its hapless captives and compelling them to submerge themselves in thick mud.

    “I didn’t believe my eyes when I first watched the video; and I almost became a psychological wreck when I attempted to watch it again.

    “What that video has depicted personnel of the Nigerian doing is condemnable in all ramifications. Not even prisoners of war are treated that way!

    “The promise by the army to investigate is salutary; but I must caution that this should not be a fluke.

    “For goodness sake, even though the renewed Biafra agitation is, responsibly speaking, not well thought out by its protagonists, but the dismissive aloofness of the Federal authorities is not good either.

    “I can’t fathom why, in a democracy, the Federal Government is blatantly refusing to meaningfully engage dissidents threatening dismemberment of that same federation, but rather derisively threat them as mere noisy elements. It is never done this way.

    “For the avoidance of any doubt, I do not support any separatist agitation in Nigeria now; but at the same time, I do not support the Nigerian Government’s demeaning response to the smouldering crisis.

    “I warned the other day that Nigeria is hemorrhaging and even hanging on the cliff. I also advised that President Muhammadu Buhari should use the carrot and stick approach of the President Obasanjo era – which deservedly beat the Niger Delta agitators to their game.

    “The actions of the Federal Government and the Nigerian Army are capable of being misinterpreted as anti-Igbo.

    “In conclusion, however, I wish to strongly plead for caution, especially on the part of the Federal Government. The apparent depicting of Biafran apologists as arch enemies is improper, with due respect.

    “Igbo leaders, political and traditional, should also not just speak up against separatism, they should also engage constructively with the agitators on the need for them to see the futility of their actions. A stitch in time saves nine!” Hon said.

  • Lawyer urges other African court’s to emulate Kenya

    Lawyer urges other African court’s to emulate Kenya

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon has commended the Kenya Supreme Court for exhibiting rare courage in nullifying the country’s last presidential election.

    Hon said the decision by Kenya’s highest court was not only a celebration of the rule of law, but an indication that democratic tradition was gradually taking root in the continent.

    He urged the Judiciary in other African countries to emulate the display of bravery on the part of the Kenya Judiciary.

    Hon said: “Recent happenings on the political landscape of Africa, including the defeat of a sitting President – Goodluck Jonathan – and his voluntary concession of defeat – all point to the fact that there is a positive upswing in African political thinking.

    “And with the pronouncement of the Kenyan Supreme Court, I think Africans are beginning to think out of the box now.

    “The trend is most welcome and should spread like wild harmattan fire across Africa.

    “Wake me up in the middle of the night; I will still be celebrating this victory for not just democracy, but also the rule of law, in Africa. It is an emerging trend that must be supported by all persons of good will,” Hon said.

  • SAN disagrees with Falana, insists Chief Judges can’t grant pardon

    SAN disagrees with Falana, insists Chief Judges can’t grant pardon

    The debate over whether or not Chief Judges possess the power to grant pardon to awaiting trial detainees continued yesterday with a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon insisting the Chief Judges cannot legally grant pardon.

    Hon spoke in reaction to argument credited to human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN) to the effect that Chief Judges can grant pardon under the Prisons Act and the Criminal Justice (Release from Custody) (Special Provisions) Act.

    Falana had, in a counter-argument, faulted Hon’s position, which was widely reported in the Media on Monday.

    But, in a detailed analysis Tuesday, Hon insisted on his position, arguing among others, that the laws cited by Falana were unconstitutional.

    Hon said: “For the avoidance of any doubt, section 35(4) of the 1999 Constitution has covered the field on what should be done to any person accused of an offence; and there is no room for any administrative action by the Judiciary.

    “Only judicial actions can lead to the release of detained persons, hence any administrative action, apart from the one in sections 175n and 212 will be directly in conflict with the said section 35(4).

    “Also, sections 175 and 212 of the Constitution have advisedly used the phrase ‘a person concerned with or convicted of an offence.’

    “The phrase ‘concerned with an offence’ is so wide that it has entirely and completely covered the situations contemplated by both the Prisons Act and the Criminal Justice (Release from Custody) (Special Provisions) Act.

    “The Constitution having covered the field, these two Acts are null and void, for attempting to provide for the same release from custody, yet by the administrative action of the Judiciary.

    “Similar arguments were advanced in the US case of Schick vs. Reed, 419 US 256 (1974) at 266.

    In rejecting them, Chief Justice Burger held in emphatic terms that ‘the unbroken practice since 1790 compels the conclusion’ that the power of the US President to grant pardon ‘flows from the Constitution alone, not from any legislative enactments,’ concluding that such presidential powers ‘cannot be modified, abridged, or diminished by the Congress.’

    “How then can the Nigerian National Assembly decimate or abridge this power, just because of Item 48 on the Exclusive Legislative List?

    “If Chief Judges are permitted to release persons from custody, what is the legal implication of that action? Do the detainees get the reprieve of pardon that only the President or the Governor can grant?

    “No! They are merely released, while the charges against them are pending! What then happens to those charges, judging from our Constitution or even the Acts cited by Mr. Falana, SAN? Nothing!

    “But if the President or a Governor grants pardon, section 36(10) of the Constitution comes in handy to erase the conviction or even accusation (in view of the phrase ‘concerned with an offence in sections 175 and 212).

    “This position was also reached by the Court of Appeal in Falae vs. Obasanjo (No. 2) (1999) 4 NWLR (Pt. 599) 476 at 495.

    “I conclude by restating that the respective Chief Judges, including even the Chief Justice of Nigeria, have no constitutional powers to embark on prison amnesty.

    “Such amnesties, including the power of the Attorneys-General to enter nolle prosequi, are deliberately left by the framers of the Constitution in the hands of politicians, to avoid the sacredness of the Judiciary being muddied or messed up with, by permitting judicial officers, through administrative actions, to order the release of politically-exposed persons from criminal prosecution,” Hon said.

     

  • Osinbajo lauded for classifying hate speech as terrorism

    Osinbajo lauded for classifying hate speech as terrorism

    The Acting President, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo has been hailed for his classification of hate speech as act of terrorism.

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon said Osinbajo was “absolutely correct” in his position on the issue of hate speech.

    Hon, in a statement Thursday, noted that Section 1(2) of the Terrorism Act, 2011, has described ‘an act of terrorism’ as an act deliberately done with malice, which, amongst other things, is intended or can reasonably be regarded as having been intended to seriously intimidate a population or seriously destabilise or destroy the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation.

    He argued that there could be no better description of the current situation in Nigeria, where ethnic or cultural groups are issuing, willy-nilly organised and unguarded threats to other ethnic groups in Nigeria.

    “I personally must commend the Acting President for this timely proclamation, which only confirms and I dare say addresses my public statement a few days ago that the Federal Government must act fast to arrest our apparent, if not clear, descent to total anarchy, due to the avalanche of hate speeches flying over the whole place.

    “The 2011 Terrorism Act was amended by Act No. 10 of 2013, which upped the minimum punishment for terrorism from 2 years to five years.

    “I will ask the Federal Government to bring to bear the full weight of the law on perpetrators and their financiers or supporters – as Section 4 of the 2011 Act criminalises support for terrorism.

    “We must not permit, I say with all vehemence, our collective existence to be threatened for very narrow and selfish reasons,” Hon said.

     

  • SAN faults Senate’s invitation to Sagay

    SAN faults Senate’s invitation to Sagay

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Sebastine Hon has said the Senate lacks the power to summons any private individual over his/her comments or view on the activities of members the legislative house.

    Hon spoke Thursday in relation to reports to the effect that the Senate has summoned the Chairman of the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PACAC), Professor Itse Sagay (SAN) over his comments about the legislators.

    The Senior Advocate argued, in a statement yesterday, that the summons by the Senate to Prof Sagay to appear before it over and concerning the Senators is unconstitutional.

    Hon said: “While those comments are not salutary, they do not merit an invitation to appear before the Upper House.

    “A similar situation had played out in the 1980s, in the case of Senate of the National Assembly vs. Tony Momoh ((1982) FNLR 307. In this case, Prince Tony Momoh had published in the Daily Times of 4/2/1980 an article the Senate of the 2nd Republic considered was
    injurious to its image.

    “A Senate Committee then invited Prince Momoh to appear before it to ‘clarify’ those press comments. Prince Momoh challenged the invitation in court.

    “Even though the Court of Appeal held that Prince Momoh’s action was premature – since the Senate had not taken steps to compel his attendance – it laid down general principles regarding exercise of oversight functions by the National Assembly, thus:

    •      The powers of the National Assembly to investigate are not general but are limited to the executing or administration of laws enacted by the National Assembly and the disbursement and administering of moneys appropriated by it. In other words, the constitutional provisions
      granting oversight functions do not constitute the National Assembly as a universal

    “Ombudsman” with power to invite and scrutinise the conduct of every member of the public.

    •       The powers of the National Assembly in this regard are further circumscribed and limited by subsection (2) of the equivalent of section 88 of the 1999 Constitution – in that the National Assembly can only invite members of the public when it wants to gather facts for the purpose of enabling it to make laws or amend existing laws.

    •       Since from the resolution, Exhibit A, and the proceedings of the Senate, Exhibit C, the purpose of the invitation was to show resentment for Prince Momoh’s affront in daring to publish a matter against the Distinguished Senators rather than for the stated constitutional purposes, the invitation was not proper.

    “The same Court of Appeal restated these principles in El Rufai vs. House of Representatives (2003) FWLR (Pt. 173) 162, wherein the present Governor of Kaduna State, then Director-General of the Bureau for Public Enterprises, BPE, upon being investigated by an ad-hoc
    committee of the House of Representatives, wrote and circulated certain offensive materials against the House.

    “Upon being invited for ‘clarification’ of those comments, he rushed to court; and the Court of Appeal, as stated above, restated the principles in Momoh’s case.

    “Indeed, the Nigerian Supreme Court also, in the case of Attorney-General of Abia State vs. Attorney-General of the Federation (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 338) 604 at 674, brevi manu, circumscribed the oversight functions of the National Assembly in the following words: Oversight functions can only be exercised within the law making powers of the National Assembly. The functions are not at large and must be exercised within the provisions of the Constitution.

    “This line of judicial thinking in Nigeria agrees with the position of the US Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals, in a long line of cases – Watkins vs. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 187 (1957); Townsend vs. United States, 95F 2d 352, 361 (D.C. Cir. 1938); McGrain vs.
    Dougherty, 716 Ed. 590, etc.

    “In conclusion, while I agree that Prof. Sagay’s comments against the Distinguished Senators were inappropriate, I make bold to state that the Senate lacks the constitutional competence to summon him to appear before it merely on account of those comments.

    “Let me also add that the Legislature should be cautious in extending summonses to persons under its constitutional oversight functions. If it engages with personalities just because they have made snide comments against it, this will amount to the Legislature reducing its
    constitutional as an arm of government.

    “The Legislature qua the National Assembly should as much as possible conduct itself in such a way as not to be seen to be quarrelsome or petty,” Hon said.

  • CJN’s appointment: SAN commends Buhari’s cautious approach

    CJN’s appointment: SAN commends Buhari’s cautious approach

    …Says delay in Onnoghen’s confirmation could result in chaos

     

    A Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Sebastine Hon has commended President Muhammadu Buhari’s cautious approach to the appointment of a substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN).

    Hon commended the position taken on the issue by the acting CJN, Justice Walter Onnoghen and the Chairman, Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption (PLACAC), Prof Itse Sagay (SAN).

    Justice Onnoghen had, in a statement on Thursday, appealed to those criticising President Buhari over his perceived delay in appointing him (Onnoghne) in substantive capacity to allow the President the free hand to operate.

    Sagay has also aired similar view in his recent comments on the issue of the appointment of a substantive CJN.

    In a statement Friday, Hon assured President Buhari that Onnoghen’s appointment in substantive capacity was the best way the President could secure the buy-in of the Judiciary and ensure the success of his various reform initiatives and anti-corruption fight.

    Part of the statement reads: “I am personally delighted and I also commend the Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter Onnoghen, for his timely reaction to the delay in the President forwarding his name to the Senate for confirmation as the substantive Chief Justice of Nigeria.

    “Honourable Justice Onnoghen has, from that reaction, proved he is worthy of occupying that high seat. By shrugging off the apparent pressure on him to utter those words, Justice Onnoghen has shown that he is a nationalistic personality and is also ready and willing to shoulder the responsibility of assuming the headship of the nation’s third arm of government.

    “I hereby encourage, if not plead, with Mr. President to forward Justice Onnoghen’s name to the Senate for confirmation. Whatever reforms the President intends for the Judiciary will not be hindered but will be enhanced if our dear President does this.

    “The reason is plain enough: it is when and only when the Judiciary willingly keys into those reforms that the said reforms will see the light of the day. I am dead serious on this!
    Finally, I also commend the reaction of respected Presidential aide, Prof. Itse Sagay, SAN to the issue.

    “The learned Professor’s views reflect a most genuine inner mind of a critical stakeholder to clean the Augean Stable of the Judiciary. Prof. Sagay has a very rich resume as a no-nonesense anti-corruption crusader; hence his views on such issues should never be treated lightly.

    “However, I also, with humility, ask that he should again look at the watertight procedure spelt out in the Constitution for the appointment and removal from office of judicial officers. Such appointment and removal must involve the National Judicial Council (NJC); and it is only the cooperation rather than the coercion of the NJC that will achieve the desired result.

    “Mr. President’s anti-graft war is on course, but he needs the two other arms of government, especially the Judiciary, to achieve this. Also, far-reaching reforms like the anti-corruption war are best achieved over time and not necessarily instantaneously.

    “Mr. President should please send Justice Onnoghen’s name for confirmation as the CJN, to save an avoidable constitutional crisis in the Judiciary,” Hon said.