TheNewsGuru

Tag: judges

  • Court fixes date for judgment in suit challenging appointment of judges

    Court fixes date for judgment in suit challenging appointment of judges

    The Federal High Court Abuja has fixed October 15 to deliver judgment in a suit challenging the procedure adopted by President Muhammadu Buhari in the appointment of judges of the High Court of Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

    Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed the date on Wednesday after parties adopted their brief of argument and adumbrated on their submissions.

    The plaintiff, Mr Oladimeji Ekengba is challenging the sending of the names of 11 nominees for appointment as judges of High Court of the FCT to the Senate for confirmation.

    Ekengba, a legal practioner, listed the President, the Attorney- General of Federation and Minister of Justice, the Senate, the Senate President, the clerk of the Senate, Chief Justice of Nigeria and the National Judicial Council as respondents.

    Ekengba prayed the court to hold that the procedure adopted by the president in forwarding the names of the 11 nominees for appointment as judges of the FCT High Court to the senate for confirmation was unconstitutional.

    He urged the court to determine whether by virtue of the provisions of Section 256(2)of the 1999 Constitution, the senate had the power to appoint, screen, confirm persons recommended as judges of the FCT High Court.

    He also prayed the court to determine whether by virtue of the provisions of

    Section 256(2)of the 1999 Constitution, the can abdicate his duty and responsibilities to the senate for the appointment of persons as judges of the FCT High Court.

    The plaintiff further prayed the court for a declaration that by virtue of the provisions of Section 256(2) of the 1999 Constitution, the senate lacked the powers to appoint, screen and confirm persons recommended as judges of the FCT High Court.

    He also prayed the court to declare the purported appointment as unconstitutional, null and void.

    Ekengba urged the court to hold that the appointment of the 11 new judges could not be subject to senate confirmation.

    A counsel from the office of the AGF, Mr Tinuola Babalola in her submission, prayed the court to dismiss the suit for lacking in merit.

    Babalola argued that the plaintiff had no locus standi (legal right) to institute the action.

    Other respondents’ lawyers also raised objections to the suit insisting that the plaintiff lacked the locus standi to file it.

    Meanwhile, the National Judicial Council asked the court to remove it’s name as a respondent in the suit on the grounds that it had not done anything wrong.

  • Photo: Wike gives 41 Range Rover SUVs to Rivers judges

    Photo: Wike gives 41 Range Rover SUVs to Rivers judges

    The Governor of Rivers State, Nyesom Wike has given 41 Range Rover Discovery Sports Utility Vehicles to judges serving in Rivers State High Court and Customary Courts.

    Other beneficiaries are judges of Rivers State origin serving the nation in the Federal Judicial Service.

    Wike said that his government gave judges and magistrates vehicles two years ago with the promise that they would be replaced from time to time as a matter of deliberate policy.

    According to him, the SUVs were the fulfillment of the promise he made to the judges to enhance effective delivery of Justice in the state.

    He said as a lawyer and Governor of the state, the rule of law, independence of the judiciary and unhindered justice delivery were paramount to his administration.

    The governor said the SUVs have a warranty of five years and that the judges could send them to Coscharis Motors if they noticed any fault within the period.

    Wike announced that his government had also completed and taken possession of a furnished 20 unit residential quarters for judges, which the government started in 2018 in fulfillment of its policy for providing decent and life long accommodation for all states’ Judges.

    He said that the Chief Judge of the Federation is expected to commission the estate soon and present certificates of occupancy (Cof O) to the benefitting judges who will occupy the houses for life.

    He said the gesture was the manifestation of the government’s abiding commitment to the independence and integrity of the State judicial arm of government.

    He said while the state government provides qualitative services for the judiciary, no judicial person had the right to dictate to the government in making choices relating to accommodation and justice dispensation as he hoped that the government’s largesse would spur the judiciary to efficiency and eliminate corruption and indolence in the system.

    Earlier, the Chief Judge of the state, Justice Iyaye Lamikara had thanked the governor for providing infrastructure and technology development for the judiciary, saying “We are very proud to be the first judiciary in the country to have an e-library, and one of the pioneer judiciaries to commence e-filing e-assignment of cases and virtual hearing of cases.”

  • Group cautions NJC over Judges seniority row in Enugu

    Group cautions NJC over Judges seniority row in Enugu

    An international human rights advocacy group under the aegis of the Igbo Oriental Think-tank has called on the National Judicial Council (NJC) to take a second closer look at its position on the issue of seniority and ranking of judges in Enugu state, based on extant High Court Rules of the state.

    The group in a press conference held in Enugu this afternoon noted that in the course of its advocacy and drive for equity, fairness, brotherliness and foster unity among the contending Nationalities in Nigeria, especially among the peoples of the South East geopolitical zone of Nigeria, especially Enugu State, they discovered a sensitive issue that bothered on the “seniority amongst the Enugu State High Court Judges”.

    According its Coordinating Secretary, Dr Kenneth Anozie, “…we took a personal study of it, with relevant instant laws as our guide. Our objective was to unravel the truth, and ensure that the Rule of Law is followed to the letter in other to ensure equity and Justice.

    In the 3-page statement, Dr Anozie disclosed that the advocacy group discovered that the Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria had in a letter ref No AJC/S.3/XXIV/147 dated Oct 12, 1998 approved and communicated the then Provisional Ruling Council’s appointment of a list of eleven Judges in Enugu State to the then Military Administrator of the state.

    The letter, Anozie pointed out, stated clearly that “the appointment of the following in order of precedence as Judges of Enugu State with effect from Sept 17, 1998. In the said letter these were the Judges approved “in order of precedence”; Benedict Egwuatu Agbata, Mrs N.P Emehulu, Fredrick Chukwuemeka Obieze, Kignsley Ngwu Udeh, Mrs Regina Obiageli Nwodo, Elvis Chile Ajaonu, Stanley Chuks Nnaji, Anthony Okechukwu Onovo, Reuben Nwajiobi Onuorah, Godwin Osita Anibueze and Raymond Ozoemena.

    The group, in drawing the attention of the NJC, the Enugu State Government and the public to see and recognize Justice Anthony Okechukwu Onovo as the Number Two judicial officer of the state, next to the incumbent Chief Judge, stated that out of the eleven High Court Judges appointed same day alongside Onovo, only four remain active in the service today. While the other seven have either retired or are deceased. The four still active according to the “order of precedence” are; Hon Justice N.P Emehelu, (The incumbent Honourable Chief Judge of Enugu State), Hon Justice A.O Onovo, Hon Justice R.N Onuorah and Hon Justice A.R Ozoemena.

    That in accordance with High Court Rules of Enugu State which states explicitly in Part 11, Section 7(3); “for the avoidance of doubt, where on the same day two or more persons are appointed to the office of a Judge, they shall have precedence in order in which they took their oath of office”

    Based on this, it was therefore clear that Honourable Justice A. O. Onovo is number (2) in the ranking, based on all the relevant laws of Enugu State High Court Rules, and according to the letter of approval sent to the Military Administrator of Enugu State by the then Honorable Chief Justice of Nigeria on Oct 12,1998.

    The Rights group bemoaned that in the course of its investigations discovered that the NJC based on a petition by Hon Justice A.R. Ozoemena has somehow waded into the matter and even given a position on the subject. That in its letter dated Dec 24, 2019 Ref. NJC/S.14/HC/EN/11/1/188 to the Chief Justice of Enugu State, Hon Justice N.P Emehelu, listing the “Order of seniority” as below:

    Name. Date of call to the Bar

    (1) Hon. Justice N. P. Emehelu. 1981

    (2) Hon. Justice A. R. Ozoemena. 1983

    (3) Hon. Justice R. N. Onuorah. 1984

    (4) Hon. Justice A. O. Onovo. 1987

    From the foregoing, the NJC and His Lordship, it would be seen did not take into cognizance the High Court Laws of Enugu State, which states categorically in Part 11, Section 7(3) “For the avoidance of doubt, where on the same day two or more persons are appointed to the office of a Judge they shall have precedence in the order in which they took their oath of office.”

    The Igbo Oriental Think Tank noted that as a rights group founded on equity, good governance and Rule of Law demand that the right things need to be done. So that the Temple of Justice should not be seen as an arena to perpetrate injustice.

  • Military plane crashes, judges, soldiers, others on board all dead

    Military plane crashes, judges, soldiers, others on board all dead

    A Russian Antonov military plane carrying Sudanese judges and injured people crashed on Thursday in the Darfur region of Sudan, with all those on board killed, according to the Sudanese Red Crescent.

    The plane was travelling from the city of El Geneina – located in the west of Sudan, near the border with Chad – to the Sudanese capital, Khartoum.

    It was not immediately clear what caused the crash.

    The aircraft was transporting people injured in a tribal conflict in Darfur to Khartoum for treatment.

    The plane’s crew comprised three Sudanese army officers.

    It was not immediately clear how many people the plane had been transporting

  • NJC recommends appointment of 33 judges

    NJC recommends appointment of 33 judges

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended the appointment of 33 judicial officers including Chief Judges for six states.

    NJC’s spokesman, Soji Oye made this public in a statement in Abuja on Thursday.

    Oye said the appointments will affect Anambra, Kebbi, Cross River, Zamfara, Ogun, Osun, Rivers, Imo, Sokoto, Ekiti and Niger states.

    Those recommended for appointment as Chief Judges are: Justice Onochie Manasseh Anyachebelu (for Anambra State); Justice Mohammed Suleiman Ambursa (Kebbi) and Justice Akon Bassey Ikpeme (Cross River).

    Others are Kadi Umaru Muhammad Gusau (as Grand Kadi, Zamfara State Sharia Court of Appeal; Justice Mobolaji Ayodele Ojo (as President, Customary Court of Appeal, Ogun State and Justice Foluke Eunice Awolalu (as President, Customery Court of Appeal, Osun State).

    For the River State Hig Court, the NJC recommended the appointment of four judges.

    They are: Stephens Dirialakeibama Jumbo, Chuku Mark Onyema, Ngbor-Abina Lemea and Fibresima Florence Atili.

    Two were appointed for Ogun State High Court – Olufunmilayo O. Stanley and Olukemi Olusola Yetunde Oresanya.

    For Imo State High Court, , the NJC recommended the appointment of seven judges.

    They are Onyeka Vincent Ifeanyichukwu, Leweanya Kechinyere A., Victoria Chinyere Isiguzo, Vivian O. B. Ekezie, Eze Nonye Eke, Ihuoma Grace Chukwunyere, and Ibeawuchi Edith Chinyere.

    Three were recommended for Sokoto State High Court. They are: Aminu Garba Sifawa, Mohammed Mohammed and Raliya Uthman Muhammad.

    One was recommended for Ekiti State High Court. He is Obafemi Makanju Fasanmi.

    Three were recommended for Niger State High Court. They are Salisu Alhassan Majidadi, Binta Bawa and Danladi Ahmad.
    For Ogun State High Court, three were recommended. They are Michael Kolawole Peters, Anthony Olusesan Araba and Adebisi Olusola Femi-Segun.

    The NJC equally recommended the appointment of two judges for the Imo State Customary Court of Appeal.
    They are Obichere Ijeoma Josephine and Nze Ifeanyi Tennyson.

    It also recommended on judge for the Rivers State Customary Court of Appeal, in the person of Amadi Ericonda, while it recommended Bello Khalid Jega for appointment as Kadi for Kebbi State Sharia Court of Appeal.

    Oye said: “All recommended candidates are expected to be sworn-in after approval by their respective State Governors and
    confirmation by the respective State House of Assembly.”

  • Between Presidential poll and the Judges’ gavels, By Carl Umegboro

    Between Presidential poll and the Judges’ gavels, By Carl Umegboro

    The Presidential Election Petition Tribunal for 2019 polls concluded its onerous tasks on Wednesday 13 September 2019 which ended in favour of the ruling party, All Progressives Congress, APC candidate, President Muhammadu Buhari and Prof Yemi Osinbajo that polled 15,191,847 votes; the highest number of votes and met all other criteria stipulated in the enabling laws for emergence of a winner in presidential poll.

    In the judgment at the Court of Appeal, the court affirmed President Buhari’s victory as a justified win. Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Atiku Abubarka polled 11,262,978 votes to emerge the first runner-up in the poll, but dissatisfied with the results, brought actions challenging the return of President Buhari as winner by the returning officer. Atiku alleged he obtained different figures from the server of the electoral umpire; Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC which purportedly showed he won the election with margins. Unfortunately, INEC disclaimed the purported servers’ data stating that Commission didn’t use the server for the poll and earlier, the Supreme Court dismissed the action entirely for lack of merit. The outcome repeated itself at the tribunal.

    Resultantly, whilst Buhari’s supporters hailed the judgments, the oppositions insinuated they were robbed of their mandate by the verdicts, bitterly alleging that judiciary merely delivered the scripts of ‘the-power-that-be’. However, in any developing nations, such insinuations are no shocking news particularly in the camps of the oppositions whenever verdicts favour the ruling party or her government. For example, the same judiciary was massively, overwhelmingly hailed as the last hope of the common man when the court’s gavels, one after another stopped APC from fielding candidates in Rivers, Zamfara, Bauchi, Sokoto and Cross River states recently which made PDP to sweep the entire polling units without stress.

    Be that as it may, appraising the poll verdicts demands legal reasoning and critical-thinking in determining if justice is actually done as adumbrated by Lord Hewart CJ in the Appeal Court in R v Sussex Justices, ex- parte McCarthy (1924) – “Not only must justice be done; it must also be seen to be done.” To do this profoundly, the two contentions which bothered on Buhari’s eligibility to contest elections without the School certificate and also the purported polls results tracked from the Commission’s server which the court refused to accept are germane. Convincingly, the two are the major causes of actions.

    Seriously, the contentions vis-à-vis education qualification ought not to be stretched too far to the Court of Appeal as it is settled ab initio. In fact, it isn’t supposed to go beyond a village square as Part IV of the 1999 Constitution (FRN) as amended which serves as the Interpretation Act crystal clearly dealt with it in a simple language. From it, it is noteworthy that issues bothering on education qualification as far as general elections are concened are exclusive duties of the Commission as it is statutorily clothed with discretionary powers to even go beyond certificate holders for all elective offices including office of the President. By implications, a candidate or political party lacks powers to challenge another on the ground of academic qualification as long as it meets the satisfaction of the Commission. This may sound witty but that is the law.

    Section 318 (1) (supra) provides, "In this constitution, unless it is otherwise expressly provided or the context otherwise requires – "School Certificate or its equivalent" means (a)a Secondary School Certificate or its equivalent, or Grade II Teacher’s Certificate, the City and Guilds Certificate; or (b)education up to Secondary School Certificate level; or(c) Primary Six School Leaving Certificate or its equivalent and (i)service in the public or private sector in the Federation in any capacity acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for a minimum of ten years.

    And (ii) attendance at courses and training in such institutions as may be acceptable to the Independent National Electoral Commission for periods totalling up to a minimum of one year, and(iii) the ability to read, write, understand and communicate in the English language to the satisfaction of the Independent National Electoral Commission, and (d) any other qualification acceptable by the Independent National Electoral Commission.”

    These provisos show clearly that the Constitution is broadminded and extremely accommodating on the issue. Apart from the statutory provision above, the court is clothed with powers to reasonably take judicial notice of Buhari's status in the Nigerian Army as a retired major general in government's payroll to determine his eligibility vis-à-vis education up to school certificate level. Judicial notice enables a judge to accept a fact without the need of a party to prove it through evidence on account of notoriety: things of common knowledge.

    On the purported results tracked from INEC server which was the basis for the botched action to upturn the election victory in favour of Atiku and PDP, indeed, it sounds absurd in the sense that a serious contention should have been anchored on original results obtained, recorded and signed by all accredited party-agents alongside designated INEC officials at the polling units accordingly. As a matter of fact, the results authenticated by accredited party agents supersede any results found anywhere whether in the server or INEC records.
    Thus, any results that are inconsistent with the one duly signed by all the party agents are invariably shams. To leave the results from the polling units and accept whatever data inputted by someone in the server is not a robust action. Instructively, in manual elections, the results from polling units are the primary evidence of scores unlike online voting that the server is a primary source. Thus, where results in the servers don't correspond with scores obtained at polling units in a manual election, it shows the server's data were manipulated. Holistically, the verdicts are profound and distinctively anchored on points of law accordingly instead of emotions and sentiments. Thus, I bow to their Lordships.

    Umegboro is a public affairs analyst and Associate, Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (United Kingdom). 08023184542-SMS only Https:carlumegboro.com

  • ECOWAS Court upholds sack of three Supreme Court justices

    The Community Court of the Economic Community of West African State (ECOWAS) has upheld the sack of three Justices of the Supreme Court of Ghana.

    The Justices – Paul Uuter Dery, Mustapha Habib Logoh and Gilbert Ayisi Addo – were among over 30 judges secretly filmed while allegedly accepting bribes in an undercover investigation carried in 2015 by journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas,

    In a judgment on Monday, a three-man panel of the ECOWAS Court dismissed the suit, marked: ECW/CCJ/APP/42/16 filed by the Justices and held that it was unmeritorious.

    In the judgment read by Justice Dupe Atoki, the court held that the applicants failed to prove that their rights were violated in process leading to the disciplinary actions taken against them by Ghana Judicial Council.

    It held that although the secret filing of the Justices in their offices, done without their consent, amounted to interference with their right to privacy, the interference was justifiable as it was meant to expose unlawful conduct by public officers.

    The court upheld the argument by the state of Ghana, to the effect that the secret filming of the Justices was supported by Article 1(1)(b) of the Whistle Blower Act of Ghana and Section 61 of the Data Protection Act of Ghana.

    It found that the applicants’ right to privacy was interfered with by the secret filming of their activities by Anas, but went further to hold that the interference, being premised on national legislation, is in compliance with the law.

    The court noted that as Justices, who did not deny knowledge or ignorance of the law, they ought to know that their conduct would be subjected to scrutiny as public officers.

    It further agreed with the state of Ghana that, in engaging in the alleged act of accepting bribe, the applicants ought to know that they would be opened to secret investigation.

    The court held that the interference with the applicants’ right to privacy, aimed at exposing of the commission of a crime, was justified and necessary in a democratic society.

    It said the applicants, by their position as judge’s, are public officers, who receive public funds are, in that capacity, accountable to the public and could be subjected to investigation, where there is reasonable suspicion of their involvement in the commission of a crime.

    “The secret recording of the applicants is necessary in a democratic society. The claim to violation of the right to privacy fails,” the court said.

    The court also held that the applicants failed to prove their claim that the respondent violated their rights to fair hearing, non-discrimination/equality before the law and right to work.

    The court noted that, while two of the applicants failed to respond to the query handed them by the Chief Justice, they challenged their suspension and investigation up to the Supreme Court and lost in all the six cases they filed.

    It said, having rightly exercised their right to access the court up to the highest court in Ghana, the applicants cannot claimed to have been denied fair hearing.

    The Justices were suspended in 2016 by the Ghana Judicial Council while a committee set up by the Chief Justice, Justice Sophia Akuffo investigated a petition written against them by Anas and his company, Tiger Eye PI Limited.

    While on suspension, they were placed on half salaries, and at the conclusion of its investigation, the committee recommended their removal, which the Ghanaian President approved in December 2018.

    In the suit they filed at the ECOWAS Court in 2016, through their lawyer, Nii Kpakpo Samoa Addo, the applicants alleged the violation of their fundamental human rights by the government of Ghana following the suspension of some of their allowances and the payment of half of their salary, because of an ongoing disciplinary procedure against them initiated by the country’s Judicial Council.

    The applicants stated that the state of Ghana violated their rights to fair hearing and administrative justice, equality before the law and freedom from discrimination, privacy and work, including the action of the council, in paying them half of their monthly salaries, the suspension of their allowances and the constitution of a panel to investigate them.

    They argued that these actions constituted an attempt by the state of Ghana to unlawfully and unfairly deprive them of their employment and right to work.

     

  • ‘Don’t betray your oath,’ Acting CJN urges judges on election tribunals

    The Acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad has urged judges nominated to serve in election tribunals to remain loyal to the judicial oath to which the subscribed upon their inauguration.

    Muhammad, who reminded the judges that their choice as members of the tribunals impose on them the duty to rise above all temptations and do justice in accordance with the law.

    He noted that the task of adjudicating election petitions would task the content of the conscience of members of the various election tribunals.

    The Acting CJN spoke in Abuja on Thursday while swearing 17 of the 250 judges nominated to serve in the election tribunals that will determine the various petition arising from this year’s general elections.

    Muhammad had, on January 26 this year, swore in the others.

    Speaking on Thursday, the Acting CJN said: “You have just taken an oath that has not only imposed a course of upright morale undertaking on you but equally looped you with destiny.

    “Your participation in these tribunals at this crucial phase of the Nigerian judiciary is not by accident but a clear design of the Almighty Allah.

    “This is an enormous national assignment that will literally put the contents of your conscience to test.

    “As judicial officers, you may have, one way or the other, trodden this somewhat dreaded terrain, but you must, against all odds, rise above the murky waters of failure and infamy.’

    “The onus is on you to keep aloft the banner of honesty and integrity that the judiciary has painstakingly hoisted over the years.

    “Your appointment to serve in these tribunals is well conceived, thus, you should do everything within your ability to justify this confidence.

    “There is no doubt that you will be exposed to different forms of temptations and even blackmails but you should know that all are aimed at testing your strength of character, honesty and integrity.

    “My candid advice is that, in whatever circumstance, you should always be mindful of this oath you have just taken because it now stands as an uncompromising witness between you and your creator.

    “It behoves you to willingly submit yourselves to the sanctity of the rule of law and supremacy of the Constitution in the discharge of your judicial functions.

    “It is the general belief that elections held when the rule of law is too fragile, seldom lead to lasting democratic governance.

    “You are enjoined to always strike a balance between justice and rule of law as you embark on this critical national assignment.

    “As you all know, the rule of law delayed, is lasting peace denied because justice is a handmaiden of true peace. We need this in Nigeria more than ever before.

    “The trumpet must first sound from the temple of justice; hence we put you forward as champions of this noble cause.

    “By virtue of this oath, you are now armed with the power to adjucate on electoral disputes and take decisions in accordance with your conviction Which must be deeply rooted in law and not sentiments or public opinion.

    “l pray the Almighty Allah will grant you the courage and wisdom to carry out this responsibility without faltering or failing,” Muhammad said.

  • NJC recommends appointment of 21 state judges (FULL LIST)

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has recommended 21 judges for appointment as chief judges and judicial officers in various states.

    They include judges of the conventional courts and Sharia courts.

    The announcement was made Friday in a statement by the NJC spokesperson, Soji Oye.

    The appointments are subject to co-formation of the president or governors of respective states.

     

    Read the statement below:

    PRESS RELEASE

    11th May, 2018

    The National Judicial Council under the Chairmanship of the Honourable Mr. Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, GCON, at its 86th Meeting, which was held on 8th and 9th May, 2018, recommended the under-listed names of twenty-one (21) successful candidates as Heads of Courts and Judicial Officers for the Federal/State High Courts and the Code of Conduct Tribunal:

    1. APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE, KEBBI STATE
    2. i) Hon. Mr. Justice Elizabeth A. Karatu

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF CHIEF JUDGE, KATSINA STATE
    2. i) Hon. Mr. Justice Musa Danladi Abubakar

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF GRAND KADI KATSINA STATE
    2. i) Hon. Kadi Alhafiz Mikail Abubakar

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, FCT
    2. i) Hon. Mr. Justice Abbazih Musa Abubakar Saddeeq

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF TWO (2) JUDGES, HIGH COURT, NIGER STATE
    2. i) Bilikisu Gambo Yusuf
    3. ii) Ishaku Usman

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF THREE (3) JUDGES, HIGH COURT, BORNO STATE
    2. i) Musa Mustapha
    3. ii) Baba Gani Karumi

    iii) Waziri Alhaji Abubakar

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF THREE (3) JUDGES, HIGH COURT, KOGI STATE
    2. i) Husaini Alhasan Saidu
    3. ii) Zubayr Saliu

    iii) Ruth Alolo Alfa

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF TWO (2) JUDGES, HIGH COURT, GOMBE STATE
    2. i) Muhammad Haruna
    3. ii) Fatima Musa

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF TWO (2) KADIS SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, GOMBE STATE
    2. i) Muhammad Inuwa Gombe
    3. ii) Hadi Aminu

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF FOUR (4) KADIS SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, GOMBE STATE
    2. i) Ahmad Muhammad Gidado
    3. ii) Mustapha Lalloki

     

    iii) Dalha Bashir Ahmad

    1. iv) Atiku Muhammad Bello

     

    1. APPOINTMENT OF ONE (1) MEMBER, CODE OF CONDUCT TRIBUNAL
    2. i) Julie Abieyuwa Anabor

    The newly appointed candidates will be sworn-in after the approval of the President and their respective State Governors as the case may be.

     

    Soji Oye

    Director, Information

  • Ghanaian President Akufo-addo suspends four judges

    Ghanaian President Akufo-addo suspends four judges

    Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo has suspended four High Court judges with immediate effect.

    The four were part of the 12 High Court judges captured by an investigative journalist, Anas Aremeyaw Anas, in audio and video recordings in 2015, which allegedly showed them collecting bribes from litigants to pervert the course of justice.

    All the indicted justices were dismissed with the exception of the four who had gone to court to battle the case.

    A statement from the Presidency signed by the Director of Communications, Eugene Arhin, said President Akufo-Addo took the decision on advice by the Judicial Council.

    The suspended judges include Mr. Justice Uuter Paul Dery, Mr. Justice Mustapha Logoh, Mr. Justice Gilbert Ayisi Addo and Mr. Justice Charles Quist.

    “The President of the Republic, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, on Tuesday, 8th May, 2018, on the advice of the Judicial Council, given in accordance with Article 146 (10) (b) of the Constitution, suspended with immediate effect, four (4) Justices of the High Court.”

    “The suspension follows the establishment of a prima facie case against the four Justices, by the Committee set up by the Chief Justice to investigate alleged acts of bribery and corruption against certain persons, including the four Justices, as contained in the 29th August, 2015 petition of Mr. Anas Aremeyaw Anas,” the statement said.

    The statement also added that the four justices have been notified about the suspension.

    “President Akufo-Addo has by letter, dated Tuesday, 8th May, 2018, notified each of the four Justices of the decision,” the statement added.