Tag: Judiciary

  • When justice flees the judiciary, the country dies a little – Owei Lakemfa

    By Owei Lakemfa.

    THE immediate-past Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen, on December 22, 2020, turned 70. It was less an occasion for celebration and more of lamentation. On this date that should have marked his retirement, his thoughts were fixated on that January 26, 2019 date he was yanked from the bench and replaced by an uninspiring Justice Ibrahim Tanko Muhammad. The former CJN said of those events: “How can you just wake up one morning and they say you have been removed from office. Nobody is ready to tell you anything, all everybody was just saying is resign, resign. What have I done?” Onnoghen laments that nobody told him his offence.

    But why would he expect anybody tell him his offence when he had not committed any? He knew he had committed no offence; those who removed him also knew that, as did discerning Nigerians, and of course, the international community. There were various reasons necessitating his removal. First, he was one of those judges the Executive tried to intimidate by raiding their homes in the dead of night in October, 2016. This was read as an attempt to harass, intimidate and brow beat the judiciary to submission. So naturally he might have been angry. Secondly, the Presidency appeared to have tried to stall his appoint as CJN. Thirdly, his suspension came a day before he was scheduled to swear in members of election tribunals in readiness for the general elections that were less than three weeks away.

    In fact, the international community seemed convinced that the pending election was the immediate trigger. That was why the United States pointed out that Onnoghen’s removal was: “without the support of the legislative branch on the eve of national and state elections”. Britain said yanking off the CJN: “risks affecting both domestic and international perceptions on the credibility of the forthcoming elections.” The European Union said the removal did not follow due process.

    Rather than due process, a media trial was conducted which found Onnoghen ‘guilty.’ Then lots of pressure was mounted on him to resign. When he insisted on knowing his crimes and be allowed his day in court, there was a cacophony of rehearsed voices who campaigned that he must resign to ‘save the judiciary.” If after his unconstitutional suspension, Onnoghen had refused to resign, the Executive would have in accordance with Section 292 of the constitution, required two thirds of the Senate to remove him. This might have been a near-impossible task in a Senate presided over by Dr. Bukola Saraki which was striving for independence from an overbearing Presidency. Hence the trick to get him to resign.

    So being told his offence(s) would have meant placing on the shoulders of his traducers, the enormous task of citing the constitutional provisions that can justify their unconstitutional actions. It would have meant giving Onnoghen the basis to put up his defence. There was also the possibility of the judicial executioners losing in court; that was a risk they were not willing to take. I must not forget to mention that the services of a pliant Code of Conduct Tribunal were secured. But a proper trial at the Tribunal would have dragged into the general elections which would have defeated a main purpose of the attack on the CJN, and by extension, on the judiciary.

    Yes, some feeble resistance including by an infiltrated Nigeria Bar Association was put up, but the coup against the judiciary could not be stopped. In a sense, Onnoghen should count himself lucky that all that was done to him was removal and forced resignation, not dismissal and imprisonment. He can still fall back on his pension. But for me, he owes the country a duty to press for justice to be done. However, this is not the struggle of an individual; it should be a collective one to save the country.

    If the Chief Justice of the Federation is denied justice and has no hope that justice will be done in his case, how can the judiciary be touted as the hope of the common man; how can an hopeless judiciary give hope? The fact that the courts continue to run with a full paraphernalia of wigged judges and robed lawyers does not mean the wheel of justice is grinding, not even slowly. We have a conquered judiciary that at crucial points in our ‘democracy’ will do the bidding of the master. As the general principle goes, justice should not just be done, but must be seen to be done.

    Once a serving CJN who is the head of the judiciary and symbol of that arm of government can be removed unconstitutionally and without him being given the basic right to defend himself, whether successfully or unsuccessfully, the justice system cannot but be on life support. The ultimate cowardice exhibited is that the National Judicial Commission, NJC, has two years later, not summoned the courage to release its own findings. I am not sure this is because it is not courageous enough to pronounce Onnoghen guilty were he was found to be wanting; it is more because it lacks the courage to pronounce him innocent as this will anger the Executive. So rather than advance the cause of justice, it prefers to let sleeping dogs lie.

    The Court of Appeal gave the country a glimmer of hope when on December 16, 2020, it upturned the conviction and seven years jail term imposed on the former National Publicity Secretary of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Olisa Metuh, by Justice Okon Abang of the Federal High Court, Abuja. Everybody and organ of the judiciary knew that Metuh in the court of Justice Abang was like lamb taken to the slaughter. But for years, nothing was done to stop this parody of justice as it played out in a court room built and run with public funds. I had drawn attention to this travesty in my May 28, 2018 column titled “Bang on, Justice Abang, bang on!” That was 23 months before he finally sentenced Metuh.

    Now that the Metuh trial is to start all over, who bears the costs? As for Justice Abang, like we say in the Niger Delta ‘nothing concern am.’ He will not be surcharged and I can bet that he would in no way be held accountable for his work on the bench which the Appeal Court in a 2016 judgement had described as “ridiculous” as it found that Justice Abang had “raped democracy”. If anything, as long as he continues in his old ways, he has bright prospects and chances of heading the judiciary at one point or stage, and then going into blissful retirement. The court shall rise!

  • TNG SPECIAL REPORT: 21 years after, how the Judiciary fared under a sustained Constitutional Democracy in Nigeria

    TNG SPECIAL REPORT: 21 years after, how the Judiciary fared under a sustained Constitutional Democracy in Nigeria

    …how elections were won in courts since 1999 till date
    By Emmanuel Bagudu
    On May 29, 1999, Nigeria established a new constitutional democracy with a democratically elected president,Olusegun Obasanjo ushering in the fourth republic and Nigeria’s highest legal document; the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).
    This singular development unchained the judiciary from the bondage of military decrees. Hope was restored once again as Nigerians “kissed good-bye” to Military dictatorship.
    More important for the citizenry was the fact that they had a place to seek redress. The Judiciary. It was the last bastion of succour since its major role as the third arm of government is to interprete the law and administer Justice without fear or favour.
    It is 21 years now without a single interruption to the established constitutional democracy. This became possible due to the consistency in the practice of democratic tenets by the Nigerian judiciary in its contributions in the adminitration of Justice. Administration of Justice which is an integral part of democratic tenets revolves the the ideals of economic Justice, political justice and social Justice. “… the Nigerian Judiciary has helped in the observance of democracy by guiding the citizenry on ways to abide by the rules of engagement in the democratic process….” Constitutional Lawyer John-mary Jideobi told TNG in an interview. This piece explores the various roles and contributions of the Nigerian Judiciary in the sustenance of the 21-year old constitutional democracy in Nigeria.
    Pre- and Post election legal tussle served as the main issue that called the Nigerian Judiciary to duty. Civil Society organisations, politics parties, Human right communities and individuals throng the law cuts almost on daily basis seeking redress in their perceived breach of the democratic process.
    From the request of the ban of the military in elections, request for disqualication of candidates, to the request for authentication of election results or termination as the case may be. Nigeria’s current president Muhammadu Buhari was one of the notable Nigerians that had hope in the democratic tenets being practice by the Judiciary. Mr Buhari went to court thrice to challenge the victory of his opponents in three different presidential elections which he participated as a candidate.
    As a candidate of the All Nigeria People’s Party (ANPP) Buhari sued the federal government to court over abuse of security forces, lapses in voting procedures and other elements which he claimed were severely flawed in 2003 elections that saw General Olusegun Obasanjo secured a second term in office.
    President Buhari also challenged the victory of former President Umaru Musa Yar’adua in 2007 as well as the victory of immediate past President Goodluck Jonathan in 2011. Other agrieved persons in the polity also reached out to the judiciary and secured Victory. Very popular in 2003 was the governorship tussle in Rivers State. The then governor of Rivers State, Rotimi Amaechi won his election in the Court. He was installed by the Judiciary. Ameachi won the legal tussle in an unprecedented manner. The Supreme Court sacked then governor-elect, Celestine Omehia and held that Amaechi was the lawfully nominated candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The action of the Apex court helped restore hope to those who felt that they were robbed off their “democratic mandates”.
    In another related case; an Imo state Senator, Ifeanyi Ararume secured his democratic mandate through the Judiciary. He won the PDP primaries in 2007 to become governorship candidate in Imo State. The party then denied him the ticket and chose to run Charles Ugwu in his place. Ararume protested this decision and approached the courts and won.
    The party (PDP) then expelled him and chose not to field a candidate, leaving the field open for Ikedi Ohakim of the Progressive Peoples Alliance (PPA) to emerge as governor.
    The case of Amaechi and Ararume made the independence of the judiciary more conspicuous. The people believe in the judiciary and are often consoled by the fact that elections are not over until the court says so.
    Other remarkable pronouncements by the Judiciary against the declaration by the election umpire, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) includes the emergence of Adams Oshiomhole as Governor of Edo State.
    The Edo State Governorship Election Tribunal in 2008 upturned the election of Professor Oserheimen Osunbor as winner of the April gubernatorial election in the state and directed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to “withdraw the Certificate of Return issued to Osunbor and be issued to Comrade Adams Oshiomhole as Governor of Edo State, having scored a quarter of total votes cast in 12 of the 18 local governmet areas of the state.
    Dissatisfied but hopefull Osunbor appealed the decision. But the Court of Appeal sitting in Benin, endorsed the decision of the Tribunal by declaring Oshiomhole duly elected governor of Edo State.
    In the judgment, Justice Umaru Farouk Abdullahi president of then Appeal Court held that the Action Congress (AC) candidate scored highest vote, in the April 14, 2007 governorship poll in Edo State. The court, as a result, dismissed the appeal filed by Osunbor. Prior to that, the election of two PDP governors in Anambra state had been upturned and Peter Obi sworn in. The elections were that of Dr. Chris Uba and Senator Andy Uba.
    Other anullment of gubernatorial elections in Ekiti and Osun States as well as ‘arrest of judgment’in Sokoto State followed later. Interstingly, those decisions, which were mainly against the ruling PDP, were enforced as soon as the courts declared. There were also anullment of election into the parliament at either the federal or state levels.
    The political parties also enjoyed more life span through the judiciary. Factional leaders of the opposition PDP Ali Modu Sheriff and Ahmed Makarfi slogged it in court on whose faction is the authentic party. The legal tussle which ended at the Supreme Court saw the Makarfi led faction taking the glory.
    Reading the lead judgment of the Apex Court, Justice Bode Rhodes-Vivour, held that contrary to the majority judgment of the Port Harcourt Division of the Court of Appeal, the suit filed by Makarfi faction before the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt was not an abuse of court.
    The apex court also held that the National Convention of the PDP held on May 21, 2016, rightly and constitutionally removed Sheriff. It held that the convention acted rightly and not in breach of any aspect of the PDP’s constitution by setting up the Makarfi-led National Caretaker Committee.
    Most recently is the just concluded 2019 polls, the Imo and Bayelsa governorship polls were all decided by the judiciary.
    In Imo, Emeka Ihedeoha of the PDP was sacked by the Supreme Court and was replaced by Senator Hope Uzodimma of the All Progressive Congress (APC). While in Bayelsa, the Apex Court sacked David Lyon of the APC and installed Douye Diri of the PDP.
    At the moment, the 21 years old democracy has given the Nigerian Democratic Process more maturity. Its power to determine who wins elections has come to stay. It is no doubt the last resort. It is indeed an integral part of the electoral process and a determinant of an existing Democracy.
  • FG releases details of judiciary financial autonomy order

    FG releases details of judiciary financial autonomy order

    The federal government has released details of Executive Order 10, which grants financial autonomy to the legislature and judiciary at the State level.

    The details were released by Umar Gwandu, Special Assistant on Media to Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami four days after it was signed into law by President Mohammadu Buhari.

    Read details of the Financial Autonomy for the State Legislature and Judiciary Order of 2020.

    “1. Appropriation, Authorisation, Orders, etc:

    (a) Without prejudice to any other applicable laws, legislations and conventions at the State tier of Government, which also provides for financial autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary, allocation of appropriated funds to the State Legislature and State Judiciary in the State appropriation laws in the annual budget of the State, shall be a charge upon the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State, as a First Line Charge.

    (b) The Accountant-General of the Federation shall by this Order and such any other Orders, Regulations or Guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, authorise the deduction from source, in the course of Federation Accounts Allocation from the money allocated to any State of the Federation that fails to release allocation meant for the State Legislature and State Judiciary in line with the financial autonomy guaranteed by Section 121(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as Amended).

    “2. Determination of the Budget:

    Notwithstanding the provisions of any existing law, convention or regulation, other than the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as Amended), providing for appropriation or management of funds at the State tier of Government as follows:

    (a) every State Government of the Federation shall set up a Committee from the commencement of this Executive Order comprising the Commissioner of Finance, Accountant-General of the State, representative of the State Budget Office, Chief Registrars of State High Court, Sharia Court of Appeal and Customary Court of Appeal, (where applicable), the Clerk to the State House of Assembly and the Secretary of the State Judicial Service Committee or Commission;

    (b) where applicable, determine and ascertain from the Revenue profile of the State, a workable budget for each Arm of the State Government based on the request and needs of the Accounting Officers; and (c) the Committee shall be given and accorded legal recognition in the various relevant appropriation or Funds Management Laws of the States.

    “3. Creation of State Judiciary Budget Committee:

    (a) For the purpose of Appropriation to the State Judiciary, each State Judiciary of the federation shall set up a State Judiciary Budget Committee (in this Order referred to as “a Committee”) to serves as an administrative body to prepare, administer and implement the budget of the State Judiciary with such modifications as may be required to meet the needs of the State Judiciary.

    (b) The Committee shall consist of the State Chief Judge as the Chairman with the Grand Kadi, Sharia Court of Appeal, the President, Customary Court of Appeal, where applicable and two members of the Judicial Service Committee or Judicial Service Commission to be appointed by the Chief Judge, in consultation with other Members of the Committee, to serve as Members.

    (c) The Chief Registrar of the State High Court is to serve as Secretary.

    (d) The modalities for budget preparations and implementation shall include but not limited to the following:

    (i) upon the receipt of the Budget Estimates of the Fiscal Year for the State Judiciary, the State Judiciary Budget Committee shall invite all the Accounting Officers of the various Courts/Judicial Bodies to defend their budget estimates;

    (ii) the budget estimates for Courts and Judicial bodies shall be based on expenditure line items given to them by the State Judiciary Budget Committee which shall be defended before the State House of Assembly; and

    (iii) upon the appropriation of Funds, the State Judiciary Budget Committee shall on a monthly basis or as the case may be, request the Budget Office of the State to release the statutory allocation for the quarter or monthly and the Authority to Incur Expenditure (AIE) shall be raised by the Office of the Accountant-General of the State for the release of the Fund to all the Heads of Courts/Judicial Bodies in line with the Appropriation Law.

    “4. Budget Preparation, Templates and Modalities:

    (a) Without prejudice to any existing budget templates in force in any State of the federation, the State Legislature and State Judiciary shall continue to maintain the strata of line consultations, inter Arms and inter-Agency pre-budget consultations and frontloading as is done in some States.

    (b) The budget templates and models in the schedule to this Executive Order shall apply to State Legislature and State Judiciary with modifications, in compliance with Section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as Amended) and such other applicable Laws.

    “5. Appropriation and Supplementary Appropriation Law, etc:

    (a) At the commencement of this Order for implementation of financial autonomy for State Legislature and State Judiciary in line with section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), all States of the Federation shall include the allocations of the two Arms of Government in their Appropriation Laws.

    (b) Where Appropriation Law exists in any State of the federation before the commencement and implementation of this Order, such States shall amend their Appropriation Law to encompass financial autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary.

    (c) This Order expects States without Appropriation Law on the financial autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary to do so.

    “6. Special Allocation for the Judiciary:

    (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of this Executive Order, in the first three years of its implementation, there shall be special extraordinary capital allocations for the Judiciary to undertake capital development of State Judiciary Complexes, High Court Complexes, Sharia Court of Appeal, Customary Court of Appeal and Court Complexes of other Courts befitting the status of a Courts.

    (b) In this section, “Other Courts” includes Magistrate Courts, District Courts, Customary Courts and Area Courts.

    “7. Implementation of this Order:

    (a) Subject to section 8(1) of this Order, implementation of the provisions of this Order shall be carried out by the Presidential Implementation Committee in accordance with its recommendations.

    (b) To the extent as may be permitted by law, the Accountant-General of the Federation shall take appropriate steps to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Order and implementation of the recommendations of the Committee, as may from time to time be made.

    (c) This Order shall be implemented consistently with States applicable laws that guarantee financial autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary and subject to the availability of funds.

    “8. Citation: This ORDER may be cited as the Implementation of Financial Autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary Order, 2020.

    “9. Commencement: This Executive Order shall take effect from this 20th Day of May 2020.”

  • Governors meet over independence of state’s legislature, judiciary

    Governors meet over independence of state’s legislature, judiciary

    The thirty- Six State Governors under the aegis of the Nigeria Governors Forum, NGF will meet tomorrow to brainstorm on President Muhammadu Buhari’s Executive Order granting financial autonomy to the legislature and judiciary at the state level.

    The governors who will be holding their 9th teleconference meeting since the lockdown that resulted from the outbreak of the Coronavirus, COVID-19 pandemic, are expected to come up with a position on the Executive Order. President Buhari signed the Executive Order into law on Friday last week.

    Recall that the federal government has given a very strong warning that any state government which withholds funds meant for their respective Houses of Assembly and judiciary would get their allocations deducted at source by the Accountant General of the Federation and remitted directly to the affected state organs.

    The invitation to the governors intimating them of the meeting was issued by the Director-General of NGF, Asishana Bayo Okauru.

    The governors are also expected to discuss follow ups from the last NEC meeting.

    According to a statement by the Head of Media and Public Affairs, Abdulrazaque Bello-Barkindo, the governors will be given an update on the Covid19 pandemic in the country as well as review a letter from the National Coordinator of the Presidential Task Force on Covid19 as it relates to the Covid19 draft regulations.

    There will also be a general update on the efforts of the Coalition Against Covid-19, CACOVID.

    The statement read, “Governors of the 36 states will be holding their 9th teleconference meeting since the lockdown that resulted from the outbreak of the Covid19 pandemic.

    “The meeting, which is taking place tomorrow Wednesday 27th May 2020, at 1400 hrs will, like eight others before it, have in attendance all the state governors via Microsoft Team from their various states.

    “Among the issues to be reviewed are a number of critical national questions that revolve around the financial autonomy for the states’ judiciary and legislature code-named the Executive Order 10, 2020.

    “The governors will also touch issues around the NLNG ownership, the controversial NCDC Bill, the restructuring of states’ loans and the FAAC deductions which have been a recurring decimal on the governors’ table.

    “As usual the governors will be given an update on the Covid19 pandemic in the country as well as review a letter from the National Coordinator of the Presidential Task Force on Covid19 as it relates to the Covid19 draft regulations. “There will also be a general update on the efforts of the Coalition Against Covid19, CACOVID.

    “The invitation which was issued by the Director-General of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, Mr Asishana Bayo Okauru also disclosed that the meeting will discuss follow ups from the last”

  • Buhari signs Executive Order granting financial autonomy to state legislature, judiciary, demands full compliance

    President Muhammadu Buhari on Friday signed into law the Executive Order Number 10 of 2020 for the implementation of Financial Autonomy of State Legislature and State Judiciary.

    Dr Umar Gwandu, Special Assistant to the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice on Media and Public Relations disclosed this on Friday in Abuja.

    The President signed the Executive Order based on the powers vested in him as the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria under Section 5 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as Amended).

    This extends to the execution and maintenance of laws made by the National Assembly (including but not limited to Section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as Amended), which guarantee financial autonomy of the State Legislature and State Judiciary.

    He noted that a Presidential Implementation Committee was constituted to fashion out strategies and modalities for the implementation of financial autonomy for the State Legislature and State Judiciary.

    This is in compliance with section 121(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended).

    “The amendment took into consideration all other applicable laws, instruments, conventions and regulations, which provide for financial autonomy at the State tier of Government’’.

    According to him, `the implementation of financial autonomy of the State Legislature and State Judiciary will strengthen the institutions at that tier of Government and make them more independent and accountable’.

    This would be in line with the tenets of democracy as enshrined in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as Amended).

    “The Order Provides that, `the Accountant-General of the Federation shall by this Order and any such other Orders, Regulations or Guidelines as may be issued by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, authorise the deduction from source in the course of Federation Accounts Allocation from the money allocated to any State of the Federation that fails to release allocation meant for the State Legislature and State Judiciary in line with the financial autonomy guaranteed by Section 121(3) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as Amended)”.

    “Based on the Executive Order at the commencement of this Order for implementation of financial autonomy for State Legislature and State Judiciary in line with section 121(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as Amended), all States of the Federation shall include the allocations of the two Arms of Government in their Appropriation Laws.

    “Article 6 (1) also provides that `notwithstanding the provisions of this Executive Order, in the first three years of its implementation, there shall be special extraordinary capital allocations for the Judiciary to undertake capital development of State Judiciary Complexes, High Court Complexes, Sharia Court of Appeal, Customary Court of Appeal and Court Complexes of other Courts befitting the status of Courts’’.

  • Who regulates the political industry? – Chidi Amuta

    By Chid Amuta

    Since 1999, democracy has delivered two persisting dividends to Nigeria: a predictable calendar of national ritual and a gigantic all- powerful political industry. Imperfections and disfigurements notwithstanding, we now have a fair idea of what must happen in this polity every four years. The campaigns. The festival of rallies. The pageant of politicians who address mobs of starving illiterates in English. The parade of known villains as born again messiahs crowned by the reduction of our national hopes into party marketing slogans and lazy catch phrases. Afterwards, the mournful processions of losers and their crashing ambitions drowned by the drums of triumph and ascension trails of winners to power, wealth and glory.

    Beyond this drama, the real dividend of democracy may be the emergence of politics as a huge unregulated industry. Politics and politicians regulate and direct our lives. The political industry through its control of the mechanics of government is the ultimate allocator of wealth, opportunity and privilege. It owns and controls the public sector through the complex machinery of the administrative state. It also controls the private sector through regulatory institutions like the stock exchange and the Central Bank in addition to frequent legislative disruptions and interventions. The political industry has a monopoly of the awesome power of outlandish pork, patronage and elaborate rents.

    But who actually regulates the political industry? This question has become urgent and necessary as the nation reels under a prevalent and crippling deficit of competence, accountability and responsibility among key captains and operatives of the nation’s mammoth power and politics industrial complex.

    We are dealing with an expansive all- dominating industry. It is a manpower dominant industry, employing a huge army of people with their own extended family of hangers on. It is equally an influence pervasive industry. Most importantly, this is an industry that controls every other industry, regulating the environment in which others practice, thrive or wither. The political industry is a super ordinate behemoth, one that determines its own rules and regulations, sets its own entry requirements, procedures and performance standards. For the nation at large, the choice of who leads us is vested in the political parties which act as clearing houses for the political industry.

    We can only guess the precise size of this industry when we estimate the sheer number of elective and appointive offices and their correlates that have featured in the political cycles since 1999. There are at any given time, the President, Vice President, about 36-42 ministers, 30-100 advisers (special, senior special, plenipotentiary etc),109 Senators, 360 House of Representative members (add at least 500 legislative aides), 36 Governors, 36 Deputy governors, about 540 commissioners, about 1,000 plus members of state houses of assembly, 776 Local government chairmen, 9,288 Councilors.

    Take the total emoluments, allowances, perquisites, paraphernalia and benefits of all political office holders at the various levels of government and you begin to imagine the expanse, size, capital and recurrent cost of the political industry. A recent industry market survey has determined that official Nigeria alone buys more Japanese SUVs every four years than all the desert safari companies of the Gulf Arab states put together!

    Most importantly, the captains of this army of political officialdom are responsible for determining the national, state and local government budgets. They allocate the resources, appropriate the funds and expend same on behalf of all of us.

    Yet somehow, politics has managed to disguise its industrial scope and status by focusing public attention on the myth and ritual of democracy decorated with the rhetoric of representative government and public service. Sometimes, politicians have focused attention on the game aspect of politics, playing it more like a vicious but unserious sport. A few honest political actors have, however, come close to admitting their role as players in an all important industry by emphasizing public service as the essence of political leadership. In other words they are in it to serve ‘the people’, a sort of enlightened service industry that renders an invaluable service to a nebulous client called ‘the people’.

    As leaders and controllers of the mechanics of government, political industry captains and operatives determine the basic outlines of our lives and livelihood as citizens, corporate or private. They determine your access to basic services, how much you will pay as tax and what will be left for you and your family. They determines how much you will pay for darkness punctuated by electricity, the quality of teachers that your children will be saddled with, what your essential drug will cost, how many toll gates will dot your way to your village as well as the size of your retirement pension if any.

    We may endlessly trumpet the relative independence of the private sector and its power to determine the economic fate of the nation. This is only to the extent that the political industry creates the legislative and general macro economic environment in which such private sector can thrive. Otherwise, even the boldest and most massive private sector investment and economic power can be drowned and destabilized overnight by a casual regulatory twist by the presiding political establishment.

    The political industry is the most attractive sector of the economy, guaranteeing an out of this world return on investment. Here is one industry that powers the creation of new social classes at a rate that would make any business entrepreneur blue with envy. It used to be the belief that education or entrepreneurship are the quickest routes out of poverty. Not anymore. The political industry is the only one in which a destitute can leapfrog into the billionaire club in less than four years. A local government councilor or chairman can transmute in a very short time from a miserable jobless pauper into an upper middle class poster boy cruising around in fancy cars, living it up in five star hotels and jetting casually across the globe.

    This is precisely because the main unofficial activity of the political industry is rent seeking and rent sharing. This is a complement to the allocation of pork as well as the privatization of constituency benefits. In Nigeria, political office holders tend to be state officials in the day and rent seekers and pork administrators at night. Due to the preoccupation with rents, a political city like Abuja is easily the most expensive piece of real estate anywhere on the African soil. Property prices and rentals as well as the general price levels for luxury goods tend to bear no relationship to the value of the item on sale.

    This is not peculiar to Abuja. It tends to apply to most political capitals in the world. In the United States for instance, of the ten most expensive neighbourhoods nationwide, five are in Washington DC. In a rent seeking economy, the proceeds come from an invisible trade in favours, influences and connections up to the highest level.

    Like every other industry, our political industry has a monopoly of its own recruitment and entry requirements. The strengths and defects in the system are showcased by the performance of the leaders of today especially our imperious state governors. In all fairness, the system has thrown up a few good men. One outstanding governor is leading the charge against the Covid-19 emergency with clear, articulate and sensible strategies to the delight of the enlightened citizens of his diverse and cosmopolitan state. Another has spent the better part of the last four plus years leading a charge for visionary modernizing governance in a northern citadel state where decadent tradition is battling his efforts. Another has called out soldiers engaged in the Boko Haram counter insurgency for collecting tolls at checkpoints while the terrorists regroup and unleash mayhem.

    One other governor, claiming ever so often to be a scholarly expert in fields ranging from epidemiology to semantics has urged his citizens to avoid social distancing but wear only face masks. Another has usurped the exclusive functions of the federal government by seizing aircraft, arresting pilots and oil workers at will for infringements against his imperial diktat.

    Yet another governor has insisted that citizens of his land locked state need no Covid-19 tests since his all-knowing government has launched an App to determine their health status by remote sensing! Another one has insisted that his state is under divine immunity from the virus as it is the only one whose name appears severally in the Bible.

    From this mixed bag of possibilities, the question that therefore arises is this: Are the captains of the political industry a special interest elite or just strange bed fellows? Are they recognizable by certain features beyond their garish costumes? Is there a unity of purpose, a solidarity of ways and means or some esprit de jouer among them as political players?

    Interactions among them are powered by naked subterfuge. Their quarrels are devoid of substance but yet vicious and warlike. Their disagreements are petty and manage sometimes to rise only to the level of motor park gang feuds. Often, these feuds are settled through rival juju priests armed with amulets and calabashes of dangerous concoctions. In extreme cases, hired assassins are called in for terminal solutions using military grade armaments ranging from assault rifles to improvised explosive devices. Our election seasons become seasons of undeclared warfare fought sometimes in cahoots with rented official security personal.

    Where on rare occasions factional captains of our political industry disagree on policy issues, these disagreements are never ideological. They tend to be a cascade of personal insults and undisguised abuses laced in the idiom of plain gutter snipes. Our parliamentarians engage in no serious debates nor are they identifiable by any known policy inclinations except those dictated by the compass of geo politics, primordial nativism and tribal arithmetic.

    On paper, our political industry may not be as unregulated as I have sounded. After all, every democracy has checks and balances that deter political leaders from gulping absolute power. We expect the legislature, judiciary, the media and civil society to weigh in against the absolutist promptings of an ambitious executive branch. But in our circumstance, do the politicians play by the constitution? Is the followership equipped to hold them accountable by the provisions of a constitution which they themselves hardly understand. In line with the provisions of the 1999 constitution, how many legislators have been recalled by their constituencies since 1999? Hardly any!

    Yet, the Nigerian parliament has relentlessly distinguished itself more by its rascality than anything else. It is fond of floating and fast-tracking bills of doubtful origins and motivation. It is about to railroad a dubious compulsory vaccination bill into law. It once tabled and debated a bill that sought to legalize same sex marriage, another one on social media gagging and yet another seeking to punish ‘hate’ speech by death penalty. These gambits and legislative escapades have been promoted in spite of an abundance of other unattended and urgent national issues. Urgent social legislations on education, healthcare, health insurance, rights of women, social security etc. remain unheard of.

    The bane of Nigerian politics is that our politicians are mostly lawless. They hardly obey the very laws they make or, for that matter, abide by the oaths of office which they take with hands placed on the holy books. People who cannot keep a contract they reach with their fellow men with God as witness cannot be trusted to obey a man -made constitution.

    Nor can we expect the judiciary to curtail the rampaging charge of disorderly politicians in both the executive and legislature. The judiciary as the only branch of government not composed of politicians bears a peculiar burden. But with the passage of time, our politicians have discovered that the easiest way to disregard the constitution is to blackmail, pocket or compromise the judiciary.

    That leaves us with the media to regulate the political industry. One of the ancient truisms of democratic discourse is that the media constitutes a so-called ‘fourth estate’ of the realm. In other words, the media is expected to watch over the political industry by reporting and exposing threats to the sanctity of democratic power. Technology has rendered this truism rather ancient. The rise of the social media means that the power of the media has been dissipated among all citizens who have smart phones, computers and computerized devices in their hands or back pockets.

    We are in the era of everyman as editor, writer, reporter, publisher and media mogul. The established media houses only have the power of brand recognition but no longer a monopoly of the political power of the written word. Alternative media has come with alternative truths in an age that glorifies bare faced lies as ‘alternative truths’. Fake news has emerged as a distinct field of journalistic enquiry with immense political impact and consequences. In a world like this, technology has literally annulled the power of the media. In becoming liberated into the private domain of personal expression, the media has lost its institutional contention for political power. Autocrats no longer need to close media houses anymore. The genie has left the bottle and flown away.

    Our fall back position then would be to retreat into a strictly constitutional republic where the ultimate playbook is the constitution. But a political industry led by rascals and unenlightened power opportunists cannot be trusted guarantee accountable and smart governance according to any constitution. To move forward, we need to reform the political industry to serve a modern Nigeria in two ways.

    First, we urgently need a reform of the nation’s political party mechanics. We must migrate from parties of presumption and notion with ascribed hierarchies to parties of merit based on ideologies in which ascendancy is earned. Only a meritocratic political culture can produce a political industry that would be credible, self- regulating and compliant with the constitution.

    Secondly, we need a knowledge based political establishment to counter the prevailing reign of embarrassing ignorance at most levels of power. An ignorant political industry cannot control and regulate a private sector and civil society that are advanced in knowledge which today rules the world. This particular challenge presents a teachable moment for Nigeria. We need to quickly resurrect the idea of something like the defunct Center for Democratic Studies, a permanent institution to continuously teach successive operatives and captains of our political industry how best to run a responsible democracy that works for all.

    Chidi Amuta is a member of TNG’s advisory board

  • Bayelsa: Why Buhari did not interfere with judiciary – Presidency

    Bayelsa: Why Buhari did not interfere with judiciary – Presidency

    The Presidency has said that President Muhammadu Buhari refused to interfere with the judgment of the Supreme Court, annulling the victory of his party in Bayelsa state.

    The Supreme Court on Thursday sacked the APC governor-elect in Bayelsa State, David Lyon after some irregularities were uncovered in the credentials of his running mate, Biobarakuma Degi-Eremienyo.

    The apex court, however, annulled the joint ticket of both Lyon and Degi-Eremienyo and pronounced the Peoples Democratic Party’s candidates, Douye Diri, and his deputy, Lawrence Ewrujakpor, as the winners of the November 2019 governorship election held in the state.

    The Supreme court also ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission to issue fresh certificates to the candidates of the party with the next highest votes and with the required constitutional spread of votes in the results of the election, which is the PDP’s Diri and his deputy governor-elect, Lawrence Ewrudjakpo.

    However, INEC complied with the verdict of the Supreme Court on Friday morning by issuing a Certificate of Return to Diri.

    In the same vein, the Chief Judge of the state on Friday evening administered the oaths of office on Diri and his deputy.

    Shortly after the inauguration on Friday evening, an aide to the President on Social Media, Lauretta Onochie, praised her principal, President Muhammadu Buhari, for refusing to interfere with the Supreme Court judgment sacking the candidates of his party, the APC, in the Bayelsa State governorship poll.

    Onochie wrote on Twitter; “Done and Dusted. Bayelsa Governor-Elect, Sen. Douye Diri and Deputy, have been sworn in as Governor and Deputy Governor of Bayelsa in Yenagoa. The Supreme Court has spoken. Bayelsans have moved on.

    “I salute the Courage of @MBuhari for refusing to interfere with the judiciary.”

  • Tinubu warns against attack on judiciary over unfavourable court judgements

    Tinubu warns against attack on judiciary over unfavourable court judgements

    National leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC) Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Monday cautioned against undue vilification of the Judiciary.

    Tinubu said Judiciary, being an important pillar in the sustenance of democracy, must be respected and its image protected always.

    He advised that, having adopted democracy as a system of government, we must learn to abide by the rule of law and decisions of the Judiciary irrespective of our disposition to such decisions

    Speaking to reporters after the valedictory court session at the Supreme Court in honour of Justice Amiru Sanusi who retired after attaining the age of 70, Tinubu said: Nigeria’s adoption of democracy as a form of government “is an irrevocable commitment to the rule of law.”

    He added: “Yes, some people are bound to succeed and some will fail (in court). Reasonableness and honesty; integrity and the character of the Judiciary have always been reflected in their judgments.

    “That is what we signed up to as a democratic nation. We should not tarnish the reputation of the Judiciary when its decision goes against us.

    “Life is difficult. Judgment and perfection are of God Almighty. And so, if you notice an error in a way and what you perceived as an error and did not favour you, you should try again. You must not be a winner at every game.

    “We will continue to promote the Judiciary as an important pillar in the sustenance of our democratic dispensation. We have chosen democracy and the Judiciary is a very important arm of the government. We must give the Bench the necessary support.

    “We will continue to promote the Judiciary as an important pillar in the sustenance of our democratic dispensation. We have chosen democracy and the Judiciary is a very important arm of the government. We must give the Bench the necessary support,” he said.

    The event was attended by among others, Governors Adegboyega Oyetaola (Osun); Aminu Masari (Katsina) (the home state of the retired jurist) and Muhammad Abubakar (Jigawa).

    Also a leader of the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN), Chief Thompson Onomigbo Okpoko (SAN) frowned at the growing practice of undue criticism of the Judiciary over its decisions.

    Okpoko who spoke during the valedictory session, on behalf of BOSAN, said: “The political class in our country does not appear to be ready to appreciate the difficult task of judging and determining issues of fact and Law applicable to any case.

    “They rush out to criticize the Judgments of our courts which they may not have read. In this way, victorious parties in a particular case, jubilate and go for thanksgiving singing praises of the Judiciary and declare openly that the Judiciary is truly the last hope of the common man.

    “When that same victorious party loses in another case, he cries out to the high heavens, accusing the Judiciary of corruption and other high crimes against his interest.

    “In recent times, the unfounded accusation against some judicial officers has moved to a call for resignation of a particular judicial officer because the judgment delivered in his court went against their expectation.

    “The call for resignation of a judge because of his judgment, is a dangerous excursion into the territory of Judicial independence.

    “Blackmail and intimidation are not compatible bedmates for the effective dispensation of Justice.

    “When the Supreme Court of the United States ruled against Vice President A.L Gore and stopped him from pursuing his petition further in the Supreme Court, all he said was, ‘I do not agree with the Judgment but I have to accept the Judgment of the Supreme Court’.

    “Why can’t the political class in Nigeria adopt the same attitude and respect our Judicial Institution?

    “We, lawyers must stand up and fight for the judiciary as an institution. Time has come for us and our clients to be held accountable for these unwanted attacks on the judiciary.”

    Okpoko urged Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Ibrahim Muhammad to reconsider his opposition to the appointment of judges from among practicing lawyers.

    The Senior Advocate, who cited instances in the past when senior lawyers were appointed to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court, urged the CJN to create a platform for stakeholders in the judicial sector to resolve the seeming contrasting positions on the issue.

    He said: “Let the door be open to every legible lawyer as enshrined in Section 231(3) and Section 238(3) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    “What the appellate court needs are more intellectually sound, efficient and hard-working justices. Only the best lawyers from the Bar and the Bench should man the apex court.

    “It is the final court; It is not a court for carrying out legal experiment or training. This is a serious issue which deserves serious consideration.

    “It is not a matters to whether the Bar agrees or disagrees with the stand of the Hon. Chief Justice round table talk and in-house debate.

    “I plead with the Right Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria to arrange for this in-house discussion, as it is in the interest of all stakeholders. Unity and oneness of the Bar and Bench is of fundamental importance in policies concerning the operations of courts and the administration of Justice.

    “Until we have a rethink on what appears to be the prohibition imposed on senior members of the Bar from being appointed into the appellate court, the pressure for change is not going to go away anytime soon.

    “The Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria therefore appeal to the Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria and all the appointing authorities of the country to have a rethink and let the need to have a virile Judiciary prevail,” Okpoko said.

    The CJN, who eulogised retired Justice Sanusi, regretted that the rank of Justices of the Supreme Court was fast depleting without prompt replacement.

    Muhammad said: “You will recall that barely seven weeks ago, being Thursday, 12th December, 2019, we assembled here to honour our brother, Justice Kumai Bayang Aka’ahs, JSC, OFR in a similar valedictory session.

    “That ceremony painfully occasioned the depleting of our ranks at the Supreme Court. In a similar fashion, this session, too, is billed to further drastically reduce the number of Supreme Court justices as low as 13.

    “This is not cheering news in view of the ever increasing number of appeals that flood the court on daily basis.

    “The highly embarrassing litigious nature of Nigerians gives no space for the Justices of the court to rest their nerves.

    “We are daily inundated and suffocated with cases of different types that we can hardly have time for ourselves and our families,” the CJN said.

    Other speakers, including the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (represented by the Solicitor General of the Fedration, Dayo Apata) and President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Paul Usoro (SAN) also took turn to shower encomium on the retired Justice Sanusi.

    Justice Sanusi, who recalled his journey through life, was full of praises for his professional colleagues and senior judges, who aided his appointment as a judicial officer and his growth over the years.

  • Judiciary under Buhari, Tanko no longer last hope of common man – PDP

    Judiciary under Buhari, Tanko no longer last hope of common man – PDP

    …Threatens nationwide ‘civil disobedience’

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has threatened nationwide civil disobedience over what it described as dangerous drift in the affairs of the nation.

    The party, still smarting from the loss of the Imo State governorship seat to the All Progressives Congress (APC) through the Supreme Court, demanded a total overhaul of the nation’s electoral process.

    Rising from an emergency National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting in Abuja on Friday, the PDP said it has already put the necessary machinery in motion to ensure that the apex court judgement on the Imo election was reversed.

    Speaking at the opening of the meeting, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar said the PDP ceded power to the APC in 2015, hoping that the then opposition party would further entrench democratic development in the country.

    Atiku, however, said it’s regrettable that instead of building on the democratic structures they inherited in 2015, President Muhammadu Buhari and the APC have continued to act in manners that threaten the nation’s democracy.

    “It is has become necessary for us to mobilise Nigerians to resist the threat to our democracy, unity and development. Therefore, I will like to propose a strong committee to review the last elections and recommend to the party needed reforms to address the challenges in the last elections be set up forthwith.

    “But what cannot wait is that we should not take for granted what has been happening in our democratic processes from the role of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), security agencies and the judiciary.

    “If we take all these roles for granted, that will be the end of our hard earned struggle, including that of our founding members who are today not alive.

    “What can we say we have done for their struggles as they lay in their graves. Therefore, as long as we are alive, it is our responsibility to reincarnate the struggle they led that brought about the democracy today that the APC government is threatening”.

    Also speaking at the meeting, the national chairman of the PDP, Prince Uche Secondus, said the party had credible intelligence indicating that the Presidency and the leadership of the APC were arm-twisting the judiciary over the remaining governorship election cases pending before the Supreme Court.

    Secondus listed affected states to include Sokoto, Benue, Bauchi and Adamawa where the victories of the PDP are being challenged at the apex court.

    The party chairman had, on Thursday, called on the Supreme Court justices that presided over the Imo case to recuse themselves from the remaining cases.

    “We know that the APC and President Buhari have taken our civility for weakness and inability to act. The Presidency has even abandoned governance amidst myriads of challenges in the land and prefers to be joining issues with us as main opposition party, a deliberate policy to divert attention from their inept leadership.

    “We have made it abundantly clear that since they have chosen to make injustice law, using the highest court in the land -Supreme Court, they should be ready to embrace the consequences of their actions. This is the point we are now as the APC is using the highest court in the country to legitimise injustice”.

    In a communique issued shortly after the meeting, the party regretted what it described as the destruction of the nation’s democratic values, ethos and principles.

    The PDP also bemoaned what it considered a breach of institutions of governance, particularly the nation’s constitution and vowed to protect and defend democracy and its institutions in the country.

    The communique further stated, “We reject the destruction of our democratic institutions and values, especially the independence of the legislature, the politicisation of the judiciary and the compromise of our security and electoral institutions.

    “We note with pains the constant abuse of the rule of law, the muzzling of the civil society and advocates of free speech as well as ordinary Nigerians.

    “We totally condemn the utter desecration of judicial values, climaxing in the national embarrassment of the Supreme Court manufacturing votes and relating same to the APC and its candidate in the Imo governorship election, thereby robbing the people of the state of their mandate freely given to our candidate, Rt. Hon. Emeka Ihedioha.

    “We note that this calculated injustice has made the judiciary under the CJN, Tanko Mohammed, no longer the last hope of the common man but rather the lost hope of the common man in Nigeria.

    “The Supreme Court by this judicial summersault has eroded the faith and confidence of Nigerians in participating in elections and showcasing that there will be no need for election in the future.

    “We assure Nigerians that the PDP through all available constitutional means, including civil disobedience, will insist that this government respect the rule of law, and desist from influencing the judiciary, INEC and our security agencies.

    “We will not allow the judiciary, legislature, security agencies and other institutions of government and democracy to become departments of the APC”.

  • (TNG Analysis): Nigerian judiciary showcased an all time low in 2019 – Lawyers

    (TNG Analysis): Nigerian judiciary showcased an all time low in 2019 – Lawyers

    …Onnoghen’s removal was a bad signal
    …it was a sad and gloomy judicial calendar for Nigerians
    ….Judiciary and the ‘Hurdle Race’ of Safeguarding Rule of Law in 2020 after a challenging 2019
    Emmanuel Bagudu, Abuja
    No doubt the year 2019 was very challenging for the Nigerian Judiciary. The third Arm of Government during the year had to battle to resist impositions from the Executive who on different occasions depleted the Rule of Law at the expense of effective Justice delivery.
    From the removal from office of the former CJN Walter Onnoghen without due process to obvious habitual defiance to court orders by the executive leading to abuse of human rights; the executive indeed gave the judiciary a very high hurdle to cross to ensure that Justice delivery in the country is not compromised in the year 2019. One among many instances was the unlawful detention of the leader of the “revolution now” Omoleye SOWORE whose ordeal caused a national outcry from the civil society Communities whose cries reached the Nigerian international Community. It will be recalled that Sowere’s continued unlawful detention provoked trial as Judge Ijeoma Ojukwu joined the records of the few Judges that stood for rule of law by threatening the Executive.
    “Take notice that unless you obey the direction contained in the order of the Federal High Court of Justice, Abuja made on the 6 November 2019, which ordered you to release the Defendants/Applicants in Suit No; FHC/ABJ/CR/235/2019 forthwith, you will be guilty of contempt of court and will be liable to be committed to prison….” Trial Judge Ijeoma Ojukwu threatens Director-General of the State Security Service Yusuf Bichi. That happened in November. It was then adjudged to be one of the most courageous move by a sitting judge to safeguard the Rule of Law.
    This resistance of incursion into the Justice system by the Executive which Justice Ojukwu did if emulated on different occasions by other Judges will increase the credibility of the Judiciary in the year 2020.
    This is not to say that the Judiciary knows it all. Lessons must be learned from some abnormalities that happened in 2019.
    The controversial exit of the former Chief Justice of Nigeria CJN Walter Onnoghen made the list of abnormalities in the Judiciary. The National Judicial Council (NJC) was not given the room to try Onnoghen on Allegations of Corruption before he was given the boots by President Mohammadu Buhari and neither did the NJC resisted such abnormality.
    One Dennis Aghanya petitioned the embattled former CJN for not properly declaring his assets as required by the law. Onnoghen’s suspension followed an order by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) where he was arraigned in January 2019.
    The former CJN eventually resigned from office later in April 2019 after he was convicted by CCT, albeit, he was billed to vacate office in December 2022 when he would clock 70. Though this caused a lot of public outcry, the Judiciary continued its proceedings with high profile Post-election litigations in hundreds still counting in various courts. The Judiciary tried to resist the temptation of carrying over post-election cases to 2020.
    The biggest of them all which caused alot of tension in the country was resolved in October when the Chief Justice of Nigeria laid to rest all anxieties in the Presidential Election Petition filed by the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) seeking the nullifaction of the Election of Muhammadu Buhari as President of Nigeria. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of President Buhari. Other appeals from governorship elections were also resolved by the Apex court with likes of Nasir Elrufai of Kaduna state and Abdullahi Ganduje of Kano State and a host of others being declared legally elected.
    Moving forward, the year 2020 will be very interesting. The industrial Court of Nigeria won’t be free as usual, Labour related cases are expected to throng the industrial Court especially now that issues of Minimum wage is on the front burner.
    The executive will not calm down in its quest for credibility and so will engage anyone that crosses its way in a legal feud. The year 2020 will be just three years to the General elections and it’s expected that gaining prominence and winning the heart of the people will be the gimmicks of politicians especially those in Government. This will make the courts busy. A lot of hurdles are being projected in 2020. Judges must resist intimidation, bribery, and blackmail from politicians for the interest of the sanctity of the Rule of Law.
    Ongoing and incoming high profile cases should not threaten Judges. Already a Judge of the Federal High Court Abuja Ahmed Mohammed had withdrawn from being adjudicator in the case of alleged treason between the Federal Goverment and leader of the Revolution Now movement Omoyele Sowore. This according to the judge was because of allegations of bais coming from the defendants. This can be prevented if counsel play according to the rules of the game. Lawyers in both private and public practice have a role to play in helping the Judiciary succeed in 2020.
    They must be proactive serving their judicial processes, justice delayed is justice denied. There should be a massive improvement in the pace of Justice delivery in 2020. Corruption must be resisted as well. These and many more professional practice in the bar and bench will give the Judiciary in 2020 a face lift.
    In conclusion here are the views of some lawyers.
    “The Nigerian Judiciary in 2019 reached an all time low, it was a dim and dark phase that history will remember and several severe questions shall be asked of the political actors, especially those who lurked around the corridors of powers, who quickly betrayed their professional and calling for political and maybe pecuniary considerations. Despite this dim and bleak introductions, there were several reasons to smile and be proud of, the Nigerian spirit of resilience forbids and prevents us to wallow needlessly in the dark, there have been several positive steps and bold decisions reached in 2019, I shall spend the next few paragraphs highlighting the highs and lows of the Nigerian Judiciary on 2019.
    With the enactment of the Federal High Court Rules 2019, the Judiciary had taken steps to bring the federal high courts up to date in terms of filling penalties, which will in turn produce speedy and expeditious attendance to civil matter this is indeed a step worthy of commendation. Another incident worthy of mention is the supreme courts ruling in Abdullahi V Adetutu in 2019, that has effectively overruled her self in the earlier case of Benjamin V Kailo. As it stands, the issues as it relates to registration of title has been judicially caged having returned back to the earlier position. I must also commend several swift decisions across this nation as far as election petition were concerned. And even in criminal matters.
    However, I will say overall it was a sad, dark and gloomy year in our Judicial calendar, one that posterity will call all of us to answer. Let’s be clear, as a nation one of our greatest strength yet greatest bane, is our short memory, and swiftness to jump on to the next big story, nothing last in our mind for that long, as Josphine Anenih, once stated, Nigerians suffer from Political Amnesia.
    The Suspension of the Chief Justice of Nigeria by the president is a scar that would last longer and would certainly outlive the this current dispensation, regardless of where one stands in the debate, or political affiliation, a wrong so deep and unfathomable could never have gone by without the active connivance of those close to the president with legal background. Our country is rooted in separation of powers, whereas, the president heads the executive, he has no powers or limits to dabble into the realm of the judiciary, how can you undo what you cannot do? The president may only Appoint the CJN , if such is person is recommended by the National Judical council, and that appointment cannot stand until and unless the senate confirms that person, therefore the CJN does not serve at the pleasure of the president, how then can a president suspend the CJN. Yet we the people allowed this executive waywardness to sail through. Indeed the president has all the powers to investigate and even arrest the CJN, and a magistrate can even convict such a person of his crimes are proven, but for the president to suspend or dismiss, he use the judiciary to harass a sitting CJN, the message he clearly wanted to pass has been passed.
    How can the Judiciary be independent when a judge can be unceremoniously removed? Even if the president had the best intention, his action has placed a stain in the judiciary that would take concerted effort to repair.
    Assuming without conceding that dismissed (not resigned) CJN was of a questionable character, the message that even lower judges of unimpeachable character would ask themselves whenever they have a reason to disagree with the executive is whether they would not be subjected to public ridicule like the last CJN was. Like stated earlier, regardless of the president’s best intentions and motive, an ugly precedent had been set, a Pharaoh who knows not Joseph, could use this precedent for his own mischief and evil; and that’s the problem with ‘gree die politics’. Lastly, I fear that the bench and even the bar, have fallen into a new low of ethno-religious divide, lawyers first reason as Muslims/Christians southerners/Northerners before people of noble calling, this is extremely disturbing. The judiciary is a glue in this nation, we must pay extra attention to the welfare and well being of legal practitioners in the bench and bar.
    Lastly, I am an unrepentant optimist, I see greater days ahead of us, I see a more united an committed bench and bar in 2020, I see a greater, happier more united Nigeria.
    By Osigwe Ahmed Momoh; A Legal Practitioner writes from Abuja.
    “The performance of the Judiciary in 2019 is quite commendable, however it will go without controversy and recommendations in the roles it plays on burning issues in our Nationals socio-political events that occurred in the year in review.
    While steps are been taken for the fight for the independence of the Judiciary, there is need to carry out an inhouse cleaning of the Men behind the Masquerades in the hallowed temple of Justice.
    A quick reminder of events, to the average Nigerian is that the law of the land is measured in two ways which are implemented or followed based on the class of individuals involved.
    A recall of the events in 2019, the removal of the Hon. Justice Walter Onnoghen as the Chief Justice of Nigeria with the issuance of restraining orders by 3 Courts of Coordinate jurisdictions and subsequent renewal of such orders.
    The role played by the Code of Conduct Tribunals in the said saga are issues that calls for Academic review and possible legislation to forstall the recurrence.
    The style and measurement used granting interim orders as earlier stated varies in my view which depend on the parties involved.
    In 2019, the lower bench, that is the Magistrate, Customary and Sharia Courts some are majorly an appendage of the Executives particularly the Nigerian Police Force, while attention are channeled to the Courts of records, the lower Bench need human Capital development.
    The judicial crisis that caught attention of Nigerians and the comity of Nations is the Sowore’s issue that A Court Order DSS for the detention of a citizen, the said Order was obeyed by DSS with Alacrity, thereafter, the same Court Ordered the same DSS for the release of the same Citizen, the same DSS outrightly disregarded the same Court Order to release the same Citizen without even an Appeal filed.
    Furthermore, the same DSS approached the same Court to arraign the same Citizen before the same Court and the same Court entertained the same DSS and remanded the same Citizen in custody of the same DSS.
    So therefore Comrades, going by the above circumstances, it is clear that what we should be fighting for is not the INDEPENDENCE of JUDICIARY as popularly being canvassed but what we should be fighting for is that the faces behind the Masquerades in the Hollow Temple of Justice to carefully understand the Jurisprudence of The Rule of Law, The Law of Rule and The Doctrine of Seperation of Power.
    We hope and expect that come 2020, the Judiciary will live upto expectation, not only seeking for the independence of the Judiciary but also seen practicing it through their judgments and actions towards the non compliance of the Judgment, because they are the custodians of our Nation’s Peace.
    Tohwo Oseruvwoja Esq.”
    ” This 2019, the judiciary was once more disregarded and desecrated by the government and its agencies. This shows the complete disregard for the rule of law and as a result a diminishing hope for the common man. I hope that in 2020, the judiciary will purge itself of elements (corruption, nepotism, fraternizing with political leaders etc) that make room for incessant disregard.
    Augusta Yaakugh Esq”