Tag: NJC

  • Re-instatement of Hon. Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia: Pristine justice finally served

    Re-instatement of Hon. Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia: Pristine justice finally served

    BY CHIEF MIKE OZEKHOME, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIARB, Ph.D, LL.D.

    INTRODUCTION

    News that the National Judicial Council ( NJC ) – the nation’s judicial regulatory agency – has reversed its earlier suspension ( on corruption charges ), of Hon. Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia and re-instated her as a judge of the Federal High Court, has elicited mostly positive – even if muted – responses from a large section of the society, particularly stakeholders in the justice – delivery sector.

    So far, the apparent lone voice of dissent appears to be that of a Civil Society Organization ( CSO ) – the Access to Justice (or A2J for short). Let me clearly state here that A2J is one of the few credible CSOs still available in the country, many others having become nothing but mere merchantilistic money-guzzling and international donor- recipients, who merely look the other way even as the nation is being brazenly and rapaciously stripped bare by her minders, of what remains of her respect, dignity and claims to nationhood. Like the Egyptian Nero, the 5th Roman Emperor – (AD 54 – AD 68), a man who was notorious for his treachery and debauchery, they “fiddled while Rome burned”.

    Re-instatement of Hon. Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia: Pristine justice finally served

    This is why I was surprised to read a press release, titled (rather most unkindly): “A brutal agonizing stab on the soul and body of Nigeria’s Judiciary”, made by A2J. The respected organization in the said statement frowned at NJC’s action in reinstating Justice Ajumogobia, a refreshingly welcome act, which it described as “unfortunate”; given what it called, “serious and damning accusations against Justice Ajumogobia”. In its opinion, NJC’s decision “will cast a long and dark shadow over the Judiciary for a long time to come and amplify questions whether the Nigerian Judiciary can continue to legitimately exercise judicial power”. The CSO therefore called on the NJC to immediately reverse its decision to reinstate Justice Ajumogobia. No. It is the other way round. The NJC should be commended and accorded plaudits and encomiums for this uncommon act of observance of due process and the rule of law.

    BACKGROUND FACTS

    To enable us have a full grasp and understanding of the depth and breadth of the circumstances surrounding the NJC’s overdue decision, it is necessary to put forward and review Justice Ajumogobia’s painful and agonizing travails over the years. Her Lordship was first dragged before Hon. Justice Hakeem Oshodi of the High Court of Lagos State on 28th November, 2016, ( over six years ago),alongside a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Godwin Obla.

    They were arraigned on 30 counts, in which the latter was accused of offering Justice Ajumogobia the sum of N5 million as gratification allegedly to influence her decision in a Suit marked FHC/L/C/482c/2010. Furthermore, Justice Ajumogibia was accused of receiving the sum of $793,800 in several tranches from different sources between 2012 and 2015 “so as to have a significant increase in your assets that you cannot reasonably explain the increase in relation to your lawful income.” That trial went nowhere and Justice Ajumogobia was reprieved after she was discharged.

    Not satisfied, however, the EFCC re-arraigned her before Hon. Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa of the Federal High Court, who in a ruling delivered on the 19th day of November, 2021, brought her ordeal to an end, as the court accepted her counsel’s application and quashed all the 18 counts against her, which had alledged unlawful enrichment, bribery and money laundering. In the words of the court: “An order is hereby granted striking out or quashing the charge against the applicant in its entirety for being incompetent and this court lacks the jurisdiction to try same.” If the public thought that the ruling had far-reaching implications for the Judiciary in terms of obedience to court orders, more hair-splitting was to arise as to how the learned trial Judge arrived at his judgement.

    The answer lies in a subsequent judgement delivered by the Court of Appeal on the 11th of December, 2017, in the case of FRN vs Hon. Justice Nganjiwa. The court in that case held that a serving Judge cannot be prosecuted by the EFCC or any prosecutorial agency unless the Judge had first been probed by the NJC, found guilty and dismissed. Justice Obaseki-Adejumo, JCA, who delivered the lead judgement which was unanimously endorsed by other members of the panel, declared that “the NJC is the sole body empowered by the Constitution to determine allegations of misconduct against judicial officers even on criminal allegations of bribery and corruption made against them”.

    Continuing, the intermediate court held that “NJC is created by the Constitution to solely regulate affairs of the appointed judicial officer without interference from any authority, and that it is only when the NJC has given a verdict and handed over such judicial officer (removing his toga of judicial powers) to the prosecuting authority that he may then be investigated and prosecuted by the appropriate security agencies”. This judgement was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court earlier this year on 27th May, 2022.

    Re-instatement of Hon. Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia: Pristine justice finally served
    Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia

    It was against this background that Hon. Justice Allagoa, upon being presented with the true and correct position of the law, discharged and acquitted Justice Ajumogobia, on the 21st day of November, 2021, as aforesaid. Pray, where is Ajumogobia’s fault in any of these? Is she to blame for seeking justice through the constitutionally – guaranteed medium, having her day in court and prevailing in hotly contested cases that dragged her name in the mud for over six years? Must she be persecuted for being successful and coming out triumphant against all odds – the serial attempts to truncate her illustrious judicial career, prematurely? Must NJC be unfairly lampooned for obeying court orders and refusing to appeal same after discovering its earlier error in hastily terminating her appointment? Is the NJC a court of law with supervisory jurisdiction over courts of law? The answers to these posers are too obvious to admit of any sophistry or Baba Sala’s Kerikeri histrionics. This conveniently takes us to the next question, which is:

    IS ACCESS TO JUSTICE RIGHT IN ITS OPINION?

    This question is legitimate because, even though opinion is free, it must, however, be expressed responsibly, with due regard to the facts of each case and the rights of other persons; and – in the peculiar circumstances of this case – the observance of the rule of law, equity, fairness, justice and respect for citizens’ fundamental rights. Yes, A2J has a right to its opinion on the re-instatement of Justice Ajumogobia; but is that opinion correct? Is Ajumogobia’s case of reinstatement to her duties unique, uncharted, or unusual? Is there anything to suggest that NJC’s decision was motivated by any untoward considerations? Was it actuated by inappropriate motives such as a desire “to protect one of its own”, seemingly at all cost? Was the decision, all things considered, in the public interest? Is it fair for Access to Justice to have jumped to the conclusion that it was not? Was Justice Ajumogobia’s case special? Is it unprecedented? Why should she – as the Organization suggests – remain suspended and traumatised indefinitely for over a year (since November, 19, 2021),even after the Federal High Court had quashed the charges for which she was indicted in the first place? Is law an instrument of oppression? Is it no longer an instrument of social engineering as Prof Dean Roscoe Pound once propounded?

    AJUMOGOBIA NOT AN ISOLATED CASE

    These questions are pertinent because not only was Justice Ajumogobia in ‘judicial limbo’ for well over six years (since November, 28, 2016, when she was first arraigned), hers was certainly not an isolated case. A host of judicial officers who were similarly indicted and charged to court for alleged corrupt practices and unjust enrichment by the EFCC, the Code of Conduct Bureau and the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation, had since been reprieved, with some of them fully restored or reinstated to their various posts and positions in the judiciary.

    Some of these Jurists include, but not limited to, late Hon Justice Sylvester Ngwuta, JSC,of the Supreme Court; and Hon. Justice Adeniyi Ademola( rtd) of the FHC; Hon. Justice Hyeladzira Nganjiwa ( FHC); and Hon.Justice Agbadu Fishim ( NICN). All the charges against them were quashed and dismissed for incompetence; and all of them were reinstated as judicial officers by the NJC. The only curious exceptions were Hon Justices Agbadun Fishin and Gladys Ololtu ( FHC ), whose secured victories from courts of competent jurisdictions were surprisingly appealed by the NJC, a judicial organ that ought ordinarily to protect the dignity of the courts and to bow to superior decisions of such courts of law that delivered judgements after full-blown trials and hearings duly witnessed by members of the public. Justice Ngwuta later resumed his duties fully at the Supreme Court.

    Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia

    I had the opportunity to appear before him in some cases before he transited.Not few Nigerians believe that his subsequent death not long after his reinstatement to the apex court was occasioned by the humiliation,mental trauma,agonizing ordeal and psychological depression that attended his state – sponsored persecution. Hon Justice Ademola honourably retired from judicial service after his reinstatement. Continuing in service to an apparently ungrateful and lynching country was no longer necessary.

    Do you blame him? Former CJN, Walter Onoghen, was literally humiliated,intimidated, harassed, hunted, and finally hounded out of the apex court through a mere ex parte order instigated by an intemperate Executive that bayed for his juristic blood.So, why and how is Justice Ajumogobia’s case different,having won her case? Yet, some other Judges were merely investigated and never charged to court at all.

    Why? That is the question that Access to Justice should seek answers to. For example, the unfair case of Hon.Justice Nnamdi Dimgba cries to high heavens here.The house of the cerebral and intellectually – grounded Scholar-Jurist was crudely attacked, broken into and ransacked by hooded SSS operatives who pulled down doors and windows. Nothing incriminating was ever found on him.

    Did the government deem it fit,decent and noble to apologise to him; to balm his bruised ego ? No. Has this government ever realized what harm and mental torture are thereby inflicted and etched forever in the psyche of such innocent citizens whose houses were brutally invaded, viet armies, and with them and their families brazenly subjected to intimidation, coercion, fear and humiliation?

    THE UNFAIR CRITICISM

    In castigating the NJC for reinstating Justice Ajumogobia, Access to Justice (which has undoubtedly made its mark as a credible Civil Society Organisation over the years), unfortunately terribly missed the mark this time around. This is because, without proffering any convincing logical, moral, legal or constitutional arguments for impugning Justice Ajumogobia’s reinstatement following her exoneration by various courts of law, A2J came across in its press release, as less-than-professional (with all due respect); and motivated by less than altruistic considerations. Perhaps, one of the very few instances, though.

    THE CONSTITUTIONAL REGIME

    For the avoidance of doubt, any criticism of Ajumogobia’s reinstatement can only be accommodated and must be located within the precincts and four corners of the clear provisions of sections 6,153(1)(i),158,292(1) and Paragraph 21(b) of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, which clearly spell out the plenitude and amplitude of the functions of the NJC –and no more. Anything short of that would be unconstitutional. Yes, corruption is bad; and judicial corruption is even worse – infact, more deadly and cancerous. I once described corruption,on 12th September, 2013 ( after my release from my three week excruciating ordeal in the hands of kidnappers),as the 37th State of Nigeria,which I described as the wealthiest and most powerful. I had therefore theorized, and I still maintain my theory, that we must kill corruption before corruption kills us all. But, in fighting corruption, we must do so within the realm of decency, with respect to citizens’ rights and observance of the rule of law and due process.Fighting corruption with corrupt, unorthodox or unconscionable means is a worse form of corruption. Thus, to condemn a Ajumogobia’s reinstatement to her position from which she was wrongly and unconstitutionally removed in the first place, so as to perpetually subject her to the asphyxiating and hanging Sword of Damocles, despite having been fully cleared of all charges by courts of competent jurisdiction – as A2J appears to suggest– is simply most unfair and uncharitable, to put it mildly.

    This stance is surprising, given A2J’s pedigree as an organization consisting mostly of legal practitioners. They are, first and foremost, Ministers in the Temple of Justice. They therefore ought to be familiar with the famous aphorism that, “it is better for 10 guilty men (or women) to be set free than for an innocent man or woman (in this case, Justice Ajumogobia) to be convicted”. This is even worse where such conviction is by the court of public opinion that lacks all the necessary facts and the peculiar workings our justice system. Put simply, A2J got it wrong this time around – big time.

    CONCLUSION

    My humble take on this is that instead of the NJC apologizing for doing the right thing and obeying valid court orders as A2J appears ro suggest, it is the organization that ought to apologise to both the NJC and Justice Ajumogobia, for allowing itself to buy into frenzied ‘mob’ sentiments; the usual government’s ” name-and-shame” mantra; and pedestrian logic in its knee-jerk reaction to NJC’s action, which ought to be applauded by all and sundry.

    Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia

    Justice Ajumogobia has been tried in courts of law, discharged and given a clean bill of health. She has had her day in court. She has been vindicated. Whoever is aggrieved by her well-deserved exoneration and reinstatement should give her – and the NJC – a total break; and move on.

    The courts have spoken and it is final. Decisions of the NJC are inferior to that of a court of law. That is the extant position under our constitutional dispensation. There is no room for jungle justice, trial by media, sensationalism, hype, or speculation-least of all, from respected senior lawyers that ought to know better.

    Beyond this, it remains to be emphasized that the Common law or Anglo-Saxon system of jurisprudence which we operate in Nigeria is accusatorial. It is not the French model, which is inquisitorial. In the accusatorial model, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty by the State. This has been enacted into section 36 of the 1999 Constitution.This is different from the inquisitorial French model which is inquisitorial; where a defendant is presumed guilty until he proves his innocence. Consequently, to the extent that Hon.Justice Ajumogobia has undergone the full rigours of a trial and came out unscathed, to that extent is it most uncharitable for anyone to suggest, let alone insist, that she should continue to prove her innocence, as it were.

    THE WAY FORWARD

    The role of the NJC in all this also deserves some commentary. This is because, as a constitutional body, its role should be no more than to dispassionately investigate allegations of misconduct against Judges and, where unproven or disproved, it should unhesitatingly and promptly reinstate such Judges, in the event that they had earlier been interdicted. Under no circumstances should NJC go so far as appealing against a decision of a court of competent jurisdiction which exonerates a judicial officer as it is currently doing with respect to the cases of Hon.Justice Gladys Olotu and Hon Justice Agbadu-Fishim.

    This, with all respect, due deference and full humility, is patently wrong. I hereby humbly appeal to the NJC to immediately discontinue and withdraw those appeals. They are as unnecessary as they are persecutory. The NJC should admit to errors and fallibility. It is not God.

    The NJC should only indict Judges in the clearest of cases. It should never allow itself to be used or misused, wittingly or unwittingly, by the other arms of Government (particularly, the intolerant and unaccountable Executive), to hound, hunt, or persecute hapless Judges doing their legitimate work.

    That would be grossly unfair and amount to a flagrant affront to the Constitution. Those arms of Government should first cleanse and deodorize their stinking Augean stables – where confirmed cases of corruption-on-steroids abound – before turning to the Judiciary – Alexander Hamilton’s weakest of the three arms of government (Federalist Paper No 78 ). This is because, compared to these other arms of government, the Judiciary – as a body – is a Saint occupying mother earth. Please, let Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia, a brilliant and fecund quintessential Jurist,be.

  • NJC orders reinstatement of Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia

    NJC orders reinstatement of Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has ordered the immediate reinstatement of Justice Rita Ofili-Ajumogobia as a judge of the Federal High Court (FHC).

    This was made known in a circular issued by the Chief Judge of FHC, Justice John Tsoho, on Dec. 5 notifying judges of the court about the development.

    Newsmen reports that the NJC took the decision on Dec 1 during a meeting it held.

    Justice Tsoho’s circular reads: “Your lordships are, by this circular letter, notified that at the meeting of the National Judicial Council held on the 1st of December, 2022, the council reinstated Hon. Justice R. N. Ofili-Ajumogobia as a Judicial Officer.

    “The reinstatement takes instant effect and there shall be consequential posting.”

    Newsmen reports that Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia was prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 15-count charge bordering on money laundering and breach of public trust.

    In a ruling in November 2021, Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa of Lagos division of FHC upheld Ofili-Ajumogobia’s application to quash the charge and dismissed the allegations against her.

    Justice Lewis-Allagoa relied on an earlier order by Justice Binta Nyako of a FHC, Abuja, which quashed all the recommendations of the NJC.

    Justice Nyako, in a judgment delivered on Nov. 28, 2019, in the suit marked:FHC/ABJ/CS/638/2018 filed by Justice Ofili-Ajumogobia against the NJC, quashed the council’s report and recommendations, including for the judge’s sack.

  • Trouble for 15 High Court Judges as NJC probes misconduct

    Trouble for 15 High Court Judges as NJC probes misconduct

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) has set up high-powered probe panels to investigate alleged gross misconduct allegations brought against 15 Judges of the Federal and State High Courts.

    The probe panels are to determine the culpability of the Judges in the various petitions filed against them by individuals and corporate bodies.

    A statement by the NJC issued by Director of Information, Mr Soji Oye on Friday in Abuja confirmed that the decision to investigate the alleged erring Judges was taken at the Council’s 99th meeting presided over by the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Olukayode Ariwoola.

    The decision, the NJC said,  is sequel to the submission of recommendations of three Preliminary Complaint Assessment Committees which considered 66 petitions forwarded to them by the Council from all over the Federation.

    However, the NJC did not name Judges to be probed, their divisions and specific nature of their alleged offences.

    It however revealed that the Council dismissed petitions against 51 Judicial Officers of the Federal and State High Courts for either lack of merit, being subjudice, or being matters for appeal or that the concerned Judge have retired from Service.

    The statement explained that the Council was formally presented with the reviewed Judicial Information Technology Policy which established the general requirements and responsibilities for the Nigerian Judiciary systems and information.

    “The policy provides for guidance of Courts and Judicial Bodies in protecting Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability (CIA) of judiciary function and process.

    ”It also stipulates guidance for acceptable use of system, services and technologies as well as provisions for secure storage of judicial data and recovery processes in the event of emergencies or distress.

    “Similarly, It further provides guidelines and incident management policies including Data Centre deployment and use policies.

    “The Scope is intended for all Courts and Judicial Bodies in Nigeria including staff of the Nigerian judiciary, employed or contracted to any Judicial Body handling information that is generated, received, stored, transmitted, or printed.

    “It encompasses all personal or Judiciary identifiable data held in their Courts and Judicial Bodies’ systems and process including supporting mechanisms and technologies for managing such data at rest or in transit.

    “All staff are expected to comply with the policy and associated standard protocols and procedures that have been put in place to support the document.

    “The policy is applicable to all Courts unit, departments of all Judicial Bodies in the Nigerian Judiciary.

    “Council noted appointments of Judicial Officers recommended for appointment at the last meeting who have been sworn –in as Judges of Federal and State High Courts.

    “Reports from Standing and ad-hoc Committees of the Council were also presented at the Meeting as well as notifications of retirement of 16 Judges  and notification of death of a Judge from the Federal and State High Courts”, the NJC said.

  • Facts about acting CJN, Justice Ariwoola

    Justice Olukayode Ariwoola of the Supreme Court, who on Monday took the judicial oath of office as the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN, was born on 22 August 1958.

     

    He was formerly a Justice of the Court of Appeal and on November 22, 2011, he was appointed to the bench of the supreme court of Nigeria as Justice.

    Justice Ariwoola

     

    Justice Ariwoola was sworn in as acting CJN, to give room for the approval of the National Judicial Council (NJC), following the resignation of Justice Tanko Muhammad.

     

    Current Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria
    Chief Justice: Tanko Muhammad (resigned)
    Associate Justices: Mary OdiliOlukayode AriwoolaMusa Dattijo MuhammadKudirat Kekere-EkunJohn Inyang OkoroChima Centus NwezeAmina AugieEjembi EkoUwani Musa Abba AjiM. Lawal GarbaHelen M. OgunwumijuAddu AbokiI. N. M. SaulawaAdamu JauroTijjani AbubakarEmmanuel A. Agim

    TheNewsGuru.com reports that Justice Ariwoola of the Supreme Court, on Monday, took the judicial oath of office as the acting CJN.

     

    President Muhammadu Buhari administered the oath of office to the acting CJN during a swearing-in ceremony held at the Council Chamber of the Presidential Villa in Abuja, the nation’s capital.

     

    The 62-year-old justice, took over from the outgone CJN, justice Tanko Muhammad

     

    He is expected to serve in an acting capacity till further confirmation by the National Judicial Council (NJC).

     

    While taking the judicial oath, he swore to be faithful and bear true allegiance to the Federal Government of Nigeria, as well as defend the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    Justice Ariwoola
    Justice Olukayode Ariwoola of the Supreme Court on Monday taking the judicial oath of office as the acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN)

     

    Justice Muhammad had resigned as the Chief Justice of Nigeria on Sunday night, citing ill-health as the reason for his decision.

     

    This led to the inauguration of the acting CJN, who is the next most senior justice of the Supreme Court at the time of Justice Muhammad’s resignation.

     

    Until his resignation, according to reports, the immediate past CJN was seriously ill.

     

    News of his resignation broke barely a week after 14 justices of the Supreme Court wrote to him to lament the dilapidated state of affairs in the apex court.

     

    In the leaked letter, the justices alleged that Justice Muhammad failed to address the issues raised despite drawing his attention to them.

     

    They had complained of a lack of residential accommodation and vehicles at the court, alleging that the former CJN was gallivanting with his ‘spouse, children and personal staff’ while not allowing them to travel with an assistant on foreign trips.

     

    But these allegations were denied by an aide to the former CJN.

  • BREAKING: Buhari swears in Justice Ariwoola as Acting CJN

    BREAKING: Buhari swears in Justice Ariwoola as Acting CJN

    President Muhammadu Buhari has sworn in Justice Olukayode Ariwoola of the Supreme Court as acting Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN).

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports the swearing-in took place at the Council Chamber of the Presidential Villa in Abuja on Monday.

    President Buhari administered the oath of office to Justice Ariwoola following Justice Tanko Muhammad’s resignation.

    The Acting CJN, Justice Ariwoola was born on August 22, 1958. He was appointed a Justice of the Supreme Court in 2011.

    He was a Justice of the Court of Appeal between 2005 and 2011 after having been elevated from the State High Court of Oyo State.

    Before his elevation to the Supreme Court, he served as Justice of the Court of Appeal in Kaduna, Enugu and Lagos Divisions.

    Justice Ariwoola is expected to serve in an acting capacity until he is confirmed by the National Judicial Council (NJC).

    Justice Ariwoola is the next most senior after Justice Mary Odili retired on May 12 after attaining the retirement age of 70.

    TNG reports that Ariwoola will retire by 2028.

    Recall that Muhammad resigned from his position, reportedly on health grounds, according to the former CNJ’s Special Assistant on Media, Mr Isah Ahuraka.

    President Buhari swore in Muhammad as CJN in January 2019 following the suspension and later sack of former CJN Walter Onnoghen.

    In a historic move, Justice Muhammad on Feb. 12, included lawyers among those to be considered in the next round of appointments as Justices of the Supreme Court.

    On June 21, Muhammad responded to a memo sent to him by 14 Justices of the Apex Curt complaining of poor welfare conditions and the deplorable state of the court.

    Muhammad addressed the wide-ranging issues, including non-provision of diesel allowances for Justices, non-provision of equipped offices, accommodation, and the complete set of vehicles for new Justices appointed two years ago, among others.

    He also addressed the issue of the non-holding of regular meetings with the justices.

    The internet services, he said, have been restored to Justices’ residences and chambers, just as some allowances have been paid to them.

    He allayed the fear of the general public assuring that “there’s no hostility or adverse feelings amongst the Justices of the Supreme Court, as everyone is going about his normal duty.”

    ”Judges in all climes are to be seen and not heard,” he said.

  • Justice for the street fighter – By Sonnie Ekwowusi

    Justice for the street fighter – By Sonnie Ekwowusi

    Last week the Federal High Court, Abuja, per Justice Inyang Ekwo, ordered the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) Danladi Umar to appear before the Senate in a probe on the petition that he was caught fighting in public. Justice Ekwo issued the aforesaid order while delivering judgment in a suit filed by Umar challenging the powers of the Senate to investigate him for fighting a security guard in public.

    In his suit against the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions and the Attorney-General of the Federation, the CCT chair had prayed the court that pursuant to sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria lacks the jurisdiction to investigate him. But while delivering his judgment last week, Justice Ekwo stated that Umar had no cogent reason to stop the Senate from carrying out its constitutional functions. The judge further said that Section 2 of the Code of Conduct Bureau Act exposed Umar to an investigation by the National Assembly. The judge held that as a public officer administering a law relating to the conduct of public officers, Umar’s disgraceful conduct should be investigated by the Senate. The Judge also said that Umar had no reason to institute the suit to stop the Senate from probing a public petition seeking justice. Holding that Umar is not above the law of the land, the Judge further stated: “As such, it will be illogical for him (Umar) to seek to stop the Senate probe as doing so will give an impression that he is above the law”.

    It is surprising that Umar was shamelessly praying to the court to stop the Senate from investigating him. You will recall that on March 29 2021, the CCT Chair Umar threw decency, dignity and decorum overboard and engaged a security guard in an open street brawl in broad daylight at the Banex Plaza, Wuse Abuja, to the astonishment of the bemused onlookers who could be heard admonishing Umar, *“Go away, go away, Oga go inside your car, respect yourself. You are not the most powerful person here, they will beat you here”*. The video which captured the fight made the rounds at that time. During the affray, Umar gave the security guard an upper cut which landed in his face and consequently sending the poor man landing and sprawling on the ground. Seeing the man sprawling on the ground, a visibly-angry Umar was not done with him yet. Just as the man was regaining his composure and was about getting up from the ground, Umar, the street fighter, further sprang to his feet in the fashion of a native wrestler, swiftly ran to his car, brought out a lethal weapon and stretched his hand to use it to smash the head of the security guard but thanks to Umar’s two police escorts, driver and some good Samaritans who swiftly used their hands to block Umar from committing what would have been a murder or a homicide. At the end of the fight the security guard was rushed to the hospital for treatment. I don’t know whether Umar was also rushed to the hospital for treatment.

    Following the unequivocal condemnation of Umar’s disgraceful conduct at that time by the general public, all have been expecting the National Judicial Council (NJC) to wield the big stick and fire Umar or at least suspend him from office pending the allegation against him. But unfortunately that hasn’t happened. Meanwhile Umar, in his arrogance, has not deemed it fit to apologize for his scandalous conduct. Instead of apologizing to the Bar, the Bench and the public for his disgraceful behaviour, Umar proceeded to institute a suit at the Federal High Court to pervert the course of justice. It is obvious that Umar believes that he is above the law of the land. He sees himself as an untouchable lawless leviathan. He is god. He is superior to everybody. He can do whatever he likes. For example, during the trial of former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Walter Onnoghen, Umar announced in open court that he would not grant an ex-parte order. Strangely enough, the same Umar secretly went behind Onnoghen’s lawyers and concocted a black-market ex-parte order which President Buhari relied on in illegally removing Onnoghen as the CJN. Umar actually threatened journalists covering judicial proceedings in his court at that time that he would imprison them and they would remain in incarceration until he (Umar) retires from service after about 28 years. An ethnic profiler, Umar threatened to deal with those whom he contemptuously labels “Biafra boys”. Shocked by the ethnic profiling, a visibly-angry co-convener of Bring Back Our Girls movement Aisha Yesufu released a video in April 2021 demanding for the immediate dismissal of Umar as CCT Chair.

    I cannot agree less. By fighting in public, Umar has brought the Bar and Bench into public ridicule, public odium and opprobrium. Consequently Umar should have been removed as Chair of the CCT. It is characters such as Danladi Umar that gives the judiciary a bad name. There have been insinuations on social media to the effect that Umar must have been provoked by the security guard or that the security guard was the first aggressor and assaulter of Umar. No matter the high level provocation or aggression, a Chairman of the CCT cannot descend to the low level of fighting in public contrary to the Code of Conduct of Judicial officers and the Judicial Oath which he swore to uphold and in fact made other judges to uphold as well. As a lawyer, Umar should have known that aggrieved persons are enjoined by the Constitution to seek remedy in a law court. Therefore if Umar had felt that the security man had wronged him he could have set the law in motion against him instead of resorting to violence. Resort to violence is a recipe for anarchy. The rule of law in contrast to the rule of force ought to reign always.

    The legal profession is a conservative profession that extols decency, public decorum, social comportment as the hallmark of excellence and success in the profession. By their special vocation as unbiased empire in the dispensation of justice, judges ought to be the most disciplined officers in the temple of justice. Like Caesar’s wife, judges should not only live and behave above board but manifestly be seen to live and behave above board. Judges are honoured and revered because of their impeccable character. This is why judges could refrain from joining issues with their critics in the media and public space. This is why judges religiously season their public utterances in public places with the ingredient of mortification. For example, Master of Rolls, Rt. Hon. A. T Denning was distinguished by both his exceptional lucidity of thought and his character. If Umar can fight in the street, what is the difference between him and the motor touts and political thugs who are always fighting in public?. If Umar can descend from his Olympian height to the low level of fighting in public, what advice will he be giving to his children and probably grandchildren? Or, what impressions will Umar’s children or grand-children have watching their father or grandfather fighting in public?

    The late eminent Justice Akinola Aguda tirelessly advocated that only worthy persons should be appointed to the Bench. Aguda believed that a single error in appointing unworthy persons to the Bench could ruin the whole administration of justice. Justice Aguda was right. In most countries, only the best and the brightest are appointed judges. Not so in Nigeria. In Nigeria the most important factor that plays out in the appointment of judges is Prof. Joseph Richard’s prebendalism. This was why a Supreme Court nominee was nevertheless appointed as a Supreme Court justice despite the fact that the man did not know the meaning of the notion “technicality in law” during the Senate screening/clearing exercise.

    I agree with Aguda that only men of character should be appointed to the Bench. For descending to the low level of fighting in the street, Danladi Umar is unworthy to be the Chairman of the CCT. If Umar is the Chairman of the CCT investigating the conduct of public officers it stands to reason that he should be fired when his conduct gives us reason to believe that he is unworthy to be the Chair of the CCT. On March 15 2010 Hon. Justice Idris Habib Shall of the Bauchi State High Court was suspended by the National Judicial Council (NJC) for fighting in public. So, why hasn’t the NJC fired Umar or at least suspended him pending the investigation of the serious allegation against him? The function of the judiciary as a dispenser of justice or as sustainer of good governance is endangered when a Chair of the CCT who ought to conduct himself responsibly in public throws decency overboard to engage in an open street brawl.

  • Two judges in serious trouble with NJC: warned and placed on watchlist

    Two judges in serious trouble with NJC: warned and placed on watchlist

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) on Wednesday issued a letter of warning to two judges and placed one of them on the ‘watch list’.

    This was announced in a statement signed on Wednesday by Soji Oye, the Director, Information, NJC, in Abuja.

    The judges affected include Justice Muawiyah Baba Idris of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, and Justice M. M. Ladan of the High Court of Kaduna State.

    Justice Muawiyah Baba Idris of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja was issued a warning letter and placed on Council’s “Watch List” for a period of one year while Justice M. M. Ladan of the High Court of Kaduna State was issued a letter of warning.

    The NJC also recommended the appointment of six heads of court and nine judicial officers for the Federal and State High Courts, Sharia Court, and Customary Court of Appeal.

    According to the statement, Justice Muawiyah Baba Idris of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Abuja was issued a warning letter and placed on Council’s “Watch List” for a period of one year for signing the Writ of Possession for execution on the same day he delivered judgement in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/FT/36/19 between Sicons Nigeria Ltd V Nile Place Restaurant and Catering Services Ltd.

    The Suit was for recovery of demised property.

    Council agreed with the findings of the Committee that investigated the Judge that his action was in contravention of Proviso to Order 27 Rule (16) (b) High Court of the Federal Capital Territory Civil Procedure Rules 2018 and Order 4 (1) and (2) of the Judgement Enforcement Rules 2004.

    Council also resolved to issue a warning letter to Justice M. M. Ladan of the High Court of Kaduna State having found merit in the petition written against him in Suit No. KDH/KAD/1321/2018 between VTLS Inc. Vs Ahmadu Bello University.

    He signed the Writ of Attachment while the Garnishee Order Nisi was pending.
    Council at the meeting considered the list of candidates presented by its Interview Committee and at the end of deliberation, Council recommended the under-listed names of Fifteen (15) successful candidates as Heads of Courts and other Judicial Officers in Nigeria.

    They are as follows:
    1. CHIEF JUDGE, PLATEAU STATE
    i) Hon. Justice David Gwong Mann
    2. CHIEF JUDGE, GOMBE STATE
    i) Hon. Justice Joseph Ahmed Awak
    3. GRAND KADI, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, KADUNA STATE
    i) Hon. Kadi Abdurrahman Umar Abubakar
    4. GRAND KADI, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, TARABA STATE
    i) Hon. Kadi Shuaibu Dahiru Ahmad
    5. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, RIVERS STATE
    i) Hon. Justice Ihemnacho Wilfred Obuzor
    6. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, CROSS RIVER STATE
    i) Hon. Justice Sampson Mbeh Anjor
    7. SIX (6) JUDGES, FEDERAL HIGH COURT
    i) Bala Khalifa-Mohammed Usman
    ii) Emmanuel Gakko
    iii) Aminu Garba
    iv) Musa Sulaiman Liman
    v) Ahmad Gama Mahmud
    vi) Segun-Bello Mabel Taiye
    8. ONE (1) JUDGE, HIGH COURT, FCT, ABUJA
    i) Joseph Adebayo Aina
    9. ONE (1) KADI, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, TARABA STATE
    i) Sallau Ismaila Madugu
    10. ONE (1) JUDGE, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, TARABA
    i) Bulus Samuelson Nyiputen
    All recommended candidates are expected to be sworn-in after approval by the President, Muhammadu Buhari, and their respective State Governors and confirmation by the National Assembly and the respective State House of Assemblies as the case may be.
    The Members also considered the reports of various Committees and noted the notification of retirements of 23 Judicial Officers of the Federal and State Courts and notification of death of one State High Court Judge.

  • [Full List] NJC recommends appointment of 64 judges

    [Full List] NJC recommends appointment of 64 judges

    The National judicial Council (NJC) has recommended the appointment of 64 persons as judicial officers in Nigeria.

    The appointments were announced in a statement by the NJC spokesperson, Soji Oye on Friday.

    Oye said the NJC “at its 96th Meeting of 14 and 15 December 2021 considered the list of candidates presented by its Interview Committee and at the end of deliberation, Council recommended the under-listed names of Sixty-four successful candidates to their various State Governors for appointment.”

    See the full statement below.

    • NJC recommends appointment of Sixty-four (64) Judicial Officers

    The National Judicial Council, at its 96th Meeting of 14 and 15 December 2021 considered the list of candidates presented by its Interview Committee and at the end of deliberation, Council recommended the under-listed names of Sixty-four successful candidates to their various State Governors for appointment.

    They are as follows:

    1. CHIEF JUDGE, ENUGU STATE

    i) Hon. Justice Ozoemena Raymond Afojulu

    2. CHIEF JUDGE, ADAMAWA STATE

    Hon. Justice Nathan Musa

    3. GRAND KADI, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, NIGER STATE

    Hon. Kadi Abubakar Musa Mohammed Kigera

    4. GRAND KADI, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, ADAMAWA STATE

    Hon. Kadi Usman Aliyu Girei

    5. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, OSUN STATE

    i) Hon. Justice Shiyanbola Raheem Akanbi

    6. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, CROSS RIVER STATE

    i) Hon. Justice Eneji Maurice Odey

    7. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, ADAMAWA STATE

    i) Hon. Justice Wajilda Peter

    8. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, ABIA STATE

    i) Hon. Justice O. I. Nwamoh

    9. PRESIDENT, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, PLATEAU STATE

    i) Hon. Justice Blessing Lyop Dalyop

    10. FIVE (5) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, SOKOTO STATE

    i) Sanusi Shehu

    ii) Mu’awiya Dahiru Mahmud

    iii) Abubakar Abubakar Zaki

    iv) Mohammad Aliyu Sambo

    v) Maryam Muhammad

    11. FOUR (4) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, NASARAWA STATE

    i) Isa Ebini Kana

    ii) Ali Tari Changbo

    iii) Abdullahi Hassan Shams Shama

    iv) Solomon Wayidna Ayenajeh

    12. TWO (2) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, OGUN STATE

    i) Adeyemi Adekunle Adewole

    ii) Bello Safrat Titilayo

    13. FOUR (4) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, BAYELSA STATE

    i) Lockie James Benimo

    ii) Zuofa Ama Patience

    iii) Simon Warikiyei Amaduobogha

    iv) Christine Irigha Kombo-Enegesi

    14. FOUR (4) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, CROSS RIVER STATE

    i) Daniel Ofre Kulo

    Rita Otu Marshall

    Odibu Emmanuel Ekaya

    iv) Obin Blessing Egwu

    15. FOURTEEN (14) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, LAGOS STATE

    Okunuga Olubusola Adeyemi

    Adeyemi Adenrera Olayinka

    Oshin Olufolake Olufolasade, Esq.

    Odusanya Oluwatoyin Atinuke

    Martins Olumuyiwa Oluseun

    Ariyike Mutiat Ipaye-Nwachukwu

    Babatunde Oladepo Kalaro

    Awope Omolade Jadesola

    Akinkunmi Olusegun Idowu

    Oresanya Olalekan Ayodeji

    Oshodi Mujibat Iyabode

    Ijelu Ismail Olalekan

    Balogun Mosunmola Muyibat

    Mathias Oluwole Dawodu

    16. FOUR (4) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, RIVERS STATE

    i) Popnen Sylvester Sunday

    ii) Daketima Gabriel Kio

    iii) Nsirim Chinwe Amanda

    iv) Chinelo Chidubem Odili

    17. FOUR (4) JUDGES, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE, EKITI STATE

    i) Apuabi Johnson Ariyibi

    ii) Blessing Oluwabukola Ajileye

    iii) Olalekan Olayinka Olatawura

    iv) Oyinkansola Olumayowa Oluboyede

    18. TWO (2) KADIS, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, SOKOTO STATE

    i) Buhari Yahaya

    ii) Umar Jibril Kebbe

    19. ONE (1) KADI, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, KATSINA

    i) Kabir Hamisu Bello

    20. THREE (3) KADIS, SHARIA COURT OF APPEAL, JIGAWA STATE

    i) Bara’u Bashir Musa

    ii) Ahmad Muhammadu Lamin

    iii) Nasiru Abubakar Zargina

    21. ONE (1) JUDGE, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, EBONYI

    i) Awada Paul Mgbada

    22. THREE (3) JUDGES, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, OGUN STATE

    i) Olukemi Folasade Osisanya

    ii) Odugbesan Idowu Adebiyi

    iii) Akinsinde Oluwasina Philip

    23. FOUR (4) JUDGES, CUSTOMARY COURT OF APPEAL, CROSS RIVER STATE

    i) Obo Agbor Anthony

    ii) Ititim Felix Igobi

    iii) Eunice Oshim Dada

    iv) Ankpor Jeremiah Arong

    All recommended candidates are expected to be sworn-in after approval of the NJC recommendations the respective State Governors and the respective State Houses of Assembly, as the case may be.

     

    Soji Oye, Esq

    Director, Information

  • NJC blocks promotion of three judges for granting conflicting orders

    NJC blocks promotion of three judges for granting conflicting orders

    Three Judges of Courts who granted conflicting ex parte orders have been barred from promotion to higher bench for a period ranging from two to five years whenever they are due.

    The National Judicial Council took the decision following its two days meeting held on December 14 and 15 in Abuja, the nation’s capital.

    In a statement issued on Thursday, NJC’s Director of Information, Soji Oye, said even though there was no written petition, allegations of corruption or impropriety against the subject judges, the Council nevertheless, initiated investigation.

    The move, he said, is in pursuant to the NJC’s inherent disciplinary powers under the Constitution to unravel the circumstances that led to the spate of Exparte Orders granted by these Courts of coordinate jurisdiction over matters bearing same parties and subject matter.

    The National Judicial Council rose from its two days meeting held on 14 and 15 December 2021, with a resolution to bar the three Judges of Courts of concurrent jurisdiction who granted conflicting Exparte Orders in matters with the same parties and subject matter from promotion to higher Bench for a period ranging from two to five years whenever they are due.

    “Even though there was no written petition, allegations of corruption or impropriety against the subject judges, Council nevertheless, initiated an investigation pursuant to its inherent disciplinary powers under the Constitution to unravel the circumstances that led to the spate of Exparte Orders granted by these Courts of coordinate jurisdiction over matters bearing same parties and subject matter,” the statement read.

    NJC Deputy Chairman of Council, Hon. Justice Mary Peter-Odili, who chaired the meeting agreed with the recommendations of the Investigation Committee set up in September 2021.

    During the meeting, Hon. Justice Okogbule Gbasam of the High Court of Rivers State was barred from elevation to higher Bench for two years whenever he is due.

    Hon. Justice Nusirat I. Umar of the High Court of Kebbi State be barred from elevation to higher Bench for two years whenever due.

  • Naira depreciation is major problem in budget implementation in Nigeria – NJC

    Naira depreciation is major problem in budget implementation in Nigeria – NJC

    The National Judicial Council (NJC) on Wednesday said the depreciating value of the naira is a major problem in the implementation of the budget in the country.

    Ahmed Saleh Executive Secretary of the Council revealed this to the House of Representatives Committee on Judiciary during the appraisal of the NJC’s 2021 budget, as well as defennce of the 2022 estimates.

    According to Saleh, the exchange rate of naira to dollar as at December 2000 was N380 to one US dollar. But in May this year, the naira has further depreciated to N570 to one US dollar. This has caused a serious challenge in our budget implementation and performance, most especially on projects and services that have foreign exchange components.

    “We have made adequate provisions in this year’s budget to cater for some of these major projects to the point of completion and exiting completely, but due to this depreciation and inflation, we certainly cannot achieve total completion. What this means is that we may have to roll over some of the projects next year and we may also have to make provision to cater for them,” he said.

    While commending the Committee for its efforts in ensuring the appropriation for the NJC in 2022 was reviewed upwards from N110 billion to N120 billion, he assured that the increment would be put to judicious use.

    He said as at October they have been able to access almost 80 percent of the total funds appropriated to the Nigerian judiciary in 2021. He added that performance and implementation was at 73 percent.

    On his part, Chairman House Committee on Judiciary, Hon. Onofiok Luke, called for an intervention fund for the judiciary to enable it meet up its competing demands and challenges.

    He assured that the National Assembly would continue to take legislative action that would lead to better welfare of judicial officers and called for the cooperation and partnership of relevant stakeholders in this regard.

    He also stressed the need for adequate security for judicial workers.

    His words:”There should be better living and working conditions for our judicial officers. There is a need to put in place, technology that would make our courtrooms to be in line with what is obtainable in other climes is making the sum appropriated inadequate.

    “Of great importance to this committee is the security of judicial officers. We have stated as a committee that we should create an enabling environment, not only a working environment, not just good living conditions, but a secured environment for our judicial officials to operate without hindrance, without any fear of intimidation or harassment. That is why we condemn the attack on the Justice of the Supreme Court, Mary Odili. It should not repeat itself because we are weakening the morale and strength of our judicial officers.

    “It is quite disheartening that not only do they have challenges in their workplace, they have challenges even in their pay. So it is the resolve of this committee and the House under the leadership of Rt Hon Femi Gbajabiamila and the entire leadership for us to partner and ensure that there is a review of salaries that would make for better welfare of judicial officers.

    “There other issue is an appeal that we made and part of the thing we have asked for is that let us take justice down to the people. The question now today is not access to justice, the question today is the exit of justice. And so a combination of two would mean that we need to have infrastructure closer to the people. So it would not be out of place for us to seek for the establishment of some other divisions of court in places that they do have like places that don’t have National Industrial Court.

    “Yes, we might say that there are minimal labour law cases in those jurisdictions, but we should not deny few the opportunity of seeking redress when their rights are infringed. A place like the Court of Appeal, the chairman of this committee has in the last two years, requested for a division of the Court of Appeal in Uyo.

    “Uyo deserve it as you see most of the cases in Calabar and then the road if we have a good road network between Calabar and Akwa Ibom, then they would not be having a challenge. So please put it as a consideration. It is not a House for the chairman for the Chairman of the committee but it is a division of the Court of Appeal, Uyo Division. Also we see what we can do with the Ekiti division too to make sure it comes on stream, and other divisions that need to be dealt with”.