The National Judicial Council (NJC) is up in arms
against Abia State over the suspension of Chief Judge Theresa
Uzokwe. It says the government could not take that decision without
its input, citing the Constitution.The NJC, some lawyers submit,
has a case, but they note that the council has been in slumber for
long, allowing judges to do as they like. Eric Ikhilae
reports.
On January 26, the Abia State House of Assembly
suspended Chief Judge Theresa Uzokwe and recomended that she be
suspended. Governor Okezie Ikpeazu did and named Justice Obisike
Orji as the Acting Chief Judge. The National Judicial Council(NJC)
felt slighted by the action.
It voided Justice Uzokwe’s suspension, citing its powers under
the Constitution. Under the Constitution, judges are appointed and
removed upon NJC’s recommendation. The drama all started with a
petition sent to the assembly by Dr Anthony Agbazuere and Mr Obinna
Nkume, Executive Director and Director, Legal Services of the
Global Centre for Peace and Justice, a non-governmental
organisation (NGO) in Umuahia, the Abia State capital.
The January 22, 2018 petition is entitled: Justice
Theresa Uzokwe’s unending acts of tyranny, infamy, gross misconduct
and incompetence: urgent need to save the administration of justice
in Abia.
It was presented in the House as a matter of urgent public
importance by a member representing Ukwa West Constituency, Mezie
Nwubani.
In a January 31 statement, the NJC overruled the governor;
suspended Orji; asked Uzokwe to stay away from office and directed
that the most senior judge, Justice Onuoha Arisa Kalu
Ogwe, be appointed the Acting chief judge pending its final
resolution of the dispute.
NJC recommendations
The statement by NJC’s Director of Information, Soji Oye,
recommended:
- The suspension of the Chief Judge of Abia State by the state
House of Assembly without a prior recommendation by the NJC
violates the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. - Consequently, the subsequent act of appointing and swearing-in
of Hon. Mr. Justice Obisike Orji as the Acting Chief Judge is
invalid for being unconstitutional. - Furthermore, the conduct of Hon. Mr. Justice Obisike Orji in
presenting himself to be sworn-in raises potential questions of
misconduct that Council is now looking into. - Council, therefore, resolved to query and suspend the Hon. Mr.
Justice Obisike Orji pending the outcome of its investigation. - In view of the recent escalation, Council, in the interest of
the smooth administration of justice in Abia State, resolved to
direct the Chief Judge, Hon. Mr. Justice T. U. Uzokwe, to stay away
from duties pending Council’s final decision after consideration of
the report of its panels. - In the prevailing circumstance whereby the NJC has directed the
Chief Judge not to perform his duties, and the next most senior
judge is suspended, the governor of Abia State shall appoint Hon.
Mr. Justice Onuoha Arisa Kalu Ogwe, the next most senior judge, to
act as the Chief Judge of Abia State, pending Council’s final
resolution of the matter.
Ikpeazu, in apparent agreement with Section 158 and Paragraph 21
of Part One of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, is said
to have accepted the NJC’s decision, particularly in relation to
the appointment of Ogwe.
Did NJC handle the crisis well?
While observers commended Ikpeazu for agreeing with NJC’s
directive, many say the tardiness with which the NJC treated the
matter before now, contributed to the degeneration of the
dispute.
The NJC, in its January 31 statement, acknowledged being aware
of the dispute in the Abia Judiciary.
Rather than assume its responsibilities and address the dispute
dispassionately, it chose to farm out its responsibilities to some
individuals it referred to as “some elderly Judicial Officers of
Abia State Judiciary” for settlement.
Part of the statement reads: “It noted that its attention had
been drawn to the crisis in Abia State Judiciary by petitions
written against Hon. Mr. Justice T.U. Uzokwe and the one written by
the Chief Judge against Hon. Mr. Justice C. U. Okoroafor.
“But in the course of the investigation by the Committees set up
by Council, some elderly Judicial Officers of Abia State Judiciary
waded in and pleaded with the committees to allow the matter to be
resolved amicably by them, which was granted by council at its
plenary.
“At the last meeting of council which was held on 6th December,
2017, council directed the Committees to continue and conclude with
the petitions before them if there were no reports of the
settlement by the peacemakers.
“While this was going on, the problem escalated and Council was
informed of the suspension of Hon. Mr. Justice Uzokwe and the
swearing-in of Hon. Mr. Justice Obisike Orji as the Acting Chief
Judge.
“In the prevailing circumstance, whereby the National Judicial
Council has directed the Chief Judge not to perform his duties, and
the next most senior Judge is suspended, the Governor of Abia State
shall appoint Hon. Mr. Justice Onuoha Arisa Kalu Ogwe, the next
most senior Judge to act as the Chief Judge of Abia State, pending
Council’s final resolution of the matter.”
Observers contended that, had the NJC accorded the case the
seriousness it deserved and attended to it promptly, rather than
yield its responsibility to some outsiders under some inexplicable
guise, Abia State would have been saved this currently trouble of a
Judiciary without a stable leadership.
They noted that the allegations of tardiness and double standard
on the part of the NJC, in addressing petitions and complaints
against judicial officers, is gradually becoming rampant and was
increasingly robbing off on its dignity and the respect people have
for it.
A dilly-dallying NJC?
The NJC’s handling of the Abia case and past cases where it had
exercised some questionable discretion, observers argued, informed
the need for an urgent review of the Council’s operations.
This, they said, relates to the need to maintain its neutrality
at all times and attend to complaints against judicial officers
with dispatch.
Observers recalled that the same allegations of delay and double
standards were raised to justify the raiding of the houses of some
judicial officers in October 2016.
Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation
(AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN), reportedly told a House of
Representatives committee on November 29, 2016, that the raid by
the Department of State Services (DSS) on judges’ homes was
authorised because the NJC was reluctant to act on complaints of
misconduct against the affected judges.
The ad hoc committee of the House of Representatives, headed by
Garba Datti-Mohammed (All Progressives Congress from Kaduna State),
was meant to investigate all cases of invasion of property and
arrests of persons by the DSS from May 2015.
Malami was quoted to have said: “When we got the petitions, I
had cause personally to write to the NJC, requesting that they take
administrative steps to investigate the allegations contained in
the petitions.
“A response was made to my office that the NJC could not act
unless the petitions were accompanied with affidavits. But, I felt
there were no reasons why the petitions could not be looked into on
their own merit by placing sanctions on the AGF, while it was a
constitutional obligation.
“Incidentally, multiple petitions were also written to the DSS
and I requested that they equally write to the NJC to look into the
petitions, but it was the same response the DSS got from the NJC
that without a supporting affidavit the petitions could not be
looked into.
“So, we have a situation where there is reasonable grounds for
suspicion for commission of corruption and we have a body saddled
with the primary administrative responsibility of looking at such
things first, but it seems not to be cooperating in that respect,”
Malami said.
Waning influence?
Observers also attributed the impasse that led to the crippling
of judicial activities in Rivers State from 2014 to 2015 to NJC’s
waning authority, mainly owing to the activities of some of its
members.
Many argued that, but for the growing erosion of public
confidence in the Judiciary as a whole, it would have been
difficult to have state governments openly disagreeing with NJC on
the choice of who becomes the Chief Judge of a State, as was the
case with River State under Governor Rotimi Amaechi.
Other similar incidents included the faceoff between NJC and
Adamawa State under Murtala Nyako, who insisted on having things
done his way. The disagreement resulted in the state not having a
substantive Chief Judge for over two years.
The immediate past administration in Abia State, under Governor
Theodore Orji, also dared the NJC when it attempted to nominate a
judge, who was 19th in the hierarchy of seniority in the state’s
Judiciary, an attempt that was rejected by the NJC.
Partisanship allegation
Observers also recalled the controversial role the NJC played in
the dispute between then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Aloysius
Katsina-Alu and former President of the Court of Appeal, Justice
Isa Ayo Salami, which led to Justice Salami’s suspension until he
retired from the Bench.
They argued that, had the NJC not adopted a partisan role in the
dispute, which resulted from the handling of a political case, the
dent suffered by the Judiciary to its name would have been
averted.
Justice Salami also recently expressed his disappointment with
the NJC when, while announcing his rejection of a recent
appointment as the Chairman of the Corruption and Financial Crime
Cases Trial Monitoring Committee (COTRIMCO), noted that the
Judiciary neglected him when he needed its support.
Earlier in a speech he gave on October 31, 2013 at valedictory
court session held in his honour on his retirement, Justice Salami
likened his case to that of the biblical Joseph, who was sold into
slavery by his brothers.
He faulted the role the NJC played in the events leading to his
suspension and claimed that by its conduct, the NJC sold out to the
Executive and failed in its duties and functions.
Justice Salami said: “The last three years of my career were
dogged by travails which are not dissimilar to the fate of Joseph
in the book of Genesis in the Bible. As his brothers conspired to
destroy him by throwing him into a well and selling him into
slavery, my learned brothers and friends in the legal profession
planned and executed evil against me.
“The NJC created by the Constitution to protect me, nay any
judicial officer, was on the vanguard of my travails. The NJC
failed in its duties and thereby surrendered its functions to the
Executive arm of government, thus, ingratiating itself to the
Executive
“At the inauguration of the most recent batch of Senior
Advocates of Nigeria, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice
Aloma Mukhtar, was on record as advising the Executive and
Legislative arms of government that the NJC is the final authority
in matters concerning judicial officers.
“This, to my mind, is superfluous, as all the powers needed by
the NJC is enshrined in the Constitution. It is, therefore, left to
the NJC to perform its functions or duties in accordance with the
Constitution.
“For instance, the NJC having cleared me of any wrongdoing,
following the recommendations of Justice Aloma Mukhtar’s committee,
ought to have recalled me to office without asking the President to
exercise the power that he does not possess, on the flimsy excuse
that it had earlier referred the matter to him.
“In truth, as a matter of courtesy, all it needed to do was to
write the President that in view of its recent decision, this
matter was now outside his purview. After so informing him, NJC
would be free to take the necessary step to implement its
decision.
“The position in which NJC has found itself is similar to that
of the proverbial cock that betrayed itself to the fox that what
was on his head was not fire and encouraged the fox to touch it.
The fox, having satisfied itself that truly it was not fire, has
since been hunting cocks to make menu of them.
“Also, when the report of the committee the NJC set up to make
recommendation on Umaru Abdullahi’s report was submitted to it for
ratification, neither the CJN nor the next most senior Justice of
the Supreme Court was present at the meeting.
“Justice Moses A. Bello, who was neither the CJN nor the most
senior Justice of the Supreme Court, took it upon himself to
preside at the meeting, contrary to the express provisions of
sub-paragraph (a) and (b) of paragraph 20 of the Third Schedule of
the Constitution.”
Justice Salami noted that by those provisions, “no other members
of the NJC, including statutory members, could be Chairman”.
He argued that by claiming to be Acting Chairman of NJC in the
two letters he (Justice Bello) wrote to him, dated August 9 and 18
2011, he (Justice Bello) was an impostor, because he was neither a
Justice of the Supreme Court, next most senior Justice of the court
nor the CJN.
“This is the levity with which the NJC treats matters of
national importance. Clearly, Justice Bello has not only behaved
irresponsibly, but also recklessly,” he said.
Justice Salami noted that the meeting at which Justice Bello
presided and took the far reaching decision to suspend him took
place when his application for an order restraining the NJC from
deliberating on his case was pending before the Federal High
Court.
He argued that the consequence of Justice Bello’s conduct is
that both meetings he presided over and the decision taken “are
null and void”.
“It is this illegal decision that the NJC had been relying upon
to keep me out of office from August 18, 2011,” Salami
lamented.
He regretted that the NJC, a body set up to protect judicial
officers, “dealt so cruelly with me.”
Lawyers back NJC
Senior lawyers including Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), Chief Mike
Ozekhome (SAN) and Dr. Salisu Abdulazeez, who assessed NJC’s
handling of the Abia crisis, commended it for being decisive.
They, however, advocated a reform that will prevent delays in
its determination of complaints against judges.
Ngige commended the NJC’s decision on the Abia issue.
“Even though it took long in coming, it is better than never,”
he said.
He noted that the mess in Abia State Judiciary had been
festering for too long and has embarrassed everybody, both within
and outside the state.
“People were asking where NJC was when the relationship in the
Abia Judiciary deteriorated from bad to worse.
“So, we are happy that they have come now to wield the big
stick, to call the warring parties to order.
“First is the person, who came forward to offer himself to be
sworn-in as an Acting Chief Judge, knowing that such an appointment
is unconstitutional.
“The second is the substantive CJ, who is in the centre of the
storm and who has now been asked by the NJC to step aside, while
another person has been appointed as the Acting CJ. And, I learnt
that the governor has accepted,” he said.
Ngige urged NJC to punish Justice Orji.
“My appeal is that the NJC should be lenient with the person who
offered himself to be made an Acting CJ unconstitutionally, because
it was out of necessity that he probably offered himself to be
sworn-in to save the judiciary that has almost collapsed.
“They should look at what he has done with some understanding.
They should warn him and allow him to go.
“This also calls into play the need for NJC to fast track its
process of dealing with petitions against judges.
“Also, the idea of allowing a third party to intervene in a
pending petition before the NJC, as was done in the Abia case by
some so called elderly judicial officers, should not be
allowed.
“There is a procedure for writing petition against a judicial
officer. Once that procedure is complied with, no matter the
request for intervention from any elder or group of elders, the NJC
should stick to its responsibility of looking into the
petition.
“If there is a case to be answered, the affected person should
be called upon.
“They should not allow any intervention for settlement. NJC is
not where royal fathers settle dispute.
“It handles cases involving judicial officers, who determine
other people’s fate.
“It amounts to compromising misconduct when you allow
interference on the pretext of settlement. I hope the NJC has
learnt from this,” Ngige said.
‘NJC should be a volcano’
Ozekhome also praised the NJC for its decision on the Abia
crisis, but disagreed with Ngige on the involvement of some
“elderly judicial officers” from Abia State.
He argued that there was nothing wrong in allowing arbitration
and conciliatory options in the resolution of any dispute.
He added: “I believe there was political undertone in this whole
case. I suspect the lady was being haunted because she is from
Anambra and not Abia State.
“Two wrongs cannot make a right. The fact that she is not from
the state does not confer on the state’s Assembly the power to
remove her.
“From this moment, and to prevent a recurrence, I will suggest
that the NJC should not be a sleeping magma. It should rather be
like a volcanic eruption.
“When cases are reported, they should quickly look into such
cases with promptitude and dispense justice, because justice
delayed is justice denied, just as justice rushed is justice
crushed.
“There must be a balance. You cannot, for example, sit on an
issue and expect an implosion not to occur.
“But, I do not believe that NJC is wrong this time, because what
I learnt was that some elders intervened and said ‘let us see how
we can settle this matter’.
“There is nothing that cannot be settled. It is not a crime to
say ‘let us settle and reconcile’,” Ozekhome said.
‘NJC must improve case resolution
mechanism’
Dr. Abdulazeez argued that the delay created by the NJC
accounted for the Abia State House of Assembly’s decision to resort
to self-help.
He commended that governor for accepting NJC’s decision on the
issue.
But, he suggested that NJC must work on the pace of its case
resolution mechanism to ensure prompt determination of complaints
against judicial officers.
The National Judicial Council (NJC) is up in arms
against Abia State over the suspension of Chief Judge Theresa
Uzokwe. It says the government could not take that decision without
its input, citing the Constitution.The NJC, some lawyers submit,
has a case, but they note that the council has been in slumber for
long, allowing judges to do as they like. Eric Ikhilae
reports.
On January 26, the Abia State House of Assembly
suspended Chief Judge Theresa Uzokwe and recomended that she be
suspended. Governor Okezie Ikpeazu did and named Justice Obisike
Orji as the Acting Chief Judge. The National Judicial Council(NJC)
felt slighted by the action.
It voided Justice Uzokwe’s suspension, citing its powers under
the Constitution. Under the Constitution, judges are appointed and
removed upon NJC’s recommendation. The drama all started with a
petition sent to the assembly by Dr Anthony Agbazuere and Mr Obinna
Nkume, Executive Director and Director, Legal Services of the
Global Centre for Peace and Justice, a non-governmental
organisation (NGO) in Umuahia, the Abia State capital.
The January 22, 2018 petition is entitled: Justice
Theresa Uzokwe’s unending acts of tyranny, infamy, gross misconduct
and incompetence: urgent need to save the administration of justice
in Abia.
It was presented in the House as a matter of urgent public
importance by a member representing Ukwa West Constituency, Mezie
Nwubani.
In a January 31 statement, the NJC overruled the governor;
suspended Orji; asked Uzokwe to stay away from office and directed
that the most senior judge, Justice Onuoha Arisa Kalu
Ogwe, be appointed the Acting chief judge pending its final
resolution of the dispute.
NJC recommendations
The statement by NJC’s Director of Information, Soji Oye,
recommended:
- The suspension of the Chief Judge of Abia State by the state
House of Assembly without a prior recommendation by the NJC
violates the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. - Consequently, the subsequent act of appointing and swearing-in
of Hon. Mr. Justice Obisike Orji as the Acting Chief Judge is
invalid for being unconstitutional. - Furthermore, the conduct of Hon. Mr. Justice Obisike Orji in
presenting himself to be sworn-in raises potential questions of
misconduct that Council is now looking into. - Council, therefore, resolved to query and suspend the Hon. Mr.
Justice Obisike Orji pending the outcome of its investigation. - In view of the recent escalation, Council, in the interest of
the smooth administration of justice in Abia State, resolved to
direct the Chief Judge, Hon. Mr. Justice T. U. Uzokwe, to stay away
from duties pending Council’s final decision after consideration of
the report of its panels. - In the prevailing circumstance whereby the NJC has directed the
Chief Judge not to perform his duties, and the next most senior
judge is suspended, the governor of Abia State shall appoint Hon.
Mr. Justice Onuoha Arisa Kalu Ogwe, the next most senior judge, to
act as the Chief Judge of Abia State, pending Council’s final
resolution of the matter.
Ikpeazu, in apparent agreement with Section 158 and Paragraph 21
of Part One of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, is said
to have accepted the NJC’s decision, particularly in relation to
the appointment of Ogwe.
Did NJC handle the crisis well?
While observers commended Ikpeazu for agreeing with NJC’s
directive, many say the tardiness with which the NJC treated the
matter before now, contributed to the degeneration of the
dispute.
The NJC, in its January 31 statement, acknowledged being aware
of the dispute in the Abia Judiciary.
Rather than assume its responsibilities and address the dispute
dispassionately, it chose to farm out its responsibilities to some
individuals it referred to as “some elderly Judicial Officers of
Abia State Judiciary” for settlement.
Part of the statement reads: “It noted that its attention had
been drawn to the crisis in Abia State Judiciary by petitions
written against Hon. Mr. Justice T.U. Uzokwe and the one written by
the Chief Judge against Hon. Mr. Justice C. U. Okoroafor.
“But in the course of the investigation by the Committees set up
by Council, some elderly Judicial Officers of Abia State Judiciary
waded in and pleaded with the committees to allow the matter to be
resolved amicably by them, which was granted by council at its
plenary.
“At the last meeting of council which was held on 6th December,
2017, council directed the Committees to continue and conclude with
the petitions before them if there were no reports of the
settlement by the peacemakers.
“While this was going on, the problem escalated and Council was
informed of the suspension of Hon. Mr. Justice Uzokwe and the
swearing-in of Hon. Mr. Justice Obisike Orji as the Acting Chief
Judge.
“In the prevailing circumstance, whereby the National Judicial
Council has directed the Chief Judge not to perform his duties, and
the next most senior Judge is suspended, the Governor of Abia State
shall appoint Hon. Mr. Justice Onuoha Arisa Kalu Ogwe, the next
most senior Judge to act as the Chief Judge of Abia State, pending
Council’s final resolution of the matter.”
Observers contended that, had the NJC accorded the case the
seriousness it deserved and attended to it promptly, rather than
yield its responsibility to some outsiders under some inexplicable
guise, Abia State would have been saved this currently trouble of a
Judiciary without a stable leadership.
They noted that the allegations of tardiness and double standard
on the part of the NJC, in addressing petitions and complaints
against judicial officers, is gradually becoming rampant and was
increasingly robbing off on its dignity and the respect people have
for it.
A dilly-dallying NJC?
The NJC’s handling of the Abia case and past cases where it had
exercised some questionable discretion, observers argued, informed
the need for an urgent review of the Council’s operations.
This, they said, relates to the need to maintain its neutrality
at all times and attend to complaints against judicial officers
with dispatch.
Observers recalled that the same allegations of delay and double
standards were raised to justify the raiding of the houses of some
judicial officers in October 2016.
Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation
(AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN), reportedly told a House of
Representatives committee on November 29, 2016, that the raid by
the Department of State Services (DSS) on judges’ homes was
authorised because the NJC was reluctant to act on complaints of
misconduct against the affected judges.
The ad hoc committee of the House of Representatives, headed by
Garba Datti-Mohammed (All Progressives Congress from Kaduna State),
was meant to investigate all cases of invasion of property and
arrests of persons by the DSS from May 2015.
Malami was quoted to have said: “When we got the petitions, I
had cause personally to write to the NJC, requesting that they take
administrative steps to investigate the allegations contained in
the petitions.
“A response was made to my office that the NJC could not act
unless the petitions were accompanied with affidavits. But, I felt
there were no reasons why the petitions could not be looked into on
their own merit by placing sanctions on the AGF, while it was a
constitutional obligation.
“Incidentally, multiple petitions were also written to the DSS
and I requested that they equally write to the NJC to look into the
petitions, but it was the same response the DSS got from the NJC
that without a supporting affidavit the petitions could not be
looked into.
“So, we have a situation where there is reasonable grounds for
suspicion for commission of corruption and we have a body saddled
with the primary administrative responsibility of looking at such
things first, but it seems not to be cooperating in that respect,”
Malami said.
Waning influence?
Observers also attributed the impasse that led to the crippling
of judicial activities in Rivers State from 2014 to 2015 to NJC’s
waning authority, mainly owing to the activities of some of its
members.
Many argued that, but for the growing erosion of public
confidence in the Judiciary as a whole, it would have been
difficult to have state governments openly disagreeing with NJC on
the choice of who becomes the Chief Judge of a State, as was the
case with River State under Governor Rotimi Amaechi.
Other similar incidents included the faceoff between NJC and
Adamawa State under Murtala Nyako, who insisted on having things
done his way. The disagreement resulted in the state not having a
substantive Chief Judge for over two years.
The immediate past administration in Abia State, under Governor
Theodore Orji, also dared the NJC when it attempted to nominate a
judge, who was 19th in the hierarchy of seniority in the state’s
Judiciary, an attempt that was rejected by the NJC.
Partisanship allegation
Observers also recalled the controversial role the NJC played in
the dispute between then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Aloysius
Katsina-Alu and former President of the Court of Appeal, Justice
Isa Ayo Salami, which led to Justice Salami’s suspension until he
retired from the Bench.
They argued that, had the NJC not adopted a partisan role in the
dispute, which resulted from the handling of a political case, the
dent suffered by the Judiciary to its name would have been
averted.
Justice Salami also recently expressed his disappointment with
the NJC when, while announcing his rejection of a recent
appointment as the Chairman of the Corruption and Financial Crime
Cases Trial Monitoring Committee (COTRIMCO), noted that the
Judiciary neglected him when he needed its support.
Earlier in a speech he gave on October 31, 2013 at valedictory
court session held in his honour on his retirement, Justice Salami
likened his case to that of the biblical Joseph, who was sold into
slavery by his brothers.
He faulted the role the NJC played in the events leading to his
suspension and claimed that by its conduct, the NJC sold out to the
Executive and failed in its duties and functions.
Justice Salami said: “The last three years of my career were
dogged by travails which are not dissimilar to the fate of Joseph
in the book of Genesis in the Bible. As his brothers conspired to
destroy him by throwing him into a well and selling him into
slavery, my learned brothers and friends in the legal profession
planned and executed evil against me.
“The NJC created by the Constitution to protect me, nay any
judicial officer, was on the vanguard of my travails. The NJC
failed in its duties and thereby surrendered its functions to the
Executive arm of government, thus, ingratiating itself to the
Executive
“At the inauguration of the most recent batch of Senior
Advocates of Nigeria, the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice
Aloma Mukhtar, was on record as advising the Executive and
Legislative arms of government that the NJC is the final authority
in matters concerning judicial officers.
“This, to my mind, is superfluous, as all the powers needed by
the NJC is enshrined in the Constitution. It is, therefore, left to
the NJC to perform its functions or duties in accordance with the
Constitution.
“For instance, the NJC having cleared me of any wrongdoing,
following the recommendations of Justice Aloma Mukhtar’s committee,
ought to have recalled me to office without asking the President to
exercise the power that he does not possess, on the flimsy excuse
that it had earlier referred the matter to him.
“In truth, as a matter of courtesy, all it needed to do was to
write the President that in view of its recent decision, this
matter was now outside his purview. After so informing him, NJC
would be free to take the necessary step to implement its
decision.
“The position in which NJC has found itself is similar to that
of the proverbial cock that betrayed itself to the fox that what
was on his head was not fire and encouraged the fox to touch it.
The fox, having satisfied itself that truly it was not fire, has
since been hunting cocks to make menu of them.
“Also, when the report of the committee the NJC set up to make
recommendation on Umaru Abdullahi’s report was submitted to it for
ratification, neither the CJN nor the next most senior Justice of
the Supreme Court was present at the meeting.
“Justice Moses A. Bello, who was neither the CJN nor the most
senior Justice of the Supreme Court, took it upon himself to
preside at the meeting, contrary to the express provisions of
sub-paragraph (a) and (b) of paragraph 20 of the Third Schedule of
the Constitution.”
Justice Salami noted that by those provisions, “no other members
of the NJC, including statutory members, could be Chairman”.
He argued that by claiming to be Acting Chairman of NJC in the
two letters he (Justice Bello) wrote to him, dated August 9 and 18
2011, he (Justice Bello) was an impostor, because he was neither a
Justice of the Supreme Court, next most senior Justice of the court
nor the CJN.
“This is the levity with which the NJC treats matters of
national importance. Clearly, Justice Bello has not only behaved
irresponsibly, but also recklessly,” he said.
Justice Salami noted that the meeting at which Justice Bello
presided and took the far reaching decision to suspend him took
place when his application for an order restraining the NJC from
deliberating on his case was pending before the Federal High
Court.
He argued that the consequence of Justice Bello’s conduct is
that both meetings he presided over and the decision taken “are
null and void”.
“It is this illegal decision that the NJC had been relying upon
to keep me out of office from August 18, 2011,” Salami
lamented.
He regretted that the NJC, a body set up to protect judicial
officers, “dealt so cruelly with me.”
Lawyers back NJC
Senior lawyers including Chief Emeka Ngige (SAN), Chief Mike
Ozekhome (SAN) and Dr. Salisu Abdulazeez, who assessed NJC’s
handling of the Abia crisis, commended it for being decisive.
They, however, advocated a reform that will prevent delays in
its determination of complaints against judges.
Ngige commended the NJC’s decision on the Abia issue.
“Even though it took long in coming, it is better than never,”
he said.
He noted that the mess in Abia State Judiciary had been
festering for too long and has embarrassed everybody, both within
and outside the state.
“People were asking where NJC was when the relationship in the
Abia Judiciary deteriorated from bad to worse.
“So, we are happy that they have come now to wield the big
stick, to call the warring parties to order.
“First is the person, who came forward to offer himself to be
sworn-in as an Acting Chief Judge, knowing that such an appointment
is unconstitutional.
“The second is the substantive CJ, who is in the centre of the
storm and who has now been asked by the NJC to step aside, while
another person has been appointed as the Acting CJ. And, I learnt
that the governor has accepted,” he said.
Ngige urged NJC to punish Justice Orji.
“My appeal is that the NJC should be lenient with the person who
offered himself to be made an Acting CJ unconstitutionally, because
it was out of necessity that he probably offered himself to be
sworn-in to save the judiciary that has almost collapsed.
“They should look at what he has done with some understanding.
They should warn him and allow him to go.
“This also calls into play the need for NJC to fast track its
process of dealing with petitions against judges.
“Also, the idea of allowing a third party to intervene in a
pending petition before the NJC, as was done in the Abia case by
some so called elderly judicial officers, should not be
allowed.
“There is a procedure for writing petition against a judicial
officer. Once that procedure is complied with, no matter the
request for intervention from any elder or group of elders, the NJC
should stick to its responsibility of looking into the
petition.
“If there is a case to be answered, the affected person should
be called upon.
“They should not allow any intervention for settlement. NJC is
not where royal fathers settle dispute.
“It handles cases involving judicial officers, who determine
other people’s fate.
“It amounts to compromising misconduct when you allow
interference on the pretext of settlement. I hope the NJC has
learnt from this,” Ngige said.
‘NJC should be a volcano’
Ozekhome also praised the NJC for its decision on the Abia
crisis, but disagreed with Ngige on the involvement of some
“elderly judicial officers” from Abia State.
He argued that there was nothing wrong in allowing arbitration
and conciliatory options in the resolution of any dispute.
He added: “I believe there was political undertone in this whole
case. I suspect the lady was being haunted because she is from
Anambra and not Abia State.
“Two wrongs cannot make a right. The fact that she is not from
the state does not confer on the state’s Assembly the power to
remove her.
“From this moment, and to prevent a recurrence, I will suggest
that the NJC should not be a sleeping magma. It should rather be
like a volcanic eruption.
“When cases are reported, they should quickly look into such
cases with promptitude and dispense justice, because justice
delayed is justice denied, just as justice rushed is justice
crushed.
“There must be a balance. You cannot, for example, sit on an
issue and expect an implosion not to occur.
“But, I do not believe that NJC is wrong this time, because what
I learnt was that some elders intervened and said ‘let us see how
we can settle this matter’.
“There is nothing that cannot be settled. It is not a crime to
say ‘let us settle and reconcile’,” Ozekhome said.
‘NJC must improve case resolution
mechanism’
Dr. Abdulazeez argued that the delay created by the NJC
accounted for the Abia State House of Assembly’s decision to resort
to self-help.
He commended that governor for accepting NJC’s decision on the
issue.
But, he suggested that NJC must work on the pace of its case
resolution mechanism to ensure prompt determination of complaints
against judicial officers.
Read more https://nairalaw.com/njc-vs-abia-who-blinks-first/