JUSTICE dispensation in Nigeria is like a shipwreck. And the
reasons for this calamity are obvious to the stakeholders. A former
Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mariam Aloma-Mukhtar, decried in Abuja
recently the prevalence of lobbying and favouritism in judicial
appointments, instead of being merit-driven.
Her observation is a knock-out on the judiciary. These base
criteria, she noted, have led to a decline in standards, weakening
of the judiciary and enthronement of incompetent judicial officers.
With the “rising culture” label she attached to it, it is obvious
that the tumour has been with the system for long. Politicians of
note are involved in this racket. In a highly corrupt country like
ours, this is tragic. As someone who chaired the National Judicial
Council until 2014 when she retired, revealing what she did to tame
the scourge would have made more sense. However, she was right in
stressing that “these practices negate the principles of justice
and breed indiscipline.”
Globally, the values of a judge define the quality of the bench.
The position is magisterial, reserved only for men and women of
distinction – with integrity, honour and high intellect – given the
fact that they are expected to deliver justice to all; and hold the
power to decide matters of life and death over fellow human
beings.
Aloma-Mukhtar is not the only judicial personage to lament the
self-immolation of our judiciary. Her successor, Mahmud Mohammed,
in fact, initiated a new recruitment process aimed at eliminating
the plague. He proposed the advertisement of vacancies in the
media, to attract interested applicants. The CJN, serving and
retired; serving and retired Justices of the Supreme Court;
President of Court of Appeal, serving and retired; other heads of
courts and President of the Nigerian Bar Association would be
required to nominate candidates.
The method will “ensure that only fit and proper persons and the
most intellectually astute, morally sound, meritorious and
deserving candidates are appointed as judges of courts. It is the
best way to proceed in reforming our judiciary,” Mohammed had
intoned.
But Aloma-Mukhtar’s recent misgiving simply means that
Mohammed’s reform was either ineffective or it never took off. The
dominant practice has been for the Federal/States Judicial Service
Commissions to prepare a list of nominees. The NJC screens and
successful candidates are then forwarded to either the president or
the governor for eventual appointment.
If mundane considerations, as outlined by the ex-CJN, still mess
up judges’ selection process, it means then that the NJC deserves a
big hit. Its incumbent chairman and CJN, Walter Onnoghen, should
now hit the bull’s-eye. Undoubtedly, the extant procedure or
Mohammed’s template is open to abuse. For instance, if a CJN once
arrested a judgement of an election petition, or tried to influence
its outcome in the past, then such a figure cannot be trusted with
the responsibility of nominating an upright candidate to the
position of a judge. Again, a retired President of the Court of
Appeal, Ayo Salami, a few years ago, took the lid off the
disgraceful post-retirement misconduct of some retired senior
judges who intimidated judges handling cases at Election Petitions
Tribunals, funnelling bribes to them on behalf of their desperate
“clients” who wanted to win at all costs.
Therefore, the selection process should be broadened to involve
the larger society. It will beget public confidence for our
beleaguered judiciary. This works in Kenya, Canada and Australia.
In Canada, a Supreme Court nominee submits an application to a
screening committee comprising judges, lawyers, government
officials and members of the public.
A former Chief Justice of Australia, Anthony Mason, now a law
professor at the University of Cambridge, the United Kingdom, says
higher courts appointments are made with the public knowing the
procedures that are followed. The process, he emphasises, involves
consultation and enquiry with professional groups and people who
can speak for the public interest.
The racketeering in Nigeria’s judiciary and high-level of
indiscipline on the bench have become too rampant and laughable:
Judges from courts of coordinate jurisdictions still give
conflicting judgements; it is doubtful if granting of ex parte
motions, relief not sought, interlocutory injunctions, perpetual
injunctions, use of other discretionary powers have been abandoned
by the judges who traffic in them. These are abuses driven by
graft.
Instructively, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015,
which prescribes procedures for speedy trials and is meant to
address these concerns, is being undermined by judges in many ways,
which include giving ruling on interlocutory applications, instead
of doing so while delivering judgement in the substantive case. The
abuse, says a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Itse Sagay, constitutes
“gross misconduct deserving of sanctions by the NJC.”
It is an unworthy judge that waits for the life-span of a
legislative tenure to end, before delivering judgement on a
pre-election matter. These and more justify the demand for a
paradigm shift in judicial personnel recruitment. Those entrusted
with the task have woefully failed the country.
While Aloma-Mukhtar and Mohammed may have expressed their
anxieties, which others share, howling over the matter does not
solve the problem. The beneficiaries of such flawed appointments
should be fished out and sent packing. It is just like the efforts
by states to cleanse their payroll by sacking workers who got into
the civil service through the back door.
This remedial step makes sense. The depravity should not be like
the “billionaire judges” the late jurist, Kayode Eso, bemoaned; or
the corrupt judges that a SAN, Femi Falana, says information on
them freely circulates within lawyers circles. The country should
abort this rot by ensuring that judges pass through the furnace
before their appointment, for a better society.
Culled From Punch
JUSTICE dispensation in Nigeria is like a shipwreck. And the
reasons for this calamity are obvious to the stakeholders. A former
Chief Justice of Nigeria, Mariam Aloma-Mukhtar, decried in Abuja
recently the prevalence of lobbying and favouritism in judicial
appointments, instead of being merit-driven.
Her observation is a knock-out on the judiciary. These base
criteria, she noted, have led to a decline in standards, weakening
of the judiciary and enthronement of incompetent judicial officers.
With the “rising culture” label she attached to it, it is obvious
that the tumour has been with the system for long. Politicians of
note are involved in this racket. In a highly corrupt country like
ours, this is tragic. As someone who chaired the National Judicial
Council until 2014 when she retired, revealing what she did to tame
the scourge would have made more sense. However, she was right in
stressing that “these practices negate the principles of justice
and breed indiscipline.”
Globally, the values of a judge define the quality of the bench.
The position is magisterial, reserved only for men and women of
distinction – with integrity, honour and high intellect – given the
fact that they are expected to deliver justice to all; and hold the
power to decide matters of life and death over fellow human
beings.
Aloma-Mukhtar is not the only judicial personage to lament the
self-immolation of our judiciary. Her successor, Mahmud Mohammed,
in fact, initiated a new recruitment process aimed at eliminating
the plague. He proposed the advertisement of vacancies in the
media, to attract interested applicants. The CJN, serving and
retired; serving and retired Justices of the Supreme Court;
President of Court of Appeal, serving and retired; other heads of
courts and President of the Nigerian Bar Association would be
required to nominate candidates.
The method will “ensure that only fit and proper persons and the
most intellectually astute, morally sound, meritorious and
deserving candidates are appointed as judges of courts. It is the
best way to proceed in reforming our judiciary,” Mohammed had
intoned.
But Aloma-Mukhtar’s recent misgiving simply means that
Mohammed’s reform was either ineffective or it never took off. The
dominant practice has been for the Federal/States Judicial Service
Commissions to prepare a list of nominees. The NJC screens and
successful candidates are then forwarded to either the president or
the governor for eventual appointment.
If mundane considerations, as outlined by the ex-CJN, still mess
up judges’ selection process, it means then that the NJC deserves a
big hit. Its incumbent chairman and CJN, Walter Onnoghen, should
now hit the bull’s-eye. Undoubtedly, the extant procedure or
Mohammed’s template is open to abuse. For instance, if a CJN once
arrested a judgement of an election petition, or tried to influence
its outcome in the past, then such a figure cannot be trusted with
the responsibility of nominating an upright candidate to the
position of a judge. Again, a retired President of the Court of
Appeal, Ayo Salami, a few years ago, took the lid off the
disgraceful post-retirement misconduct of some retired senior
judges who intimidated judges handling cases at Election Petitions
Tribunals, funnelling bribes to them on behalf of their desperate
“clients” who wanted to win at all costs.
Therefore, the selection process should be broadened to involve
the larger society. It will beget public confidence for our
beleaguered judiciary. This works in Kenya, Canada and Australia.
In Canada, a Supreme Court nominee submits an application to a
screening committee comprising judges, lawyers, government
officials and members of the public.
A former Chief Justice of Australia, Anthony Mason, now a law
professor at the University of Cambridge, the United Kingdom, says
higher courts appointments are made with the public knowing the
procedures that are followed. The process, he emphasises, involves
consultation and enquiry with professional groups and people who
can speak for the public interest.
The racketeering in Nigeria’s judiciary and high-level of
indiscipline on the bench have become too rampant and laughable:
Judges from courts of coordinate jurisdictions still give
conflicting judgements; it is doubtful if granting of ex parte
motions, relief not sought, interlocutory injunctions, perpetual
injunctions, use of other discretionary powers have been abandoned
by the judges who traffic in them. These are abuses driven by
graft.
Instructively, the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015,
which prescribes procedures for speedy trials and is meant to
address these concerns, is being undermined by judges in many ways,
which include giving ruling on interlocutory applications, instead
of doing so while delivering judgement in the substantive case. The
abuse, says a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Itse Sagay, constitutes
“gross misconduct deserving of sanctions by the NJC.”
It is an unworthy judge that waits for the life-span of a
legislative tenure to end, before delivering judgement on a
pre-election matter. These and more justify the demand for a
paradigm shift in judicial personnel recruitment. Those entrusted
with the task have woefully failed the country.
While Aloma-Mukhtar and Mohammed may have expressed their
anxieties, which others share, howling over the matter does not
solve the problem. The beneficiaries of such flawed appointments
should be fished out and sent packing. It is just like the efforts
by states to cleanse their payroll by sacking workers who got into
the civil service through the back door.
This remedial step makes sense. The depravity should not be like
the “billionaire judges” the late jurist, Kayode Eso, bemoaned; or
the corrupt judges that a SAN, Femi Falana, says information on
them freely circulates within lawyers circles. The country should
abort this rot by ensuring that judges pass through the furnace
before their appointment, for a better society.
Culled From Punch
Read more https://nairalaw.com/cronyism-lobbying-in-judicial-appointments/