Judiciary not cause of slow justice dispensation ―CJN

CHIEF Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen,
has absolved the judiciary of blame over the perceived slow
dispensation of justice in the country, saying that it is not the
one guilty of arresting before fishing for evidence to
prosecute.

Speaking to State House correspondents after a meeting with
President Muhammadu Buhari on Tuesday, he said it is not that cases
are not tried expeditiously because judges are not there or refuse
to hear them and deliver judgment but that all those involved tend
to seek adjournments.

Asked to respond to claims that the Judiciary is not doing
enough to ensure speedy trial of cases, he said: “Now, l believe
that you know, with your experience of many years of practice that
there has never been situation in which any case was taken to court
and decided upon and the Judge was not there to listen to the case,
or having finished hearing, he refused to deliver judgement.

“So, when cases are not tried expeditiously and the Judge is
there, ready to listen to the case, you come and for one reason or
the other, you take a date to adjourn the case, and the court
grants the adjournment which is normal during proceedings, you
cannot turn round and blame the Judge for that. These the basic
things that everybody must know. We must all work together,
cooperate for the system to move forward.

“But if you keep thinking that the Judiciary is the culprit in
this delay process, you are not telling the whole story.

“It is not the judiciary that would go and arrest someone before
looking for evidence. It is not the judiciary that would go into
investigations. No, we do not operate the inquisitional mode of
justice as it is practised by the French. Our own is that an
independent body must investigate, prosecute while the judge
decides.”

Justice Onnoghen who said he was at the presidential villa to
felicitate and interact with President Buhari on his return from
the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), also said he
is happy with the performance of judges so far just as he
reiterated that he set up the Commission for the Prevention of
Corruption (COMPRECO) to enhance the process of justice
dispensation.

He added: “Yes. So far, so good. Under the circumstances, l must
admit that so far, so good. It is in order to enable you to know
the workings of the system that l set up the COMPRECO (Commission
for the Prevention of Corruption) committee.

“All along, everybody is passing the buck. The prosecution will
say ‘it is not our responsibility, we are not the cause of the
delay;’ the investigator will say ‘l am not the cause;’ the Judge
will say, ‘l am not the cause.’ So, the people must know who is the
cause of the delay. That was why l set up that committee. And it is
made up of both the defence counsel, the prosecutor and the
Judiciary under the NJC.”

On whether the judiciary is on the same page with the Executive
on the fight against corruption, the CJN answered in the
affirmative, saying: “I have answered that before and l still say
the same thing. We are on the same page with the Executive. There
are three arms of government and these three arms constitute the
government. The government is not only the Executive.”

He also spoke on the idea of setting up of special courts for
corruption cases, noting that as far as that is concerned, the ball
is in the courts of the Executive and the Legislature.

According to him, “It is the Executive in conjunction with the
Legislature that has the prerogatives of setting up Courts,
including the Special Courts, under our Constitution and not the
Judiciary. Once the Executive set up such Courts, the Judiciary
will run not by providing the manpower.”

Similarly, Justice Onnoghen spoke on the effort to decongest the
prisons, adding: “You are seeing everything being done on the
issue. Next week, we are continuing with our action. But there is
one thing you need to know. There is the physical constraint about
the congestion itself.

“How many were to be contained in a prison room and how many are
there now.

“Secondly, you should also know that the actual prisoners are
fewer compared with the total number you see there.

“This where the issue of awaiting trial comes in and that is the
aspect where prison decongestion is working on and l can assure you
that this is being handled.“

CHIEF Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen,
has absolved the judiciary of blame over the perceived slow
dispensation of justice in the country, saying that it is not the
one guilty of arresting before fishing for evidence to
prosecute.

Speaking to State House correspondents after a meeting with
President Muhammadu Buhari on Tuesday, he said it is not that cases
are not tried expeditiously because judges are not there or refuse
to hear them and deliver judgment but that all those involved tend
to seek adjournments.

Asked to respond to claims that the Judiciary is not doing
enough to ensure speedy trial of cases, he said: “Now, l believe
that you know, with your experience of many years of practice that
there has never been situation in which any case was taken to court
and decided upon and the Judge was not there to listen to the case,
or having finished hearing, he refused to deliver judgement.

“So, when cases are not tried expeditiously and the Judge is
there, ready to listen to the case, you come and for one reason or
the other, you take a date to adjourn the case, and the court
grants the adjournment which is normal during proceedings, you
cannot turn round and blame the Judge for that. These the basic
things that everybody must know. We must all work together,
cooperate for the system to move forward.

“But if you keep thinking that the Judiciary is the culprit in
this delay process, you are not telling the whole story.

“It is not the judiciary that would go and arrest someone before
looking for evidence. It is not the judiciary that would go into
investigations. No, we do not operate the inquisitional mode of
justice as it is practised by the French. Our own is that an
independent body must investigate, prosecute while the judge
decides.”

Justice Onnoghen who said he was at the presidential villa to
felicitate and interact with President Buhari on his return from
the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), also said he
is happy with the performance of judges so far just as he
reiterated that he set up the Commission for the Prevention of
Corruption (COMPRECO) to enhance the process of justice
dispensation.

He added: “Yes. So far, so good. Under the circumstances, l must
admit that so far, so good. It is in order to enable you to know
the workings of the system that l set up the COMPRECO (Commission
for the Prevention of Corruption) committee.

“All along, everybody is passing the buck. The prosecution will
say ‘it is not our responsibility, we are not the cause of the
delay;’ the investigator will say ‘l am not the cause;’ the Judge
will say, ‘l am not the cause.’ So, the people must know who is the
cause of the delay. That was why l set up that committee. And it is
made up of both the defence counsel, the prosecutor and the
Judiciary under the NJC.”

On whether the judiciary is on the same page with the Executive
on the fight against corruption, the CJN answered in the
affirmative, saying: “I have answered that before and l still say
the same thing. We are on the same page with the Executive. There
are three arms of government and these three arms constitute the
government. The government is not only the Executive.”

He also spoke on the idea of setting up of special courts for
corruption cases, noting that as far as that is concerned, the ball
is in the courts of the Executive and the Legislature.

According to him, “It is the Executive in conjunction with the
Legislature that has the prerogatives of setting up Courts,
including the Special Courts, under our Constitution and not the
Judiciary. Once the Executive set up such Courts, the Judiciary
will run not by providing the manpower.”

Similarly, Justice Onnoghen spoke on the effort to decongest the
prisons, adding: “You are seeing everything being done on the
issue. Next week, we are continuing with our action. But there is
one thing you need to know. There is the physical constraint about
the congestion itself.

“How many were to be contained in a prison room and how many are
there now.

“Secondly, you should also know that the actual prisoners are
fewer compared with the total number you see there.

“This where the issue of awaiting trial comes in and that is the
aspect where prison decongestion is working on and l can assure you
that this is being handled.“