It’s improper for govs to ask CJN to shun CCT – Ubani

Former Deputy President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mr
Monday Ubani, tells FEMI MAKINDE that lawyers
are not shielding the Chief Justice of Nigeria, Justice Walter
Onnoghen, from being prosecuted over allegations of non-declaration
of assets, but have faulted the process

Was it
right for the South-South governors to have asked the CJN to shun
his arraignment before the Code of Conduct
Tribunal?

A lot of people are emotional about issues that come up in our
nation most times. The advice given to the CJN by some South-South
governors was borne out of emotion. It is not proper to advise
anyone not to honour any court invitation; that will be creating
anarchy. If anybody is invited by the court or is asked to appear
before any court, it will be improper for people, who are in charge
of government like the governors, to ask such person to shun the
court invitation. These are governors, who run their states and it
will be improper for them to ask a public officer, who is alleged
of an infraction, not to appear before the court. I don’t think the
CJN heeded that advice. This is because he was represented by his
counsel at the Code of Conduct Tribunal. It is ill-advised (that
the governors gave) but he obviously did not heed the advice.

The arraignment was said not to have followed the
due process of law because the CJN was not first reported to the
National Judicial Council. Should the allegation against him be
swept under the carpet because of this?

Nobody is saying the allegations should be swept under the
carpet. We are under constitutional democracy. If the constitution
has made a provision that certain things should be done in certain
manner, it will be improper not to follow the laid down procedure.
If the CJN had been involved in crimes like robbery, murder or rape
that has nothing to do with the functions of his office, that is
another thing. But if the infractions arose out of the function of
his office, then the case must follow the due process. 
Without being a judicial officer in this case, he wouldn’t have
been asked to declare his assets. There is a link between that
infraction and this office. The proper thing to do is to report
that matter to the NJC. He will not preside over that case and it
is important we make that clear. He cannot be a judge in his own
case. After reporting the matter to the NJC, then he can be dragged
before the CCT or any court if there is anything wrong that he has
done. That is the procedure and even there is a judicial authority
which has not been reversed. There is a judicial authority that
applies to when something like this happens and it has not been
reversed. Going to the CCT straight is putting the cart before the
horse. It is fundamental process; the moment you breach it, you run
into problem and that is what is happening now. There is even an
injunction now by a superior court that the CJN should not be
arraigned. And there is a preliminary objection before the court
that the court has no jurisdiction; all these things will put that
trial into jeopardy. They won’t move further in this case because
they didn’t receive quality advice. And we keep on advising this
government that let them receive quality advice from the people
they have appointed. I am sure they have lawyers they appointed and
the moment they don’t listen to these lawyers, they will run into
technical hitch, which is what is happening now.

What do you think will happen to this
case?

The due process should be followed to avoid anarchy. The CJN is
the head of an arm of government like the President is the head of
the executive arm. You don’t embarrass your judicial system. Of all
the arms of government, the judiciary is the most important. Who do
you refer this matter to? Is it not the judiciary? The man is
before the judiciary and you want the judiciary not to follow the
due process. They will follow the due process; if they don’t, the
judiciary will put them on the right track and that is what will
happen in this case.

Do you support the call that the CJN should also
enjoy immunity since the heads of the executive arm also enjoy
immunity?

This is a constitutional issue but as long as the constitution
does not confer immunity on the CJN, there is nothing anybody can
do for now. I agree that if the head of the executive is enjoying
immunity, there is no reason why the head of legislature and the
head of the judiciary should also not enjoy immunity. The only
problem is that he has not been conferred with immunity and we are
not even saying that the CJN should enjoy immunity. If he has done
anything wrong, is it not good to follow what the constitution
says? For now, let the proper procedure of the law be followed in
trying him. He is not above the law and I want the people to get us
right. We lawyers are in support of the fight against corruption.
We must get this country back to where it is supposed to be.
Corruption has kept us retarded and denied us of basic amenities
that are taken for granted elsewhere. We lawyers, who have
conscience, will always support the fight against corruption but
there are processes and procedures. We cannot allow the government
we voted for to be doing the wrong thing. We must insist on due
process. We are not saying the CJN should not be tried or that he
is above the law.

How will you rate the anti-corruption war of Buhari
administration?

I have always said that we must put a structure in place that
will discourage people from engaging in corruption. If Buhari goes
tomorrow, what structure do we have in place to fight
corruption?

Cuuled from Punch