Judiciary’s Independence Is Non-Negotiable – Acting CJN

The acting Chief Justice of Nigeria, (CJN), Ibrahim Tanko, on
Monday said the independence of the judiciary should be guarded
jealously even as the general polls approach.

Mr Tanko, whose controversial appointment is still raising dust
in the polity, said the judiciary must also be allowed to function
unhindered.

Mr Tanko was appointed in an acting capacity by President
Muhammadu Buhari in the midst of allegations of failure to declare
assets levelled against the now suspended substantive CJN, Walter
Onnoghen.

Mr Buhari said he relied on a ruling by the Code of Conduct
Tribunal asking that the embattled official should be suspended
despite a stay of action ruling granted by an appeal court.

The action has drawn the ire of Nigerians and some western
nations who are appalled that Mr Buhari ignored a constitutional
provision which stipulated the mandatory role of the National
Assembly and the National Judicial Council in the removal of the
top judicial officer.

“It is important that the Judiciary must have absolute
independence,” Mr Tanko said Monday. “Judges should handle election
petitions without any external pressure or influence either by
political parties, stakeholders or economic interest groups. The
Judiciary must continue to take steps to ensure that It is not seen
as being partisan.”

The official spoke at an event organised by the Independent
Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for election
tribunal judges on Monday which deliberated on election
matters.

The ongoing two-day workshop, organised by INEC is taking place
at the Andrews Otutu Obaseki Auditorium, National Judicial
Institute, Abuja.

The INEC chairman, Mahmood Yakubu was represented by May
Agbamuche while Mr Tanko was represented by Zainab Bulkachuwa.

Deliberations
Both the INEC chairman and the acting CJN agreed elections are
governed by legislation and multiple court judgment reduces the
confidence of the people in INEC and the judiciary.

The acting CJN said the procedure of conducting elections comes
with numerous challenges.

He said the workshop will present participants the opportunity
to discuss and find a common course towards addressing the
challenges which judges face while serving on election petition
tribunals.

“This workshop is a unique opportunity to deliberate and agree
on the basic tenets and guiding principles as well as ensuring
quick dispensation of electoral matters,” he explained.

He also said election litigation is an inevitable part of the
electoral process.

“INEC has the responsibility to conduct and manage elections,
the Judiciary on its part is charged with the responsibility of
resolving issues arising from the process,” he added.
He also said the present electoral system is fraught with
challenges which include (controversial) party nomination,
substitution of candidates, late conduct of party primaries
amongstothers.

“This poses the need for participants in this workshop to be
constantly equipped with the rudiments of the law to enable them
accomplish their task with the desired efficiency and
competence.”

He also said these will help arrive at well-researched judgments
and modalities to reduce the spate of conflicting judgments
emanating from courts.

He urged judges to guard their integrity and the integrity of
the judiciary, by avoiding acts that will bring them under the
disciplinary jurisdiction of the NJC.

The NJC according to him will not hesitate to “wield the big
stick of sanctions” on any judicial officer who is found wanting in
the discharge of his/her duties.

INEC
“Conflicting court orders are negatively affecting the consistency,
neutrality, and public perception, not only of the Commission but
the Judiciary as well,” Mr Mahmood, earlier in his remarks,
said.

The INEC chairman also said there is the urgent need to address
the issue of conflicting judgments in order to engender ‘certainty’
in the electoral process.

“It is for this reason that the Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC) considers this workshop necessary in the best
interest of our democracy,” he said.

Mr Mahmood said the survival of the democratic process and the
consolidation of the ongoing electoral reforms require the
commitment of all actors hence the workshop.

The chairman said the workshop is important to both parties
because it affords them a platform to further record concerns about
the adjudication of electoral disputes as the election
approaches.

He also said this workshop will aid the commission get feedback
from the sector “that has reviewed its activities over the years to
help it do more in aspects necessary”.

The commission also noted two areas of concern it will like to
address: conflicting judgements and lack of consequential orders by
courts.

“For our part, there are two major areas of concern. First is
the issue of conflicting judgements arising from pre-electlon and
post-election cases. Conflicting judgements, especially by courts
of co-ordinate jurisdiction at the high court level, are putting
the commission in a very difficult position and creating
uncertainty in the process.

“Our second area of concern relates to the lack of consequential
orders by the courts after making findings on an issue and stating
the position.”