Supreme Court rejects request to determine propriety of ex-CJN Onnoghen’s removal

The Supreme Court has rejected a request to review the
circumstances leading to the exit of the immediate past Chief
Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen and pronounce on
the propriety or otherwise of his removal following an ex-parte
order issued by the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT).

A panel of the court, led by Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour, on
Monday, struck an application filed on behalf of the former CJN by
one Dr. N. S. Nwawka, in which he sought the court’s to among
others applied for the determination of some constitutional
questions relating to Onnghne’s removal and the roles played by the
current CJN, Justice Ibrahim Muhammad, Attorney General of the
Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami, the National Judicial Council
(NJC), among others.

One of the constitutional questions Nwawka had sought the
court’s answer was whether the Federal Government, the NJC and the
Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (HOS) ought not to
dismiss and prosecute Malami, Muhammad and two members of the CCT
“for the treasonable action of unconstitutional overthrow of
Onnoghen from the office of the CJN contrary to sections 1(2) and
292(1) of the Constitution.”

The members of the CCT listed in the motion, marked:
SC/1206/2019 are Danladi Umar and Julie Anabor, who he claimed
granted an unlawful ex-part order, on which basis Onnoghen was
removed from office.

Nwawka had also prayed the court to determine whether the 1st to
6th respondents allegedly involved in the removal of Onnoghen “by
means of an ex-parte order of the CCT does not amount to
treasonable conduct, having regard to the clear provisions of
sections 1(2) and 292(1) of the Constitution.”

Listed as the 1st to 6th respondents were: the Federal
Government, Malami, Muhammad, the Chairman of the Code of Conduct
Bureau (CCB), Muhammed Isah, Umar and Anabor.

Nwawka said his decision to approach the Supreme Court for the
determinations of the constitutional quests he raised was informed
by the refusal of the two lower courts -the Federal High Court,
Abuja and the Court of Appeal in Abuja to hear similar applications
he had filed before them.

When the case was called on Monday neither Nwawka nor his lawyer
was in court. All the nine respondents were also not represented in
court, following which Justice Rhodes-Vivour ruled that the motion
be struck out for want of diligent prosecution.

Subscribe ToNairalaw News!